Ε Ρ Η E S O S
161
Either the lapidary made a slip, or else ύπατο? τό γ is
placed last by way of emphasis, to indicate the joint
consulship with Caracalla; see line 12.
The latter portion (lines 7 foil.) refers to Caracalla
(Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius; compare C. I.
353, etc.). In a letter of Severus and Caracalla to
the people of Minoa (Mittheilungen i, p. 349), the
lineage of Caracalla is rehearsed just as here, in
deference to the taste of Severus. In a. d. 202
Caracalla was his father’s colleague in the consulship,
hence υ7τα[το?] in line 12. To this year we may
therefore assign our inscription. It is probably part
of an imperial letter, in answer perhaps to some letter
of compliment from the boule and demos of Ephesos.
C. I. 3178 is another letter jointly addressed by ‘ the
Emperors ’ Severus and Caracalla to the people of
Smyrna, which Bockh assigns to about 200 a. d.
(compare C. I. 2971). The reader may also refer to
Klein, Fasti Consulares, p. 89 reff.; andC. I.L.
vi, Pt. i, 1031 ; and especially vi, Pt. i, 896, from the
Pantheon at Rome, which was restored by Severus
and Caracalla when colleagues in 202.
CCCOXCVI.
Fragment of white marble wall-stone; broken at the left and bottom, but at the top and at the right edge are joints. Height 5 in. ;
width 1 ft. 5 in. Discovered by Mr. Wood. Unpublished.
EAY'.-i - ΤΩΝΜΕΝ
’ΤΗΚΟΤΩΝΑΠΟΕ
1 η pii/nv~
. . . ίαυτώ των μόν
άφβσ^τηκότων από €-
. . . eiKo? . . . .
The inscription so much resembles the fragments
of imperial letters Nos. cccclxxxviii and ccccxc,
that it probably should be placed here,
racters are those of the Antonine age.
The cha-
CCCCXCVII.
A block of white marble, the surface having at each edge a slight rebate of one inch in width; the joints are entire on all sides, showing
that the block fitted on to other wall-stones from the same building. Height 9 in.; width 1 ft. | in. Discovered by Mr. Wood.
Unpublished.
Ε ΓΕΙΚΩΣ λΤ.ΟΔΕΙΚΝΥΕΙΠΑΡΑΣΤΑΙΗ r
Γ ΚΕΙΝΚΕΑΕΥΣΘΗΝΑίΤΑΚΑΚΩΣΑΠΟΔΟ
4 ΔΟΣΕΙ ΑΙΔΕΣΥΝΕΧΕΙΣΑΝΑΒΟΛΑΙΤ^
N ΟΠΑΠΠΟΣΑΥΤΟΥΣΑΒΕΙΝΟΣΏΣφΗΣΕΝΕΕ
5 “I ΏΝΑΣΧΕΔΟΝΑΝΑΓΚΑΙΟΝΠΟΟΥΣΙΚΑΙΣΟΙΤΟΧΓ
I ΤΟΣΥΝΧΏΡΕΙΝ - ΏΣΠΕΡΓ ΑΡΑΙΔΏΠΟΛΛΗΝ AN/-
TIN Φ ΟΥΤΏΣΕΠΕΙΔΑΝΑΥΤΟΙΤΙΝΕΣΑΙΤΙΑΝΙ
... i .. ... 4 [δίκαίων μ^ν αν τα χρήματα,]
ά ^βτβίκώ? άποδεικνυει, παρασταίη, [καί ου <5ei αυτόν προσε-
νε^γκεΐν κελευσθήναι τα κακώ? άποδο\βεντα ούδε προσθεΐναι
T~^fj δόσετ αί δε συνεχεΐ? άναβολαι τ[ων ..
ω]ν ό πάππο? αυτόν Σαβεΐνο?, ώ? φή?, ενε ... .
5 . ιωνά, σχεδόν άναγκαΐον ποοϋσι καί σοι τό χρ[ηζόμενδν κατά τό
αύ]το συνχωρεΐν’ ώσπερ γάρ αιδώ πολλήν άνα[βολαι παρε-
χου^συ/, ούτω? επειδάν αυτοί τινε? αιτίαν ε[χωσί ? . . .
Fragment of a letter, perhaps addressed by the
Emperor to the proconsul of Asia (lines 4, 5 ; ώ$· φή?,
καί σοι). The subject is the recovery of certain debts;
and unless these debts were owing to some public
body, the letter would hardly have been inscribed on a
public building, as it appears to have been. It is pos-
sible that it refers to the same affair which occasioned
the letter of Hadrian to the Ephesian Gerousia (No.
cccclxxxvi, ante). If so, the writer of the present
letter is Hadrian, and it may be addressed to Mettius
Modestus, proconsul of Asia, shortly before a. d. i 20.
We must suppose that Sabinus (line 4) had
borrowed moneys of the Gerousia, and his grandson,
who is now his representative, is slack in making
repayment (see on No. cccclxxxvi, lines 7 foil.).
If my restorations are at all right, the drift of the
letter is somewhat as follows : ‘ Whatever-the debtor
in question can prove that he has paid, must be
reckoned to his credit (παρασταίη, compare παράστασι?
in L. and S.), however irregularly it was repaid (κακώ?
άποδοθίντα); it must not be charged to him again.
It would be best to compel an immediate settlement;
but such perpetual adjournments have been pre-
viously allowed, that you are practically compelled
to grant this request for postponement also. I know
such delays are embarrassing, and make the creditor
appear as if in the wrong, but yet there are cases
where the creditor has only himself to blame for the
necessity of delay,’ etc.
