ISic000647: Fragmentary Christian epitaph

Apparatus criticus

Text based on photograph;
line.0a: Manganaro adds [ὁ δεῖνα--- ἐποίησα] before l. 1
line.1: Manganaro: ---[τ]ὸ. κόσμον ἐ.. After ε, Korhonen reads a vertical or slightly slanted stroke and a straight one (Α, Η, Ρ, less likely Κ, Ν)
line.2: Libertini, Ferrua, Korhonen: [βασιλ]έως καὶ βασιλίδος; Manganaro: [τύμβῳ (name)]εως καὶ βασιλίδος
line.3: Libertini, Ferrua, Korhonen: [ἀμεμπ]τως; Manganaro: [oὗτοι ἀμέμπ]τως
lines.3-4: Ferrua: ἀκαταγνώ-|[στως ἦ]σαν; Manganaro, Korhonen: ἀκαταγνώ-|[στως--- ἔζη]σαν
lines.4-5: Libertini: ἐν | [ζήσ]ασα; Ferrua: ἐν | [γάμῳ ἅπ]ασα; Manganaro: ἕν, (?) | [ἑτέρα πληρώσ]ασα. Another possibility can be ἐν | [Χ(ριστ)ῷ ζήσ]ασα or ἐν | [Χρ(ιστ)ῷ ζήσ]ασα (for this formula, see e.g. IMC Catania 192 = ISic003290, IG 14, no.535 = ISic001354 and Korhonen 2004: 263).
lines.5-6: Libertini: ὅρκι(ον) | [αὐτο]κράτορα; Ferrua: ὀρκί-|[ζω (sic) θ(εὸν) παντο]κράτορα; Manganaro: ὁρκί-|[ζω τὸν Παντο]κρατορα; Korhonen: ὀρκί-|[ζω (sic) τὸν παντο]κράτορα
line.7: Libertini, Manganaro: [τὸν μέλ]λοντα; Ferrua, Korhonen: [τὸν ἔτι μέλ]λοντα
line.8: Ferrua: [τὴν σορὸν μη]δέν'; Manganaro: [κληρονόμων μη]δέν'. Korhonen reads a vertical stroke before ΕΝ (Η, Ι, Ν, Ω)
lines.9-10: Ferrua: [ἐγεννήθη τῇ πρ(ὸ) . ] νων(ῶν), κατ[ε|τέθη]---; Manganaro: [ἢ σκυλήσαι] --- [ἐκεί]νων κατ[ά|θεσιν] (or κατ[ά|γειον μνημίον]) ---; Korhonen: --- [ἐκεί]νων κατ[ά|θεσιν] ---

Physical description

Support

Description: Marble plaque, intact on the right, set in plaster in modern times.
Object type: plaque
Material: marble
Condition: fragment
Dimensions: height: 27 cm, width: 32 cm, depth: 1-4.5 cm

Inscription

Layout

No data

Text condition

incomplete

Lettering

Letter heights

Lines 1-10: 15-22mm

Interlinear heights

Interlineation line 1 to 2: not recordedmm

Provenance

Place of origin: Catina
Provenance found: Original discovery not recorded, presumed to be from Catania.

Current location

Place: Catania, Italy
Repository: Museo Civico di Catania , 311
Autopsy: Observed by Libertini formerly in sala VI.119, recently by Korhonen in magazzino del cortile, Collezione Biscari
Map

Date

4th century CE (AD 301 – AD 400)

Evidence: No data

Text type

funerary

commentary

Due to the largely fragmentary condition, it is difficult to reconstruct the text of this Christian epitaph, which could have a hexametrical form at least in the first two lines, if one admits with Korhonen a metrical lengthening of the third syllable of βασιλίδος.

The clause τὸν κόσμον ἅπαντα recurs in a Christian inscription from Phrygia of the 3rd cent. CE (SEG 6.159 = SGOst Vol. 3 no.16/31/85). The word κόσμος might allude to the world (left by the deceased), rather than to the ornament of the tomb (Manganaro suggests both possibilities). Βασιλίς is frequently a proper name or an adjective (often referring to Rome, see e.g. IG 14, no.830 ll. 17, 31, 41): another example of the use of Βασιλίς as a personal name from Catania is IG 14, no.450 = ISic001275, corrected by Manganaro (1988: 68 n. 346 = SEG 38.942, see also LGPN 3A: 89), although probably belonging to the high imperial period. On the contrary, Ferrua understands βασιλίς as a noun, synonymous of βασιλίσσα, and he suggests the integration at l. 2 βασιλ]έως καὶ βασιλίδος: Korhonen (2004: 272) accepts the integration, but excludes the possibility that this formula refers to sovereigns (“non siamo ancora ai tempi delle regine bizantine”), assuming an allusion to a theological concept. In this sense, βασιλίς perhaps occurs in a Byzantine inscription from Ikaria of 5th-6th cent. CE (SEG 53.904), which refers to the transformation of a temple into a church dedicated to Mary, to which the expression in B l. 2 ἀγαθὴ ἡμν βασιλίς καὶ δέσποινα refers. However, there do not seem to be any other evidences of this expression in combination with βασιλεύς.

Manganaro's interpretation, who reads Βασιλίς as a proper name, seems more advisable. The scholar assumed that the funerary inscription names two deceased individuals, the first (whose name was originally in the lacuna) would have died at the age of 14, the second, Βασιλίς, would have died at the age of 28: the likely integration at l. 4 ἔζησ]αν refers indeed to two persons. Manganaro's integration of ll. 4-5 ἕν (?) | [ἑτέρα], however, is unacceptable, since the neuter cannot refer to a male individual (unless one assumes an original error of the stonecutter). Ferrua, on the contrary, believed that the epitaph mentions only one deceased woman, of whom it first indicates the years, 14, that she lived ἐν γάμῳ (integration of ll. 4-5) with her husband, and then the total number of years she lived, 28.

The second part of the epitaph would have contained a curse formula against a possible violation of the tomb (for Christian curse formulas, see Feissel 1980: 464-470). The invocation to Παντοκράτωρ at l. 6 can be eventually preceded by τὸν θεόν, depending on the space in the gap, which cannot be easily quantified. An admonition not to violate the tomb follows: Manganaro’s integration of κληρονόμων (or κληρονομήσῃ) is based on a frequent formula in Christian inscriptions, which associates the verb with the expression τὸν μέλλοντα αἰῶνα (see IG 14, no.1563 ll. 2-4). The integration of Manganaro and Korhonen at ll. 9-10, κατ[ά-|θεσιν ---], is based on the vocabulary of Christian inscriptions, since in these texts κατάθεσις recurs often referred to the tomb. According to Ferrua instead, the last line contained the date of death, dies natales for Christians: τῇ πρ(ὸ) . ] νων(ῶν).

Bibliography

Digital editions

Printed editions

Discussion

Citation and editorial status

Editor

Jonathan Prag

Principal contributor