Hogarth, David G.; Smith, Cecil Harcourt [Contr.]: Excavations at Ephesus: the archaic Artemisia: Text (London, 1908)

134 The Archaic Artemisia or Ethesus.

reserved for the completion of the preceding aythm. For the preposition I can
find none fulfilling the conditions and making an intelligible sense, except
av€v~\0€v, and adopt it despite its purely epic use, noting that epic forms are not
to be greatly wondered at in an early Ionian text. This restoration leaves only
two vacant places after aythm, and, after many attempts, I can suggest nothing
more likely than the Ionic and epic form avTrjp^ap. The whole entry will then
run : On the same day, without reckoning tliis stater, we made up in gold 14 minae.
If this be right, the reference is back, across the conjunctive interpoint, to the
preceding statement and to the stater there mentioned, and, incidentally, the
reading crrcm/pa—a single stater—is confirmed. Dr. Keil suggested to me a
different and very ingenious restoration : avrr) p.\_6vr) avev~\0cv crra[Vetera] to
vS[ptSi]o o dpvop.ev k.t.X. = this (vessel) alone, weighed without the pail with
which we draw (water), etc. But, in my opinion, this is vitiated not only
by its assumption that some vessel has been mentioned in a previous lost
passage on the right hand of the plate, to which cu/777 must refer, but by the
absence of any verb to govern pv4a<; (Dr. Keil supposes an ellipse of elX/ce).
Also [x\_6py] avevjdeu is too long for the first gap. Still, I admit that this curious
coincidence of a possible vSpiSiov and a possible dpvop.ei> seemed to me at first
attractive. To the former word Dr. Keil was of course disposed by the later
occurrence of <f>id\r) (1. 5). My own restoration makes a statement which, as it
stands, is in somewhat obscure relation to the general context, but clear enough
in itself.

(c) The third statement contains only one gap, between tovto and r)pip.vqiov.
In that gap the last letter is 77 and probably the last three are -orq. At the
beginning the indications look very much like mn^. If a mina is mentioned
here it is probably in the singular, since there is hardly room for a following
numeral before the word ending -anj, which itself looks like a participial ending
agreeing with p.vea. Aeo/i,]eV^ would be possible were the following rjpLp.vrjiov in
the genitive. Though the accusative, depending on Seo/xcu, is not impossible
grammatically, the analogy of 1. 2 is against our assuming its use here in
such a connection. I am inclined to think that a transitive medial participle has
to be restored which will govern ^/xi/ii^'ioi' and have some such sense as
" including " ; but I am unable to suggest a satisfactory word. There are
two further difficulties. What is exactly meant by iyivovio Ik tovto(v) ?
The smallness of the following values shows that we have here no summing
up of previous items. 'Eyivovro may, therefore, introduce a statement of profit,
viz., 1 mina and 5 twelfths, made by interest upon the preceding \.\ minae
(Ik tovtov), which would be at the rate of about 7 per cent. Hut I doubt this