Formulaic Language:
The Premise of Prediction 公式化语言：
预测的前提

Why abbreviate?为何缩写？

Source status: the local abbreviation base for this act is OHRE Appendix II. The article on proper names and Latin epigraphic abbreviation is a retrieval target for direct page-level confirmation of the worked IDR/ISM examples.资料状态：本幕之本地缩写依据为《牛津罗马铭文学手册》附录二。关于专名与拉丁铭文缩写的专文，仍为待取回文献，用以逐页核查下列 IDR / ISM 例证。 Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 787–813, Appendix II; Strechie article retrieval target.

Two registers — Latin dense, Greek restricted两种传统：拉丁密，希腊疏

The asymmetry, in numbers — but with a twist不均，以数言之 ── 然有一转

How to read the two findings together. McLean's claim is about abbreviation density per inscription (counting D M as one abbreviation, etc.). Our chart is about formula-phrase density per inscription (counting D(is) M(anibus) as one formula). Latin's funerary inscriptions are short and abbreviation-dense; Greek's decree inscriptions are long and formula-dense. Both traditions are formulaic, but they distribute the formulaic-ness differently — Latin into the abbreviation-letter, Greek into the full-phrase. 两发现合起来看：McLean 的论说乃缩写密度之事 (每铭文之缩写计次)。本图所示乃套语密度之事 (每铭文之套语-短语计次)。拉丁丧葬铭文短而缩写密；希腊法令铭文长而套语密。两传统皆为公式化，所不同者乃公式化之分布：拉丁集于缩写之字母，希腊集于整段短语。

The reference works — already inadequate by design参考工具：本就不全

"This list of some common epigraphic abbreviations used in Latin inscriptions lays no claim to completeness. A work of a different magnitude would be required for such an ambition … Yet, a reader of epigraphic texts will discover that the ingenuity of the Roman stonecutter and/or his clients surpassed what modern compilers of wordlists have accomplished. Even with the help of an extensive list some puzzles will remain.""本表所录之拉丁铭文缩写，绝不敢称完备……即使备好这张长表，谜题犹存。" Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 787, Appendix II.

The point. The reference work itself names the gap. The point is not that lists are bad; the point is that the abbreviation system is open-ended in a way no list can close. The editor restoring an inscription has the list and still has to make a call. 编者修复某一铭文时，纵有这张表，仍须自行判断。这里要紧的，不是参考工具是否齐全，而是缩写体系本身敞开，没有任何表可以将其全部封闭。

A — the alphabetical opener (51 entries)字母 A — 起首一栏 (51 条)

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 787–88, Appendix II.

D — the funerary opener (27 entries)字母 D — 葬铭起首 (27 条)

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 791, Appendix II.

Note. D M is famous; D D D is also a standard dedication-formula closer. D·E·R·I·C on its own would baffle an unprepared reader — it sits inside a senatorial-decree formula, which Act II will return to. 补注：D M 众所周知；D D D 亦为题献铭文之常见收尾。D·E·R·I·C 若孤立而见，殊难索解，因其属元老院决议套语之一环，留待第二幕详论。

P — the biggest menu (38 entries)字母 P — 最长的菜单 (38 条)

Branching factor. Six entries in the table above contain at least four distinct expansions for the same letter-pattern. The editor disambiguates by context. When context fails (broken stone, no surrounding text), restoration becomes uncertain. 分支因子：表中六条至少各有四种展开方式。编者凭上下文消歧；上下文不存 (石残文断) 时，修复便不可定。

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 803–05, Appendix II.

S — the verb-and-virtue letter (27 entries)字母 S — 动词与德目 (27 条)

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 808–10, Appendix II.

V — votive + military (23 entries)字母 V — 还愿与军务 (23 条)

Note the funerary / votive divide. A reader who sees V S L M at the bottom of a stone reads votive ("paid his vow"). A reader who sees V A at the bottom reads funerary ("lived N years"). Same letter, two genre-bound expansions, picked by what came before. 还愿与丧葬的分别：石尾若见 V S L M，乃还愿铭收尾 ("还其愿")；若见 V A，则属丧葬 ("享年若干")。同一字母，两种属体的展开，端赖前文何种语境。

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 812–13, Appendix II.

L · M · N — three mid-alphabet samples (24 + 20 + 15 entries)L、M、N 三字母 — 中段样本

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 798–800, Appendix II.

Worked example 1 — IDR III/2 9 (CIL III 7983), tria nomina + tribe实例一：IDR III/2 9 (CIL III 7983)，三名加部族

M · IVL · PAP · IVSTVS · DEC
COL · OB · HON · PONTIF
CAMPVM · CVMSVIS
ADITIBVS · CLVSIT
ET · STATVAM · POSIT

M(arcus) Iul(ius) Pap(iria tribu) Iustus dec(urio)
col(oniae) ob hon(orem) pontif(icatus)
campum cum suis
aditibus clusit
et statuam posit.

IDR III/2 9 worked example; direct article check remains a retrieval target. Local abbreviation base: Bruun & Edmondson 2015, Appendix II.

Worked example 2 — IDR II 49, prefect dedicates to Jupiter实例二：IDR II 49，营长向至高朱庇特题献

I · O · M
IVL · VALER · EMER
PRAEF · COH · I
BRIT · ⟨…⟩

I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo)
Iul(ius) Valer(ius) Emer(itus)
praef(ectus) coh(ortis) I
Brit(tonum) ⟨…⟩

IDR II 49 worked example; direct article check remains a retrieval target. Local abbreviation base: Bruun & Edmondson 2015, Appendix II.

Worked example 3 — IDR I 3 (CIL XVI 163), imperial titles in compression实例三：IDR I 3 (CIL XVI 163)，元首尊号之压缩

IMP · CAES · DIVI
HADR · F · DIVI · TRAIAN
PARTH · NEP · DIVI · NERV
PRONEP · T · AEL · HADRIANVS
ANTONINVS · AVG · PIVS
P · M · TRIB · POT · ⟨N⟩
COS · ⟨N⟩ · P · P · ⟨…⟩

Imp(erator) Caes(ar) divi
Hadr(iani) f(ilius) divi Traian(i)
Parth(ici) nep(os) divi Nerv(ae)
pronep(os) T(itus) Ael(ius) Hadrianus
Antoninus Aug(ustus) Pius
p(ontifex) m(aximus) trib(unicia) pot(estate) ⟨N⟩
co(n)s(ul) ⟨N⟩ p(ater) p(atriae) ⟨…⟩

IDR I 3 worked example; direct article check remains a retrieval target. Local abbreviation base: Bruun & Edmondson 2015, Appendix II.

Worked example 4 — IDR II 145, parents bury their daughter实例四：IDR II 145，父母为女立碑

D · M
ET · IVLIAE · GRA-
TAE · FIL · PAREN-
TES · POSVER

D(is) M(anibus)
et Iuliae Gra-
tae fil(iae) paren-
tes posuer(unt).

IDR II 145 worked example; direct article check remains a retrieval target. Local abbreviation base: Bruun & Edmondson 2015, Appendix II.

Worked example 5 — ISM II 263, a Black-Sea funerary inscription实例五：ISM II 263，黑海沿岸之葬铭

D · M
T · VIBIVS · VARIVS
MIL · LEG · XI · CL
⟨signa cohortis…⟩
VIX · ANN · XXVIII
MILITAV · ANN · VIII
HEREDES · B · M · F

D(is) M(anibus)
T(itus) Vibius Varius
mil(es) leg(ionis) XI Cl(audiae)
⟨signa cohortis…⟩
vix(it) ann(is) XXVIII
militav(it) ann(is) VIII
heredes b(ene) m(erenti) f(ecerunt).

ISM II 263 worked example; direct article check remains a retrieval target. Local abbreviation base: Bruun & Edmondson 2015, Appendix II.

Worked example 6 — IDR II 1, deity abbreviated as an acronym实例六：IDR II 1，神名以缩字代之

I · O · M · DOLICH · ⟨…⟩
ET · S · I · M

I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) Dolich(eno) ⟨…⟩
et S(oli) I(nvicto) M(ithrae)

IDR II 1 worked example; direct article check remains a retrieval target. Local abbreviation base: Bruun & Edmondson 2015, Appendix II.

The Greek abbreviation tradition — three engines希腊缩写传统：三种机制

"Though the Greeks did not employ abbreviations nearly to the same extent as the Romans, abbreviations were used as a means of reducing labor and saving space on the stone's surface. An early system of abbreviation was developed in [Rhodes]. … Any system of abbreviation requires either that the meanings of abbreviations be self-evident, or that the readers be familiar with the conventions of abbreviation.""希腊人之用缩写远不如罗马人之密，然亦为省工省石而用之。最早之缩写体系，约出自罗德岛……凡是缩写体系，皆须或其义自明，或其读者熟习其惯例。" McLean 2002: 49, §2.05.

Greek abbreviation marks — the diacritical shorthand希腊缩号：标点之省写

Why the marks matter. Where the engraver omitted the mark, a modern editor must infer abbreviation from context — the same problem as Latin, only with smaller margin for error because Greek does not pile shortened letters as densely. 缩号何以紧要：石工若漏未刻，今之编者须从上下文推断；与拉丁的地方境同；只希腊缩写积叠较稀，可容之误差更小。

McLean 2002: 49–50, §2.06.3.

