V 1. Belgorod. Building inscription, 1451–1452 C.E.
White marble (?).
Inset panel with two coats of arms (in relief?). Condition unknown.
Place of Origin
Fortress, crosswall, watch tower opposite the mosque, in the wall.
1840s, survey of N.N. Murzakevich.
Institution and inventory
Within inset area.
Lapidary; relief, elongated, ornate letters. Ligatures, abbreviations.
L1. Murzakevich 1850, 481; 1.1. Latyshev 1896, 2, № 2; 1.1.1. Millet 1900; 1.2. Bogdan 1908, 324; 1.3. Pippidi 1998; 1.4. Shlapak 2000; 1.5. Rhoby 2014, 749–751.
<div type="edition" xml:lang="grc"> <ab> <lb n="1"/><date><num value="6960">ςϠξ</num>, <g ref="#stauros"/> <lb n="2"/><expan><abbr>ἰνδ</abbr><ex>ικτιῶνος</ex></expan> <app type="alternative"><lem><num value="13">ιγ</num></lem><rdg><num value="13">ι<surplus>γ</surplus></num></rdg></app></date>. <lb n="3"/>Τέλος <expan><abbr>ἔλα</abbr><ex>βε</ex></expan> βιηθείᾳ τὸ <expan><ex>τ</ex><abbr>ῆχος</abbr></expan>. <lb n="4"/><expan><abbr>Ἔλθῃ</abbr><ex>ς</ex></expan> βοηθός, <expan><abbr>Χ</abbr><ex>ριστ</ex><abbr>έ</abbr></expan>, τῷ ποιηκότι. <date>Ἔτι <num value="6960">ςϠξ</num></date>. </ab> </div>
1-2: В лт ѕѯ іѡ(анн) ігумень Pippidi;
1: ςϠξ´ Shlapak
2: ٣١٢ Shlapak
3: Θεία Murzakevich, Bogdan, Pippidi, Shlapak; τόδ]ε Latyshev; (βο)ηθείᾳ Millet; ἡ θεία (?) Rhoby
4: ἔλθη (ἡ χάρις) Murzakevich; [Βοή]θη ? ὀ Latyshev; ἔλθῃς Bogdan, Shlapak; ἔλθ(ον) Pippidi; ἐλθὲ Rhoby ; βοηθὸς: om. Shlapak; Ἰ(ησοῦ)ς Murzakevich, Latyshev, Iorga 1899; (ὁ) ἱερὸς ναὸς Pippidi; Χ(ριστο)ῦ Pippidi; πεποιηκότι Murzakevich et alii; ? Κόστι Skrzynska; πεντηκόστῃ Pippidi; ποιηκότι Rhoby; Σταν add. Shlapak; Ἔτει ςϠζ´ Skrzynska; ἔτει ςϠξ´ Pippidi, Shlapak
In the year 6960, in the 13th (or 10th) indiction. With the Lord's help, the wall was completed. Christ, come as a Helper, to the man who has built it. In the year 6960.
The study history of the inscription can be found in Shlapak 2000. During my visit to Belgorod-Dnestrovsky in 1999, I was unable to find this inscription. My reading is based on the text of Murzakevich (see Voytsekhovsky 1972, 372, fig. 2) and is therefore rather hypothetical. N. Iorga's (1899, 99) translation is reflected in the apparatus, as well as the translation of E.Cz. Skrzynska published in Voytsekhovsky 1972.
1. Line 1 is apparently identical with the last word of Line 4, and its reconstruction is not in doubt.
2. Shlapak's proposal that we should read here the arabic numerals - Hijri year 1012 (1603 C.E.) - is not justified since the numbers are intelligible as Greek. The first letter sign of the line represents a conventional abbreviation of the word "indiction." The 13th indiction in the text is a mistake since the year 6960 since the Creation (1451-1452 C.E.) corresponds to the 10th indiction. It is possible that Murzakevich interpreted as gamma a random stroke or a late mark.
3-4. The textual reconstruction in these lines is rather hypothetical and for this reason I abstain from making historical comments. Rhoby, noting the metrical character of lines 2 and 3 (two dodecasyllabic lines), made a convincing restoration in the middle of line 2. It is worth remarking on the formulae, which have previously attracted little scholarly attention. The formula τέλος ἔλαβε with reference to a physical structure is attested in Shevchenko 1966, 264, № 17 (Sinai, XVIIIth century). The formula Ἔλθῃς βοηθός, Χ(ριστ)έ (line 4) is known from Byzantine lead seals (see, e.g., SEB 180, 1b).
For the archaeological and historical context of the architectural construction, see Bruyako, Sapozhnikov 2000.