Ramsay, William Mitchell: The cities and bishoprics of Phrygia: being an essay of the local history of Phrygia from the earliest time to the Turkish conquest (Band 1,2): West and West-Central Phrygia (Oxford, 1897)

App. INSCRIPTIONS. 739

spread the names among the Clir. of Central Phrygia (no. 672). A salu-
tation is here added to the epitaph, as was customary in the Pentapolis,
no. 654-658; and this fact favours the connexion of Dorotheos with
Hieropolis. Salutations, addressed either to the spirit of the departed by the
survivors, or by the spirit to the survivors or passers by, are common in
pagan epigraphy; and were adopted by the early Christians, but were
gradually disused by them. MM. De Rossi and Le Blant find their
occurrence in Chr. epitaphs a sure proof of comparatively early date.
In pagan epitaphs we find [iv\j/)vxi reKovaa, oiibels aOavaros Kaibel 1353*
cp. 15 31, 1536, 1806, 1832. tvhaifiovei, oiibels aOdvaros 1J43, ev\j/v[xei],
Trapobelra Kaibel 1465 ; but more commonly, such encouragements are
addressed to the spirit of the dead (Kaibel 1488 is very clear, cp. 1782).
ev\j/vxei with the name of deceased in vocative is very common (Kaibel
1314, 1400, 1554, 1555, 1594, 1633, 1699, &c).

The monogram T is of later origin than ■£. As M. Le Blant points
out :£ is used in Rome between a.d. 298 or 3231 and 451 or 474, and in
Gaul between 377 and 493 2, while T appears in Rome from o,55 to 542-
565 and in Gaul from c. 400 to 525-540. The monogram and symbols
A >£ GJ occur in a Phoenician inscription bearing the date 625, which, if
it is calculated by the Seleucid era, is a.d. 313 3. The next dated eastern
inscription with this monogram is of a.d. 399 (LW 2263). It occurs as
late as a.d. 500 in an inser. of the northern Hauran (along with the
symbols XMT), Wright and Souter in Pal. Expl. F. Quart. Siatem. 1895
p. 524. An inscr. of Mauretania, dated a.d. 384, has the heading

D kf OJ MS

Dates a little earlier are likely to rule in the East than in Rome, as
a general survey of the facts presented in Ch. XII and XVII shows ;
but it is not probable that the present inscr. can be placed earlier than
a.d. 330. At the same time none of the signs of lateness occur in it;
and probably 350 is the latest date that can safely be suggested for it.
The maker of the tomb is named first. Now in Roman inscr. the maker
of the tomb ceases to be mentioned a.d. 408, in Gaulish 470. Saluta-
tions rarely occur in Chr. inscr. after Constantine; and in all respects
except the symbols and a slightly elongated formation of the letters, this

1 The first certain occurrence is in this inscription, see Rev. Arch. 1876
A.D. 323. (Nov.) p. 289) thinks this date impro-

2 De Rossi Inscr. Christ, no. 127; Le bable. The further study of eastern
Blant Inscr. Chret. no. 369, Manuel Chr. inscr. has greatly diminished the
p. 29. improbability; and the date must be

3 Renan Mission de Phenicie p. 390; accepted.

but M. Bayet (from whom I learn about * Cp. Mel. d'Arch. 1895 p. 50.

C C 2