^{page 133 note 1} ῾Η Μακεδονία ἐν λίθοις φθεγγομένοις καὶ μνημείοις σωζομένοις κ.τ.λ. [Athens, 1896]Google Scholar. This work is indispensable in spite of numerous inaccuracies of all sorts, in scholarship as well as printing; it is cited below as Demitsas or Dem.

^{page 135 note 1} Mr. W. W. Tarn has given me invaluable assistance towards understanding the chronological problems here involved, which are fully treated in his recent work, Antigonos Gonatas, pp. 112, note 3, 434 note 6.

^{page 135 note 2} Griechische Geschichte, iii 2, p. 81Google Scholar (par. 28). Ferguson, , Hellenistic Athens, p. 150Google Scholar, states that Antigonos assumed the regal title in 287, clearly accepting the tradition that he reigned ten years in Greece; but he did not call himself βασιλεύς while his father was alive.

^{page 135 noye 3} For the circumstances, cf. Ferguson, op. cit. p. 159; Tarn, op. cit. pp. 163 ff. A third tradition, according to which Antigonos reigned in Macedon from 279/8, cannot be ignored. See Tarn, loc. cit., especially note 94, and addenda, p. 478. The article by Mayer, A. in Philologus, lxxi (1912), pp. 224 ffGoogle Scholar. I have unfortunately been unable to consult in time for this paper.

^{page 136 note 1} J.H.S. xxx (1910), pp. 198 ff.Google Scholar; Hellenistic Athens, p. 198; but see Tarn, op. cit. pp. 378, 461 ff.

^{page 136 note 2} J.H.S. xxix (1909), p. 213Google Scholar; xxx (1910), p. 223; Antigonos Gonatas, pp. 370 ff.

^{page 136 note 3} Cf. Ferguson, , J.H.S. xxx. p. 208, and note 76Google Scholar; it was presumably the case whenever Antigonos was away fighting in the latter part of his reign. Cf. Tarn, op. cit. pp. 383, 433 ff.

^{page 136 note 4} Ferguson, , Hellenistic Athens, p. 150Google Scholar, seems wrong in giving him the title βασιλεύς from 287 onwards: see above, p. 135 note 2, and Tarn, op. cit. pp. 20, 37, 92, and especially 112, note 3.

^{page 136 note 5} The earliest example given in Dittenb. Syll. ² (918, 1. 4) belongs to 295 B.C.; instances are much more frequent in the next century; cf. op. cit. 240, l. 5; 254, l. 9; 270, l. 8; 276, ll. 16, 36, 70; 284, l. 12; 285, l. 6; 287, l. 3; 303, l. 21, which are all from the period 200–160 B.C.: it is common throughout the following periods. Cf. ἔντευξις (= a petition), L. & S. s.v.; in papyri, Milligan, G., Greek Papyri, No. 5, l. 5Google Scholar (163–2 B.C.).

^{page 136 note 6} This might be possibly assumed on the ground of the brevity of the communications; but this cannot be taken as proof.

^{page 136 note 7} There is no evidence for the position of court-huntsmen in Macedonia analogous to those in Egypt, where the ἀρχικύνηγος under the Ptolemies was clearly of considerable eminence. Cf. Dittenb., O. G. I. 99, l. 2Google Scholar; 143, l. 3; and Egyptian κυνηγέ(ται) in Cyprus, ibid. 20, l. 3. Perhaps the word κυνηγός came to be used in a technical sense meaning a messenger: then the I'tolemaic ἀρχικύνηγος would have been chief of the king's messengers, and the two κυνηγοί have been messengers on the staff of Harpalos.

^{page 137 note 1} E.g. Dittenb., Syll.² 192, l. 107Google Scholar; 312, l. 1; cf. Phocion's friend (the son-in-law of Aristotle), Plutarch, , Phocion c. 31 ff.Google Scholar; and the general of Philip V, Polybius, xvi. 27.

^{page 137 note 2} I.G. ix 2, 515, l. 1Google Scholar; cf. Nos. 285, 457.

