From jbutrica@morgan.ucs.mun.ca Mon Oct 2 05:18:29 2000 Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id FAA47034 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 05:18:28 -0700 Received: from cerberus.ucs.mun.ca (cerberus.ucs.mun.ca [134.153.2.162]) by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id FAA03311 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 05:18:27 -0700 Received: from [134.153.128.98] (drusus.clas.mun.ca [134.153.128.98]) by cerberus.ucs.mun.ca (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04920 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 09:25:58 -0230 (NDT) X-Sender: jbutrica@pop.morgan.ucs.mun.ca Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 08:30:50 +0100 To: classics@u.washington.edu From: James Butrica Subject: that "signature" At the suggestion of Luis Aguilar Polo -- who was kind enough to send me the picture of the document in question when my University's server wouldn't allow me access -- I'm posting this query to the list (inspired also by David Meadows' latest listing): Is there any way to be sure that it was indeed Cleopatra herself who added "genesthoi" and not some palace functionary whose job was to put "genesthoi" on documents for which the queen had expressed a verbal approval? And what about a seal? Other big deals like Augustus had seal-rings (and Augustus' definitely seems to have had a role as an expression of his power): wouldn't we expect Cleopatra to be doing something similar? Only curious...; I'd love for this to be the real thing. James Lawrence Peter Butrica Department of Classics Memorial University St. John's, Newfoundland A1C 5S7 (709) 737-7914 .