Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T04:49:07.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Phoenician Inscriptions of the Cyprus Museum1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

A. M. Honeyman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Myres and Richter, A Catalogue of the Cyprus Museum (Oxford, 1899), record three Phoenician inscriptions among the contents of the Cyprus Museum. Since C.C.M. others have been acquired. The catalogue, complete to date, of Phoenician inscriptions in the Cyprus Museum is as follows:

  • 1. Larnaka, 1894, C.C.M. 6231 = R.É.S. 1207.

  • 2. Larnaka, 1894, C.C.M. 6232 = R.É.S. 1208.

  • 3. Dali, found 1887. C.C.M. 6300 = R.É.S. 453. The squeeze from which Euting published did not adequately represent the state of preservation of the stone, and it is to be regretted that the text given in R.É.S. was not based on an independent examination of the stone. From a squeeze supplied to me by Mr. Mitford (Fig. 1) I read and restore as follows:

The stone has been built into the inner wall of a room in the Museum, and it is not now possible to tell how much—whether … or merely —preceded the name of the month.

Type
Research Article
Information
IRAQ , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1939 , pp. 104 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1939

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

My thanks are due to Mr. T. B. Mitford of the University of St. Andrews for bringing this collection of inscriptions to my notice, and to the Department of Antiquities and Mr. P. Dikaios, Curator of the Cyprus Museum, for information and permission to publish them.

References

page 104 note 2 Hereafter referred to as C.C.M. Other abbreviations employed in the course of this article are C.I.S. for Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, tomus 1, 1881–1887 Google Scholar; N.S.E. for Lidzbarski, , Handbuch der Nordsemitischen Epigraphik, 1898 Google Scholar; R.É.S. for Répertoire d'Épigraphie Sémitique, 1900– (references by number).

page 104 note 3 Epigraphische Miscellen, No. 130 (S.P.A.W. 1887, I. 420–2)Google Scholar.

page 104 note 4 Cf. the remarks of Ohnefalsch-Richter, ibid. 421.

page 104 note 5 Harris, , Grammar of the Phoenician Language, 54 Google Scholar.

page 105 note 1 Only Deuteronomy xxii. 8.

page 105 note 2 e.g. Tosefta, Kelim Baba Meçi'a viii. 2.

page 105 note 3 For an illustration of such a temenos-wall in Idalium see Ohnefalsch-Richter, Ancient Places of Worship in Kypros, pl. XVI.

page 105 note 4 Kypros, die Bibel und Homer, 17.

page 105 note 5 As in Larn. Lap. 2° (R.É.S. 1211)

page 105 note 6 Cf. C.I.S. 116.

page 105 note 7 Cf. C.I.S. 95 and A.J.S.L. XLI. 82–2Google Scholar.

page 105 note 8 Cf. Hill, , Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Cyprus, xxx–xxxii Google Scholar. On the cult of ‘Anat in Idalium see Ohnefalsch-Richter, ibid. I. 16–17 and Gjerstad, , The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, 11. 460 ff., 628Google Scholar.

page 105 note 9 Or ‘Uzziba'al; cf. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 73, 12, note 12.

page 105 note 10 Or ‘gave this temenos-wall as a memorial among the living’.

page 105 note 11 Hebrew (Leviticus ii. 4).

page 106 note 1 R.É.S. 12157.

page 106 note 2 Hebrew (Judges xvi. 13, 19).

page 106 note 3 Justin, , Historiae Philippicae XVIII. 5 Google Scholar; Rohde, , Psyche (2nd ed.) 1. 17 Google Scholar; Westermarck, , History of Human Marriage (5th ed.) 1. 208 ffGoogle Scholar.

page 106 note 4 Dea Syria, lx; Smith, Robertson, Religion of the Semites (1st ed.), 307 Google Scholar; Rouse, , Greek Votive Offerings, 244 Google Scholar.

page 106 note 5 As in R.É.S. 12.

page 106 note 6 Or ‘the goddess’.

page 107 note 1 e.g. Exodus vi. 25, Judges x. 18, Hosea ii. 2.

page 107 note 2 The representation of the final radical is surprising (cf. Bauer-Leander, , Historische Grammatik, § 25 m′Google Scholar, Harris, op. cit. 45) and must be accounted an archaism. It is quite regular in Ugaritian in the imperfect indicative of such verbs. See also Friedrich, in Z.S. 1, 3 ffGoogle Scholar.

page 107 note 3 Seyrig, in B.C.H. LI (1927), 148–51, 502–3Google Scholar; S.E.G. VI (1932), No. 802 Google Scholar.

page 107 note 4 C.I.S. 1. 192, where, referring to the Nora inscription, he writes: ‘Antiquitatem monumenti ex antiquitate scripturae qui judicaret, fortasse errori obnoxius foret; in regionibus longiiiquis, a veteribus colonis habitatis, scriptura saépe fert indolem archaicae vetustatis qua facile decipitur incautus.’