Version classiqueVersion mobile

Les royaumes de Chypre à l’épreuve de l’histoire

 | 
Anna Cannavò
, 
Ludovic Thély

Partie III – Les royaumes à l’épreuve de l’histoire : les transformations de l’époque classique

The Syllabic Inscriptions of Amathous: Past and Present

Artemis Karnava

Résumé

Amathonte et sa région témoignent de l’usage du syllabaire chypriote commun pour la rédaction de 50 inscriptions syllabiques environ. Même si ce nombre n’est pas comparable à celui qu’on connaît pour Paphos (plus de 500 inscriptions) et Marion (plus de 300 inscriptions), ou même pour l’Égypte, avec ses « signatures » sous forme de graffitis (plus de 140 inscriptions), il permet de mettre Amathonte au même niveau de Kourion et Salamine en termes de quantité d’inscriptions syllabiques connues, à peine derrière Kafizin et Golgoi (avec 70 inscriptions chacun). Ce qui est frappant dans le cas d’Amathonte toutefois n’est pas tant la quantité d’inscriptions syllabiques, mais la variété du matériel épigraphique syllabique, avec de nombreuses inscriptions incisées et peintes sur vases, des inscriptions gravées sur pierre (épitaphes et dédicaces), un seau en pierre et le monnayage. Certaines parmi les plus longues inscriptions sur pierre restent énigmatiques en ce qui concerne leur contenu, à cause du fait qu’elles sont supposées transcrire une langue autre que le grec, appelée conventionnellement « étéochypriote », la langue originaire présumée de la population. Parmi les inscriptions sur pierre, est particulièrement remarquable une inscriptions bilingue digraphe aujourd’hui perdue. La majorité du matériel épigraphique syllabique est daté des périodes classique et hellénistique, et quelques inscriptions remontent à la période archaïque. Toutes les inscriptions d’Amathonte connues et conservées ont été documentées à l’occasion de l’étude pour un corpus des inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques du Ier mill. av. J.-C. et sont incluses dans le premier volume du corpus à paraître. L’article se concentre sur le matériel syllabique d’Amathonte, de découverte aussi bien ancienne que récente, afin de traiter certaines des questions principales relatives à l’épigraphie amathousienne, concernant sa paléographie, sa chronologie et son histoire.

Texte intégral

1In a meeting that celebrates, among other milestones, forty years of French research in the ancient Cypriot city of Amathous, it seems also appropriate to celebrate more than one hundred and f ifty years of research into the syllabic inscriptions of the area.

2What is presented in this paper is part of the work that has been carried out since 2007 by Markus Egetmeyer (Université Paris IV-Sorbonne), Massimo Perna (Suor Orsola Benincasa, Naples) and myself (University of  Vienna), where inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary dating to the 1st mill. BC are being documented for the purpose of putting together a corpus. This is compiled in collaboration with Hedvig Landenius Enegren (University of Copenhagen), who has actively engaged in the re-discovery and documentation of a considerable number of inscriptions; with Evangelini Markou (National Research Foundation, Athens), who is responsible for the insertion of inscribed coins in the corpus; with Sabine Fourrier (CNRS, HiSoMa-UMR 5189, Lyon), to whose expertise we have entrusted the dating of the inscribed objects.

3Our work has benefitted greatly from larger or smaller grants from the National Research Foundation (Athens), the Henry Brown Fund (University of London), as well as INSTAP (New York). We have also enjoyed the active and, at times enthusiastic, support of colleagues and staff over the numerous museums that we visited around the world, museums in Cyprus, Greece, Italy, France, the UK, Sweden, Poland and the US.

  • 1 Henceforth: IG.
  • 2 Egetmeyer, Karnava, Perna à paraître.
  • 3 Egetmeyer, Karnava, Perna 2011.
  • 4 Egetmeyer, Karnava, Perna 2012, p. 27-28.
  • 5 Egetmeyer et al. .

4The corpus will be included in the Inscriptiones Graecae series1 and the first fascicle containing inscriptions from Amathous, Kourion and Marion is planned to be submitted for publication in 2018.2 We have previously reported on our progress in the last Cyprological conference held in Nicosia in 2008,3 as well as the Mycenological colloquium in Paris in 2010;4 one more report was presented in the Mycenological colloquium in Copenhagen in September 2015,5 focusing on the first fascicle, for which all material is collected and the manuscript is in course of submission.

