l. 12: 
(υἱ(ὸν)) --> (υἱ(οῦ)); the usual construction in this phrase is epi+gen.; see e.g. P.Apoll. p. 9. (I suppose Bell intended the same in P.Lond. IV)

 - l. 12:
(υἱ(ὸν)) --> (υἱ(οῦ)); the usual construction in this phrase is epi+gen.; see e.g. P.Apoll. p. 9. (I suppose Bell intended the same in P.Lond. IV)

Signed-off-by: Joshua D. Sosin <joshuad.sosin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: James Cowey <james.cowey@urz.uni-heidelberg.de>
Signed-off-by: Rodney Ast <simoeis@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Heilporn <paul.heilporn@unistra.fr>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Kruse <thomas.kruse@oeaw.ac.at>
Signed-off-by: Cisca Hoogendijk <ciscahoogendijk@live.nl>
Signed-off-by: Graham Claytor <gclaytor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Depauw <mark.depauw@arts.kuleuven.be>
Signed-off-by: Lajos Berkes <berkes.lajos@googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Georg Schmelz <georg.schmelz@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Alain Delattre <adelattr@ulb.ac.be>
Signed-off-by: Jenny Cromwell <jenniferacromwell@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Tonia Sarri <toniasarri@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Christian-Jürgen Gruber <morunculus@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Hélène Cuvigny <h.cuvigny@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: W. Graham Claytor <gclaytor@umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Verhoogt <verhoogt@umich.edu>
Signed-off-by: Esther Garel <esthergarel@gmail.com>
Update revisionDesc

 - Vote - DEFER - This seems right to me, but I would want a second or third opinion. At lin12 consider we should probably construe εἰ(ς τὴν) (σάκε(λλαν) as so often in this text, rather than  (εἰ(ς)) (σάκε(λλαν); also if we correct lin12 we should also consider doing same at lins210 and 276. Note parallel use, with name apparently omitted at lin464 (Joshua D. Sosin)
 - Vote - Accept-Straight-to-Finalization - I asked N. Gonis for advice on this text and the suggested corrections. He kindly sent me the following notes. "We ought to have υἱ(οῦ) in 12, 210, 276, 279, 456; but in 457 we have ἐπὶ τὸν αὐ[τ(ὸν)], which suggests that the scribe intended the accusative, and this must have influenced the decision to produce these accusatives. If I were to edit the text, I would resolve υἱ(οῦ) throughout and correct the accusative in 457.
εἰ(ς τὴν) (σάκε(λλαν)  was not what the scribe intended, and the same applies to the editor (see 364 n.); ει/  = εἰ(ς). We have ει¯/ = εἰ(ς) τ(ὴν) only once, in l. 12 (for the abbreviation see P.Lond. IV p. 604 top); εἰ(ς) σάκε(λλαν) is a data entry error. Correct accordingly.
The text needs checking; I've noticed some data entry errors but there may well be more: 
216 δ(ιὰ) νο(μισμάτων) ϛ]γ: ϛ]γ → ξ]γ)
234 (πρώτου) (καὶ) (δευτέρας) κ(α)τ(α)βολῆ(ς): (πρώτου) → (πρώτης) 
531 remove the question mark, and then replace πρ(  )τ(  ) with <:(πρ(o)τ(έρου))(?)|alt|(πρ(ώ)τ(ου)) (?):>  (I'd rather have one of the two in the text than leave the word unrestored); 
535 ἀν(τὶ) τ(οῦ) ἀποστρε(φθέντος) → <:(ἀντ(ὶ)) (|ἀποστρε|)|alt|(ἀντ(ὶ)) <τοῦ> (ἀποστρε(φθέντος))(?):> (the abbreviation used stands for ἀντί, not ἀντὶ τοῦ)."
I have checked the volume and have nothing further to add. Carry out corrections as given by Berkes and Gonis. (James Cowey)
 - Finalized - Ready. (James Cowey)
Finalization merge of branch 'DDbDP_Editorial_Board/finalizing/2014/04/10/P.Lond._4_1412' into canonical master