Lysimachus to Samos: the arbitration of the Batinetis boundary dispute magalia.wiki — Epigraphy Matrix Hub reading text and apparatus afterW. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae I (Leipzig 1903), no. 13 (the base text). magalia.wiki — Epigraphy Matrix Hub magalia.wiki — Epigraphy Matrix Hub Beijing 2026 magalia.wiki welles-lysimachus-samos OGIS 13 (Welles, RC 7) 13 7 CC-BY 4.0 — EpiDoc TEI edition for study and reuse. see provenanceOGIS 13 (Welles, RC 7) 13 7 A marble block from Samos, now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford; the lower part, with the verdict, is lost. Marble block, ll.1-31 preserved; the lower part (the verdict) lost c. 283/2 BCE Samos the island of Samos; carried to Oxford — Mutilated at the foot — the award is not recoverable W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae I (Leipzig 1903), no. 13 (the base text). C. B. Welles, Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period (New Haven 1934), no. 7 (text after Hiller, with M. N. Tod's revision; translation, commentary; the witness). A. Boeckh, Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum 2254; The Collection of Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum III, no. 403 (the Ashmolean stone). F. Hiller von Gaertringen, Inschriften von Priene (1906), 37 (the Rhodian arbitration; cf. SIG³ 599); cf. the Roman Senate's later confirmation (SIG³ 688). Linked data and external resources Pleiades 599925 magalia.wiki edition

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.

 Ancient Greek English LysimachusThe writer (Diadoch king; arbitrator)Master of Ionia c.283/2 BCE; hears both embassies and opens with disarming candour about whether he should have taken the case at all. His verdict is lost with the foot of the stone. The Samian and Prienian envoysThe two embassiesSent by the rival cities to plead the Batinetis before the king; the Prienians argued 'from the histories', the Samians from ancestral title and the thousand resettlers. LygdamisThe Kimmerian invader (in the histories)His invasion of Ionia is the historical hinge: it drove the Samians to the island and reset the question of possession that both cities now litigate three centuries later. Bias of PrieneThe peacemaker (in the histories)Sent from Priene with full powers when the returning Samians seized the land by force; he made peace and the settlers withdrew — a precedent in Priene's case.
Lysimachus to Samos: the arbitration of the Batinetis boundary dispute — edition Βασιλεὺς Λυσίμαχος Σαμίων τῆι βουλῆι καὶ τῶι δήμωι χαίρειν Βασιλεὺς Λυσίμαχος Σαμίων τῆι βουλῆι καὶ τῶι δήμωι χαίρειν· κατέστησαν ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς οἵ τε πρέσβεις οἱ παρ’ ὑμῶν καὶ οἱ παρὰ τῶν Πριη νέων ἀποσταλέντες ὑπὲρ τῆς χώρας ἧς ἐτύγχανον ἠμφισ- βητηκότες ἐφ’ ἡμῶν. εἰ μὲν οὖν προείδομεν τήν- δε τὴν χώραν ὑμᾶς ἐκ τοσούτων ἐτῶν ἔχειν καὶ νέμεσθαι, ὅλως οὐκ ἂν ἐπεσπασάμεθα τὴν κρίσιν· νῦν δὲ ὑπολαμβάνομεν ὑπογύου τινὸς χρόνου παντελῶς γεγονέναι τὴν ἀμφισβήτησιν· οὕτω γὰρ ἡμῖν ἐποιοῦντο τὴν μνείαν ἐν τοῖς πρότερον λόγοις οἱ τῶν Πριηνέων πρέσβεις· οὐ μὴν ἀλλ’ ἐπειδὴ παρῆσαν οἵ τε παρ’ ὑμῶν — — — — —, οἱ μὲν οὖν Πριηνεῖς τὴμ μὲν ἐξ ἀρχῆς γεγενημένην αὐτοῖς κτῆσιν τῆς Βατινητίδος χώρας ἐπεδείκνυον ἔκ τε τῶν ἱστοριῶν
Lysimachus to Samos: the arbitration of the Batinetis boundary dispute — translation
'If we had foreseen that you held this land for so many years, we should not have taken up the case' (ll. 1–11)

King Lysimachus to the council and the people of Samos, greeting. Your envoys and those sent by Priene appeared before us concerning the land about which they happened to be in dispute. Now if we had foreseen that you had held and possessed this land for so many years, we should not at all have taken up the case; but as it is, we suppose the dispute to have arisen entirely within a recent time — for so the envoys of Priene made mention of it in their earlier statements. Nevertheless, since both your envoys and those of Priene were present, (we heard the case).