5The preparation of a corpus is an ungratifying task, since a lot of effort is devoted to technical duties, such as photographing, producing paper squeezes (where possible) (fig. 1), executing drawings, and then correcting the drawings on the spot with the inscription at hand. What follows, the meticulous work of properly cataloguing each inscription and producing a succinct and correct apparatus criticus is also a time-consuming process. Thankfully, the work in our case is divided between more people and thus progresses at a steady pace.

Fig.1 — Stone inscription in the process of having its squeeze made.

Fig.1 — Stone inscription in the process of having its squeeze made.

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, no 118; ICS 193; photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum.

  • 6 The word ‘kingdom’ is used here in inverted commas, following Iacovou 2013b, p. 15-16, n. 2, and Ia (...)

6Yet, while in the process of compiling the corpus, a more general evaluation of the material is hardly possible, so it is ideally reserved for the readers and users of the corpus. What can be offered in the present paper is nonetheless a preliminary assessment of the material collected with provenance known to have been Amathous, the city and the broader area, which we assume belonged to the ‘kingdom’ of Amathous.6

History of Research: 1862-1914

  • 7 Masson 1983 [= ICS], p. 17-29. All inscriptions included in this paper are referenced by the number (...)

7The current volume contains introductory notes to the most recent history of excavations and archaeological investigations at Amathous and its surrounding area, we will focus therefore here only on the history of research of syllabic epigraphy at Amathous that goes back to the second half of the 19th cent. This history is well-known and reported by Olivier Masson,7 so I will limit myself to a brief presentation. Some developments that post-date Masson’s seminal work are, naturally, included.

  • 8 Vogüé 1868, p. 495-496, nos 3-4, pl. IV; ICS 190-191.
  • 9 Masson 1953, p. 87.
  • 10 Hellmann, Tytgat 1984, p. 102.

8The discovery of the first syllabic inscriptions from Amathous goes back to 1862, when a mission led by the count de Vogüé collected two stone inscriptions from the village of Agios Tychonas, which is very near to the site of the ancient city (fig. 2-3).8 We have no information on the actual discovery of the inscriptions, except that they were collected from inside the village (“nous les avons trouvés dans le village d’Hagios Tykhôn … qui est rempli de débris apportés”); they both ended up in the Louvre Museum in Paris, where they were sent in all probability shortly after their discovery.9 It was the same mission that first took notice and saw to it that the colossal, intact stone vase from the acropolis (see below) would subsequently (1865) also be transported to the Louvre.10

Fig 2 — Stone inscription, one of the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary to have been recovered from Amathous.

Fig 2 — Stone inscription, one of the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary to have been recovered from Amathous.

Louvre Museum, Paris, AM 1857; ICS 190; photograph: courtesy of the Louvre Museum.

9 

Fig 3 — Paper squeeze of the stone inscription AM 2813 one of the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary to have been recovered from Amathous.

Fig 3 — Paper squeeze of the stone inscription AM 2813 one of the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary to have been recovered from Amathous.

Louvre Museum, Paris; ICS 191. Photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin-Brandenburg and Inscriptiones Graecae.

  • 11 Schmidt M. 1874.

10These inscriptions came at the beginning of some two decades of an extremely crucial period of intense activity for the studies on the syllabary, namely the 1860s and the 1870s. This is when a proliferation of syllabic inscriptions occurred in excavations throughout the island, including a number of biscriptual inscriptions; these discoveries ultimately advanced a deeper understanding of the syllabary and led to its decipherment in 1874 by Moriz Schmidt.11

  • 12 ICS 190; Egetmeyer 2010, p. 580.
  • 13 Vendryes 1913.
  • 14 ICS 191; Egetmeyer 2010, p. 580.
  • 15 Funke 2013.
  • 16 Hermary, Masson 1990.
  • 17 Not in ICS; Egetmeyer 2010, p. 587.

