Chapter IV: Latin Inscriptions (1)

I. Latin or Roman Inscriptions (by which general name are designated, in classical archaeology, all non-literary remains of the Latin language, with the exception of coins, letters and journals) fall into two distinct classes, viz. (1) those which were written upon other objects of various kinds, to denote their peculiar purpose, and in this way have been preserved along with them; and (2) those which themselves are the objects, written, to be durable, as a rule, on metal or stone. The first class is that of _inscriptions_ in the stricter sense of the word (styled by the Romans _tituli_, by the Germans _Aufschriften_); the second is that of instruments or charters, public and private (styled by the Romans first _leges_, afterwards _instrumenta_ or _tabulae_, and by the Germans _Urkunden_).

No ancient Latin authors have professedly collected and explained or handed down to us Roman inscriptions. Some of the orators and historians, such as Cicero, Livy, Pliny the elder, and Suetonius among the Latins, and Polybius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Josephus among the Greeks, occasionally mention inscriptions of high historical interest. A few grammarians, as, for example, Varro, Verrius Flaccus and Valerius Probus of Berytus, quote ancient words or _formulae_ from them, or explain the abbreviations used in them. Juridical instruments, laws, constitutions of emperors, _senatus consulta_ and the like appear in the various collections of Roman jurisprudence.

Inscriptions (in the wider sense, as we shall henceforth call them without regard to the distinction which has been drawn) have been found in nearly every centre of ancient Roman life, but, like many other remains of antiquity, only seldom in their original sites. The great mass of them has to be sought for in the large European museums of ancient art, and in the smaller local collections of ancient remains which occur nearly everywhere in the European provinces of the former Roman empire as well as in the north of Africa, and also here and there in Asia Minor.

Only those copies of inscriptions are to be received with full confidence which are furnished by experienced and well-equipped scholars, or which have been made with the help of mechanical methods (casts, photographs, moist and dry rubbings), not always applicable with equal success, but depending on the position and the state of preservation of the monuments.[36] From the first revival of classical learning in the Carolingian age attention was paid anew, by pilgrims to Rome and other places worth visiting, to epigraphic monuments also. In the time of the Renaissance, from the end of the 14th century downwards, some of the leading Italian scholars, like Poggio and Signorili, and the antiquarian traveller Cyriacus of Ancona, collected inscriptions, Greek and Latin.[37] In the 15th century large collections of the inscriptions of all countries, or of limited districts, were made by Giovanni Marcanova, Fra Felice Feliciano, Fra Michele Ferrarino, Fra Giocondo the architect of Verona, Marino Sanudo the Venetian polyhistor, and others. At the end of the 15th and the beginning of the 16th, the first printed collections can be recorded (Spreti's for Ravenna, 1489; Peutinger's for Augsburg, 1508; Huttich's for Mainz, 1520; Francesco degli Albertini's for Rome, printed in 1521 by Jacopo Mazochi), while during the same century a long list of epigraphic travellers, like Pighius, Rambertus and Accursius, or antiquarian collectors, like Sigonius, Panvinius, Antonius Augustinus with his collaborators Ursinus and Metellus, and many others, were busy in augmenting the stock of epigraphic monuments. The series of printed epigraphic _Corpora_ begins with that of Apianus (Ingolstadt, 1534), the only one arranged in geographical order, and is continued in those of Smetius (1558, but edited only after the author's death by Justus Lipsius, 1588), Gruter (with Joseph Scaliger's _Indices_, 1603, and re-edited by Graevius, 1707), Gudius (about 1660, edited by Hessel, 1731), Reinesius (1682), Fabretti (1699), Gori (1726), Doni (1731), Muratori (1739), Maffei (1749), Donati (1765-1775). These collections, manuscript and printed, will never altogether lose their value, as great numbers of inscriptions known to the ancient collectors have since been lost or destroyed. But, inasmuch as even towards the beginning of the 15th century, as well as afterwards, especially from the 16th down to a very recent period, all sorts of inaccuracies, interpolations and even downright falsifications, found their way into the _Corpora_, these can be employed only with the greatest caution. Modern critical research in the field of epigraphy began with the detection of those forgeries (especially of the very extensive and skilful ones of Pirro Ligorio, the architect to the house of Este) by Maffei, Olivieri and Marini. The last-named scholar opens a new era of truly critical and scientific handling of Roman inscriptions (especially in his standard work on the _Atti dei fratelli arvali_, Rome, 1795); his disciple and successor, Count Bartolomeo Borghesi (who died at San Marino in 1860), may be rightly called the founder of the modern science of Roman epigraphy.[38] Orelli's handy collection of Roman inscriptions (2 vols., Zurich, 1828) is a first attempt to make accessible to a larger scientific public the results of the researches of Marini and his successors; but it was not completed, (and thoroughly corrected) until nearly thirty years later, by Henzen (Orelli, iii., with the indispensable _Indices_, Zurich, 1856), who, with Mommsen and De Rossi, carried out the plan of a universal _Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum_, previously projected by Maffei (1732), by Kellermann and Sarti (1832), with Borghesi's help, and by Letronne and Egger (1843). After the appearance of Mommsen's _Inscriptiones regni Neapolitani Latinae_ (Leipzig, 1852) and his _Inscriptiones confoederationis Helveticae Latinae_ (vol. x. of the publications of the Zurich Antiquarian Society, 1854), the publication of the _C.I.L._ , following the similar work of the Greek inscriptions, was undertaken by the Royal Academy of Sciences of Berlin.

This work, in which the previous literature is fully described and
utilized, consists of the following parts:--vol. i., _Inscriptiones
antiquissimae ad C. Caesaris mortem_ (1863; 2nd ed., part i., 1893);
Ritschl's _Priscae Latinitatis monumenta epigraphica_ (Berlin, 1862,
fol.) form the graphic illustration to vol. i., giving all extant
monuments of the republican epoch (with five _Supplementa_, Bonn,
1862-1865; R. Garrucci's _Sylloge inscriptionum Latinarum aevi Romanae
reipublicae usque ad C. Iulium Caesarem plenissima_, 2 vols., Turin,
1875-1877, must be used with caution); vol. ii., _Inscr. Hispaniae_
(1869; with Supplement, 1892); vol. iii., _Inscr. Asiae, provinciarum
Europae Graecarum, Illyrici_ (1873; with Supplements and Index,
1889-1902); vol. iv., _Inscr. parietariae Pompeianae Herculanenses
Stabianae_ (the scratched and painted inscriptions chiefly of Pompeii)
(1871; with Supplement, part i., 1898; part ii., 1909); vol. v.,
_Inscr. Galliae cisalpinae_ (1872-1877; with Suppl., Et. Pais, _C.I.L.
suppl. Italica_); vol. vi., _Inscr. urbis Romae_ (1876-1902; with
Supplement, 1902); vol. vii., _Inscr. Britanniae_ (1873); vol. viii.,
_Inscr. Africae_ (1881; with Supplement, 1891-1894, 1904); vol. ix.,
_Inscr. Calabriae, Apuliae, Samnii, Sabinorum, Piceni_ (1883); vol.
x., _Inscr. Bruttiorum, Lucaniae, Campaniae, Siciliae, Sardiniae_
(1883); vol. xi., _Inscr. Aemiliae, Umbriae, Etruriae_ (1888; part
ii., 1901 sqq.); vol. xii., _Inscr. Galliae Narbonensis_ (1888); vol.
xiii., _Inscr. trium Galliarum et duarum Germaniarum_ (1899 sqq.; part
ii., 1905 sqq.); vol. xiv., _Inscr. Latii antiqui_; vol. xv., _Inscr.
laterum_ (1891; part ii., i. [_vasa, lucernae, fistulae_], 1899). The
arrangement observed in the _Corpus_ is the geographical (as in
Apianus); within the single towns the order of subjects (_tituli
sacri_, _magistratuum_, _privatorum_, &c., as in Smetius) is followed,
with some few exceptions, where the monuments are so numerous (as in
the _forum_ of Rome and at Pompeii and Lambaesis) that they can be
assigned to their original places. Running supplements to the _C.I.L._
are given in the _Ephemeris epigraphica, Corporis inscr. Latinarum
supplementum_ (Berlin, 1872 sqq.); and the new discoveries of each
year are recorded in Cagnat's _L'Annee epigraphique_.

