WE-2: Difference between revisions

From Thesaurus Inscriptionum Raeticarum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
|condition=damaged, fragmentary
|condition=damaged, fragmentary
|sigla_mancini=BZ-31
|sigla_mancini=BZ-31
|sigla_mlr=294
|sigla_tm=218572
|source=Schumacher 2004: 189, 214
|source=Schumacher 2004: 189, 214
|checklevel=2
|checklevel=2
Line 22: Line 24:
First published in {{bib|Schumacher 1992}}: 189.
First published in {{bib|Schumacher 1992}}: 189.


Pictures in {{bib|Schumacher 2004}}: Taf. 5,2 (drawing) and 6,1 (photo), {{bib|LIR}} (drawing).
Pictures in {{bib|Schumacher 2004}}: Taf. 5,2 (drawing) and 6,1 (photo), {{bib|LIR}} (drawing), {{bib|MLR}} (drawing).


Length of the visible remains, including the upper tips of characters on the right, 2.6 cm. The scratches are well visible. {{c||E|d}} is clear; on the breaking edge to its left, the very tip of a bar may be visible (see drawing), but it might be merely an unintentional dent. It is therefore unclear whether there were characters before {{c||E|d}}. {{c||E|d}} is followed by a tip-up chevron, the lower part og which is broken off ({{c||U|d}} or {{c||A|d}}). Then, in the upper area above the breaking edge, the tip of a scratch inclined to the left, a small angle opening to the right, and the very tip of another scratch. Schumacher's tentative reading {{w||eais}} is unlikely, for the very reasons mentioned by himself: The scratch after the chevron is inclined, and would have had to merge with the hypothetical {{c||S}}, for which the angle is too small. The visible tips are too crowded to suggest actual letters; despite {{c||E|d}}, we are probably concerned with non-script. (See [[index::Non-script notational systems|here]] for a discussion of possible interpretations of inscriptions with doubtful status.) Note in this context that the inscription was applied before firing.
Length of the visible remains, including the upper tips of characters on the right, 2.6 cm. The scratches are well visible. {{c||E|d}} is clear; on the breaking edge to its left, the very tip of a bar may be visible (see drawing), but it might be merely an unintentional dent. It is therefore unclear whether there were characters before {{c||E|d}}. {{c||E|d}} is followed by a tip-up chevron, the lower part og which is broken off ({{c||U|d}} or {{c||A}}). Then, in the upper area above the breaking edge, the tip of a scratch inclined to the left, a small angle opening to the right, and the very tip of another scratch. {{bib|Schumacher 2004|Schumacher}}'s tentative reading {{w||eais}} is unlikely, for the very reasons mentioned by himself: The scratch after the chevron is inclined, and would have had to merge with the hypothetical {{c||S|d}}, for which the angle is too small. The visible tips are too crowded to suggest actual letters; despite {{c||E|d}}, we are probably concerned with non-script. (See [[index::Non-script notational systems|here]] for a discussion of possible interpretations of inscriptions with doubtful status.) Note in this context that the inscription was applied before firing.
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Latest revision as of 22:16, 8 November 2021

Inscription
Transliteration: ]e[???
Original script: ]E d[???

Object: WE-2 potsherd (pottery)
Position: outside
Script: unknown
Direction of writing: dextroverse
Letter height: 1.8 cm
Number of letters: 2
Number of lines: 1
Craftsmanship: incised before firing
Current condition: damaged, fragmentary
Date of inscription:
Date derived from:

Language: unknown
Meaning: unknown

Alternative sigla: LIR BZ-31
MLR 294
TM 218572
Sources: Schumacher 2004: 189, 214

Images

Commentary

First published in Schumacher 1992: 189.

Pictures in Schumacher 2004: Taf. 5,2 (drawing) and 6,1 (photo), LIR (drawing), MLR (drawing).

Length of the visible remains, including the upper tips of characters on the right, 2.6 cm. The scratches are well visible. E d is clear; on the breaking edge to its left, the very tip of a bar may be visible (see drawing), but it might be merely an unintentional dent. It is therefore unclear whether there were characters before E d. E d is followed by a tip-up chevron, the lower part og which is broken off (U d or A s). Then, in the upper area above the breaking edge, the tip of a scratch inclined to the left, a small angle opening to the right, and the very tip of another scratch. Schumacher's tentative reading eais is unlikely, for the very reasons mentioned by himself: The scratch after the chevron is inclined, and would have had to merge with the hypothetical S d, for which the angle is too small. The visible tips are too crowded to suggest actual letters; despite E d, we are probably concerned with non-script. (See here for a discussion of possible interpretations of inscriptions with doubtful status.) Note in this context that the inscription was applied before firing.

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)