ISic003293: Fragment of an 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
ISic003293
Language
Ancient Greek
Text type
funerary
Object type
plaque
Status
No data
Links
View in current site

Edition

Loading...

Apparatus criticus

  • Text based on photograph;
  • line.1: Ferrua saw a Christogram with a small Σ in rasura;
  • Libertini: μνήμ(η); Mercurelli, Ferrua, Korhonen: μνημ[εῖον];
  • Korhonen: [ἔνθαδε κῖτε(?)]
  • lines.1-2: Libertini, Mercurelli: ΘΕΟΥΧΑΡ|ΙΣΤ (i.e. θεοῦ χάριν); Ferrua: ΘΕΟΧΑΡ|ΙΣΤ (i.e. Θεοχαρ|ίστ[ος]); Korhonen: Θεοχάρ|ις (i.e. Θεοχάρης)

Physical description

Support

Description
Upper left fragment of marble plaque, set in plaster in modern times. The second fragment has been lost.
Object type
plaque
Material
marble
Condition
fragment
Dimensions
height: 17 cm, width: 20 cm, depth: 6 cm

Inscription

Layout
No data
Text condition
No data
Lettering

Letter heights
Lines 1-2: 45mm
Interlinear heights
Interlineation line 1 to 2: not recordedmm

Provenance

Place of origin
Catina
Provenance found
Found in 1935 in Via Dottor Consoli, Catania.

Current location

Place
Catania, Italy
Repository
Museo Civico di Catania
Autopsy
Observed by Korhonen in Magazzino del cortile, Museo Civico (formerly sala VI suppl. 168).
Map

Date

5th — 6th century CE (AD 401 – AD 600)
Evidence
No data

Text type

funerary

commentary

The epitaph must have been Christian as revealed by the erased cross and the formula, characteristic of another Christian inscription found at the same cemetery in Via Dottor Consoli and published by Manganaro (Minima Epigraphica et papyrologica 5 (2001), 138 = ISic003506), in which the μνημεῖον is followed by the formula ἐνθάδε κεῖται and the nominative of the name of the deceased. Another possibility could be the recurrent structure in some Christian epitaphs from Syracuse, in which μνημεῖον is followed by the name of the deceased in genitive (see Korhonen 2002: 76-77). However, the first interpretation suggested by Korhonen is preferable, given the comparison with the other inscription from Catania that seems to present the same form. In the first case, the name of the deceased would be Θεοχάρις (i.e. Θεοχάρης) or in the feminine form Θεόχαρις (both names, however, have no attestation in Sicily), in the second case, the genitive Θεοχαρ|ίστ[ου] could be integrated (Mercurelli and Ferrua had already suggested Θεοχαρίστος, attested only in an inscription from Aphrodisias of the V-VI century CE, IAph2007 15.363 l. 10).

Bibliography

Digital editions
Printed editions
Discussion

Citation and editorial status

Editor
Jonathan Prag
Principal contributor
Jonathan Prag
Contributors
Last revision
12/22/2022