The Iguvine Tablets record the sacred practices and rites of the Atiedian brotherhood of the ancient city of Iguvium (modern Gubbio, Italy). They are among the most important religious documents, if not the most important, in all of Italic; they sit beside the Rig Veda and the Gathas in the pantheon of Indo-European religious texts.
The Iguvine Tablets were discovered in 1444 in the city of Gubbio in Umbria. The texts were incised on seven bronze plaques, five of which are opisthographs (I, II, V, VI, VII). Tablets I–IV and V obverse were written in a native Umbrian script. V reverse and VI and VII were incised in a Republican Latin script. The Umbrian rites in the Latin script (V reverse, VI and VII) are in large part redactions of the texts on Tablets I and II. Tablets III and IV are not redacted in the Latin script, and they are not opisthographs.
Although the Tablets have been the target of scientific scholarly investigation for over a century and a half, difficulties of textual analysis, interpretation and etymology remain. This latest book-length study is a microscopic examination of the ritual complex set forth on Tablets III and IV, rites in honour of the divinities Puemun- and Vesuna. The ritual performance described in Tablets III and IV is troublesome; the ritual actions and their significance are not particularly clear; and the interpretation of numerous passages is hampered by words that pose serious challenges to synchronic and diachronic analysis. A review of the interpretations published in the past half-century reflects the range of disagreement about particulars and about the function of the ritual as a whole.
W.'s book has a straightforward organisational schema: an introduction, five chapters and a conclusion. The introduction begins with methodological considerations. This is standard fare: discussion of the combinatory method, the etymological method and the method of parallel texts. But, to this linguistic triad, W. adds ritual comparison. The idea is that ritual practice in Umbrian may be better understood when compared in a judicious manner to similar practices in Italy or elsewhere in the Indo-European world. The final section of the introduction is a polemic against J. Wilkins' ‘interpretative model for the Iguvine Tables’ (p. 9). Wilkins's provocative papers on the Iguvine Tablets call into question the very core of historical linguistic methodology – the etymological method and the comparative method. W. provides a spirited defence against such attacks.
Chapters 1–5 lead us through the text of the ritual complex, each chapter covering major sub-sections of the text and each sub-section dealing in detail with key issues. Chapter 1 tackles the first ten lines of Tablet III; the topics are: the dating formula; the purpose of the preliminary purification; and the status of the uhtur and the meaning of the events he participates in. Chapter 2 (III 11–20) examines the ritual procession to the field and the building of the portable couch known as the kletra. Chapter 3 (III 21–30) deals with the arrival at the grove, the call to prayer and the beneficiary phrases for the sacrifices to be performed in the grove. Chapter 4 (Tablet III 30–IV 6) examines various problems connected with the offering of the victims. Chapter 5 (IV 6–27) covers the supplementary offering; considerable space is devoted to in-depth analyses of the words erus and supa. The conclusion is W.'s translation of the text of the two Tablets followed by summary comments. This is accompanied by G. Devoto's translation of the same, ostensibly for comparison, though the latter's translation serves in large part as a measure of how much progress W. has made in making sense of these Tablets.
What is the overall function of the ritual complex of Tablets III and IV? Earlier commentators approach this question with considerable trepidation, offering no more than is obvious: the rites are public and in honour of Puemun- and Vesuna. W., after surveying the salient characteristics of the rites, argues convincingly that they are part of a New Year's observance.
This book is challenging; 400 pages of phrase-by-phrase analysis, most of which focusses on words critical for the interpretation of the text, make awfully tough going. But it is hard to see how it could be otherwise. Many of the interpretations offered by W. hinge on or are buttressed by the analysis of Umbrian words whose morphological structure and etymology are controversial.
Consider W.'s treatment of Umbrian supa/sopa and related, whose meaning is important for an understanding of the supplementary offerings described in Tablet IV. A number of interpretations, and etymological proposals, are in play. W. begins with a survey of the word in its various syntactic contexts. It appears eleven times in the Tablets, but in syntactic frames that suggest a unified interpretation. Morphological analysis points to feminine forms (supaf acc. pl.) and neuter forms (supa acc. pl.). W. suggests feminine and neuter substantives of an original thematic adjective formation. Phonologically, the stems must have a short syllable-initial vowel. The spelling sopa in the Latin script make this clear. In terms of meaning, supa must refer to a part of the sacrificial animal, cf. katles supa ‘the supa of the puppy’ (IIa 22). W. rejects etymological connections with Hittite suppa ‘taboo meat’ even though there is a certain appeal to a Hittite-Umbrian etymon when it comes to religious terminology. He makes a strong case for a vṛddhi derivation from *sup- ‘above’, thus *sewp-o-. The Umbrian forms with short syllable-initial vowel and double consonant (/soppa-, soppo-/) can be gotten by regular sound change from *sōpo-/*sōpā- (Umbrian regularly takes *ew to ō) via the littera-rule. The semantic developments from the meaning ‘on top’ → ‘supine’ → ‘the under-part(s) (of an animal)’ are arduous but paralleled in Greek in the same adverbial root, cf. ὕπτια ‘belly’, neuter plural of ὕπτιος ‘supine’. W. suggests ‘intestines’ as a likely meaning. In the Tablets the supa/sopa were not eaten and not directly sacrificed. The result is an interpretation that fits well in all contexts, and an etymology that finds phonological and morphological support within Italic.
The volume has many strong points, but what stands out is W.'s ability to bring a wide range of linguistic and ritual data to bear on his analyses, both textual and etymological, and to do so in a clear and coherent manner. His analyses are always carefully crafted and supported by as much linguistic evidence as can be mustered; they reveal a comprehensive command of Italic and Indo-European languages; and they demonstrate a wide-ranging knowledge of the religious texts of ancient Italy, Greece and beyond.
This book is a must read for anyone interested in Italic religious studies, regardless of home discipline. Indo-Europeanists will find plenty to like too; dense etymological discussions fill pages of text. Perhaps, though, the book has a more important role to play. The etymological analyses offered by W. stand as a more impassioned defence of the methods of historical linguistics than the one offered in the introductory section of the book.