The inscriptions in the other Italian dialects have been published by
Conway, _Italic Dialects_ (Cambridge, 1897); cf. vol. ii. of von
Planta, _Grammatik der oskisch-umbrischen Dialekte_ (Strassburg,
1897). A Corpus of the Etruscan inscriptions was begun in 1893 by
Pauli and is now nearly complete. The inscriptions of the Veneti, a N.
Italian people of the Illyrian stock, will be found in vol. iii. of
Pauli, _Altitalische Forschungen_ (Leipzig, 1891). For the Christian
inscriptions see De Rossi's _Inscr. Christianae urbis Romae septimo
saeculo antiquiores_, vol. i. (Rome, 1857), vol. ii. (1888); the
_Inscriptions chretiennes de la Gaule of Le Blant_ (2 vols., Paris,
1857-1865; new edition, 1892); the _Altchristliche Inschriften der
Rheinlande_ of Kraus (1890); the _Christliche Inschriften der Schweiz
vom IV.-IX. Jahrhundert_ of Egli (1895); and the _Inscr. Hispaniae
Christianae and Inscr. Britanniae Christianae_ of Hubner (Berlin,
1871, 1876). As splendidly illustrated works on the Latin inscriptions
of some districts Alphonse de Boissieu's _Inscriptions antiques de
Lyon_ (Lyons, 1846-1854), Ch. Robert's _Epigraphie romaine de la
Moselle_ (Paris, 1875), and J. C. Bruce's _Lapidarium septentrionale_
(London and Newcastle, 1875) can be recommended. Besides the
above-mentioned Orelli-Henzen collection, G. Wilmanns's _Exempla
inscriptionum Latinarum_ (2 vols, Berlin, 1873, with copious indexes),
and Dessau's _Inscriptiones Latinae selectae_ (vol. i., 1892; vol.
ii., 1903; ii., 1906) give a general synopsis of the materials.
Inscriptions of interest to students of history are collected in
Rushforth's _Latin Historical Inscriptions_ (Oxford, 1893); Leroux,
_Revue des publications epigraphiques relatives a l'antiquite
romaine_, records those which bear on antiquities. Of other works may
be mentioned Ruggiero, _Dizionario epigrafico di antichita romane_
(1886); Olcott, _Thesaurus linguae Latinae epigraphicae_ (1904 sqq.).

II. Information regarding the forms of letters used on Roman inscriptions will be found under the articles LATIN LANGUAGE, PALAEOGRAPHY and WRITING (cf. Hubner, _Exempla scripturae_ _epigraphicae Latinae_, 1895). The forms of the single letters vary not inconsiderably according to the material of the monuments, their age and their origin. Carefully cut letters, especially when on a large scale, naturally differ from those scratched or painted on walls by non-professional hands, or hewn on rocks by soldiers; and small incised (or dotted) letters on metal or ivory and bone, and those painted on earthenware, or impressed on it or on glass before burning, are also necessarily of a different character. The letters, ordinarily drawn with _minium_ on the monument before being cut (and also often painted, after having been cut, with the same colour), sometimes have been painted with a brush, and thence receive a peculiar form. To save space, on coins first and afterwards in inscriptions also, two or three or even more letters were joined, especially at the end of the lines, to a _nexus_ or a _ligatura_. This system of compendious writing, very rare in the republican epoch, and slowly extending itself during the 1st century, became rather frequent in the 2nd and 3rd, especially in Spain and Africa. There is no constant system in these _nexus litterarum_, but generally the rule is observed that no substantial element of a single letter is to be counted for twice (thus e.g. [cross] is _it_ or _ti_, not _Titi_). Numerals are usually distinguished from letters in the ancient period, down to the end of the republic, by a stroke drawn through them, as in ++VIR, _duo(m) vir(om)_ ++S _duo semis_ (_sestertius_), [D with line-through] 500; it was afterwards put above them, as in IIVIR, XVIR, I[1111]IVIR, _duovir_, _decemvir_, _sevir_.[39]

The direction of the writing is in the very oldest inscriptions from right to left and from left to right in alternate lines, an arrangement technically called [Greek: boustrophedon] (D. Comparetti, _Iscrizione arcaica del Foro Romano_, Florence, 1900; H. Jordan, _Hermes_, vol. xv. p. 5, 1880), and in the Sabellic inscriptions similar arrangements are not infrequent. In all others it is from left to right. Each word is separated from the other by a sign of interpunction, which is not wanted, therefore, at the end of lines or of the whole text. Exceptions to this rule occur only in the later period (from the 2nd century downwards), and sometimes under special conditions, as when abridged words form the end of the line. Here and there even the different syllables of each word are separated by interpunction. The interpunction is formed by a single dot (except in some very ancient inscriptions, such as the recently found Forum inscription of the regal period and those of Pisaurum, where, as in Greek and other Italian monuments, three dots [:.] are used). According to the technical skill of the different periods in stone-cutting this dot is in some very ancient inscriptions quadrangular, or similar to an oblique cross (X), or oblong (as a bold stroke), but, as a rule, triangular, and never circular. This triangular dot changes, by ornamentation, into a hook [Symbol] or a leaf [Symbol]; the ivy-leaf-shaped dot is especially frequent in inscriptions from about the 2nd century downwards. The dot is always placed at the middle height of the letters, not, as now, at the foot of the line. In large texts of instruments the interpunction is often omitted; in the later period it is often entirely wanting; and in short texts, in the disposition of the lines, in the varying sizes of the letters employed, in the division of words at the end of the lines, &c., certain rules are observed, which cannot be detailed here. In some instances older inscriptions have been cancelled and more recent ones substituted (e.g. on milestones), especially in the case of the _damnatio memoriae_ (in cases of high treason), in consequence of which the names of consuls and emperors are often cancelled; but in modern times also inscriptions have been deliberately destroyed or lost ones restored.

