BZ-6: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{inscription | {{inscription | ||
|reading=φanaχi / nụaupe | |reading=unknown!φanaχi / unknown!nụaupe | ||
|reading_original={{c|I}}{{c|Χ|Χ3}}{{c|A|A21}}{{c|N}}{{c|A|A21}}{{c|Φ|Φ2}}<br>{{c|E}}{{c|P|P2}}{{c|U|U2 | |reading_original={{c|I}}{{c|Χ|Χ3}}{{c|A|A21}}{{c|N}}{{c|A|A21}}{{c|Φ|Φ2}}<br>{{c|E}}{{c|P|P2}}{{c|U|U2}}{{c|A|A21}}{{c|U|U2}}{{c|N}} | ||
|direction=sinistroverse | |direction=sinistroverse | ||
|letter_height_min=8 | |letter_height_min=8 | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
|sigla_mancini=BZ-3 | |sigla_mancini=BZ-3 | ||
|source=Schumacher 2004: 179 | |source=Schumacher 2004: 179 | ||
|checklevel= | |checklevel=1 | ||
|problem=interpretation? mayr: keltisch? comp. BZ-10 pnake? | |||
}} | }} | ||
== Commentary == | == Commentary == | ||
First published in {{bib|Mayr 1962b}}. | |||
Images in {{bib|Mayr 1962b}}: 285 (drawing) and Abb. 1 (photos = {{bib|Prosdocimi 1971}}: 40), {{bib|IR}}: tav. LIV, a and b (photos), {{bib|LIR}} (drawings). | |||
Inscribed on one broad (line 1) and one narrow (line 2) side of the slab, running downwards; length 47.5 cm and 38 cm respectively. The stone, particularly the side bearing line 1, is not much eroded; the lines are broad and somewhat fuzzy, but even line 2 is well visible on the uneven surface. Apart from a piece of stone broken off the top on the side above line 2, the slab and inscription seem to be complete. While line 1 starts at the very top, line 2 starts right under the damaged area – the inscription may have been applied after the slab was damaged. There are no traces of a letter before {{c||N}} in line 2. An independence of the two lines can be excluded on the basis of similarities in the execution of some letters ({{c||A21}} tilted against writing direction, {{c||N}} with a rather level first and almost vertical second bar). | |||
The reading of line 1 {{w||φanaχi}} is unambiguous. The left half of {{c||Φ2}}, the shorter hastae of {{c||A21}}, and the lateral lines of {{c||Χ3}} are slightly rounded. In line 2, the letters {{c||E}}{{c||P2}}{{c||U2}}{{c||A21}}{{c|N}} are written in full size; the hastae of {{c||E}} and {{c||P2}} are curiously curved. Under the angle of {{c||N}}, a small {{c||U2}} or {{c||L2}} seems to have been inserted. ({{bib|Mayr 1962b|Mayr}}'s assumption that the angle in question is merely that of {{c||N}}, which had been written incorrectly, then repeated above, is not feasible.) {{bib|Prosdocimi 1971|Prosdocimi}}'s reading {{w||nlaupe}} is grounded on the asymmetry of the letter, which may however be due only to the awkward position. The cluster {{p||n}}{{p||l}} is more manifest only in light of the following diphthong and the implausibility of a sequence {{p||u}}{{p||a}}{{p||u}}, but it might be surmised that the belated addition of a letter did not necessarily result in a correct inscription, and that neither {{w||nlaupe}} nor {{w||nuaupe}} represent the intended outcome. The most attractive amendation could be achieved by assuming that the letters {{c||A21}} and {{c||U2}} were applied in the wrong order. Discarding the original {{p||u}} in {{w||nuaupe}} yields {{w||nuape}}, a sequence very similar to the well-attested suffix group {{m||-nu}}{{m||-(a)le|-ale}}. This reading, however, would need to explain both the second misspelling of {{c||P2}} for {{c||L2}}, and the fact that the writer removed the group in its entirety to the side of the slab, rather than continuing line 1 to the bottom. Also, at this point an interpretation of {{w||φanaχi}} as an individual name is mere speculation. | |||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Revision as of 20:02, 18 November 2014
| Inscription | |
|---|---|
| Transliteration: | φanaχi / nụaupe |
| Original script: |        
|
|
| |
| Object: | BZ-6 slab (stone) |
| Position: | front, upper area"upper area" is not in the list (front, back, top, bottom, inside, outside, neck, shoulder, foot, handle, ...) of allowed values for the "position" property., side"side" is not in the list (front, back, top, bottom, inside, outside, neck, shoulder, foot, handle, ...) of allowed values for the "position" property. |
| Orientation: | 90° |
| Script: | North Italic script |
| Direction of writing: | sinistroverse |
| Letter height: | 88 cm <br /> – 12 cm |
| Number of letters: | 11 |
| Number of lines: | 2 |
| Craftsmanship: | engraved |
| Current condition: | complete, damaged |
| Archaeological culture: | Late Iron Age [from object] |
| Date of inscription: | |
| Date derived from: | |
|
| |
| Language: | unknown |
| Meaning: | unknown |
|
| |
| Alternative sigla: | IR 81 LIR BZ-3 |
| Sources: | Schumacher 2004: 179 |
Images
 Inscription BZ-6.
|
Commentary
First published in Mayr 1962b.
Images in Mayr 1962b: 285 (drawing) and Abb. 1 (photos = Prosdocimi 1971: 40), IR: tav. LIV, a and b (photos), LIR (drawings).
Inscribed on one broad (line 1) and one narrow (line 2) side of the slab, running downwards; length 47.5 cm and 38 cm respectively. The stone, particularly the side bearing line 1, is not much eroded; the lines are broad and somewhat fuzzy, but even line 2 is well visible on the uneven surface. Apart from a piece of stone broken off the top on the side above line 2, the slab and inscription seem to be complete. While line 1 starts at the very top, line 2 starts right under the damaged area – the inscription may have been applied after the slab was damaged. There are no traces of a letter before in line 2. An independence of the two lines can be excluded on the basis of similarities in the execution of some letters ( tilted against writing direction, with a rather level first and almost vertical second bar).
The reading of line 1 φanaχi is unambiguous. The left half of , the shorter hastae of , and the lateral lines of are slightly rounded. In line 2, the letters are written in full size; the hastae of and are curiously curved. Under the angle of , a small or 
seems to have been inserted. (Mayr's assumption that the angle in question is merely that of , which had been written incorrectly, then repeated above, is not feasible.) Prosdocimi's reading nlaupe is grounded on the asymmetry of the letter, which may however be due only to the awkward position. The cluster nl is more manifest only in light of the following diphthong and the implausibility of a sequence uau, but it might be surmised that the belated addition of a letter did not necessarily result in a correct inscription, and that neither nlaupe nor nuaupe represent the intended outcome. The most attractive amendation could be achieved by assuming that the letters and were applied in the wrong order. Discarding the original u in nuaupe yields nuape, a sequence very similar to the well-attested suffix group -nu-ale. This reading, however, would need to explain both the second misspelling of for , and the fact that the writer removed the group in its entirety to the side of the slab, rather than continuing line 1 to the bottom. Also, at this point an interpretation of φanaχi as an individual name is mere speculation.
Bibliography
| 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) |
