Tablet 615

description

Inv.no.93.1453. 95 x 40 mm. Plate 10.
Archaeological data. Location: SG (bonfire site). Period: 3.
A fragment of a draft letter or letters written on both sides of the leaf. It is written in the hand which we have identified as that of Cerialis (see 225-232). Side A is crossed through with a large X, for which cf. 226. It also has a large v-shaped notch in the left edge, which suggests it was the left-hand leaf of a diptych, with the right-hand leaf having been lost. Side A is complete at the top and at the left, except for the loss of the top right corner; it is incomplete at the foot. Side B, comparably, is complete at top and right, and no writing seems to have been lost at the left (see B.1-2 note). There appears to be an interpunct in A.2. There is a tiny unattached fragment, reading ].deu[ or ].del[ on one side and ]m on the other.

edition

A:
uẹnatores meị uọ[.... n n
..[.] uecturas · [[ adịci[... ]] n n
aḍ pretia adic̣ierunt [ n
[[ quẹṃ[a]ḍmodum]] qua n
5 ] ṛ..... [
. . . . . . . .
B:
[[promiscue]] commilị-
[[tones]]
n uacat n
Ḅrocchus n(oster) postea acẹ. n n
so reuersus eṣ[t] quam ego n n
5 ].ẹ. puto illụ[m c]um plurịbụṣ n
].[
. . . . . . . .

translation

'(A)My huntsmen have added the transport charges to the costs (B) Our Brocchus returned from Celsus(?) after I did. I think that he, with many '

commentary

A.1. uẹnatores: cursively written with several ligatures. For other references to hunting in the tablets see 594 introduction, A.R.Birley (2002), 147ff.

A.1-2. There is very little doubt about the reading uọ[ and probably not room for more than four letters in the rest of the line. uọ[bis would fit but it is then hard to see what could have come at the start of line 2. Here there is room for 3-4 letters before uecturas, but the traces are wholly uncertain. Very tentatively we wonder whether the solution is to read uọ[luc]|ṛụ[m] (or uọ[luc]|ṛịụ[m]); for hunting birds with nets see 593. We have also considered uọ[st]|ṛạ[s] (for uestras), though the fact that the adjective would then precede its noun whereas mei follows it, is against this suggestion. Another possibility, suggested by Rea, is to read uọ[len]|ṭẹ[s].

A.2. uecturas: see 649.11-12 note. adịci[: it is most probable that Cerialis started to write adicierunt at this point, but then crossed it out so that he could first insert ad pretia.

A.3. Probably no writing has been lost after adic̣ierunt. We have assumed this is intended for adiecerunt, giving the sense suggested in the translation; see Adams (2003), 00.

A.4. quẹṃ[a]ḍmodum deleted and qua|[re substituted, beginning a new sentence?

B.1-2. promiscue has been crossed through, as has tones in the next line, but there is no sign that commilị has been erased; we assume nonetheless that the intention was to erase the whole of these words. It is odd that these lines are inset in relation to what follows and that there is a uacat in line 2. Perhaps they belong to a different letter, which Cerialis discarded before starting afresh in line 3. promiscue: we are confident of the reading. It is no doubt to be understood in the sense given in OLD s.v.1 "all at the same time or in the same place".

B.3. On the abbreviation n— for noster see Tab.Vindol.II, p.54.

B.3-4. After postea, we seem to have to choose between acẹ plus one letter or two narrow letters, and, less probably, acḥ plus one letter; the trace at the right is indistinctive. In view of reuersus eṣ[t] in the next line, we should no doubt treat a as the preposition and look for a place-name or a personal name to follow. The reading Cel|so, suggested in A.R.Birley (2001b), 11 n.6, is possible, and a Celsus may occur in 770. On possible identifications see A.R.Birley (2002), 138.

B.4. Possibly an apex mark over the o of ego.

B.5. Before puto the easiest reading is ẹṃ and the trace before this could be part of , with the whole perhaps deleted: i.e. Cerialis first wrote q]ụẹṃ and then changed it to illum. But if so, this line extended further left than the line above and was aligned with line 3. c]um plurịbụṣ gives the impression that it has been squashed in between lines 5 and 6 as an addition.

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