For understanding the texts of the inscriptions an accurate knowledge of the system of abbreviations used in them is necessary (see Cagnat, _Cours d'epigraphie latine_, 3rd ed., 1898). These are almost invariably _litterae singulares_; that is to say, the initial letter is employed for the entire word (in all its grammatical forms), or if one initial, as belonging to more than one word, is not sufficiently clear, the first two or even the first three letters are employed; rarely more than three. Abbreviations in the true sense of the word (by dropping some letters at the end) are to be found, in the older period, only at the end of lines, and not frequently. In the later period some instances of them have been observed. The _litterae singulares_, as Valerius Probus taught, are either generally employed (_usus generalis_) in all classes of written documents (and so in literature also), as, for instance, those of the individual names (the _praenomina_), the names of days and feasts (_kal._ for _kalendae_), and those of the chief magistrates (_cos._ for _consul_) and the like; or they belong chiefly (but not exclusively) to certain classes of documents, such as those used in juridical acts (_l._ for _lex_, _h._ for _heres_, _s. d. m._ for _sine dolo malo_, and so on), in sepulchral inscriptions (_h. s. e._, _hic situs est_) or in dedicatory inscriptions (_v. s. l. m._, _votum solvit libens merito_), &c.[40]

It may be observed here that the _praenomina_ are, as a rule, always written in the universally known abbreviations (in the few instances where they are written in full it is a consequence of Greek influence or of peculiar circumstances). The _gentilicia_ in -_ius_ are abridged, in the republican period, in -_i_ (in the nominative, perhaps for -_is_). In the always abbreviated indications of ancestors or patrons (in the case of slaves and freedmen), as _C.f._, _Gai filius_, _M.l._, _Marci libertus_ (_s._ for _servus_ is not frequent), the feminine gender is sometimes indicated by inversion of the letters. Thus [Symbol]. _l._ (or _lib._) or W (an inverted M) _l._ designates a _mulieris libertus_; [Symbol] and [Symbol] are used for _filia_, _pupilla_. On the _tribus_ and their abbreviations, and on the so-called military _tribus_ (which are names of colonies collocated, for the sake of symmetry, at the place usually occupied, in the nomenclature, by the _tribus_), and on the other indications of origin used in the designation of individuals, the indexes to the above-named works give sufficient information; on the geographical distribution of the _tribus_ see Grotefend's _Imperium Romanum tributim descriptum_ (Hanover, 1863). For the abbreviations of official charges, urban and municipal, and, in the imperial period, civil and military (to which, beginning with the 4th century, some Christian designations are to be added), see also the explanations given in the indexes. Among these abbreviations the first instances are to be found of the indication of the plural number by doubling the last letter; thus _Augg._, _Caess._, _coss._, _dd._ _nn._ (_domini nostri_), are used from the 3rd century downwards (see De Rossi's preface to the _Inscriptiones Christ. urbis Romae_) to distinguish them from _Aug., Caes._, as designating the singular. In the later period, a dot or a stroke over the abridged word, like that upon numerals, here and there indicates the abbreviation.

