Leiden conventions rendered as EpiDoc: restorations as supplied(reason=lost), gaps as gap, abbreviations as expan(abbr+ex), omitted letters as supplied(reason=omitted), surplus as surplus, corrections as corr. Critical apparatus as listApp. The facing translation is div type=translation; the historical commentary is div type=commentary.
[Paullus Fabius Persicus, pontifex, sodalis Augustalis, frater arvalis ... proconsul of Asia, sent,] at the direction of Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, an epikrima in the interest of the city of the Ephesians and of the whole province; he posted it at Ephesos and arranged for it to be inscribed on a stele on the fifth day before the Kalends of April.［保卢斯·法比乌斯·佩尔西库斯，大祭司、奥古斯都崇拜祭司团成员、阿尔瓦尔兄弟会成员……亚细亚行省代执政官，遵照］提比略·克劳狄乌斯·凯撒·奥古斯都·日耳曼尼库斯之指示，为以弗所城与全行省之利益颁此政令；其于以弗所公示之，并安排在四月朔前第五日刻于石碑之上。
Though I have always held the view that, above all, the officials set over the provinces ought, with every steadiness and good faith, to take care of the office entrusted to them, so that they may provide for the continuous and lifelong benefit of the whole province and of every city, and not merely for their own year of tenure, yet I gladly confess that I have been the more drawn to this conviction by the example of the best and most truly just hegemon, who, having taken the whole human race into his own care, has among his first and most welcome acts of philanthropia bestowed this also — that to each is restored what is his own.笔者素来以为：受命于行省之上的官员，理应以全副的稳定持重与信义守护所托之职，以谋全行省与每一城邦持续而终身之利益，而不仅以自己一年的任期为限；然笔者乐于承认，自己之所以更趋于此一信念，是受了那位最优秀、且真正最公正的统治者的范例所感召：他将整个人类置于自身的照看之下，其首要而最受欢迎的仁爱施惠之举，便有此一项 — 将各人之物还给各人。
Wherefore I have undertaken an investigation that is burdensome, but necessary for the most brilliant city of the Ephesians. ... [some sixteen lines lost] ... if anyone has cleared out the affairs of a prior year ... the individual fiscal year ... of the council. ... now from the proconsulate ...因此笔者已着手一项稽查：其事繁重，然对至光辉的以弗所城而言为必要。……［此处残缺约十六行］……倘有人清理了往年事务……该年度之财政……议事会之事……如今出自代执政官（之职权）……
For many temples have either been destroyed by fire or have fallen, in their collapse, into unsightly ruin; and the shrine of Artemis herself — which is the adornment of the whole province, both by the magnitude of its fabric and by the antiquity of the cult paid to the goddess and by the abundance of the revenues that the divine Augustus restored to her — is being deprived of its own funds, which had been enough to provide for the upkeep and the adornment of the votive offerings. For those funds are being diverted to the unjust greed of those who so preside over the common purse that they reckon things to be profitable only to themselves. For whenever a cheerful piece of news comes from Rome, they make of it an occasion for their own private gain, using the appearance of the divine house as a screen.盖许多神庙或为火所毁，或已坍塌成不堪入目之废墟；至于阿耳忒弥斯本人之神庙 — 其为全行省之冠冕，既以工程之宏大著称，又以对女神崇拜之古老著称，又以神圣的奥古斯都为其恢复的丰沛岁入著称 — 如今正被剥夺自己的款项，而这笔款项本足以维持其修缮与还愿物之妆点。盖此款已被转作主理公库者之不义贪欲之用，这些人把持公库的方式，便是只把利益看作自家之物。每当罗马传来令人欣喜的消息，他们便藉此为由，自牟其利，借神圣家族的颜面作幌子。
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 select the most fitting — those upon whose heads the appropriate wreath ought to be set; and they fix stipends for the priests at whatever sums the recipients may wish, so that they themselves may purloin the most possible.他们将祭司职如同拍卖一般售出；召来形形色色的竞价者来买，却不选最堪其任者 — 即那些理应将合宜花冠戴在其头上之人 — 并按上任者所欲数额为祭司确定俸给，以便自己尽可能多地抽取。
