Three New Funerary Inscriptions in the Adana Museum from the Cappadocian city of Comana/Hierapolis

The article explores the diction of the funerary (and honorific) inscriptions from three early imperial (1 BC to AD 401) Sicilian cities, i.e. Catania, Termini, and Syracuse. By means of the I.Sicily Sketch Engine corpus, three sub-samples were drawn reflecting syntactic (asyndesis), pragmatic (Dis Manibus (Sacrum)), and semantic-lexemic (symbols, indexes, icons) phrasemes in the sense of Mel’čuk’s Sens-Texte framework. The article conceptualises cemeteries with Foucault as heterotopic spaces with language / diction as a gatekeeper. The cemetery thus becomes a space for reflection on the differences between (i) individual, social, and cultural memory, (ii) pre-colonial (pagan) past and imperial (Christian) present, and (iii) language and identity choices. This reflection is externalised by means of the symbol system of language. While at the cultural level we see convergence (with customisation), at the social and individual levels flexibility prevails as the diction of the funerary inscriptions reflects. While early imperial Sicily seems to form a cultural space, smaller sub-groups, especially the Christian and polis communities, could express distinctive identity and memory choices. Individual variation focusses on the conceptualisation of the link between deceased and dedicator and the function of the memorial monument and reflects the dedicators’ bilinguality. This kind of variation highlights personal experience of collective remembrance.

A striking difference between ancient Jewish and early Christian inscriptions is that in the former one finds only very few biblical quotations, while in the latter they are abundant. This chapter presents a survey of the relevant material in Jewish epigraphical record and then compares it with the situation in Christian inscriptions. Biblical quotations appear almost exclusively in funerary inscriptions, hardly in other epigraphic material. Apart from some other isolated quotations, only two biblical verses seem to be highly favoured, 1 Sam 25:29 and Prov 10:7, the two verses which remained the most popular in epitaphs in medieval and modern times as well. What strikes one at first is the great predominance of quotations from Book of Psalms. Apart from the Psalms, Isaiah is the best represented book in Christian epigraphy. Through its prominent role in liturgy, the Psalter provided the believers with a rich resource of praise and prayer.Keywords: biblical quotations; book of Psalms; Christian inscriptions; funerary inscriptions; Isaiah; Jewish epigraphical record

