[ 698 ] 
fides, the name of the people is not mentioned in one 
of thofe in Camden ; which might then have been 
defaced, or omited by the tranfcriber. And as to 
the other objection of Horfley, from the title of im- 
perator being given to Vefpafian , Titus, and Domi- 
tian , at the fame time, in thofe two infcriptions ; 
that the peices of lead, which contain them, mud 
have been call: at fome years didance from each other, 
has been jfhewn already (31). 
As to Camden’s defcription of them, as monu - 
mentum erecium ob vifforiam in Cangos, if from their 
number he fuppofed them to have been fet together 
in the form of a trophy ; how they could well have 
been placed in fuch a fituation, I do not apprehend ; 
nor have I ever met with any indance of a fimilar 
nature. He mentions indeed another infcription upon 
lead, found near Ochie hole in Somerfetfhire, of 
which he gives the following account : Non procid 
ab hoc , regnant e Henrico v 111, aratro eruta Juit cb- 
longa plwnbi lamina in trophaeum olim erect a, et fic 
infcripta : 
TI. CLAVDIVS CAESAR AVG. P. M. 
TRIE. P. VII 1 I. IMP. XVI. DE BRITAN (32). 
The fize of the lead is not here given ; but as lie 
calls it lamina , a plate, that might indeed be fxed 
up fomewhere, as a fort of trophy, or monument. 
Which feems confirmed by a coin of that emperor, 
(3 1 ) Pag. 695. 
(32) Britann. pag. 168. edit. 1607. A more particular account 
of this may be feen in Leland’s /IJJcrtio Arturii , p. 45. where the 
infcription is read fomewhat differently. 
with 
