Upper right fragment of a lamina, probably nailed to the wall of a building (perhaps a temple). A trace of this operation can be read in the damage in the upper margin between the seventh and eighth letters of the first line of writing.
Encoded following the latest EpiDoc guidelines
Taxonomies for ISicily controlled values
ISicily glyphs authority list
Julian Calendar
God, (grant) good luck. The Syracusans have decreed [in favour of ... and immunity] from taxes and the right [to the possession of land and house ...] in case they are descendants of gamoroi and (have decreed) that they have the right to participate in all public offices [with the exception of (that of) ... and] (that of) the hipparchus and [---]
Dio, (concedi) buona fortuna. I Siracusani hanno decretato [a favore di ... e l'immunità] dalle imposte e il diritto [al possesso della terra e della casa ...] nel caso in cui siano nati da gamoroi e (hanno decretato) che abbiano il diritto di partecipare a tutte le cariche pubbliche [ad eccezione di (quella) de ... e] (quella) dell'ipparco e [---]
Decree engraved on a bronze tablet in a fragmentary state found in the area of Palazzolo Acreide (ancient Akrai) in 1925 and now preserved at the Metropolitan Museum in New York. The text, partially reconstructible, reports mention of a series of privileges - the ateleia (or isoteleia), and right of possession of land (and house?) - granted to an individual or a group of foreign individuals who are received into the citizenship of another polis (specified in the part of the text now lost) in which the group of gamoroi - known from the sources as landowners belonging to the Syracusan aristocracy - must have had a central role, probably as a group of full citizens of the polis. The decree has been dated by most scholars between 491 and 485 on account of the episode, reported, among others, by Herodotus (Hdt. 7.155.2) of the expulsion of the gamoroi from Syracuse following the revolt of a coalition of damos and slaves (kyllyrioi). This episode is only one of the few that we know about the archaic aristocracy of Syracuse. Although a connection between the episode narrated by the sources and the facts referred to in the decree may be fascinating, it is not possible to prove that the document refers to that expulsion of the gamoroi. The dating of the text on a palaeographical basis has generally been subject to the same prejudice that has influenced its interpretation and led scholars to date it between the years 491-485, i.e. after the expulsion of the gamoroi from Syracuse by the coalition of damos and kyllyrioi and before their return to Syracuse under Gelon in 485. The analysis of its palaeography by comparing the text with the few documents from the Archaic period from the area of Syracuse and from Syracuse itself leads to other conclusions. The Syracusan alphabet seems to have gone through several phases during the Archaic period: the first (early 7th-early 6th century BCE), in which the influence of Corinthians alphabet is evident; the second (early 6th-first half of the 6th century) in which part of the most distinctive Corinthian features (e.g. beta, four-stroke iota, san, etc.) are abandoned to adopt features in which an influence from Megara has been seen (Arena, IGASM V, p. 112) but maintaining the use of ou to indicate vowel 'o' long closed; a third phase (second half of the VI c. BCE) in which it seems possible to recognise some traits that could refer to the Geloan environment, evidence of which would be the adoption of the red chi at Akrai (Βραχί̣δ̣α̣ εἰμί, Arena, IGASM V, no. 77; ISic001478) and of the red csi at Syracuse in an inscription dated by Jeffery to c. 475. In our case, as several editors have pointed out, there are traits pertinent to the oriental blue alphabet, in particular the use of + for chi, and traits, such as the use of ου for 'o' long closed, which refer to the alphabet of the Corinthian colonies. As Dubois notes, this would seem to be a 'hybrid' alphabet. But it might be more plausible to attribute the document to a phase of definition of the Syracusan alphabet, i.e. to a time between the abandonment of the second type of alphabet and the adoption of the third. The chronology of this phase, i.e. the second half of the sixth century, would be consistent with the palaeography of the document, which suggests the end of the sixth century. A comparison with the inscription on the crepidoma of the temple of Apollo in Syracuse (datable to the end of the 6th century) or with the bronze vessel (also from the end of the 6th century), bearing the name Μελανίπο (Arena, IGASM V, no. 70; ISic030044) in which the pi is identical to that used on this lamina, is a sufficient proof of this.
In terms of linguistic characteristics, a Doric dialect of Sicily is noted, with 'predoric' traits (Arena) and other traits related to the dialect of Syracuse (and the colonies). Examples of Doric features: - l.3 αἴ κα, Doric corresponding to ep. εἴ κεν (att. ἄν); - l.3 γᾱμόρος, Doric corresponding to Attic γημόρος; - l.4 ἀ]ρχᾶν, Doric corresponding to Attic ἀρχῶν. Examples of the predoric features: - l.1 ἐψαφίσαντο (aorist does not extend the -ξ- treatment of the root as is usually the case in Doric in verbs in -ζω); - l.4 πεδεῖμ[εν, corr. to att. μετεῖναι. Examples of features related to the dialect of Syracuse (and the colonies): - l.5 hιπάρχου, with digraph -ου (close back rounded vowel).
Other elements of the text, such as its key words (i.e. ἀτέλεια, ἔνπασις), do not allow us to confirm or clarify the chronology, as they refer to horizons (the end of the 5th century) that cannot be reconciled with its palaeography. While the concession of ateleia has comparisons with texts from the end of the 6th century, the institution of enktasis is known only from texts of the classical period. However, this does not preclude the possibility of tracing the term at such a high date in one of its earliest occurrences. Even the place where the lamina was exhibited cannot be precisely determined. Although Alexander, the first editor, records that she found the lamina in the area of Akrai, it is indeed a fact that in 1925, the date of the discovery, Akrai was a well-known archaeological site, while Kasmenai, another subcolony of Syracuse, was not yet known but under investigation (consequently, it is possible that Alexander, or her informers, would simply have referenced Akrai as a proxy for the as yet unidentified Kasmenai). But precisely Kasmenai would lend itself to being the ideal place for such a document because of the 'amicable' relations between its aristocracy and that of Syracuse, shown by its reception of gamoroi exiles during the crisis of 491. More than this, however, cannot be said about the context of display, which remains unknown.