Iberian language

The Iberian or Iberian was a paleohispanic language (or family of languages) spoken by the Iberians along the entire peninsular Mediterranean coast. Its extension would go from the Hérault river in France north to no further south than Porcuna, in Jaén.

Some researchers such as Javier de Hoz considered Iberian a lingua franca that had spread thanks to trade, spurred on by contact with the Phocian Greeks, while other researchers consider Iberian the mother tongue of a culturally heterogeneous group.

Geographic extent

The Iberians spread along the Mediterranean coast of the Iberian Peninsula.

To the north, it would include the south of France up to the Hérault River. Important remains of writings have been found in Ensérune, between Narbonne and Béziers in France, in an oppidum in which Iberian and Celtic elements are mixed.

To the south, the limit would be in Porcuna, in Jaén, where some magnificent sculptures of Iberian horsemen have been found.

Inwards the exact extent is uncertain. It seems that in the Ebro valley there was an expansion of culture inland, reaching Salduie (Zaragoza) but not further.

Of the pre-Roman peoples, it is believed that the following were Iberian-speaking: Ausetanos (Vic, Gerona), Ilergetes (Lérida and Huesca up to the Pyrenees), Indigetes (Gerona coast), Laietanos (Barcelona), Cossetanos (Tarragona)), Ilercavones/Ilergavones (Castellón and Tarragona), Edetanos (Valencia, Castellón and Teruel), Contestanos (Valencia, Elche, Cartagena and Albacete), Bastetanos (Granada, Almería, Murcia and Albacete) and Oretanos (Jaén, Ciudad Real and Albacete). The túrdulos and turdetanos usually consider themselves to be speakers of Tartessian.

Main hypotheses about the origin of the Iberian language

The Iberian language is usually considered a language isolate. However, after verifying the various existing affinities with the Basque and Aquitanian languages, many researchers have proposed that such affinities would be justified by some kind of kinship, this theory being known as Basque-Iberianism. But there are also many other researchers who believe that these affinities do not necessarily come from a kinship relationship, since phonological affinities could be due to linguistic area phenomena between languages that share the same territory, while lexical and onomastic affinities could be due to linguistic borrowing.

North African

This hypothesis proposes that the Iberian culture originates from North Africa. It was in vogue in the mid-20th century century, but currently has few advocates. From the linguistic point of view, Antonio Tovar related the Iberian language with the Berber languages.

Answer

This hypothesis considers that the cultural diversity of the Iberians, estimated from archaeological data, should also translate into linguistic diversity. Thus, it is postulated that the Iberian language would originally only be that of the contestant Iberians (and perhaps also of the Edetanos, Oretanos and Bastetanos), who would have become the privileged intermediaries of trade with the Greeks, and that they would have become the lingua franca of trade for all peoples who identify themselves as Iberians. The presence of anthroponyms of unknown affiliation in Iberian texts from C. Valenciana (Castellón), Aragón, Catalonia and southern France would be proof of the existence of other languages in these areas.

The Iberian scriptures in the context of the paleo-Hispanic scriptures.

Pyrenees

This hypothesis considers that the affinity between the Iberian language and the Aquitanian language should translate into a real proximity to their place of origin, for which reason it postulates the existence of a Pyrenean linguistic group product of the millenary coexistence of the human groups of the zone. From the western languages of this Pyrenean group would come the Aquitanian language in the northern slope and the Basque in its southern slope. The Iberian language would be the result of the evolution of the eastern languages of this group, which would have expanded from north to south from the eastern Pyrenees or its foothills towards the south.

Urn Fields

This hypothesis considers that the relationship between the Iberian, Basque and Aquitanian languages should translate in historical and cultural terms into some common factor that would justify the expansion of this linguistic family over a wide territory in a few centuries. Thus, it is postulated that this family of languages would come from a demographically invasive layer that would form part of the Campos de Urnas culture, since in the Iberian Peninsula the area of diffusion of this culture basically coincides with the territory of diffusion of the language. Iberian.