III.--1. Among the inscriptions in the stricter sense (the _tituli_),
perhaps the oldest, and certainly the most frequent, are the
_sepulchral inscriptions_ (_tituli sepulcrales_). Of the different
forms of Roman tombs, partly depending upon the difference between
burial and cremation, which were in use side by side, a very complete
account is given in Marquardt's _Handbuch der romischen Altertumer_
(vol. vii. part i., Leipzig, 1879, p. 330 seq.). The most ancient
examples are those of a _sepulcretum_ at Praeneste (_C.I.L._ i. 74,
165, 1501 _a-d_; _Ephem. epigr._ i. 25-131; Wil. 153); the oldest of
these contain nothing but the name of the deceased in the nominative;
those of more recent date give it in the genitive. The oldest and
simplest form remained always in use down to Christian times; it is
that used on the large tectonic monuments of the Augustan age (e.g.
that of Caecilia Metella, _C.I.L._ vi. 1274) and in the _mausolea_ of
most of the emperors, and is still frequent in the _tituli_ of the
large _columbaria_ of the same age (_C.I.L._ vi. part ii.). It was
early succeeded by the lists of names, given also in the nominative,
when more than one individual, either dead or alive, were to be
indicated as sharers of a tomb. To distinguish the members still
alive, a _v_ (_vivit_, _vivos_, _vivi_) was prefixed to their names
(e.g. _C.I.L._ i. 1020, 1195, 1271); the deceased were sometimes
marked by the [Greek: theta] _nigrum_ (_C.I.L._ i. 1032; Wil. 158; see
also _C.I.L._ vi. 10251 seq.). Only the names in the nominative are
shown, too, on the _sarcophagi_ of the _Turpleii_ and _Fourii_ at
Tusculum (_C.I.L._ i. 65-72; Wil. 152), and in the oldest
inscriptions on those of the _Scipiones_, painted with _minium_
(_C.I.L._ i. 29; Wil. 537), to which were added afterwards the
insignia of the _magistratus curules_ (_C.I.L._ i. 31; Wil. 538) and
the poetical _elogia_. Of a somewhat different kind are the
inscriptions scratched without much care on very simple earthen
vessels which belonged to a _sepulcretum_ of the lower class, situated
outside the _porta Capena_ at Rome, on the Appian road, near the old
church of San Cesario (_C.I.L._ i. 882-1005, 1539, 1539 _a-d_ =
_C.I.L._ vi. 8211-8397; Wil. 176); they can be ascribed to the period
of the Gracchi. On these _ollae_, besides the name of the deceased,
also for the most part in the nominative, but on the more recent in
the genitive, the date of a day, probably that of the death, is noted;
here and there _obit_ (or _o._) is added. About the same epoch, at the
beginning of the 6th century, along with the growing taste for
tectonic ornamentation of the tombs in the Greek style, poetical
epigrams were added to the simple sepulchral _titulus_, especially
amongst the half-Greek middle class rapidly increasing in Rome and
Italy; Saturnian (_C.I.L._ i. 1006), iambic (1007-1010) and dactylic
(1011) verses become more and more frequent in epitaphs (see
Buecheler, _Anthologia Latina_, ii.). In prose also short designations
of the mental qualities of the deceased (_homo bonus_, _misericors_,
_amans pauperum_, or _uxor frugi_, _bona_, _pudica_ and the like),
short dialogues with the passer-by (originally borrowed from Greek
poetry), as _vale salve_, _salvus ire_, _vale et tu_, _te rogo
praeteriens dicas_ "_sit tibi terra levis_," &c. (Wil. 180), then
indications of his condition in his lifetime, chiefly among the Greek
tradesmen and workmen, e.g. _lanius de colle Viminale_ (_C.I.L._ i.
1011), _margaritarius de sacra via_ (1027) and the like, and some
formulae, such as _ossa hic sita sunt_, _heic cubat_, _heic situs est_
(in republican times mostly written in full, not abridged) were added
(J. Church "Zur Phraseologie der lat. Grabinschriften" in _Arch. lat.
Lexikogr._ 12. 215 sqq.). The habit of recording the measurement of
the sepulchre, on the sepulchral _cippus_, by such formulae as _locus
patet in fronte pedes tot_, _in agro_ (or _in via_, or _retro_) _pedes
tot_, seems not to be older than the Augustan age (_C.I.L._ i. 1021,
with Mommsen's note; Wil. 188). About the same time also the epitaphs
more frequently state how long the deceased lived, which was formerly
added only on certain occasions (e.g. in the case of a premature
death), and mostly in poetical form. The worship of the _dei Manes_,
though undoubtedly very ancient, is not alluded to in the sepulchral
inscriptions themselves until the close of the republic. Here and
there, in this period, the tomb is designated as a (_locus_) _deum
Maanium_ (e.g. at Hispellum, _C.I.L._ i. 1410); or, it is said, as on
a _cippus_ from Corduba in Spain (_C.I.L._ ii. 2255; Wil. 218), _C.
Sentio Sat_(_urnino_) _co(n)s(ule)_--that is, in the year 19
B.C.--_dei Manes receperunt Abulliam N(umerii) l(ibertam) Nigellam_.
In the Augustan age the _titulus sepulcralis_ begins to be confounded
with the _titulus sacer_; it adopts the form of a dedication _deis
Manibus_, offered to the _dei Manes_ (or _dei inferi Manes_, the _dei
parentum_ being the _Manes_ of the parents) of the deceased (see Orel.
4351; Wil. 217-228). This formula, afterwards so common, is still very
rare at the end of the republic, and is usually written in full, while
in later times it is employed, both simply and in many varied forms
(as _dis manibus sacrum_, or _d. m. et memoriae_, _d. m. et genio_, or
_memoriae aeternae_, _paci et quieti_, _quieti aeternae_, _somno
aeternali_ and so on; Wil. 246), in thousands of monuments. By similar
degrees the _titulus sepulcralis_ adopts many of the elements of the
_titulus honorarius_ (the indication of the _cursus honorum_, of the
military charges, &c., as e.g. in the inscription of Cn. Calpurnius
Piso, _C.I.L._ i. 598 = vi. 1276, Wil. 1105, on the pyramid of
Cestius, _C.I.L._ vi. 1374, and on the monument at Ponte Lucano of Ti.
Plautius Silvanus Aelianus, consul A.D. 74, Orel. 750, Wil. 1145 and
many others), of the _tituli operum publicorum_ (e.g. _monumentum
fecit_, _sibi et suis_, &c.), and of the _instrumenta_. Testaments
(like those of Dasumius of the year A.D. 109.--_C.I.L._ vi. 10229;
Wil. 314; and T. Flavius Syntrophus--_C.I.L._ vi. 10239; Henz. 7321;
Wil. 313), or parts of them (like that on the tomb of a Gaul of the
tribe of the Lingones, belonging to Vespasian's time, Wil. 315),
funeral orations (as those on Turia--_C.I.L._ vi. 1527; _Notizie degli
scavi_ (1898), p. 412; Hirschfeld, _Wiener Studien Bormannheft_, p.
283; Fowler, _Classical Review_, xix. 261; on Murdia--_C.I.L._ vi.
10230; Orel. 4860; Rudorff, _Abhandlungen der Konigl. Akademie der
Wissenschaften zu Berlin_ (1868), p. 217 seq.; and that of Hadrian on
the elder Matidia, found at Tivoli--Mommsen in the same _Abhandlungen_
(1863), p. 483 seq; Dehner, _Laudatio Matidiae_, Neuwied (1891),
numerous statements relating to the conservation and the employment of
the monuments (_C.I.L._ vi. 10249; Wil. 287-290), to their remaining
within the family of the deceased--from which came the frequent
formula "_h(oc) m(onumentum) h(eredem) n(on) s(equetur)_" and the like
(Wil. 280; cf. Hor. Sat. i. 8. 13),--and relating to the annual
celebration of _parentalia_ (Wil. 305 seq.), down to the not uncommon
prohibition of violation or profanation of the monument _noli
violare_, &c., with many other particulars (on which the index of Wil.
p. 678 seq. may be consulted), form the text of the sepulchral
inscriptions of the later epoch from Augustus downwards. The
thoroughly pagan sentiment _non fui non sum non curo_, or _n. f. n. s.
n. c._, is common, apparently a translation of the Greek [Greek: ouk
emen, egenomen ouk esomai ou melei moi]. Another type of epitaph, much
affected by the poorer classes (like our "Affliction sore" &c.), is:
_noli dolere mater eventum meum, Properavit aetas, hoc voluit fatus_
(sic) _mihi_ (Lier, "Topica carminum sepulcralium Latinorum" in
_Philologus_, 62. 445 sqq.). To these are to be added many local
peculiarities of provinces (as Spain and Africa), districts (as the
much-disputed _sub ascia dedicare_ of the stones of Lyons and other
parts of Gaul), and towns, of which a full account cannot be given
here.

