DOI Artikel:
Arkwright, Walther: Über das lykische Alphabet
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22624#0086
76
Limyra 16, which cannot be separated from his Limyra 6; and which I have
therefore quoted as Limyra ,6 af Inscriptions unknown to Schmidt have as
a general rule been added alter his in the order (as far as possible) of their
discovery. The order of publication would be no doubt better; but is almost
impracticable where so many remain unpublished. In accorclance with this System
in the case e. g. of Telmessus, Schmidt’s numbers i, 2, and 3 are retained, and
Beaufort’s ,Caria^ becomes Telmessus ,4', though in reality it was published
before the others, while an unpublished inscription is cited as Telmessus ,5!
Unfortunately Schmidt in many instances gives the same inscription twice
or even three times over under different numbers and even different places. Thus
his Limyra 7, 28 and 39 are different copies of one inscription; his Antiphellus
2 is really at Limyra and is given again by him as Limyra 20. Again his
Limyra 37 and 38 are not there but at Tristomo. When all necessary corrections
are made, many gaps are left in his series of numbers, so that his Limyra 43,
for instance, is really only the 37th. If the principle of adding the new in-
scriptions after his be adhered to; those from Limyra would be numbered
up to 57 or 58, thoug-h there are really only 49; while the numbers Limyra
25, 28, 35 etc. would be left entirely unused, since those inscriptions do not
exist at all. I have therefore filled in the gaps in his series of numbers with
inscriptions unknown to him in the order of their discovery, indicating by
the use of inverted commas the fact that Schmidt’s numbering* is no longer
observed in these cases. Thus I have given the name Antiphellus ,2', to an
inscription published by Texier, and referred to by Savelsberg under the very
inconvenient name of Antiphellus 3 b: no confusion need arise, since Schmidt’s
Antiphellus 2 can never again be cited under that name, but must always
be referred to by its correct title of Limyra 20.
WALTHER ARKWRIGHT.
[Zu den von Herrn Walther Arkwriglit ver-
werteten Inschriften lykischen Idioms hat Rudolf
Heberdey auf einer Reise im Sommer 1898 vier
neue hinzugefunden:
1. in Pinara am Südostabhang der kleinen
Akropolis vier Zeilen, deren Anfänge verwittert
sind, an der Felswand neben einem Felsgrabe im
Holzbaustil;
2. in Myra (Westnekropole) drei großentheils
zerstörte Zeilen im Innern eines Felsgrabes im
Holzbaustil;
3. in Xanthos nahe beim Triumphbogen drei
wohl erhaltene Zeilen auf einer 0'9m hohen, 0'5m
breiten viereckigen Kalksteinbasis, deren Oberseite
Reste von Standspuren zeigt;
4. in Üsümlü (Kadyanda) 21 Zeilen mit feinen,
O'01m bis 0'0I5m hohen, aber stellenweise ganz
verwaschenen Buchstaben auf einer o’39m hohen,
°'35m breiten Kalksteinplatte, die jetzt vor der
Moschee als Stiegenstufe verbaut ist.
Soweit ich es übersehe, erleiden die obigen Auf-
stellungen durch diese neuen Funde keine Änderung.
ERNST KAI-INKA.]
Limyra 16, which cannot be separated from his Limyra 6; and which I have
therefore quoted as Limyra ,6 af Inscriptions unknown to Schmidt have as
a general rule been added alter his in the order (as far as possible) of their
discovery. The order of publication would be no doubt better; but is almost
impracticable where so many remain unpublished. In accorclance with this System
in the case e. g. of Telmessus, Schmidt’s numbers i, 2, and 3 are retained, and
Beaufort’s ,Caria^ becomes Telmessus ,4', though in reality it was published
before the others, while an unpublished inscription is cited as Telmessus ,5!
Unfortunately Schmidt in many instances gives the same inscription twice
or even three times over under different numbers and even different places. Thus
his Limyra 7, 28 and 39 are different copies of one inscription; his Antiphellus
2 is really at Limyra and is given again by him as Limyra 20. Again his
Limyra 37 and 38 are not there but at Tristomo. When all necessary corrections
are made, many gaps are left in his series of numbers, so that his Limyra 43,
for instance, is really only the 37th. If the principle of adding the new in-
scriptions after his be adhered to; those from Limyra would be numbered
up to 57 or 58, thoug-h there are really only 49; while the numbers Limyra
25, 28, 35 etc. would be left entirely unused, since those inscriptions do not
exist at all. I have therefore filled in the gaps in his series of numbers with
inscriptions unknown to him in the order of their discovery, indicating by
the use of inverted commas the fact that Schmidt’s numbering* is no longer
observed in these cases. Thus I have given the name Antiphellus ,2', to an
inscription published by Texier, and referred to by Savelsberg under the very
inconvenient name of Antiphellus 3 b: no confusion need arise, since Schmidt’s
Antiphellus 2 can never again be cited under that name, but must always
be referred to by its correct title of Limyra 20.
WALTHER ARKWRIGHT.
[Zu den von Herrn Walther Arkwriglit ver-
werteten Inschriften lykischen Idioms hat Rudolf
Heberdey auf einer Reise im Sommer 1898 vier
neue hinzugefunden:
1. in Pinara am Südostabhang der kleinen
Akropolis vier Zeilen, deren Anfänge verwittert
sind, an der Felswand neben einem Felsgrabe im
Holzbaustil;
2. in Myra (Westnekropole) drei großentheils
zerstörte Zeilen im Innern eines Felsgrabes im
Holzbaustil;
3. in Xanthos nahe beim Triumphbogen drei
wohl erhaltene Zeilen auf einer 0'9m hohen, 0'5m
breiten viereckigen Kalksteinbasis, deren Oberseite
Reste von Standspuren zeigt;
4. in Üsümlü (Kadyanda) 21 Zeilen mit feinen,
O'01m bis 0'0I5m hohen, aber stellenweise ganz
verwaschenen Buchstaben auf einer o’39m hohen,
°'35m breiten Kalksteinplatte, die jetzt vor der
Moschee als Stiegenstufe verbaut ist.
Soweit ich es übersehe, erleiden die obigen Auf-
stellungen durch diese neuen Funde keine Änderung.
ERNST KAI-INKA.]