Linguistic Society of America

THE INSCRIPTION OF DVENOS
from right to left, while the first line stands below the second, and the
second below the third. The order of the lines is not in doubt, as the end
of the second line is bent out of direction to avoid collision with the
beginning of the first line, and the end of the third line is bent away to
avoid the beginning of the second line.
The text of the three lines is as follows, with letters that are in any
way doubtful represented by italics:
(1) IOVEISATDEIVOSQOIMEDMITATNEITEDENDO-
COSMISVIRCOSIED
(2) ASTEDNOISIOPETOITESIAIPAKARIVOIS
(3) DVENOSMEDFEKEDENMANOMEINOMDVENOINEMED-
MALOSTATOD
Yet even among these 'doubtful' letters, very little is doubtful. In
the first line, the I was inserted after the first writing, as is shown by the
crowding; some have thought that it was a word-divider or an acci-
dental scratch. The A was first written E, and then corrected to A.
In the second line, the K may have been corrected to C, and the same is
true of the K in the third line; but this is of no significance for the in-
terpretation, and will be disregarded. The V of line two is slightly
irregular in shape, and it is barely possible that L should be read. In
the third line, the E was first written D, by haplographic loss of EINOM,
but was corrected before further false copying was done. The I runs far
below the line, intersecting the horizontals of E in ENDO, line one;
for this reason, von Grienberger9 thinks it an accidental mark; but the
spacing distinctly demands the presence of a letter between E and N.
The V was at first omitted, and when inserted was so restricted for
space that it consists only of a vertical with a short cross-stroke at the
bottom; it was first read Z or I, but M. Breal'0 soon recognized its true
value. The L, as Breal was again first to note,1' seems to have been
written at first with the angle at the top, then corrected by the partial
erasure of the oblique stroke and the addition of the side stroke at the
bottom; some earlier editors took it for an N, or for an A written by
error for N.
The text is therefore certain within very narrow limits; for little real
doubt remains about the value of the characters just discussed. Some
9 Indogermanische Forschungen 11. 342-3.
10 Melanges d'arch. et d'hist. (Ecole fr. de Rome) 2. 147-67, esp. 148-9, = Revue Arche-
ologique, new series, 44. 82-98, esp. 83-4 [1882].
11 Melanges 2. 162= Rev. Arch. 44. 94.
209