2. Of the _dedicatory inscriptions_ (or _tituli sacri_), the oldest
known are the short indications painted (along with representations of
winged _genii_, in the latest style of Graeco-Italian vase painting),
with white colour on black earthen vessels, by which those vessels
(_pocula_) are declared to be destined for the worship, public or
private, of a certain divinity (_C.I.L._ i. 43-50; _Ephem. epigr._ i.
5-6; Wil. 2827 a-i); they give the name of the god, as that of the
possessor, in the genitive (e.g. _Saeturni pocolom_, _Lavernai
pocolom_). The proper form of the dedication, the simple dative of the
name of a divinity and often nothing else (as _Apolenei_, _Fide_,
_Junone_, &c., which are all datives), is shown on the very primitive
altars found in a sacred wood near Pisaurum (_C.I.L._ i. 167-180; Wil.
1-14); but also the name of the dedicants (_matrona_, _matrona
Pisaurese_, which are nomin. plur.) and the formulae of the offering
(_dono dedrot_ or _dedro_, _donu dat_, where _dono_ and _donu_ are
accus.) are already added to them. This most simple form (the verb in
the perfect or in the present) never disappeared entirely; it occurs
not infrequently also in the later periods. Nor did the dative alone,
without any verb or formula, go entirely out of use (see _C.I.L._ i.
630; Wil. 36; _C.I.L._ i. 814 = vi. 96; Orel. 1850; Wil. 32; _C.I.L._
i. 1153; Henz. 5789; Wil. 1775). But at an early date the verb _donum
dare_ and some synonyms (like _donum portare_, _ferre_, _mancupio
dare_, _parare_) were felt to be insufficient to express the
dedicator's good-will and his sense of the justice of the dedication,
which accordingly were indicated in the expanded formula _dono dedet
lub(e)s mereto_ (_C.I.L._ i. 183, cf. p. 555; Wil. 21; _C.I.L._ i.
190; Wil. 22), or, with omission of the verb, _dono mere(to) lib(e)s_
(_C.I.L._ i. 182). The dative case and this formula, completely or
partially employed (for _merito_ alone is also used, as _C.I.L._ i.
562, cf. _Ephem. epigr._ ii. 353, Wil. 29), remained in solemn use. To
_lubens_ (or _libens_) was added _laetus_ (so in Catullus 31. 4), and,
if a vow preceded the dedication, _votum solvit_ (or _voto condemnatus
dedit_; see _C.I.L._ i. 1175; Henz. 5733; Wil. 142, and _C.I.L._ ii.
1044); so, but not before the time of Augustus (see _C.I.L._ i. 1462 =
iii. 1772), the solemn formula of the dedicatory inscriptions of the
later period, _v. s. l. m._ or _v. s. l. l. m._, arose. To the same
effect, and of equally ancient origin with the solemn words _dare_ and
_donum dare_, the word _sacrum_ (or other forms of it, as _sacra
[ara]_), conjoined with the name of a divinity in the dative,
indicates a gift to it (e.g. _C.I.L._ i. 814; Wil. 32; _C.I.L._ i.
1200-1201; Wil. 33 _a_ _b_); the same form is to be found also in the
later period (e.g. _C.I.L._ i. 1124; Henz. 5624-5637), and gave the
model for the numerous sepulchral inscriptions with _dis Manibus
sacrum_ mentioned before. _Sacrum_ combined with a genitive very
seldom occurs (Orel. 1824; Wil. 34); _ara_ is found more frequently
(as _ara Neptuni_ and _ara Ventorum_, Orel. 1340). Dedications were
frequently the results of vows; so victorious soldiers (such as L.
Mummius, the conqueror of Corinth--_C.I.L._ i. 541 seq.; Orel. 563;
Wil. 27), and prosperous merchants (e.g. the brothers
Vertuleii--_C.I.L._ i. 1175; Henz. 5733; Wil. 142) vow a tenth part of
their booty (_de praedad_, as is said on the basis erected by one of
the Fourii of Tusculum--_C.I.L._ i. 63, 64; Henz. 5674; Wil. 18) or
gain, and out of this dedicate a gift to Hercules or other divinities
(see also _C.I.L._ i. 1503; Wil. 24; _C.I.L._ 1113; Wil. 43). Again,
what one man had vowed, and had begun to erect, is, by his will,
executed after his death by others (as the _propylum Cereris et
Proserpinae_ on the Eleusinian temple, which Appius Claudius Pulcher,
Cicero's well-known predecessor in the Cilician proconsulate,
began--_C.I.L._ i. 619 = iii. 347; Wil. 31); or the statue that an
_aedilis_ vowed is erected by himself as _duovir_ (_C.I.L._ iii. 500;
Henz. 5684); what slaves had promised they fulfil as freedmen
(_C.I.L._ 1233, _servos vovit liber solvit_; _C.I.L._ 816, Wil. 51,
"_ser(vos) vov(it) leibert(us) solv(it)_"), and so on. The different
acts into which an offering, according to the circumstantially
detailed Roman ritual, is to be divided (the _consecratio_ being
fulfilled only by the solemn _dedicatio_) are also specified on
dedicatory inscriptions (see for instance, _consacrare_ or
_consecrare_, Orel. 2503, and Henz. 6124, 6128; for _dedicare_,
_C.I.L._ i. 1159, Henz. 7024, Wil. 1782, and compare Catullus's _hunc
lucum tibi dedico consecroque Priape_; for _dicare_ see the _aara
leege Albana dicata_ to Vediovis by the _genteiles Iuliei_, _C.I.L._
i. 807, Orel. 1287, Wil. 101). Not exactly dedicatory, but only
mentioning the origin of the gift, are the inscriptions on the
pedestals of offerings ([Greek: anathemata], _donaria_) out of the
booty, like those of M. Claudius Marcellus from Enna (_C.I.L._ i. 530;
Wil. 25, "_Hinnad cepit_") or of M. Fulvius Nobilior, the friend of
the poet Ennius, from Aetolia (_C.I.L._ i. 534; Orel. 562; Wil. 26 a,
and _Bullettino dell' Instituto_, 1869, p. 8; _C.I.L._ vi. 1307; Wil.
26 b, "_Aetolia cepit_" and "_Ambracia cepit_"); they contain only the
name of the dedicator, not that of the divinity. Of the similar
offerings of L. Mummius, already mentioned, two only are preserved in
their original poetical form, the Roman in Saturnian verses of a
_carmen triumphale_ (_C.I.L._ i. 541; Orel. 563; Wil. 27 _a_) and that
found at Reate in dactylic hexameters (_C.I.L._ i. 542; Wil. 27 _b_);
the rest of them contain only the name of the dedicant and the dative
of the community to which they were destined (_C.I.L._ i. and Wil.
_l.c._). Of a peculiar form is the very ancient inscription on a
bronze tablet, now at Munich, probably from Rome, where two _aidiles_,
whose names are given at the beginning as in the other _donaria_,
"_vicesma(m) parti(m)_ or _[ex] vicesma_ _parti Apalones_ (that is,
_Apollinis_) _dederi_ (that is, _dedere_)" (_C.I.L._ i. 187; Orel.
1433). Many, but not substantial, varieties arise, when old offerings
are restored (e.g. _C.I.L._ i. 638, 632 = Orel. 2135, and Wil. 48;
_C.I.L._ i. 803; Henz. 5669, 6122); or the source of the offering
(e.g. _de stipe_, _C.I.L._ i. 1105; Henz. 5633 a; _ex reditu
pecuniae_, _ex patrimonio suo_, _ex ludis_, _de munere gladiatorio_,
and so on); or the motive (_ex jusso_, _ex imperio_, _ex visu_, _ex
oraculo_, _monitu_, _viso moniti_, _somnio admonitus_ and the like),
or the person or object, for which the offering was made (_C.I.L._ i.
188, _pro poplod_; _Ephem. epigr._ ii. 208, _pro trebibos_, in the
British Museum; _pro se_, _pro salute_, _in honorem domus divinae_,
&c.), are indicated; or, as in the _tituli operum publicorum_, the
order of a magistrate (_de senati sententia_, _C.I.L._ i. 560 = vi.
1306; Orel. 5351; i. 632 = vi. 110; Orel. 2135; Wil. 48; _decurionum
decreto_, &c.), and the magistrates or private persons executing or
controlling the work, the place where and the time when it was
erected, are added. On all these details the indexes, especially that
of Wil. (ii. 675), give further information. The objects themselves
which are offered or erected begin to be named only in the later
period just as in the _tituli operum publicorum_ ("_basim donum
dant_," _C.I.L._ i. 1167; "_signum basim_," _C.I.L._ i. 1154;
"_aram_," _C.I.L._ i. 1468; Orel. 1466; Wil. 52; _C.I.L._ i. 1109;
Wil. 54); in the later period this custom becomes more frequent. It is
hardly necessary to observe that all kinds of offerings have very
frequently also been adorned with poetry; these _carmina dedicatoria_
are given by Buecheler, _Anthologia Latina_, ii.; cf. Wil. 142-151.

