†urmλo

Schürr 2001c:62–64 read, segmented and reconstructed the inscription C.Ka 9 as […]ois [:?] urmλo and connected urmλo (as a presumable personal name in nom. sg.) with u/wrm (see s.v.) as its regular derivative (cf. psn-λo). His analysis was not mentioned in Marek 2006a:126–128 (only as a bibliographical entry) and Adiego 2007a:440. The inscription C.Ka 9 is read slightly more cautiously as […]ois^?ur^?mλo by Adiego 2007a:157, 454, who also points out (Adiego 2007a:158) that “some doubts remain, however, about the sign read as F r by Schürr”. In fact, a comparison with the photograph of the publishers (Frei & Marek 2000a:120) confirms that this sign is not an ‹r› and its closest parallels are ‹a›, ‹b›, and ‹d›, as pointed out already by the publishers (Frei & Marek 2000a:123f., but only the latter two readings in Marek 2006a:127, which are indeed more probable). Schürr 2001c:62 refers to an allegedly identical ‹r› sign in the inscription C.Ia 3, but this does not exist. All in all, we are dealing with a false reading.

[Zs.S.]