Indigetes

According to another theory, the Iberian language would have its origin in the north of present-day Catalonia, where the oldest Iberian inscriptions (Ullastret) are documented, and its expansion in a north-south direction would have occurred through large population movements in times Not long before the first written documents, perhaps in the s. vi a. C., since the Iberian language appears homogeneous in the known texts, whereas if it had been established with greater antiquity (ss xi / x BC for example) its dialectalization should be evident. The presence of elements that cannot be interpreted as Iberian anthroponyms among the inscriptions from this area is not considered statistically significant, since Iberian anthroponyms are very frequent even among the oldest inscriptions.

Writing

Ullastret's Lead in Northern-Eastern Bid Signature

Head A of La Bastida de les Alcuses (Mogent) in South-Eastern Iberian Signature.

Head B of the Serreta (Alcoy) in Greek-ibric Alphabet.

The Iberians (or Iberians) used three different scripts to represent their language. The oldest archaeological contexts place them at the end of the s. v a. C., while the most modern are from the end of the s. i a. C. or perhaps from the beginning of the s. i d. c.

• North-Eastern Iberian
  • Dual variant
  • Non-dual variant
• South-Eastern Iberian
• Greek-Iberian alphabet

In addition, there are two texts in Latin script of uncertain Ibericity.

Northeast Iberian signer

Also known as Levantine or simply Iberian because it is by far the most used Iberian sign. This writing presents signs with syllabic value, for the plosives, and signs with alphabetic value, for the rest of the consonants and vowels. Its deciphering, completed in 1922 by Manuel Gómez-Moreno, is practically complete. Two variants are known of the northeastern Iberian signary: the dual variant makes it possible to differentiate the voiceless dental and velar plosive syllabograms from the voiced ones with an added stroke so that the simple form represents the voiced one and the complex form the voiceless one. This signatory was adapted by the Celtiberians to write their language.

Southeastern Iberian signer

Also known as southern. This signatory also presents signs with syllabic value, for the stops, and signs with alphabetic value, for the rest of the consonants and vowels, but it differs from the northeastern Iberian signary, both for the shape of the signs and for the value that the signs represent.. The southeastern Iberian signary is very similar to the Tartessian signary, which could be its antecedent. Its decipherment cannot yet be considered closed, since there is no consensus among the different researchers who have made specific proposals.

Greco-Iberian alphabet

The Greco-Iberian alphabet is an almost direct adaptation of an Ionic Greek alphabet to the particularities of the Iberian.

Phonology and phonetics

Vowels and Diphthongs

It has five vowels, the same as those of Spanish or Basque: /a, e, i, o, u/, with /a/ and /i/ being the most frequent and /o/ and /u/ the least. Although there have been indications that the script indicated a nasal vowel (sign ḿ), it is considered that it could be an allophone. There do not appear to be length differences in timbre if judged from the transcriptions Although it is striking that for the Iberian /e/ in Greco-Iberian the letter eta (/eː/) is used but not the short epsilon.

It seems that the diphthongs would be decreasing with vowel+closed vowel, attesting to those in [aj] śaitabi, saetabis, [ej] neitin, neitinbeles and [aw] lauŕ-, lavrbeles. Untermann notes that the cluster [ui] is only found in the first syllable.

Semiconsonants

The possibility of [j] has only been found in words like aiun- or iunstir and [w], although it is only in loans, such as in diuiś from Gaulish divix. It has been questioned whether they really existed in Ibero except for loans.

Consonants

Glasses

In Iberian there are two vibrant, r and .but there is no unanimity among the researchers about what the opposition would distinguish them. Correa (1994) has proposed the hypothesis that . would be the simple/brain/ coral) and r multiple /r/ (as in corral). It has subsequently been proposed that it could be a uvular fricative or a vibrant backflex, but the Ballester himself (2005) has abandoned his theory, opting to invest the values proposed by Correa so the sign r would be the simple (/give/) and the sign . multiple (/r/). Vibrant Iberians never appear in the beginning of the word, as in Basque.

