Epitaph
created: Transcription from stone (CDL).
source date: Ca. 300 BC
language: ar; en; fr; de; grc; grc-Latn; el; he
availability: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Deed Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. All citation, reuse or distribution of this work must contain a link back to DOI: https://doi.org/10.60760/unibo/igcyrgvcyr2 and the filename (IGCyr000000 or GVCyr000), as well as the year of consultation. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

[...], p. 117, n. 119, fig. 75, whence [...], 9.231; again as unpublished [...], 64; [...] 027500. Cf. [...], pp. 181, 182, 204; [...], p. 150; [...], pp. 56-58, whence [...], 38.1892; [...], catalogue B.10.

Μνάσαρχος Δαμώνακτος

Μνάσαρχος[^a1]

[^a1: Μνάσαρχος | Μνάσαρχος | [...]χος]

Mnasarkhos fils de Damonax.

Mnasarchos son of Damonax.

Mnasarchos figlio di Damonax.

Pugliese Carratelli published again this inscription as [...], 64, without illustration nor restoration, from Oliverio's papers, as was later established by Marengo.

Neither Oliverio nor Beschi did notice that the stone was re-used, a fact that seems rather certain to C. Dobias-Lalou.

Moreover, the lettering seems rather old amongst the series of bases from the same tomb (IGCyr027100,IGCyr027200, IGCyr027300, IGCyr027400 and possibly IGCyr114300).

That family-tomb is commonly called after the name Mnasarchos, frequent among them, and the name of the present deceased has been thus restored as Mnasarchos. Furthermore, Laronde identifies the father Damonax with a monetary officer active between 331 and 321.

Only Beschi, who assumes the stone to have fallen from another tomb situated above, refrains from completing the name. The fact that it had been re-used is another reason for being cautious.