^{page 137 note 3} Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, s.n. Harpalos 3; Dittenb, . Syll.² 293, l. 5.Google Scholar The well-known general of Alexander the Great may possibly have been a member of the same family, but there is no indication.

^{page 137 note 4} v. 26, 5.

^{page 137 note 5} Demitsas, 671 (= Michel, , Recueil, 322)Google Scholar. I am indebted to Mr. Tarn for these references; cf. his Antigonos Gonatas, pp. 195 f. note 97, and addenda.

^{page 137 note 6} The word appears to be rare except in poetry. Cf. L. & S. s.v.

^{page 137 note 7} Gr. Mythologie, pp. 208 ff., cf. the votive inscriptions in Demitsas, op. cit. Nos. 18, 207, 284, 291, 335, 1064, 1085.

^{page 138 note 1} A.J.A. xvi (1912), p. 59Google Scholar; the commentary by Messrs. Buckler and Robinson is on an ample scale.

^{page 138 note 2} Dittenb., O.G.I. 332, l. 41Google Scholar[ίεραὶ κα]ὶ πολιτικαὶ πρόσοδοιs at Elaea; ibid. 267, l. 6 [κοιναὶ τ]ῆς πόλεως καὶ αἱ ἱεραὶ πρόσοδοι, at Pergamon; cf. ὁ ἐπὶ τῶν ἱερῶν προσόδων, op. cit. 483, l. 166, from the same place; and see below, note 6.

^{page 138 note 3} ῾Ιεραὶ πρόσοδοι, op. cit. 56, l. 71.

^{page 138 note 4} Cf. Κατατάσσειν εἰς τὰς ίερὰς προσόδους, Dittenb., Syll.² 566Google Scholar, l. 28, at Pergamon; op. cit. 575, l. 8 (= C.I.G. 3156) relating to the temple of Aphrodite at Stratonicea.

^{page 138 note 5} Cf. L. & S. s.v.; Dittenb. Syll. ² Index vi, s.v.; a parallel from Magnesia ad Maeandrum is perhaps worth quoting: ὤστε . . . ἀποκατασταθῆναι αὐτῶι πάντα τὰ π[ροχορηγηθ]ησόμ(ε)να, Syll. ² 928, l. 32.

^{page 138 note 6} Moreover we require οὖν, as the sentence would otherwise be very abrupt.

^{page 138 note 7} Cf. ἐνθαῦθα in the inscription of the Demotionidae, Dittenb., Syll.² 439, l. 60Google Scholar; ἐνθαυθοῖ ἀνεθέθη, op. cit. 20, ll. 13, 44; and in general for the ‘metathesis of aspiration,’ Meisterhans-Schwyzer, , Grammatik der attischen Inschriflen,² pp. 102 ff.Google Scholar, and authorities cited there; Mayser, , Grammatik der gr. Papyri aus der Ptolemäerzeit, pp. 3, 183 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 139 note 1} The fullest account of manumission is that of Calderini, , La Manomissione e la Condizione dei Liberti in Grecia [Milan, 1908]: for the present type see pp. 94, 96 ffGoogle Scholar. (‘Religiosa,’ α.); and cf. a few characteristic instances in Rouse, , Greek Votive Offerings, pp. 335 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 139 note 2} Reprinted most accessibly in a note on Oxyrh, Papyri iv, 722Google Scholar.

^{page 141 note 1} See Pauly-Wissowa, s.v. Ἀριάδνη, and C.I.L. iii, Suppl. (3), 12033² and note ad loc.

^{page 141 note 2} It seems much more likely to be of Macedonian origin (and presumably akin to the tribal name Bastarnae) than Roman, for as a Greek form of either Bassus or Vastus it seems highly unlikely; moreover the names of his children are not Roman.

^{page 141 note 3} E.g. Dittenb., Syll.² 846, 848Google Scholar (παιδίσκη dedicated to Apollo Pythios by process of sale); to Ma, , R.E.G. xii (1899), p. 172, No. 7Google Scholar; cf. ibid. Nos. 4 and 8, and Calderini, op. cit. p. 77.

