NOTES ON LATIN INSCRIPTIONS FOUND IN BRITAIN. 231 
The points obviously open to objection, in these readings and expan- 
sions, are Gneium Lucilianum, in n. xi., and Cohortis prime legionis 
Gordiane in both. Instead of “ Gneitum,” we should read Hgnatium, as 
proposed by Mr. Ward, and established by an inscription on an altar 
found at High Rochester (Bremenium), (Bruce, Roman Wall, p. 457), 
in which the name of Luezlianus is given as EGNAT. In the rendering 
cohortis prime legionis Gordiane, the absence of the number of the 
legion at once suggests doubt, and this is strengthened by the con- 
sideration that there is no evidence that any legion, known to have 
been in Britain, bore the title Gordiana. 
As to Mr. Gale’s conjecture, that the “legion here called Gordiana 
was the /egio sexta victriz,” there is no other ground for it than that 
‘the stated quarters [of that legion] were at York. whilst the other 
legions had theirs at a much greater distance.” Mr. Smith (Collect. 
Antiq. iv. p. 142) with equally little reason, refers the inscriptions to 
‘the twentieth legion, apparently the legio Gordiana.” 
An examination of the words preceding legionis Gordiane, scil. 
prefectus cohortis, suggests fresh doubt, for there is no authority 
for a prefect of a legionary cohort, whilst the term is the usual desig- 
nation of the commander of an auxiliary cohort. Moreover, the 
order of the words—cohortis legionis, and not legionis cohortis—is 
so unusual, if not unprecedented, as in itself to cause dissatisfaction. 
Influenced, probably, by these considerations, Henzen, n. 6626, rejects 
the expansion, legionis Gordiane, although accepted by Orelli, 
n. 975, and suggests Ligurum, or Ligurum Gordiane ; but neither of 
these readings appears to me probable. 
I interpret COH +I: L* GOR* as cohortis prime Lingonum* Gor- 
diane. We know that there were three, probably four, cohorts of the 
Lingones in Britain. Trajan’s}+ tadule@ inform us that the fourtht was 
* I do not recollect having seen a similar use of the first letter of the ethnic name of a 
cohort; but in this case no confusion could arise, for, so far aS we have evidence, there was 
no other corps, that served in Britain, whose initial letter was L. 
t+ Mr. Wright (Celé, Roman, and Saxon, pp. 362, 363), through some strange inadvertence» 
remarks on these tabule@—“ They are all decrees of the Emperor Trajan ;” and, again speake 
ing of the inscription found at Malpas,—‘ The date of this record is fixed by its internal 
evidence to the 20th day of January, A.D. 103. The other similar monuments found in 
Britain are all of the same year.” 
¢ It appears that there is a difference in the number of the cohort between the outer and 
inner inscriptions of this diploma. The latter, it is stated, gives IIII and the former III> 
It is not easy to decide which is the correct number. Gazzera, Henzen, and Béckiag 
prefer IIT. 
