ISic001876: Fragmentary Latin inscription

I.Sicily with the permission of the Assessorato Regionale dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana - Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana; photo J. Prag 2023-07-06.
ID
ISic001876
Language
Latin
Text type
honorific
Object type
plaque
Status
No data
Links
View in current site

Edition

Loading...

Apparatus criticus

  • Text from autopsy;
  • 1: Bivona: [---]vi(xit) a(nnis) II [---]
  • 2: Bivona: [---]tas ti[---]

Physical description

Support

Description
Small rectangular shaped fragment of a thick white marble plaque of a very granular consistency. Seemingly cut down on all sides, although the lower edge could be original, roughly finished. The stone is opisthographic, with an earlier text on the reverse. Same support as .
Object type
plaque
Material
marble
Condition
No data
Dimensions
height: 11.5 cm, width: 17.5 cm, depth: 5.0-5.4 cm

Inscription

Layout
Two lines of equal sized latin letters
Text condition
No data
Lettering

Letter heights
Line 1: greater than 35 (incomplete)mm
Line 2: 44-46mm
Interlinear heights
Interlineation line 1 to 2: 13-14mm

Provenance

Place of origin
Thermae Himeraeae
Provenance found
The piece was first published by Bivona in 1975-76, with no record of its original discovery (presumably Termini Imerese)

Current location

Place
Termini Imerese, Italy
Repository
Museo Civico Baldassare Romano , 6
Autopsy
Prag 2023-07-06, storeroom of the Museo Civico, room 1, rack 13, shelf 5.
Map

Date

Imperial, but could also be much later? (AD 1 – AD 400)
Evidence
No data

Text type

honorific

commentary

Bivona presents the reading of this face of this fragment (for the obverse face, see ISic000155) without discussion. Her reading cannot stand, since the final letter of line 1 is quite clearly an F and not a numeral, and the only possible interpunct stands after the A, such that the separation of the VIA into "vi(xit) a(nnis)" (an unusual splitting of the abbreviation already) is highly implausible. Similarly, the separation of letters in line 1 proposed by Bivona is arbitrary. There is no obvious restoration for the combination IF (it cannot be TF, the spacing is too narrow, compare the line below). TASTI in line 2 could be part of the phrase devotus numini maiestatique, and the very faint traces of what may be letters at the beginning and end of the line are not incompatible with this, in which case an imperial honorific of the third/fourth century CE is possible (but various verbs ending -tasti are also theoretically possible). The letter forms are somewhat untypical, and it should not be ruled out that this is a post-antique text. In any case, there is no reason to think it funerary or to have any relation to the text on the obverse, which it presumably post-dates.

Bibliography

Digital editions
Printed editions

Citation and editorial status

Editor
Jonathan Prag
Principal contributor
Jonathan Prag
Contributors
Last revision
5/8/2024