Sibilante

There are two, s and ś. The distinction between the two is not clear: for Ballester (2001) it would be swhile ś would be a palatal sibilante; while Rodríguez Ramos (2004) considers this the alveolar, while s would be a dental africada /ts/ or palatalized (similar to the /tь/ of Castilian), in which it coincides with the observation made by Correa that according to the adaptations of Galician names in Iberian texts ś It would be an alveolar fricative, while s his corresponding African. It should be noted that the Basque also has two wings: s apico-alveolar (/s)/) and z lamino-alveolar (/s),/), which could correspond to s and ś.

Lateral

There's only one. l which is normally interpreted as a /l/; is extremely rare in final position and seems to be complementary at times with . (both) al- / a.-bi).

Nasales

La n corresponds to the Spanish /n/.

The sign m seldom appears and never in initial position. Velaza throws the hypothesis that you can treat a /n/ variant and supports it with the example iumstir/Iunstir. José A. Correa advances the possibility that it is a twined or strong nasal. While Rodriguez Ramos points to the idea that it is a variant of /n/ in the cases where the previous vowel has nasalized.

There is a certain controversy about the value of the letter .. It is believed to be some kind of nasal, but there is no security about the exact value. Siles, Silgo, Velaza and others have proposed the /na/ value based on equivalences with texts written in Greek alphabet. So there are equivalencies in suffixes -. -Nai (as in bantui-(e)n- / leiśtÃike-ar-éi / saka prociske-ar-nai) and in the onomastic elements -.- / -nabar-. On the other hand this theory is contradicted by the transcription of Minibar-bells Latin as vmarbeles. José A. Correa proposes that the letter was made as a labialized nasal, although it is unclear that the sign should always be pronounced in the same way. Rodríguez Ramos considers it safe that it is a nasal vowel, produced by progressive nasalization (asy /na/  /nã/, written both na, n or .).

Occlusive

There are five.

The evidence indicates the absence of fonema /p/. It is not documented in the texts written in Greek alphabet, nor in the Iberian inscriptions of the dual system, finding itself only in indigenous names in Latin inscriptions, where it appears that it is only an alophonic variant of /b/ conditioned by its environment.

Evidence has been noted that the phonema /b/ at least on occasions would have been pronounced similar to /w/ (which would explain the very low frequency of the sign #) as well as may have nasal pronouncements /m/.

There are no traces of aspirated or twined occlusives.

Accentuation

There are only hypotheses about the accentuation in Iberian. The two hypotheses presented are based on the assumption that it had a fixed and not free accentuation.

Luis Silgo Gauche defends a mostly paroxytone language, based mainly on the loss of a weak vowel in beleś to bels and the comparison with the Aquitaine-Basque complex and testimony Romance.

Xaverio Ballester proposes a language with a demarcating accent, rather fixed and rather final (oxytone) based mainly on linguistic universals and Greek and Latin adaptations of Iberian place names and anthroponyms.

Morphology

The Iberian morphology is of an agglutinative type, since suffixes postposed to the elements that can be more easily identified, the anthroponyms, are identified with some ease. The best known are the following:

-a/-e

applied to anthroponyms seems to mark the dative.

-Aar.

applied to anthroponyms seems to mark it as possessor (a kind of genitive) or indicate origin or honorary distinction (varón, noble).

-

genitive/procedure with possessive use, similar or identical to -ar.

-I

applied to anthroponyms seems to mark the accusatory.

- Okay.

applied to certain names seems to mark the plural.

-ka

It seems to indicate or the person from whom something is collected or to whom something will be given (from Hoz). The evidence is greater favorable mind for the second option, acting as well as a kind of dative/partitive/distributive.

- mister.

usually receive the aseptic designation of possessive particle, but multiple interpretations remain open (genitive disinence, copulative verb as That's it. or I am., descriptive/demonstrative morphema or even personal pronoun: Me., that).