[For those who have purchased the priesthoods ought not to bear such] outlays, in order that the man most fitting for it may always be deemed worthy of the honour from the people; and the city's enormous debt ought, through this epikrima, to be cut back. Since I know that the repayment of the moneys is difficult for the city, or wholly impossible, if it should now be compelled to enumerate all that it received from the purchasers, it is my decision that the city pay to the priests nothing more than the one-hundredth part of the price then given, according to the diataxis of Vedius Pollio, which was preserved also by the divine Augustus; that the priests should give anything to the council, or in turn receive anything back from it, is not my will.［盖购得祭司职之人，不应承担如此］开支，俾使最堪其任者始终能受民众所授之尊荣；城中巨债亦应藉此政令得以削减。笔者深知：若如今强令城方一一计入由购买者所收之款项，其偿还实为困难，或全然不可能；故笔者裁定：城方所付与祭司者，至多不过当时所付价款之百分之一，悉依维迪乌斯·波利奥之法令（diataxis）行之 — 此法令神圣的奥古斯都亦曾维护之；至于祭司向议事会有所给付，或反向自议事会有所收受，皆非笔者所愿。
Likewise: all those who, being free men, are performing the service of public slaves and burdening the common funds with superfluous expense ought, it seems, to be dismissed — public slaves being substituted in the place of their service.同样：凡身为自由民却履行公共奴隶（servi publici）之役务、并以多余开支加重公帑者，理应予以解任 — 由公共奴隶补入其位。
Likewise: as for the public slaves who are said to buy infants for whatever price comes to hand and to consecrate them to Artemis, so that their own slaves may be fed out of the goddess's revenues — it is my decision that they themselves provide food for their own slaves.同样：据闻有公共奴隶以随手之价购入婴儿，将其献给阿耳忒弥斯，以便他们自家的奴隶能由女神的岁入中受养 — 笔者裁定：他们应自行为其奴隶供给食物。
Likewise: as for the hieronicae who are said to be sacred to Artemis on account of the stipend — it is not my decision that they be supported by Artemis, but rather that they receive only so much as was voted under the diataxis of Vedius Pollio.同样：据闻有圣战胜利者（hieronicae）因津贴之故而被视为献于阿耳忒弥斯者 — 笔者裁定：他们不应由阿耳忒弥斯受养，所领数额仅以维迪乌斯·波利奥法令（diataxis）所议者为限。
Likewise: it is my decision that none of the priests of Artemis or of the annual magistrates borrow money on the public account, except such as can be repaid out of the revenue of the year itself. And if anyone has pledged the revenue of the following year, it is my decision that the creditor be given the right of action upon the sum so given.同样：笔者裁定：凡阿耳忒弥斯之祭司或城邦之年度行政长官，皆不得以公账名义借款，除非该款能以同年岁入偿还。若有人以来年岁入作质押，笔者裁定：债权人对所给付之款项被授予追索之权。
Likewise: as many moneys as have been bequeathed to the city, or to any part or association within it, are to be lent out under the very law by which they were left, and not transferred by the magistrates to other uses and expenses. Likewise: upon the penteteric games no more than four thousand five hundred denarii are to be expended, according to the diataxis of Vedius Pollio.同样：凡遗赠给城邦或其下任何分部、社团的款项，皆须依其所立时之规定出借，不得由行政长官转作他用与他项开支。同样：五年一度的竞技会（penteteric agones）所支不得超过四千五百第纳里（denarii），依维迪乌斯·波利奥之法令（diataxis）行之。
Likewise: as for the hymnodes, upon whom no small part of the city's revenues is expended, it is my decision that they be released from this service; and that the ephebes, whose age and worth and aptitude for learning better suit such a liturgy, perform that service without silver. Yet, that I may not seem to have made this ruling against all hymnodes everywhere, I except those at Pergamon who sing to the divine Augustus himself in the precinct consecrated by Asia: their first society was assembled not for hire but willingly and without silver. For that very reason the divine Augustus preserved for them the philanthrōpa subsequently voted, extending them to the children begotten of them in succession, and ordered that the expense for them be paid not by the Pergamenes alone but by all Asia, reckoning that such a contribution would be heavy for a single city. The city of the Ephesians, however, being released from this expense, and the service being transferred by their own decree to the ephebes, must take care that the ephebes perform the office diligently and with the appropriate concern, as befits those who sing to the divine house.