[ 8o] 
ed by (4) Ptolemy, but in his days feems to have 
been a place of no confiderable note. It, however, 
probably made a greater figure, when inhabited 
either by the Carthaginians, or the Phoenicians, and the 
Romans j for that it was occupied by two at leaf! of 
thofe nations, when the medal before me firfl ap- 
peared, the legends on the reverfe, though fomewhat 
imperfedt, render fufficiently clear. That the Car- 
thaginians were pofiefied of this city in ancient times, 
is coiifonant to the faith of hi dory ; fince they were 
niafters of all that part of Africa extending from the 
pillars of Hercules, or (freights of Gibraltar, to the 
greater Syrtis, for a confiderable period of time, as we, 
learn from (5) Polybius. And that the Phoenicians 
were mafters of it in early times, is equally probable. 
For that they occupied the fea-coa(f of IVlauritania, 
from at lead the generation immediately preceding 
Homer to the time it fell into the hands of the 
Romans, we are informed by Strabo (6). It cannot 
therefore be eafily determined, as already obferved, 
whether the piece in quelfion was ft ruck by the 
Phoenicians or the Carthaginians. It muft, however, 
be attributed to die town of Vabar, when inhabited 
by either the Carthaginians or the Phoenicians, not 
improbably the latter, and the Romans ; the two 
legends on the reverfe, as well as the perfedf agree- 
ment between them, rendering this inconteftably clear. 
That the piece I am confidering was either of a 
Punic or an Africo-Phoenician origin, may be deemed 
probable from hence, that it exhibits a Latin legend 
(4) Ptol. Geogu Lib. IV. c. ii. 
(5) Polyb. Megalopolit. HiJioriar.JJih. iii, p. 266, 267. Am- 
ftelodami, 1670* 
(6) Strab.G<’e^r.Lib,iii.p.i5p, i5i.Lutetiffi Parifiorum, 
on 