-sk-en/-k-en

applied to names of tribe or city in the inscriptions of the coins seems to be interpreted as a plural genitive (so iltiæke-sk-en It would be of the illiterates, auśe-sk-en auśeskos / ausetanos, etc.).

-

has an agent and ablative/locative subject (Untermann).

Lexicon

The following are some of the meaning hypotheses proposed for Iberian terms:

Nouns

abiner

Maybe it was the Iberian equivalent to Latin servvvs, slave (Untermann 1997), if the parallelism between two production seals, one Iberian and another Latin, present in the same mortar was perfect, although it is not the only possibility.

aries/ars

term that appears associated with some toponyms, as bilbilia, which is why it has been considered the possibility that could mean city (from Hoz 1995) or perhaps castle (Rodríguez Ramos 2001). It has been related to the Basque ertzi"closed" and etxe, house (Rodríguez Ramos 2001).

batir

it has been proposed to designate a position or title (from Hoz 1985), since it appears repetitively associated with anthroponyms in the lead of Palamós.

Baites

It could be an appeal that identifies the accompanying anthroponyms, perhaps. witnessaccording to parallels of Greek commercial texts, since it appears associated with anthropomos in lead foils that plausibly contain commercial texts.

eban / teban

almost exclusive term of funeral inscriptions associated with anthroponyms that appear in them. For some researchers it would be the equivalent of Latin filivs, son (Bähr 1947), hypothesis extended by Velaza (1994), for which teban would also mean daughter. For others it would be a verb equivalent to Latin coeravit, he took care (Untermann 1986).

iltià / iltur / iltun

common terms in toponyms, such as illiterate or ilturo, which is why they are interpreted with the meaning of city (of Hoz 1983) interpretation that could have the support of the origin of the name of Pamplona according to the ancient sources: pompelo, city of Pompeyo. They have also been placed in connection with the Basque hiri/uri (old form) ili) city, community.

seltar, seldar, sildar

exclusive term of the funeral mats, which is why the meaning of grave (Antonio Beltrán 1950, Tovar 1954). It is related to the Basque zilo or zulo fosa (cf. zulogile sepulturer). The proposed monument monument monument or This is it. (Rodríguez Ramos 2005).

śalir

term very common in silver coins, which is why the meaning of silver (Gómez-Moreno 1945), value or currency (Tovar 1954), perhaps an account unit similar to denario or dracma (Silgo 1994). It has been placed in relation to the Basque zilhar; silver (Gómez-Moreno 1945) or better sari *sali(r); payment, price(Michelena 1979).

Verbs

aicitake / ae teike / ae teki

formula present in funeral inscriptions that could be the Iberian equivalent of the Latin formula heic est sitvs / hic sitvs est, Here it is. (Hübner s. xix) if a very fragmented bilingual inscription of Tarragona was a perfect bilingual.

biterarokan / biteoke / itienokan / iteidioke / terentokan / terentoke (and variants)

term very common in lead foils that is usually interpreted as verbal form due to its morphological complexity. In some cases it appears associated with figures and the term śalir so it has been proposed to be a verb of the kind give, receive or demand to demand (Quintanilla 2005).

eban /teban / ebanen

almost exclusive term of funeral inscriptions associated with anthroponyms that appear in them. For some researchers it would be the equivalent of Latin coeravit, he took care (Untermann 1986) identifying the one who built the monument, hypothesis that could have the support of a very fragmented bilingual of Sagunto. It has been compared to the Basque verb ibeni, Put. For other researchers it would be a substantive that would indicate filiation (Bähr 1947; Velaza 1994).

ekiar / tekiar / ekien

its presence associated with anthroponyms in local production objects in registrations made in the production process of the object has led to the thought that it was the Iberian equivalent of the Latin fecit, perhaps a verb or a substantive verbal with the meaning He did., done by or work. It has been compared to the Basque verb egin, make (Pío Beltrán 1942).

iunstir / iuśtir (and variants)

very common term in very varied supports, especially in lead sheets where it usually appears heading the text associated with neitin. This circumstance has led to thinking that it was some kind of greeting formula (from Hoz 1983) similar to Greek χαιρε (jareor the Latin Salve. It has also been proposed to sign give (Rodríguez Ramos 2005) or having a function similar to the Latin verbs licet and oportet (Untermann 1986), although it was not a verb. It has also been proposed to be a theonymous (Silgo 1994).

