30 NOTES ON LATIN INSCRIPTIONS 



notice n. (1) BRITANNIC* *4VG II, and n. (9) CAESAR***** 

 VADON, which are imperfect, also n. (4) NERONIS AVG'EX KIAN 

 nTT cos BRIT, which is unique. These doubtful portions are (a) 

 •LVT— in 



(3) TI • CL • TR • LVT • BR • EX • ARG 



(iO) IMP • CAES • HADRIANl • AVG • MET • LVT 



(14) C • IVL • PROTI • BRIT • LVT • EX • ARG • ; 



(a) MET • LVT -—in n. 10 ; (a) METAL • LVTVD -—in n. 



(13) L • ARVCONI • VERECVNDI ■ METAL • LVTVD • ; 



(6) EX- ARG ---in nn. (1) and (14) ; and (c) TR • and BR •— iir 



D.(3). 



(a) LVT •, MET • LVT •, METAL • LVTVD -—As these readings 

 seem to be unquestionably correct, I shall offer no criticism on the 

 interpretations, which have been given, of erroneous readings, such as 

 POT • for LVT • in n. (3), MEM • L • VI for MET • LVT in n. (10), 

 and LVND for LVTVD in n, (13), but shall limit my remarks to the 

 explanations, which have been proposed, of the readings as given 

 above. Mr. Crane, Archceologia, xiii. 405, regards LVT . in n. (3) 

 as standing for LVTVM, and reads the whole inscription thus t 

 " rj[ber.ii] C/[audii] !;r[ibutum] lut\mn\ £?-[itannico] ex flr_^[ento] — 

 the tribute of Tiberius Claudius paid out of British money." 



Lysons, History of Derbyshire, p. ccvi., traces LVT • and 

 LVTVD- to LVTVDx\RVM, the Roman Station mentioned by 

 Bavennas as next to Derveniio, and believed to be represented by the- 

 modern Chesterfield. 



Mr. Bateman, Vestiges of the Antiquities of Derbyshire, p. 135,. 



observes : — 



"These inscriptions, [nn. (3), (10), and (13)] have given rise to various con- 

 jectures, and accordingly to a great display of erudition ; but if we allow the 

 LVT • and the LVTVD ■ to be the contractions of LVTVDARVM, the name of 

 a Roman station next in order, according to Ravennas, to Derventio, or Little 

 Chester, and which is supposed to be Chesterfield, much of the difficulty will 

 vanish. The first [n. (10)] will then be found to bear the name of the Emperor 



I am aware, for the infereuce fiom the accent, nor for the use of P or Tondo as denoting the 

 semis or 7ialf-Hb7-a. The acrur.acy of the readines seems to me very doublfvi!. Can it be 

 that the letters given as LVICVC, are really LVT • CANG ? 



• Di.Thurnam, Historical Ethnology of Britain, xi- 100, Cran. 5rit, i>ec. 3, mentions 

 " the inscription LVTVM EX ARGENT on various British pigs of lead fif the date of 

 Claudius and his successors." There is no authority, so far as I am awar^', for this state- 

 ment; pigs have been found bearing LVT , LVT • EX • ARG ", and EX" ARGENT', but. 

 there is no '.-xamplo either of LVTVM EX ARGENT", or of LVTVM alone. 



