Funerary inscription

Description

Idno filename 22/01/0051
Type of inscription: Sepulcralis
Material Description: Two fragments of coarse-grained marble plate which fit well together.
Conservation status: Two fragments. The lower part preserves a segment of a wide double striped concave-convex molding (7) which framed the epigraphic field.
Dimensions height/width/depth (cm): 30/32.4/3.6
Epigraphic field:
- Layout: There are tears affecting the text. Remains of eight lines of text. Increasing line spacing from the first to the last preserved line (0,6/1,8). There are interpunctions between each word, all of them very unequal to each other.

Lyrics

Font:Capital cuadrada
Letter size:1,2 y 1,7 cm
Description of the letters:Square capital letter of irregular size tending to book script in some characters.

Location

Place of discovery: Both fragments appeared in the excavations carried out in the Plaza de España in Écija (Sevilla). They had been reused in one of the inner walls which compartmentalized the space occupied by a late Christian funerary precinct which was built using part of a Flavian monumental portico.
Geolocation

Conservation location: They are kept in the collection of the Museo Histórico Municipal in Écija.
Inventory number: 01/19-13382-688 y 13385-69
Location with Modern Nomenclature España / Sevilla / Écija
Location with Old Nomenclature Hispania / Baetica / Astigitanus / Astigi

Chronology

Inscription's dating: Between year 170 and year 230
Dating explanation: Late 2nd c., beginning of the 3rd for the shape of the letters.

Type of verse

Type of verse: Dactílico (hexámetro)
Verse/line correspondence: Si
Prose/verse distinction: Si

Epigraphic edition

——

[—]+as ▴ o+[—]

[—]++um ▴ sang[—]

[—]e ▴ simul ▴ cura[—]

5 [—]us ▴ propere ▴ tibi ▴ d[—]

[—]ṃediocre ▴ quidem ▴ s[—]

[—]ịnam melius ▴ pr+[—]

[—]+ ▴ ut ▴ hoc ▴ titulo [—]

[—s]c̣riptorẹ ·▴ ị[—]

Text divided into verses and metric signs

– – – – – –

[- – -]as o[- – -] [ln|ln|ln]|l/l|[lkk|l~]

[- – -]um sang[uine – – -] [ln|ln|ln|l]l|l[kk|l~]

[- – -]e simul cura[- – -] [ln|ln|lk]/k|l/l|x[kk|l~]

5 [- – -]mediocre quidem s[- – -] [ln|l]/kk|lk/k|l/[n|lkk|l~]

[- – -ut]inam melius pr[- – -] [ln|lk]k|l/kk|l/l|[lkk|l~]

[- – -] ut hoc titulo [- – -] [ln|lk]k|l/kk|l/[n|lkk|l~]

[- – – s]criptore i[- – -] [ln|l]/l|lk/k|[ln|lkk|l~]

Bibliography

CARANDE – ORDÓÑEZ – GARCÍA DILS 2013, 39-53; CUGUSI 2012, 53.

Comentary

The preserved lexicon suggests that this is a funerary inscription. Despite the fact that the text is fragmented, it is possible to recognize several common topoi in funerary CLE: propere tibi (l. 3) refers to a deceased seized prematurely by death. The deceased was probably male given the sequence –us which precedes, perhaps, the ending of raptus (cf. Bücheler, CLE 654, 4: sed raptus propere liquisti sancte Kameni). Mediocre quidem (l. 4) could refer to the modesty of the monument and to the idea that this might not be up to the merits of the deceased (cf. Bücheler, CLE 1102, 3-6: [P]arva quidem mo/[n]umenta tibi pro / munere vitae feci/[m]us). The sequence [ut]ịnam melius (l. 5) might be related to this topos, that is, the idea that the dedicant wished to have built a better tomb, but his or her resources were not enough to do so (cf. Bücheler, CLE 1768, 5-6: [—] munera digna dare / [—] melius monumenta dedisset). Carande – Ordóñez – García Dils 2013, 49 suggest that this could also be the topos of lament for not having died before than a loved one (cf. II2/14, 1279, 9 = hoc melius fuerat ut funus hoc mihi parares).

As for the metric, the preserved text is characterized by dactylic rhythm, with no irregularities in prosody. Carande – Ordóñez – García Dils 2013, 44 specify that, since there is no heroic clause to be observed, each line must have included a verse, and these verses were almost certainly hexameters. It is possible that the last line was a subscriptum in prose, since the letter size is bigger there than in the rest of the lines, a common resource to distinguish between prose and verse in these cases (cf. Limón 2014, 43-44). The line spacing which separates the line from the rest of the inscription is also bigger. Nevertheless, scriptore would also fit in the suggested metric scheme; therefore it is not possible to opt with certainty for neither of the two options.

Images

Photo author: S. García Dils.

Link to DB

Author

Author:M. Limón Belén
Last Update2024-02-17 20:40:05
Autopsy date:2015

You can download this