Numerals

In 2005 Eduardo Orduña published a study in which he interpreted some Iberian compounds as numerals, both because of their resemblance to Basque numerals, and because of the contextual data. This study has been expanded in Ferrer i Jané (2007) and Ferrer i Jané (2009) according to the terms present in coins that indicate their value and with new combinatorial and contextual arguments. The relationship of numbers is as follows:

The bases of this theory are better understood if we compare some of the Iberian compounds with complex numbers in Basque (the dots indicate morpheme boundaries and are not normally written in Basque):

At first Orduña did not claim that the relationship was proof of genetic kinship between the Iberian and the Basque, but the consequence of a loan from the Iberian to the Basque, but now (Orduña, 2011) he maintains that the most economical hypothesis to explain the coincidences between the Iberian numeral system and the Basque numeral system is that of genetic kinship. For his part, Ferrer considers that the similarities detected could be due to both kinship and borrowing, although he indicates that the borrowing of the entire numeral system is an infrequent event.

Lakarra (2010) has rejected both hypotheses: loan or genetic relationship. Lakarra's arguments focus almost exclusively on the field of historical Basque grammar, but he also argues, following Hoz's (1993) hypothesis, that the loan was already implausible, due to the limited and remote extent of the territory in the southeast. from Spain, where according to this hypothesis Iberian was spoken as the first language. Lakarra (2010) argues with data and reasoning from comparative historical linguistics and historical phonetics, that it is not true that the Orduña and Ferrer i Jané hypothesis fully adjusts to Mitchelena's reconstructions. While he argues, from the new historical linguistics and the advances in historical phonetics -which have already been many since Mitchelena's time- that the reconstruction of numbers is quite different in most cases and this does not support the Orduña and Ferrer i Jané hypothesis.

Hoz (2011) considers plausible the internal contextual and combinatorial arguments that would allow certain Iberian forms to be considered numerals. In fact, in terms of concrete values, he considers the equivalence of Iberian ban with & # 39; one & # 39; and to lose with 'half', according to the lexical indications of the value of the coins, while the rest of the proposed equivalences would not go beyond working hypotheses. Regarding the equivalence between possible Iberian numerals and Basque numerals, he agrees with Lakarra (2010) that the documented forms in Iberian do not fit with the reconstructed forms in Proto-Basque. Finally, he considers that the greatest difficulty in accepting this hypothesis is, paradoxically, its extension and systematic nature, since if correct it would imply a close relationship between Iberian and Basque, which should allow us to identify other subsystems as clear as this one, subsystems that no researcher with reasonable linguistic arguments he has been able to identify.

Orduña Aznar (2011) insists that the Iberian elements proposed as numerals are not only similar to Basque numerals, but that they are combined as numerals and appear in contexts in which numerals are expected, arguments that Hoz (2011) does not rebate, nor Lakarra (2010). Regarding the hypothesis of Iberian as De Hoz's vehicular language, Orduña stresses its hypothetical nature, despite the fact that Lakarra presents it as an established fact. The problems of this hypothesis have been collected in Ferrer i Jané (2013). Regarding the phonetic difficulties indicated by Lakarra, Orduña argues that his proposals are compatible with Michelena's Proto-Basque, which is the one that an Iberian member should stick to for chronology and security reasons, while Lakarra's hypothesis of internal reconstruction has an imprecise chronology and a much lower degree of security.

Villar (2014) confirms that the coincidences between the Iberian numerals and the Basque numerals are of the same order as those documented between the Indo-European languages and consequently defends that the only sustainable hypothesis at this time is that of the linguistic relationship between Iberian and Basque. Villar also considers that if the reconstruction of Proto-Basque proposed in Lakarra (2010) turns out to be incompatible with the evidence derived from the numerals, it is necessary to correct the reconstruction, since like all reconstructions it is hypothetical and perfectible.