^{page 141 note 4} E.g. Syll. ², 865, an ἀπελευθέρα in Kalymnos; there is no need to multiply instances.

^{page 141 note 5} For the list of known recipients see Calderini, op. cit. pp. 108 ff.

^{page 141 note 6} For the distribution of the cult of Artemis, Farnell, , Cults ii, pp. 437, 562 f.Google Scholar; Gruppe (in Iwan-Müller), p. 1283, note 1; for her cult at Skudra, Demitsas, Ἡ Μακεδονία, Nos. 125, 126(1) [note that he numbers two inscriptions as 126]: the latter, recording the dedication of a θρεπτάριον to Artemis Gazoria, is thus the best Macedonian parallel for the contents of our present stone.

^{page 141 note 7} Dittenb., Syll.² 844, ll. 12–14Google Scholar. In the present inscription we should have expected μὴ ἔχοντος μηθενός, κ.τ.λ.: perhaps the length of the phrase accounts for the participle being placed so late.

^{page 141 noye 8} Ibid. 856 ff. (passim).

^{page 141 note 9} Ibid. 514, l. 46; 722, l. 51; 738, l. 9.

^{page 142 note 1} Cf. κύριέ μου ἀδελφέ κύριέ μου ἀδελφέ Brit. Mus. Pap. ii, No. 417, l. 16Google Scholar (= Milligan, Greek Papyri, No. 51); κυρία μήτηρ . . . κυρία ἀδελφή, Gr. Urkunden der Papyrussammlung zu Leipzig (ed. Mitteis, ), i, No. 110, 1, l. 24 fGoogle Scholar. In literature cf. κυρίᾳ τῇ μητρί (1 Greg. Nazianz. Epist. 4), and the Thesaurus s.v. κύριος. Κυρίε(-ία) as a vocative is generally coupled with the name of the relation addressed, or with a proper name. For an instance without either cf. Dio Cassius, xlviii, c. 44, where Livia is addressed as κυρία (= Latin domina), and of course Κύριε, of our Lord, in N.T. In inscriptions, Syll. ² 655, ll. 3, 13 where a proconsul is addressed as κύριε.

^{page 142 note 2} Dem. 126 (1).

^{page 142 note 3} C.I.G. 4299, cf. addenda, at Antiphellus; add. 4303 h ⁶ at Tristoma near Cyaneae. In a papyrus in the Louvre, Papiers du Louvre, ed. Letronne, , p. 422Google Scholar, No. 18, cf. Herwerden, Lexicon ², s.v. ἀβάσκαντος. This list does not claim to be exhaustive.

^{page 142 note 4} E.g. B.C.H. xvii (1893)Google Scholar [Herwerden, op. cit. s.v. wrongly says 1894] pp. 384 ff., Nos. 81 ff, supplies 15 examples.

^{page 142 note 5} E.g. Dittenb., Syll.² 329, l. 52Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 6} This involves our translating δανείζεσθαι; as though it were δανείζειν; ὑποθέσθαι is used more than once instead of the active form, e.g. Plut, . Cato Minor, c. 6Google Scholar.

^{page 142 note 7} Ev. Matth. 6, 28; 1 Tim. 4, 10, etc.

^{page 142 note 8} C.I.G. 6509.

^{page 143 note 1} Cf. Meisterhans-Schwyzer, , Grammatik der attischen Inschriften ³, p. 169, 3, and note 1416Google Scholar; Mayser, E., Grammatik der gr. Papyri aus der Ptolemäerzeit, p. 330, 2, and note 2Google Scholar; representative examples both of βούλομαι and δύναμαι, Dittenb, . Syll² 197, l. 25Google Scholar; 213, l. 42; 226, l. 168; 263, l. 8; 356, l. 20; 918, l. 2; 928, l. 66 (ἠδυνήθηπαν); 928, l. 84; 929, l. 32; eight of the nine are the imperfect tense, and none later than 100 B.C.

