NO·18: Difference between revisions

From Lexicon Leponticum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{inscription
{{inscription
|reading=metelui : maeśilalui : uenia : metelikna : aśmina / krasanikna
|reading=metelui : maeśilalui : uenia : metelikna : aśmina : krasanikna
|reading_lepontic=unknown
|reading_lepontic={{c|M|M6|d}}{{c|E||d}}{{c|T||d}}{{c|E||d}}{{c|L||d}}{{c|U||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|separator||d}}{{c|M|M6|d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|E||d}}{{c|Ś||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|L||d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|L||d}}{{c|U||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|separator||d}}{{c|U||d}}{{c|E||d}}{{c|N||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|separator||d}}{{c|M|M6|d}}{{c|E||d}}{{c|T||d}}{{c|E||d}}{{c|L||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|K||d}}{{c|N||d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|separator||d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|Ś||d}}{{c|M|M6|d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|N||d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|separator||d}}{{c|K||d}}{{c|R|R3|d}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|S}}{{c|A||d}}{{c|N||d}}{{c|I||d}}{{c|K||d}}{{c|N||d}}{{c|A||d}}
|direction=dextroverse
|direction=dextroverse
|letter_height_min=0
|letter_height_min=0
|letter_number_min=47
|letter_number_min=47
|word_number=6
|word_number=6
|line_number=2
|line_number=1
|script=North Italic script
|script=North Italic script
|object=NO·18 Miasino
|object=NO·18 Miasino
|position=shoulder, outside
|position=shoulder, outside
|orientation=0
|orientation=0
|workmanship=scratched
|workmanship=scratched after firing
|condition=complete
|condition=complete
|type_inscription=unknown
|type_inscription=unknown
|language=unknown
|language=Celtic
|analysis_syntactic=unknown
|meaning='for Metelos son of Maeśilos Uenia daughter of Metelos (and) Aśmina daughter of Krasanos'
|meaning=Uenia daughter of Metelos (and) Aśmina daughter of Krasanos (for) Metelos son of Maeśilos
|whatmough=321
|whatmough=321
|tibiletti_bruno=20
|tibiletti_bruno=20
|solinas=122
|solinas=122
|morandi=94
|morandi=94
|source_detail=Morandi 2004: 582, Solinas 1995: 372-373, Rhŷs 1913: pl. VII
|source_detail=Morandi 2004: 582 no. 94
|checklevel=4
|checklevel=4
|problem=Buchstabenvarianten, Zeilen, Rahmen?, unbedingt besseres Foto als Rhŷs 1913 auftreiben, zusätzliche Literatur auftreiben
|problem=schiefes L? M?, Rahmen?, unbedingt besseres Foto als Rhŷs 1913 auftreiben, zusätzliche Literatur auftreiben
}}
}}
==Commentary==
==Commentary==
According to the [http://www.archive.org/stream/celticinscriptiorhys00rich#page/n109/mode/2up poor photograph] in {{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}, pl. VII
First published in {{bib|Lattes 1904}}. In private possession.
*the following character variants are cognizable: {{c|M|M5|d}}, {{c|A||d}}, {{c|E||d}}, {{c|Ś||d}}, {{c|I||d}}, {{c|L||d}}, {{c|U||d}}, {{c|separator||d}}
*the last word seems to be written in a second line


See:
Images in {{bib|Lattes 1904}}: 449 (drawings of the letters) and tav. (photos = {{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}: tav. VII).
*{{bib|Pulgram 1978}}: 37-38 and {{bib|Pisani 1964}}: 284-285 in Celtic Languages 1st ed. p. 44
 
*{{bib|Whatmough 1933}} (PID): 321
Applied in a circle around the shoulder of the small flask; the last word had to be placed below the first. The reading was already established by Lattes based on the drawing of the letters provided by Curioni, the only point of uncertainty being the first letter of the third word, which looked more like kappa in Curioni's, more like upsilon in Ferrero's drawing; upsilon and everything else are confirmed by {{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}: 57 with a description of the letters. {{bib|Rhŷs 1914}}: 25 notes that a faint {{c||T}} seems to be written under the bars of the first nu in {{w||krasanikna}} and suggests this to be a correction. The alphabet is Lepontic, but mu has a Latin form (cf. [[VB·1]], [[VB·3.1]] at Ornavasso).
*{{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}: p. 56-59, n.8, Tav. VII
 
