VB·26: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
|source_detail=Morandi 2004: 565–567 no. 69 | |source_detail=Morandi 2004: 565–567 no. 69 | ||
|checklevel=1 | |checklevel=1 | ||
|problem=Lejeune 1971, 50, no. 124 koimila tunal | |problem=Lejeune 1971, 50, no. 124 koimila tunal, Literatur ab Terracini | ||
}} | }} | ||
==Commentary== | ==Commentary== | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
Inscribed in two lines between three horizontal frame lines, the uppermost ca. 25 cm from the top of the stela (length line 1 26 cm, line 2 27 cm, height of both frame parts 8.5 cm). Despite surface damage, the letters can be cleary identified under raking light. The reading with Latin nu and (inverted) mu goes back to {{bib|Ferrero 1897}}: 57 f., no. 1. Whatmough {{bib|PID}} 107, no. 301, notes correctly that nu is in fact inverted Lepontic {{c||N10}}, the first hasta being higher than the bars forming the angle; the form thus constitutes a missing link between Lepontic and inverted/retrograde Latinoid nu in [[VB·27]] and [[VB·22]]. More difficult is Whatmough's assertion that, similarly, mu in line 2 is inverted {{c||M10}} rather than inverted Latin {{c||M7}} – the first hasta is indeed straighter, but only insignificantly longer than the following ones. Inverted Latin {{c||M7}} is otherwise only attested (debatably) in the [[BS·3.2|Voltino inscription]], but three- rather than regular Lepontic four bar mu would arguably still be due to Latin influence. It can be argued that a neat distinction between Lepontic vs. Latin forms of mu and nu through the relative lengths of the lines of the zig-zag shapes was of little to no relevance to the writers of these inscriptions. Inverted letters are notably common on the [[Stresa]] gravestones, see beside [[VB·22]] and [[VB·27]] also [[VB·23]]. | Inscribed in two lines between three horizontal frame lines, the uppermost ca. 25 cm from the top of the stela (length line 1 26 cm, line 2 27 cm, height of both frame parts 8.5 cm). Despite surface damage, the letters can be cleary identified under raking light. The reading with Latin nu and (inverted) mu goes back to {{bib|Ferrero 1897}}: 57 f., no. 1. Whatmough {{bib|PID}} 107, no. 301, notes correctly that nu is in fact inverted Lepontic {{c||N10}}, the first hasta being higher than the bars forming the angle; the form thus constitutes a missing link between Lepontic and inverted/retrograde Latinoid nu in [[VB·27]] and [[VB·22]]. More difficult is Whatmough's assertion that, similarly, mu in line 2 is inverted {{c||M10}} rather than inverted Latin {{c||M7}} – the first hasta is indeed straighter, but only insignificantly longer than the following ones. Inverted Latin {{c||M7}} is otherwise only attested (debatably) in the [[BS·3.2|Voltino inscription]], but three- rather than regular Lepontic four bar mu would arguably still be due to Latin influence. It can be argued that a neat distinction between Lepontic vs. Latin forms of mu and nu through the relative lengths of the lines of the zig-zag shapes was of little to no relevance to the writers of these inscriptions. Inverted letters are notably common on the [[Stresa]] gravestones, see beside [[VB·22]] and [[VB·27]] also [[VB·23]]. | ||
The inscription is one of two in Cisalpine Celtic with an apparent name formula one of whose elements ends in -''al'' and is grammatically and functionally unclear. Unlike in [[GR·1]], where the second name {{w||raneni}} is also difficult to interpret (genitive? non-Celtic nominative?), {{w||koimila}} in the present inscription looks like a perfectly straight-forward personal name in the nominative. There is thus better reason to expect {{w||tunal}} to be the appositive/patronym, though it would also here be irregularly written before the personal name (cf. [[VB·22]] on the uncertain orientation and thus order of inscribed names on the Verbano stelae). Like {{w||ualaunal}} in [[GR·1]], {{w||tunal}} has been considered to be formed with the Lepontic patronymic suffix {{m||-al-}}, here already by Ferrero, who emends to ''tunala koimila'' (a "nome familiare" followed by a cognomen). {{bib|Danielsson 1909}}: 29 starts with line 2 and separates ''koimi latunal''(''i'') to achieve the same formation in the genitive he assumes for [[GR·1]] (cf. {{bib|Jacobsohn 1927}}: 30, no. 188, '''Whatmough {{bib|PID}} 107, no. 301'''; critical {{bib|Lejeune 1971}}: 50, n. 124). {{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}: 53 f., no. 3 combines the two previous approaches, reading ''koimila tunal''(''a'') 'Koimila, daughter of Tunos'. See also {{bib|Terracini 1927}}: 146, {{bib|Pisani 1964}}: 282 f., no. 119 E (''koimila tunal''), {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978c}}: 23 f., {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1978}}: 152, {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1981}}: 169 f., no. 16 (''tunal koimila''), {{bib|Solinas 1995}}: 374, no. 125, {{bib|Morandi 2004}}: 565–567, no. 69. | |||
See also {{bib|Krahe 1936}}: 247, {{bib|Untermann 1960}}: 305, {{bib|Caramella & De Giuli 1993}}: 209 f. | See also {{bib|Krahe 1936}}: 247, {{bib|Untermann 1960}}: 305, {{bib|Caramella & De Giuli 1993}}: 209 f. | ||
<p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p> | <p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p> | ||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Latest revision as of 18:07, 17 December 2024
| Inscription | |
|---|---|
| Reading in transliteration: | tunal / koimila |
| Reading in original script: |          
|
|
| |
| Object: | VB·26 Stresa (stela) |
| Position: | top, front |
| Orientation: | 0° |
| Frame: |  (left: none, middle: all, right: none)
|
| Direction of writing: | sinistroverse |
| Script: | North Italic script (Lepontic alphabet) |
| adapted to: | Latin script |
| Letter height: | 5–7 cm1.969 in <br />2.756 in <br /> |
| Number of letters: | 12 |
| Number of words: | 2 |
| Number of lines: | 2 |
| Workmanship: | carved |
| Condition: | complete |
|
| |
| Archaeological culture: | La Tène D 2 [from object] |
| Date of inscription: | 1st c. BC [from object] |
|
| |
| Type: | funerary |
| Language: | unknown |
| Meaning: | unknown |
|
| |
| Alternative sigla: | Whatmough 1933 (PID): 301 Tibiletti Bruno 1981: 16 Solinas 1995: 125 Morandi 2004: 69 |
|
| |
| Sources: | Morandi 2004: 565–567 no. 69 |
Images
 Stela VB·26 Stresa with inscription VB·26
|
 Inscription VB·26
|
Commentary
First published in Ferrero 1889: 262 (e). Examined for LexLep on 24th April 2024.
