Version classiqueVersion mobile

Hittitology today: Studies on Hittite and Neo-Hittite Anatolia in Honor of Emmanuel Laroche’s 100th Birthday

 | 
Alice Mouton

I. Linguistique, grammaire et épigraphie

Old and newly discovered Lycian Inscriptions from Tlos

Recai Tekoğlu

Texte intégral

  • 1 Korkut 2015.
  • 2 The present study was suppoted by the Turkish Scientific and Technical Research Council - TÜBİTAK ( (...)

1Taner Korkut, from Akdeniz University, Antalya, has conducted systematic archaeological excavations in Tlos for the last seven years1. I have taken part in the excavations as the epigraphist for the last four years2. At this symposium commemorating Emmanuel Laroche’s achievements on the understanding of the ancient languages of Asia Minor, I would like to provide a provisional evaluation on the Lycian inscriptions from Tlos.

  • 3 Kalinka 1901, TL 22-30.
  • 4 Tekoğlu2002-2003. See also Raimond 2005: 164ff.

2Before the archaeological campaigns began in Tlos, the number of Lycian inscriptions already known was eleven. Kalinka3 published nine of them in Tituli Asiae Minoris and I added two new ones4. In the last seven years, important field works were carried out at the theater, the stadium, the basilica and the bath. The theater, especially, was a prolific site for the discovery of new Lycian inscriptions. Thanks to those researches and excavations, we found four new fragments and two new inscriptions so far.

3The current situation of the Lycian epigraphic material from Tlos is as follows:

  • The old inscriptions TL 22, TL 23, TL 26, TL 29, TL 30 and N 334 are still in situ in Tlos;

  • TL 24 and N 333 are now in the Fethiye Archaeological Museum;

  • TL 27 is in the Istanbul Archaeological Museums;

  • TL 25 was among the ruins of the theater building and it was transported to the field next to the theater;

  • TL 28 has not yet been found.

  • 5 Tekoğlu 2006.

4I have neither new readings nor corrigenda to provide for those inscriptions, but I would like to remind the reader of TL 29, whose new reading appeared in the Omaggio di Roberto Gusmani5. In the present article, I will offer a parallel text for TL 28 in the light of a newly found inscription from Tlos. Most of the new epigraphic finds are very small and fragmentary.

  • The first fragment may belong to a funerary inscription (pl. 1). On it, ]eñte[ can be read. This may be a part of a formula which may go as me-n]e-ñte[… or se-ij]e-ñte[…, or it can be interpreted as the initial part of ñtepi, or else it can be a word beginning with ñte

  • The second fragment may also belong to a funerary inscription (pl. 2). Only two lines are preserved. In the first line, the dead’s and his father’s names were recorded. The father’s name ends in -]ereh, whereas the dead’s name begins with De[-. In the second line, only the h and i letters can be read.

  • The third inscription is very fragmentary and does not give any clue about its content (pl. 3). 4- The fourth fragment was found among the ruins of Zindan, a country of ancient Tlos in the mountain (pl. 4). Our colleagues consider it to be a part of an architectural building which is not funerary in character. We plan to dig the area in the coming years. On the block, only three letters remain. Their reading as ]ele[ does not allow any lexical interpretation.

  • The fifth inscription is a partly broken inscribed marble block found among the ruins near to the great bath (pl. 5). On the marble block, which measures 110 x 80 x 52 cm, two inscriptions (A and B) were observed. The right side of inscription A and the left side of inscription B are lost. Both inscriptions have five lines and the transcription of inscription A goes as follows (pl. 6):

1

] putin[e]zi tuwete

-]buhãmah kbatru ehbi

-]tiweh tezi puweje

-]u uwitahñ χahbu

5

-]zahi prñezijehi

5The transcription of inscription B goes as follows (pl. 7):

1

ñ[-

prij[-

hrppi[

ladu u[-

5

apuwaza[-

6A quick analysis shows a parallelism between TL 28 and the present group of inscriptions. The transcription of TL 28 as made by Kalinka goes as follows:

1

ñtene putinezi tuw[etê

prijabuhãmah kbatru n[-

mlttaimi mrbbanada[

ladu uwitahñ χahb[i

5

apuwazahi p[r]ñnezijeh[i d]i[

7Thus, we can restore inscriptions A and B with the help of TL 28 as follows:

A

B

1

[ñtene] putin[e]zi tuwete

1

ñ[te-ne putinezi tuwete]

[prija]buhãmah kbatru ehbi

prij[abuhãmah kbatru]

[…..]tiweh tezi puwejehñ

hrppi [….. puwejehñ]

[lad]u uwitahñ χahbu

ladu u[witahñ χahbu]

5

[apuwa]zahi prñnezijehi

5

apuwaza[hi prñnezijehi]

8The inscriptions seem to belong to a collective burial, as no deceased seem to be connected with each other by name. The defunct persons are described as daughter of Prijabuhãma, wife of Puweje, grandchild of Uwita and member of Apuwaza’s household. Their personal names are not mentioned. The deceased are only daughter, wife, grandchild and member of the household. The restoration of the third line of each of the three inscriptions is problematic. We read mlttaimi mrbbanada[ in TL 28, ]tiweh tezi puwejehñ in A and a hrppi[ in B. It seems that only the husbands’ names were modified in TL 28 and inscription A. They are Mrbbanada in TL 28 and Puweje in inscription A.

  • 6 Neumann 2007: 355.
  • 7 Melchert 2004: 99Z.
  • 8 Zgusta 1964, § 1295.1.
  • 9 Neumann 2007: 293-294.
  • 10 Schürr 2009: 161 suggested that it designated an erection of statues.

