« PreviousContinue »
poplé totar Tjouinar, totè Ijouinè, erer nomne, erar nomne, P. 32Ç. Ç. M.! tiom esir uesclir alfer popluper totar Ijouinar. totâper Ijouinâ, erer nomneper, erar 33 nomneper. P. Ç. Ç. M.! tiom subbocâu. Prestotar Çerfiar Ç. M. foner frite! tiom 34 subbocâu.”
Enom persclu (ordine) eso persnimu: “P.Ç. Ç. M.! tiom isir uesclir alfir, tiom plener, 35 popluper totar Ijouinar, totâper Ijouinâ, erer nomneper, erar nomneper. P.Ç. Ç. M.! tiom 36 subbocâuu. Prestotar Çerfiar, Ç. M. foner frite! tiom subbocâuu.
Enom uesticatu, ahatripursatu. 37 Uestiça" et mefam spefam scalsie conegos fetu Fisovi sançii, popluper totar Ijouinar, totâper Ijouinâ. Surront 38 narratu, puse post uerir Tesenocir.
Uestisiar erus ditu. Enno uestisiam, mefam spefam, sopam Festivæ (T1) illis dato. Tum festivam, tjecur [scissum], offam
purome efurfatu : 39 supra spahamu. Traf Sahatam etu. (in igne feffrigito: supra (ignem) veru-figito. Trans Sahatam ito
Ape traha Sataha couortus, ennom comoltu, comatir Postquam trans Sahatam converteris, tum molâ conspergito, coctis persnihimu. Capif 40 sacral aitu.
ministrato. Capides sacras disponito. 41 Trahaf Sahate uitla trif feetu Turse Çerfier Çerfer Martier, popluper totar Ijouinar, totâper Ijouinâ. Persaea fetu: pôni 42 fetu : aruio fetu: taçes persnimu. Proseçetir struclam, ficlam arsueitu. Surront narratu, puse uerisco Treblanir.
Ape 43 purdinçiust, carsitu, pufe fabrons facurent. Puse erus dersa, ape erus dirsust, postro combifiatu ;-Rubiname, erus 44 dersa: enem traha Sahatam combifiatu, erus dersa. Enem Rubiname postro covertu ; comoltu, comatir persnimu, et 45 capif sacra(f) aitu. Enom traha Sahatam covertu; comoltu, comatir persnihimu: enom purditom fust.
46 Postertiom pane poplom andirsafust; porse percam Post tertium (diem) quàm populum indicaverit; quisquis virgam 43. Abrons. A.K. justly regard this word as monstrous and impossible. A Latin carver, reading Abrom, in Etruscan text, may have mistaken m for ns. I do not think he conld have so mistaken f. Hence I incline to read Abrom, in spite of Ib. 33.
44. Combifiatu, compared with Compifiaja, Ib. 25, is of great importance as
first disclosing to us that -aja is optative mood.
Şarsmatiam habiest, et prinuatur dur, tefruto, Tursar, eso militarem habebit, et patricii duo, ab Teuévet Tursæ, hoc
taçetur 47 persnihimumo; (hanc precem) voce submissâ ministranto :
“ Tursa Jouia ! totam Tarsinatem, trifom Tarsinatem, Tuscom, Naharcom, Jabuscom nomem; totar 48 Tarsinater, trifor Tarsinater, Tuscer, Naharcer, Jabuscer nomner nerf, çihitu' ancihitu'; jouie' hostatu! an(h)ostatu', 49 tursitu, tremitu; hondu, holtu ; ninctu, nepitu; sunitu, sauitu; preplo hotatu, preuiclatu. Tursa Jouia ! futu fons, 50 pacer pase tua, pople totar Jouinar, totè Jouinè, erar nerus çihitir ancihitir, jouies hostatir anhostatir, erom 51 nomne, erar nomne.