11One inscription of the two is apparently an epitaph and it most probably stands for a deceased person’s name (] pu-nu-to-so) (fig. 2).12 The interpretation of the text as a name in the poorly documented ‘Eteocypriot’ language was only recognized for the first time at a later instance in a linguistic study.13 The second inscription, although longer, is badly preserved and only partly legible.14 It consists of three lines of writing, but our best bet for reading it remains a paper squeeze kept at the archives of the IG in Berlin (fig. 3). It is not known by whom or when the squeeze was made, but it was probably part of the first attempt the IG commissioned to Richard Meister for the edition of a corpus of Cypriot syllabic inscriptions.15 Meister’s untimely death in 1913 stopped the project short. The IG maintains however a small collection of squeezes of stone inscriptions from the Louvre, the British Museum and the Ashmolean in the UK, to which the newly produced squeezes will be added for safekeeping in the future. The inscription on the colossal stone vase previously mentioned, although noticed relatively recently,16 should be listed under the earliest inscribed objects retrieved at Amathous.17 The existence of an inscription (or more) was reported since the vase was first discovered (fig. 4).

Fig 4 Inscription on a colossal stone vase from the acropolis of Amathous.

Fig 4 — Inscription on a colossal stone vase from the acropolis of Amathous.

Louvre Museum, Paris, AO 22897; photograph: M. Perna, courtesy of the Louvre Museum.

  • 18 Palma di Cesnola 1878, p. 440, pl. 8, no 60.

12A stone inscription, now lost, is also reported by Cesnola in his 1878 book on Cyprus, where he describes it as “a piece of limestone found in Amathous” (fig. 5).18 The forthcoming corpus will include a number of these instances, i.e. inscriptions reported with minimal or no documentation in old publications, which are unfortunately nowhere to be found nowadays.

Fig.5 A lost stone inscription from Amathous.

Fig.5 — A lost stone inscription from Amathous.

Palma di Cesnola 1878, pl. 8, no 60.

  • 19 Meister 1911.
  • 20 Sittig 1924, p. 194, who records the testimony of a person claiming that the inscriptions originate (...)
  • 21 It has to be conjectured that they originated in the British excavations at Amathous between the ye (...)

13But the big breakthrough which put Amathous firmly on the map of syllabic epigraphy were two inscriptions now kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford. The inscriptions appeared in print in 191119 and they are reportedly from Amathous (fig. 6; also fig. 1),20 although no specific information is available on how exactly they found their way to the Ashmolean or when.21 Their texts range among the inscriptions from Amathous termed as ‘Eteocypriot’, inscriptions that record a language other than Greek.

Fig 6 — Two stone inscriptions reportedly from Amathous kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford.

Fig 6 — Two stone inscriptions reportedly from Amathous kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford.

Meister 1911, pl. I; inscription I: no 119, ICS 192; inscription II: no 118, ICS 193.

  • 22 See M. Perna in this volume. Three lines in a footnote are reserved in Perdrizet 1896, p. 336, for (...)
  • 23 Vendryes 1913.

14A most important inscription, the second longest in the Cypriot syllabary, was detected by Paul Perdrizet in 189622 and ultimately also found its way to the Louvre. This inscription likewise subscribes to the small corpus of ‘Eteocypriot’ inscriptions, a fact established when it first appeared in print in 1913.23

  • 24 Sittig 1914.

15Finally, a most interesting bilingual and biscriptual honorific stone inscription was recovered in 1914.24 The inscription was reportedly seen by Ernst Sittig in Limassol, but then disappeared. There is a photograph however in the Archaeologiki Ephimeris of that year (fig. 7) and the transcription is quite secure. This inscription demonstrates the problems encountered when trying to comprehend elementary facts about the ‘Eteocypriot’ language behind a number of these inscriptions.

Fig 7 — A lost stone inscription from Amathous.

Fig 7 — A lost stone inscription from Amathous.

Sittig 1914, p. 1.

  • 25 Meister 1911; Vendryes 1913.

16Summing up, from the 1860s until the 1910s only eight inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary came to light in Amathous. Yet among these some of the longest specimens of syllabic inscriptions from the island of Cyprus are to be found; more importantly, although the decipherment of the writing system in 1874 revealed at an early stage of the relevant discoveries that the language primarily recorded was Greek, researchers such as Richard Meister and subsequently Joseph Vendryes25 had realized by the end of this fifty-year period that another language, of unknown nature and affiliations, was lurking behind most of these inscriptions.

