of the Greco-Roman Era in certain ancient Sites of Asia Minor. 79 
partly by collating my own copy, so far as it extended, and partly by a careful 
study of the formularies in Chishull’s collection: for it has happened most fortu- 
nately that their language had been framed in strict accordance with the techni- 
cal formule usual in such cases, from which it resulted that two or three words of 
a sentence conducted immediately to those before and after, as also that certain 
proper names peculiar to them respectively have been preserved from the effects 
either of the mutilation or the abrasion of the marble. This last circumstance has 
been of the utmost importance, as it furnished me at once with an almost infalli- 
ble guide in the process of identification, that is of discovering in each instance 
the people to which the monument was to be attributed. 
I must be pardoned for refraining to express myself more clearly just at pre- 
sent, as to do so would be premature, these tituli still continuing to engage much 
of my attention. My study of them has, however, advanced so far as to make it 
necessary that the reader should cancel the whole of the supplement which I have 
submitted to his inspection in pages 21 and 22. No mention whatever had been 
made of the people of Agrigentum in the original, and as little of the Coans, or 
of Agelaon ; of these the first and last were the results of obscurities in the 
marble. 
I may explain this in the case of the Agrigentines. The first copy which I 
made of the commencing line was TPATANAZSYAON, the next PPAT' * * IA- 
ZYAON, and that which the Greek of Smyrna made was TPAT’ + * ASYAON. 
We both agree in AI'T'PA at the end of the eleventh line. I concluded from 
this that ATTPAT'AN had been the true reading, and that the Sicilian people 
was referred to in this part of the inscription, but not without a good deal of he- 
sitation, as the reader may perceive from the note in page 22. The adjustment 
of the reading, so as to square with my hypothesis, was hardly consistent with le- 
gitimate argument, and could only be palliated by the extreme imperfection of 
the monument ; nor, after all, was it, when viewed in connexion with the ana- 
logy of the language, satisfactory. I have since arrived at the conclusion, that 
the true restoration of the passage is IEPANKAIASYAON, it containing an 
acknowledgment of the sacredness and inviolability of the Teian soil, and 
that the fragment in the eleventh line, restored to its integrity, is ATTPAWAI, 
that is, avaypawat, this clause announcing the final ratification of the decree by 