τ t
161
Either the lapidary made a slip, or else ύπατο? τό γ is
placed last by way of emphasis, to indicate the joint
consulship with Caracalla; see line 12.
The latter portion (lines 7 foil.) refers to Caracalla
(Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius; compare C. I.
353, etc.). In a letter of Severus and Caracalla to
the people of Minoa (Mittheilungen i, p. 349), the
lineage of Caracalla is rehearsed just as here, in
deference to the taste of Severus. In a. d. 202
Caracalla was his father’s colleague in the consulship,
hence υ7τα[το?] in line 12. To this year we may
therefore assign our inscription. It is probably part
of an imperial letter, in answer perhaps to some letter
of compliment from the boule and demos of Ephesos.
C. I. 3178 is another letter jointly addressed by ‘ the
Emperors ’ Severus and Caracalla to the people of
Smyrna, which Bockh assigns to about 200 a. d.
(compare C. I. 2971). The reader may also refer to
Klein, Fasti Consulares, p. 89 reff.; andC. I.L.
vi, Pt. i, 1031 ; and especially vi, Pt. i, 896, from the
Pantheon at Rome, which was restored by Severus
and Caracalla when colleagues in 202.
CCCOXCVI.
Fragment of white marble wall-stone; broken at the left and bottom, but at the top and at the right edge are joints. Height 5 in. ;
width 1 ft. 5 in. Discovered by Mr. Wood. Unpublished.
EAY'.-i - ΤΩΝΜΕΝ
’ΤΗΚΟΤΩΝΑΠΟΕ
1 η pii/nv~
. . . ίαυτώ των μόν
άφβσ^τηκότων από €-
. . . eiKo? . . . .
The inscription so much resembles the fragments
of imperial letters Nos. cccclxxxviii and ccccxc,
that it probably should be placed here,
racters are those of the Antonine age.
The cha-
CCCCXCVII.
A block of white marble, the surface having at each edge a slight rebate of one inch in width; the joints are entire on all sides, showing
that the block fitted on to other wall-stones from the same building. Height 9 in.; width 1 ft. | in. Discovered by Mr. Wood.
Unpublished.
Ε ΓΕΙΚΩΣ λΤ.ΟΔΕΙΚΝΥΕΙΠΑΡΑΣΤΑΙΗ r
Γ ΚΕΙΝΚΕΑΕΥΣΘΗΝΑίΤΑΚΑΚΩΣΑΠΟΔΟ
4 ΔΟΣΕΙ ΑΙΔΕΣΥΝΕΧΕΙΣΑΝΑΒΟΛΑΙΤ^
N ΟΠΑΠΠΟΣΑΥΤΟΥΣΑΒΕΙΝΟΣΏΣφΗΣΕΝΕΕ
5 “I ΏΝΑΣΧΕΔΟΝΑΝΑΓΚΑΙΟΝΠΟΟΥΣΙΚΑΙΣΟΙΤΟΧΓ
I ΤΟΣΥΝΧΏΡΕΙΝ - ΏΣΠΕΡΓ ΑΡΑΙΔΏΠΟΛΛΗΝ AN/-
TIN Φ ΟΥΤΏΣΕΠΕΙΔΑΝΑΥΤΟΙΤΙΝΕΣΑΙΤΙΑΝΙ
... i .. ... 4 [δίκαίων μ^ν αν τα χρήματα,]
ά ^βτβίκώ? άποδεικνυει, παρασταίη, [καί ου <5ei αυτόν προσε-
νε^γκεΐν κελευσθήναι τα κακώ? άποδο\βεντα ούδε προσθεΐναι
T~^fj δόσετ αί δε συνεχεΐ? άναβολαι τ[ων ..
ω]ν ό πάππο? αυτόν Σαβεΐνο?, ώ? φή?, ενε ... .
5 . ιωνά, σχεδόν άναγκαΐον ποοϋσι καί σοι τό χρ[ηζόμενδν κατά τό
αύ]το συνχωρεΐν’ ώσπερ γάρ αιδώ πολλήν άνα[βολαι παρε-
χου^συ/, ούτω? επειδάν αυτοί τινε? αιτίαν ε[χωσί ? . . .
Fragment of a letter, perhaps addressed by the
Emperor to the proconsul of Asia (lines 4, 5 ; ώ$· φή?,
καί σοι). The subject is the recovery of certain debts;
and unless these debts were owing to some public
body, the letter would hardly have been inscribed on a
public building, as it appears to have been. It is pos-
sible that it refers to the same affair which occasioned
the letter of Hadrian to the Ephesian Gerousia (No.
cccclxxxvi, ante). If so, the writer of the present
letter is Hadrian, and it may be addressed to Mettius
Modestus, proconsul of Asia, shortly before a. d. i 20.
We must suppose that Sabinus (line 4) had
borrowed moneys of the Gerousia, and his grandson,
who is now his representative, is slack in making
repayment (see on No. cccclxxxvi, lines 7 foil.).
If my restorations are at all right, the drift of the
letter is somewhat as follows : ‘ Whatever-the debtor
in question can prove that he has paid, must be
reckoned to his credit (παρασταίη, compare παράστασι?
in L. and S.), however irregularly it was repaid (κακώ?
άποδοθίντα); it must not be charged to him again.
It would be best to compel an immediate settlement;
but such perpetual adjournments have been pre-
viously allowed, that you are practically compelled
to grant this request for postponement also. I know
such delays are embarrassing, and make the creditor
appear as if in the wrong, but yet there are cases
where the creditor has only himself to blame for the
necessity of delay,’ etc.
τ t