View source for VB·30

{{inscription
|reading=surica / ciponis / filia!f
|reading_lepontic={{c|S|S6|d}}{{c|U||d}}{{c|R|R6|d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|C||d}}{{c|A|A25|d}}<br>{{c|C||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|P|P6|d}}{{c|O|O2|d}}{{c|N|N6|d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|S|S6|d}}<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;{{c|V|V4|d}}
|reading_variant=surica / {{w|cipośis}} / f<br>{{c||S6|d}}{{c||U|d}}{{c||R6|d}}{{c||I|d}}{{c||C|d}}{{c||A25|d}}<br>{{c||C|d}}{{c||I|d}}{{c||P6|d}}{{c||O2|d}}{{c|Ś||d}}{{c||I|d}}{{c||S6|d}}<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;{{c||V4|d}}
|direction=dextroverse
|letter_height_min=5.5 cm
|letter_height_max=8 cm
|letter_number_min=14
|word_number=3
|line_number=3
|corpus=Latin
|script=Latin script
|object=VB·30 Stresa
|position=top, front
|orientation=0
|workmanship=carved
|condition=complete
|type_inscription=funerary
|language=Latin
|meaning='Surica daughter of Cipo' (?)
|whatmough=note xvii (a)
|tibiletti_bruno=18b
|morandi=73
|source_detail=Morandi 2004: 569 no. 73
|checklevel=3
}}
==Commentary==
First published in {{bib|Ferrero 1889}}: 261 (b). Examined for LexLep on 20<sup>th</sup> April 2024.

Images in {{bib|Ferrero 1889}}: 261 (drawing), {{bib|Ponti 1896}}: 155, no. 192 (drawing from Fabretti's calque), {{bib|Ferrero 1897}}: 59 (drawing from Fabretti's calque), {{bib|Caramella & De Giuli 1993}}: 211 (drawing).

Inscribed in three centered lines in the upper area of the stela (length line 1 30 cm, line 2 34 cm); well legible despite surface damage. The script is Latin, some letters are executed with serifs. The reading of the fifth letter in line 2 as a xenograph san goes back to De-Vit/Ferrero and is accepted by most scholars, see {{bib|Ponti 1896}}: 155–157, {{bib|Ferrero 1897}}: 59, no. 4, {{bib|Pauli 1891}}: 158, {{bib|Danielsson 1909}}: 27, n. 2, {{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}: 55 f., Whatmough {{bib|PID}} 108, note xvii (a), {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 154, {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1981}}: 173, no. 18b, {{bib|Morandi 2004}}: 569, no. 73. Cf., however, {{bib|Schürr 2007}} on san in the [[index::BS·3.1|Voltino inscription]] {{w||saśadis}}, who (p. 340 f., 343) points out that the letter in the present inscription could be a corrected nu and the name an ''on''-stem genitive {{w||ciponis}} (as in [[VB·21]] {{w||moconis}}, [[VB·24]] {{w||diuconis}}, [[VB·25]] {{w||artonis}}). Note the tendency toward inverted/retrograde nu in the alphabetically Lepontic [[Stresa]] inscriptions ([[VB·22]], [[VB·26]], [[VB·27]]), which may have caused confusion. {{bib|Mainardis 2009}}: 344 suggests that the {{c||V4|d}} for filius is written in a third line because it was felt to be a novel addition to the traditionally two-word name formulae.

The text is a Latinised name formula with individual name and filiation; both names are etymologically Celtic (see the word pages).

See the object page on the dating.

See also {{bib|Untermann 1959}}: 94, {{bib|Untermann 1960}}: 280, 302, '''{{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1990}}: 65''', {{bib|Caramella & De Giuli 1993}}: 211.
{{bibliography}}