Audited case study (M18 + M19.4).经审定的案例研究（M18 + M19.4）。 Greek + English + commentary blocks below are verbatim extracts from Welles 1934 (the in-folder PDF 1934 welles doc 2…pdf): the Greek body via fresh grc+eng OCR; the English translation + commentary via the PDF's text layer. Bibliography lists only in-folder files. No invented quotes.下列希腊文、英文与评注各段是取自 Welles 1934 的逐字摘录（即文件夹内的 PDF 1934 welles doc 2…pdf）：希腊文正文经全新的 grc+eng OCR 得到；英文翻译与评注则取自该 PDF 的文本层。参考文献只列出文件夹内的文件。没有杜撰的引文。

1. Metadata1. 元数据

Source
Welles 1934 doc. 2 (= OGIS 8 / IG XII,2 526)
Date年代
c. 306 BCE
Period
Hellenistic (Diadochi)
Place地点
Eresus on Lesbos (two squared blocks of grey marble; one face in the Church of Christ, the other in the Church of the Holy Virgin / later St. Irene; now in the local Greek school)
Language语言
grc (Hellenistic koine, with Aeolic flavour)
Evidentiary Profile
HT3/ET2/RT4

Evidentiary Profile HT3/ET2/RT4 (calibrated)（已校准）

HT3 — historical (significant-terms density)—— 历史维度（关键术语密度）
ET2 — epigraphic (preservation completeness)—— 铭文维度（保存完整度）
RT4 — restoration (editorial inferential density)—— 复原维度（编者推断密度）

Damaged marble blocks at Eresus; the opening (King Antigonus to the council and the people of Eresus, greeting) survives intact, but the body of the letter (lines 7–17) is heavily restored. The Greek text in lines 16–17 has competing reconstructions (Paton vs Welles, recorded in the apparatus). Content density is high relative to length: named prytanis (Melidoros), King Antigonus, the sons of Agonippus, and three royal predecessors (Alexander, Philip Arrhidaeus, Antigonus) named as authorities.厄瑞索斯的大理石块已受损；开头部分（安提柯王致厄瑞索斯的议会与人民，致意）完整存留，但书信正文（第 7–17 行）经大量复原。第 16–17 行的希腊文有相互竞争的重构（Paton 与 Welles 一说，记于校勘栏）。相对于篇幅而言信息密度高：点名的值勤主席（prytanis，Melidoros）、安提柯王、阿戈尼普斯诸子，以及作为权威被点名的三位王室前任（亚历山大、腓力·阿里达乌斯、安提柯）。

↗ Preservation Typology Plan↗ 保存类型学方案 §16-17 ↗ Open the Evidentiary Profile tab↗ 打开“证据画像”标签页

