Epitaph
created: Transcription from previous editors (CDL).
source date: Fourth to third centuries BC
language: ar; en; fr; de; grc; grc-Latn; el; he
availability: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Deed Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. All citation, reuse or distribution of this work must contain a link back to DOI: https://doi.org/10.60760/unibo/igcyrgvcyr2 and the filename (IGCyr000000 or GVCyr000), as well as the year of consultation. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

[...], n. 43, fig. 31, whence [...] 5890; [...] 231,7; [...], 274 (Morelli), as unpublished; [...], p. 225, footnote 3; [...], pp. 161-162; [...] 010200. Cf. [...], p. 12 (area of discovery), whence [...], 63.1717; [...], catalogue B.3.

[...]ταχα [...]κλεῦς

[...]ταχα [...]κλεῦς[^a1]

[^a1: [...]ταχα [...]κλεῦς | Ταχακλεῦς]

[...]takha fille de [...]kles.

[...]tacha daughter of [...]kles.

[...]tacha figlia di [...]kles.

The tomb may be identified from Uhlenbrock's and Santucci's researches in Norton's archive.

Robinson's reading gave way to a ghost-name *Ταχακλῆς, admitted by Schwyzer ([...] 231,7), [...], and also [...], p. 419, who however hold it for uncertain and guessed that there were two names.

Morelli, not aware of Robinson's publication, was right in his description.

Masson and Marengo linked both publications and the latter confirmed the reading.

For a name ending in -ταχα, the most plausible restoration could be a feminine counterpart to the Cretan name Βρόταχος, for which see [...], p. 452 (paper of 1984).