Funerary inscription

Type of verse

• Type of verse: Dactílico (hexámetro)
• Verse/line correspondence: No
• Prose/verse distinction: No

Epigraphic edition

Text divided into verses and metric signs

Viginti tecum transfers non amplius annos, ll|l/l|l/l|l/l|lww|l~

     debueras tamen habuisse mille. lwwlww||wwlwl~

Translation

You take with you no more than twenty years; yet you should have had a thousand. May the earth rest lightly on you.

Bibliography

García de Córdoba 1746, ms. BNM 10479, 112v et BCC 58-3-21, 104v (inde Hübner II 1414 [inde Bücheler, CLE ad 1069; Cholodniak 1904, 1167; Vives ILER 5769]; González Fernández, CILA II, 664; Stylow – González Fernández II2/5, 1079; Pachón Romero – Ruiz Cecilia 2006, 370–371; Martín Camacho, CLEB ES, SE12, qui in linguam Hispanicam vertit; id. 2014, 147–159; Cugusi 2012, 42. – Cf. Mariner 1952, 108. 112. 118. 124. 128. 132. 134. 170; Hernández Pérez 2001a, 304; Salas 2002, 43.

Apparatus

Versibus aliter divisis García de Córdoba Bibl. Colomb., Hübner (inde Bücheler ad 1069, Cholodniak 1167, González Fernández, CILA), Vives 5769. –1 L . L . XX García de Córdoba; LXX intellexit Hübner in apparatu (inde Vives in texto); L(ibens) L(aetus) González Fernández, CILA in apparatu.

Comentary

A correct hexameter, (viginti) tecum transfers non amplius annos, (ll|l/l|l/l|l/l|lww|l~), plus a non-metrical sequence: debueras tamen habuisse mille (lww|l/wwwwlwl~); Mariner 1952 considers it a pentameter with some stress influences, but with too much prosodic licence. In actual fact, the epitaph was based on an inscription, CIL II2/5,1055, from the same necropolis; the sole difference between CIL II2/5,1055,5 and this inscription, the conjunction nam and prefix trans-, shows that the first form belongs to the inscription which served as model: nam fits in CIL II2/5, 1055 to argue on the topos of mors immatura, but here at the beginning of the composition it makes no sense; this makes it necessary to introduce the compound transfero in order not to spoil the verse. The composition process can be explained as follows: this inscription was based on CIL II2/5,1055, from which it copied verse 3, perhaps because both dedicatees had died at the same age; it changes the verb fero to its compound transfero. However, verse 2, although it deals with the same theme as verse 4 of CIL II2/5,1055, aims at originality by moving away from its model and resorting to an expression with a similar meaning, but the versifier was obviously unable to do this correctly.  

1. L. 1: Hübner took the second <L> as part of the age of the deceased (LXX), but the manuscript source clearly shows an interpunction between the <L> and the first <X>, and not between the two Xs. It is not clear how to interpret the abbreviations L×L×; no satisfactory explanation has so far been put forward. L. 1 transfers to express the age of the deceased is as much an unicum in epigraphical texts as elsewhere (unlike fero, cf. OLD, v., and also CLE 2171,5; CLE 420,19-20; etc): it has been used for metrical reasons by analogy with other pairs of simple and composite verbs with the same meaning (cf. ago and transigo). Ll. 2-3 for the lament and, at the same time, elogium in the expression debueras tamen habuisse mille, cf. CLE 1328 and 1329, both from Haidra, where the influence of one epigraph (or a common model) on another is also seen.

Images

Photo author: García de Córdoba 1746 (BBC)

Link to DB

Author

• Author:J. Martín Camacho
• Last Update2024-02-25 19:43:23