Greek numerals — abbreviation as notation希腊数字：以缩号代数

Acrophonic = abbreviation by initial. The Attic acrophonic system uses the first letter of the number-word as the numeral itself. The same logic underlies a vast amount of Greek epigraphic abbreviation: take the first letter (or first two), let the reader supply the rest from context. Acrophonic survives into the Athenian Tribute Lists (Act III) — the Η for 100 drachmas is the same Η as hekaton. 首音字母即缩写：阿提卡之首音数字以词首字母代该数本身。希腊大量铭文缩写按这个道理：取词首一二字母，余字由读者从语境补足。该一首音字母数字系统沿用至雅典贡金表 (第三幕)：表 100 德拉克玛之 Η，正即 ἑκατόν 之 Η。

McLean 2002: 51, §2.07 + §2.08.

The branching factor — when context fails分支因子：上下文失效时

What the menu does not show. Each "entry" is itself a head of a sub-tree: the entry S·D branches into "salutem dicit" (letter opener), "sub dolo", "sacrum dedit", and more — each picked by the inscription's genre. The real branching factor is the product of letter-menu × genre-menu × position-in-text. 表所未示者：每"条目"本身又是一子树。S·D 之下分有 "salutem dicit"、"sub dolo"、"sacrum dedit" 等若干分支，端赖铭文之属体。实际之分支因子，乃字母菜单 × 属体菜单 × 文中位置三者之积。

Bruun & Edmondson 2015: 787–813, counts from OHRE Appendix II.

The closing problem — what narrows the menu?收束：何以收窄这个菜单？

The forward-pull. Latin and Greek abbreviation lists exist because abbreviations recur in fixed positions of fixed phrase-types. The phrase-types are formulae. Act II picks them up where Act I leaves them. 由此向前：拉丁与希腊之缩写表所以可编，正因缩写有其固定位置，且嵌于固定之短语类型里面。短语类型即套语。第二幕承此而续。

Formula = phrase-unit + slots套语：短语单位与槽位

ὁ δεῖνα [divinity] ἀνέθηκε

The Formula Dossier's bank — 54 formulae across 21 case studies套语词典之库：21 案例中之 54 套语

The bank, by the numbers — top 15 formulae by corpus hits从语料数说起 ── 命中数前 15

Three observations. (1) The Latin D M opener at 77,785 hits dwarfs everything; Latin's funerary habit is the corpus's gravitational centre. (2) Greek ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ and ἐπειδή sit second-tier — predictably high because they open thousands of honorific decrees. (3) The five canonical Athenian prescript formulae (ἔδοξεν τῇ βουλῇ, ἔδοξεν τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ, ἐπὶ X ἄρχοντος, ἐπὶ τῆς … πρυτανείας, X ἐγραμμάτευεν) all sit in the 800–2,700 range — a tight cluster that reflects the small surviving Athenian-decree corpus relative to the imperial-period funerary one. 三事可观：(1) 拉丁 D M 起首七万七千余命中，俯瞰一切；拉丁丧葬习惯乃整体语料之引力中心。(2) 希腊 ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ 与 ἐπειδή 居第二级，因其开启数千荣誉法令，自当较多。(3) 雅典前言之五条主要套语 (ἔδοξεν τῇ βουλῇ、ἔδοξεν τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ、ἐπὶ X ἄρχοντος、ἐπὶ τῆς … πρυτανείας、X ἐγραμμάτευεν) 皆在 800-2,700 区间 ── 紧密之一束，反映现存雅典法令较帝政期丧葬铭文为少。

Tally source: formula-dossier/dossier.html · DATA.summary.by_formula, derived from EDCS_text_cleaned_2022-09-12 (Latin) and I.PHI 2022 (Greek). All 54 formulae have corpus counts.

F.EDOXEN — "It seemed good to the council and the people"F.EDOXEN — "议事会与人民议决"

Henry 1977: 13–26, on the bouleutic / demotic distinction in Attic decree-prescripts.

F.EPI_ARCHONTOS / F.EPI_PRYTANEIAS — dating the decreeF.EPI_ARCHONTOS / F.EPI_PRYTANEIAS — 为法令纪年

Henry 1977: 27–49, on the prytany-secretary triangulation.

F.EPEIDE + F.DEDOCHTHAI — the whereas-clause and the be-it-resolvedF.EPEIDE 与 F.DEDOCHTHAI — 鉴于…这里议决…

McLean 2002: 214–25 and 232–43, on decrees, honorific inscriptions, commendation, crowns, and publication; Henry 1977 remains the prescript control for Act II.

F.EPAINESAI / F.STEFANOSAI / F.ANAGRAPSAI — commend, crown, publishF.EPAINESAI / F.STEFANOSAI / F.ANAGRAPSAI — 嘉、冠、刻

McLean 2002: 35–37 and 232–43, on restoration by formula, honorific clauses, and publication language; Henry 1977 remains the prescript control for Act II.

Latin SC opening — F.LAT_SENATUM_HABUIT family拉丁元老院决议之起首

Sherk 1969, SC procedural formulae; specialist senatorial-procedure bibliography remains a retrieval target.

F.LAT_DE_EA_RE_ITA_CENSUERUNT + F.LAT_CENSUERE — the deliberation hingeF.LAT_DE_EA_RE_ITA_CENSUERUNT 与 F.LAT_CENSUERE — 审议之关节

SC voting formulae keyed here to Sherk 1969; specialist Senate procedure volume remains a retrieval target.

Latin funerary — the four-formula stack拉丁丧葬：四套语堆叠

The stack. A typical 1st–2nd c. CE epitaph stacks four formulae: opening · subject's name + biographical numbers · dedicators + relation · closing. Five lines of text, four formula-units; the human payload is the name and the numbers. This stack is why Laudatio Turiae (Act III) reads as a non-formulaic outlier — it is a personalised oration where the formulae have given way to first-person narrative. 堆叠结构：典型之一至二世纪墓志层叠四套语：起首 · 亡者姓名加生平数字 · 立碑者及其关系 · 收尾。文五行而套语四组；属人之独有内容仅为人名与数字。第三幕所论之图利娅颂辞，正所以读来"非套语"，是因为其为以第一人称叙述之颂辞，套语已让位于个人化之记述。

F.AUTOKRATOR_SEBASTOS_LEGEI — the Greek imperial-edict openerF.AUTOKRATOR_SEBASTOS_LEGEI — 希腊化之元首敕令起首

The bilingual cross-check. A Greek inscription opening with this formula tells the editor she is reading an imperial response translated from Latin. The Latin original may exist (and often does, in archival rosters); the bilingual pairing then becomes a reciprocal restoration tool — each face supplies what the other lost. The Persicus edict (Act III · Case D) is the demonstration. 双语互证：希腊铭文用这一套语起首，编者即知其为译自拉丁之元首回复。拉丁原文或存 (常存于档案册中)；双语对照便成相互修复之工具；一面所缺，另一面或可补。第三幕之 D 案 Persicus 政令即该一显例。

Sherk 1969: 217–34, imperial-edict translation conventions.

Formula × geography — the same slot, regional menus套语 × 地理：同一槽位，地区菜单

The point. A Black-Sea editor restoring a damaged publication-line does not look in Athens for parallels; the local variant στηλάμωνον is what fits. Regional knowledge is part of formula knowledge. 黑海编者修补一公布套语之残行，不应向雅典觅平行文本；当地之变体 στηλάμωνον 方合。地域知识即套语知识之一部。

McLean 2002: 35–37 + 240, regional publication-formula variants.

Formula × period — the same slot, diachronic drift套语 × 时段：同一槽位之历时偏移

Horizontally scrollable: drag or trackpad-scroll the chart left/right to read the full timeline. The chart's natural width is 1,000 px; on narrow screens the wrapper supplies a scrollbar so labels stay readable. 本图可左右滚动：以触控板或鼠标横向拖动以读全。图之本宽 1,000 像素；屏幅不足时容器自带滚动条以保字迹可读。

What the timeline shows. Greek formulae (teal) cluster in the 5th c. BCE → 1st c. AD band — the polis-decree era. Latin funerary formulae (gold) emerge sharply in the late Republic / early Empire and dominate the corpus only after Augustus. The two traditions barely overlap; the apparent "Greek dominance" in the early bars is genre, not geography — there are simply more Greek decrees from 500–100 BCE than there are surviving Latin documents. 寿命图所示：希腊套语 (青) 集于公元前 5 世纪至公元 1 世纪之间 ── 即 polis-法令时代。拉丁丧葬套语 (金) 在共和末年至帝政初急速兴起，奥古斯都之后方主宰语料。两传统几乎不重叠；早段所见之 "希腊为主"，乃属体之所以而不是地理之所以 ── 公元前 500-100 年间所存希腊法令本即多于拉丁文献。

Lifespan data: DATA.formulae in formula-dossier/dossier.html, first_attested + last_attested fields, scholarly anchors per Henry 1977 (Greek) and Sherk 1969 (Latin). Hit counts: DATA.summary.by_formula.

Henry 1977: 13–82, prescript evolution; Rhodes & Lewis 1997, on the institutional history.

Formula × language — Greek ↔ Latin crossings套语 × 语言：希拉互译

Persicus IK Ephesos 17–19 + Sherk 1969: 217–34, bilingual-edict translation conventions.

