Senatus consultum de Plarasensibus et Aphrodisiensibus
Δόγμα συγκλήτου περὶ Πλαρασέων καὶ Ἀφροδεισιέων

1. The stone, the moment, the genre1. 石碑、时刻、类型

The Greek-only face — and what it tells us about the missing Latin original.仅希腊面 — 以及它对失落拉丁原本告诉我们的. Where case study #5 (SC de Asclepiade, 78 BCE) preserves both the Latin face and the Greek calque-translated face on the same stone, the SC de Plarasensibus preserves only the Greek translation — the Latin original copy at Rome's aerarium is long lost. Yet the Greek translation uses precisely the calque vocabulary case #5 documented (γραφομένων παρῆσαν, the canonical Greek calque of scribendo adfuerunt, fires here too). This is a different kind of cross-influence evidence from case #5: not direct stone-to-stone parallel translation, but indirect — the survival of the calque vocabulary, in a stone that doesn't have its Latin original next to it, is what lets us reconstruct what the Latin must have read like. The §5 Cross-influence network's calque-edge claims thus rest on a complementary pair: case #5 supplies the direct Latin/Greek same-stone evidence; case #4 supplies the indirect evidence that the same translator tradition continued operating 39 years later, on a much grander text, for an audience entirely on the Greek-speaking eastern frontier. 案例 #5 (SC de Asclepiade, 公元前 78 年) 在同一石碑上同时保存拉丁面与希腊转译面, 而 SC de Plarasensibus 仅保存希腊翻译 — 罗马 aerarium 的拉丁原本副本早已遗失. 然而希腊翻译使用的转译词汇正与案例 #5 所记录相符 (γραφομένων παρῆσαν, scribendo adfuerunt 的标准希腊转译, 此处亦触发). 这是一种不同于案例 #5 的跨语言转译证据: 不是直接的石与石平行翻译, 而是间接的 — 转译词汇的存留, 在没有拉丁原本于旁的石碑上, 使我们能重建拉丁原本之样貌. §5 跨语言转译网络的转译边主张因此基于一对互补证据: 案例 #5 提供直接的拉丁/希腊同石证据; 案例 #4 提供间接证据, 即同一译者传统在 39 年后, 在更宏大文本上, 为完全居于希腊语东方边境的受众, 继续运作.

Date日期

2 October 39 BCE (pro hēmerōn hex Nōnōn Oktōbriōn in the Greek translation = a.d. VI Nonas Octobres, in the consulship of C. Calvisius Sabinus and L. Marcius Censorinus). The Second Triumvirate is operational; Antony and Octavian are explicitly named as triumvirs in the text

Place of issue颁布地点

en Palatiōi en tōi naōi (Greek for in Palatio in templo) — the temple on the Palatine where the Senate met. Raggi & Buongiorno 2020 pp. 105–106 argue for the temple of Magna Mater (Cybele) rather than Reynolds's original suggestion of Iuppiter Stator

Place of find出土地点

Aphrodisias (modern Geyre, southwestern Turkey), inscribed on the famous archive wall of the city's theatre — a 13-metre-long marble surface in the theatre's north parodos, on which the city's most important Roman-relation documents were monumentalised over the period 39 BCE to ~50 CE. This SC occupies the most prominent block of the wall

Material材质

Carved into the theatre archive wall, in continuous lines — exceptionally long and complete preservation for an SC

Language语言

Koine Greek; the lost Latin original would have been classical Late Republican Latin (i.e. the same chancery prose as the SC de Asclepiade 39 years earlier). The Greek translation is the work of a Roman-trained translator (very likely the same aerarium-attached translator pool Sherk/Viereck 1969 identifies)

Editorial canon编辑标准

Reynolds, J. M. 1982, Aphrodisias and Rome (London: SPRS Monograph 1), doc. 8. Greek text in OGIS 453 = SIG³ 762. The dedicated monograph is Raggi & Buongiorno 2020, Il senatus consultum de Plarasensibus et Aphrodisiensibus del 39 a.C. (Münster: Acta Senatus), present in the dossier's general knowledge folder with clean text (the dossier's three excerpts files §5.4–§5.7 hold seven verbatim passages from this monograph)

