WE-3: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 25: Line 25:
Pictures in {{bib|Dal Rì 1987}}: fig. 305 (photos), {{bib|Schumacher 2004}}: Taf. 7,1 and 2 (photos) and Taf. 5,1 (drawings), {{bib|LIR}} (photos and drawings) and {{bib|Tecchiati et al. 2011}}: figg. 35–37 (photos).
Pictures in {{bib|Dal Rì 1987}}: fig. 305 (photos), {{bib|Schumacher 2004}}: Taf. 7,1 and 2 (photos) and Taf. 5,1 (drawings), {{bib|LIR}} (photos and drawings) and {{bib|Tecchiati et al. 2011}}: figg. 35–37 (photos).


Length 6 and 6.5 cm respectively. The inscription is written ''boustrophedon'' in two lines, both sinistroverse, with one being inverted. The lines are not quite straight, the letters are of unequal height, and hastae and bars do not touch. The scratches are much faded; while some lines or parts of lines are still well visible, others are almost gone. The reading is nevertheless unambiguous, including that of {{m||-ale}}, though damaged by a crack. Note that {{c||P2|d}} in line 2 is turned against writing direction; the reading as {{p||p}} is supported by the good documentation of the name {{w||piθamne}}. This reading is also supported by the fact that the two sigmas of this inscription have a different orientation although they are very close to each other.
Length 6 and 6.5 cm respectively. The inscription is written ''boustrophedon'' in two lines, both sinistroverse, with one being inverted. The lines are not quite straight, the letters are of unequal height, and hastae and bars do not touch. The scratches are much faded; while some lines or parts of lines are still well visible, others are almost gone. The reading is nevertheless unambiguous, including that of {{m||-ale}}, though damaged by a crack. Note that {{c||P2|d}} in line 2 is turned against writing direction; the reading as {{p||p}} is supported by the good documentation of the name {{w||piθamne}}. Moreover, the reading is supported by the fact that the two sigmas of this inscription have a different orientation although they are very close to each other.


Both lines start at the respective end of the object; it cannot be securely determined in which order they should be read: in our line 1, a non-script sequence, much damaged by a broad crack, follows at a certain distance; this group ({{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||Θ}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}} or similar) does not belong with the inscription, being scratched much more deeply, presumably with a different instrument. Similarly, in our line 2, a very faintly and untidily scratched {{c||R}}-shape follows. Both these elements differ clearly from both inscription and the ornament bands in application technique and seem to have been added at a later time; they cannot be interpreted as line fillers. Our arrangement is based on the interpretation of the inscription as the typically Raetic group of an individual name plus patronymic in the pertinentive case, accompanied by a verbal form in {{m||-ku}}. Cp. '''???'''.
Both lines start at the respective end of the object; it cannot be securely determined in which order they should be read: in our line 1, a non-script sequence, much damaged by a broad crack, follows at a certain distance; this group ({{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||Θ}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}}{{c||I}} or similar) does not belong with the inscription, being scratched much more deeply, presumably with a different instrument. Similarly, in our line 2, a very faintly and untidily scratched {{c||R}}-shape follows. Both these elements differ in application technique not only from the inscription proper but also from the ornament bands; they seem to have been added at a later time and cannot be interpreted as line fillers. The sequence in which we have added the two lines presupposes that the inscription consists of an individual name plus patronymic, both in the pertinentive case, accompanied by a verbal form in {{m||-ku}}, an arrangement which is typical of Raetic inscriptions. Cp. '''???'''.


Further references: {{bib|Mancini 1994}}: 289, {{bib|Rix 1998}}: 34.
Further references: {{bib|Mancini 1994}}: 289, {{bib|Rix 1998}}: 34.
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Revision as of 15:13, 13 November 2014

edit with form
Inscription
Transliteration: laspasieluku / piθamnuale
Original script: U2 sK sU2 sL2 sE sI sS dA5 sP2 sS sA5 sL2 s
E sL2 sA5 sU2 sN sM sA5 sΘ sI sP2 d
Object: WE-3 handle ()
Position: outside
Script: North Italic script
Direction of writing: boustrophedon
Letter height: 11 cm <br /> – 1.5 cm
Number of letters: 22
Number of lines: 2
Craftsmanship: engraved
Current condition: complete, damaged
Date of inscription:
Date derived from:
Language: Raetic
Meaning: 'X-ed by/for Laspa, son of Piθamne'
Alternative sigla: LIR BZ-32
Sources: Schumacher 2004: 189, 342

Images

WE-3 antler
Object WE-3 antler with inscription WE-3 - line 2.
WE-3 antler
Object WE-3 antler with inscription WE-3 - line 1.

Commentary

First published in Dal Rì 1987: 178 (no. 731).

Pictures in Dal Rì 1987: fig. 305 (photos), Schumacher 2004: Taf. 7,1 and 2 (photos) and Taf. 5,1 (drawings), LIR (photos and drawings) and Tecchiati et al. 2011: figg. 35–37 (photos).

Length 6 and 6.5 cm respectively. The inscription is written boustrophedon in two lines, both sinistroverse, with one being inverted. The lines are not quite straight, the letters are of unequal height, and hastae and bars do not touch. The scratches are much faded; while some lines or parts of lines are still well visible, others are almost gone. The reading is nevertheless unambiguous, including that of -ale, though damaged by a crack. Note that P2 d in line 2 is turned against writing direction; the reading as p is supported by the good documentation of the name piθamne. Moreover, the reading is supported by the fact that the two sigmas of this inscription have a different orientation although they are very close to each other.

Both lines start at the respective end of the object; it cannot be securely determined in which order they should be read: in our line 1, a non-script sequence, much damaged by a broad crack, follows at a certain distance; this group (I sI sI sI sΘ sI sI sI sI s or similar) does not belong with the inscription, being scratched much more deeply, presumably with a different instrument. Similarly, in our line 2, a very faintly and untidily scratched R s-shape follows. Both these elements differ in application technique not only from the inscription proper but also from the ornament bands; they seem to have been added at a later time and cannot be interpreted as line fillers. The sequence in which we have added the two lines presupposes that the inscription consists of an individual name plus patronymic, both in the pertinentive case, accompanied by a verbal form in -ku, an arrangement which is typical of Raetic inscriptions. Cp. ???.

Further references: Mancini 1994: 289, Rix 1998: 34.

Bibliography

Dal Rì 1987 Lorenzo Dal Rì, "Influssi etrusco-italici nella regione retico-alpina", in: Raffaele De Marinis (Ed.), Gli Etruschi a nord del Po, Mantova: Regione Lombardia - Provincia e Comune di Mantova 1987, 160–179.
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)
Mancini 1994 Alberto Mancini, "-", review of: Stefan Schumacher, Die rätischen Inschriften. Geschichte und heutiger Stand der Forschung [= Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft, Sonderheft 79], Innsbruck: Verlag des Instituts für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck 1992, Geschichte und Region / Storia e regione 3/1994 (1994), 286–291.
Retrieved from "https://tir.univie.ac.at/index.php?title=WE-3&oldid=9591"