Images in Ferrero 1889: 262 (drawing), Ponti 1896: 153, no. 186 (drawing from Fabretti's calque), Ferrero 1897: 57 (drawing from Fabretti's calque = Danielsson 1909: 28), Caramella & De Giuli 1993: 210 (drawing).
Inscribed in two lines between three horizontal frame lines, the uppermost ca. 25 cm from the top of the stela (length line 1 26 cm, line 2 27 cm, height of both frame parts 8.5 cm). Despite surface damage, the letters can be cleary identified under raking light. The reading with Latin nu and (inverted) mu goes back to Ferrero 1897: 57 f., no. 1. Whatmough PID 107, no. 301, notes correctly that nu is in fact inverted Lepontic , the first hasta being higher than the bars forming the angle; the form thus constitutes a missing link between Lepontic and inverted/retrograde Latinoid nu in VB·27 and VB·22. More difficult is Whatmough's assertion that, similarly, mu in line 2 is inverted rather than inverted Latin 
– the first hasta is indeed straighter, but only insignificantly longer than the following ones. Inverted Latin is otherwise only attested (debatably) in the Voltino inscription, but three- rather than regular Lepontic four bar mu would arguably still be due to Latin influence. It can be argued that a neat distinction between Lepontic vs. Latin forms of mu and nu through the relative lengths of the lines of the zig-zag shapes was of little to no relevance to the writers of these inscriptions. Inverted letters are notably common on the Stresa gravestones, see beside VB·22 and VB·27 also VB·23.
The inscription is one of two in Cisalpine Celtic with an apparent name formula one of whose elements ends in -al and is grammatically and functionally unclear. Unlike in GR·1, where the second name raneni is also difficult to interpret (genitive? non-Celtic nominative?), koimila in the present inscription looks like a perfectly straight-forward personal name in the nominative. There is thus better reason to expect tunal to be the appositive/patronym, though it would also here be irregularly written before the personal name (cf. VB·22 on the uncertain orientation and thus order of inscribed names on the Verbano stelae). Like ualaunal in GR·1, tunal has been considered to be formed with the Lepontic patronymic suffix -al-, here already by Ferrero, who emends to tunala koimila (a "nome familiare" followed by a cognomen). Danielsson 1909: 29 starts with line 2 and separates koimi latunal(i) to achieve the same formation in the genitive he assumes for GR·1 (cf. Jacobsohn 1927: 30, no. 188, Whatmough PID 107, no. 301; critical Lejeune 1971: 50, n. 124). Rhŷs 1913: 53 f., no. 3 combines the two previous approaches, reading koimila tunal(a) 'Koimila, daughter of Tunos'. See also Terracini 1927: 146, Pisani 1964: 282 f., no. 119 E (koimila tunal), Tibiletti Bruno 1978c: 23 f., Tibiletti Bruno 1978: 152, Tibiletti Bruno 1981: 169 f., no. 16 (tunal koimila), Solinas 1995: 374, no. 125, Morandi 2004: 565–567, no. 69.
See also Krahe 1936: 247, Untermann 1960: 305, Caramella & De Giuli 1993: 209 f.
Bibliography
| Caramella & De Giuli 1993 | Pierangelo Caramella, Alberto De Giuli, Archeologia dell'Alto Novarese, Mergozzo: Antiquarium Mergozzo 1993. |
|---|---|
| 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. |
| Ferrero 1889 | Ermanno Ferrero, "Regione XI. (Transpadana)", Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità (1889), 261–262. |
| Ferrero 1897 | Ermanno Ferrero, "Iscrizioni di Chignolo Verbano", Atti della Società di Archeologia e Belle Arti per la provincia di Torino 7 (1897), 56–60. |