Position in the formula dossier项目地位

Carries the corpus's most distinctive SC archival heading (ἐκ τῶν ἀνενεχθέντων δογμάτων συνκλήτῳ δέλτῳ πρώτῃ κηρώμασι τετάρτῳ...), explicitly tagging the document's archival position in Rome's aerarium tabularium. Fires F.GRAFOMENON_PARESAN (calque #1) and F.EDOXEN_BD (Greek enactment formula). The dossier's unique attestation of an SC that quotes itself as a referenced archival item

This SC is the centrepiece of the Aphrodisias archive wall — the most extensive single-site documentary corpus we have for Roman/Greek-East diplomatic relations in the Late Republic and early Empire. The wall preserves a Greek translation of an SC that ratifies the city's special status as amica populi Romani and as a free city (civitas libera) with tax-exempt status, and that elevates the temple of Aphrodite at Aphrodisias to the asylum status of the temple of Artemis at Ephesos. Beyond the SC's content, its formal interest is the depth of its archival framing: the opening lines name the Roman aerarium's tablet-and-wax-tablet numbering system (tablet 1, waxes 4–9), making this case study the dossier's clearest evidence for how the SC genre managed its own institutional preservation. 本 SC 是 Aphrodisias 档案墙的核心 — 我们拥有的关于共和晚期和帝国早期罗马/希腊东方外交关系最广泛的单一遗址文献集. 此墙保存了 SC 的希腊翻译, 该 SC 确认该城作为 amica populi Romani 与免税自由城邦 (civitas libera) 的特殊地位, 并将 Aphrodisias 的 Aphrodite 神庙提升至 Ephesos 的 Artemis 神庙的避难权地位. 除 SC 内容外, 其形式上的兴趣在于其档案框架之深度: 开头几行命名了罗马 aerarium 的板与蜡板编号系统 (板 1, 蜡 4–9), 使本案例研究成为项目对 SC 类型如何管理其自身机构保存最清晰的证据.

2. Key passages — Greek face with formula highlights, reconstructed Latin in parallel2. 关键段落 — 希腊面公式高亮, 重建拉丁并列

archival heading (unique to this SC)档案标题 (此 SC 独有)   cross-language calque (canonical)跨语言转译 (标准)   relator (Sherk #6 inversion: pre-Hadrianic but named)提案人 (Sherk #6 反向: Hadrian 前但已命名)   enactment (ἔδοξεν, the Greek closing)核准 (ἔδοξεν, 希腊语结尾)   publication clause (bronze tablet duplication)公布条款 (青铜板复制)

(a) The archival heading — uniquely documented here(a) 档案标题 — 仅此处有完整记录

The archival heading is the dossier's most distinctive SC documentary feature.档案标题是项目最独特的 SC 文献特征. Raggi & Buongiorno 2020 pp. 121–122 (excerpted in dossier_workspace/excerpts_latin_sc.md §5.7) reconstruct from this Greek phrasing that the Roman aerarium's SC archive was organised by tablets (δέλτοι = tabulae) with multiple wax inserts (κηρώματα = cerae) per tablet, AND the Senate's own quaestor-urbanus tablets (ταμιακαὶ δέλτοι = quaestoricae tabulae) as a separate parallel series. The Greek translator preserved this archival positioning information when translating — they explicitly named "tablet 1, waxes 4–9" so the Aphrodisians would know which tablet at Rome to refer to. Pliny NH 7.149 and Suet. Vesp. 8.5 confirm the aerarium's tablet-archive existed; this SC is the most direct documentary evidence we have of how it was structured. Raggi & Buongiorno 2020 pp. 121–122 (摘录于 dossier_workspace/excerpts_latin_sc.md §5.7) 从此希腊语措辞重建罗马 aerarium SC 档案的组织方式: 由板 (δέλτοι = tabulae) 构成, 每板含多个蜡插入物 (κηρώματα = cerae), 且元老院自身的 quaestor-urbanus 板 (ταμιακαὶ δέλτοι = quaestoricae tabulae) 为独立平行序列. 希腊译者翻译时保留了此档案定位信息 — 明确命名"板 1, 蜡 4–9", 以便 Aphrodisians 知道在罗马参考哪块板. Pliny NH 7.149 与 Suet. Vesp. 8.5 证实 aerarium 板档案的存在; 本 SC 是我们对其结构最直接的文献证据.

