I 48. Tyras (?). Incertum, II-III century C.E.
H. 35.0, W. 70.0, Th. 53.0.
Fragment of a block that probably served as a lintel of a doorframe. One end is rounded. Broken off on the right and left. Размеры приводятся по данным Кочубинского.
Place of Origin
Diviziya village, Tatarbunar district, Odessa region.
According to Kochubinsky, the monument was found in the winter of 1885-1886 by two local treasure hunters (Vakul and Alexander Kotlyarenko) during the excavation of a kurgan in the vicinity of Diviziya village.
Institution and inventory
On the front. Broken off on the right and left.
Letters are cut with care, decorated with small serifs. Alpha with straight crossbar. Rounded omega, open at the bottom, with inward-curving ends.
II-III century C.E.
L1. Latyshev 1890, 125, № 71 (по эстампажу); 1.1. IOSPE IV, 5; 2. Kochubinsky 1889, 100-101 (по карандашному рисунку); 2.1. IOSPE IV, p. 293, Ad n° 5; 3. IOSPE I2, 13 (по эстампажу).
<div type="edition" xml:lang="grc"> <ab> <lb n="1"/><gap reason="lost" extent="unknown" unit="character"/><w part="F"><unclear>ν</unclear>ῳ</w> ναῷ ἐν τ<unclear>ῷ</unclear> <gap reason="lost" extent="unknown" unit="character"/> </ab> </div>
1: ΓΩΝΑΩΕΝΤΩ Kochubinsky
Latyshev suspected that the block was part of a door lintel.
The village Diviziya is situated about 37km southeast of Belgorod-Dnestrovsky, on the bank of the river Chadjider, near to the spot where it empties into the estuary (lagune Chadjider). We may speculate that the block arrived there by sea from Akkerman/Belgorod as a spolion to be reused as building material.
No one of the publishers had seen the monument. Latyshev relied on an estampage, received in the spring of 1887 from N.P. Kondakov; the tracing of the estampage is presented in IOSPE I2. Kochubinsky, who supplies information about the place and circumstances of discovery, learned about it from a correspondence of some journalist working for the "Odessa News." He probably received a pencil drawing of the monument from the same journalist and relied on that in his opinion of the monument. Apparently, no one else saw the stone. It never reached a museum and can be considered lost.
It is difficult to form an opinion of the content. Latyshev is probably right to read the word "temple" in the Dative. If we trust Kochubinsky's drawing, the first letter can be restored as tau, giving us ἐν] τῳ ναῷ.