AS-1: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|sigla_pid=216 | |sigla_pid=216 | ||
|sigla_mancini=ROT-2 | |sigla_mancini=ROT-2 | ||
|sigla_mlr=98 | |||
|sigla_tm=218498 | |||
|source=Schumacher 2004: 167 | |source=Schumacher 2004: 167 | ||
|checklevel=0 | |checklevel=0 | ||
| Line 20: | Line 22: | ||
First published in {{bib|Orsi 1890}}: 293 f. Lost. | First published in {{bib|Orsi 1890}}: 293 f. Lost. | ||
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) / {{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 ([[index:: | 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. | |||
Further references: {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 236. | Further references: {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 236. | ||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Latest revision as of 19:42, 8 November 2021
| 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 TM 218498 |
| Sources: | Schumacher 2004: 167 |
Images
 Inscription AS-1 according to Orsi.
|
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 
, 
and maybe 
qualify as letters. The status of 
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) |
|---|