同样：至于颂歌者（hymnodes），城邦岁入中相当不小的一部分用于其身；笔者裁定：解除其此项役务；其位由青年（ephebes）顶替，盖青年之年龄、尊严与学习禀性更宜于此项礼仪劳务，且应无偿履行之。然为免显得笔者所裁针对所有地方的所有颂歌者，特此排除帕加马城那些在亚细亚行省议会所祝圣的神域中为神圣的奥古斯都本人咏唱者：其最初的社团并非由雇佣而集，乃自愿而无偿者。正缘此故，神圣的奥古斯都为其保留了后来投票通过的仁爱施惠之资（philanthrōpa），并将其延及其后世所生之子嗣，且下令其养赡费不应由帕加马人独力承担，而应由全亚细亚行省承担，盖以为此类负担对一城而言过重。至于以弗所城，既得免此项开支，并以本城决议将此役务转予青年，便应注意青年勤勉、应分谨慎地履行此职，正如向神圣家族咏唱者所应有之操持。
And since the heaven-equal honour long owed to Julia Augusta has now been rendered to her by the Augustus, our most pious and most powerful princeps, it is necessary that her hymnodes be deemed worthy of the same rights as those who sing to the divine Augusti — since she, already honoured by the sacred laws prior to her immortality and godhood, was deemed worthy of them and deified, both by the senate and by the divine Augustus.既然奥古斯都 — 我们最为虔敬、最为权能的元首（princeps） — 已将拖欠已久、与天同等的荣耀归予尤利娅·奥古斯塔（Julia Augusta），则其颂歌者应被认定配享与那些为神圣的奥古斯都们咏唱者同等之权利 — 盖她在不朽与神格之前，便已为神圣律法所尊奉，并由元老院与神圣的奥古斯都认定配享此等荣耀，受神格化。
Likewise, it is fitting also to confirm for others the honours that the man rising upon the rostrum named, the summary of which is appended to this epikrima. — It was resolved by the Greeks in Asia, on the address of Alexander upon the rostrum ... in [the koinon of] Asia under the archiereus Gaius Iulius ... . A pious matter ... (broken) ... I wish [these things] to remain.同样，亦宜确认那位登上讲坛之人所提名的其他诸项荣誉，其纲要附于此政令（epikrima）之后。 — 亚细亚行省的希腊人议决，依登上讲坛之亚历山大之提案……于亚细亚［行省议会］内，在大祭司盖乌斯·尤利乌斯……之年……。此为一件虔敬之事……（残断）……笔者愿［此等事项］得以长存。
The edict opens, in the most fully preserved Greek copy (IK 18a), with a statement that this epikrima — a proconsular decree or judgment — has been issued at the direction (προτρέψαντος) of the emperor Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, ‘in the interest of the city of the Ephesians and of the whole province’. The Latin fragment 19B preserves the proconsul’s full titulature: Paullus Fabius Persicus, pontifex, sodalis Augustalis, frater arvalis — three of the great Roman priestly colleges, marking him out as one of the inner circle of the senatorial elite around the princeps.
The proconsul also notes that the edict was posted at Ephesos and that he arranged for it to be inscribed on a stele on the fifth day before the Kalends of April — 28 March, AD 44.
这份政令在保存最完整的希腊文抄本（IK 18a）中以这样一段宣示起首：本政令（epikrima） — 即一道代执政官层级的裁决或判定 — 乃 遵照（προτρέψαντος） 元首 提比略·克劳狄乌斯·凯撒·奥古斯都·日耳曼尼库斯之指示而颁布，“为以弗所城与全行省之利益计”。拉丁文残片 19B 则保存了代执政官完整的官衔：保卢斯·法比乌斯·佩尔西库斯，大祭司（pontifex）、奥古斯都崇拜祭司团成员（sodalis Augustalis）、阿尔瓦尔兄弟会成员（frater arvalis） — 罗马三大祭司团皆在其身，足见他属于元首身边元老阶层的核心圈子。
代执政官并记下：政令公示于以弗所，并由其安排刻于石碑之上，时在四月朔前第五日 — 公元 44 年 3 月 28 日。
The proem sets out a quietly remarkable theory of provincial office. Governors, Persicus declares, are bound by steadiness (εὐστάθεια) and good faith (πίστις) to look not to their own year of office alone but to the continuous and lifelong benefit of the whole province and of every city in it. He then frames this duty as a deliberate imitation of the princeps, ‘the best and most truly just hegemon’, whose first and most agreeable acts of philanthropia include ‘restoring to each what is his own’.