(b) The relatio — the consuls and the triumvirs together(b) Relatio — 执政官与三人执政者同时

Two extraordinary features here. First, the consuls are named as relatores — a Sherk modification #6 feature that case #3 (SC Beguensis, 138 CE) was supposed to be the dossier's earliest example of. The Plarasensibus SC pre-dates Beguensis by 177 years and yet uses the same convention, breaking the smooth Hadrianic-threshold story. The likely explanation: the Triumviral period (43–33 BCE) was a constitutional anomaly, with procedural conventions in flux; the Plarasensibus is an early Imperial precursor to what would become standard practice generations later. Second, the triumvirs Antony and Octavian are themselves named as additional relatores: the relatio is jointly made by 2 consuls + 2 triumvirs. No other SC in the dossier corpus has this configuration — the triumvirs sit alongside the consuls in the SC's formal procedural framing, exactly as their constitutional position as tresviri rei publicae constituendae would require. 此处有两个非凡特征. 第一, 执政官被命名为 relatores — 案例 #3 (SC Beguensis, 公元 138 年) 本应是项目此 Sherk 修正 #6 特征的最早范例. Plarasensibus SC 比 Beguensis 早 177 年却使用同一惯例, 打破平稳的 Hadrian 阈值故事. 可能解释: 三人执政时期 (公元前 43–33 年) 是宪政异常时期, 程序惯例处于流动; Plarasensibus 是数代后将成为标准实践的早期帝国先驱. 第二, 三人执政者 Antony 与 Octavian 自身被命名为额外的 relatores: relatio 由 2 位执政官 + 2 位三人执政者共同作出. 项目语料库中无其他 SC 有此配置 — 三人执政者与执政官在 SC 的形式程序框架中并列, 正如其作为 tresviri rei publicae constituendae 的宪政位置所要求.

(c) The decretum — the asylum-status grant + the bronze publication clause(c) Decretum — 避难权地位授予 + 青铜公布条款

The asylum-grant clause is itself a piece of Roman administrative bricolage: it constructs Aphrodisias's temple of Aphrodite as a peer of the temple of Artemis at Ephesos — the most famous Greek-East asylum sanctuary, the temple Augustus himself would later regulate (Tacitus Ann. 3.61–63 records imperial restrictions on Greek-East asyla). Granting Aphrodisias parity with Ephesos was an extraordinary diplomatic honour, conferred specifically because Aphrodite was the dynastic patroness of the Julian family and Octavian was the Triumvir most invested in the city. 避难权授予条款本身是一件罗马行政上的"拼凑"杰作: 它将 Aphrodisias 的 Aphrodite 神庙构造为与 Ephesos 的 Artemis 神庙同等地位 — 最著名的希腊东方 asylum 圣所, Augustus 后来亲自规制的神庙 (Tacitus Ann. 3.61–63 记录帝国对希腊东方 asyla 的限制). 授予 Aphrodisias 与 Ephesos 同等地位是非凡的外交荣誉, 特别授予是因为 Aphrodite 是 Julian 家族的世袭守护神, 且 Octavian 是最看重该城的三人执政者.

