224 NOTES ON LATIN INSCRIPTIONS 



his colleague in 253, but I think that this tablet, bearing, as it does, 

 the name of an imperial legate of the Augusti, was not erected before 

 the death of the Galli, and the recognition by the senate. But the 

 Reviewer gives a modern authority in support of his view, the Baron 

 Marchant. On the other side, I may be permitted to refer to Fynes 

 Clinton, whose opinion on such subjects is justly held in the highest 

 estimation. That learned investigator, in his Fasti Romani, A.D. 254, 

 remarks : 



" Gallienus is associated in the empire." " The son of Valerian [i.e. 6allie> 

 nns] was acknowledged by the senate in June, A.D. 254." 



In A.D. 260, he gives the following notes : 



" Saloninus slain." " Saloninus was still living, August 29, A.D. 259, and is 

 mentioned in Cod. Justin, at May 15, A.D. 260; see col. 3. Hia death maj 

 therefore be placed about June, A.D. 260." 



The notices in the Justinian Code are the same which I have al- 

 ready mentioned. Clinton adds the remark : <* The Csesar Valerian 

 is named in only three out of seventeen laws [of the year 260]. If 

 he is rightly inserted, he was still living in May, 260." Here, it 

 must be admitted, is the expression of a doubt as to the correctness 

 of the insertion of the name in this year, but the author's estimation 

 of the value of this doubt is manifest from his disregarding it, and 

 placing the death of Saloninus, and giving the authorities, in 260. 



In the 'Chronological Tables of Roman History,' subjoined to 

 Dr. Smith's Bictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mytho' 

 logy, we have the following notices on the subject : — 



'• 254. Valerianus emperor. His son Gallienus is made Augustus. 

 " 260. Saloninus, the son of Valerian, put to death by Postumus." 



The statement that "Gallienus was made Augustus" is correct, 

 for he was in this year not only Ccesar hut Augustus ,: but "Vale- 

 rian," in the words " son of Valerian," is a mistake for *' Gallienus.'' 



63. In the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries, Nev^rcastle-upon- 

 Tyne, there is a " fragment of a rudely carved monumental stone," 

 from Risingham, which bears an inscription of more than ordinary 

 interest, if my view of it be correct. It is figured in the Archaologia 

 ^liana, new series, i. p. 257 ; and " the letters which appeared [to 

 Dr. Bruce] most probable when the stone was placed under a strong 

 light, are : 



