Tablet 320

description 106 x 43 mm.
Part of the right-hand portion of a diptych containing line-ends from the first column, which we have not transcribed, five lines of the second column of a letter, and remains of an address on the back. This hand is very difficult to read and we have little notion of the content. There may be a reference to three people, at least one of whom might have a female name (line 2), and this may be followed by a reference to the release of deserters. The closure, which is probably in a second hand, consists only of uale.


traces of lines(?)
. . . . . . . .
libenti ḍẹḷecṭor . [ . ] . [ n
ạtọnem ẹṭ p̣actam et ru. ṛ[ n
deịnḍe omịṣẹṛas . ḍ. [ n
deṣẹṛṭores traces n
5 uale
traces n
] ... ḅḷ .. ọ n


ii.1. The tops of some letters are missing in the second word. We think it most likely that we have the verb delector in a middle sense, perhaps preceded by a phrase such as animo libenti. An alternative would be to take libenti as a name, followed by defectori or defectores, but we can see nothing after r which resembles e or i.

ii.2. ạtọnem: the trace before t is definitely ink and this must be the beginning of the line. We can only suggest that this is a name (see Attonem in 345.ii.3 and cf. 308), or possibly the end of a name. p̣actam: this looks certain and if it is preceded by et (obscured by dirt), we must have a female name, perhaps Pac<a>tam, cf. 353.ii.1; the only alternative we can envisage is sactam (for Sanctam, a well-attested name (cf. 182.ii.18)). ru.ṛ: the doubtful letter, of which only the bottom survives, might well be b; LC cites the cognomina Ruber and Rubrianus; RNGCL offers Ruta, which is also possible.

ii.3-4. We appear to have an abrupt change of subject here. There seems no possible reading other than deịnḍe for the first word. omes appears to follow but suggests nothing; we therefore prefer to read omịṣ, although i is very difficult. There is a gap before the next group of letters and the writer may have avoided a knot. In line 4 de and ores are certain and if deṣẹṛṭores is correct, we may have a reference to the release of some deserters who had been apprehended (cf. 226.a.10).

Back.1. Traces of the bottoms of letters in address script.

Back.2. This is doubtless the name of the sender. The traces would be compatible with ạ P̣ụḅḷịc̣ọ.

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