The construction ἐν + accusative is a ghost in the dialect of Cyrene. The local inscriptions overwhelmingly attest to ἐς + accusative. A few alleged occurrences of this feature must be discarded. The only valid example, ἐν στάλ[αν] | λυγδίναν in the ‘Pact of the first settlers’ (seg 9.3, 16-7, 4th c. bce), remains an anomaly that calls for a justification. The paper tries to demonstrate that the co-occurrence of ἀναγράφω/καταγράφω ἐς + accusative and ἀναγράφω/καταγράφω ἐν + dative resulted in an unintentional blending of both constructions.
MaquieiraH.ZaragozaJ.González SenmartíA.Presencia de beotismos en las inscripciones de EgostenaHomenatge a Josep Alsina. Actes del Χè simposi de la Secció catalana de la seec Tarragona 28-30 de novembre de 19901992Vol. 1Tarragona8589
Thumb and Scherer1959§ 238.6b and 247.6b. In the inscriptions of Aigosthena in the Megaris ἐν + acc. is a Boeotian feature (see Maquieira 1992).
Dobias-Lalou (1994) read [ἐς τὰν Λιβ]ύαν (.26). As it happens Oliverio’s edition (on which seg 9.3 and ml no. 5 are based) presents ἘΣ ΤΑΝ the capitals representing letters that are uncertain (the photograph given by Oliverio at Table xii is useless in this case).
See Oliverio1928223(his own notation): (Δ)ᾶμις (2) (Θ)ήραθε (6) κατ(ο)ικίξασι ἐμμένοντ(α)ς (8) ὕστερ(ο)ν (32) ἀδιέ(ω)ς (36) ἀδελφε(ό)ς (39) ἐποιήσαντ(o) (42).