Anthroponyms

Iberian plomo written by Castellet de Bernabe.

Thanks to the Latin inscription on the Ascoli bronze, which includes a list of Iberian horsemen enrolled as auxiliary Roman troops who received citizenship for war merits, it has been possible to unravel the form of Iberian anthroponyms (in fact, this knowledge contributed to the decipherment of the Iberian script). Iberian names are usually made up of two interchangeable elements, normally made up of two syllables, which are written together. For example, an element like "iltiŕ" it can be found under the following names: iltiŕ-aŕker, iltiŕ-baś, iltiŕ-tikeŕ, turs-iltiŕ, baise-iltiŕ or bekon-iltiŕ. This discovery was a giant step, since from that moment it was possible to indicate with some certainty the names of people in the texts.

However, the list of onomastic components of Iberian anthroponyms varies depending on each researcher. The basic relationship comes from Untermann (1990) which was recently updated by Rodríguez Ramos (2002), complementary data and alternative criteria can be found in Faria (2007a) and Faria (2007b). Some of the elements that are interpreted as onomastic components are:

abair, adin (Viseradin, atin-bels 한 Adimels, atin- kibas  Adingibas, Adinildir, bels-atin  Belsadin, isker-atin 한 Escradin, taneg-adin  Tannegadinia), aibe, aile, ain (aini-beles /2005 Aenibelis), aitu, aiun, aker, albe, aloidi, an, anaì, aíbi, aìki, aìs, aai, aster, atun, aunin, auvenir, austin, bais (bais-isker  Baesiscer(is)), bullet, balke (balke-atin  Balciadin, balke-bilos  Basketball.), bartaś, baś, basto (Bastugitas, Bastobler), bekon, belauÃ, beleś / bels (bels-sosin, bels-atin  Belsadin), bene, bene, beri, beon, betan, betin, bikir, bilos (*sosin-bilos  Sosimilos, *bilos-taker  Bilistage, *bilos-tibas  Bilustibas), bin, bir, bitu, biÃ, balli, boneś, boule, bos, button, boutin, ekes, ekarar, eler, ena (Enasagin), this, eten, eter, iar, iaun, ibeś, ibeis, ike, ikobor, ildiAdinildir, Erdoildir), ildur (*ildur-tibas  Illurtibas), inde (inte-beles  Indibilis), isña (isker-atin أع م م م م م م م م م م م م م م م م Escradin, bais-isker-is  Baesisceris, tanek-isker  Tannegiscer), istan, iunstir, iur, kaisur, kake, kaltuū, kani, kaidies, kaidiko, katu, keidie, kibaś, kine, kitaBastugitas), kon, koÃo, koõś, kuleś, kurtar, lako, lao, leis, lor, lusban, nalbe, neitin, neidise, nes, niś, nios, o proctin, sakapur, sakin (Enasagin), saltu, śani (Sanibelser), śar, seken, selki, sike, sili, sine, Sir, situ, soket, sor, sosin (*sosin-bilos  Sosimilos, Sosinate), suise, taker, talsku, taneg (taneg-isker /2005 Tannegiscer, Tannegadinia, Tannegaldunis), taí, tarban, taítin, taś, tautin, teita, tekeì, tibaś, tikeìr, tikirs, tikis, tileis, tolor, tuitui, tumar, tuarś, turkir, tortin, ulti, unin, urentke, ustain, Гbaì (*umbar-beles  Umarbeles, *umbar-ildur  Umarillum- No.

