Bilingual Inscription Research Articles

Una cohorte hispana en el desierto del Néguev, a la luz de un hallazgo reciente

A fragmented statue with a bilingual inscription, found in the Negev desert, throws new light on the Roman military presence in the ancient Nabataean kingdom. The statue's features identify the Greek war goddess with the Nabataean goddess Alat. The Latin inscription mentions a soldier from the very little known Cohors VI Hispanorum.

NAKHUDAS AND NAUVITTAKAS: SHIP-OWNING MERCHANTS IN THE WEST COAST OF INDIA (C. AD 1000-1500)

AbstractAmong the diverse types of merchants active in India during the first half of the second millennium, the ship-owning merchants occupy a prominent position in the coastal areas of western India (especially at ports). These merchants are given distinct epithets nakhuda and nauvittaka, the two terms being occasionally used as interchangeable ones and also in their abbreviated forms in official documents. Known from the medieval Jewish letters of 'India Traders', copper plates, a bilingual inscription, Arabic accounts and epitaphs and Jaina carita (biographical) texts, nakudas and nauvittkas of different religious leanings (Jewish, Muslim and Hindu) illustrate remarkable co-operation and social amity and religious toleration, which underline their importance in the Indian Ocean maritime network prior to AD 1500. Possessing considerable wealth, these ship-owning merchants can be considered as elites in the ports of coastal western India and were also known for their patronage to religious and cultural activities. The paper is presented as a tribute to the memory of Professor Ashin Das Gupta who immensely enlightened us on the ship-owners of coastal western India between 1500-1800.

Notes on the Akkadian-Aramaic Bilingual Statue from Tell Fekherye

The discovery in 1979 of an anthropoid statue at Tell Fekherye (the site of Sikan, the sacred precinct of ancient Gozan) with an extensive bilingual inscription in Akkadian and Aramaic has renewed speculation about the extent of the Aramaic-Assyrian symbiosis in the earlier Neo-Assyrian period. First edited by A. Abou Assaf, it has recently been re-edited in a monograph by the latter together with Pierre Bordreuil and Alan R. Millard. A date of around the 9th century for the statue is favoured by the Editors . This date seems reasonable on most grounds, though some adjustment up or down may prove necessary. Arguments based on Aramaic palaeography may be used to push the date higher. On the other hand, strong topical similarities with the Mati-ilu treaty (mid-8th century) may be sufficient grounds to lower the date (cf. comments to ll. 32, 34, 37). Abou Assaf first dated the statue to the 9th century mainly on art historical grounds. The Edition seeks to pinpoint this by identifying Sassu-nuri, the father of Adad-id'i, the statue's donor (l. 12), with the Assyrian eponym of 866.

Remarks on Two East Aramaic Inscriptions

The Dura-Europos Bilingual Inscription In 1938 R. du Mesnil du Buisson published a bilingual (Aramaic-Greek) votive inscription found at Dura-Europos.' The Aramaic version is written in the Hatran script-type2 and dialect. At that time very few Hatran inscriptions were known; the bulk have been published since 1951.3 It is therefore natural that the editio princeps is not free of error. Nevertheless, scholars who have studied this DuraEuropos inscription since 1951 have not improved its readings and some have misinterpreted it. The transliteration and translation of Du Mesnil du Buisson follows:

The Date of the Neo-Hittite Enclosure in Karatepe

The dating of the Neo-Hittite enclosure in Karatepe, discovered about twenty years ago by H. Th. Bossert and his Turkish colleagues, forms a problem of primary importance, the solution of which could have deep repercussions on wide fields of study. Even though Azitawadda, the builder and ruler of Karatepe, has left a relatively long bilingual inscription, it lacks the direct and conclusive evidence which might have proved its dating. It is not surprising, then, that several scholars differ widely on the date of Karatepe.The dating generally accepted today is the one put forward by Bossert in 1948, who proposed that Karatepe was built, and Azitawadda reigned, during the second half of the eighth century B.C. This dating is mainly based on three arguments each of a different kind: firstly, it was assumed that “Awrikku king of the Dannunites” (Á-wa+ri-ku-s of the Hittite hieroglyphic inscription), whom Azitawadda mentioned as his benefactor, must be identified with “Urikki of Que” who, as related in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser III, paid a tribute to Assyria probably in 738 B.C. Secondly, a palaeographical analysis of the script of Azitawadda's Phoenician text indicated that the letters are of a rather “developed” and late type, a fact which points to as late a date as possible for this inscription. Thirdly, the artistic style of the reliefs seemed to be late, and as argued by E. Akurgal, to be much influenced by Assyrian art.

On a Phoenician Bilingual Inscription at Larnax, Lapethos

"On a Phoenician Bilingual Inscription at Larnax, Lapethos." Palestine Exploration Quarterly, 101(2), p. 122

A Greek and Aramaic Inscription Discovered at Armazi in Georgia

IN THE autumn of 1940 the Georgian archeologist, the late I. Javakhishvili, excavated a tomb in the region of Armazi,1 the ancient capital of Iberia (Georgia). In the course of the excavation five inscriptions were discovered, three in Greek, one in Aramaic, and one in Greek and Aramaic. The three Greek inscriptions, which are brief and of much less interest and importance than the bilingual inscription, are as follows.2 1. A gem with the portrait of a man

