L 4^ 4* 1 
I therefore cancelled that part of my fmall work 
in which the interpretation of the infcriptiorr, pre- 
ferved by one of theie Phoenician medals, was con- 
tained. The cancelled partis, however, drill in my 
hands. 
Of the Sicilian medals in M. l’Abbe’s plate four are 
to be attributed to one city, .and two to two others. 
Of the latter M. I’Abbe aliigns one to Imachara, and • 
the other to Carthage j with what truth, I ihali not 
take upon tne at prelent to decide. But that a per- 
lon fo juftly celebrated for his knowledge of antrent- 
medals, particularly Punic and Phoenician medals, as 
is M. l’Abbe, diould fird aferibe the former to I know 
not what Cadra Caecilia, or Cadra Julia, and after- 
wards to Panormus, now Palermo, is to me, I mud 
confefs, real matter of furprize. For the Punic name 
on thefe coins is evidently r"WTJ, mahhanoth, 
mehnoth, or, as Hheth is fometimes diveded of 
even the force of an afpirate (17), menoth; which 
apparently anfwers to the Greek MHNAI, and the 
Latin men^e, the name of a city in Sicily, called 
Meneo by Cluverius ( 1 8 ), feveral of whofe medals 
adorn the cabinets of the curious at this day. Nay, one 
of the Punic coins of Menae publidied by M. l’Abbe, 
though without any explication of the Punic infcrip- 
tion, an dconfequently without fufficient proof of the 
point in view, has been expredy attributed to Men®, or 
Meneo, by Goltzius (19). An accurate defcription 
of a medal of Menae, together with a complete in- 
terpretation of the Punic infcription it exhibits, may 
(17) Bochart. Phal. Lib, I. c. i. 
(18) Phil. Cluver. Sicil. Antiq. Lib. II. c. ix. p. 339. 
(19) Hubertus Goltzius, in Num. Sicil. Tab.XIL num. 5,6. 
be 