*{{bib|Lejeune 1971}}: pp. 64, 73-74
The inscription was cited as the main piece of evidence for the ending {{m||-ūi̯}} being a dative by {{bib|Danielsson 1909}}: 18 f. (following a hesitant {{bib|Herbig 1906}}: 197, n. 2). {{w||uenia}} {{w||metelikna}} and {{w||aśmina}} {{w||krasanikna}} were taken to be two women, respectively Metelos' daughter and wife, by Lattes, Herbig, Danielsson, Rhŷs and Tibiletti Bruno; '''{{bib|Vetter 1926}}: 12 f.''' instead proposed that, since the conjunction is missing (cf. {{w||-pe}} in [[VB·3.1]]), {{w||uenia}} was a lexeme 'wife', the last four words naming a single person 'wife of Metelos, Aśmina, daughter of Krasanos' (thus also {{bib|Pisani 1964}}: 285 f., no. 122). As argued by {{bib|Lejeune 1971}}: 73 f., this is syntactically unlikely, as the individual name {{w||aśmina}} should be expected to precede the affiliations, and also implausible with regard to the generally patronymic function of the suffix {{m||-ikn-}}; Lejeune also observed that the relationship of Aśmina to Metelos is not evident. {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1975}}: 55 f. notes the difference between the patronymic suffixes in the names of Metelos – {{m||-al-}} as on the {{w||pala}}-stelae from the Lugano area – and those of his daughter and putative wife – Gaulish {{m||-ikn-}} –, concluding that the familiy was in the process of Gallicisation. 
*{{bib|Lattes 1904}}: pp. 443-452 (with photograph of the vessel)
 
*{{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1975}}: p.54
See also {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 149 f., 165 f.
*{{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: pp. 149-150, 166
 
*{{bib|Pulgram 1978}}: 37-38
*{{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1981}}: pp. 174-176, n.20
*{{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1981}}: pp. 174-176, n.20
*{{bib|McCone 1993}}
*{{bib|McCone 1993}}
*{{bib|Meid 1999}}: p. 15
*{{bib|Meid 1999}}: p. 15
*{{bib|Markey & Mees 2003}}: p. 140
*{{bib|Markey & Mees 2003}}: p. 140
*{{bib|Vetter 1926}}: pp. 12-13
{{bibliography}}
{{bibliography}}

Revision as of 22:29, 1 July 2024

Inscription
Reading in transliteration: metelui : maeśilalui : uenia : metelikna : aśmina : krasanikna
Reading in original script: M6 dE dT dE dL dU dI dseparator dM6 dA dE dŚ dI dL dA dL dU dI dseparator dU dE dN dI dA dseparator dM6 dE dT dE dL dI dK dN dA dseparator dA dŚ dM6 dI dN dA dseparator dK dR3 dA dS sA dN dI dK dN dA d

Object: NO·18 Miasino (bottle)
Position: shoulder, outside
Orientation:
Direction of writing: dextroverse
Script: North Italic script
Number of letters: 47
Number of words: 6
Number of lines: 1
Workmanship: scratched after firing
Condition: complete

Archaeological culture: unknown [from object]
Date of inscription: second half of 2nd century BC [from object]

Type: unknown
Language: Celtic
Meaning: 'for Metelos son of Maeśilos Uenia daughter of Metelos (and) Aśmina daughter of Krasanos'

Alternative sigla: Whatmough 1933 (PID): 321
Tibiletti Bruno 1981: 20
Solinas 1995: 122
Morandi 2004: 94

Sources: Morandi 2004: 582 no. 94

Commentary

First published in Lattes 1904. In private possession.

Images in Lattes 1904: 449 (drawings of the letters) and tav. (photos = Rhŷs 1913: tav. VII).

Applied in a circle around the shoulder of the small flask; the last word had to be placed below the first. The reading was already established by Lattes based on the drawing of the letters provided by Curioni, the only point of uncertainty being the first letter of the third word, which looked more like kappa in Curioni's, more like upsilon in Ferrero's drawing; upsilon and everything else are confirmed by Rhŷs 1913: 57 with a description of the letters. Rhŷs 1914: 25 notes that a faint T s seems to be written under the bars of the first nu in krasanikna and suggests this to be a correction. The alphabet is Lepontic, but mu has a Latin form (cf. VB·1, VB·3.1 at Ornavasso).

The inscription was cited as the main piece of evidence for the ending -ūi̯ being a dative by Danielsson 1909: 18 f. (following a hesitant Herbig 1906: 197, n. 2). uenia metelikna and aśmina krasanikna were taken to be two women, respectively Metelos' daughter and wife, by Lattes, Herbig, Danielsson, Rhŷs and Tibiletti Bruno; Vetter 1926: 12 f. instead proposed that, since the conjunction is missing (cf. -pe in VB·3.1), uenia was a lexeme 'wife', the last four words naming a single person 'wife of Metelos, Aśmina, daughter of Krasanos' (thus also Pisani 1964: 285 f., no. 122). As argued by Lejeune 1971: 73 f., this is syntactically unlikely, as the individual name aśmina should be expected to precede the affiliations, and also implausible with regard to the generally patronymic function of the suffix -ikn-; Lejeune also observed that the relationship of Aśmina to Metelos is not evident. Tibiletti Bruno 1975: 55 f. notes the difference between the patronymic suffixes in the names of Metelos – -al- as on the pala-stelae from the Lugano area – and those of his daughter and putative wife – Gaulish -ikn- –, concluding that the familiy was in the process of Gallicisation.

See also Tibiletti Bruno 1978: 149 f., 165 f.

Bibliography

Danielsson 1909 Olof August Danielsson, Zu den venetischen und lepontischen Inschriften [= Skrifter utgivna av Kungliga Humanistiska Vetenskaps-Samfundet i Uppsala 13.1], Uppsala – Leipzig: 1909.