222 NOTES ON LATTN INSCRIPTIONS FOUND IN BRITAIN. 



Stand for COHORS SECVNDA TVNGEORVM, and indicate that 

 the altar was erected by the cohort V-S'L"M' or the verb 

 posuity dedicavit, or some similar term being omitted, as is of 

 frequent occurrence. MIL EQ are for Milliaria Equitata, the 

 well known designations of a cohort in which there were a thousand 

 men, of whom a portion were cavalry. From Hyginus de Cas- 

 trametatione (vide Grsev. Antiq. X. 1093) we learn, that in such a 

 cohort there were 760 infantry and 240 cavalry soldiers. COHORS 

 SECVNDA TVNGRORVM was a cohort of this description, as ap- 

 pears from other inscriptions e. gr. the following given by Dr. Bruce 

 (Roman Wall, p. 264.)— 



lOM 



COH II- TVNGR • 



* m EQ-CLCVI 



PRAEESTALB 



SEVERVS PR 



AEF- TVNG- IN 



STA- VIC- SEVRO 



PRINCIPI. 

 So far there is no doubt as to the true interpretation of the inscrip- 

 tion, but the letters C'L- present no ordinary difficulty. In Camden's 

 Britannia, ed. Gough, III, p. 457, we find reference to a discussion by 

 Professor Ward of the meaning of these letters, as they were applied to 

 the same cohort on another altar found at Castlesteeds. Prof. Ward was 

 of opinion that they were numerals, standing for 150, and supports this 

 opinion by arguments, from which it is plain that he was not aware of the 

 difference between auxiliary and legionary cohorts. Mr. Hodgson, 

 (vide Bruce' s Roman Wall, p. 264,) "after a careful and learned ex- 

 amination of [the inscription already cited] and kindred inscriptions" 

 regards the letters C-L- as used for Civium Latinorum. Henzen 

 (Orell. Inscrip.nn.6780 and 6781) boldly removes the difficulty by sub- 

 stituting R as a correction for L — i.e. he reads, C-R- the well-known 

 representatives of Civium Rotnanorum. This might be admitted as a 

 satisfactory solution, if the letters C. L. had been found on but one 

 stone, but as there are at least four altars on which these letters appear 

 in the same connexion, Henzen' s assumption of a mistake is highly 

 improbable. Mr. Hodgson's interpretation is certainly preferable to 

 either of the others. It is liable, however, to the objection that, so 

 far as I am aware, there is no certain example of this use of the letters 

 C. L. in any other inscription. 



• .This represents the ordinary symbol for 1000. 