Echoes of Claudian self-presentation — the emperor as iustissimus, his rule as indulgentia in the service of restitution — run through every clause. The reform that follows is offered as the provincial-administrative counterpart of that imperial ideal.
这段序言不动声色地铺陈出一种颇为可观的行省官职理论。佩尔西库斯宣称，代执政官们应以 稳定持重（εὐστάθεια）与 信义（πίστις）自束，所顾及的不应只是自己任期那一年，而应着眼于全行省、每一城邦 持续而终身之利益。继而他将这份职责定位为对 元首（princeps）的有意效仿 — “那位最优秀且真正最公正的统治者（hegemon）”，其 仁爱施惠（philanthropia）的首要、最受欢迎之举，便包括“将各人之物还给各人”。
克劳狄乌斯自我塑造的回声 — 元首作为 iustissimus（最公正者），其治理乃以归还为旨之 indulgentia（恩宥） — 贯穿了每一句话。其后的改革，便被呈现为这一元首理想在行省治理层面的对应。
The proem closes with a sentence of striking candour: the proconsul ‘has undertaken an investigation (ἐπίγνωσις) that is burdensome, but for the most brilliant city of the Ephesians necessary’. The Greek word epignōsis belongs to the technical vocabulary of cognitio, judicial inquiry; with it Persicus signals that the edict to follow is not mere exhortation but a finding rendered after evidence.
The text then breaks off for some sixteen lines. When the surviving Ephesos stones (layer III of IK 17) resume, they are speaking of someone who has ‘cleared out’ (ἐκκαθάρῃ) the affairs of an earlier year, of the synedrion, of an action ‘from the proconsulate’ — the institutional setting of the reform.
序言以一句颇见坦率的话作结：代执政官“已着手一项 稽查（ἐπίγνωσις），其事繁重，然对至光辉的以弗所城而言为必要”。希腊文 epignōsis 一词属于 cognitio（司法调查）的术语，佩尔西库斯藉此表明，随之而来的政令并非寻常劝喻，而是据证据所作之裁断。
其后文断缺约十六行。当 IK 17 第 III 层的以弗所残石重新接续时，所言者已是某人“清理”（ἐκκαθάρῃ）了上一年度的事务、议事会（synedrion）、以及一项“出自代执政官（之职权）”的行动 — 也正是此项改革所处的制度位置。
The diagnosis is the rhetorical centrepiece of the edict. Many sacred buildings, the proconsul reports, have been disfigured — consumed by fire or fallen into collapse. The shrine of Artemis herself — ‘the adornment of the whole province’, distinguished by the magnitude of its work, the antiquity of the goddess’s cult, and the abundance of revenues that the divine Augustus had restored to her — is being deprived of the very funds set aside for its upkeep.
The cause, Persicus says bluntly, is the unjust greed of those who preside over the common purse. Whenever cheerful news arrives from Rome (typically an imperial accession or birthday), the leading men of Ephesos use the occasion as cover for their own profit. The Latin copy IK 19B preserves the parallel opening: multae enim aedes deorum ignibus consumptae aut ruinae conlapsae iacent.
此“诊断”是政令的修辞重心。代执政官报告说：诸多神圣建筑已蒙损毁 — 或为火焚，或自行坍塌。至于阿耳忒弥斯本人之神庙 — “全行省之冠冕”，以其工程之宏大、女神崇拜之古老、以及 神圣的奥古斯都 为其恢复的丰沛岁入而著称 — 如今竟正被剥夺其原本拨作维护之用的款项。
佩尔西库斯直言：原因在于 主理公库者之不义贪欲。每当罗马传来令人欣喜的消息（多半是元首即位或诞辰），以弗所的首脑人物便借此为名行私利之实。拉丁文抄本 IK 19B 保存了与此并列的开端文字：multae enim aedes deorum ignibus consumptae aut ruinae conlapsae iacent（许多神庙或为火焚毁，或已倾圮成废墟）。
Now Persicus names the specific abuse. On each imperial occasion the local elite ‘sell the priesthoods as at an auction (ἀπαρτία)’, calling forward bidders of every sort, picking not the worthiest but the highest. They then fix stipends for the new priests at whatever level the appointees demand, so as to skim the maximum for themselves.