New, Post-Independence Finds

17From then on, new inscriptions from Amathous are reported since the 1960s mostly from excavations of the Department of Antiquities; from 1975 onwards, when the French School at Athens became active again in Amathous, a number of new inscriptions were recovered from the acropolis and the urban area of Amathous. Due to advancements in archaeological mentality and priorities, we now have a considerable number of clay vase inscriptions, the sort that was mostly overlooked in earlier, pre-war archaeological endeavors.

  • 26 Violaris, Karnava à paraître.

18For the purposes of the corpus, all the known and surviving syllabic inscriptions from Amathous have been documented. The inscriptions are kept in their overwhelming majority in the Limassol Museum as well as the storerooms of the French Mission in Amathous. There, we enjoyed the unwavering support of Antoine Hermary and Sabine Fourrier, who made sure that all the material was made available to us. Additionally, the project and myself, as the field representative of the group, have benefitted enormously from the collaboration and generosity of Yiannis Violaris (Department of Antiquities, Cyprus), who has also graciously permitted us to include new, unpublished syllabic material in the corpus. Three inscribed stone stelae recovered during the excavations of the Department of Antiquities in the extensive necropoleis of Amathous26 constitute a most welcome addition to the relatively small body of inscribed material from Amathous.

19The first stele (LM 2073/10) bears an inscription consisting of four signs and probably refers to the name of the deceased (a name otherwise unattested so far in the existing documentation). The second stele (LM T.876.9+47) is fragmentary and preserves only two signs, but one of the two is the sign so in its characteristic Amathousian form. The third stele (LM T.932) attests to the longest of the three inscriptions (nine signs); because however the words are completely incomprehensible, it is assumed that they are in the ‘Eteocypriot’ language.

20Apart from Amathousian syllabic inscriptions kept in Limassol and a few in Nicosia, a number of inscriptions are kept in museums worldwide (fig. 8). The grey dots on the map stand for countries where Cypriot inscribed material is kept in museums after having been transported outside Cyprus, or even found in situ, such as the instance of Egypt. The black dots indicate the spots where Amathousian inscriptions are kept: the Ashmolean in Oxford (UK), the Cabinet des Medailles and the Louvre in Paris (France), but the majority is kept in Cyprus, which makes for a relatively restricted modern diffusion of the material.

Fig 8 — A world map indicating the countries where inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary of the 1st mill. BC are kept.

Fig 8 — A world map indicating the countries where inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary of the 1st mill. BC are kept.

Grey dots: inscriptions in the syllabary; black dots: inscriptions in the syllabary with provenance from Amathous.

Amathousian Syllabic Inscriptions in Volume IG XV, 1

  • 27 Karnava 2014, p. 407.

21Amathous and its surroundings testify to the use of the common Cypriot syllabary for the production of syllabic inscriptions, less than 50 of which have been recovered from 1862 onwards. Although the number presents no match for Paphos (with over 500 inscriptions) and Marion (with over 300 inscriptions), or even Egypt with its rock-carved ‘signatures’ (over 140 inscriptions), it puts Amathous together with Kourion and Salamis in terms of the quantity of known syllabic inscriptions, barely behind Kafizin and Golgoi (with 70 inscriptions each).27 We are not in a position to confirm whether these numbers, when seen comparatively, represent the reality of the 1st mill. BC in Cyprus, or are merely due to the hazards of chance finds. Marion, for instance, has an elevated number of stone grave stelae and numerous inscriptions incised on Attic pots, which were subsequently placed in tombs. But, as a matter of fact, more tombs of the period, during which it is likely to encounter syllabic inscriptions, were excavated in Marion compared to the rest of Cyprus, so our numbers could be due to the fact of more tombs being excavated there than anywhere else.

22But the relatively low quantity of the number of inscriptions does not represent its quality, since Marion, with supposedly more than six times the material of Amathous, only attests to a total of 1,500 signs of the syllabary, whereas the Amathous material testifies to some 650 signs, i.e. a little less than half of the signs attested in Marion. When it comes to words, there are 478 in the inscriptions found in Marion, and 149 in the ones found at Amathous, an analogy that shows the big percentage of monosyllabic inscriptions the Marion material includes. The elevated number of words attested in the Amathous material, despite its low number of inscriptions, is due to the fact that some of the longest known inscriptions in the syllabary come from Amathous; among these, the big stone inscription kept in the Louvre is the second longest inscription in the syllabary thus far, it therefore provides us with abundant textual evidence. The lengthy Amathousian inscriptions constitute, therefore, a precious base for the paleographical study.

