EnglishGreekFinalized - Ready.Vote - Accept-Straight-to-Finalization - FineSubmit - Corrected shape of sigma at l. 4Finalized - Ready.Vote - Accept-Straight-to-Finalization - The accusative looks fine but I would dot both nus. This needs to be marked as a PN correction with (image) as the source.Submit - In l. 14 Ἀλέξανδρο̣ς̣ λαάρχη̣ς̣ κ̣α̣[ὶ ][.?] -> Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν λάαρχο̣ν σκ̣α̣[.?] on photo online The accusative is clear because we can see the last letter ν (especially the oblique and the right vertical of N) in both words: Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν λάαρχο̣ν σκ̣α̣[ (or ση̣μ̣[ ). In any case, as indicated in the edition the ending of the nominative Ἀλέξανδρο̣ς̣ λάαρχο̣ς̣ is uncertain. Part of the omicron of Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν can be seen and it is almost a dor like the one at the end of Ζηνόδωρος in l. 16. As for λάαρχο̣ν, we find χο only in ἐρχομένων in l. 8., and certainly it is not the same. However, the letter α that follows χ in ll. 21 στοχαζόμενοι and 22 μαχαίραις is not formed in the same way and ductus. Probably in λάαρχο̣ς̣ a small letter omicron was made at the end of the right top edge of χ, and the ink spot there may be part of that omicron, Otherwise, we have to assume that omicron is lost in the damaged area between χ and ν, and so transcribe λάαρχ[o]ν. Then, σκ̣α̣[ as read in the edition looks fine, even though I can even read ση̣μ̣[.Vote - Return-Straight-to-Sender - Sending back as requestedSubmit - In l. 14 Ἀλέξανδρο̣ς̣ λαάρχη̣ς̣ κ̣α̣[ὶ ][.?] -> Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν λάαρχο̣ν σκ̣α̣[.?] on photo online
The accusative is clear because we can see the last letter ν (especially the oblique and the right vertical of N) in both words: Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν λάαρχο̣ν σκ̣α̣[ (or ση̣μ̣[ ). In any case, as indicated in the edition the ending of the nominative Ἀλέξανδρο̣ς̣ λάαρχο̣ς̣ is uncertain. Part of the omicron of Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν can be seen and it is almost a dor like the one at the end of Ζηνόδωρος in l. 16. As for λάαρχο̣ν, we find χο only in ἐρχομένων in l. 8., and certainly it is not the same. However, the letter α that follows χ in ll. 21 στοχαζόμενοι and 22 μαχαίραις is not formed in the same way and ductus. Probably in λάαρχο̣ς̣ a small letter omicron was made at the end of the right top edge of χ, and the ink spot there may be part of that omicron, Otherwise, we have to assume that omicron is lost in the damaged area between χ and ν, and so transcribe λάαρχ[o]ν. Then, σκ̣α̣[ as read in the edition looks fine, even though I can even read ση̣μ̣[.
Commit - In l. 14 Ἀλέξανδρο̣ς̣ λαάρχη̣ς̣ κ̣α̣[ὶ ][.?] -> Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν λάαρχο̣ν σκ̣α̣[.?] on photo online The accusative is clear because we can see the last letter ν (especially the oblique and the right vertical of N) in both words: Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν λάαρχο̣ν σκ̣α̣[ (or ση̣μ̣[ ). In any case, as indicated in the edition the ending of the nominative Ἀλέξανδρο̣ς̣ λάαρχο̣ς̣ is uncertain. Part of the omicron of Ἀλέξανδρο̣ν can be seen and it is almost a dor like the one at the end of Ζηνόδωρος in l. 16. As for λάαρχο̣ν, we find χο only in ἐρχομένων in l. 8., and certainly it is not the same. However, the letter α that follows χ in ll. 21 στοχαζόμενοι and 22 μαχαίραις is not formed in the same way and ductus. Probably in λάαρχο̣ς̣ a small letter omicron was made at the end of the right top edge of χ, and the ink spot there may be part of that omicron, Otherwise, we have to assume that omicron is lost in the damaged area between χ and ν, and so transcribe λάαρχ[o]ν. Then, σκ̣α̣[ as read in the edition looks fine, even though I can even read ση̣μ̣[.Finalized - Ready.Vote - Accept-Straight-to-Finalization - Add the readings of the ed.pr.corrected version following BGU 8 2847rationalized languages in langUsagechanged editor names to URIschanged type=inWord to break=nochanged schema; added xml:space=preserve; indented; moved title/@n to idnoAdded language la-GrekConverted from TEI P4 (EpiDoc DTD v. 6) to P5 (EpiDoc RNG schema)Automated split from transcoder filesI sacHerakleopoliteBGU 8 1763