3. Slot-by-slot decomposition — Late Republican / Triumviral SC scheme3. 逐槽分解 — 共和晚期 / 三人执政 SC 框架

The Plarasensibus SC sits chronologically between the Republican four-part Sherk scheme (case #1 Bacchanalibus, 186 BCE; case #5 Asclepiade, 78 BCE) and the Imperial-era six-modification scheme (case #2 SCpP, 20 CE; case #3 Beguensis, 138 CE). It exhibits a hybrid feature set: the Republican scribendo adfuerunt-style witness list (in Greek calque), plus the post-Hadrianic-by-Sherk's-account named-proposer convention (here in the Triumviral exception), plus the case-3-style attendance count, plus the case-3-style bronze publication clause. Reading this row by row alongside the three other case studies makes the diachronic claim non-linear: the SC genre did not evolve in a straight line from Republican to Imperial; the Triumviral period saw experimental procedural variations that some of which (named-relator) anticipated Imperial norms by a century or more. Plarasensibus SC 在时间上位于共和四部 Sherk 框架 (案例 #1 Bacchanalibus, 公元前 186 年; 案例 #5 Asclepiade, 公元前 78 年) 与帝国时期六修正框架 (案例 #2 SCpP, 公元 20 年; 案例 #3 Beguensis, 公元 138 年) 之间. 它展现混合特征集: 共和 scribendo adfuerunt 式证人列表 (希腊转译), 加按 Sherk 说法的 Hadrian 后命名提案人惯例 (此处在三人执政例外中), 加案例 3 式出席人数, 加案例 3 式青铜公布条款. 将此与其他三个案例研究逐行对照, 历时主张变为非线性: SC 类型并非从共和直线发展至帝国; 三人执政时期出现实验性程序变体, 其中一些 (命名提案人) 比帝国常规早一个多世纪.

The publication clause asks the SC to be set up in bronze in Rome AND in Aphrodisias's temple AND in both Plarasensian and Aphrodisian agorai. The marble inscription we have on the theatre archive wall is, strictly speaking, a monumental reproduction of one of those bronze copies — but the bronze itself is long gone. The marble preserves the SC's content; the bronze duplication clause documents the SC's institutional life on the Capitoline (the same place case #5's Asclepiade bronze was set up, 39 years earlier). Reading this clause alongside case #3's two-tablet doubling at Beguensis (the bronze copy at the petitioner's estate alongside the aerarium copy) and case #2's tiered publication at SCpP (every province + every legion), one sees the SC genre's publication apparatus evolving through three distinct strategies — but always anchored in bronze on the Capitoline as the master copy. 公布条款要求 SC 以青铜立于罗马, 同时立于 Aphrodisias 的神庙, 以及 Plarasensian 与 Aphrodisian 的两 agorai. 我们今天所有的剧场档案墙上的大理石铭文严格而言是其中一份青铜副本的纪念性再现 — 但青铜本身早已遗失. 大理石保存 SC 的内容; 青铜复制条款记录 SC 在 Capitoline 的机构生活 (与案例 #5 的 Asclepiade 青铜 39 年前所设之处相同). 将此条款与案例 #3 在 Beguensis 的双板 (请愿者地产青铜副本与 aerarium 副本并列) 以及案例 #2 在 SCpP 的分级公布 (每省 + 每军团) 一同阅读, 可见 SC 类型的公布装置经过三种不同策略演化 — 但始终以 Capitoline 上的青铜为主副本.