Eskişehir Müzesi’ndeki Eski Yunanca ve Latince yayımlanmamış yazıtlar üzerinde yıllardır çalış­malar yürütmekteyiz. Bu makalede müzede kaydettiğimiz 43 yeni yazıtı tanıtmaktayız. Yazıtların 38 tanesi mezar yazıtıdır. Bir tanesi olasılıkla bir adak yazıtıdır (no. 15). Bir adet yüzük üzerinde bir yazıt vardır (no. 40). Son üç eser ise yazılı mühürlerden oluşmaktadır (no. 41-43). Mühürler zamanında ekmek mühürü olarak kullanılmıştır. Mezar yazıtlarından iki tanesi epigramdır (no. 33-34). Mezar yazıtlarının steller, altarlar veya sütunlar üzerine yazılmış olduğu görülmektedir. Eserler Eskişehir teritoryumunda bulunmuştur ancak birçoğunun tam buluntu yeri bilinme­mektedir. Eserler çoğunlukla İS 2./3. ile 4./6. yüzyıllara aittir. Ekmek mühürlerinden ilk ikisi oldukça geç bir dönemden, olasılıkla İS 11. yy’dan gelmektedir. Yazıtların çevirileri şöyledir:1. Ben Maximus’un oğlu, vatanı için tüm arkhe ve parapompe görevlerini tamamlamış olan bouleutes Marcus Aurelius Iulianus, artık (bu zamandan sonra) yaşlı bir kimse olarak eşim Theodora ile birlikte burada yatmaktayım. Bedbaht bir fani olmamak için yaşarken hayatın tadını çıkar!2. Bu (mezarı) Italicus oğlu Aur(elius) Amianus ve Demetrios oğlu Demetrios, Appas oğlu Appas, Demetrios oğlu Dionysios ve Teuthras oğlu Akmazon yaşarlarken kendileri için yaptırdılar.3. Epiktetos sütkardeşi Trophimas ile beraber anneleri Gallene’nin anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).4. Eren(n)ius karısı Fla(v)ia’nın anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdı).5. Gaius’un oğlu Agrippas karısı Apphia için şefkat dolu sevgisi nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdı).6. Eru(c)cius Antipatros ve Cor(nelia) Flaviane ve kızları Theophile sütanneleri Kimre’nin anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).7. Paideros’un çocukları Aurelia Servilia ve Aurelius Paideros biricik anneleri Iulia için - - - - Corne(lius?)’la beraber (anısı nedeniyle bu mezar taşını yaptırdılar.)8. Oğlu Hermogenes ve torunları Ladike’ye anısı nedeniyle (son) saygılarını sundular.9. Karısı İode, kardeşi Mommon ve oğulları Seleukos ile Antikrates Theophilos’a anısı nedeniyle (son) saygılarını sundular.10. Gaizatoris ve Seleukos ve Phoinikea İode’ye anısı nedeniyle (son) saygılarını sundular.11. Annesi Tertia genç ölen oğlu Teuthras için, Apollonides ve Hermesileon da biricik kardeşleri için anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).12. Bakıcıları (bakıcı ailesi) Kallistratos ve Beronike ve annesi Thallousa 12 sene yaşayan çok değerli Agathemeris için anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).13. Hermon ve Onesimos babaları Agathemeros için anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).14. Biz Aur(elius) Nounas ve Aur(elia) Domna kızımız Ammia için anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı) yaptırdık.15. Beronikos’un oğlu Aur(elius) Athenodoros karısı Syntrophos’un kızı Nike ile beraber - - - - -16. Lucilla kendi kızı Theodoule için - - - - -17. Kocası Menandros ve (çocukları?) Lucius, Marcus, Gaius, Titus, Akka - - - - Tertia’ya (anısı nedeniyle son) saygılarını sundular.18. Aurelius Hilaros ve Aurelia Iulia biricik kızları - -lia’ya anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).19. Aleksandros’un oğlu Paideros karısı Semne’nin anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdı).20. 24 yıl yaşamış olan Tiberius Iulius Graptus.21. - - - ve Manes ebeveynleri için - - - -22. Komisyoncu/simsar Dionas kendi karısı Khreste için (bu mezarı yaptırdı).23. Aurelia Mania kocası Manes ve erken yaşta ölen çocukları Polykhronios, Phosphoros ve Karikos için anıları vesilesiyle (bu mezarı yaptırdı).24. İmparator Traianus Hadrianus Augustus Kaisar’ın kulu, ev kölesi Areidaios eşi - - -mos’un kızı Flavia Euhemeria’nın anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdı).25. Oğulları Antonius ve Pompeius (babaları) Gaius’un hatırası nedeniyle (ona son) saygılarını sundular.26. Aleksandros ve Apphe oğulları, Apollonios ve Apphia kardeşleri, karısı Mania (ise kocası) Menotenes’in hatırası nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).27. Çocukları Nikias, Demetrios, Nana, Antiokhos - - - - (babaları) Antiokhos’un hatırası nedeniyle (ona son) saygılarını sundular.28. Henüz konuşmaya başlamamış olan Doretos burada yatyor. Amarantos ve Dorete oğulları ve kendileri için anneleri Eirene ile birlikte (çocuğun) hatırası nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).29. G(aius) Iulius Timianos Polemon nişanlı kuzeni Cl(audia) Themisto için (anısı nedeniyle bu mezarı yaptırdı).30. Kardeşleri Antonius ve Petronius ve kızkardeşi Lala ve annesi Nysa Aribazos’a hatırası nedeniyle (bu mezarı) yaptırdılar.31. - -ros ve karısı Magna tek çocukları Nounas’ın anısı nedeniyle (bu mezarı yaptırdılar).32. Markion’un kızı Markia ve Damas’ın mirasçıları - - - - -33. Olasılıkla bir erkek çocuğuna ait fragman şeklindeki mezar şiiri. Yazıda anlamlı bir bütünlük yoktur.34. Tanrının diakon’u (din görevlisi), ve bir at doktoru yatıyor burada, yaşlı bir kimse olarak, bırakıp evde üç oğlunu, kızını ve hayat arkadaşını. Gördüğün gibi yazdılar bu yazıyı küçük harflerle, pek bilge babaları Abaskantos için ve yaptılar ona bu mezarı.35. Diakon (din görevlisi) Theodoulos’un dindar kızı Amia burada yatıyor.36. Burada Orthodoks Hıristiyanların kilisesine ait mezar kazıcılarının başı (protodekanos) ve tüccar olan Stephanos’un karısı Maria yatıyor.37. Burada Trophimos’un oğlu Korynthos yatıyor. Yazıtın altındaki ligatür şeklindeki omikron ve ypsilon’dan oluşan kısaltma belki şöyle anlaşılmalıdır: (Tanrı)nın?38. Burada Anastasios’un oğlu kutsal metin okuyucusu (anagnostes) Eusebis yatıyor.39. Kyriakos’un oğulları Onesimos ve Asterios’un mezarı.40. Solomon’(un yüzüğü).41. Baskı yüzündeki yazıt: Kurtar bizi ey Efendi! Tutamak çevresindeki yazıt tam okunamıyor.42. Tanrı’nın koruması (himayesi). 43. Anthimos.

