NO-3: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(9 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{inscription
{{inscription
|reading=φeluriesi : φelvinuale space upiku!uφiku
|reading=φelturiesi!φelturiesi : φelvinuale space utiku
|reading_original={{c|U|U2}}{{c|K|K3}}{{c|I}}{{c|Φ|Φ5}}{{c|U|U2}}<span style="margin-left:44px">{{c|E}}</span>{{c|L|L2}}{{c|A|A4}}{{c|U|U2}}{{c|N}}{{c|I}}{{c|V}}{{c|L|L2}}{{c|E}}{{c|Φ|Φ3}}{{c|punctuation|punctuation3}}{{c|I}}{{c|S}}{{c|E}}{{c|I}}{{c|R|R2}}{{c|U|U2}}{{c|L|L2|d}}{{c|E}}{{c|Φ|Φ3}}
|reading_original={{c|U|U2}}{{c|K|K3}}{{c|I}}{{c|T|T4}}{{c|U|U2}}<span style="margin-left:44px">{{c|E}}</span>{{c|L|L2}}{{c|A|A4}}{{c|U|U2}}{{c|N}}{{c|I}}{{c|V}}{{c|L|L2}}{{c|E}}{{c|Φ|Φ3}}{{c|punctuation|punctuation3}}{{c|I}}{{c|S||d}}{{c|E}}{{c|I}}{{c|R|R2}}{{c|U|U2}}{{c|LT}}{{c|E}}{{c|Φ|Φ3}}
|direction=sinistroverse
|direction=sinistroverse
|letter_height_min=0.9
|letter_height_min=0.9
Line 12: Line 12:
|alphabet=Sanzeno alphabet
|alphabet=Sanzeno alphabet
|language=Raetic
|language=Raetic
|meaning='by of Φelurie son of Φelvi* X-ed'
|meaning='by of Φelturie son of Φelvi* X-ed'
|object=NO-3 plaque
|object=NO-3 plaque
|position=back
|position=back
Line 20: Line 20:
|sigla_ir=1
|sigla_ir=1
|sigla_mancini=ME-1
|sigla_mancini=ME-1
|sigla_mlr=37
|sigla_tm=218446
|source=Schumacher 2004: 150, 336
|source=Schumacher 2004: 150, 336
|checklevel=1
|checklevel=1
|problem=NRIE: Lattes ILE = PID Rh. Mus. 68 (1913) p. 527? Gugsi: wieso Rückseite?
|problem=NRIE: Lattes ILE = PID Rh. Mus. 68 (1913) p. 527?
}}
}}
== Commentary ==
== Commentary ==
First published in {{bib|Pauli 1888}}: 139 ff.
First published in {{bib|Pauli 1888}}: 139 ff.


Images in {{bib|IR}} (photo tav. Ia and drawing) = {{bib|LIR}}.
Images in {{bib|Pauli 1888}}: Tav. II,1 (drawing), {{bib|IR}} (photo tav. Ia and drawing) = {{bib|LIR}}, {{bib|MLR}} (photo).


Inscribed in two parts on what appears to be the back side of the little votive shield. The first and longer sequence is written in a half-circle along the rim on lower end of the shield (opposite the hole), facing outward. It measures about 13 cm, starting and ending very neatly at the same level (about halfway along the length of the shield). The shorter sequence is inscribed in the same "line", but at a considerable distance from the first group, at the upper end just before and over the hole (length 3.5 cm). The lines are very thin, but all in all well legible.
Inscribed in two parts on what appears to be the back side of the little votive shield. The first and longer sequence is written in a half-circle along the rim on lower end of the shield (opposite the hole), facing outward. It measures about 13 cm, starting and ending very neatly at the same level (about halfway along the length of the shield). The shorter sequence is inscribed in the same "line", but at a considerable distance from the first group, at the upper end just before and over the hole (length 3.5 cm). The lines are very thin, but all in all well visible.