4. English translation (key passages)4. 英文翻译 (关键段落)

5. Historical context — Aphrodisias, the Triumvirs, and the Aphrodite cult5. 历史背景 — Aphrodisias、三人执政与 Aphrodite 崇拜

Aphrodisias's political relationship with Rome was unusual. The city had been favoured by Sulla in the 80s BCE, and during the civil wars of the 40s BCE it took an exposed pro-Caesarian and pro-Octavian stance. After Caesar's assassination, the city held its loyalty to the Caesarian-Octavian side through Mark Antony's eastern dominance and into the Triumviral period. By 39 BCE, when this SC was passed, Octavian and Antony were uneasy partners in a tripartite division of the Roman world; the SC's joint relatio by both triumvirs is itself a documentary manifestation of that constitutional anomaly. The two triumvirs would not openly break with each other until 33 BCE; the Battle of Actium (31 BCE) was twelve years away. Aphrodisias 与罗马的政治关系不同寻常. 该城曾在公元前 80 年代受 Sulla 青睐, 在公元前 40 年代的内战中采取明显的亲 Caesar 和亲 Octavian 立场. Caesar 被刺杀后, 该城在 Mark Antony 东方统治期间及至三人执政时期保持对 Caesarian-Octavian 一方的忠诚. 至公元前 39 年本 SC 通过时, Octavian 与 Antony 是不安的合作伙伴, 在罗马世界三分; SC 由两位三人执政者共同 relatio 本身正是此宪政异常的文献体现. 两位三人执政者直至公元前 33 年方公开决裂; Actium 战役 (公元前 31 年) 还在十二年后.

The asylum-status grant to the temple of Aphrodite was an extraordinary diplomatic move. Aphrodite was the Greek-named version of Venus Genetrix, the patron goddess Caesar had publicly claimed as his family's ancestress. In honouring the temple of Aphrodite at Aphrodisias, the Roman Senate was — at the triumvirs' explicit instigation — honouring the Julian house's dynastic patroness on her Greek-East home ground. Octavian's later use of the Venus-cult in his Augustan religious programme can be read backward from this SC: 39 BCE is the moment the Greek-East side of that cult was given Roman legal recognition. 对 Aphrodite 神庙授予避难权地位是一项非凡的外交举动. Aphrodite 是 Venus Genetrix 的希腊名形式, Caesar 公开宣称为其家族祖先的守护女神. 罗马元老院在三人执政者明确推动下表彰 Aphrodisias 的 Aphrodite 神庙, 即表彰 Julian 家族在希腊东方本土的世袭守护神. Octavian 后来在其奥古斯都宗教计划中对 Venus 崇拜的使用可从本 SC 倒读: 公元前 39 年正是该崇拜的希腊东方面获得罗马法律承认的时刻.

The SC was inscribed on what would become the city's archive wall: a 13-metre-long marble surface in the theatre's north parodos, on which Aphrodisias monumentalised its most important Roman-relation documents over the following ~90 years. The wall (Reynolds, Aphrodisias and Rome, 1982 — the definitive corpus) carries this SC + letters from Antony and from Octavian + Augustan-era decrees + Imperial-era responses + a Hadrianic letter, all preserved in continuous lines. The archive wall is the dossier's single most important monumental witness to long-term Roman/Greek-East diplomatic continuity; its placement in the theatre — a civic-celebratory site, not a sanctuary or administrative office — turns the city's Roman diplomatic history into part of its civic identity for the audiences watching theatrical performances. SC 被刻于将成为该城档案墙之处: 剧场北 parodos 一面 13 米长的大理石表面, 此后约 90 年间 Aphrodisias 在此纪念性地展示其最重要的罗马关系文献. 此墙 (Reynolds, Aphrodisias and Rome, 1982 — 权威语料库) 承载本 SC + Antony 与 Octavian 之信函 + 奥古斯都时期法令 + 帝国时期回应 + Hadrian 时期信函, 皆以连续行保存. 档案墙是项目对长期罗马/希腊东方外交连续性最重要的纪念性见证; 其位于剧场 — 一个市民庆祝场所, 而非圣所或行政办公室 — 将该城的罗马外交史转化为观看戏剧表演观众市民身份的一部分.

6. Scholarship synthesis6. 学术综合

Raggi & Buongiorno 2020 — the monograph dedicated to this SC

"Ciascun senatus consultum è un atto giuridico che rappresenta, in forma più o meno sintetica, il processo verbale di una deliberazione assunta dal senato rispetto a un oggetto di discussione in una seduta formalmente convocata da un magistrato competente (dotato cioè di ius agendi cum patribus). … Questo spiega la standardizzazione della struttura testuale dei senatus consulta sostanzialmente in tre parti." Raggi & Buongiorno 2020, pp. 102–103. Excerpted in dossier_workspace/excerpts_latin_sc.md §5.4.