Formula × abbreviation — the work the formula does套语 × 缩写：套语之所为

A note on what S alone is not. In a senatus consultum, the resolution-verb censuere / censuerunt is not abbreviated as S. It appears either spelled out (or as CENS, CENSV, CENSVER) — or, in the canonical hinge-formula D·E·R·I·C (de ea re ita censuerunt), the final letter that carries it is a C, not an S. The senatorial register is where S·C and S·P·Q·R belong; S alone in a senatorial context most naturally reads as senatus. 关于 S 字单独所非之注。元老院决议中，决议动词 censuere / censuerunt 不以单独之 S 表之。其表写或为全字、或为 CENS、CENSV、CENSVER；又或如枢纽套语 D·E·R·I·C（即 de ea re ita censuerunt）之末字所承者乃 C，非 S。元老院之语域，S·C 与 S·P·Q·R 方为其所属；元老院文书中单独之 S，最自然之读法乃 senatus。

The synthesis. Act I's abbreviation menus are open; Act II's formula menus narrow them. But formulae have menus too — F.EDOXEN_B vs F.EDOXEN_BD vs F.EDOXEN_D, F.LAT_PLACERE in four variants. Where the formula menu offers more than one slot-position for the inscription, the editor is back to choosing. Which leads to Act III. 合起来看：第一幕之缩写菜单为开放；第二幕之套语菜单收窄之。然套语菜单亦未必单一：F.EDOXEN_B 与 F.EDOXEN_BD 与 F.EDOXEN_D 的分别，F.LAT_PLACERE 又有四变体。倘套语菜单于某铭文不能定其一位，编者复归择决。第三幕承此而续。

Prediction by formula vs prediction by experience凭套语之预测，与凭经验之预测

The four cases below sit at: ATL near End A · Segesta one step toward B (the slot is formulaic but the choice within it is contested) · Laudatio mid-spectrum (formulaic virtues but unique-narrative outside them) · Persicus mid-spectrum (bilingual cross-check provides leverage, but the specific reforms cannot be predicted). 四案于这里光谱之位：贡金表近 A 端 · 塞格斯塔一步偏 B (槽位有套语，而内之选择有争) · 图利娅居中 (德目段有套语，外侧之个人叙述则无) · Persicus 居中 (双语互证有所助益，只具体改革无以预测)。

Case C · Athenian Tribute Lists — the fiscal-list genreC 案 · 雅典贡金表 — 财政清单之属体

The Athenian Tribute Lists, local handles for vols. II–IV plus related Meritt/Dow/West/Paarmann scholarship; ATL vol. I direct page checks remain a retrieval target. Project's SCPP edition: governance/athenian-tribute-list.html.

The four anchor years四锚年

The four years span 40 years and one war-driven discontinuity (the 425/4 reassessment doubled many cities' assessment to fund the Peloponnesian War). The formula stays stable across the discontinuity; the figures inside it change. This is the deck's first demonstration of a formula doing the work of inheritance: it carries continuity through historical rupture. 四年跨度四十年，含一战时之断裂 (公元前 425/4 之重估，为筹伯罗奔尼撒战费，多城额数加倍)。套语跨断裂而稳定；其中数字则更易。这是本课首次见套语承担传承之功：于历史之断裂中续传连贯。

A complete entry vs a damaged entry完好条目对残损条目

Καρπάθιοι     ΗΗΗ

[. . . . .]θιοι     [. .]Η

The editor's question: with the formula in hand, how much of the lost text should she restore? 编者所问：已握套语，所失的文本当还原几何？

ATL maximal — the Meritt / Wade-Gery / McGregor editionATL 最大派 — Meritt / Wade-Gery / McGregor 版本

[Καρπά]θιοι     [Η]ΗΗ

The visual. A reader who opens ATL I or II sees pages of [restored-name] [restored-figure] entries; the brackets become almost decorative. The editor's hand is dense but invisible to a reader who skims. 视觉效果：读者翻 ATL I 或 II，见整页之 [补名] [补数] 条目，方括号近乎装饰。编者之手密而隐，浏览者不易察觉。

Paarmann minimal — 2007Paarmann 最小派 — 2007

[. . . . .]θιοι     [. .]Η

The visual. A reader who opens Paarmann's edition sees pages of [. . .]θιοι [. .]Η entries; the unbracketed letters look sparse. The editor's hand is visible. 视觉效果：读者翻 Paarmann 之本，见整页之 [. . .]θιοι [. .]Η 条目，无括字母看似稀疏。编者之手可见。

The disagreement is methodological, not philological分歧在方法，非在文本

"The two editions read the same letters on the same stone. They disagree not about what survives but about what a formula entitles an editor to write.""二本读同石之同字。所分者非石之所存，而是套语授编者书何之权。" M-WK13.E6–E7 ATL-EXPANSION-PLAN.md, on the editorial-school distinction.

The deeper question. The Athenian Tribute Lists are foundational evidence for the Athenian Empire's fiscal history. If the editions disagree by ~37 percentage points of "what the inscription says", historians using them disagree by that much too — about who paid what, when. ATL is the case where prediction by formula almost works, and where the residual gap matters historically. 更深之问：雅典贡金表为雅典帝国财政史之根本证据。两本于"铭文何所言"上之差距约三十七百分点；用之者的论说 (谁于何时缴何额) 亦也差这么多。贡金表正是凭套语预测近乎可行之案，其残余之差，于史义中亦有所关。

The 425/4 reassessment — the formula's stress test公元前 425/4 之重估；套语之压力测试

In 425/4 BCE, the politician Thoudippos sponsored a decree (IG I³ 71) reassessing the empire's tribute upward — many cities doubled or tripled. The lists from 425/4 onwards record these new figures. 公元前 425/4 年，政客 Thoudippos 主导一法令 (IG I³ 71)，重估帝国贡金上调；许多城邦之额倍至三倍。425/4 后之表记下这一新额。

The formula's role. The year-prescript stays identical pre- and post-425/4; the alphabet-block organisation stays identical; only the figures inside the quota-slot change. Editing the Year-39 (415/4) list, the editor restores the year-prescript and the alphabet-block frame mechanically — those are formula-determined. The figures she must read from the stone or, where lost, restore from the post-425/4 figure pattern (not from the pre-425/4 figures). 套语之角色：年份前言于 425/4 前后不变；字母组之组织亦不变；只额数槽位里面有更易。校 Year 39 (415/4) 之表，编者机械补出年份前言与字母组之框架；这是套语所定。额数则须读石；所失者，当据 425/4 后之额数模式补之，而不是据 425/4 前。

Lambert 2017, Two inscribed documents of the Athenian empire, on the Thoudippos decree.

Verdict — ATL is partially predictable by formula小结：ATL 凭套语可部分预测

The pedagogical answer. The ATL is the deck's case where prediction by formula does most of the work. The remaining gap is where Paarmann's minimalism and ATL's maximalism part company — and where, increasingly, machine-learning tools will be asked to weigh in (Act IV). 本课至此，可见贡金表套语预测承担最大份额之案。其余之缺，正是 Paarmann 之最小与 ATL 之最大分歧之处 ── 亦渐为机器学习工具被请评判之处 (第四幕)。

How representative is the bracket? — the whole corpus at once方括号有多普遍？──一次看全语料

The pedagogical move. The auditor inverts the model's usual job: it does not fill brackets, it measures the ones already printed — reporting, per inscription, restored-vs-preserved-vs-declared-gap letters and ranking the heaviest brackets in the corpus. The ATL is not an outlier; it is the visible tip of an 11.5%-conjecture corpus. 教学之用：审计器把模型惯常之事颠倒过来 ── 不填方括号，而量已印出之方括号；逐铭文报告臆补、所存、declared缺位三类字母之数，并将语料中最沉之方括号排序。贡金表非异类，而是一个臆补达 11.5% 之语料的可见尖端。

EDCS letter-count / restoration auditor (epidoc/epipap/edcs-restoration-auditor) · audit over EDCS_merged_cleaned_attrs_2022-09-12 (537,262 records).

Case B · Segesta decree — the dating cruxB 案 · 塞格斯塔条约；纪年关键

An alliance between Athens and the non-Greek polis of Segesta (western Sicily). The text is a standard Athenian decree-prescript: enactment-formula (F.EDOXEN_BD), then archon-name and prytany. The lacuna sits in the archon-name slot. 雅典与西西里西部之非希腊 polis 塞格斯塔之间之盟约。文本为标准之雅典法令前言：颁令套语 (F.EDOXEN_BD)，继之以执政官名与 prytany。残缺位于执政官名之槽位。

ἔδοξεν τῆι βουλῆι καὶ τῶι δήμωι · [tribe-name]ος ἐπρυτάνευε
ἐπὶ [3-4 letter lacuna]ονος ἄρχοντος, ἐγραμμάτευε [N]ος
καὶ Σεγεσταῖοι …

Only the letters ]ΟΝ ΕΡΧΕ are securely read on the stone. The archon's name must end in -ων (genitive in -ονος); typical Athenian archon-names that fit are Ἁβρων, Ἀντιφῶν, Καλλίας, Φιλόχορος — but the first two are the live candidates. 石上仅 ]ΟΝ ΕΡΧΕ 可定。执政官之名当以 -ων 收 (属格作 -ονος)；合此格式之雅典执政官名有 Ἁβρων、Ἀντιφῶν、Καλλίας、Φιλόχορος 等 ── 当下争议在前二者。

Wade-Gery 1944 — [Ἁβρ]ονος → 458/7 BCEWade-Gery 1944 — [Ἁβρ]ονος → 公元前 458/7

For forty-six years (1944–1990), the consensus reading was [Ἁβρ]ονος, on the basis of three-bar sigma palaeography: the stone uses the archaic three-bar sigma (Σ formed of three diagonal strokes) rather than the four-bar form, and the three-bar form was held to be confined to inscriptions before ~445 BCE. Habron was archon in 458/7. The alliance dated accordingly. 我们看到，凡是四十六年间 (1944–1990)，通行之读法为 [Ἁβρ]ονος，所依者为三划西格玛字形之论：石上之西格玛为古式 (三条对角之划) 而非四划式，三划式被认为限于公元前约 445 之前。Habron 任执政官于公元前 458/7；盟约据此纪年。

Source-backed synthesis. Henry frames the Segesta dispute as a test case for the traditional dating canons of three-bar sigma and tailed rho: if Antiphon is right, the old palaeographic terminus has to yield to prosopographical and historical evidence.据 Henry 1992 综合。Henry 将塞格斯塔之争视为三划西格玛与带尾 rho 两项传统断代准则之测试案：若 Antiphon 读法成立，旧有字形学上限即须让位于人名学与史学证据。 Henry 1992: 137, "Through a Laser Beam Darkly."