The picture is one of structural simony: the priesthood becomes a fungible asset, the cult treasury a pool from which both buyer and seller draw. The reform that follows is built around capping these stipends and unwinding the cycle of inflated entry-prices.
佩尔西库斯此处点出具体的弊端。每逢元首相关的场合，地方权贵便“将祭司职（hierosyne / sacerdotium）如同 拍卖（ἀπαρτία）一般售出”，召来形形色色的竞价者，所选并非最堪其任者，而是出价最高者。继而他们又 为新任祭司确定俸给，数额随上任者所索而定，以便自己从中抽取最多。
所呈现者，乃一种结构性的圣职买卖：祭司职成为可流通的资产，神庙库藏成为买卖双方各取所需的池子。其后的改革，正是围绕着压低这些俸给、解开虚高入场价的循环而展开。
Here the first operative remedy appears. Persicus acknowledges that calling in, from the bidders, the full purchase-prices of the priesthoods would be ‘difficult, or wholly impossible’ for the city. He therefore decrees a compromise: the city is to render to each priest nothing more than one one-hundredth (ἑκατοστή) of the price then paid — that is, an annual stipend of 1 % of the original purchase, no more.
The authority cited is the diataxis of Vedius Pollio, ‘preserved also by the divine Augustus’. P. Vedius Pollio, the Augustan eques notorious from Cassius Dio, had evidently issued a financial settlement for Ephesos — perhaps during a special commission — that capped just this kind of expense. Persicus revives it. He further bars priests and councillors from lending to each other on this account.
此处出现第一项 具操作意义的补救措施。佩尔西库斯承认，若要从竞价者手中收回其所付的祭司职全部购价，对该城而言会“极为困难，或全然不可能”。他因此颁定一项折中：城方对每位祭司至多支付 当时所付价款之百分之一（ἑκατοστή） — 即年度俸给为原购价的 1%，不得更多。
所援引的依据，是 维迪乌斯·波利奥的法令（diataxis），“神圣的奥古斯都亦曾维护之”。P. 维迪乌斯·波利奥（P. Vedius Pollio）是奥古斯都时代的骑士，因卡西乌斯·狄奥的记述而声名不佳；他显然曾为以弗所颁布过一份财政裁决 — 或属其担任某特别委任之时 — 对此类开支正好设下上限。佩尔西库斯如今将其重新启用。他更禁止祭司与议事会成员就此款项 相互借贷。
The first ‘ὁμοίως’ (‘likewise’) clause attacks an upside-down arrangement. Free men, Persicus learns, have been performing the duties (hyperesia) ordinarily owed by public slaves — and burdening the city’s accounts with excessive remuneration in the process. He directs that such free men be dismissed, and public slaves substituted in their place.
The reform is small but exact: it severs an avenue by which the local elite drew civic salaries for unnecessary ‘service’, and restores the regular distinction between honorific magistracy and paid servile labour.
第一个“ὁμοίως”（“同样”）条款针对一桩颠倒的安排。佩尔西库斯查知：本应由公共奴隶承担的役务（hyperesia），却由自由民代为执行 — 并因此以过高的报酬加重了城方账目。他指示：此类自由民 应予解任，由 公共奴隶补入其位。
这一改革幅度虽小却切中要害：它截断了地方权贵藉所谓“服务”而从公帑中支取薪水的一条通道，恢复了荣誉性公职与有偿 奴役性 劳动之间的常规分际。
The next clause exposes an ingenious abuse of the goddess’s purse. Public slaves, having bought infants at trivial cost, have been dedicating those infants to Artemis — with the result that the goddess’s revenues are made to feed the slaves’ private dependants. Persicus rules that the buyers must themselves supply food to their own slaves: the cult treasury is not a private welfare fund.
The clause is among the most vivid traces in the inscriptional record of how temple-economies could be quietly diverted to support entire households at sacred expense.