This article offers a brief introduction to the most frequent type of inscription: funerary inscriptions or epitaphs. The article offers a chronological overview from the Archaic period to late Antiquity, with an emphasis on Athens. It opens with a brief discussion of the archaeological and ritual contexts in which funerary inscriptions were set up, followed by a discussion of archaic epigrams and the social strategies that lay behind them. This is followed by a discussion of public and private graves that shows how epigraphic habits changed over time. The article continues with a discussion of funerary epigraphic habits outside Athens and closes with a few examples of Christian epitaphs.

Summary This study proposes a different analysis of the Roman military testament by focusing on the information obtained from soldiers’ funerary inscriptions. It aims above all to verify the application of the rules of testamentum militis in practice. On the other hand, it intends to explain some testamentary practices used by the soldiers serving in different territories and to define some problems of military testamentary law, for example, that of the testamenti factio activa of the soldiers without Roman citizenship.

This article deals with a second group of funerary inscriptions discovered in the Western Necropolis of Perge during the excavations between 1998 and 2011. The funerary inscriptions in question are located in the excavation site known as Parcel 169. This parcel consists of burial complex M9, tomb building M3 and the burial complex M6 with the burial chamber M6.3. The authors give an architectural description of the monuments with dating suggestions and epigraphic assessments. M9 is the area’s largest, best-preserved, and most monumental burial complex and contains two levels to different periods. It belonged to the local family of the Iulii for over almost a century (from the second half of the 2nd century CE to the second half of the 3rd century CE). The tomb building M3 has a single chamber. Its façade and western side is built of terracotta bricks, while its eastern and southern sides were carved on the natural rock. Inside the tomb are three sarcophagi made of terracotta bricks. Owners of the tomb were Eutychos, his wife and his heirs. The tomb’s architecture points to the 3rd century CE. The tomb complex M6 contains four chambers with the first three constructed with alternating terracotta bricks and mortared rubble stone. M6.3 demonstrates different features from the other burial chambers with its direction, use of limestone blocks for its constructions and its interior design. It belonged to Ophonius Marcianus and was constructed in the 3rd century CE.

In 2012 the term ‘Judeo-Syriac’ was coined independently by two scholars to refer to Syriac written in Jewish Aramaic/Hebrew script, in texts from late antiquity, on the one hand, and in medieval texts, on the other. In this article the differences between these two types of Judeo-Syriac are established, particularly in respect of their sociolinguistic contexts. The earlier context involves the Jews of Edessa and its environs, for whom Syriac was their mother tongue, and who, as evidenced by the Peshitta Old Testament, normally used Syriac script; their use of Jewish script in funerary inscriptions was exceptional. The later context involves Jewish scholars, for whom Syriac was not their mother tongue, engaging with Syriac Christian scholarship, initially through direct contact with Christian scholars. The textual products of such collaborations resulted in Judeo-Syriac texts that continued to be copied by Jewish scholars who had little knowledge of Syriac in Syriac script.

