Decree of Cyrene (?)
created: Transcription from stone (CDL).
source date: Between 139 and 132 BC (rather than 124/116 for Rosamilia)
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/)

[...], whence [...], 50.1639.B.I; [...] 062820; [...], pp. 240-243, number 4, document IV (text).

[...] κα[...][...] καπο[...] [...] πωλειμενα πρὸ κώμας [...]λος δαμοσια Ἀπολλων[...]ἔκδοτος

καπο[...][^a1]

[^a1: καπο[...] | κα πο[...]]

πρὸ κώμας [...][^a2]

[^a2: πρὸ κώμας [...] | πρὸ κω[...]]

Ἀπόλλων[^a3] ἔκδοτος[^a4]

[^a3: Ἀπόλλων | [...]υλω]

[^a4: ἔκδοτος | [...]δοτος]

[...] mis(e) en vente en avant du village [...] publics/ques [...] affermé.

[...] offered for sale ahead of the village [...] public [...] leased.

[...] messa/i in vendita davanti al villaggio [...] pubblica/i [...] affittato.

This fragmentary text mentions the status of some fields and the language is the dialect, like in IGCyr062810, but the hand is different so that it may be supposed that it belongs to another decree of the city. [...] suggests that line 4 should belong to the next document on the stone, i.e. IGCyr062830. He might be right, but with so poor fragments neither position seems really secure. At the beginning of the line, although his reading is convincing, it does not help to decide, as it is not clear whether we have here the god's name or a personal name built with it. Moreover, ending the present document with δαμοσια would be quite strange.

At the beginning of line 2, the use of dialect allows either κα ποησ[...] or a form of κᾶπος 'garden'.

At the end of line 2, πωλειμενα could be either a feminine singular (πωλειμένα) or a neutral plural (πωλείμενα) of the present middle participle. The same for δαμοσία or δαμόσια, which are probably related to the same lost word.

The inventory numbers show that at least some parts of the stone were already in the epigraphic collection at the time of the reorganization of the Cyrenaean antiquities after World War II care of Goodchild (from 1956 on) and before Fraser observed one of them. They were perhaps all found during the Italian period, like both fragments of IGCyr062830.