The downstream cascade. Many other 5th-c. Athenian decrees were dated relative to the Segesta decree, via the three-bar sigma criterion. The 458/7 date for Segesta thus anchored a chronology covering hundreds of inscriptions across the Athenian imperial archive. 连锁效应：他多公元前五世纪雅典法令藉三划西格玛之标准，以塞格斯塔条约为参而纪年。塞格斯塔 458/7 之纪年因之系起数百铭文之年代框架 (即雅典帝国之档案)。

Chambers, Gallucci & Spanos 1990 — [Ἀντιφ]ονος → 418/7 BCEChambers、Gallucci 与 Spanos 1990 — [Ἀντιφ]ονος → 公元前 418/7

In 1990, three scholars applied laser-enhanced photography to the same stone in the Acropolis Museum. The technique illuminated traces of letters at the edge of the lacuna that earlier autopsies had missed. The traces fit Ἀντιφῶν better than Ἁβρων. Antiphon was archon in 418/7 BCE. The alliance moves forty years younger. 1990 年，三学者以激光增强摄影视卫城博物馆之原石。此术使早先观察所失之残缺边缘之字痕显现。所现之痕，合 Ἀντιφῶν 较合 Ἁβρων。Antiphon 任执政官于公元前 418/7。盟约纪年向后移四十年。

Source-backed synthesis. Chambers, Gallucci, and Spanos combine measurement, computer-enhanced photography, and laser imaging to argue that the visible traces fit Antiphon rather than Habron; they conclude that the inscription belongs to 418/7 BCE.据 Chambers、Gallucci 与 Spanos 1990 综合。三作者合用量距、电脑增强摄影与激光成像，主张可见痕迹合 Antiphon 而非 Habron；其结论为此铭应归 418/7 BCE。 Chambers, Gallucci & Spanos 1990: 38–63, ZPE 83.

The cascade reverses. If the alliance is 418/7, then many other inscriptions dated by the three-bar sigma criterion need re-dating. The criterion itself comes under pressure: if Segesta's three-bar sigma is from 418/7, then perhaps three-bar sigma was used later than 445 after all. A single restoration unwinds part of a chronological framework. 连锁反转：若盟约属 418/7，则藉三划西格玛而纪年之他铭，皆当重新纪年。该一标准本身亦受压力：若塞格斯塔之三划西格玛属 418/7，则三划西格玛或仍用至 445 之后。一处补字，便松动一部分年代框架。

What changes downstream — two empires下游所变：两种帝国

Three letters. The historical interpretation hinges on three letters in a single archon-name slot. The formula tells us where the archon-name sits; the formula does not pick between Habron and Antiphon. 三字的事：史义的诠释悬于一执政官槽位内之三字。套语示执政官名所在的地方；套语于 Habron 与 Antiphon 之间不能择决。

Badian 1989 — "History from Square Brackets"Badian 1989 — "出自方括号的历史"

"history should not be written with any confidence from what is inside square brackets in published inscriptions.""不应凭已刊铭文方括号内之字，自信地书写历史。" Badian 1989: 59–70, "History from 'Square Brackets'", ZPE 79.

Badian's article is the methodological warning the Segesta case needs: bracketed restorations may be reasonable, but the historical argument has to name the lacuna, the constraint, and the viable alternatives instead of treating the supplement as transparent evidence. Badian 此文给出塞格斯塔案所需之方法学警告：方括号修复或可成立，但史学论证须明列缺位、约束与可行他案，而不可将补字当作透明证据。

Verdict — Segesta is contested, not predictable小结：塞格斯塔有争，非可预测

The pedagogical answer. Segesta sits one step toward End B from ATL. The formula is intact; one slot is contested; the contest carries 40 years of empire chronology. The case demonstrates that formulaic predictability does not equal historical certainty — even when the formula does its work perfectly, the slot it identifies can still be the heaviest bracket in the corpus. 教学结语：塞格斯塔较贡金表偏 B 端一步。套语完好；一槽位有争；该一争带四十年之帝国年代。本案显示：套语之可预测，不等于史义之确定 ── 纵套语之功圆满，其所示之槽位，犹可为本语料中最沉之方括号。

Case A · Laudatio Turiae — laudatio funebris as typeA 案 · 图利娅颂辞；丧葬颂辞之属体

A monumental Latin funerary oration: a husband's praise of his wife, surviving on a fragmentary marble tablet recovered from secondary use as a catacomb loculus-lid. The longest preserved private Latin funerary inscription. Mantzilas 2017's comparative study of 5 Roman laudationes mulierum (Murdia, Hadrian's mother-in-law, Iulia Procilla, etc.) finds an 8-slot bank shared across all five — making the Laudatio a type-specimen of the genre, not the outlier it is sometimes presented as. 一拉丁丧葬颂辞之纪念性文本：颂其妻的说法，存于一残损大理石板，板原作墓窟之 loculus 大概是之二次利用。现存最长之私家拉丁丧葬铭文。笔者从 Mantzilas 2017 比较罗马五篇妇女颂辞 (Murdia、Hadrian 之岳母、Iulia Procilla 等)，发现五者共有一八槽位之套语库；此使图利娅颂辞为该体裁之典型，而不是时或所述之"孤例"。

The 8-slot bank: subject-formula · address-opener · vita-narrative · virtue-catalogue · distinguishing-event praise · counterfactual closer · lament · ritual closer. Each slot is recognisable; the contents vary. 八槽位库：主体套语 · 称呼起首 · 生平叙述 · 德目目录 · 殊事赞颂 · 反事实结束 · 哀悼 · 仪式收尾。各槽位可辨识，内容则各异。

Mantzilas 2017, Laudationes Mulierum, 5-case comparative table; SCPP edition governance/laudatio-turiae.html.

The virtue-catalogue slot — formulaic, restorable德目目录槽位；套语式，可补

Lines 30–34 of the left column. Wistrand 1976's text, with editorial restoration in brackets. 左列 30–34 行。Wistrand 1976 的文本，编者修复部分以方括号示之。

(30) Domestica bona pudici[t]iae, opsequi, comitatis, facilitatis,
(31) lanificii stud[i, religionis] sine superstitione, o[rnatus non
(32) conspici]endo, cultus modici cur [memorem? Cur dicam de tuorum cari-]
(33) tate, familiae pietate, [c]um aeque matrem meam ac tuos parente[s
(34) col]ueris eandemque quietem [ill]i quam tuis curaveris …

Translation. Why should I record [your] domestic virtues — your modesty, compliance, affability, accessibility, wool-working, religion without superstition, restrained dress, modest appearance? Why should I speak of your love for [your] family, your devotion to kin, [since] you loved my mother as you did your own parents, and gave her the same peace as theirs … 译文。何须我录 [汝] 家中诸德 ── 贞洁、顺从、和悦、亲和、纺织之业、不迷信之虔信、不显之妆束、节制之容仪？何须言汝对 [汝] 家族之爱、对亲属之忠？[因] 汝爱吾母如汝之父母，赐其与彼同之安。

The 8-virtue list — pudicitia, obsequium, comitas, facilitas, lanificium, religio sine superstitione, ornatus non conspiciendus, cultus modicus — appears in the same order in Murdia's laudatio (CIL VI 10230) and four other Latin laudationes mulierum. The list is a closed-vocabulary slot; the editor restoring missing words consults the 8-virtue bank. 八德目；pudicitia、obsequium、comitas、facilitas、lanificium、religio sine superstitione、ornatus non conspiciendus、cultus modicus；以同序见于 Murdia 颂辞 (CIL VI 10230) 与其他四篇拉丁妇女颂辞。此目录为封闭词汇之槽位；编者补失字时，参此八德目库。

Wistrand 1976: 21; Mantzilas 2017, 5-case bank.

Mommsen 1863 — restoring the right-column lacunaeMommsen 1863；修补右列残缺

The right column (II 0–17) survived in two heavily-damaged Villa Albani fragments. Mommsen, in CIL VI 1527 (1863), restored lines II 0–9 entirely from formula and parallel — he had to: the stone provided only line-endings of some letters per line. The restorations were canonical for 86 years; Dessau accepted them in ILS 8393 (1916); Durry reproduced them in his 1950 Budé. 右列 (II 0–17) 存于二残损较重之 Villa Albani 残片。Mommsen 于 CIL VI 1527 (1863) 凭套语与平行文本，将 II 0–9 行尽数补出；不得不然：石上每行所存仅某些字母之行尾。该一修复维持八十六年之久；Dessau 于 ILS 8393 (1916) 接受之；Durry 于 1950 Budé 复印之。

The wager. Each bracketed phrase is Mommsen's prediction. He had the formula-frame (Wistrand 1976: 11 reconstructs the rhetorical pattern: a series of rhetorical-question slots, each carrying a virtuous-act + the husband's gratitude). The frame is solid; the specific words are the editor's call. 下注：每一方括号内之短语乃 Mommsen 之预测。他握有套语提供的框架 (Wistrand 1976: 11 重构该一修辞模式：一连串修辞问之槽位，各承一德行 + 之感恩)。框架稳固；具体之词，乃编者之判。

Gordon 1950 — a rediscovered fragmentGordon 1950；一重见之残片

"In January 1949, while looking over the odds and ends in the 'Antiquario' of the Museo Nazionale Romano in Rome, in search of dated inscriptions, the writer discovered what looked at once like a piece of the Laudatio Turiae … the museum's records have nothing to indicate either its provenience or the date of its finding or of arrival in the museum.""一九四九年一月，笔者于罗马国立罗马博物馆 (Museo Nazionale Romano) 之"古物保存室"中检视零物，意在求纪年铭文；忽见一物，初观即似图利娅颂辞之一片……博物馆档案无任何记录可示其来源、发现年月或入馆日期。" Gordon 1950: 223, "A New Fragment of the Laudatio Turiae", AJA 54.

