{"title":"Wer ließ in der Grabinschrift I.Milet VI 2,570 sieben Zeilen eradieren?","authors":"G. Thür","doi":"10.1515/zrgr-2021-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Who got seven lines erased in the funeral inscription I.Milet VI 2.570? In a funeral inscription from Miletus, well known since 1843, two passages have been neatly erased already in Antiquity. Recently they were carefully reconstructed by Praust and Wiedergut. This contribution aims to deepen the social and legal meaning of the text being not fully grasped by the authors. Surprisingly, among the persons entitled to be buried the owner of the grave monument did not mention his wife, and he restricted his sons to being sheer participants in the grave. On the other hand, he entrusted an outsider woman and her children (probably his own offspring) with power of disposal over the grave. Because of this woman his wife might have quitted the wedlock and claimed her dowry. After the owner’s death the dispute was settled resulting in the two erasures: the younger son, objecting the compromise, had been completely excluded and the former wife finally was admitted being buried in the monument.","PeriodicalId":23880,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Romanistische Abteilung","volume":"1 1","pages":"595 - 606"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Romanistische Abteilung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zrgr-2021-0017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Who got seven lines erased in the funeral inscription I.Milet VI 2.570? In a funeral inscription from Miletus, well known since 1843, two passages have been neatly erased already in Antiquity. Recently they were carefully reconstructed by Praust and Wiedergut. This contribution aims to deepen the social and legal meaning of the text being not fully grasped by the authors. Surprisingly, among the persons entitled to be buried the owner of the grave monument did not mention his wife, and he restricted his sons to being sheer participants in the grave. On the other hand, he entrusted an outsider woman and her children (probably his own offspring) with power of disposal over the grave. Because of this woman his wife might have quitted the wedlock and claimed her dowry. After the owner’s death the dispute was settled resulting in the two erasures: the younger son, objecting the compromise, had been completely excluded and the former wife finally was admitted being buried in the monument.
是谁擦掉了葬礼题词I.Milet VI 2.570中的七行?在米利都的一篇丧葬题词中,有两段在古代就已经被整齐地擦掉了。最近,Praust和Wiedergut仔细地重建了它们。这一贡献旨在加深作者未完全掌握的文本的社会和法律意义。令人惊讶的是,在有权下葬的人中,墓地的主人没有提到他的妻子,他限制他的儿子们完全参与坟墓。另一方面,他委托一个外来的女人和她的孩子(可能是他自己的后代)对坟墓有决定权。因为这个女人,他的妻子可能已经退出婚姻,并要求她的嫁妆。在墓主死后,争端得到解决,结果有两处被抹去:反对妥协的小儿子被完全排除在外,而他的前妻最终被承认埋葬在纪念碑里。