23A problem we faced was how to sort our material, namely the inscriptions attributed to each region. Although an epigraphic corpus, we decided to privilege archaeology and make a division according to the supporting material of each inscription. For this decision we had to balance a number of factors. Firstly, the IG tradition itself, a corpus which usually lists stone inscriptions under distinct and well-defined categories of inscriptions of the classical antiquity. Some of these categories, however (for example: honorific inscriptions; decrees) are either absent or practically non-existent for the syllabic inscriptions. Secondly, we were bound to include categories of inscriptions which do not normally find their way into an IG volume, such as vase inscriptions and coins. And thirdly, we wanted to present a homogeneous image from the point of view of paleography, since the same sign appears quite different when carved on stone and when incised or painted on clay.

24With all the above in mind, we divided the material of each region into stone inscriptions, inscriptions on metallic objects, vases, seals and coins. These are the five basic categories that will be listed under every region. There are nonetheless some (few) odd inscribed objects, that cannot fit under any of these categories, such as bone objects, clay figurines etc., which will make up separate categories in due time. In the case of Amathous, what is missing from the above categories are syllabic inscriptions on metallic objects, a fact which is probably accidental.

25But, according to the this basic division, the data concerning the Amathous material are the following (table below):

Amathous: Tituli lapidari 16
Amathous: Vasa (clay; stone) 33
Amathous: Sigilla  1
Amathous: Nummi  1
Amathous: Varia  3
TOTAL: 54

26There are sixteen inscriptions carved on stone. No further divisions will be attempted, especially due to the problem posed by the inscriptions in Eteocypriot, which cannot be attributed to any precise category. Among these, we have funerary stelae and honorific inscriptions. There are four inscriptions painted on clay and stone vases, twelve inscriptions incised on vases (some incised before firing, some after), and one is carved on the colossal stone vase, i.e. a total of seventeen vase inscriptions.

27In the course of the study, we also decided to include isolated attestations of syllabic signs, the ones which we consider to belong to the syllabary beyond doubt. There has always been a confusion between writing and marks of various kinds on pottery: not all marking on pots constitutes writing. Different notation systems have been employed over the centuries for the marking of vases, systems that ranged from simple incised, stamped or even impressed versions; these systems were not always employed in societies that also made use of writing. Although from the point of view of methodology a single sign does not constitute an inscription in the strict sense of the word, it seems that the Cypriot syllabary made use of abbreviations and ligatures, i.e. the use of a single sign could denote the abbreviation of a word, most commonly a name; or, sometimes, what appears to be a single sign could actually be the combination of more than one sign, therefore a ligature. With this in mind, a further seventeen monosyllabic inscriptions have been added to the Vasa list.

28Two more documents from Amathous include an inscription carved on a steatite seal and one painted on a clay statue (fig. 9). The coins of Amathous are a whole different chapter, which Evangelini Markou will be exclusively dealing with.

Fig.9 — A sign of the Cypriot syllabary painted on a clay statue.

Fig.9 — A sign of the Cypriot syllabary painted on a clay statue.

Limassol Museum, Cyprus, AM 1845; photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus and the EFA.

29The Amathousian material is quite varied and heterogeneous. It has a high percentage of incised inscriptions on local vases, a phenomenon not attested on other sites. Marion is well-known for incised inscriptions on pottery, but these seem to represent a specific habit of inscribing imported Attic pottery, ultimately placed in tombs. The Amathousian inscribed pottery was retrieved from domestic, as well as ritual and burial contexts, it therefore presents a picture altogether different than that of Marion. Speaking of retrieval contexts, the stone inscriptions from Amathous with known provenance were found either on the acropolis and in the sanctuary of Aphrodite, or in the necropoleis; some had been used as building material for later buildings (second use).

  • 28 Hermary, Masson 1990, p. 203.