^{page 143 note 2} See note on ll. 13, 14 above.

^{page 143 note 3} Two examples, though not worded like the present stone, relate to illiterate women who manumit slaves at Amphissa in the Imperial Era. They run thus: χειρόγραφον [τοῦ δεῖνοσ] ὑπὲρ,τὴν δεῖνα . . . παροῦσαν καὶ κελεύουσαν γράφειν ὑπὲρ αὑτάν, ἐπεὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτὰ γράμματα νὴ εἰδέναι (I.G. ix I, 318Google Scholar) and the same formula, except that it has ὑπὲρ αὑτὰν γράψαι, in I.G. ix I, 1066Google Scholar (= Dittenb., Syll.² 844)Google Scholar. They are engraved on the back and front of the same stele, though in different years. Dittenberger says, note 3 ad loc., ‘Alibi me nihil eiusmodi legere memini.’ Clearly he was not thinking of the evidence from papyri.

^{page 143 note 4} Not to multiply instances, cf. ὁ δεῖνα ἔγραψα ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ μὴ ε ἰδότος γράμματα Oxyrh. Papyri 275, ll. 42, 3 ( = Milligan, Greek Papyri, No. 20). Εἰδέναι erai seems the usual verb.

^{page 143 note 5} Cf. Plato, , Legg. 689 DGoogle Scholar.

^{page 144 note 1} Dem. 170, Ἐπίκτητος (a common name), 178, Оὐαλεριανός.

^{page 144 note 2} Examples in Dittenb. Syll. ² (Index I) from Lilaea, Delphi, Athens, and Megalopolis show its wide distribution.

^{page 144 note 3} For γ for ι in such syllables cf. κλάγω ( = κλαίω), Paris Papyri (Notices et Extraits, xviii, ii, ed. de Presle, Brunet, 1865Google Scholar), No. 51 (= Milligan, op. cit. No. 6, 1. 15). For γ inserted, cf. Μναγαῖον (=μνααῖον), Oxyrh. Papyri, 905 ( = Milligan, No. 34), 1. 6, and in general, Mayser, , Gramm. dergr. Papyri, p. 167 fGoogle Scholar. § 34. In inscriptions, Τραγιανοῦ, Dittenb, . Syll.² 843, 1. 8Google Scholar. For the omission of γ, in Attic inscriptions, Meisterhans, op. cit. p. 75, 4; in papyri, Mayser, op. cit. pp. 163 ff. § 33.

^{page 146 note 1} Dittenb, . Syll.² 802Google Scholar; cf. his list of previous publications and commentary.

^{page 146 note 2} Pausanias i. 3, 4.

^{page 146 note 3} Hymn. Hom. 15; and, in general, cf. the references collected by Rouse, , Greek Votive Offerings, pp. 189 ff.Google Scholar; Farnell, , Cults, iv, 239 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 146 note 4} Rouse, op. cit. p. 273; for a recently found Thessalian example, Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Liverpool), iii, p. 159, No. 14Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 5} It is to be distinguished from ἐγκοίμητρον meaning a sheet or counterpane (L. & S. s.v.) and its adjective ἐγκοιμήτριος (cf. ἐγκοιμήτριν ὀθόνιον, Paris Papyri No. 53, l. 8, Mayser, op. cit. p. 450).

^{page 146 note 6} Cf. C.I.G. 2430; I.G. vii, 96Google Scholar; Dittenb, . Syll.² 392Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 7} See Hamilton, Mary, Incubation [St. Andrews, 1906]Google Scholar; cf. Gruppe, op. cit. p. 932, note 6.

^{page 146 note 8} Strabo, p. 437; Rouse, op. cit. pp. 192 ff.; Farnell, , Cults, iv, 239Google Scholar.

^{page 146 note 9} I.G. xii 8, p. 208Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 1} Though not a very rare name Mαρσύας is not common in Macedonia in spite of its local connexions, cf. Hoffmann, , Die Makedonier, p. 210Google Scholar.