3. Statues to mortals, whether living or after their death (but not on
their tombs), with _honorary inscriptions_ (_tituli honorarii_), were
introduced into the Roman republic after the Greek model and only at a
comparatively late date. One of the oldest inscriptions of this class
comes from Greek soil and is itself Greek in form, with the name in
the accusative governed by some (suppressed) verb like "honoured"
(_C.I.L._ i. 533; Wil. 649), "_Italicei L. Cornelium Scipionem_ (i.e.
_Asiagenum_) _honoris caussa_," lost and of not quite certain reading,
belonging to 561 A.U.C. (193 B.C.); the same form (in the accusative)
appears in other (Latin or Latin and Greek) inscriptions from Greece
(_C.I.L._ i. 596 = iii. 532; Wil. 1103; _C.I.L._ iii. 365, 7240;
compare also _C.I.L._ i. 587, 588; Orel. 3036). The noble house of the
Scipios introduced the use of poetical _elogia_ in the ancient form of
the _carmina triumphalia_ in Saturnian verses (from the 6th century in
elegiac distichs). They were added to the short _tituli_, painted only
with _minium_ on the sarcophagi, giving the name of the deceased (in
the nominative) and his curulian offices (exclusively), which were
copied perhaps from the well-known _imagines_ preserved in the
_atrium_ of the house (_C.I.L._ i. 29 sq; Orel. 550 sq.; Wil. 537 sq.,
and elsewhere). They hold, by their contents, an intermediate place
between the sepulchral inscriptions, to which they belong properly,
and the honorary ones, and therefore are rightly styled _elogia_. What
the Scipios did thus privately for themselves was in other cases done
publicly at a period nearly as early. The first instance preserved of
such a usage, of which Pliny the elder speaks (_Hist. nat._ xxxiv. S
17 sq.), is the celebrated _columna rostrata_ of C. Duilius, of which
only a copy exists, made in or before the time of the emperor Claudius
(_C.I.L._ i. 195 = vi. 1300; Orel. 549; Wil. 609). Then follow the
_elogia_ inscribed at the base of public works like the _Arcus
Fabianus_ (_C.I.L._ i. 606, 607 and 278, elog. i.-iii. = vi. 1303,
1304; Wil. 610), or of statues by their descendants, as those
belonging to a _sacrarium domus Augustae_ (_C.I.L._ i. elog. iv.-vi. =
_C.I.L._ vi. 1310, 1311) and others belonging to men celebrated in
politics or in letters, as Scipio, Hortensius, Cicero, &c., and found
in Rome either on marble tablets (_C.I.L._ i. vii.-xii. = _C.I.L._ vi.
1312, 1279, 1283, 1271, 1273; Wil. 611-613) or on busts (_C.I.L._ i.
xv.-xix. = _C.I.L._ vi. 1327, 1295, 1320, 1309, 1325, 1326; Wil.
618-621; see also _C.I.L._ i. 40 = vi. 1280; Wil. 1101; and _C.I.L._
i. 631 = vi. 1278; i. 640 = vi. 1323, vi. 1321, 1322, where _T.
Quincti_ seems to be the nominative), and in divers other places
(_C.I.L._ i. xiii., xiv.; Wil. 614, 615). This custom seems to have
been resumed by Augustus (Suet. _Aug._ 31) with a political and
patriotic aim, praised by the poet Horace (_Od._ iv. 8. 13, "_incisa
notis marmora publicis, per quae spiritus et vita redit bonis post
mortem ducibus_"); for he adorned his _forum_ with the statues of
celebrated men from Aeneas and Romulus downwards (_C.I.L._ i. xxiv.,
xxv., xxvii., xxxii. = _C.I.L._ vi. 1272, 1308, 1315, 1318; Wil. 625,
626, 627, 632), and other towns followed his example (so Pompeii,
_C.I.L._ i. xx., xxii. = Wil. 622, 623; Lavinium, _C.I.L._ i. xxi.;
Wil. 617; Arretium, _C.I.L._ i. xxiii., xxviii., xxix., xxx., xxxi.,
xxxiii., xxxiv. = Wil. 624, 625, 629-633). All these _elogia_ are
written in the nominative. In the same way in the colonies statues
seem to have been erected to their founders or other eminent men, as
in Aquileia (_C.I.L._ i. 538 = v. 873; Wil. 650; compare also _C.I.L._
v. 862; Orel. 3827) and Luna (_C.I.L._ i. 539 = Wil. 651).