In some cases a simple name can be found, with a single element or followed by a suffix: BELES, AGER-DO and BIVR-NO in Áscoli bronze, neitin in Ullastret and lauŕ-to, bartas-ko or śani-ko in other Iberian texts. More rarely, the presence of an infix between the two elements has been pointed out, which can be -i-, -ke- or -bo- (thus Untermann exemplifies oto-iltiŕ against oto-ke-iltiŕ or with AEN-I- BELES). Untermann also points out that in rare cases an element is- or o- is found prefixing the anthroponym (is-betartiker; o-tikiŕtekeŕ; O-ASAI).

In the elements that make up Iberian names it is common to find patterns of variation: thus eter/eten/ete with the same variations as iltur/iltun/iltu; kere/keres as lako/lakos; or alos/alor/alo as bikis/bikir/biki).

On other occasions, what is found are assimilations produced by the contact of consonants at the compound limit. Thus, in the Latin inscriptions it becomes clear that in this context n+b were pronounced /m/ (ADIMELS or SOSIMILVS are equivalent to *adin-bels or *sosin-bilus). Optionally, also a ŕ disappears before n or l (*biuŕ+lakos appears as biulakos; *biuŕ+nius as biunius; *sakaŕ+laku as sakalaku). Some of the names from the Ascoli Bronze are strikingly reminiscent of names known in Basque such as ENNEGES / ENNEKES (Segiensis) (CIL VI, 37045) related to Eneko or the Castilian Íñigo < *enneko.

Feminine names partly follow the masculine system as in ASTERDVMAR, SILLIBOR or VRCHATETEL, which makes it partly impossible to know if the name of an inscription is masculine or feminine. However, it seems that the elements -eton (as in BILESTON) and -aun- or -iaun- with suffix -in (as in GALDVRIAVNIN, VNIAVNIN or ankonaunin) could be feminine name markers. Untermann has proposed that a suffix -in marks a female name (analysing, eg aiun-in), but the validity of this proposal has lately been questioned.

Interpretations of specific texts

Simple texts

The most easily interpretable texts are the short texts on valuable ceramics or funerary monuments in which an anthroponym appears followed by one of the most common suffixes (ar, en and ḿi) and which are unanimously considered property marks:

• Aicitibaś-ar
• Ibeśor-en
• Etesike-
• Aloso
• Ustainaba
• Ilti procbikis-in seltar

In the last example, the seltar element, typical of sepulchral inscriptions, would be the object possessed: the "Iltirbikis tomb".

The bilingual architrave of Sagunto

This inscription contains two fragmented lines of text, the first in Latin and the second in Iberian:

The interpretation of the Latin text presents no difficulties:

This is the inscription on which Untermann bases himself to propose that eban and its variants (teban, ebanen, tebanen) are the equivalent of the Latin verb 'curavit' (& # 34; was commissioned & # 34;) typical indicative of the action of someone who has made or financed a monument, since he presupposes that it is a perfect bilingual in which both texts would be identical. The defenders of the hypothesis that eban and its variants are the filiation indicator consider that both texts are independent.

The stelae of Baetulo (Badalona)

These two stelae appeared side by side reused in a sewer in a Roman city:

Based on them, assuming that they correspond to the tombs of a father and his son and that the son's is later than the father's, Velaza (2001) indicates the possibility that the Iberian personal names initially did not indicate the filiation and that its use was the result of romanization. This interpretation presupposes that eban means "son," a hypothesis not shared by other researchers.

The Plaque of Ampurias (La Escala)

This inscription was found very fragmented in the filling of a silo in Ampurias. Your reading is:

And it has been interpreted by Velaza (2001) as:

So it would be an inscription with nomen, cognomen, filiation and origo, in the Roman style. This interpretation presupposes that eban means "son," a hypothesis not shared by other researchers.

The stamps of the workshop of bilake / FL(ACCVS)

These stamps appear simultaneously on two mortars, one from La Caridad (Caminreal) and the other from La Corona (Fuentes de Ebro) and are interpreted as the factory mark:

The interpretation of the Latin inscription, once the abbreviations have been resolved, is:

Despite the possible reinstatement of the abbreviation FL as FLAVVS, it is generally accepted that the bilake of the Iberian seal is the Iberianized form of FLACVS from the Latin seal. For some researchers (Untermann 1997; Rodríguez Ramos 2005) the parallelism between both seals would be total, so that aiunatin (with the suffix -en, interpreted as a genitive mark) should be the cognomen of Lucio Atilio, a romanized indigenous person, and abiner would be the equivalent of Latin servus "slave". However, for other researchers (Velaza 1996, Miguel Beltrán 2003) the content of each stamp would be independent.