下一条款揭示了对女神库藏的一种巧妙挪用。公共奴隶 以极低代价买来婴儿，再 将这些婴儿献给阿耳忒弥斯 — 结果便是女神的岁入反过来供养这些奴隶自家的人口。佩尔西库斯裁定：买家须自行为其奴隶供给食物：神庙库藏并非私家的福利基金。
这一条款，是铭刻记录中相当生动的一笔，让我们看到神庙经济如何能在不动声色之间被分流以圣职之名供养整户人家。
The hieronicae — victors in the sacred games — had traditionally received an opsōnion, a stipend, as a mark of civic gratitude. The Ephesian arrangement, Persicus reports, had let the practice slide into a perpetual maintenance drawn from Artemis’s funds. He rules that such men are not to be fed out of the goddess’s revenues, but are to receive only what the diataxis of Vedius Pollio originally voted — the second invocation of that key text.
圣战胜利者（hieronicae） — 即圣职竞技会的优胜者 — 按惯例可领取 opsōnion，作为城邦感谢的标志。佩尔西库斯报告说，以弗所的安排已让此项津贴滑入由阿耳忒弥斯财库长期维持的状态。他裁定：此辈 不得由女神之岁入受养，仅可领取 维迪乌斯·波利奥法令 当年所议之数额 — 这是这一关键文本在政令中第二次被援引。
A short, technical, and consequential rule. Neither the priests of Artemis nor the city’s annual magistrates are to borrow money on the public account beyond what can be repaid from that same year’s revenue. If anyone has pledged the revenue of the following year against a loan, the creditor is granted the right of action against the pledged sums — an indication that the limitation is to bind both lender and borrower, not merely the magistracy.
The provision is one of the earliest documented attempts to forbid magistrates from mortgaging future civic income to fund current obligations — a problem that, as Migeotte showed, dogged Greek cities throughout the early empire.
这是一条简短、技术性强且影响深远的规则。阿耳忒弥斯的祭司与城邦的 年度行政长官，均不得以 公账 名义借贷超过 本年度岁入 所能偿还之数。若有人以 来年 岁入作质押，债权人对所质押之款项被授予追索之权 — 可见此限制旨在同时约束放款人与借款人，而非只针对行政官署本身。
这是已知最早一批明文禁止行政长官以未来公帑收入作抵押以应当下支出之尝试 — 正如米若特（Migeotte）所揭示，这一问题在帝国早期希腊城邦中长期挥之不去。
Two clauses of strict fiscal discipline. First, sums bequeathed to the city, or to any of its subdivisions or associations, are to be lent out only under the law by which they were left; the magistrates may not redirect them to other needs. Second, no more than 4,500 denarii may be spent on the penteteric games, again on the authority of the diataxis of Vedius Pollio — its third invocation in the edict.
Together these clauses suggest the basic shape of Ephesian fiscal disorder: testators’ intentions had become liquid, the games had become a vortex of expenditure, and an old Augustan-era settlement had been quietly forgotten.
两条严格的财政纪律条款。其一：凡 遗赠 给城邦或其下任何分部、社团的款项，皆只可依 其所立时之规定 出借；行政长官不得将其改作他用。其二：五年一度的竞技会（penteteric agones）开支不得超过 4,500 第纳里（denarii），依据仍是维迪乌斯·波利奥法令 — 此为政令中第三次援引。
合而观之，这两条勾勒出以弗所财政混乱的基本图景：立遗嘱者的意愿变得可以挪用，竞技会成了开支的旋涡，而那项奥古斯都时代的旧裁决也悄然被人遗忘。
The most rhetorically vivid of the cost-cutting clauses. The salaried hymnodes who chant for the imperial cult at Ephesos absorb ‘no small portion of the city’s revenues’. Persicus releases them from service; in their place the ephebes, whose age, dignity, and aptitude for learning are better suited to such a liturgy, are to perform the office without payment.
An exemption follows. To prevent the rule reaching too far, Persicus excepts the hymnodes who sing ‘to the divine Augustus himself’ at Pergamon, in the precinct consecrated by the koinon of Asia. Their first society was formed not by hire but by free will, and the divine Augustus himself had voted them hereditary privileges and ordered that their support be borne by all Asia, not by Pergamon alone — on the principle that the burden was too heavy for one city. At Ephesos, the funds so released are now to be redirected to ensure that the ephebes perform the new office ‘diligently and with all due care, as befits those who sing to the divine house’.