But along with this primitive and genuine form of the _titulus
honorarius_ another form of it, equivalent to the dedicatory
inscription, with the name of the person honoured in the dative,
begins to prevail from the age of Sulla onwards. For the oldest
examples of this form seem to be the inscriptions on statues dedicated
to the dictator at Rome (_C.I.L._ i. 584 = vi. 1297; Orel. 567; Wil.
1102_a_) and at other places (Caieta and Clusium, _C.I.L._ i. 585,
586; Wil. 1102_b_, _c_), in which the whole set of honours and offices
is not enumerated as in the _elogia_, but only the _honores
praesentes_; compare also the inscription belonging to about the same
date, of a _quaestor urbanus_ (_C.I.L._ i. 636). Within the Greek
provinces also, at the same period, this form is adopted (_C.I.L._ i.
595 = iii. 531; Henz. 5294; Wil. 1104). Similar dedications were
offered to Pompey the Great (at Auximum and Clusium, _C.I.L._ i. 615,
616; Orel. 574; Wil. 1107) and to his legate L. Afranius (at Bologna,
but erected by the citizens of the Spanish colony Valentia, _C.I.L._
i. 601; Henz. 5127; Wil. 1106). They are succeeded by the statues
raised to Caesar (at Bovianum, _C.I.L._ i. 620; Orel. 582; Wil. 1108),
and, after his death, _iussu populi Romani_, in virtue of a special
law, at Rome (_C.I.L._ i. 626 = vi. 872; Orel. 586; Wil. 877). With
him, as is well known, divine honours begin to be paid to the
_princeps_, even during life. In this same form other historical
persons of high merit also begin to be honoured by posterity, as, for
example, Scipio the elder at Saguntum (_C.I.L._ ii. 3836; Wil. 653),
Marius at Cereatae Marianae, the place which bears his name (_C.I.L._
x. 5782; Wil. 654). Of statues erected by the community of a
municipium to a private person, that of L. Popillius Flaccus at
Ferentinum seems to be the oldest example (_C.I.L._ i. 1164; Wil. 655,
and his note). In Rome, Augustus and his successors in this way
permitted the erection of statues, especially to _triumphatores_, in
the new _fora_, including that of Augustus (_C.I.L._ vi. 1386; Orel.
3187; Wil. 634; _C.I.L._ vi. 1444; Henz. 5448; Wil. 635) and that of
Trajan (_C.I.L._ vi. 1377; Henz. 5478; Wil. 636; vi. 1549; Henz. 5477;
Wil. 639; iv. 1549; Orel. 1386; Wil. 637; _C.I.L._ 1565, 1566; Wil.
640); and this custom lasted to a late period (_C.I.L._ vi. 1599;
Henz. 3574; Wil. 638), as is shown by the statues of Symmachus the
orator (_C.I.L._ vi. 1698, 1699; Orel. 1186, 1187; Wil. 641), Claudian
the poet (_C.I.L._ vi. 1710; Orel. 1182; Wil. 642), Nicomachus
Flavianus (_C.I.L._ vi. 1782, 1783; Orel. 1188; Henz. 5593; Wil. 645,
645a), and many other eminent men down to Stilicho (_C.I.L._ vi. 1730,
1731; Orel. 1133, 1134; Wil. 648, 648a), who died in the year 408. In
similar forms are conceived the exceedingly numerous dedications to
the emperors and their families, in which the names and titles,
according to the different historical periods, are exhibited, in the
main with the greatest regularity. They are specified in detailed
indexes by Henzen and Wilmanns, as well as in each volume of the
_Corpus_. In the provinces, of course, the usages of the capital were
speedily imitated. Perhaps the oldest example of a _titulus
honorarius_ in the form of an _elogium_ (but in the dative), with the
full _cursus honorum_ of the person honoured, is a _bilinguis_ from
Athens, of the Augustan age (_C.I.L._ iii. 551; Henz. 6456a; Wil.
1122); the honours are here enumerated in chronological order,
beginning with the lowest; in other instances the highest is placed
first, and the others follow in order.[41] In the older examples the
formula "_honoris causa_," or _virtutis ergo_ (_Hermes_, vi., 1871, p.
6), is added at the end, as in an inscription of Mytilene belonging to
the consul of the year 723 A.U.C., i.e. 31 B.C. (_C.I.L._ iii. 455;
Orel. 4111; Wil. 1104b); the same, abbreviated (h.c.), occurs on an
inscription of about the same age from Cirta in Africa (_C.I.L._ viii.
7099; Wil. 2384). Shortly afterwards the honour of a statue became as
common in the Roman _municipia_ as it was in Athens and other Greek
cities in the later period. Each province furnishes numerous examples,
partly with peculiar formulae, on which the indexes of Wilmanns (pp.
673, 696 sq.) may be consulted. Special mention may be made of the
numerous honorary inscriptions belonging to _aurigae_, _histriones_
and _gladiatores_; for those found in Rome see _C.I.L._ vi.
10,044-10,210.

He who erects a temple or a public building, or constructs a road, a
bridge, an aqueduct or the like, by inscribing his name on the work,
honours himself, and, as permission to do so has to be given by the
public authorities, is also honoured by the community. Therefore the
_tituli operum publicorum_, though in form only short official
statements (at least in the older period) of the origin of the work,
without any further indications as to its character and purpose,
partake of the style of the older honorary inscriptions. Of the
ancient and almost universally employed method of erecting public
buildings by means of the _locatio censoria_ one monument has
preserved some traces (_Ephem. epigr._ ii. 199). The oldest instance
of this class is that commemorating the restoration of the temple of
the Capitoline Jupiter, begun, after its destruction by fire in the
year 671 (83 B.C.), by Sulla and continued five years later by the
well-known orator and poet Q. Lutatius Catulus, but completed only
about twenty years afterwards. Here, after the name of Catulus in the
nominative and the indication of the single parts of the building (as,
for example, _substructionem et tabularium_), follows the solemn
formula _de s(enati) s(ententia) faciundum coeravit eidemque probavit_
(_C.I.L._ i. 592 = vi. 1314; Orel. 31, 3267; Wil. 700). With the same
formula the praetor Calpurnius Piso Frugi (of about the same period)
dedicated an unknown building (_C.I.L._ i. 594 = vi. 1275), restored
afterwards by Trajan. On a work executed by the _collegium tribunorum
plebis_ (_C.I.L._ i. 593 = vi. 1299; Wil. 787), perhaps the public
streets within the town, the sum employed for it is also inscribed.
Precisely similar is the oldest inscription of one of the bridges of
Rome, the _ponte dei quattro capi_, still preserved, though partly
restored, on its original site, which commemorates its builder, the
tribune of the year 692 (62 B.C.), L. Fabricius (_C.I.L._ i. 600 =
vi. 1305; Orel. 50; Wil. 788); it was restored by the consuls of the
year 733 (21 B.C.).[42] On privately erected buildings the founder
after his name puts a simple _fecit_ (as also on sepulchral
inscriptions); so, possibly, did Pompey, when he dedicated his theatre
as a temple of Venus Victrix and, on Cicero's clever advice, as Varro
and Tiro had it from Cicero himself, inscribed on it COS. TERT (not
_tertium_ or _tertio_) (see Gellius, _Noct. Att._ x. 1). So Agrippa,
when he dedicated his Pantheon in the year 727 (27 B.C.), inscribed on
it only the words _M. Agrippa, L. f. cos. tertium fecit_ (_C.I.L._ vi.
896; Orel. 34; Wil. 731), as all who visit the Eternal City know. Of
municipal examples it will be sufficient to name those of the majestic
temple of Cora (_C.I.L._ i. 1149-1150; Wil. 722, 723), of Ferentinum,
with the measurements of the foundation (_C.I.L._ i. 1161-1163; Wil.
708), of the walls and towers at Aeclanum (_C.I.L._ i. 1230; Orel.
566; Henz. 6583; Wil. 699), of the theatre, amphitheatre, baths and
other structures at Pompeii (_C.I.L._ i. 1246, 1247, 1251, 1252; Orel.
2416, 3294; Henz. 6153; Will. 730, 1899-1901). At Aletrium a
munificent citizen gives an enumeration of a number of works executed
by him in the period of the Gracchi, in his native town ("_haec quae
infera scripta sunt de senatu sententia facienda coiravit_," _C.I.L._
i. 1166; Orel. 3892; Wil. 706); and, more than a century later, the
same is done at Cartima, a small Spanish town near Malaga, by a rich
woman (_C.I.L._ ii. 1956; Wil. 746). Military works, executed by
soldiers, especially frequent in the Danubian provinces, Africa,
Germany and Britain, give, in this way, manifold and circumstantial
information as to the military administration of the Romans. On a
column found near the bridge over the Minho at Aquae Flaviae, the
modern Chaves in northern Portugal, ten communities inscribed their
names, probably as contributors to the work, with those of the
emperors (Vespasian and his sons), the imperial legate of the
province, the legate of the legion stationed in Spain, the imperial
_procurator_, and the name of the legion itself (_C.I.L._ ii. 2477;
Wil. 803); and similarly, with the name of Trajan, on the famous
bridge over the Tagus at Alcantara, in Spanish Estremadura, the names
of the _municipia provinciae Lusitaniae stipe conlata quae opus pontis
perfecerunt_ are inscribed (_C.I.L._ ii. 759-762; Orel. 161, 162; Wil.
804).