"Chinese Funerary Biographies: An Anthology of Remembered Lives." Monumenta Serica, 68(2), pp. 562–563

SOME YEARS AGO, Joyce Reynolds published a rather puzzling funerary inscription from Filissano in southern Etruria.1 The stone raises several significant problems regarding the persons mentioned, their statuses, and their respective administrative posts. As well, there are problems with the reading and sense of the text that deserve further attention. I shall begin with an interpretation of the text,2 and then turn to the questions of office and status raised by it.

The settlement of Belen has not been investigated since the brief notice made by J. Borchhardt in 1975 until last year, although there are significant archaeological remains and it is situated at an important geographical position between Myra and Limyra. Some new archaeological and epigraphic finds, one, a funerary inscription, the others, fragmentary inscriptions, were found in the settlement of Belen Tepesi during our survey concerning the research pertaining to the Stadiasmus Patarensis Project conducted by Akdeniz University. In this paper the set-tlement and its unknown ancient name, the road system, the extent of its territory and its eco-nomic structure are discussed together with the new finds and some new observations are made concerning the settlement and its surroundings. In consequence, this paper proposes Belen Tepesi was inhabited in the Classical period contrary to what had been previously as-sumed, that it was a Hellenistic–Roman settlement. Plenion is suggested for the name of the settlement at Belen, an important village mentioned in the Vita of Nicholas of Holy Sion. Based on the road system in the mountainous area of Bonda, it is proposed that the territory of Belen included a large area from the west slope of the hill to the Claudian road on Bonda. And finally this paper suggests the main economic resource, of those settled at Belen Tepesi would primarily have been shipping and trade, rather than the agricultural production.

Spirits of the Dead examines the importance attached to preserving the memory of the dead in the Roman world, and explores the ways in which funerary inscriptions can be used to reconstruct Roman lives, however fragmentarily and imperfectly. It is the only study to examine epigraphic, historical, and archaeological evidence in order to gain insight into the way Romans used funerary texts to establish a dialogue with their own society. Maureen Carroll brings together a large body of material from many geographical areas, shedding light on provincial and regional variation in funerary commemoration and even on the differences between funerary traditions of neighbouring towns.

The article publishes a new funerary inscription of the Roman Imperial period now located in the Kırşehir Museum (Cappadocia). The stele was erected by a couple for their eight-year-old daughter, who seems to bear the distinctive name Λαζουρη. There follows an epigram in her memory which combines a series of fairly common formulae, though a few particularities or difficulties of interpretation remain.

Funerary Inscriptions in Early Modern Europe

The second volume of E. S. Robert's Introduction to Greek Epigraphy, written with E. A. Gardner and published in 1905, continued the important and innovative work of the first volume of 1887. The focus is on the inscriptions found in Attica, and especially Athens: they are presented in categories such as decrees of the city-state, foreign affairs, financial, military and naval affairs, administrative regulations, lists of officials, and dedicatory and funerary inscriptions. Each is given in transcription, with suggested restorations and the reproduction of unusual characters where the value is not certain, and with full explanatory notes.

Age is an integral part of social interaction and identity but has been largely neglected in studies of early Christ groups. An understanding of the demography (the study of population patterns) of first century Roman cultures in the ancient Mediterranean is critical if one is to avoid, as much as possible, anachronistic and ethnocentric understandings of age in early Christ groups. Although average life expectancy at birth was low (mid-20s to early 30s), people did not expect to die young. This paper reviews ancient demographic evidence used to estimate life expectancy in the ancient Mediterranean (census data in papyri, funerary inscriptions, material culture and model life tables) and assesses Richard P. Saller’s simulation of the kin universe (1994). Clarifying the implications of demography is critical for studying the rhetoric and realities of age in early Christ groups in their ancient Mediterranean settings.