The longer sequence is fairly neatly executed, although the curve led to some minor problems for the writer. {{c||Φ3}} and {{c||E}} are clear. {{c||L2|d}} has its bar pointing against writing direction. {{c||U2}} features a little bar {{c||line d 2000}} extending from its right hasta, but a reading {{c||A2|d}} can be excluded by comparison with secure {{c||A4}}. (PID|Whatmough somewhat randomly interpreted the bar of L2|d and the abovementioned scratch as punctuation marks.) {{c||I}}{{c||S}}{{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||R2}} is unambiguous, the letters becoming successively smaller in the curve. The dots making up the separator are very distinct, being small patches scratched off the surface rather than just indentations. Resuming with bigger letters, now increasing in size: {{c||N}}{{c||I}}{{c||V}}{{c||L2}}{{c||E}}{{c||Φ3}} is clear. The area around {{c||U2}} in the lefthand side curve is damaged by scratches, some unintentional, some maybe stemming from some incertitude on the part of the writer, but {{c||U2}} can be identified without doubt. Following inverted {{c||A4}} may probably also be rated as a mistake due to having to write in a curve; maybe the writer turned the object around to be able to steady his hand on the object. Final {{c||E}}{{c||L2}} is not inverted.
The longer sequence is fairly neatly executed, although the curve led to some minor problems for the writer. {{c||Φ3}} and {{c||E}} are clear. The next element appears to be a ligature {{c||LT}}: The hasta features both a bar {{c||line d 001}} on the right and a dot on top. The dot is executed the same way as the other dots in the inscription (in the separators and {{c||T4}}), i.e. as a small patch with the upper layer of material carefully scraped off. The bar of Lambda being turned against writing direction must be taken as indicating the order in which the elements of the ligature are to be read, i.e. {{p||l}}{{p||t}}. (See below.) It is unclear why just these two letters are ligated, and not also for example Lambda and Digamma a little further on in the same way. See [[index::Script]] on ligatures in Raetic. {{c||U2}} features a little bar {{c||line d 2000}} extending from its right hasta, but a reading {{c||A2|d}} can be excluded by comparison with secure {{c||A4}}. ({{bib|PID|Whatmough}} somewhat randomly interpreted the bar of {{c||L2|d}} and the abovementioned scratch as punctuation marks.) {{c||I}}{{c||S|d}}{{c||E}}{{c||I}}{{c||R2}} is unambiguous, the letters becoming successively smaller in the curve. The dots making up the separator are very distinct, being small patches scratched off the surface rather than just indentations. Resuming with bigger letters, now increasing in size: {{c||N}}{{c||I}}{{c||V}}{{c||L2}}{{c||E}}{{c||Φ3}} is clear. The area around {{c||U2}} in the lefthand side curve is damaged by scratches, some unintentional, some maybe stemming from some incertitude on the part of the writer, but {{c||U2}} can be identified without doubt. Following inverted {{c||A4}} may probably also be rated as a mistake due to having to write in a curve; maybe the writer turned the object around to be able to steady his hand on the object. Final {{c||E}}{{c||L2}} is not inverted.


The shorter sequence is much less tidily inscribed. After {{c||U2}}, a wiggly line with a dot on top, executed exactly like the dots making up the separator, is certainly {{c||Φ5}}. The line {{c||I}}, also skew, is prolonged in the bottom, probably a slip if the tool – a short horizontal scratch crossing it in the place where it's supposed to end is probably an effort of the writer to make his intention clear. Final {{c||U2}} is small and written over the hole.
The shorter sequence is much less tidily inscribed. After {{c||U2}}, a wiggly line with a dot on top, executed exactly like the dots making up the separator, is certainly {{c||T4}}. The line {{c||I}}, also skew, is prolonged in the bottom, probably a slip if the tool – a short horizontal scratch crossing it in the place where it's supposed to end is probably an effort of the writer to make his intention clear. Final {{c||U2}} is small and written over the hole.


The interpretation of the inscription is unproblematic: a standard Raetic name formula in the pertinentive case, followed by a verbal form in {{m||-ku}}. The more interesting question concerns the relation of the two parts of the inscription to each other: A supplementary addition of {{w||upiku|uφiku}} might explain its displacement from the name formula, but despite the sloppier execution, the similarity of how the dots were made indicates the same writer. In this case, a co-occurrence of {{c||Φ3}} and {{c||Φ5}} is hard to explain and may be taken as an argument against interpreting {{c||Φ5}} as a character for a labial, or at least as a variety of Phi. See [[index::Φ]] for a discussion. Note also that another similar dot is found on top of the hasta of the first {{c||L2|d}}. While the bar of {{c||L2|d}}, though oriented incorrectly, cannot be disregarded, the dot cannot be excluded to be intentional – possibly a ligature {{p||l}}{{p||p}}? Cp. [[index::SZ-14]].
The interpretation of the inscription is unproblematic: a standard Raetic name formula in the pertinentive case, followed by a deverbal form in {{m||-u}}. The individual name {{w||φelturie}} has a parallel in [[index::SZ-14]] {{w||φeliturie}}. Concerning the relation of the two parts of the inscription to each other: A supplementary addition of {{w||utiku}} might explain its displacement from the name formula, but despite the sloppier execution, the similarity of how the dots were made indicates the same writer.


Further references: {{bib|NRIE}} 90, {{bib|Battisti 1936b}}: 598, {{bib|Battisti 1944}}: 233 f., {{bib|Pellegrini 1951}}: 325 f., {{bib|Mayr 1959}}: 230 f., {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 220 f.
Further references: {{bib|NRIE}} 90, {{bib|Battisti 1936b}}: 598, {{bib|Battisti 1944}}: 233 f., {{bib|Pellegrini 1951}}: 325 f., {{bib|Mayr 1959}}: 230 f., {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 220 f.
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Latest revision as of 20:12, 8 November 2021

edit with form
Inscription
Transliteration: φelturiesi : φelvinuale utiku
Original script: U2 sK3 sI sT4 sU2 sE sL2 sA4 sU2 sN sI sV sL2 sE sΦ3 spunctuation3 sI sS dE sI sR2 sU2 sLT sE sΦ3 s
Object: NO-3 plaque (bronze)
Position: back
Script: North Italic script (Sanzeno alphabet)
Direction of writing: sinistroverse
Letter height: 0.90.9 cm <br /> – 1.6 cm
Number of letters: 14
Number of characters: 15
Number of lines: 1
Craftsmanship: engraved
Current condition: complete
Date of inscription:
Date derived from:
Language: Raetic
Meaning: 'by of Φelturie son of Φelvi* X-ed'
Alternative sigla: PID 210
IR 1
LIR ME-1
MLR 37
TM 218446
Sources: Schumacher 2004: 150, 336

