DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45618#0031
Brad
191
I am inclined to believe, furthermore, that the traces of letters below the third line in
the drawing may be the last remains of |Σεργω]να, depending upon |3ωέθισον. The names
which appear in the first line of the drawing, 'Ρωυ.αν?ΰ etc., may depend, of course,
upon an έπι' to be supplied from the context. Or they may depend upon something
in the fourth line. In view of the other mistakes in this inscription it is even possible
that these names depend upon βωε'Θισον, and we should then read: Κ(ύρι)ε βωεθισον
[Σεργω]να καί 'Ρωμανού (καί) Ίωαννου κτλ.
Concerning the word νεωκτ[ί]στου see what is said above under No. 1147. It does
not seem to me possible in either inscription to connect this word with έτους as Professor
Dolger suggests.1 There is no evidence that the era of Bosra was ever used in this
northern region of Syria: it does not seem to me possible that it could be used here
except perhaps by some immigrant from the South. And certainly this explanation
cannot be applied to the present inscription. For, aside from the improbality of so
late a date as 5444- 105 = 649 a. d., the month Loos was not the beginning of the
year according to any era.
My colleague, Professor Morey, has suggested to me that perhaps the word was
a title, denoting primarily a profession or occupation, like νέωκόρος2 or τζγγίχης. If that
is the case, then a proper name must be read in the ΑΡΧΗ or APXHTOY of No. 1147,
and this is certainly possible.3 Moreover it should be noticed that in both inscriptions
the form of the word is N E LU Κ T I L T Ο Y, i. e. with UJ instead of 0 before the K. I do
not believe, however, that the word is derived from νείς = ναός. If it were, it might
mean temple-builder and then church-builder, and so perhaps become an honorary title.
But I can find no evidence that it was used either in this sense, or in the sense of
new-builder, i. e. renovator (from νέος = new).
It is of course possible also that there was a proper name Νεόκτιστος; but I do
not know any example of such a name elsewhere.
The word νεόκτιστος occurs in the Wisdom of Solomon, xi, 19 (18), in the sense of
newly-created: z νεόκτιστους Θυμού πλήρεις Θχίρας άγνωστους, Or unknown beasts full of rage
newly-created. There is also the following statement in the Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus
of Ioh. Caspar Suicerus (Schwyzer), edition of 1728: Νεόκτιστος proprie est, interprete
Hesychio, νεοκαθιόρυτος, ί νεωστΐ κατεσκευσαμενος, recens aedificatus vel recens conditus.
Deinde improprie notat νεοφώτιστου, recens baptizatum, apud Nazianzenum, Orat. X,
p. 169.” The passage referred to may be found in Migne, Patrol. Graec., Vol. xxxv,
p. 773 — Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. vn, c. 15 : .... καί τήίς νεόκτιστου ψυχζίς, £υ το
Πνεύμα th’ υό'ατος αυεμόρφωσε, αξία τά γέρα καρπούμευος: enjoying honors worthy of his NEW-
CREATED soul, which the Spirit through water formed anew. I believe this is the
meaning of the word in both of these inscriptions. If so it is analogous to νεόφυτος,
νεοφώτιστος, ανακιζινισύεις, etc.4 I do not mean that it was distinctly an ecclesiastical term,
implying necessarily either baptism or confirmation, but that it signified simply that
the person so described was a Christian, one born again.
1 Das Fischsymbol^ I, p. 251 f. Professor Dolger also quotes a card from Dr. Anton Baumstark in which the latter
regards the connection of νεωκτίστου with ’έτους in No. 1147 as “evident richtig”.
2 Cf. Acts xix, 35: this word later came to mean sacristan.
3 A name s,Ap%^$ occurs in Inscrr. Graecae XII, vm, No. 331 1. 6 (from Thasos). An Άρ%ίτας appears in Z. G. V, I,
No. 211, 1. 45 (from Laconia), and Αρχιτος in Greek Papyri in the Brit. Mus. 11, p. 131, 1. 18.
