ISic001329: Epitaph

I.Sicily with the permission of the Assessorato Regionale dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana - Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana
ID
ISic001329
Language
Ancient Greek
Text type
funerary
Object type
plaque
Status
No data
Links
View in current site

Edition

Loading...

Apparatus criticus

  • Text based on photographs;
  • line.1: Kaibel: Τίμη; Ferrua: Τιμη[σίθεος; Korhonen: Τιμή
  • lines.1-2: Kirchhoff read ΠΟΙΩ which Ferrua (1941) corrected in ΠΟΙΗ (ἐ|ποίη[σε) but a Μ is clearly legible. Later, Ferrua (1989) suggested the supplement Ποιμ[ένιος]
  • line.3: Ferrua: ἑαυτ[ῷ]; Kaibel, Korhonen ἑαυτ[οῖς]
  • lines.4-5: Kaibel: τὸ[ν τόπον] (scil. ἠγόρασαν)]; Ferrua: το[ῖς ἰδίο]|[ις πᾶσιν]; Korhonen: το[ῖς ἰδίοις]|[ἐποίησαν?]

Physical description

Support

Description
Two joining fragments of marble plaque, preserving the upper left corner, missing below and to the right; part of the lower left margin was previously preserved / seen by earlier editors.
Object type
plaque
Material
marble
Condition
fragments, contiguous
Dimensions
height: 10 cmwidth: 10.5 cmdepth: 1.7 cm

Inscription

Layout
No data
Text condition
No data
Lettering

Letter heights
Lines 1-3: 15-22mm
Interlinear heights
Interlineation line 1 to 2: not recordedmm

Provenance

Place of origin
Catina
Provenance found
Original discovery not recorded, but probably Catania.

Current location

Place
Catania, Italy
Repository
Museo Civico di Catania
Autopsy
Observed by Amico in Museo Biscari and by Kaibel (who saw more of it than is now preserved); later by Korhonen in magazzino superiore, Collezione Biscari.
Map

Date

Second half of 3rd century CE or 4th century CE (AD 250 – AD 400)
Evidence
No data

Text type

funerary

commentary

The structure of the epitaph is influenced by Latin epigraphy (fecit sibi et suis) and recurs often (but not exclusively) in Christian epitaphs: for this reason, Ferrua believed that the epitaph was Christian. The formula is used to indicate the dedicant, who is not yet dead, but the verb ζάω is often omitted (see Korhonen 2004: 88-89). According to Kaibel, followed by LGPN 3A: 429, Τίμη, attested in the imperial age also in SEG 31.1327A, is the name of the first deceased, whereas Τιμησίθεος suggested by Ferrua is not attested in that age. The second deceased could have been a Ποιμήν or a Ποιμένιος (as Ferrua suggested): the latter is attested in Christian age by literary sources. On the names, see Solin 1982: 1030 and 1256.

Bibliography

Digital editions
Printed editions

Citation and editorial status

Editor
Jonathan Prag
Principal contributor
Jonathan Prag
Contributors
Last revision
10/31/2022