Tablet 207

description

Inv.no.85.018. 72 x 180 mm.
A diptych made up of fifteen fragments. There are two notches and two tie-holes at the top and bottom. The placement of two very small scraps in lines 2 and 3 is tentative and there is one other scrap with writing across the grain which must belong to a different tablet. As is clear from the notation on the back, the text is an account of Gavo, like 192, but differs in that it appears to be concerned exclusively with clothing (saga, sagaciae, tunicae, palliola and at least two other items). It is possible that the account records supplies from Gavo which were then distributed or that there are sub-categories of items received from or distributed to other people (see notes to lines 4, 11). The highest number of items recorded is 15 (line 6) and this perhaps suggests that the clothes were for military rather than domestic use. On the hand see 192, introduction.

edition


a Gauuone n
sagá n(umero) ịịi n
[[ ṣagạcias ṇ(umero) ṿịị]] n
uacat
[........] . ó n
5 ]ṣ n(umero) v
]ụs n(umero) xv n
[...] ṛal. [ ] ṇ(umero) . n
[ t]ụnicaṃ [ n
[ e] ṭ palliolạ n(umero) vii n
10 tunicas n(umero) v
a Mạṛco . [....] .. n
p̣alliola [n(umero) ]x n
ṭunicas [n(umero) ]ii n

translation

'From Gavo
saga number, 3
[[sagaciae number, 7 (?)]]
from (?) ...us
5... number, 5
... number, 15
capes (?) number, ..
a tunic
and palliola number, 7
10tunics number, 5
from Marcus the optio (?)
palliola number, 10 (?)
tunics number, 2 (?)
(Back) Account of Gavo. '

commentary

1. For Gavo see 192.1 note. Whether Gavo is collecting items from or distributing them to others depends on the reading and interpretation of lines 4 and 11 (see notes).

2. sag: for the occurrence of the apex mark with short vowels see above, pp.57-61.

3. For sagaciae see 255.i.8-ii.9, 184.ii.20, 521.2. It is unclear precisely what kind of cloak the word signifies; the noun had not occurred in Latin before the Vindolanda texts were discovered (Columella 11.1.21 has sagaceus as an adjective, see Tab.Vindol.I, p.74). The reading of the number at the right is uncertain. What appears to be a large c is certainly a crack in the wood. The rest of the top half of the diptych is lost after this line.

4. The first surviving letter appears to be h or, less probably, n. The former suggests that we might have Brocc]ho, possibly but not necessarily the prefect Aelius Brocchus (see 243-8, 196.15 note). Presumably the name was preceded by a, but it is also possible that the items following were destined for the person named (see line 11 note).

6. The easiest reading is us made in ligature (as in 248.i.3, for example); a possible restoration would be amict]us. It is less likely that we should read ]as.

7. We suggest the restoration of the word [(h)ume]rali[a, a kind of military cape, see Digest 49.16.14, nam si tibiale uel umerale alienauit, castigari uerberibus debet.

8. Since the entry is singular there is unlikely to be anything lost at the right (cf. 192.2 note).

9. The broken letter at the start suits t and the spacing suits e]t, even though there is no parallel in this account (but see 196.6).

11. There are difficulties in the reading and interpretation of this line, which must be a sub-heading since it commences further to the left than the preceding and following lines. By analogy with line 1 it seems most likely that it begins with the preposition a, followed by a name beginning with m, though we cannot quite exclude a name in the dative beginning with am or ma. The next visible letter is a or r, although there could be a letter lost at the break in the leaf; there may then be traces of one more letter before co which is fairly certain. a Marco seems the most plausible reading; an alternative might be a Marico (for Mariccus of the tribe of the Boii see Tacitus, Hist. 2.61). The next letter is best read as o (assuming that the other marks are not ink) and there are some other marks further to the right which may or may not be ink. In between we may have lost some writing, for the corresponding area in the two following lines is abraded and n(umero) has disappeared. We tentatively suggest o[ption]e or o[ptio]ne.

12-13. In both these lines there might be a digit lost, in addition to n(umero), before the surviving traces.

Back.1. This is written along the grain from bottom to top of the lower half of the leaf.

Download EpiDoc version using the CC license Creative Commons License and EpiDoc Schema v.5