30As far as the chronology of the Amathousian material is concerned, the earliest datable syllabic inscription is found painted on a bichrome amphora from the sanctuary of Aphrodite and has been dated to the first half of the 7th cent. BC, i.e. during the CA I period (fig. 10).28 A few incised, painted as well as carved (on stone) vase inscriptions can be dated to the CA I and CA II periods. Some inscriptions dating to the Classical period are found carved on a steatite seal and, similarly to the previous period, on pottery vases (painted and incised). It is in the 4th cent. BC that stone inscriptions appear, and no inscription can be suggested to have been produced beyond that century.

Fig 10 — A painted inscription on a Bichrome vase.

Fig 10 — A painted inscription on a Bichrome vase.

Limassol Museum, Cyprus, AM 1554; photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus and the EFA.

  • 29 Egetmeyer 2010, p. 584.

31Writing in Amathous presents a number of peculiarities. Although the script used in the overwhelming majority of the inscriptions was in fact the common syllabary, there are some sign versions, such as so (also confirmed by the most recent finds), that are considered typically Amathousian and are thus easily recognized. The development of local writing idiosyncrasies implies developments independent from mainstream practices and a certain local trajectory of writing habits and uses. Also, among the inscriptions in the common syllabary, which usually runs from right-to-left, it seems that the earliest Amathousian inscription on the bichrome amphora (fig. 10) is uniquely dextroverse. Finally, an inscription on a clay vase from a tomb is possibly written in the Paphian syllabary and is therefore also dextroverse.29 Such a find does not imply any local use or knowledge of the Paphian syllabary at Amathous, since a vase is a movable object; importation of the vase from the area of Paphos is a more likely explanation for its presence in Amathous.

  • 30 The most recent conspectus in Steele 2012 and 2013.

32The syllabary in Amathous was used for more than one language, an exceptional phenomenon within Cypriot epigraphy. The elusive ‘Eteocypriot’ language remains undeciphered,30 and its inscriptions have been offered, oddly enough, a place in a corpus of Cypriot syllabic inscriptions recording the Greek language. The small quantity of the material allowed us not to exclude this material from the corpus; additionally, the attribution of certain inscriptions to the ‘Eteocypriot’ corpus is a highly conjectural interpretation, we would therefore run the risk of excluding material that could potentially be proven in the future written in Greek.

The Future of Syllabic Epigraphy

33With the publication of the first fascicle of the corpus our editorial work on the inscriptions of Amathous, Kourion and Marion is completed. We hope to be able to supplement the publication with some sort of elaboration on paleography and writing principles. Such a task can also be undertaken separately in the future.

  • 31 http://ig.bbaw.de/uebersetzungen.
  • 32 The database was initially compiled by J.-P. Olivier, with the assistance of F. Vandenabeele on typ (...)

34But the target for the next fascicle are Paphian inscriptions, the most numerous inscriptions of any one Cypriot region, more than 500. It is fortunate however that the Paphian material should be more easily accessible to document, since it is primarily kept in the region of Paphos itself. Since we begun the project back in 2007, rapid technological advancements have also revolutionized the way inscriptions, but also archaeological material in general, is documented. New technologies, such as RTI (Reflectance Transformation Imaging), a computational photographic method, as well as the development of electronic drawing tablets, are most likely to supersede the way inscriptions were chosen to be documented for this first IG fascicle. The RTI technology is intended directly for the electronic publication of archaeological material and the drawing tablet allows the drafting of a direct digital drawing. Both methods are within our means for the next phase of the project. A more general question regards the fate of the fully digitized archaeological documentation we have at our disposal: transcriptions of the texts will appear online concomitantly with the printed edition, since the IG offers such possibility,31 but a question mark is reserved for the photographic documentation and the database itself we have at our disposal for the purposes of the corpus.32 These questions are not however for the present to discuss, but are issues to be addressed in the future.

Notes

1 Henceforth: IG.

2 Egetmeyer, Karnava, Perna à paraître.

3 Egetmeyer, Karnava, Perna 2011.

4 Egetmeyer, Karnava, Perna 2012, p. 27-28.

5 Egetmeyer et al. .

6 The word ‘kingdom’ is used here in inverted commas, following Iacovou 2013b, p. 15-16, n. 2, and Iacovou 2014a, p. 98-100.

