from The Century Dictionary.
- noun In Roman antiquity, a post or pillar, or even a large stake, of wood or stone, used for forming a palisade (for which purpose tree-trunks stripped of their branches were commonly used), or as a mark or monument; specifically, such a monument marking a grave or a sacred place.
- noun In Rom. milit. hist., a palisade for military purposes.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English.
- noun A small, low pillar, square or round, commonly having an inscription, used by the ancients for various purposes, as for indicating the distances of places, for a landmark, for sepulchral inscriptions, etc.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.
- noun A small, low
pillar, square or round, commonly having an inscription, used by the ancientsfor various purposes, as for indicating the distances of places, for a landmark, for sepulchralinscriptions, etc.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
Something like "The cippus which is before you was made for ..." would be understandable but why not just "This cippus ..."
We must match this pronoun with the grammatical subject of the sentence, which happens to be tezan 'cippus'.
A small commentbox coalition developed recently against my Etruscan translation concerning the Cippus Perusinus such that ipa in ipa ama hen agrees in case with its antecedent, tezan 'cippus'.
Etruscan's default word order is SOV and caru tezan [ama] "a cippus [was] created" is the core clause that conforms to this word order.
"The cippus was made for the sacrifice which is forthcoming" makes the most sense to me.
But Etruscanists are also generally aware that caru is a transitive participle meaning 'made'; tezan means 'cippus' see Paleoglot: The Etruscan word 'tezan'; tesnś is a declined form of tesiam ~ tesian 'sacrifice'; teiś is the directive form of ta 'that, the'; and Raśneś is likewise the directive form of Raśna 'Etruria'.
In the Cippus Perusinus, ipa is certainly in the nominative case matching corresponding nominatives ita 'that' and ica 'this' but the question is whether this pronoun's declined according to its role in the relative clause or its antecedent, tezan, which I give the value of 'cippus':
'In (a) slela (the) cippus (was) made for (the) fuśil of the sacrifice to the Etruria which is forth.'
"This cippus" is translated as ca tezan but this isn't what was written on this artifact obviously.
It seems to me that if you have a word consistently written on a cippus and no other object, it's probably not a stretch of the imagination to consider that tezan is referring to a cippus.