Inscription

Museum number:
8-3420
Permalink:
ark:/21549/hm21080003420
Accession number:
Acc.147
Description:
Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)
Donor:
Alfred Emerson and M. Boissé
Collection place:
Naples, Campania, Southern Italy
Collector:
Alfred Emerson
Materials:
Marble (rock)
Object type:
archaeology
Object class:
Inscriptions
Accession date:
1904
Department:
Classical Mediterranean
Loans:
S1970-1971 #118: Department of Classics (UC Berkeley)/Arthur Ernest Gordon (April 21, 1971–May 3, 1971)
Images:
Hearst Museum object 1 of 6 titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)Hearst Museum object 2 of 6 titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)Hearst Museum object 3 of 6 titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)Hearst Museum object 4 of 6 titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)Hearst Museum object 5 of 6 titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)Hearst Museum object 6 of 6 titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)
Legacy documentation:
Documentation associated with Hearst Museum object titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)Documentation associated with Hearst Museum object titled Inscription, accession number 8-3420, described as Latin inscription on marble Translation: To the Di Manes. Gaius Amatius Polybius [made this] for Amatia Adaucta, his well deserving wife. She lived 30 years, 3 months, and 5 days. [sculptor ran out of room on the stone at the 5 (V), so it's possible it was originally supposed to be a 6 (VI)] Dating: The EDR dates it between 151 and 250 CE based on the lettering and language used (entry here). The U.S. Epigraphy Project essentially agrees, dating it to the late 2nd or 3rd century CE. A date from this period makes sense - the EDR is right that it is very common in this period to list the age of death this way. General information: Because they have the same nomen (Amatia/Amatius), this couple were either both freedpeople from the same household, or Gaius Amatius Polybius was originally Amatia Adaucta's enslaver, and he freed her on the condition that she marry him. After the object was dug up, someone appears to have examined it using a candle, which dripped white wax in at least two patches roughly centered on the D and M at the top of the text. This certainly postdates the object's rediscovery, because the wax has dripped down the sides of the old break in the top right corner of the stone. (Description provided by Darcy Tuttle)

Tools