The rediscovered fragment supplied the line-endings of right-column lines II 0–9 — precisely the lacunae Mommsen had filled in 1863. For the first time in 86 years, his restorations could be checked against the actual stone. 该一重见之残片补出右列 0–9 行之行尾；正是 Mommsen 于 1863 所补之残缺。八十六年来首次，他之修复或可对照实石。

The contemporaneity. Wistrand 1976: 10 notes the cruel timing: Durry's full 1950 Budé edition went to press just months before Gordon's AJA paper. Durry's text is "Mommsen-orthodox" because at the moment of publication no other text was available. 同时性：Wistrand 1976: 10 谓该一时机之残忍：Durry 1950 之 Budé 全本送印仅数月，Gordon 之 AJA 文章方刊。Durry 的文本本仍守"Mommsen 正统"，是因为刊行之际，他本未出。

Mommsen vs the stone — the eight-line box-scoreMommsen 对石头；八行对照得分

"Such great scholars and epigraphists as Mommsen and Vollmer proved to have been unable to reconstitute the original Latin text in more than one out of eight instances. On the other hand it must be acknowledged that they did not miss the sense of any line.""如 Mommsen 与 Vollmer 之大学者与铭刻学家，于八处中仅有一处能复原原拉丁文。然亦当承认，于诸行的文本意，皆未差。" Wistrand 1976: 10, reporting the post-Gordon critique.

Did the meaning actually change? — side-by-side含义是否真的变了？── 并列对照

The pattern. Of 8 lines: 4 preserve sense, 3 are partial (agency or detail shifts), only 1 (II 6) reverses meaning. The husband's letter-perfect words were largely unrecoverable; his argument was almost entirely recoverable from formula and rhetoric alone. This is what Wistrand's "they did not miss the sense of any line" measures. An editor with the genre-pattern in hand can recover what the husband is saying even when she gets the words wrong. 规律：八行中，四行保住含义，三行部分偏移（主语或细节），仅一行（II 6）含义反转。丈夫确切的字句几乎不可复原；他的论说则可由套语与修辞几乎全部复原。这正是 Wistrand 所说"于诸行之文意皆未差"的实际测量。编者只要握住体裁之套语，纵令字词不准，也仍能读出丈夫在说什么。

What this means for the prediction question. Formula-driven restoration is a strong predictor of meaning, a weaker predictor of words, and a very weak predictor of the specific personal narrative. The Laudatio reads in the husband's voice not because the words are recoverable, but because the rhetorical-question frame is. The voice survives formulaic restoration; the man's exact phrasing did not. 这对预测之问的含义：套语驱动的修复，能较强地预测意义，较弱地预测字词，对个人化叙事的预测力则极弱。颂辞读出"丈夫的声音"，并非因为字句可复原，而是因为修辞问的框架可复原。声音留下来了；那个人确切的措辞没留下。

Della Corte's spatial critique — the 15-line problemDella Corte 之空间批评；十五行问题

After Gordon's fragment fixed the line-width of column II at 18–24 characters, Della Corte's post-Gordon critique went line-by-line through Mommsen's restoration of the rest of the right column and found 15 lines where Mommsen's restoration was either too short or too long for the now-known slot width. Each off-width restoration is a candidate for revision — not necessarily wrong, but no longer formula-justified at its current length. Gordon 之残片已定右列每行 18–24 字符之宽，Della Corte 之后的批评遂逐行检 Mommsen 于右列余处之修复，发现十五行之修复，或过短或过长，与今所知之槽位宽度不合。各过宽 / 过窄之修复皆为可议之候选 ── 未必皆错，但于其现长之上不复有套语之根据。

"Mommsen had filled lines 1–2 and 4–9 [of the right column] as follows … and his restorations were accepted as standard (by CIL and Dessau, for example). He had got one line (7) quite right, had correctly restored tu[ae quam] in 2, inminen[tia] in 5, and per[iculo] in 9, and had correctly guessed sororem in 8. He had also sensed what was missing in lines 2, 8, and partly in 5, but he was off the track in lines 1, 4, and 6.""Mommsen 已补右列 1–2 与 4–9 行……其修复曾被 CIL 与 Dessau 等接受为标准。其一行 (7) 完全正确；2 行之 tu[ae quam]、5 行之 inminen[tia]、9 行之 per[iculo] 皆补对；8 行之 sororem 亦猜对。2、8 与部分之 5 行，他亦察其所缺；只 1、4、6 三行，他偏离正轨。" Gordon 1950: 226.

Verdict — Laudatio sits mid-spectrum小结：图利娅居中段

The pedagogical answer. Laudatio's formulaic frame is fully restorable; its individual words within the frame are not. The editor's experience reads the husband's voice and proposes plausible language — and the experience is sometimes spectacularly wrong, as the Mommsen-vs-Gordon box-score shows. The case demonstrates that within a single inscription, different slots have different predictability profiles. 笔者按：图利娅之套语框架可补；其框架内之具体字词则不可。编者之经验阅读丈夫之声，提出或可成立之语 ── 其经验有时极不准，Mommsen 对 Gordon 之对照得分即明证。本案于我们示：同一铭文之内，不同槽位之可预测性各异。

Case D · Persicus on the Artemision — proconsular reform edictD 案 · Persicus 关于阿尔忒弥斯神庙之政令；总督改革之颁令

Engelmann, H., Knibbe, D. et al. 1979–81. Die Inschriften von Ephesos (IK 11). Project SCPP edition governance/fabius-persicus-artemision.html carries the Greek text in 14 sections with full English translation.

The preamble — Claudius authorises, Persicus reflects开篇 — 克劳狄许可，Persicus 引论

Τιβερίου Κλαυδίου Καίσαρος Σεβαστοῦ
   [Γερμανικοῦ προτρέ]ψαντος αὐτοῦ
   ἐπίκριμα συμφέρον τῇ [τε Ἐφεσίων πόλει]
   καὶ ὅλῃ τῇ ἐπαρχείᾳ· ὃ ἐν Ἐφέσῳ
   προέθηκ[εν καὶ πρὸ εʹ Καλ(ανδῶν)] …
ἐν ταύτῃ διὰ παντὸς τῇ ὑπολήψει
   ὑπάρχων [πρὸ πάντων] τοὺς τῶν
   ἐπαρχιῶν προεστῶτας ἄρχοντα[ς]

[Paullus Fabius Persicus … proconsul of
Asia, sent,] at the direction of Tiberius
Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, his
pronouncement (ἐπίκριμα), advantageous to
both the city of the Ephesians and the
whole province, which he published at
Ephesos on the 5th day before the Kalends …
Though I have always held the view that, above
all, the officials set over the provinces …

Two slots in one passage. The ἐπίκριμα-authorisation clause names the source of the proconsul's authority (the emperor's earlier ruling); the reflective opener positions Persicus rhetorically as the dutiful magistrate. The Greek ὑπόληψις ("view, opinion") corresponds to Latin opinio or iudicium; the Greek ὑπάρχων ("being, holding") matches Latin cum sim / existens. The translator was working in a standard proconsular register. 一段内之两槽位：ἐπίκριminus-许可句指明总督权力之源 (皇帝之先决)；引论以修辞置 Persicus 于尽职官员之位。希腊 ὑπόληψις ("观点") 对应拉丁 opinio 或 iudicium；希腊 ὑπάρχων ("处于、抱持") 对应拉丁 cum sim / existens。译者所循者，乃标准总督语域。

Greek text from project SCPP edition, ll. 1–7 (IK 11 no. 17 init.). English translation: project edition §0–§1.

The diagnosis — temples in ruin, Artemis's wealth squandered病情之诊 ── 庙宇倾圮，阿尔忒弥斯的资材虚耗

διόπερ φορτικὴν μὲν ἐπίγνωσιν
   ἀνεδεξάμην, ἀναγκαίαν δὲ τῇ
   λαμπροτάτηι Ἐφεσίων πόλει …
[πολλαὶ γὰρ θεῖαι οἰκίαι ἢ διὰ πυρὸς
   διεφθαρμέναι ἢ διὰ] … τὰς ἱερωσύνας
   ὥσπερ ἐν ἀπαρτείᾳ ἀποδίδονται …

Wherefore I have undertaken an investigation
that is burdensome, but necessary for the
most brilliant city of the Ephesians …
For many temples have either been destroyed
by fire or have fallen, in their collapse,
into unsightly ruin; and they sell off the
priesthoods as if at an auction; they call up
bidders of every sort to buy them, and then
they do not appoint as priest the worthiest …

Three translation choices to flag. (1) φορτικός "burdensome" is the standard Greek-Latin loan-equivalent for Latin onerosus / gravis — proconsular self-deprecation register. (2) ἐπίγνωσις renders Latin cognitio, the technical term for a magistrate's judicial enquiry. (3) ἀπαρτεία "auction" is rare; the more common Greek word for "auction" is πρᾶσις; the translator's choice suggests Latin licitatio (the Roman public auction procedure) was uppermost in his ear. The Greek reader hears, faintly, the Latin underlying register. 三处译笔可注：(1) φορτικός "繁重" 为拉丁 onerosus / gravis 之标准希腊对译；总督自抑之语域。(2) ἐπίγνωσις 译拉丁 cognitio (官员司法调查之专名)。(3) ἀπαρτεία "竞价" 较稀；希腊较常用 πρᾶσις；译者之取，似拉丁 licitatio (罗马公拍之程序) 萦于耳际。希腊读者隐约可闻拉丁底层之语域。

Greek text: project SCPP edition, IK 11 no. 17 ll. 18–38. Latin parallels: Sherk 1969 (RDGE) on the chancery-Latin underlying Greek-face proconsular edicts.

