Yuri Vinogradov who published the editio princeps (“Новые материалы по раннегреческой экономике”, ВДИ 1 (1971), 64-76; also ВДИ 4 (1974), p. 58, no. 13) dates the pot and graffito to the first half of VI century; Bravo 1977, 41: 2nd half of VI century; Johnston (LSAG2, p. 478, no. 60b): ca. 550? B.C.E.

Frag. 1, line 1. Vinogradov read the third preserved letter as alpha, but this is far from certain, as my autpopsy has shown. Alpha has a peculiar shape in this graffito: instead of two diagonals connected by a crossbar, we have a vertical, from the midpoint of which a horizontal extends rightwards, and a diagonal connects the apex of the vertical with the end of the horizontal in a sharp trianlgle. This shape is not attested in other inscriptions of Borysthenes, Olbia or any Ionian city. At the same time, the dialect of the graffito and the rest of the script look Ionian. Vinogradov 1971 noted that this shape of alpha is attested in Aeolian cities and it leads him to suggest that the writer was an Ionian Greek who travelled and traded in different parts of Greece, became familiar with different local scripts, and developed a mixed personal style of writing, while Bravo (1977, 41) also envisions an Ionian foreigner at Borysthenes whose writing, however, repsents a local variety of Ionian alphabets, which is simply unknown from other sources. There are three clear instances of alpha in this graffito (Frag. 1, line 1, second letter from the right break; Frag. 1, line 3; Frag. 2, line 3 - in all of these the sharp triangle formed by the horizontal and diagonal lines is quite pronounced. The third letter of line 1 in Frag. 1, by contrast, is different: the vertical is clear, and then there is a depression in the surface below the apex but it does not extend far enough to the right to indicate a shape similar to other certain alphas in this text. We would also expect a diagonal, as in the other three cases, to start from the very top of the vertical, but there is no such stroke there; instead, what looks like a short sideways stroke sits several mm below the apex. In my view, the depression in the surface is not a genuine stroke or strokes, but a damage, a gouge that only resembles intentional strokes. For these reasons, I prefer to read the letter as an iota. As a result, I do not follow Vinogradov in reading a verbal form [ἐπώλ]ησα here. Dubois accepted Vinogradov's alpha, but not the restoration, leaving the maiuscule transcription in his edition.

Frag. 1, line 3. The second preserved letter is a narrow ypslion, not a rho. A proper tailed rho with a large loop is clear in Frag. 2,line 3. Cross-shaped chi is not typical for Borysthenes or Olbia, but does occur in the Ionian dodecapolis, e.g. on Samos and Chios, in the Archaic period (LSAG, p. 341, no. 2, Pl. 63 (Samos, c. 600-575), p. 343, no. 41, Pl. 65 (Chios, c. 575-550?). Vinogradov was inclined to see the Genitive of a personal name or of magistrate's office in the first four letters; Dubois agreed, and I also see this as the most likely. Since, however, I read the second letter as ypsilon and not rho, we have fewer options for personal names, e.g. Πάνταυχος, attested in Euboea in the IV-III cent. B.C.E. (LGPN online, V1-76372) and several times in Macedonia in the III cent. A couple of other names with the second part -αυχος are attested, according to LGPN online, mostly in the Roman period.

A likely mention of hemiekton in line 4 of Frag. 1 and line 5 of Frag. 2 suggests that we are dealing with an account that records either weights or money. As a measure of weight, hemiekton is known, for example, on Samos, where a bronze rectangular weight has been found (Samian Heraion, Inv. Her. B 976; IG XII.6,2 965, dated 2nd half VI cent BCE), weighing 140,12g, and carrying three inscriptions, including (on the wide face A): ἡμίεκ-| τον τ-| ὸ ΔΗΜΙΑ. As money, it is attested e.g. at Halikarnassos (SIG 45.26); it was equal to 8 obols.

In lapidary epigraphy, we find examples of inscribed cultic regulations, where certain weights (in hemiekta) of produce are prescribed for use in rituals: e.g. IG XII,4 1:276, line 6 (sacrificial calendar from Kos, mid-4th century B.C.E.). In our case, a graffito on a potsherd most likely suggests a draft of calculations or a receipt. That these calculations or records were related to cult duties cannot be excluded, but a mundane case of commercial accounting is equally possible.

Vinogradov sees a commercial record here, specifically, an income account from a recent trade (pottery being a likely item of import, in his view), where each line of text names an individual in the Gen. Sing., followed by the amount of money in hekta and hemiekta, earned from a sale to that person; the repetition of sums suggests to him a trade in some stock product; one entry, however, represents a barter exchange, where our hypothetical merchant receives grain, which Vinogradov sees in the word artos he reads in Frag. 2, line 3, in lieu of monetary payment. Benedetto Bravo ("Remarques sur les assises sociales, les formes d'organisation et la terminologie du commerce maritime à l'époque archaïque", Dialogues d'histoire ancienne 1977/3, 1-59; SEG 27:428), envisions (pp. 41-42) a different professional as a composer of the list, namely, a magistrate or responsible party of some kind (an 'arkhos' or 'neouros'), who makes a mnemonic list of a ship's cargo. His line of thinking is based on a mistaken reading of line 3 in Frag. 1. More convincingly, he also argues that hekta, emiekta are not likely to be monetary units at this early date and are best taken as units of weight, of either liquid or dry goods.

Frag. 2, line 2. The sequence of letters [- -]ΟΚΜΙ[- -] can be explained as a result of either elision, abbreviation, misspelling, omission of letters, or use of numerals. Firstly, I do not see a tau at the right break. Vinogradov refrained from an interpretation. Bravo proposed to amend to [- -]ο̄ ἡμίε̣[κτον] where he seems to think that a kappa was inscribed by mistake in place of an eta. If all the letters were inscribed intentionally, then, in my view, we could consider a case of elision, e.g. [- -]ο’κ μι[- -], with a noun/pronoun with the final omicron followed by the preposition ἐκ followed by a toponym e.g. ἐκ Μιλήτω or ἐκ Μιλήτου.

Frag. 2, line 3. My inspection of the ostracon de visu showed, at the left break, three short strokes one below the other, which should be read as a ksi. In that case, the sequence of letters ΞΙΑΡ could be read either as [- -]ξιαρ (e.g.[τα]ξιάρ(χος)), [- -]ξι Αρ[- -] (e.g. [Να]ξι(ος) Αρ[- -]) οr [- -]ξια Ρ[- -]. Finally, there is a slight possibility that the space between iota and the letter at the right break, although it looks like a proper vacat, may have not been intended as such. If the letter at the break is a squarish omicron, then the sequence up for interpretation would be ΞΙΑΡΟ.

In sum, the preservation of fragmentary words that are best restored as weight measurement units ἕκτην and ἡμίεκτον indicate that we are dealing with some type of an account. At the same time, the rest of the text is too fragmentary to allow greater specificity in interpretation.