As in some of the already-mentioned inscriptions of public works the
measurements of the work to which they refer (especially, as may be
supposed, in the case of works of great extent, such as walls of towns
or lines of fortification, like the walls of Hadrian and Antoninus
Pius in Britain) are indicated, so it early became a custom in the
Roman republic to note on _milestones_ the name of the founder of the
road and, especially at the extremities of it and near large towns,
the distances. So in the _val di Diana_ in Lucania P. Popillius
Laenas, the consul of the year 622 (132 B.C.), at the end of a road
built by him, set up the _miliarium Popilianum_ (_C.I.L._ i. 551;
Orel. 3308; Wil. 797), which is a general elogium to himself, in which
he speaks in the first person (_viam fecei ab Regio ad Capuam_, &c.).
One of the single _miliaria_ set up by him is also preserved (_C.I.L._
i. 550; Henz. 7174 _d_; Wil. 808), which contains only his name and
the number of miles. In the same brief style are conceived the other
not very frequent republican miliaria found in Italy (_C.I.L._ i.
535-537; Henz. 5348; Wil. 567; _C.I.L._ i. 540; Henz. 5350, 6226; Wil.
807; _C.I.L._ i. 558, 559; Henz. 5353; Wil. 808; _C.I.L._ i. 561;
Henz. 5180; Wil. 811; _C.I.L._ i. 633; Wil. 812) down to the time of
Augustus (_C.I.L._ x. 6895, 6897, 6899; Wil. 813), and also the even
more rare specimens from the provinces (from Asia--_C.I.L._ i. 557 =
iii. 479, Wil. 826, _C.I.L._ i. 622 = iii. 462, Wil. 827; from
Spain--_C.I.L._ i. 1484-1486 = ii. 4920-4925, 4956, Wil. 828, 829).
Augustus inscribed on each milestone on his road across Spain "_a
Baete et Jano Augusto ad Oceanum_" (e.g. _C.I.L._ ii. 4701; Wil. 832),
Claudius on those of a road in Upper Italy founded by his father
Drusus "_viam Claudiam Augustam quam Drusus pater Alpibus bello
patefactis derexserat munit ab Altino (or a flumine Pado) ad flumen
Danuvium_" (_C.I.L._ v. 8002, 8003; Orel. 648, 708; Henz, 5400; Wil.
818). The later milestones vary greatly in form, but all contain most
precious materials for ancient geography and topography; in the
volumes of the _Corpus_ they are taken together under the special head
_viae publicae_ (and here and there _privatae_) at the end of each
chapter.

A similar character, resulting from the combination of a mere
authentic record with the peculiar form of the honorary inscription,
belongs to the kindred classes of _inscriptions of the aqueducts_ and
of the different _boundary-stones_. The large dedicatory inscriptions
of the celebrated aqueducts[43] of Rome (as the Aquae Marcia, Tepula
and Julia, _C.I.L._ vi. 1244-1246, Orel. 51-53, Wil. 765; the Virgo,
_C.I.L._ vi. 1252, Orel. 703, Wil. 763; the Claudia, &c., _C.I.L._ vi.
1256-1258. Orel. 54-56, Wil. 764) have quite the character of
honorary inscriptions, while the various _cippi terminales_, which
mark the ground belonging to the aqueduct, show the greatest analogy
to the milestones (e.g. _C.I.L._ vi. 1243 a-g; Henz. 6635, 6636; Wil.
775-779). The other Italian and provincial varieties cannot be
specified here. Of boundary-stones, or _cippi terminales_, some very
ancient specimens have been preserved. To the age preceding the Second
Punic War belong two, found at Venusia and erected by municipal
magistrates (_C.I.L._ i. 185, 186; Orel. 3527, 3528; Wil. 863); they
give a short relation of a decree, by which certain localities were
declared to be sacred or public ("_aut sacrom aut poublicom locom
ese_"). Then follow the _cippi Gracchani_, by which Gaius Gracchus and
his two colleagues, as _tres viri agris iudicandis adsignandis_,
measured the _ager Campanus_, for its division among the plebs. They
contain the names of the _tres viri_ in the nominative, and in
addition, on the top, the lines and angles of the _cardo_ and
_decumanus_, according to the rules of the _agrimensores_, or the
boundary lines between the _ager publicus_ and _privatus_ (_C.I.L._ i.
552-556; Henz. 6464; Wil. 859-861). From the age of Sulla we still
have various boundary-stones giving the line of demarcation between
different communities (between Fanum and Pisaurum--_C.I.L._ i. 583,
Orel. 570, Wil. 861; between Ateste, Vicetia and Patavium--_C.I.L._ i.
547-549, Orel. 3110, Henz. 5114, 5115, Wil. 865, 866). To the town of
Rome belong the _termini ripae Tiberis_ (_C.I.L._ i. 608-614 = vi.
1234 _a-l_), beginning in the Augustan age, and the _termini of the
pomoerium_ of Claudius and Vespasian as censors, and of the _collegium
augurum_ under Hadrian (_C.I.L._ vi. 1231-1233; Orel. 710, 811; Wil.
843, 844), while others, of the consuls of the year A.D. 4 (_C.I.L._
vi. 1263; Orel. 3260; Wil. 856), of Augustus (_C.I.L._ vi. 1265; Henz.
6455; Wil. 852), &c., show the boundary between the _ager publicus_
and _privatus_. With similar objects boundary-stones were erected by
the emperors, or, under their authority, by magistrates, mostly
military, in the rest of Italy also (as in Capua--_C.I.L._ x. 3825,
Orel. 3683, Wil. 858; at Pompeii--_C.I.L._ x. 1018, Wil. 864) and in
the provinces (as in Syria--_C.I.L._ iii. 183; and Macedonia--_C.I.L._
iii. 594; in Dalmatia--_C.I.L._ iii. 2883; in Africa-- _C.I.L._ viii.
7084-7090, 8211, 8268, 10,803, 10,838, Wil. 869, 870; in
Spain--_C.I.L._ ii. 2349, 2916, Wil. 871--where the _pratum_ of a
legion is divided from the territory of a _municipium_; in Gaul--Wil.
867; in Germany, in the column found at Miltenberg on the Main,
_Bonner Jahrbucher_, vol. lxiv., 1878, p. 46, &c.). Private grounds
(_pedaturae_) were unfrequently marked off by terminal _cippi_. To
this class of _tituli_ must be added also the curious inscriptions
incised upon the steps of Roman circuses, theatres and amphitheatres
(see Hubner, _Annali dell' Instituto archeologico_, vol. xxviii.,
1856, p. 52 sq., and vol. xxxi., 1859, p. 122 sq.), as, for instance,
upon those of the Coliseo at Rome (_C.I.L._ vi., 1796, 1-37; compare
R. Lanciani, _Bullettino archeologico municipale_, 1881).