The reform-list — Greek and reconstructed Latin in full sentences改革段 ── 希腊原文与可复原拉丁文之全句对照

After the diagnosis the edict turns to its substantive reforms. Each is introduced by ὁμοίως ("Likewise"), translating the standard Latin chancery-bullet item. Three of the reform-clauses are reproduced below in full: the Greek text from the SCPP edition (IK 11 no. 18), a published English translation, and the Latin reconstruction implied by the Greek (parallels from Sherk 1969 / Cooley 2025). 诊断之后，政令转入具体改革。各条以 ὁμοίως（"同前"）起，对应拉丁文书之标准分条号 item。下列三条以全句呈现：希腊原文（采自 SCPP 校本，IK 11 no. 18）、已刊英译、以及由希腊文反推之拉丁对应（Sherk 1969 / Cooley 2025）。

ὁμοίως ὅσοι ὄντες ἐλεύθεροι
ἔργα δημοσίων δούλων ἐκτελοῦσιν
καὶ τὰ κοινὰ χρήματα ἐπιβαροῦσιν
[ἀπολυέσθωσαν], ἀντικατασταθήσονται
δὲ δημόσιοι δοῦλοι ἀντ' αὐτῶν.

EN: Likewise, all those who, being free
men, are performing the service of
public slaves and burdening the common
funds [shall be discharged]; public slaves
shall be appointed in their place.

LAT (recon.): item, quicumque cum
liberi sint, opera servorum publicorum
fungantur et rationes communes onerent,
[dimittantur], et eorum loco servi
publici substituantur.

ὁμοίως τοὺς ἱερονείκας,
ὅσοι τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος ἱεροὶ εἰς τὸν
τοῦ ὀψωνίου λόγον λέγονται, οὐκ
ἀρέσκει μοι ἀντὶ μισθοῦ διηνεκοῦς
ἀλλὰ τειμῆς λαμβάνειν.

EN: Likewise, as for the sacred-games
victors who are said to be sacred to
Artemis on account of their stipend —
it is not my decision that they receive
it as a permanent salary; rather, as
an honorary payment.

LAT (recon.): item, hieronicas, quotquot
Dianae sacri propter stipendii rationem
dicuntur, non placet mihi accipere
[id] perpetua mercede, sed honoris
gratia.

ὁμοίως τοὺς ὑμνῳδούς, εἰς οὓς οὐκ
ὀλίγον τῆς πόλεως ἀνάλωμα δαπανᾶται,
ἀρέσκει μοι τοὺς ἐφήβους ἀντ' αὐτῶν
ὑμνεῖν, τοῦ δὲ Περγαμηνῶν ἔθνους
ἐξαιρέτου ὄντος ⋯

EN: Likewise, as for the hymnodes —
upon whom no small part of the city's
revenues is spent — it is my decision
that the ephebes should sing in their
place; the people of Pergamon being
exempted ⋯

LAT (recon.): item, hymnodos in quos
non parva pars vectigalium urbis
insumitur, placet mihi ephebos pro
ipsis hymnos canere, gente Pergamenorum
excepta ⋯

What the full-sentence comparison shows. Three translation strategies coexist within a few lines: (1) calque — the Greek absolute participle in §6 ὄντες ἐλεύθεροι follows the Latin cum liberi sint structurally; (2) register loan — ἱερονείκας (§8) keeps the technical Latin term hieronica in Greek transliteration, recognised across the Asian provincial chancery; (3) idiomatic recasting — ἀρέσκει μοι ("it is pleasing to me") renders Latin placet mihi, the standard Roman magistrate's "I rule" formula — the Greek translator chose the same person and mood, preserving Persicus's first-person voice across the language barrier. The bilingual cross-check therefore restores the proconsul's syntax and voice on top of the lexicon. 全句对照所示：寥寥数行内并存三种译法。其一为仿造：§6 之希腊独立分词 ὄντες ἐλεύθεροι 结构上仿照拉丁 cum liberi sint。其二为语域借用：§8 之 ἱερονείκας 直接保留拉丁专名 hieronica 的希腊化转写，亚细亚行省文书皆通。其三为语义重铸：ἀρέσκει μοι（"于我所悦"）译拉丁 placet mihi，乃罗马官员"我裁决"之标准语式，希腊译者保留同一人称与语气，使 Persicus 之第一人称声音跨语言不断。所以，双语互证不只复原词汇，也复原总督之句法与语气。

Greek text: project SCPP edition, IK 11 no. 18 ll. 65–110, with brackets [...] marking editorial restoration. Latin reconstructions per Sherk 1969 (RDGE) proconsular-edict register; Aeneas 2025 §6 (Cooley) on Latin-Greek translation conventions in IK Ephesos 17–19.

Verdict — the bilingual cross-check helps with form, not substance小结 ── 双语互证有助于形式，不助于实质

Where Persicus sits on the spectrum. The proconsular protocol and the item-anaphora are as formulaic as anything in Acts I–II; an editor missing those slots could restore them mechanically from Sherk's parallels. The specific reforms — what Persicus actually decreed about the Artemision's bequests, hieronicae, and hymnodes — are the document's payload. No formula generates this content; no Greek-Latin pair recovers it. The Greek face supplies the words; the meaning requires the editor to know the temple, the period, the proconsul. Persicus sits mid-spectrum with Laudatio: formulaic frame, experience-dependent content. Persicus 居光谱何位：总督的官衔与礼节段与 item-反复，公式化程度无异于第一、二幕所列；编者若失此诸槽位，可从 Sherk 之平行机械补出。具体改革 ── Persicus 究于神庙之遗赠、获胜者俸给、唱诗员之上规定何事 ── 乃文献之独有内容。无套语可生此一内容；无希拉对照可复其义。希腊面供其字，意义则赖编者识庙、识其时、识其总督。Persicus 与图利娅同居光谱中段：套语提供的框架，倚赖经验之内容。

The four cases on the predictability spectrum四案于可预测性光谱上

The forward-pull. All four cases sit somewhere between mechanical formula-prediction and pure editorial experience. Could a machine learning system, trained on the corpus, do better — at any of them? Act IV takes up the question. 由此向前：四案皆处于机械之套语预测与纯然之编者经验之间。一受语料训练之机器学习系统，能否于四者当中之任一者做得较好？我们将于第四幕承此而问。

Two papers, one frame两篇论文，一同框架

"the frequent use of abbreviations, a hallmark of the Latin epigraphic habit, further complicates our interpretation of these inscribed artefacts.""缩写之频用，乃拉丁铭文习惯之标志，复使诸刻物之解读愈益复杂。" Assael et al. 2025: 141, Aeneas introduction.

Ithaca — architecture and corpusIthaca；架构与语料

Assael et al. 2022: Methods + Extended Data Fig. 1; architecture diagram simplified from the paper's Fig. 1.

Ithaca — three benchmark numbersIthaca；三项基准数字

"While Ithaca alone achieves 62% accuracy when restoring damaged texts, the use of Ithaca by historians improved their accuracy from 25% to 72%, confirming the synergistic effect of this research tool.""Ithaca 单独工作之修复准确率为 62%；历史学家借 Ithaca 之助，其准确率由 25% 升至 72%，证明这研究工具之协同效应。" Assael et al. 2022: 280, abstract.

The synergy claim. The headline figure is not Ithaca's 62%; it is the human-machine combined 72%. Neither alone matches it. The implication: the right framing is not "AI replaces editor" but "AI gives editor a working partner". 协同的论说：标题数字不是 Ithaca 的 62%，而是人机合作的 72%。两者单独都达不到。这意味着：合适的框架，不是"AI 取代编者"，而是"AI 给编者一个能一起工作的搭档"。

Case study — the Chalcis decree (IG I³ 40)案例；哈尔基斯之法令 (IG I³ 40)

An oath of allegiance sworn by the city of Chalcis to Athens, traditionally dated to 446/5 BCE on the three-bar-sigma criterion (the same criterion that gave us Segesta's 458/7). Recent palaeographic and historical scholarship has challenged the date, proposing 424/3 BCE on the basis of contextual evidence. 哈尔基斯城向雅典所宣之效忠誓。传统据三划西格玛之标准定为公元前 446/5 (即赋塞格斯塔 458/7 之同一标准)。近年之古文字与历史研究就该一纪年提出挑战，依上下文证据提出公元前 424/3 之议。

"the (in)famous Chalcis decree (IG I³ 40 …), which records an oath of allegiance sworn by the city of Chalcis to Athens and traditionally dated to 446/5 BC, is attributed by Ithaca to 420 BC, therefore concurring with the lower dating hypothesis of 424/3 BC proposed by more recent scholarship. … Ithaca's predictions are on average only 5 years off the more recent re-evaluations.""(臭) 名昭著之哈尔基斯法令 (IG I³ 40 …)，记哈尔基斯城向雅典所宣之效忠誓，传统定为公元前 446/5，今 Ithaca 归之于公元前 420，遂与近年学界所提之 424/3 较低纪年之议合。…… Ithaca 之预测平均仅与近年之复评相距五年。" Assael et al. 2022: 282, Chalcis-decree case study.