^{page 147 note 2} The cult of Hermes in Macedonia is not known to us from any Greek inscription given by Demitsas: that of Mercury is found in Latin inscriptions from Amphipolis, Dem. 895 (if correctly interpreted?), and from Philippi, Dem. 934 ( = C.I.L. iii, Nos. 633, 14204).

^{page 147 note 3} Cf. Meisterhans, op. cit. p. 39, § 10.

^{page 148 note 1} Cicero, , Phil. xii. 9, 23Google Scholar; Tac., Ann. xv. 6 ff.Google Scholar; cf. Prosop. Imp. Rom. s.v.

^{page 148 note 2} Beroea is called δὶς νεωκόρος on coins struck for the first celebration of the Ὀλύμπια in 242 A.D. during the reign of Gordian. Similar coins were struck in 244 and 246. The coins are dated by the Actian era, Head, Hist. Num.² p. 243.

^{page 149 note 1} Olympia v (Inschriften), No. 55, cf. Dittenberger's stemma of the family, ibid. p. 525.

^{page 149 note 2} See especially Francotte, , Le pain à bon marché; et le pain gratuit dans les cités grecques (Mélanges Nicole, 1905)Google Scholar; for Athens in the 5th century, cf. Zimmern, , The Greek Commonwealth, pp. 353 ffGoogle Scholar. and authorities cited in his notes.

^{page 149 note 3} Marquardt, J., Staatsverwaltung, i ², p. 213Google Scholar; Liebenam, , Städteverwaltung im röm. Kaiserreiche, p. 358Google Scholar.

^{page 150 note 1} In a Paris papyrus, op. cit. No. 50, 1. (cf. Mayser, op. cit. p. 148) we find πορεύμενον, where an accented omikron is lost; in our inscription it is unaccented.

^{page 150 note 2} Dem. 218.

^{page 151 note 1} I seem to see remains of Δ or Λ, which preclude the obvious restoration ἀνέθηκεν vel sim.

^{page 151 note 2} For κατ᾿ ἐπιταγήν cf. Dittenb, . Syll.² 786Google Scholar (and parallel expressions quoted ad loc.), 805, the former from Athens, the latter from Lebena in Crete. The vertical stroke visible between the Г and Η is an accidental scratch on the stone.

^{page 151 note 3} Demitsas, 780; ἀνάθηκεν in his transcript must be a misprint of the uncial ἀνέθηκεν.

^{page 151 note 4} I.G. xii 3, 384–388Google Scholar; see also the evidence collected by Rouse, op. cit. pp. 210ff., and the votive sandal on a relief from the Asklepieion in Athens, B.S.A. xi, 146 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 152 note 1} E.g. B.S.A. xv, p. 88Google Scholar, Fig. 1.

^{page 152 note 2} Гλαύκιννα is known, but not Гλαυκίννω and for Гλυκίννω cf. the feminine name Гλύκιννα from near Thessalonica, Dem. 689 (2nd century B.C.); at Larissa, , I.G. ix 2, 1347Google Scholar, cf. Bechtel-Fick, , Personennamen, p. 86Google Scholar.

^{page 153 note 1} Dem. 374, 1. 9 ad fin.

^{page 153 note 2} E.g. Kaibel, , Epigr. Gr. 557Google Scholar.

^{page 153 note 3} E.g. Dittenb, . O.G.I. 148, 181Google Scholar (referring to the same man, at Alexandria); in Boeotia, , I.G. vii, 1777Google Scholar, col. ii, 1. 22; at Athens in the Imperial Age, 13 times, cf. I.G. iii, 2Google Scholar, Index.

^{page 154 note 1} Dem. 53 (= 216); it is common elsewhere.

^{page 154 note 2} [‘Female bust of fair style, and of Neronian or Flavian date. It is a fragment of a typically Roman monument like Altmann, Röm. Grabaltäre, p. 201, Figs. 159, 160. Cf. No. 29 below.]—A. J. B. W.]

^{page 154 note 3} Dem. 1245 (1275 is the same stone, republished).