2. Text + translation + commentary (verbatim)

Greek text (verbatim OCR)希腊文文本（逐字 OCR）Πρύτανις Μελίδωρος. Βασιλεὺς Ἀντίγονος Ἐρεσίων τῆι [βουλῆι καὶ τῶι δήμωι] χαίρειν· παρεγένοντο πρὸς ἡμᾶς οἱ παρ' ὑμῶν πρέσβεις καὶ διελέγοντο, φάμενοι τὸν δῆμον κομισάμενον τὴν παρ' [ἡ]μῶν ἐπιστολήν, ἣν ἐγρ[ά]ψαμεν ὑπὲρ τῶν Ἀγωνίππου υἱῶν, ψήφισμά τε π[ο]ι[ή]σασθαι, ἀνεγνωσαφ[ι ἡμ]ῖν, καὶ αὐτοὺς ἀπεστάλκεναι τ[ὰ]ς τε [κρί]σεις τῶν δικαστηρίων ἐμφανιοῦντας … ἐν Ἀλεξάν[δρωι ἐν]τυγ[χ]άν[οντες] … ἔρρωσθε.Source: Welles 1934 doc. 2, p. 13 = OCR'd PDF page 2 (verbatim grc+eng Tesseract; restorations bracketed as in Welles's critical text; line breaks reflowed for legibility)
English translation (verbatim from Welles 1934)"When Melidorus was prytanis. King Antigonus to the council and the people of Eresus, greeting. Your envoys came to us and spoke, saying that your people, on receipt of the letter which we wrote on behalf of the sons of Agonippus, had passed a decree, which they read to us, and had sent them [to make clear the decisions of the courts… on appeal to Alexander…] Farewell."Source: Welles 1934 doc. 2, p. 13 (verbatim from the in-folder PDF's text-layer extraction; the bracketed gap reproduces Welles's own ellipses for the damaged middle portion)
Welles 1934 commentary (verbatim)The collection of documents to which this letter belongs (OGIS 8) is a body of precedent, decisions of special tribunals, decrees of the assembly, and royal ordinances, on the basis of which the city of Eresus maintained its law concerning tyrants, which provided death for them and perpetual exile for their descendants. Although fragmentary, the main lines of the text are clear. During the second quarter of the fourth century, Eresus as a member of the second Athenian League enjoyed a democratic constitution. On the dissolution of the League after the Social War of 357–355 B.C., the city appears to have fallen under the control of tyrants supported by the Persians, among them Apollodorus, Hermon, and Heraeus (OGIS 8, VII, 135–137). The campaign of Alexander found Eresus in the hands of the brothers Agonippus and Eurysilaus, who were like the other tyrants in Asia Minor expelled. In the following year, when Memnon of Rhodes with the Persian fleet won all of Lesbos except Mytilene, they recovered their power under such conditions of violence (I, 1–5) that their subsequent rule appears to have been short; they fell undoubtedly with the withdrawal of Persian support after the death of Memnon. Some years later, probably after the edict ordering the reinstatement of exiles (324 B.C.) [= the diagramma covered by case study #11 RO 101], they appealed to Alexander to compel the city to readmit them. His reply was the διαγραφή several times mentioned (II, 35; VII, 127, 142), permitting the city itself to pass judgement on them. Later, the children of earlier tyrants applied to him similarly for reinstatement; then also he refused to interfere, and wrote to Eresus that the city should decide the question for itself (VII, 135–140). The agitation continued, however. Philip Arrhidaeus was obliged to issue a confirmation of Alexander's policy (V), and in the present case, Antigonus had interceded in behalf of the sons of Agonippus, only with this letter to yield to the city's representations and to permit the law to stand. The occasion of this transaction cannot certainly be determined. It was subsequent to Demetrius' victory at Salamis in 306, for Antigonus uses the royal title, and only the master of the Aegean would have been asked to interfere in the politics of an island city. Probably it was soon after the battle, for a new ruler had always to confirm or to supplant the policy of a predecessor. In any case, Antigonus here consistently followed his declared policy of permitting the Greek cities to enjoy liberty and autonomy.Source: Welles 1934 doc. 2, pp. 13–14 (verbatim text-layer extraction; the bracketed cross-reference "= case study #11 RO 101" is the dossier author's own editorial connection, not Welles's text)

3. Slot-by-slot decomposition3. 逐栏分解 (royal-letter genre)

The royal-letter formula bundle has its own slot vocabulary distinct from the polis decree (no enactment formula, no proposer in the polis sense; instead SENDER + χαίρειν opening + ἔρρωσθε closing). This is the dossier's first case study of that bundle.

SlotFunction功能Surface form表层形式Formula UID公式编号 / note
1Civic dating clause (eponym)Πρύτανις Μελίδωροςeponym-prytanis dating, parallel to F.EPI_ARCHONTOS in Athenian decrees but using Eresan civic vocabulary
2Royal-letter openingΒασιλεὺς Ἀντίγονος Ἐρεσίων τῆι βουλῇ καὶ τῷ δήμῳ χαίρεινroyal-letter formula: SENDER(king) + RECIPIENT(polity) + χαίρειν (= "greeting"). The dossier's first instance of the Hellenistic royal-letter genre's opening slot.
3Embassy clauseπαρεγένοντο πρὸς ἡμᾶς οἱ παρ' ὑμῶν πρέσβεις καὶ διελέγοντοnarrative formula: "your envoys came to us and spoke" — the standard Hellenistic royal-letter way of acknowledging the request being responded to
4Decree-reference clauseψήφισμά τε π[ο]ι[ή]σασθαι ἀνεγνωσα[ι ἡμ]ῖνthe civic decree the embassy carried is named explicitly with ψήφισμα + ἀναγνώσασθαι ("read aloud to us")
5Court-decisions clause (restored)[τ]άς τε [κρί]σεις τῶν δικαστηρίων ἐμφανιοῦνταςthe κρίσεις τῶν δικαστηρίων — formal court-decisions — that the embassy is to make manifest
6Royal-cross-referenceἐν Ἀλεξάν[δρωι ἐν]τυγ[χ]άν[οντες]cross-reference to a prior decision of Alexander (the διαγραφή Alexander issued for Eresus)
7Closing greetingἔρρωσθεroyal-letter closing formula ("Farewell") — paired with the opening χαίρειν as the genre's bookends

