ALEXANDRIA. 359 
traveller to determine what the true readinsf chap. 
^ VI]. 
really is. The probability is certainly strong for v.i. .y »> 
AIOKAHTIANON, but this is by no means 
certain; and in favour of A80NAAPIAN0N, it 
maybe urged, that Sicard, as cited by Brotier\ 
who examined the Inscription long ago, declared 
the fourth letter to be N, instead of K. In order 
to account for the introduction of Diocletian^ 
name, the supposed gratitude of the people of 
Alexandria to Diocletian, for an allowance of com, 
has been mentioned^; but there is no authority 
in History, either for the tribute itself, or for the 
feelings thereby believed to have been comme- 
morated. Hadrian, on the contrary, for the 
services he rendered to their city, was pre- 
eminently entitled to their gratitude. This 
is evident, from his own observations, when 
(4) Sicard believed the name to be that oi Dionyshis PloIeiit(nis, 
brother of Cleopatra, by whose order Pompey was assassinated. " Scra- 
peum fuit in vico, cui iiomen Necropolis, prope Coluninam Pompeii, ut 
vulgo loquuntur; quam verius columnam Dionysii Ptolemai dicerent, 
ut ex semesis inseriptiones literis observavit P. Sicard egregius iEgyp- 
tiacaruni antiquitatum indagator." (Vid. Brotier. Annot. in Tacit. Hist, 
lib. iv. cap. 84.) The circumstance of Sicard's maintaining' that the 
name at the beginning of the third line of the Inscription was Dionysil's, 
&c. proves, at least, that he read AION, and not AIOK. 
C")) "The occasion may perhaps he found in that part uf the hi/itory 
of this Emperor, where, after having severeh/ chastised the inhabitants 
(if .Hexandria who had rebelled against the government, he established 
a public allowance of corn for the city at two millions of niedimni. See 
the Memoir rend to the Society of .Intiqitaries , Feb. 3, 1803, as before cited. 