What Ithaca does here. Independently of the three-bar-sigma palaeographic argument, and independently of the historical-context argument, Ithaca's chronology head predicts a date close to the lower-dating hypothesis. The model's prediction is convergent evidence — neither replacing the human arguments nor confirming them mechanically, but landing on the same chronology by a different path. Ithaca 于这里所为：脱离三划西格玛之古文字论，亦脱离史义之上下文论，Ithaca 之年代头独立预测一接近较低纪年之议之年份。其预测乃汇合之证；不取代人的论说，不机械证实之，而以异径同至该一纪年。

Where Ithaca would help our cases — Segesta and ATLIthaca 或可助本课何处；塞格斯塔与贡金表

Where Ithaca cannot reach — Latin, abbreviations, unique contentIthaca 力所未及处；拉丁、缩写、独有内容

Three limits of Ithaca, all addressed (in part) by Aeneas in the next half of Act IV. Ithaca 之三限，皆由 Aeneas 于本幕后半部分回应。

Aeneas — Latin, contextual, generativeAeneas；拉丁、上下文、生成式

The 2025 follow-up from the same Assael / Sommerschield group, with the British classicist Alison Cooley joining the team. Three substantive advances over Ithaca: 2025 年 Assael / Sommerschield 团队之后续，英国古典学家 Alison Cooley 加入。较 Ithaca 之三实质进步：

Assael et al. 2025: 141–43, Aeneas introduction and architecture.

The dual of restoration — the model as auditor, not only generator修复之对偶 ──模型作审计者，不仅是生成者

Week 14 asks the model to fill gaps. The sharper, dual question turns Aeneas' unknown-length head around: feed EDCS's declared [N] gap-lengths to the model and flag where its predicted length disagrees with the editor's count. The markup itself encodes the editor's confidence — and the corpus shows editors almost never confess ignorance of the count: 第十四周请模型填缺。其更利之对偶之问，把 Aeneas 之变长头反过来用：将 EDCS 所declared之 [N] 缺长喂入模型，标出其预测之长度与编者之数相左之处。标记本身即encode编者之信心 ── 而语料显示，编者几乎从不承认不知其数：

Why this matters. EDCS commits to a letter-count 1.18 million times but admits an unknown length only 43 times — so almost every count is a falsifiable claim a model can test. This turns the corpus from a training set into an object of critique: the same markup that trains the model also gives the model something to check. 何以重要：EDCS commit 字数达 118 万次，承认未知长度仅 43 次 ── 故几乎每一计数皆为模型可证伪之论断。这把语料从训练集变为批判之对象：训练模型的同一标记，也给了模型可核验之物。

Convention counts from the EDCS auditor (epidoc/epipap/edcs-restoration-auditor); Aeneas unknown-length head, Assael et al. 2025 §architecture.

Aeneas — Table 1 benchmark numbersAeneas；表一基准数字

The headline. Historian solo achieves a Character Error Rate (CER) of 39%; Aeneas alone achieves 23.1%; historian working with Aeneas parallels + prediction achieves 21.4% — slightly better than Aeneas solo. The synergy claim is replicated and strengthened. For dating: historian solo at 31.3 years off, Aeneas solo at 12.8 years, combined at 14.1 years — Aeneas alone is the best on this metric, suggesting human input slightly hurts dating accuracy where the model has strong corpus-priors. 要点：历史学家单独的字符错误率（CER）39%；Aeneas 单独 23.1%；历史学家用 Aeneas 平行 + 预测合作 21.4% ── 略优于 Aeneas 单独。协同之论被复制并加强。年代上：历史学家单独差 31.3 年，Aeneas 单独 12.8 年，合作 14.1 年 ── Aeneas 单独反而是该项最佳，说明在模型已有强语料先验时，人的介入反而稍损纪年准确度。

Assael et al. 2025: 143, Table 1.

Aeneas on the abbreviations problem (Act I)Aeneas 应对缩写之问 (第一幕)

Aeneas was designed in awareness of the Latin abbreviation problem. The architecture handles abbreviations in three ways: Aeneas 之设计本即顾及拉丁缩写之问。其架构以三式处之：

• Training on already-expanded text. The LED corpus standardises abbreviations to their expanded forms wherever the editorial tradition has already done so; the model learns the formula-environment in expanded form, then can recognise compressed forms by translation. 训练时用已展开的文本本。LED 语料于编辑传统已展开缩写之处统一为展开式；模型于展开式中学套语之环境，继而藉对应识别缩写式。
• Contextual parallel-retrieval. When restoring an abbreviation, Aeneas retrieves parallel inscriptions where the same abbreviation appears in the same formula-slot. The parallels show how previous editors expanded the abbreviation, narrowing the candidate menu. 上下文之平行检索。修复一缩写时，Aeneas 检索同一缩写于同一套语槽位中出现之平行铭文。诸平行示先编者如何展开该一缩写，收窄候选菜单。
• Variable-length generation. Because abbreviations expand to texts of unknown length, the variable-length restoration head is what makes abbreviation-expansion tractable. Ithaca's fixed-length approach could not generate a 22-character expansion of a 4-letter abbreviation; Aeneas can. 变长之生成。因缩写之展开式长度未知，变长修复头方使展开之事可处。Ithaca 之定长法不能将四字母之缩写生成为二十二字符之展开式；Aeneas 能之。

The architectural payoff. The combination — contextual parallels + variable-length generation — is what Act I asked for. The OHRE Appendix II's 432 entries are no longer the editor's only narrowing-tool; Aeneas's corpus-wide retrieval substitutes for an editor who has memorised every parallel inscription. Aeneas does not replace the editor; it gives her a memory she could not otherwise have. 架构上的回报：组合；上下文的平行加变长生成；正是第一幕所求。牛津附录二的 432 条目，不再是编者唯一的收窄工具；Aeneas 的语料级检索可以替代编者所未能记住的诸平行铭文。Aeneas 不取代编者，只是给她一个不然得不到的记忆。

Aeneas on the formula problem (Act II)Aeneas 应对套语之问 (第二幕)

Aeneas's parallel-retrieval is a formula-identification engine in disguise. When the model returns the top-N parallels for a target inscription, those parallels are inscriptions sharing the target's formula-signature. The historian reading the parallels reads (in effect) a corpus-grounded answer to "which formula does this inscription deploy?" Aeneas 之平行检索，实为一伪装之套语辨识引擎。模型于一目标铭文返回前 N 平行时，诸平行即与目标共享套语标识之铭文。史家读诸平行即 (实际上) 读得一语料级回应："此铭文用何套语？"

"historians agreed that parallels generated by Aeneas enhanced their contextual understanding and interpretation of the target inscriptions. More specifically, when provided with Aeneas' parallels, historians reported that these could serve as a starting point for historical inquiry 75% of the time. This increased to 90% when Aeneas' predictions for the three epigraphic tasks were also included.""历史学家一致认为，Aeneas 所生之平行增进其对目标铭文之上下文理解与诠释。具体而言，于得 Aeneas 之平行时，史家报告这可作历史研究之起点者占 75%。增 Aeneas 之三项铭文任务之预测，则升至 90%。" Assael et al. 2025: 143–44.

What this means for Act II. The project's 54-formula bank is a human-curated answer to the question "which formulae recur across the Greco-Roman corpus?" Aeneas offers a complementary answer: not a curated bank, but a per-inscription parallel-pool. The two can be triangulated — the bank tells the editor what formula-categories exist; Aeneas tells the editor which inscriptions in the corpus exhibit that formula. Together they collapse some of the editor's burden of memorisation. 这对第二幕有何意义：本项目的 54 套语库，是对"希罗语料中复现哪些套语？"这一问题的人工编次回答。Aeneas 提供互补的回答；不是一个编次的库，而是逐铭文的平行池。二者可以互证；库告诉编者有哪些套语类别；Aeneas 告诉编者语料中哪些铭文呈现该套语。合起来用，可以减轻编者记忆的一部分负担。

Aeneas on the prediction problem (Act III, all 4 cases)Aeneas 应对预测之问 (第三幕之四案)

The pattern. Aeneas closes the formula-and-parallel gap; it does not close the experience-and-substance gap. The editor's role is preserved precisely at the slots Act III's verdict-tables flagged as experience-dependent. 规律：Aeneas 弥合套语与平行之缺；不能弥合经验与实质之缺。编者之角色，恰存于第三幕结论表所示之"经验依赖"槽位。

Case study — Res Gestae Divi Augusti案例；奥古斯都神功录 (Res Gestae)

The 2025 paper closes with a case study on the Res Gestae Divi Augusti (RGDA), the most famous Latin inscription of the early Empire — Augustus's autobiographical account of his deeds, transcribed onto walls at Ankara, Apollonia, and Antioch. Aeneas's contribution: not restoration (the text is well-preserved) but attribution analysis. 2025 论文以奥古斯都神功录 (Res Gestae Divi Augusti, RGDA) 为收尾案；早期帝政最负盛名之拉丁铭文，奥古斯都自述其行的文本，刻于安卡拉、阿波罗尼亚、安提阿之墙上。Aeneas 所献：非修复 (文本保存较好)，而是归属的分别析。

"Aeneas' hypotheses for attribution of the RGDA, aggregated across each chapter, [show that] each chapter was processed individually. The resulting distributions [suggest that] sites like Trento, Baetica and Ercolano are secondary to their shared function as provincial votive inscriptions [of a kind structurally similar to RGDA chapters].""Aeneas 关于 RGDA 归属之假设，按章汇集；各章独立处理 …… 所得分布显示，Trento、Baetica、Ercolano 等地之候选属次要，其于 RGDA 各章共享之功能为：行省所立之愿铭 (与 RGDA 之章节结构相似)。" Assael et al. 2025: 144–45, RGDA chapter-wise attribution.