The 2020 monograph is the dedicated full-scale treatment of this SC — a 207-page volume that walks through every line of the Greek text, reconstructs the lost Latin original, and contextualises the SC within the Triumviral period's procedural fluidity. The dossier's excerpts_latin_sc.md §5.4–§5.7 holds seven verbatim passages from this monograph; together they cover (a) the three-part SC structure as restated for the Triumviral case, (b) the per singulorum sententias exquisitas vs per discessionem distinction (the Plarasensibus was probably the former, given its multiply-named relatio), (c) the prescript reconstruction including the lost convening temple, (d) the canonical Greek calque περὶ τούτου τοῦ πράγματος οὕτως ἔδοξεν formula and its absence from this specific SC (replaced here by the bare ἔδοξεν), (e) the recte atque ordine endorsement formula that incorporates the triumvirs' independent grants into the SC's ratification, (f) the unique archival heading that names the aerarium's tablet-and-wax numbering, and (g) the bronze publication clause and the aerarium's tablet-archive context (Suetonius Vesp. 8.5). 2020 年专著是本 SC 的全面专项处理 — 207 页, 逐行走过希腊文本, 重建失落的拉丁原本, 并将 SC 置于三人执政时期程序流动性中. 项目 excerpts_latin_sc.md §5.4–§5.7 收藏此专著的七段原文; 共同覆盖 (a) 三人执政案重述的三部 SC 结构, (b) per singulorum sententias exquisitas 与 per discessionem 的区别 (Plarasensibus 可能为前者, 鉴于其多重命名的 relatio), (c) 开头重建包括失落的召集神庙, (d) 标准希腊转译 περὶ τούτου τοῦ πράγματος οὕτως ἔδοξεν 公式及其在本 SC 中之缺席 (此处由裸 ἔδοξεν 替代), (e) recte atque ordine 背书公式将三人执政者独立授予纳入 SC 批准, (f) 命名 aerarium 板与蜡编号的独特档案标题, 以及 (g) 青铜公布条款与 aerarium 板档案语境 (Suetonius Vesp. 8.5).

The unique archival prescript — Raggi & Buongiorno on the aerarium's tabularium

"Le linee 1–3 del testo del senatus consultum de Plarasensibus et Aphrodisiensibus contengono una serie di dati utili per lo svolgimento di considerazioni in ordine all'archiviazione non soltanto del testo in esame ma più in generale dei deliberati senatori … Il verbo ἀναφέρω, di cui ἀνενεχθέντων è participio plurale passivo che va collegato a δογμάτων, va senz'altro reso con il latino refero e indica appunto l'atto della registrazione di una delibera senatoria all'interno delle tabulae publicae (in tabulas publicas referre, sintagma peraltro di natura tecnica)." Raggi & Buongiorno 2020, pp. 121–122. Excerpted in dossier_workspace/excerpts_latin_sc.md §5.6 / §5.7.

The opening lines of this SC are the dossier's most direct documentary evidence for the structure of Rome's aerarium SC archive. Raggi & Buongiorno demonstrate that the Greek phrase ἐκ τῶν ἀνενεχθέντων δογμάτων is a calque of the Latin technical term ex senatus consultis relatis ("from the senatorial resolutions referred to [the public tablets]"), and that the SC's reference to "tablet 1, waxes 4–9" plus the separate "quaestorian tablets" gives us a parallel reference system: the aerarium kept the Senate's resolutions in physical tablets with multiple wax inserts each, and a separate parallel run of quaestoricae tabulae. The Suetonian datum (Vesp. 8.5) about the 3,000 bronze tablets destroyed in the 69 CE fire of the Capitoline gives the upper bound for the SC tabularium's later size; this SC is the most direct documentary witness to how it was structured. 本 SC 的开头行是项目对罗马 aerarium SC 档案结构最直接的文献证据. Raggi & Buongiorno 证明希腊短语 ἐκ τῶν ἀνενεχθέντων δογμάτων 是拉丁技术术语 ex senatus consultis relatis 的转译 ("从已转交 [公共板] 的元老院决议"), SC 对"板 1, 蜡 4–9"加单独"quaestorian 板"的引用给我们一个平行参照系统: aerarium 将元老院决议保存于物理板上, 每板含多个蜡插入物, 与 quaestoricae tabulae 平行运行. Suetonius (Vesp. 8.5) 关于公元 69 年 Capitoline 大火中毁坏的 3,000 块青铜板的资料给出 SC tabularium 后期规模的上限; 本 SC 是其结构最直接的文献见证.

