EN-1: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
|source=Schumacher 2004: 195, 217
|source=Schumacher 2004: 195, 217
|checklevel=5
|checklevel=5
|problem=ardez - keltisch oder rätisch?
}}
}}
== Commentary ==
== Commentary ==
First published in {{bib|Risch 1984}}: 29.
Further references: {{bib|Risch 1989}}: 1580.
Picture in {{bib|Risch 1984}}: 28, Abb 9 (drawing = {{bib|Risch 1989}}: 1586, fig. 7 = {{bib|Schumacher 2004}}: Taf. 5,4).
{{bib|Risch 1989}} argues that the potsherd, together with [[index::Ardez|three more typically Raetic objects with scratchings found at Ardez]], belongs in Frizens-Sanzeno-context and should therefore be considered part of the Raetic corpus. {{bib|Pellegrini 1985}}: 98, n. 14 remains sceptical. As, archaeologically, Ardez lies in an area of interference between a number of cultural horizons considered Raetic and/or Celtic, and the two identifiable letters are not decisive palaeographically, an attribution to Raetic is not unassailable. Generally speaking, properly inscribed pottery (as opposed to quasi-script scratchings on Sanzeno bowls and the like) is more typical for the area west of the river Etsch/Adige, usually assigned to the Lepontic (Celtic) corpus. The northernmost Lepontic finds from Graubünden, however, are two gravestones ([http://www.univie.ac.at/lexlep/wiki/GR%C2%B71 GR·1] and [http://www.univie.ac.at/lexlep/wiki/GR%C2%B72 GR·2]).
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Revision as of 17:14, 25 February 2014

Inscription
Transliteration: aχ[?
Original script: ]Χ sA s

Object: EN-1 potsherd (pottery)
Position: outside
Script: North Italic script
Direction of writing: ambiguous
Number of letters: 3
Number of lines: 1
Craftsmanship: incised before firing
Current condition: damaged, fragmentary
Archaeological culture: La Tène A, La Tène B [from object]
Date of inscription: first half of the 5th–middle of the 3rd centuries BC [from object]
Date derived from: archaeological context, typology [from object]

Language: unknown
Meaning:

Alternative sigla: none
Sources: Schumacher 2004: 195, 217

Images

Commentary

First published in Risch 1984: 29.

Further references: Risch 1989: 1580.

Picture in Risch 1984: 28, Abb 9 (drawing = Risch 1989: 1586, fig. 7 = Schumacher 2004: Taf. 5,4).

Risch 1989 argues that the potsherd, together with three more typically Raetic objects with scratchings found at Ardez, belongs in Frizens-Sanzeno-context and should therefore be considered part of the Raetic corpus. Pellegrini 1985: 98, n. 14 remains sceptical. As, archaeologically, Ardez lies in an area of interference between a number of cultural horizons considered Raetic and/or Celtic, and the two identifiable letters are not decisive palaeographically, an attribution to Raetic is not unassailable. Generally speaking, properly inscribed pottery (as opposed to quasi-script scratchings on Sanzeno bowls and the like) is more typical for the area west of the river Etsch/Adige, usually assigned to the Lepontic (Celtic) corpus. The northernmost Lepontic finds from Graubünden, however, are two gravestones (GR·1 and GR·2).


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)