9Another question revolves around the locations mentioned in line 3: hrppi appears in line 3 of inscription B, whereas we read tezi in inscription A. Tezi is generally translated by “monument; sarcophagus, coffin, chamber”6. Does tezi in inscription A refer to the kind of monument in which it is situated, or does it designate something to be placed inside the building? Tezi was mentioned among the dead persons. It is possible that some of the deceased were buried with or without tezi. But where were these deceased and tezi placed? In the first line, we see the word putinezi, which was considered to be a personal name by Melchert7, thus following Zgusta’s KPN8. However, Neumann doubted it, suggesting an etymology deriving from a place name in his Lexikon9. We do not have good reasons to consider putinezi to be a personal name. If it designates a person, we should wonder who this person can be and what his relation with the other persons is. There is no evidence of kinship between putinezi and the other characters in the inscriptions. We suggest that putinezi rather refers to a kind of monument that is neither a χupa, a prñnawa nor a ñtata.10

10As for the grammatical attestations and vocabulary, there is little to say. The accusative singular of genitival adjectives in -are frequent in the Tlos testimonia, like Urtaqijahñ kbatru and Prijenubehñ tuhesñ in TL 25. Puweje is identical with Puwejehñ tupelijã in TL 44 line 39 and it obviously is a personal name.

11Based on the restoration, I would like to suggest a reading for TL 28 as follows:

ñtene putinezi tuw[ete]
prijabuhãmah kbatru
mlttaimi mrbbanada[hñ]
ladu uwitahñ χahb[u]
apuwazahi p[ñ]nezijehi

12The translation should be “They placed Prijabuhãma’s daughter, mlttaimi, wife of Mrbbanada, grandchild of Uwita (and) member of Apuwaza’s household inside putinezi”.

13The last inscription that I will present here was found during the early acropolis excavations (pl. 8). It measures 120 x14 cm and was read as follows:

Siχeriwale: Ddew[ele]deh:tideimi:atli
se-(e)sedẽ[ñ]newi:χñnahi:aladahali:ada
esedẽ[ñ]newi:χñnahi

is parallel to TL 39.3 : hrppi esedeñnewi:χñnahi.

Translation: “Sikheriwale, son of Ddewelede, for himself and for the grand-mother’s descendents. aladahali ada.

Pl. 1: A fragment of funerary inscription from the stadium

Pl. 1: A fragment of funerary inscription from the stadium

Pl. 2: A fragment

Pl. 2: A fragment

Pl. 3: A fragment

Pl. 3: A fragment

Pl. 4: A fragment from Zindan

Pl. 4: A fragment from Zindan

Pl. 5: An inscribed marble block

Pl. 5: An inscribed marble block

Pl. 6: Inscription A

Pl. 6: Inscription A

Pl. 7: Inscription B

Pl. 7: Inscription B

Pl. 8: A funerary inscription in rock-cut tomb

Pl. 8: A funerary inscription in rock-cut tomb

Bibliographie

Kalinka, E., Tituli Lyciae lingua Lycia conscripti (Tituli Asiae Minoris I). Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienne, 1901.

Korkut, T., Arkeoloji, Epigrafi, Jeoloji, Doğal ve Kültürel Peyzaj Yapısıyla Tlos Antik Kenti ve Teritoryumu. T.C. Seydikemer Kaymakamlığı Yayınları 1, Ankara, 2015.

Melchert, H. C., A Dictionary of the Lycian Language. Beech Stave Press, Ann Arbor, 2004. Neumann, G., Glossar des Lykischen (DBH 21). Harrassowitz, Wiebaden, 2007.

Raimond, É., “Études philologiques des inscriptions lyciennes-1 Tlos”, Colloquium Anatolicum 4, 2005, 155-180. Schürr, D., “Zum Agora-Pfeiler in Xanthos II: Selbstlob auf Perserart und Ordnung des Raumes”, Kadmos 48, 2009, 157-176.

Tekoğlu, R., “Three New Lycian Inscriptions from Tlos and Asartaş”, Die Sprache 42, 2002-2003, 104-114.

Tekoğlu, R., “TL 29: una nuova proposta di lettura”, in: Studi Linguistici in onore di Roberto Gusmani, Bombi, R. / Cifoletti, G. / Fusco, F. (éds.), Vol. III. Edizioni dell’Orso, Alessandria, 2006, 1703-1710.

Zgusta, L., Kleinasiatische Personennamen (Tschechoslowakische Akademie der Wissenschaften 19). Verlag der Tschechoslowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Prague, 1964.

Notes

1 Korkut 2015.

2 The present study was suppoted by the Turkish Scientific and Technical Research Council - TÜBİTAK (Project number 111K227).

3 Kalinka 1901, TL 22-30.

4 Tekoğlu 2002-2003. See also Raimond 2005: 164ff.

5 Tekoğlu 2006.

6 Neumann 2007: 355.

7 Melchert 2004: 99Z.

8 Zgusta 1964, § 1295.1.

9 Neumann 2007: 293-294.

10 Schürr 2009: 161 suggested that it designated an erection of statues.

Table des illustrations

Titre Pl. 1: A fragment of funerary inscription from the stadium
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 225k
Titre Pl. 2: A fragment
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 162k
Titre Pl. 3: A fragment
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 138k
Titre Pl. 4: A fragment from Zindan
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 127k
Titre Pl. 5: An inscribed marble block
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 155k
Titre Pl. 6: Inscription A
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 194k
Titre Pl. 7: Inscription B
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 389k
Titre Pl. 8: A funerary inscription in rock-cut tomb
URL http://books.openedition.org/ifeagd/docannexe/image/3472/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 403k

Auteur

Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir

© Institut français d’études anatoliennes, 2017

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

Lire

Open access

Acheter

Volume papier

amazon.fr
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search