4 See Dolger, “Die Firmung in den Denkmalern des christlichen Altertums”, in Rom. Quartalschrift xix (1905), p. 1 ff.
191
I am inclined to believe, furthermore, that the traces of letters below the third line in
the drawing may be the last remains of |Σεργω]να, depending upon |3ωέθισον. The names
which appear in the first line of the drawing, 'Ρωυ.αν?ΰ etc., may depend, of course,
upon an έπι' to be supplied from the context. Or they may depend upon something
in the fourth line. In view of the other mistakes in this inscription it is even possible
that these names depend upon βωε'Θισον, and we should then read: Κ(ύρι)ε βωεθισον
[Σεργω]να καί 'Ρωμανού (καί) Ίωαννου κτλ.
Concerning the word νεωκτ[ί]στου see what is said above under No. 1147. It does
not seem to me possible in either inscription to connect this word with έτους as Professor
Dolger suggests.1 There is no evidence that the era of Bosra was ever used in this
northern region of Syria: it does not seem to me possible that it could be used here
except perhaps by some immigrant from the South. And certainly this explanation
cannot be applied to the present inscription. For, aside from the improbality of so
late a date as 5444- 105 = 649 a. d., the month Loos was not the beginning of the
year according to any era.
My colleague, Professor Morey, has suggested to me that perhaps the word was
a title, denoting primarily a profession or occupation, like νέωκόρος2 or τζγγίχης. If that
is the case, then a proper name must be read in the ΑΡΧΗ or APXHTOY of No. 1147,
and this is certainly possible.3 Moreover it should be noticed that in both inscriptions
the form of the word is N E LU Κ T I L T Ο Y, i. e. with UJ instead of 0 before the K. I do
not believe, however, that the word is derived from νείς = ναός. If it were, it might
mean temple-builder and then church-builder, and so perhaps become an honorary title.
But I can find no evidence that it was used either in this sense, or in the sense of
new-builder, i. e. renovator (from νέος = new).
It is of course possible also that there was a proper name Νεόκτιστος; but I do
not know any example of such a name elsewhere.
The word νεόκτιστος occurs in the Wisdom of Solomon, xi, 19 (18), in the sense of
newly-created: z νεόκτιστους Θυμού πλήρεις Θχίρας άγνωστους, Or unknown beasts full of rage
newly-created. There is also the following statement in the Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus
of Ioh. Caspar Suicerus (Schwyzer), edition of 1728: Νεόκτιστος proprie est, interprete
Hesychio, νεοκαθιόρυτος, ί νεωστΐ κατεσκευσαμενος, recens aedificatus vel recens conditus.
Deinde improprie notat νεοφώτιστου, recens baptizatum, apud Nazianzenum, Orat. X,
p. 169.” The passage referred to may be found in Migne, Patrol. Graec., Vol. xxxv,
p. 773 — Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. vn, c. 15 : .... καί τήίς νεόκτιστου ψυχζίς, £υ το
Πνεύμα th’ υό'ατος αυεμόρφωσε, αξία τά γέρα καρπούμευος: enjoying honors worthy of his NEW-
CREATED soul, which the Spirit through water formed anew. I believe this is the
meaning of the word in both of these inscriptions. If so it is analogous to νεόφυτος,
νεοφώτιστος, ανακιζινισύεις, etc.4 I do not mean that it was distinctly an ecclesiastical term,
implying necessarily either baptism or confirmation, but that it signified simply that
the person so described was a Christian, one born again.
1 Das Fischsymbol^ I, p. 251 f. Professor Dolger also quotes a card from Dr. Anton Baumstark in which the latter
regards the connection of νεωκτίστου with ’έτους in No. 1147 as “evident richtig”.
2 Cf. Acts xix, 35: this word later came to mean sacristan.
3 A name s,Ap%^$ occurs in Inscrr. Graecae XII, vm, No. 331 1. 6 (from Thasos). An Άρ%ίτας appears in Z. G. V, I,
No. 211, 1. 45 (from Laconia), and Αρχιτος in Greek Papyri in the Brit. Mus. 11, p. 131, 1. 18.
4 See Dolger, “Die Firmung in den Denkmalern des christlichen Altertums”, in Rom. Quartalschrift xix (1905), p. 1 ff.