The continuation of the calque tradition from case #5 (78 BCE) to this SC (39 BCE)

The Greek face of this SC fires F.GRAFOMENON_PARESAN — exactly the calque that case study #5 (SC de Asclepiade, 78 BCE) was the first to attest. 39 years later, the same Latin-to-Greek calque vocabulary is operational in the Aphrodisias archive's Greek translation. This is the strongest single piece of evidence in the dossier for the continuity of the aerarium translator tradition: the same translator pool (or its institutional successor), working in the same Roman archive, produced calques of the same Latin formulae across at least four decades. The 19 corpus attestations of F.PERI_TOUTOU_OUTOS_EDOXEN and 8 of F.GRAFOMENON_PARESAN together trace this institutional continuity across the Late Republican and Augustan-Tiberian Greek East. The Plarasensibus SC sits at the chronological centre of that trace. 本 SC 的希腊面触发 F.GRAFOMENON_PARESAN — 正是案例 #5 (SC de Asclepiade, 公元前 78 年) 首次记录的转译. 39 年后, 同一拉丁至希腊转译词汇在 Aphrodisias 档案的希腊翻译中运行. 这是项目对 aerarium 译者传统连续性最强的单一证据: 同一译者群 (或其机构继承者), 在同一罗马档案中工作, 跨至少四十年翻译同一拉丁公式. 语料库中 F.PERI_TOUTOU_OUTOS_EDOXEN 的 19 次出现与 F.GRAFOMENON_PARESAN 的 8 次共同追溯此机构连续性, 跨越共和晚期与奥古斯都-提比略时期的希腊东方. Plarasensibus SC 位于该追溯的时间中点.

Reynolds 1982 — the Aphrodisias archive wall as a documentary monument

J. M. Reynolds, Aphrodisias and Rome (London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies Monograph 1, 1982) is the definitive edition of the Aphrodisias archive wall — all of its 22 documents, of which this SC (Reynolds doc. 8) is the most extensive. Reynolds's commentary establishes the wall's chronological depth (39 BCE through ~50 CE, with later additions), its physical disposition (the 13-metre theatre parodos surface, in continuous-line layout), and the relationship between the wall's documents and the city's diplomatic strategy. Her introduction frames the wall as a city's self-monumentalisation through its Roman documentary record — Aphrodisias's claim to a special relationship with Rome made visible in marble, on a surface adjacent to the city's most performative civic space. The case study's framing of the wall in §1 and §5 follows Reynolds's analysis closely. J. M. Reynolds, Aphrodisias and Rome (London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies Monograph 1, 1982) 是 Aphrodisias 档案墙的权威版本 — 其全部 22 份文献, 其中本 SC (Reynolds 文献 8) 最广泛. Reynolds 注释确立墙的时间深度 (公元前 39 年至约公元 50 年, 加上后期添加), 其物理布置 (13 米剧场 parodos 表面, 连续行布局), 及墙的文献与该城外交策略的关系. 其导论将墙框架为该城通过其罗马文献记录的自我纪念化 — Aphrodisias 对与罗马特殊关系的主张以大理石形式可见, 置于该城最具表演性市民空间相邻的表面. 案例研究 §1 与 §5 对墙的框架紧随 Reynolds 的分析.

7. Cross-references7. 互参

8. Bibliography8. 参考文献