The Prienians sought to demonstrate their original possession of the Batinetis from the histories and the other testimonies and documents. (They related) that later, when Lygdamis invaded Ionia with an army, the others too left the land and the Samians withdrew to the island; that for many years no Samian was present at all; that when the Samians, returning, seized the land by force, Bias was sent from Priene with full powers, concluded peace with Samos, and the settlers left the Batinetis; and that, things having remained in this state in former times, only quite recently had Samos taken possession — and now they asked us, on the basis of this original possession, to give them back the land.

Lygdamis, the flight to the island, Bias' peace, the thousand resettled Samians — then the break (ll. 12–31)

Your envoys declared that you had received your existing possession of the Batinetis from your ancestors; they admitted that, after the invasion of Lygdamis, the Samians like the rest left the land and retired to the island; but that afterwards a thousand Samians returned, settled, and divided the land into lots. … (the stone is mutilated at the point of the king's decision).

Lysimachus to Samos: the arbitration of the Batinetis boundary dispute — commentary

The opening is a small masterpiece of royal judicial rhetoric. Lysimachus receives both embassies and at once disarms the Samians with candour: had he known they had quietly held the Batinetis 'for so many years', he would never have entertained the case at all — but the Prienians' own earlier statements made the dispute sound recent, so he heard it. Then he turns to Priene's argument: they sought to demonstrate their original possession of the Batinetis (ἡ Βατινητὶς χώρα) 'from the histories' (ἐκ τῶν ἱστοριῶν) and the other testimonies. These eleven lines are the securely legible part of a stone whose lower half — with the verdict — is lost (OGIS 13; Welles 1934, 46–56).

The rest of the letter (ll. 12–31, fragmentary) rehearses the two cities' historical cases. Priene: that when Lygdamis the Kimmerian invaded Ionia the Samians abandoned the mainland for the island, that the land lay in others' hands for years, and that when the Samians later seized it by force Bias of Priene came with full powers, made peace, and the settlers withdrew. Samos: that they held the Batinetis by ancestral title, conceding the flight to the island but insisting a thousand Samians later returned and divided the land into lots. Then the stone breaks — precisely at the verdict. Which way Lysimachus decided cannot be recovered: Waddington and Lenschau read the award for Samos, Hicks for Priene, Dittenberger leaves it open. This edition records the quarrel, not a winner — and the Batinetis was arbitrated yet again, later, by Rhodes (IBM III 403) and the Roman Senate (SIG 688).

Critical apparatus Βασιλεὺς Λυσίμαχος Σαμίων τῆι βουλῆι καὶ τῶι δήμωι χαίρειν — the incipit; its exact match in OGIS 13 (vol.1 p.59) proves OGIS 13 = Welles RC 7. εἰ μὲν οὖν προείδομεν … οὐκ ἂν ἐπεσπασάμεθα τὴν κρίσιν — 'if we had foreseen … we should not have taken up the case' — the king's candid framing. ὑπογύου τινὸς χρόνου … τὴν ἀμφισβ[ήτησιν] — 'the dispute (arose) within a recent time' — Lysimachus' reason for hearing the case at all; the supplement ἀμφισβ[ήτησιν] is secure from sense. τῆς Βατινητίδος χώρας ἐπεδείκνυον ἔκ τε τῶν ἱστορ[ιῶν] — Priene demonstrates its possession of the Batinetis 'from the histories'. (fragmentary) — ll.12-31 carry the rival historical cases (Lygdamis, the island, Bias, the thousand Samians); Welles flags many uncertain readings (ΠΑΛΙΠ?, AIA? on the stone). Given by translation. (lost) — the stone breaks at the award; Waddington & Lenschau read it for Samos, Hicks for Priene, Dittenberger leaves it open — competing readings, not resolved.
Editions and commentary W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae I (Leipzig 1903), no. 13 (the base text). C. B. Welles, Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period (New Haven 1934), no. 7 (text after Hiller, with M. N. Tod's revision; translation, commentary; the witness). A. Boeckh, Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum 2254; The Collection of Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum III, no. 403 (the Ashmolean stone). F. Hiller von Gaertringen, Inschriften von Priene (1906), 37 (the Rhodian arbitration; cf. SIG³ 599); cf. the Roman Senate's later confirmation (SIG³ 688).