NOTES ON THE LHASA DIALECT OF THE EARLY NINTH CENTURY

The tasks of philology are often greatly complicated, when working with materials from the East and Far East, by the complex nature of many of the scripts there employed; especially is this so in the Chinese field, where our philological materials are recorded by means of the morphemic symbolisation system known as the Chinese logograph (vulgo: ideographs, characters). Tibet, however, was fortunate enough to come to look toward India rather than toward China, in so far as its writing system is concerned, and has hence, since the beginnings of its literacy, employed a script based upon an Indic prototype. This has of course been an enormous boon to comparative philology in this area, and indeed, phonetic records of the degree of precision and antiquity which we may safely attribute to those of Written (the so-called 'Classical') Tibetan would be treasured in any branch of comparative philology. The researches of Karlgren and Maspero have, however, made the phonetic interpretation of records in Chinese logographs a less formidable task than it once was; give or take a few points of detail, we may now with considerable confidence use their reconstruction as the basis for phonetic conclusions concerning a logographic text. It has long been generally known that after the Tibetan language was committed to writing, sweeping phonetic changes took place, at least in the central and south-central dialect areas, while the border dialects, those on the east and west, appear to have escaped these changes to a surprising extent; these last, even today, retain a phonetic aspect strikingly like the language preserved for us by the orthography. The present notes are concerned with the problem of how early it can be shown that this change in the central dialects took place, and with the problem of the exact description of these early changes. The Chinese-Tibetan bilingual inscription of 822 A.D. provides all but unique materials for the study of the metropolitan dialect of Tibetan

G. Tseretheli, A Bilingual Inscription from Armazi near Mcḫeta in Georgia. Bulletin of the Marr Institute of Languages, History, and Material Culture (Tiflis), xiii (1942), pp. 1–83.

G. Tseretheli, A Bilingual Inscription from Armazi near Mcḫeta in Georgia. Bulletin of the Marr Institute of Languages, History, and Material Culture (Tiflis), xiii (1942), pp. 1–83.

Caucasica

Knowledge of scholarly literature produced in recent years in Georgia is all too little disseminated in England. I was delighted to receive a copy of vol. xiii of the Bulletin of the Marr Institute of Languages, History, and Material Culture, published by the Academy of Sciences of the Georgian SSR (Sahartvelos SSR Mecnierebata Ak'ademia), Tiflis, 1942. This volume contains “A Bilingual Inscription from Armazi near Mcheta in Georgia,” by Professor George Tseretheli, written in Georgian with an almost complete English translation, and with three excellent photographs. The bilingual inscription is in Greek (10 lines) and Aramaic (11 lines), and is one of two inscriptions found at Armazi, 22 km. from Tiflis, in 1940 in excavations under the direction of the late I. Javakhishvili. A report of this discovery was made at the Session of the Scientific Council of the Institute in 1940, and at the first Conference of the Georgian Academy of Sciences on the 1st March, 1941. The Greek inscription was published by S. Qaukhchishvili (Qauχčlišvili) and A. Shanidze in 1941. Professor Tseretheli has analysed the Aramaic inscription, its script, language, and historical significance, and offered a translation. The script which he proposes to call Armazian Aramaic, a new variety of this alphabet; is of great importance for the history of writing in Georgia.

Note on the Ogam and Latin Inscriptions from the Isle of Man, and a recently found Bilingual in Celtic and Latin

A brief account of the previously published Latin and Ogam inscriptions on the Isle of Man is accompanied by illustrations. The new discovery from Knoc y doonee, has the first example of a bilingual inscription in Ogam and in Roman capitals from the island. It is a large pillar of clay slate. The fact of the pillar having its edges dressed shows that this cannot be a monument of the earliest period; but the inflexions in the Celtic inscription and the plain capitals and whole character of the Latin one, are, with the forms of the names, in keeping with the idea that it may belong to the first half of the sixth century.

On the Pantheon of Tyre

IN the collapse of the ancient Phoenician civilization, the Phoenician literature, of which, if we may believe classical authors, there was considerable, has entirely perished. The comparatively few inscriptions which have been brought to light in recent years, consisting as they do of votive and temple inscriptions and grave stones, can hardly be dignified with the name of literature. These inscriptions, however, such as they are, shed some light on the character of the Phoenician civilization and religion. From the most famous of Phoenician cities, Tyre, almost no inscriptions have been taken, and none which throws any light upon its religion. To study the pantheon of Tyre, therefore, fragments of information must be pieced together from many outside sources. That the Baal of Tyre was called Melqart (king of the city), we learn from the Phoenician portion of a bilingual inscription from Malta (CIS. 122). The Greek portion of the same inscription shows that Melqart was identified with the Greek Herakles. The temple of Melqart under this Greek name is mentioned by Herodotus (II, 44), and by Dion and Menander as quoted by Josephus (Antiquities, VIII, 5, 3 and Contra Apion, I, 18). We should naturally expect from the analogy of other Phoenician pantheons that Ashtart would be worshipped together with Melqart, and the quotations made from Dion and Menander vouch for this also, as does a quotation from Sanchoniathon preserved in the Praeparatio Evangelica of Eusebius (ed. Dindorf, 1, 10, 31). All this is clear. The puzzling part of the problem comes when one endeavors to discover whether the pantheon extended bevond these two deities. Sanchoniathon, as quoted by Eusebius, states that Astarte, the greatest, Zeus Demarous and Adodos ruled over the country by the consent of Kronos. As this statement occurs in connection with the statement that Astarte settled in the holy Island of Tyre, I had inferred in an article published in the Journal of this Society that this statement referred to Tyre and that it afforded ground for the

XIII. Account of a Bilingual Inscription taken from a Vase at St. Mark, at Venice, by T. J. Pettigrew, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A. Communicated to the Society of Antiquaries by the Council of the British Archæological Association

I Have great gratification in laying before the British Archæological Association the rubbing of an inscription, taken by Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson, from a Vase deposited in the Treasury of St. Mark, at Venice, which, at his request, I communicate on the present occasion.