^{page 155 note 1} [‘Late and bad, 3rd cent, after Christ.’—A. J. B. W.]

^{page 155 note 2} See the lists given by Wilhelm, , Jahreshefte, iv, Beiblatt, pp. 16 f.Google Scholar; Beiträge zur gr. Insckriftenkutide, pp. 200 f., 320.

^{page 155 note 3} Poland, , Gr. Vereinswesen, p. 120Google Scholar.

^{page 155 note 4} Poland, op. cit. p. 52.

^{page 156 note 1} E.g. Ὀτευδανός a title of Apollo in the neighbourhood of Derriopos, Dem. 277; he compares (l. c.) (Γ) οιτόσυρος the Scythian title of Apollo, Hdt. iv. 59, C.I.G. 6013 (Hesychius is the authority for the spelling with a gamma, Hdt. and the inscription spell it without).

^{page 156 note 2} I.G. i, 433Google Scholar ( = Dittenb, . Syll.² 9Google Scholar), l. 60.

^{page 156 note 3} I.G. vii, 1285Google Scholar.

^{page 157 note 1} It is of course not nearly so common as Καλλίας: e.g. in Dittenb. Syll. ² Index i, it occurs twice, to about forty examples of the other.

^{page 157 note 2} At Nicaea, C.I.G. 3765 ( = Kaibel, , Epigr. Gr. 350Google Scholar); in Boeotia, , I.G. vii, 376, 1745, 1749Google Scholar.

^{page 158 note 1} No. 9, the rider is accompanied by a dog which attacks a bear or wild boar, near the latter is a snake. By a coincidence one of the dedicators of this grave-relief also is called Παραμόνα.

^{page 158 note 2} A monument like No. 18, q.v.; found together with Nos. 4, 26, and 34.

^{page 158 note 3} Dittenb, . O.G.I. 234Google Scholar, Syll. ² 924.

^{page 158 note 4} The church is so called because of the following local legend. Once upon a time a local merchant in Lent brought to Beroea a large quantity of caviare. Coarse red caviare is a common Lenten food amongst members of the Orthodox church. To his surprise he could sell none and was faced with ruin. In his despair he prayed to the Virgin and vowed to build her a church if he sold all his stock of caviare. He sold it and built the church which in memory of the vow is called ‘Our Lady of Caviare.’

^{page 158 note 5} Epigr. Gr. 350, 351.

^{page 159 note 1} Op. cit. 290, 291 (from Tralles).

^{page 159 note 2} Op. cit. 529( = Dem. 512), beginning Βίκτωρ Σκευᾶς ἐνθἀδε κεῖμαι πατρὶς δέ μον Θεσσαλονίκη.

^{page 159 note 3} Dem. 536, though his copy is very unsatisfactory.

^{page 159 note 4} Dem. 16, where the deceased describes himself as πυκτϵύσας, but is figured on a relief holding a spear. In another Greek epitaph of a retiarius, from Amasia in Cappadocia, I. G. ad res Rom. pert, iii, 1,438, we have πυκτεύσας ἄλ(η)πτος. In ll. 8, 9, the editors, following Cumont who first published it (Festschrift zu Otto Hirschfeld, 1903, p. 273)Google Scholar, read Δομνασκίων ἰδίων. This should surely be Δόμνα (ΕΚΤωΝ) ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων.

^{page 159 note 5} It is evidently of Roman origin, cf. Flamma, etc.

^{page 159 note 6} Cf. C.I.G. 5909, 5912–15, 6883, 6884.

^{page 159 note 7} Epigr. Gr. 526 ( = Dem. 74).

^{page 159 note 8} Dem. 183.

^{page 159 note 9} It occurs in Epigr. Gr. 425, and I. G. ix 2, 924Google Scholar.