7 Masson 1983 [= ICS], p. 17-29. All inscriptions included in this paper are referenced by the number under which they are listed in Masson’s collection of inscriptions.

8 Vogüé 1868, p. 495-496, nos 3-4, pl. IV; ICS 190-191.

9 Masson 1953, p. 87.

10 Hellmann, Tytgat 1984, p. 102.

11 Schmidt M. 1874.

12 ICS 190; Egetmeyer 2010, p. 580.

13 Vendryes 1913.

14 ICS 191; Egetmeyer 2010, p. 580.

15 Funke 2013.

16 Hermary, Masson 1990.

17 Not in ICS; Egetmeyer 2010, p. 587.

18 Palma di Cesnola 1878, p. 440, pl. 8, no 60.

19 Meister 1911.

20 Sittig 1924, p. 194, who records the testimony of a person claiming that the inscriptions originate in Amathous.

21 It has to be conjectured that they originated in the British excavations at Amathous between the years 1893 and 1894 (Hellmann, Tytgat 1984, p. 105).

22 See M. Perna in this volume. Three lines in a footnote are reserved in Perdrizet 1896, p. 336, for the announcement of the existence of “une inscription chypriote de grande valeur, la plus longue qui soit après la plaque d’Idalie”, which he copied with the intention of publishing later (but never did).

23 Vendryes 1913.

24 Sittig 1914.

25 Meister 1911; Vendryes 1913.

26 Violaris, Karnava à paraître.

27 Karnava 2014, p. 407.

28 Hermary, Masson 1990, p. 203.

29 Egetmeyer 2010, p. 584.

30 The most recent conspectus in Steele 2012 and 2013.

31 http://ig.bbaw.de/uebersetzungen.

32 The database was initially compiled by J.-P. Olivier, with the assistance of F. Vandenabeele on typology of objects and dating, and has been given to our team in 2007 as a starting present for the corpus project.

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig.1 — Stone inscription in the process of having its squeeze made.
Crédits Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, no 118; ICS 193; photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Ashmolean Museum.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-1.png
Fichier image/png, 2,2M
Titre Fig 2 — Stone inscription, one of the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary to have been recovered from Amathous.
Crédits Louvre Museum, Paris, AM 1857; ICS 190; photograph: courtesy of the Louvre Museum.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-2.png
Fichier image/png, 1,3M
Titre Fig 3 — Paper squeeze of the stone inscription AM 2813 one of the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary to have been recovered from Amathous.
Crédits Louvre Museum, Paris; ICS 191. Photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Akademie der Wissenschaften Berlin-Brandenburg and Inscriptiones Graecae.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 5,0M
Titre Fig 4 Inscription on a colossal stone vase from the acropolis of Amathous.
Crédits Louvre Museum, Paris, AO 22897; photograph: M. Perna, courtesy of the Louvre Museum.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 6,8M
Titre Fig.5 A lost stone inscription from Amathous.
Crédits Palma di Cesnola 1878, pl. 8, no 60.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-5.png
Fichier image/png, 14k
Titre Fig 6 — Two stone inscriptions reportedly from Amathous kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford.
Crédits Meister 1911, pl. I; inscription I: no 119, ICS 192; inscription II: no 118, ICS 193.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-6.png
Fichier image/png, 1,2M
Titre Fig 7 — A lost stone inscription from Amathous.
Crédits Sittig 1914, p. 1.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-7.png
Fichier image/png, 3,8M
Titre Fig 8 — A world map indicating the countries where inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary of the 1st mill. BC are kept.
Crédits Grey dots: inscriptions in the syllabary; black dots: inscriptions in the syllabary with provenance from Amathous.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-8.png
Fichier image/png, 818k
Titre Fig.9 — A sign of the Cypriot syllabary painted on a clay statue.
Crédits Limassol Museum, Cyprus, AM 1845; photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus and the EFA.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-9.png
Fichier image/png, 1,8M
Titre Fig 10 — A painted inscription on a Bichrome vase.
Crédits Limassol Museum, Cyprus, AM 1554; photograph: A. Karnava, courtesy of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus and the EFA.
URL http://books.openedition.org/efa/docannexe/image/3026/img-10.png
Fichier image/png, 3,1M

© École française d’Athènes, 2018

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search