?
De titulis Bosporanis et viciniis VI
This paper continues the series of corrections to some published inscriptions from Cimmerian Bosporus. No 22 (Fig. 1) presents the corrected lecture of votive inscription from the excavations in Panticapaeum at 2008. No 23 & 24 criticizes some general approaches to discussion and inaccuracy of A.V. Belousov. No 25 (Fig. 2, 3) demonstrates the A.S. Balakhvantsev’s priority of understanding of the inscription on the bronze cauldron founded in Volgograd region. No 26 revises the A.V. Belousov’s lecture of the inscription on the bailer from the kurgans excavations in Rostov-on-Don region at 1927. No 27 (Fig. 4) reinterprets the graffito of ΑΡΠΑΤΡΙΣ as the name of hetaera from Phanagoria. No 28 presents some examples of the utilization of the token τράχηλος in the Greek epigraphy. No 29 shows the futility of the A.V. Belousov’s reasoning about the genres of the Greek lead letters and the curses tablets. No 30 (Fig. 5) insists than the lead tablet from Panticapaeum necropolis mentioning 18 times ἀνώνυμος is the prayer to Jews God. No 31 (Fig. 6, 6a) demonstrates than the graffito from the burial on the Taman’ peninsula has a magical character. No 32 (Fig. 7) proposes the correct lecture of the third Spartocids decree from Phanagoria. No 33 discusses some answers of N.V. Zavoykina. No 34 (Fig. 8) understands the initial letters of graffito from Ak-Burun as initials from some personal names. No 35 (Fig. 9) reads the letters on the big marble bowl from Gorgippia as the dedication to the δῆμος. No 36 presents some observations about the cult of oikistes in Phanagoria. No 37 decodes the numbers on the amphora from the Kerch Museum. Nos 38–43 (Fig. 10) demonstrates the S.Yu. Saprykin’s inaccuracy in Greek and epigraphical discussions.