^{page 159 note 10} 12,000 denarii is the fine on two inscriptions, Epigr. Gr. 520 (= Dem. 401) at Thessalonica, and Dem. 740 at Socha (= Ossa?) between Thessalonica and the Strymon. 5, 500 at the former place, Dem. 417; 5,000, frequently (Dem. 409, 410, 419, 420, 447, 475, 476). Of similar formulae from Beroea none is preserved in full. Dem. 83 has χ]ίλια πϵντακόσια (? 2,500 or 1, 500), in Dem. 89 the sum is lost, in Dem. 103 ΧΙΛΙΑС (1,000 or more?). In general cf. Reinach, , Traité, pp. 429 ff.Google Scholar; Hirschfeld's essay on this subject in Königsberger Hist.-Phil. Studien, i, 1887Google Scholar, I have been unfortunately unable to consult. Arkwright, , Penalties in Lycian Epitaphs- J.H.S. xxxi (1911), pp. 269 ff.Google Scholar is illuminating, not merely for local examples.

^{page 161 note 1} See above, No. 30, 1. 8. A different version of l. 1 is given below in the Postscript.

^{page 162 note 1} Perhaps Ποῃιδώ[νιος . . ενον] as in l. 17.

^{page 163 note 1} a. l. 1, , W.; l. 2, (?) Λϵόν[τ]ας; ll. 3, 4, Dem. transposes; l. 5, ad fin. , W.; ΟΝ, Dem.; l. 7, (?) τρᾳ(ν)ου; l. 10, Dem. makes nothing certain, except where W. has perhaps Ἀρ[τέ]μωνος (?).

b. (numbering as in col. 1), l. 7, , Dem. which I adopt; , W.; l. 8, , Dem. , W.; l. 10, ΛΥχΟС, Dem.; l. 12, , Dem.: Ῥοπίλ(ιος) = Rupilius is almost certain, so W.; l. 15, , Dem., which he transcribes Ἀνδρακᾶς: the third sign is clearly a stop; l. 18, νυσ are ligatured; Dem. has ΝΥΣΟΣ; l. 22, ΛΟΥΚΑΤΙΟС, Dem., which he transcribes Λουκάτιος; W. reads ΛΟΥСΑΤΙΟС, and presumably ΛΟΥ is a praenomen; l. 25, ϕΙΛΟΣϵΝϕΙΛΟΤΡΑΙ, Dem.; W. as in text; I cannot elucidate the ligatured symbol as it stands, but might it be for = ἀπε(λϵύθϵρς) as e.g. etc. in Argive and other inscriptions, Walter, , Jahresh. xivGoogle Scholar, Beiblatt, p. 143, No. iv; Baunack, , Philologus, lxix, p. 4, 62Google Scholar; or for νέος or νϵώτϵρος; l. 28, Dem. and W. both read ΑΥΡΗΝΟΕ (, W.), but this must be for Αὐρήλιος; l. 30, ΛγΚΟΑСωΝ, Dem.: ΛγΚΟΛСωΝ, W.; Λυκολέων seems much more likely, especially in view of the almost certain Λϵοντόλυκος above, l. 7.

c. 1. 6, ЄΠΤΑΧΡСΟ, Dem.: ЄΠΤΑΧΙС, W.; l. 8, ΛΥСΤΑС, Dem., which he transcribes Λύκτας; l. 13, Dem. represents the Є above the line; W. omits; l. 17, Ἀσκλήτας Dem. not seeing the ΗΠ to be ligatured; l. 18, ΦΑΥСΠΟΝ, Dem.; ΦΑΥСΠΩΝ, W.; clearly a mistake of the engraver's for ΦΑΥСТΙΩΝ; 1. 22, ΑΙΛγСΙΜΙΑΧΟС, Dem. , W.

The other points of difference are chiefly concerned with simple ligatures.

^{page 164 note 1} For the name cf. No. 2 above.

^{page 165 note 1} B.C.H. 1911, pp. 238 f.Google Scholar, Nos. 6, 7. In 1. 1 of the latter (No. 34 here) Hatzfeld reads, doubtfully, Ὀλ̣υ̣μ̣π̣ - - .. Perhaps the name is ᾿Αν]τώνιον ᾿Ολύμπ[ιον]