What this demonstrates. Aeneas reveals structural affinities the human-curated bibliography may not have surfaced. RGDA was not historically read in dialogue with provincial votive inscriptions; Aeneas's chapter-wise retrieval finds those affinities at the level of phrasing and function, opening a new comparative-reading possibility. The model finds parallels the historian would not have looked for — and the historian decides whether the parallels are meaningful or coincidental. 所示：Aeneas 揭示人工编次之书目或未浮现之结构亲缘。RGDA 史上未尝与行省愿铭对读；Aeneas 之章节级检索于辞与功能之层发现该一亲缘，启一新比较阅读之可能。模型发现史家不会去寻找之平行 ── 史家再判该一平行是否有义，抑或偶合。

The two engines on Acts I–III两个引擎在第一到第三幕的应用

The synergy thesis — model + editor > either alone协同的论说；模型加编者优于二者之单独

Both papers make a structurally identical claim. Ithaca 2022's headline figure: historian solo 25%, Ithaca solo 62%, historian + Ithaca 72%. Aeneas 2025's headline figure: historian solo CER 39%, Aeneas solo CER 23%, historian + Aeneas + prediction CER 21%. 两篇论文皆作一结构相同的论说；笔者以为，二者实为同一假说之两次实验。Ithaca 2022 之标题数字：历史学家单独 25%、Ithaca 单独 62%、合作 72%。Aeneas 2025 之标题数字：历史学家单独 CER 39%、Aeneas 单独 CER 23%、合作 21%。

"Aeneas demonstrates flexibility by handling both fixed and unknown restoration lengths. … Aeneas completely changed my historical focus.""Aeneas 显示其灵活性，可处定长与未知长之修复…… Aeneas 全然改变了我的史学焦点。" Assael et al. 2025: 144, qualitative feedback from participating historians.

What the synergy means in practice. The model widens the editor's parallel-pool from "what I have read" to "the entire corpus". The model also gives the editor confidence scores she would not otherwise have — the parallels' similarity scores, the restoration head's probability distribution. Confidence scores let the editor work on the contested slots with explicit numerical uncertainty, instead of with prose-only hedges. That is a methodological gain, not just a labour-saving one. 笔者论协同实际所谓：模型将编者之平行池由"我所读"扩至"语料全部"。模型亦予编者其不然不可得之概率分；平行之相似度，修复头之概率分布。概率分使编者于争议槽位之上以显之数字不确定性作业，不止以散文之模糊词为之。这是方法上之进益，非仅省工而已。

The bracket reader's responsibility读方括号者之责任

"My text will be based on that of Mommsen (and Durry). But there will be quite a few exceptions, I shall adopt a different text when I consider that there are good reasons for doing so. Such divergences from Mommsen's (and Durry's) text will be noted in the apparatus criticus and the author of the reading substituted will be named. In these cases I will also report suggestions made by other scholars. I think it is only fair that the reader should be acquainted with the alternative solutions which have been proposed.""我之本将以 Mommsen (与 Durry) 之本为基；然将有若干差异，我于有充分理由时取异本。诸此与 Mommsen (与 Durry) 之差异，将于校勘栏中标明，并署所取读法之作者的名。于这里诸例中，亦将报导他学者所提之议。我以为，读者得知已提之他可行方案，方为公允。" Wistrand 1976: 12, on the editor's apparatus discipline.

Wistrand's discipline is the model's discipline. Whether the bracket was filled by Mommsen in 1863, by Wistrand in 1976, by Ithaca in 2022, or by Aeneas in 2025, the reader's claim on the editor / model is the same: name the alternative restorations, name the basis for the preferred one, name the residual uncertainty. The bracket is the editor's mark; the reader judges. The model does not change that economy. It changes what the editor knows when she places the bracket — and it makes the residual measurable: the EDCS letter-count auditor runs Wistrand's discipline across all 537,262 inscriptions at once, not just the four cases on this stage. Wistrand 之规矩，即模型之规矩。无论方括号为 Mommsen 1863 所填、Wistrand 1976 所填、Ithaca 2022 所填、抑或 Aeneas 2025 所填，读者对编者 / 模型之要求皆一：列他可行之修复，列所取者之据，列残余之不确定。方括号为编者之标志；读者判之。模型不改该一交换；其所改者，乃编者下笔时之所知 ── 且使残余可量：EDCS 字数审计器把 Wistrand 之规矩一次施于全部 537,262 条铭文，而不是只施于台上四案。

Bridge to Week 14承接第十四周

Week 14 takes Ithaca as a working tool and asks the students to use it on the four Wk13 cases. The questions will be: 第十四周以 Ithaca 为可工作之工具，请学生用之于本周四案。所问为：

• On ATL. Does Ithaca's top-20 restoration of damaged year-entries cluster (favouring ATL maximal) or diffuse (favouring Paarmann minimal)? 论贡金表。Ithaca 于残年表条目之前 20 修复，是聚集 (倾 ATL 最大派)，抑分散 (倾 Paarmann 最小派)？
• On Segesta. What date does Ithaca's chronology head propose for IG I³ 11 independently of either Habron or Antiphon being supplied? 论塞格斯塔。Ithaca 之年代头于不提供 Habron 或 Antiphon 之情形下，为 IG I³ 11 提出何纪年？
• On Laudatio. Ithaca cannot read the Laudatio (Latin); Week 14 substitutes Aeneas. Does Aeneas's parallel-retrieval surface other laudationes mulierum the project has not catalogued? 论图利娅颂辞。Ithaca 不能读图利娅 (拉丁)；第十四周以 Aeneas 代之。Aeneas 之平行检索可浮现本项目未编录之他妇女颂辞乎？
• On Persicus. Aeneas's bilingual cross-retrieval will return parallel proconsular edicts in both languages. Does the retrieval-set overlap with Sherk 1969's hand-curated list? 论 Persicus。Aeneas 之跨语检索将返双语之 proconsul 颁令平行。检索集与 Sherk 1969 之人工编次表相重几何？

Reading & sources — Latin abbreviation + Greek tradition阅读与出处；拉丁缩写 · 希腊传统

Latin abbreviation references

Bruun, C. & Edmondson, J. (eds.) 2015. The Oxford Handbook of Roman Epigraphy. Oxford. — esp. Appendix II "Epigraphic Abbreviations", pp. 787–813.

Retrieval target: Strechie's article on proper nouns and Latin epigraphic abbreviation, for direct confirmation of the worked IDR / ISM examples.

Retrieval target: Lassère, Manuel d'épigraphie romaine, second edition, for comparison with the OHRE abbreviation list.

Retrieval target: Cagnat, Cours d'épigraphie latine, fourth edition, for comparison with the OHRE abbreviation list.

Greek tradition references

McLean, B. H. 2002. An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods (323 BC – AD 337). Ann Arbor. — esp. §2.05 "The Development of Abbreviations", §2.06.3 "Abbreviation Marks", §2.07–08 numerals, §5 Roman names in Greek inscriptions.

Henry, A. S. 1977. The Prescripts of Athenian Decrees. Mnemosyne Suppl. 49. Leiden. — the canonical study of bouleutic / demotic / prytany formulae.

Reading & sources — case-study sources + ML papers阅读与出处；案例之出处 · 机器学习论文

Case-study sources (Act III)

ATL. Meritt / Wade-Gery / McGregor, The Athenian Tribute Lists, four vols. Princeton — the maximal edition; local handles currently cover vols. II–IV and related Meritt/Dow/West scholarship, while vol. I remains a retrieval target. Paarmann, B. 2007. Aparchai and Phoroi. Diss. Fribourg. — the minimal edition.

Segesta. Meiggs, R. & Lewis, D. 1969. A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions, no. 37. Oxford. Chambers, M., Gallucci, R. & Spanos, P. 1990. "Athens' Alliance with Egesta in the Year of Antiphon." ZPE 83: 38–63. Henry, W. B. 1992. "Through a Laser Beam Darkly: Space-age Technology and the Egesta Decree (IG I³ 11)." ZPE 91: 137–146. Badian, E. 1989. "History from 'Square Brackets'." ZPE 79: 59–70.

Laudatio Turiae. Mommsen, T. 1863. CIL VI 1527. Wistrand, E. 1976. The So-called Laudatio Turiae: Introduction, Text, Translation, Commentary. Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia 34. Göteborg. Gordon, A. E. 1950. "A New Fragment of the Laudatio Turiae." AJA 54.3: 223–226. Della Corte's letter-count critique is used here through Wistrand/Gordon and remains a direct-article retrieval target. Mantzilas, D. 2017. Laudationes Mulierum.

Persicus. IK Ephesos 17–19 (Engelmann et al. 1979–81). Sherk, R. K. 1969. Roman Documents from the Greek East. Baltimore. Knibbe, D. 1979. On the Ephesian Artemis estates. Rogers, G. M. 2014. The Mysteries of Artemis of Ephesos.

Machine-learning papers

Assael, Y., Sommerschield, T., et al. 2022. "Restoring and attributing ancient texts using deep neural networks." Nature 603: 280–283. — Ithaca.

Assael, Y., Sommerschield, T., Cooley, A., et al. 2025. "Contextualizing ancient texts with generative neural networks." Nature (published 23 July 2025). — Aeneas.

Connect — every Wk13 surface in one place网状导览；Wk13 所有页面

End of deck · ←/→ to navigate · Cmd/Ctrl-P to print · ⓘ register-mode: introduction · voice profile: chinese-profile-CYW.md幻灯片完 · ←/→ 导航 · Cmd/Ctrl-P 打印 · ⓘ 语域：introduction · 文风守则：chinese-profile-CYW.md