Este trioper deitu. Enom juenga' peracrio tursituto, Ita ter dicito. Tum juvencas ακραίας sacranto, porse perca" arsmatiam habiest, et 52 prinuatur. Hondra quisquis virgam militarem habebit, et patricii illi duo). Infra ( furom Sehemeniar hatuto, totar pisi heriest. Pafe trif pro[Fora] Semoniæ capiunto, urbis qui volet. Quas tres primom haburent, eaf Acersoniem 53 fetu Turse Jouie, popluper
mum ceperint, eas in Aquiloniâ facito Tursæ Joviæ, pro populo totar Jouinar, totâper Jouina. Surront narratu, puse uerisco Treblanir. Aruiom fetu : 54 persaea fetu. Struçlam, ficla", proseçetir arsueitu. Taces persnimu: pôni fetu.
51. Peracrio is neut. pl. (May it, in the adjective, be of all genders ?) Peracniom. gen. pl. is strained syntax “ Juvencas ex egregiis,” i.e. egregias. The omission of final f and m where it leaves the imber and sense uncertain, is wonderful.- Tursituto, pl. of Tursitu ; is found only with the goddess Tursa ; perhaps allusively.
52. Promom. "This word is important,
as fixing the scope of the whole. It was a seizure of cattle. We presume, the
were indemnified. Cmp. Va. 1-10.—Pisi heriest, quisquis volet, is plural in idea, and hangs on to the plural verb Hatuto. -Acersoniem Aceronie of Ib. 43. See Appendix I.
54. Persaea fetu. This seems strangely out of place: but cmp. IIa. 13. It comes like an afterthought.
Εύθυναι OF THE MAGISTER. .
Pisi panupei fratrexs fratrus Attiersier fust, erec suèso Qui quandoque fmagister fratribus Attidiis fuerit, ille tsuæmet fratrecate portaja sevacne' fratrom ? Attiersiom desenduf; pifi fraternitati portet puros
fratrum Attidiorum [indices]; quos reper fratreca pars est erom ehiato', ponne juengar tursiandu re pro fraternâ † par est esse [exhibitos] quum juvencæ sacrabuntur hertei. 3 Appei arfertur Attiersir poplom andersāfust, sue ultro. Postquam | dictator Attidius populum indicaverit, si (magis
neip portust issoc, pusei subra screhtom est, 4 fratreci motar ter?) non portaverit hoc? velut supra scriptum est, magistro multa sins, sint (irrogentur), asses trecenti.
TABLE VIIb. (Roman letter).
1. Sue-so, suæ-met, on -so, see VIb. 51. Sue, = suæ, follows from Tua, tua; Vestra, vestra.-In 2, we have Fratreco
- fraterno; naturally then, Fratrecat fraternitat. Fratrecs with dative Fratreci in 4, gives us grammatical instruction as to the nom. of the conson. decl. Indeed Fons, nom. of conson. decl. is similar.
2. Desenduf, is the noun with which Sewacne agrees. It may express either sacrificial gear or (what may seem too modern a thought) a warrant from the magistrate to seize the cattle “ultro ;" or perhaps rather insignia understood as a warrant; indicia. If Desenduf - Dersenduf, (as Desua for Dersua,) we might get Indicia out of it. True, it is masculine, but Index is used for Indicium.-ß. Pars, I suppose may=Latin adj. par.g. Ehia-to, a participle. Since Habeto
becomes Hah(i)tu, Hatu, it is possible that E-bia-to means Ex-hibi-to. -8. Ponne (so in the inscr.) is possibly the more correct spelling everywhere.
3. Appei, to judge by étel, is less correct than Ape (Api, Apei).-B. Attiersir in nom. is comparable to Fisim for Fisiom. This clause is of value, as disclosing the syntax of VIIa. 46.-7. Issoc, neut. sing. alluding to Desenduf, masc. pl. which is strange. Issoc (so in the inscr.) seems to mean only Esoc, hoc.
It is remarkable that the Etrusco Umbrian portion ends with a fine on the dictator by the magister or quaestor with a vote of the majority of the brethren ; and this ends with a fine on the magister for neglect, when the dictator has initiated proceedings :-if at least I understand the passages.
ON THE LOCATIVE CASES.
1. In Tables III. IV. and in IIa., we find the postposition Ar (= Latin Ad = Irish Ag) joined to accus. case. Asam-as, ad aram; Spinam-as, ad mensulam ; Spantim-as, ad patinam; but in concord with another accusative the final r vanishes; as tertiam-a(r) spanti(m). This use of aș, a- is wholly confined to those tables, and seems to indicate their antiquity.
