THE STELE OF NORA

The highest linguistic memory of Phoenician antiquity in Sardinia is the famous Stele of Nora, the most ancient written document of the West. Since the nineteenth century there hasn’t been a pedigreed scholar who hasn’t attempted to pit himself against its translation. And every attempt has left a radically different version from the preceding one. In those works, the condition of the Stele played an important part, as time (3000 years) competes with the erosion of the stone. As a matter of fact, only half of the characters allow one to clearly understand the traces left by the stone-cutter, whereas the others can be perceived only after careful scrutiny of the edge tearing and of age-old grinding. Found in the tophet, today the text is above all legible for the varnish that highlights every character, to which we must stick to as the starting point of all translations. And nevertheless the scholar’s team that marked the letters equally blundered.

For instance, the first letter of the second line was marked as a W (read It. u) whereas the Phoenician track shows a N (here and after I express myself with the Latin alphabet, and remember that the list of graphemes is indicated according to the Phoenician way, from right to left).

To complicate the facts, the traspositors of single Phoenician grapheme interfere: in certain books, the graphemes are distorted in front of those stone-made. For instance, in the real sixth line there are 6 letters (not 7).

As far as the translators from Phoenician signs to Latin signs, I may understand their mistake of proposing an R instead of a D (line 7, letter 6); nevertheless I notice that they could have helped themselves with a Phoenician Dictionary, to better understand the engraver’s intentions and the lessical correctness of the words.

Besides, the reading drawn out from the character M written at lines 4 and 8 is singular. At line 4 the engraver had initially written an N, but then, noting in progress the mistake, he corrected to an M, being possible to amend it with little damage. At line 8 the engraver wrote an M (hyper-correcting onself but getting it wrong since, properly in that point, an N was needed, which at that moment wasn’t possible to amend for the complicated shape of the Phoenician M). The engraver wasn’t, evidently, a great scholar. Maybe he wasn’t Phoenician, either.

Nevertheless the whole Phoenician text isn’t as difficult to understand as some people would like us to think; with the assistance of a Phoenician Dictionary the text can be surely translated without dribblings.

The texts, according to Semerano, should recite as follows: Et rš š ngr š Ea b Šrdn šlm et šm ṣbt mlk t nb nš bn ngr lpn j. But Semerano evidently hasn’t read the original Stele, otherwise he wouldn’t have made a crop of mistakes and got a wrong translation, that for him is as follows (OCE 836): Et (nearby is) rš (the sacellum) š (that) ngr (the ambassador) š (of) Ea (Ea) b (in) šrdn (Sardinia) šlm (have built): et (this) šm (memory) ṣbt (expresses the vow) mlk (that the king) t (in writing) nb (exibits): nš (do raise) bn (the building) ngr (the ambassador) lpn (in front of) j (the island).

Other scholars have left their mark on the venerable text, failing equally. It really seems the translation is undertaken for duty, not for passion. Other scholars, in the presumptuosness of proposing an accurate dating of the text (and its subtended alphabet), have even forgotten to insert some letters in the alphabet present in the Stele.

The penultimate resounding incorrectness was the Moore-Cross interpretation (1984), proposed by SFI 89: btršš (... in Tarshish) wgrš h’ (and he led them outside) bšrdn š (among Sardoes) lm h’ šl (he now is in peace) m sb’ m- (and his army is in peace) -lktn bn (Milkaton son of) šbn ngd (Subna, general) lpmy (of king Pumay).

I leave out other examples of incredible carelessness, but I can’t forgive the searchers’ superficiality, who have even forgotten the dedicatory epigraphs technique learned at University. The true translation isn’t difficult by means of the Phoenician Dictionary. This is it:

BT RŠ Š NGR Š H’ BŠRDN ŠLM H’ ŠLM ṢB’ MLKTNBN Š BN NGR LPNY

The translation is: [This is] the main temple of Nora that he [the dedicator] in Sardinia has visited with a sign of peace. Who hopes for peace is Saba, Milkaton’s son, who built Nora opposite the island [of Capo Pula].

The interlinear translation is the following:

Bt (the temple) rš (main) š (of) ngr (Nora) š (that) h’ (he) bšrdn (in Sardinia) šlm (has visited with a sign of peace). H’ (who) šlm (hope for peace) ṣb’ (is Saba) mlktnbn (Milkaton’s son) š (who) bn (built) ngr (Nora) lpny (opposite the island).