The mosaics of La Caridad (Caminreal) and Andelos (Mendigorría)

· · likinete ekiar useketeku

There are a couple of inscriptions that have been written about a lot. It is a pair of mosaics from around 100 B.C. C. that indicate, as was customary in the ancient world, the brand of the same:

In these mosaics there are some clear words:

likine

corresponds to the Celtibic name Likinos

abulo

corresponds to the Celtibic name Abulu

bilbili

is the city of Bílbilis (Calatayud)

usekerte

is the city of Ossicerda

-

It's the agent suffix.

ekiar/ekien

are forms of the verb "doing"

a

with a sense like "city", "house"

There is a certain unanimity in that both inscriptions indicate that they are the work of Likinos and in the mention of the cities (which could indicate their origin or the headquarters of their workshop). Less clear is the interpretation of abulo-ŕaune. For Untermann it would be (Likinos) "in the company of Abulo", indicating that Abulo was a collaborator. For Rodríguez likine abuloŕaune would be a complete adaptation of a Celtiberian onomastic formula "Likinos Abulos launi" with a sense of the type "Likinos the slave of Abulo". However, his interpretation of the term launi in Celtiberian (frequent in the third bronze of Botorrita) is not the most accepted, since a translation "wife" is usually proposed to him.

Examples

Lead from La Punta d'Orleyl (La Vall d'Uixó)

This text, like most of those written in Northeastern Iberian Signary, does not show the distinction between voiceless and voiced (k/g, t/d).

iìe: bototaś: bitebakiśbane: baéen modelliki: antin modellituborane: a

atilebeiun: lauîiskeÃkate: ban qítibaituane: kaisan motherlibaituìituéa: neitailini
kutur: write biteoketetine: eidiatiae: kokor: tauebaiditiate: aikaйbinÃlikise:
iunstirlaku: bototaśeai: selkeaibartuneai: unibeikeai: anerivai: unibeikeai:
iunstirlaku: uskeike: bototiki: keietisiatense: uśtalarikaune: ban unesu[-]lu:

bitiÃokebetense: uskeane

Lead of Puig de Sant Andreu (Ullastret)

In some inscriptions written in northeastern Iberian signary, as in the case of this lead, there are indeed some indications of the distinction (in the "dual system") where te/de, ti/di, to/do, tu/du, ka/ga, ke/ge, ki/gi and ko/go.

ar: basiaebe: ebaìiKame: TuiKesiiera: borsTe: abaíGeborsTe: Terri[

Diõs: baiDesbi: neiTeGeu: boidibelio
Kyoto: bartaśKo: anbeiku: baiDesir: salDuKo: kulebobeku-Ge[3]
biGilDisTe: eìeśu: KoDibanen: eberGa: bośKalis

thea: baTibi: bioboneś: salDuGilerentku: Gi[

Lead from La Serreta (Alcoy)

On the other hand, in the inscriptions written in the Greco-Iberian alphabet, since they are written in an adaptation of the Greek alphabet, the distinction between voiceless and voiced is clear. As it is an alphabet and not a semisyllabary, it is possible to observe cases of stops in final position (without a vowel that follows them) that are hidden in texts in northeastern Iberian signary or southeastern Iberian signary.

iìike: orti: gaidiokan: danula: baśkbuiśtiner: bagaok: SSSXC: tuidilbailuiera:

leguśegik: baseokienunbaida: uidike: basbidibartin: i.e.: tebind:
belagaśikau: isbinai: asgandis: tagisgaidiok: binikebin: śalir: kidei: gaibigait

saka prociskearnai: