Search results
From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
- {{inscription ...iption length 2.2 cm. The object bears [[index::SZ-27.2|another, identical inscription]].768 bytes (93 words) - 23:16, 13 December 2021
- {{inscription ...9.2 cm), but no reading can be offered. Possibly the remains of a younger inscription.756 bytes (99 words) - 20:38, 8 November 2021
- The inscription VR-5 was included in the Raetic corpus by {{bib|Schumacher 2004}}: 172, 340 [[Category:Non-inscription]]509 bytes (70 words) - 14:46, 29 June 2020
- {{inscription ...belong to [[index::AK-1.12]]. No reading can be offered. Possibly a pseudo-inscription.816 bytes (104 words) - 20:37, 8 November 2021
- {{inscription ...le despite corrosion. The object bears [[index::SZ-37.2|another, identical inscription]].770 bytes (100 words) - 23:17, 13 December 2021
- {{inscription ...white inlay, is left. The object bears [[index::SZ-37.1|another, identical inscription]].764 bytes (102 words) - 23:17, 13 December 2021
- {{inscription ...iption length 2.4 cm. The object bears [[index::SZ-43.1|another, identical inscription]] on the opposite side.771 bytes (95 words) - 23:18, 13 December 2021
- {{inscription ...bowl]]), {{bib|LIR|Mancini}} included the inscription twice: SA-81 is the inscription as published by {{bib|PID|Whatmough}}, SA-101 as he saw it at the [[index::994 bytes (127 words) - 21:42, 8 November 2021
- {{inscription ...7 potsherd|potsherd]], mentions only [[index::SZ-27.1|the other, identical inscription]] on the [[index::SZ-27 potsherd|object]].787 bytes (105 words) - 23:16, 13 December 2021
- ...anzeno alphabets]], related to Etruscan. The linguistical ascription of an inscription to Raetic is usually dependent on the presence of certain suffixes; differe ...s of inscriptions of doubtful status, i.e. when it is not certain that the inscription has any linguistic content at all. '''None''' indicates that the marks in q5 KB (596 words) - 14:27, 21 May 2020
- {{inscription ...iption length 2.4 cm. The object bears [[index::SZ-43.2|another, identical inscription]] on the opposite side.798 bytes (101 words) - 23:18, 13 December 2021
- Concordance of TIR [[:Category:Inscription|inscription]] sigla with those used in the {{bib|PID|Pre-Italic Dialects of Italy (PID) {{#ask:[[Category:Inscription]]|mainlabel=TIR|sort=sortform|?sigla_pid=PID|?sigla_ir=IR|?sigla_mancini=LI847 bytes (111 words) - 18:22, 6 November 2021
- {{inscription ...t traces before and after it. No reading can be offered. Possibly a pseudo-inscription.832 bytes (116 words) - 20:34, 8 November 2021
- {{inscription ...entification with {{bib|PID}} 207 b, and assigned the sigla SA-50 a to the inscription published in {{bib|PID}}, SA-50 b to the one seen by him.1 KB (144 words) - 21:41, 8 November 2021
- {{inscription ....2 cm. Well legible despite corrosion. Another, [[index::SZ-92.1|identical inscription]] on the other side.587 bytes (74 words) - 23:28, 13 December 2021
- {{inscription ....1 cm. Well legible despite corrosion. Another, [[index::SZ-93.2|identical inscription]] on the other side.587 bytes (74 words) - 23:28, 13 December 2021
- {{#ask:[[Category:Inscription]][[word::{{PAGENAME}}]]|sort=sortform|format=ol|?text_plain=|limit=1000}}121 bytes (14 words) - 03:33, 12 August 2013
- {{inscription ...rranged into a Lepontic "butterfly" san. Possibly the remains of a younger inscription. In any case, no reading can be offered.1 KB (158 words) - 20:35, 8 November 2021
- {{inscription ....4 cm. Well legible despite corrosion. Another, [[index::SZ-92.2|identical inscription]] on the other side.610 bytes (77 words) - 23:27, 13 December 2021
- {{inscription ....9 cm. Well legible despite corrosion. Another, [[index::SZ-93.1|identical inscription]] on the other side.610 bytes (77 words) - 23:28, 13 December 2021