Dedication to Apollo of the 'bench of Elaiitas'
created: Transcription from stone (CDL).
source date: About 300 BC (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/)

[...], p. 113, n. 6, and [...], pp. 189-190, whence [...], 38.1897; [...] 080500; [...], p. 102, p; 367, number 92 (text). Cf. [...], p. 94; [...]; [...], pp. 277-280, whence [...] 68.1750.

Ἐλαιίτας Θευδώρω τῶι Ἀπόλλωνι ἱαριτεύων ἀνέθηκε.

Θευδώρω[^a1]

[^a1: Θευδώρω | [...]ω | Θευδώρω]

Elaiitas fils de Theudoros durant sa prêtrise a consacré à Apollon.

Elaiitas son of Theudoros being priest dedicated to Apollo.

Elaiitas figlio di Theudoros ha dedicato ad Apollo quando era sacerdote.

Stucchi's restoration for the father's name was based on IGCyr096700, which is clearly much later. We followed thus already for [...] Laronde's dating and consider the two Elaiitas to be different persons of different times. Hence a date for the wall-bench that should be older than proposed by Stucchi and Ensoli. However, the latter's research in the area proved that the wall-bench was built after the Greek propylaea. [...] (and again [...]), being able to date IGCyr096700 about 250, tries to reconcile all arguments and allows for two generations separating the two men named Elaiitas. By the way, he regenerates Stucchi's restoration of the present inscription, supposing that the two names Elaiitas (a rare one) and Theudoros (a very common one) were given alternatively in the family. This point should be taken cautiously as a tempting hypothesis, for many other names ending with ος may fill the gap of six letters.

Laronde mentioned also en passant a possible restoration of the priest's name as Ἐπαρίτας; this is a relic of a former stage of his work that he omitted to cancel in his publication, but rejected firmly in further oral discussion and in his unpublished prosopography, inasmuch as IGCyr102000 now offers a third instance of the rare name Ἐλαιίτας.

By the time of the discovery, Oliverio thought this wall to be a dam protecting the sanctuary from rain-water (see for example [...], p. 133). Laronde provided arguments against this idea and [...], p. 94 (cf. [...]) eventually considered it as a bench for visitors, namely for people taking part into the sacred processions.