2. Final -en (= Latin In with accus. Greek eis) is also found in Table III. IV. alone. Arwam-en, eis špovpav, in arvum ; Wocom-en, in focum ; Esonom-en, in sacrum ; are the only instances with accusative. With dative case, the same once expresses rest; viz. Arwe-n, ¿v åpoúpą. But final n in Umbrian always tends to become m, as in Latin musam for nowoav, num for uwv; moreover final m readily vanishes. It is instructive to find in Ib. 16, Pone menes Aceroniamem, Quum venies in Aquiloniam, (where final -em is evidently corrupt for -en) and in the parallel place of the later dialect, VIb. 52, Ape Acesoniam-e benust, Postquam in Aquiloniam venerit; where -em has become -e, At the same time, for the case of rest, “ At Aquilonia,” we have Aceronie (the mere dative) Ib. 43, and Acersonie-m, (dative with -m= -em -en, in) VIIa. 52. Thus just enough is preserved to clear up the origin of these terminations.
3. Some uncertainty hangs over the particle -ne, which we cannot overlook in Menz-ne, apud mensam, side by side with Menzarum,
Besides this, there is Asmu-ne, apud exercitum, where apparently -ne is joined to ablative, not to dative. Does this distinguish -ne from en, as in and apud? Menz(Q)-ne, or Menze-ne? of the a-declension, and Asmu-ne of the o-decl. are our only instances. [Dicamne (II a. 8) I now see to have a widely different interpretation. Ufestne, IV. 22, is wholly dark. In the a-declension the prevalent forms are as follows:tote-me, in urbe
toter-e, in urbibus totam-e, in urbem
totaf-e, in urbes. Totaf-e, may be replaced by Totaf-em; so that -e, -em no doubt mean
Totêre is euphonic for Totêse; as Facurent for Facusent, Totarum for Totasum, Ererec for Eresec ; even in the old dialect, s between two vowels becoming r. A.K. are disposed to treat Totese as a variation of the dative Totes, similar to teualoi for thuais: but this seems to open
the new question, whether truaio. itself is not abbreviated from Tiuaio-ey, and similarly Totere for Totês-en. In the singular, Tote-me is anomalous. Is it for Tote-ne? If so, m changes to n in the middle of a word ; and why is it not Totâ-me, with abl. as Armu-ne ? It seems a lame reply, “Tota-me would confound the thought with that of Totam-e.” To avoid confusion, it would have been obvious rather not to corrupt n to m than to change ablative to dative. In fact in the o-declension this confusion does exist.
Esonome (apparently) means in sacro, or in sacrum: whether from confounding Esono-me with Esonom-e(n), there are no means of deciding.
In Ib. 14, we have Wapef-em awiecluf-e, represented in VIb. 51 (later dialect) by Uapef-e auieclu. The former shows an attempt at concord, converting the postposition into a case, by adding -e to Awiecluf. See III. 20.
4. A new difficulty rises in two passages, where the meaning is clear; Esme pople, in hoc populo (or intra hunc populum), and Esmei stahmei, intra hoc templum. Why have we datives? The question is the same as we just now put concerning Tote-me. Apparently then the -me of Esme is the same as of Toteme. Is then Esme contracted from Eseme? (I see nothing gained by inventing a new demonstr. Esmo = Eso.) Esme contracted is so closely in analogy to Mensne, that (the sense being the same) we seem forced to identify the -me with the -ne, although the latter governs an ablative in Armu-ne.
Perhaps we ought to expect, in regard to the case of Rest, such unaccountable irregularities, when in Greek the πτυοφι, ουρανοφι, στηθεσφι perplex us, while we have in Latin Brundusii, at Brundusium, Belli, at war; which look like genitives, although we read Carthagini, at Carthage ; Tibure, at Tivoli. Whoever can believe that Brundisii is a “dative in disguise,” may well believe the same of Armu in Armune.
What if the radical o which generally vanishes in the dative of the Umbrian, stood its ground in the composition of the dative with -ne, exceptionally? Then Armune means Armoe-ne. I have no better solution.