Talk:Tripolitania Punic inscriptions

Phoenicia Mid‑importance

	Phoenicia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Phoenicia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.PhoeniciaWikipedia:WikiProject PhoeniciaTemplate:WikiProject PhoeniciaPhoenicia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Neo-Punic

Onceinawhile, thank you for the beautiful and important article! I have always like the monumental cursive Neo-Punic inscriptions, and these are some of the finest examples of them.

I think it should be mentioned in the title that these inscriptions are Neo-Punic and not just Punic. This is also the way they are mentioned in most, if not all, of the sources. What do you think? I don't want to put a template without hearing you opinion first. פעמי-עליון (talk) 14:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@פעמי-עליון: thank you for the compliments - I am glad you like it. These are also perhaps the first discovered of the neopunic inscriptions. I have been trying to find out when the name "neopunic" was first used - so far I have found the German "neupunischen" commenting on Scripturae Linguaeque Phoeniciae in 1837. It may well have been that Gesenius first used a version of the word in Latin, but I haven't found it yet.

Re this article, Levi Della Vida's 1927 work was entitled: "Le iscrizioni neopuniche della Tripolitania", whereas Amadasi Guzzo's 1987 follow up work was entitled "Iscrizione Puniche della Tripolitania".

I assume this means that a mix of inscriptions has been found at the site. Note that the introduction to the Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften states that the division between “Punic” and “Neo Punic” is subjective.

I think we need an article on Neopunic, which would help make all this crystal clear. Onceinawhile (talk) 00:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's good I consulted you – based on the possibility that Punic inscriptions were discovered in Tripolitania as well (although based on the letters shape of the inscriptions in the article, as well as the spelling in those I managed to read properly, all of the inscriptions in the article are definitely Neo Punic) and the subjectivity of the definition of "Neo Punic", I am convinced the current title shouldn't be changed.

Maybe I will write an article about the Neo Punic dialect in the future, unless somebody will write it before me :) פעמי-עליון (talk) 13:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]