27.09.2013 Views

Submitted for award of PhD September 2006. - King's College London

Submitted for award of PhD September 2006. - King's College London

Submitted for award of PhD September 2006. - King's College London

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Pompeianorum. Oscan inscriptions <strong>of</strong> Pompeii potentially date from a period <strong>of</strong> over<br />

300 years, although most <strong>of</strong> the inscriptions are probably from a late date. We have<br />

archaeological contexts <strong>for</strong> most <strong>of</strong> them, but in cases <strong>of</strong> public inscriptions found in<br />

private houses, the location cannot help us establish the time when the inscription was<br />

originally set up. Most <strong>of</strong> the inscriptions are broadly dated to the second century BC,<br />

when a large part <strong>of</strong> the city's public buildings were reconstructed and numerous private<br />

houses built.<br />

Conway created a system <strong>of</strong> dating the inscriptions <strong>of</strong> Pompeii. He divided the<br />

Oscan inscriptions into three chronological groups 'according to the degree <strong>of</strong> finish with<br />

which they are written, and the <strong>for</strong>ms <strong>of</strong> f and d, whose loops are open in earlier and<br />

closed in later inscriptions'. 709 This system, however, needs to be handled with extreme<br />

care. 710<br />

In this section I follow that a dating based on the archaeological contexts wherever<br />

available:<br />

Dating Refence number Archaeological<br />

reference<br />

Office<br />

second part <strong>of</strong> third ST Po 15 Antonini (1983) 204. aedilis<br />

century BC Caratelli (1979) 454<br />

ST Po 16 Carratelli (1979) 473 aedilis<br />

ST Po 4 quaestor<br />

709<br />

Conway (1897) 56.<br />

710 Rix reconstructed the ST Po 2 road-maker inscription out <strong>of</strong> two, Ve 9 and 10 (= Conway 40 and 41).<br />

Conway attributed inscription 40 to the second chronological group, but not 41, since that fragment does<br />

not contain the f not d letters which are his criteria <strong>of</strong> dating. ST Po 91 has the same as ST Po 5 and 6<br />

there<strong>for</strong>e must have been made around the same time.<br />

205

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!