AS-1: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
|sigla_pid=216
|sigla_pid=216
|sigla_mancini=ROT-2
|sigla_mancini=ROT-2
|sigla_mlr=98
|source=Schumacher 2004: 167
|source=Schumacher 2004: 167
|checklevel=0
|checklevel=0
Line 20: Line 21:
First published in {{bib|Orsi 1890}}: 293 f. Lost.
First published in {{bib|Orsi 1890}}: 293 f. Lost.


Image in {{bib|Orsi 1890}}: 293 (drawing).
Image in {{bib|Orsi 1890}}: 293 (drawing = {{bib|MLR}}).


According to Orsi, the inscription is written somewhere "in fondo" of the fragmentary vessel, and damaged. He adds a highly suspicious drawing of only the characters, and offers no reading. Pellegrini ({{bib|Pellegrini 1915|1915}}: 121 (note 4), 123 / {{bib|Pellegrini 1918|1918}}: 192 f. (note 3)) assumes that the fragment is not of a "pentola", but of a cup similar to the ones on which the other inscriptions are written. The common reading (dextroverse) ]{{w||)iśnaśu|iśnaśu}} goes back to him; the idea that the inscription is incomplete on the left is based on the comparison with [[index::MA-4]] and [[index::MA-14]]. He appears not to have seen the object himself. In Orsi's drawing, only {{c||I|d}}, {{c||N|d}} and maybe {{c||U3|d}} qualify as letters. The status of {{c||Ś3|d}} as a Raetic letter is dubious, but the form does repeatedly occur in [[index::Bostel]] as part of what is probably a manufacturer's mark (see [[index::śv]]). The character in the centre is probably misrepresented. In light of the recent inscription finds from [[index::Bostel]], AS-1 may have (had) linguistic content, but we prefer not to speculate based on the inadequate drawing.
According to Orsi, the inscription is written somewhere "in fondo" of the fragmentary vessel, and damaged. He adds a highly suspicious drawing of only the characters, and offers no reading. Pellegrini ({{bib|Pellegrini 1915|1915}}: 121 (note 4), 123 / {{bib|Pellegrini 1918|1918}}: 192 f. (note 3)) assumes that the fragment is not of a "pentola", but of a cup similar to the ones on which the other inscriptions are written. The common reading (dextroverse) ]{{w||)iśnaśu|iśnaśu}} goes back to him; the idea that the inscription is incomplete on the left is based on the comparison with [[index::MA-4]] and [[index::MA-14]]. He appears not to have seen the object himself. In Orsi's drawing, only {{c||I|d}}, {{c||N|d}} and maybe {{c||U3|d}} qualify as letters. The status of {{c||Ś3|d}} as a Raetic letter is dubious, but the form does repeatedly occur in [[index::Bostel]] as part of what is probably a manufacturer's mark (see [[index::śv]]). The character in the centre is probably misrepresented. In light of the recent inscription finds from [[index::Bostel]], AS-1 may have (had) linguistic content, but we prefer not to speculate based on the inadequate drawing.

Revision as of 14:36, 9 November 2015

Inscription
Transliteration: ?
Original script: ?

Object: AS-1 potsherd (pottery)
Position: unknown
Script: unknown
Direction of writing: unknown
Craftsmanship: incised
Current condition: unknown
Date of inscription: 4th–2nd centuries BC [from object]
Date derived from: archaeological context [from object]

Language: unknown
Meaning: unknown

Alternative sigla: PID 216
LIR ROT-2
MLR 98
Sources: Schumacher 2004: 167

Images

Commentary

First published in Orsi 1890: 293 f. Lost.

Image in Orsi 1890: 293 (drawing = MLR).

According to Orsi, the inscription is written somewhere "in fondo" of the fragmentary vessel, and damaged. He adds a highly suspicious drawing of only the characters, and offers no reading. Pellegrini (1915: 121 (note 4), 123 / 1918: 192 f. (note 3)) assumes that the fragment is not of a "pentola", but of a cup similar to the ones on which the other inscriptions are written. The common reading (dextroverse) ]iśnaśu goes back to him; the idea that the inscription is incomplete on the left is based on the comparison with MA-4 and MA-14. He appears not to have seen the object himself. In Orsi's drawing, only I d, N d and maybe U3 d qualify as letters. The status of Ś3 d as a Raetic letter is dubious, but the form does repeatedly occur in Bostel as part of what is probably a manufacturer's mark (see śv). The character in the centre is probably misrepresented. In light of the recent inscription finds from Bostel, AS-1 may have (had) linguistic content, but we prefer not to speculate based on the inadequate drawing.

Further references: Tibiletti Bruno 1978: 236.

Bibliography

LIR Alberto Mancini, Le Iscrizioni Retiche [= Quaderni del dipartimento di linguistica, Università degli studi di Firenze Studi 8–9], Padova: Unipress 2009–10. (2 volumes)