这是节省开支条款中修辞最为生动的一条。在以弗所为元首崇拜咏唱的有偿颂歌者（hymnodes）吞噬了“城邦岁入中相当不小的一部分”。佩尔西库斯免其役务；其位由 青年（ephebes）顶替 — 他们的年龄、尊严与学习的禀性更宜于此项礼仪劳务，且 无须给付即可履行。
随后是一项例外。为免规则牵连过广，佩尔西库斯特意排除了帕加马那些为“神圣的奥古斯都本人”咏唱的颂歌者：他们所驻之神域由亚细亚行省议会（koinon of Asia）所祝圣。其最初的社团并非由雇佣而成，乃是自愿而组；神圣的奥古斯都本人为其投票通过了世袭性的特权，并下令其养赡费由 全亚细亚行省 共同承担，而非帕加马一城独力 — 其原则是：这一负担对一城而言过重。在以弗所，由此省出之款如今则改用于确保青年“勤勉、应分谨慎地履行此职，正如向神圣家族咏唱者所应有之操持”。
The reform closes with a clause that returns to the rhetoric of the proem. Now that the ‘long-owed heaven-equal honour’ (ἰσουράνιος τειμή) has been restored to Julia Augusta — the deified Livia, finally raised to diva by Claudius in AD 42 — her hymnodes must be granted the same rights as those who sing to the divine Augusti. The senate and Augustus himself, Persicus reminds the city, had already deemed her worthy of immortality and divinity; her ritual personnel cannot stand on lesser ground.
The clause is one of the earliest provincial-administrative responses to Claudius’s consecration of Livia, and rare epigraphic evidence for the way that act reshaped existing cult-bodies in Asia.
改革以一项回到序言修辞的条款收束。如今“拖欠已久、与天同等的荣耀”（ἰσουράνιος τειμή）已归还给 尤利娅·奥古斯塔（Julia Augusta） — 即受神格化的利维娅（Livia），公元 42 年由克劳狄乌斯终于擢升为 diva（女神） — 故其颂歌者应享有与那些为神圣的奥古斯都们咏唱者同等的权利。佩尔西库斯提醒城方：元老院与奥古斯都本人此前已认定她配享 不朽与神性，其礼仪职员自然不应处于更低之位。
此条款是行省治理层面对克劳狄乌斯将利维娅神格化一事最早的回应之一，也是稀有的铭刻证据，可观察该举如何重塑亚细亚行省既有的崇拜组织。
The edict closes by signalling that further honours, ‘named by Alexander, who came forward upon the rostrum’, are also to be confirmed, and that the summary (kephalaion) of those honours is appended to the edict. There follows a brief fragment of a koinon-decree: ‘it was resolved by the Greeks in Asia, on the address of Alexander ‘upon the rostrum’, in [the koinon] of Asia in the year of the archiereus Gaius Iulius …’.
The fragment matters out of proportion to its size: it shows that Persicus’s edict was issued together with a parallel act of the koinon of Asia, ratifying the honours that the proconsul had endorsed. The Stage-5 pattern of governor proposing, koinon ratifying — familiar from the Fabius Maximus calendar reform of 9 BC — is here visible a second time, half a century later, under Claudius.
政令在结束时指出，其他若干 荣誉 — “由登上讲坛的亚历山大所提名者” — 亦应予以确认，且其荣誉之纲要（kephalaion）附于政令之后。继而是一段简短的行省议会决议残片：“亚细亚行省的希腊人于会议中议决，依登上讲坛之亚历山大之提案，于亚细亚［行省议会］内，在大祭司盖乌斯·尤利乌斯……之年……”。
此残片的意义远超其篇幅：它显示佩尔西库斯的政令乃 与 行省议会的平行决议一同颁布，议会从而确认代执政官所支持的诸项荣誉。第五阶段那种 由总督提议、由行省议会确认 的模式 — 这在公元前 9 年法比乌斯·马克西穆斯（Fabius Maximus）的历法改革中已为人所熟知 — 于此再次可见，时已逾半个世纪，正当克劳狄乌斯之世。