Images

NO-3 plaque
Object NO-3 plaque with inscription NO-3.
NO-3 plaque
Object NO-3 plaque with inscription NO-3 - rear side.
NO-3
Inscription NO-3 - detail 1 "φeluriesi:".
NO-3
Inscription NO-3 - detail 2 "φelvinuale".
NO-3
Inscription NO-3 - detail 3 "uφiku".

Commentary

First published in Pauli 1888: 139 ff.

Images in Pauli 1888: Tav. II,1 (drawing), IR (photo tav. Ia and drawing) = LIR, MLR (photo).

Inscribed in two parts on what appears to be the back side of the little votive shield. The first and longer sequence is written in a half-circle along the rim on lower end of the shield (opposite the hole), facing outward. It measures about 13 cm, starting and ending very neatly at the same level (about halfway along the length of the shield). The shorter sequence is inscribed in the same "line", but at a considerable distance from the first group, at the upper end just before and over the hole (length 3.5 cm). The lines are very thin, but all in all well visible.

The longer sequence is fairly neatly executed, although the curve led to some minor problems for the writer. Φ3 s and E s are clear. The next element appears to be a ligature LT s: The hasta features both a bar line d 001 s on the right and a dot on top. The dot is executed the same way as the other dots in the inscription (in the separators and T4 s), i.e. as a small patch with the upper layer of material carefully scraped off. The bar of Lambda being turned against writing direction must be taken as indicating the order in which the elements of the ligature are to be read, i.e. lt. (See below.) It is unclear why just these two letters are ligated, and not also for example Lambda and Digamma a little further on in the same way. See Script on ligatures in Raetic. U2 s features a little bar line d 2000 s extending from its right hasta, but a reading A2 d can be excluded by comparison with secure A4 s. (Whatmough somewhat randomly interpreted the bar of L2 d and the abovementioned scratch as punctuation marks.) I sS dE sI sR2 s is unambiguous, the letters becoming successively smaller in the curve. The dots making up the separator are very distinct, being small patches scratched off the surface rather than just indentations. Resuming with bigger letters, now increasing in size: N sI sV sL2 sE sΦ3 s is clear. The area around U2 s in the lefthand side curve is damaged by scratches, some unintentional, some maybe stemming from some incertitude on the part of the writer, but U2 s can be identified without doubt. Following inverted A4 s may probably also be rated as a mistake due to having to write in a curve; maybe the writer turned the object around to be able to steady his hand on the object. Final E sL2 s is not inverted.

The shorter sequence is much less tidily inscribed. After U2 s, a wiggly line with a dot on top, executed exactly like the dots making up the separator, is certainly T4 s. The line I s, also skew, is prolonged in the bottom, probably a slip if the tool – a short horizontal scratch crossing it in the place where it's supposed to end is probably an effort of the writer to make his intention clear. Final U2 s is small and written over the hole.

The interpretation of the inscription is unproblematic: a standard Raetic name formula in the pertinentive case, followed by a deverbal form in -u. The individual name φelturie has a parallel in SZ-14 φeliturie. Concerning the relation of the two parts of the inscription to each other: A supplementary addition of utiku might explain its displacement from the name formula, but despite the sloppier execution, the similarity of how the dots were made indicates the same writer.

Further references: NRIE 90, Battisti 1936b: 598, Battisti 1944: 233 f., Pellegrini 1951: 325 f., Mayr 1959: 230 f., Tibiletti Bruno 1978: 220 f.

Bibliography

Battisti 1936b Carlo Battisti, "Rassegna critica degli studi linguistici sull'Alto Adige nel quinquennio 1931-36", Archivio per l'Alto Adige 31/2 (1936), 561–611.
Battisti 1944 Carlo Battisti, "Osservazioni sulla lingua delle iscrizioni nell'alfabeto etrusco settentrionale di Bolzano", Studi Etruschi 18 (1944), 199–236.
IR Alberto Mancini, "Iscrizioni retiche", Studi Etruschi 43 (1975), 249–306.
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)
Mayr 1959 Karl M. Mayr, "Das Schildchen von Mechel und der Reiter von Sanzeno und ihre Inschriften. Zwei Deutungsversuche", Der Schlern 33 (1959), 230–232.
Retrieved from "https://tir.univie.ac.at/index.php?title=NO-3&oldid=17896"