4. Historical context4. 历史背景

This is the dossier's first royal-letter case study, complementing the polis-decree (cases #6–#13) and Roman SC (cases #1–#5) genres. The royal-letter formula bundle has its own characteristic slots: a civic dating clause (here Πρύτανις Μελίδωρος in Eresan style), then the diagnostic opening formula SENDER + RECIPIENT + χαίρειν ("greeting"), an embassy-acknowledgment clause, the substantive body, and the closing formula ἔρρωσθε ("Farewell"). Per Welles 1934 (verbatim above): the genre was consolidating in this period and Antigonus, having taken the royal title after Demetrius' victory at Salamis in 306 BCE, is here exercising the rhetorical machinery of royal correspondence to a Greek polis.这是本文献集第一篇王室书信案例研究，与城邦法令（案例 #6–#13）和罗马元老院决议（案例 #1–#5）文类互补。王室书信的公式组合有自己特征性的栏位：城邦纪年条款（此处为厄瑞索斯式的 Πρύτανις Μελίδωρος），随后是标志性的开头公式 发信人 + 收信人 + χαίρειν（“致意”），一段使节致谢条款，实质性正文，以及结尾公式 ἔρρωσθε（“珍重”）。据 Welles 1934（见上方逐字引文）：这一文类在此时期正趋于定型，安提柯在公元前 306 年德米特里乌斯于萨拉米斯获胜后取得王号，此处正运用王室往来文书的修辞机制致信一个希腊城邦。

The substantive content connects directly to case study #11 (RO 101 Tegean exiles decree, 324/3 BCE). Per Welles 1934 (verbatim above): "Some years later, probably after the edict ordering the reinstatement of exiles (324 B.C.), they appealed to Alexander to compel the city to readmit them. His reply was the διαγραφή several times mentioned, permitting the city itself to pass judgement on them." The διαγραφή Welles names is the same Alexander διάγραμμα the Tegean ordinance executes in case #11. The dossier thus documents both halves of the Hellenistic royal-edict / civic-response interaction: at Tegea the polis ordinance executing the king's directive (case #11), at Eresus the king's letter confirming the polis's autonomy in the matter (this case).

For the typology dossier, the case study contributes two things:对类型学文献集而言，本案例研究贡献了两点：

5. Additional scholarship5. 补充学术文献

No additional verbatim scholarship quotes from the dossier's excerpts files apply to this case beyond the Welles 1934 commentary already quoted in §2. (Per M18 no-fabrication policy.)除 §2 已引用的 Welles 1934 评注外，本文献集摘录文件中没有其他适用于本案例的逐字学术引文。（依据 M18 无杜撰政策。）

6. Cross-references6. 交叉引用

7. Bibliography (in-folder files only)7. 参考文献（仅限文件夹内文件）

  1. Welles, C. B. (1934). Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period. New Haven: Yale University Press. Doc. 2, pp. 12–14 (the letter of Antigonus to Eresus, c. 306 BCE). In folder as 1934 welles doc 2 letter of antigonus to eresus permitting city to enforce law against tyrants 306 BCE.pdf (a single-document extract from the 1934 volume); the full volume is also in the folder as 1934 welles royal correspondence in the hellenistic period.pdf.
  2. Rhodes, P. J., & Osborne, R. (2003). RO 101 (the Tegean exiles ordinance of 324/3 BCE, executing the Alexander διαγραμμα to which Welles 1934 doc. 2 cross-refers). In folder.
  3. Rhodes, P. J., with Lewis, D. M. (1997). The Decrees of the Greek States. Oxford. In folder — for the cross-polis decree-formula framework into which this Eresan civic-response case fits.

Welles 1934 is in the local folder; the case study works exclusively from it plus the dossier's in-folder cross-references. The substantial 19th- and early-20th-c. apparatus that Welles himself cites (Sauppe, Kirchhoff, Cauer, Hicks, Bechtel, Hoffmann, Dareste/Haussoullier/Reinach, Paton, Michel, Dittenberger, Schroeter, Windel, Ghione, Tarn, Meyer) appears inside the verbatim Welles commentary block in §2 but is not asserted as independently-verified bibliography per M18 policy.