An Attempt to Explain Two Roman Inscriptions, Cut upon Two Altars, Which Were Dug up Some Time since at Bath. By John Ward, LL. D. Rhet. Prof. Gresh. and V. P. R. S.

P. S. I find some gentlemen have objected to my account last year, of the number of the people within the London bills of mortality, that the diminution of the burials may only be owing to an extraordinary degree of health, that may have been for the last ten years, and not to any decrease of the number of the living. But these gentlemen have not attended to what is there shewn in the Table, that the births are also greatly diminished, and that from the decrease of both together, it is concluded, that the people are fewer. For if greater health was the cause of the decrease of the burials, the births for that reason ought rather to be more. The truth is, the decrease of the people diminishes the practice of physic, which makes some of that profession imagine, that the times are more healthy. XLVI. An Attempt to explain two Roman Inscriptions, cut upon two Altars, which were dug up some time since at Bath. By John Ward, L.L.D. Rhet. Prof. Gresh. and V. P. R. S. Read Dec. 11, 1755. These two inscriptions were found near the same time and place with that, which has been already published in the forty eighth volume of the Philosophical Transactions (1). The altars, which contain them, are now in the pos- (1) Par. i. Num. li. fession of Doctor William Oliver, physician at Bath; who has placed them in his garden, and been so obliging as to transmit to me draughts of them, with their inscriptions, taken by the Reverend Mr. Borlase, a worthy member of this Society, which accompany this paper (1). And since that I received from Mr. Prince Hoare casts of the inscriptions in plaster of Paris, by which means I have had the advantage of comparing them together. 1. The inscription upon the higher altar may, as I apprehend, be thus read in words at length: Peregrinus Secundi filius, civis Trever, Jovi Cetio, Marti, et Nemetona, votum solvit libens merito. The person, who dedicated this altar, calls himself Peregrinus Secundi filius; each of which names occurs several times in Gruter, as a cognomen, which often stands alone, when the person named is sufficiently distinguished by it. Having given us his own name, and that of his father, he proceeds to acquaint us with his country, and styles himself Civis Trever. So in Gruter we read Civis Trevera, in the feminine (2); but Tacitus has Trevir, with an i in the latter syllable (3). Tho when he speaks of these people collectively as a nation, in the plural number, he always calls them Treveri, with an e in the middle syllable, in which he is followed by later historians; but in Caesar they are always written Treviri, with an i. They inha- (1) See Tab. viii. Fig. 1, 2. (2) Page xiii. num. 5. (3) Hist. Lib. iii. cap. 35. bited that part of Belgic Gaul between the Maese and the Rhine, which is now the electorate of Triers; and were conquered by Caesar, with the rest of the Gallic nations. But Pliny speaking of them sais, they were liberi antea (1), that is, tho subject to the Romans, yet, with some limitations, permitted to govern themselves by their own laws (2). By the words liberi antea Harduin understands him to mean, that they were free both before that time, and then continued so; but others think his design was to intimate, that tho they had before been free, they were then deprived of their liberty by Vespasian, on account of their joining with Civilis in the late disturbances of the Roman government (3). But I find no particular mention of this in antient writers; and it is plain from Vopiscus, that they enjoyed this privilege long afterwards. For in his life of the emperor Florianus he recites a letter, written by the Roman senate to that of the Treveri, in which is this expression: Ut eftis liberi, et semper fuiftis, laetari vos credimus (4). Their chief city, which was situated on the Moselle, being made a Roman colony in the reign of Augustus, is by Tacitus called Colonia Treverorum, but by others more frequently Augusta Treverorum, and now Triers (5). The three following lines of the inscription contain the names of three deities, to whom this altar (1) H. N. Tom. i. pag. 224. l. 5. (2) Strab. L. xvii. pag. 839. (3) Cellar. Geograph. antiqu. Tom. i. p. 201. (4) Cap. 5. (5) Cellar. ibid. p. 202. was dedicated. The first of these is here called Jupiter Cetius. Ptolemy makes mention of a large mountain in Germany, which he calls Kétios, and describes as the eastern boundary of Noricum (1), by which it was separated from Pannonia, now Hungary. From this mountain it seems highly probable, that the name Cetius might be given to Jupiter, as its tutelar deity. So likewise he was styled Casius from a mountain of that name in Aegypt, where, as Strabo informs us, a temple was erected to him under the title of Διός Κασίου (2). And indeed there was scarce any mountain, or other place, of considerable note, where some pagan deity, either male or female, was not more particularly worshiped as its protector and guardian, tho at the same time they had their votaries likewise elsewhere. There was also a town called Cetium, which was situated at the foot of this mountain, towards the Danube, and not far from Vienna (3). It is mentioned both in Antonine's Itinerary (4) and Peutinger's Tables, tho in the latter it is corruptly written Citium (5); for it plainly appears, that the same town was designed in each, by its situation. However it seems more probable, that Jupiter had the title Cetius ascribed to him from the mountain, to which the town likewise owed its name; tho let either be supposed, it will make no difference, with regard to the explication (1) Geograph. Lib. ii. cap. 14. (2) Lib. xvi. p. 760. (3) Cellar. ubi supra, pag. 342. (4) Pag. 234. edit. Wesselung. (5) Segment. ii. in Norico. here given of this inscription. In the name Cetius indeed, as it is written on the stone, the two first letters c and e are separated from each other by a point. But that doubtless must have been occasioned either through the ignorance or inadvertency of the workman, in misplacing the point, which should have stood after the imperfect word iov. that immediately precedes. Mistakes of this kind are not uncommon, two or three of which were observed in one of the Wroxeter inscriptions, some account whereof I had not long since the honour to lay before this Society (1). But it may be further observed concerning this Jupiter Cetius, with relation to the place of his worship, that he must have been a German deity; whereas the Treveri were inhabitants of Gaul, on the other side of the Rhine, which divided those two countries. However, no impropriety will arise from thence, in supposing him to have been worshiped by them; for most of the Belgic nations, as Caesar informs us, sprang originally from the Germans; but having formerly passed the Rhine they settled themselves in Gaul, on account of the fertility of the country, and drove out the antient inhabitants (2). And particularly with regard to the Treveri Tacitus says: Circa affectationem Germanicae originis ultras ambitiosi sunt, tanquam per hanc gloriam a similitudine et inertia Gallorum separantur (3). It cannot seem strange therefore, if being thus tenacious of preserving the memory of the country, from whence (1) See above, pag. 196. (2) B. G. Lib. ii. cap. 4. (3) De moribus German. cap. 28. Vol. 49. P p they originally came, they continued to worship the German deities after their settlement in Gaul. And that they did so, will further appear from the next deity here addressed to, which is Mars; who was not only worshiped by all the Germans, but likewise in the highest esteem among them. For one of their ambassadors in a public speech made to the Belgic Gauls, as given us by Tacitus, thus expresses himself: *Redisse vos in corpus nomenque Germaniae communibus deis, sed* (1) *praecipuo deorum Marti, grates agimus* (2). The third and last name here mentioned is Nemetona, which I have nowhere else met with; but as it stands connected with the two former by the particle *et*, it must, I think, denote some deity, and by the termination a goddess. For thus we have Bellona, Hippona, Latona, Pomona, with other names of female deities, in the like form. The construction of the sentence seems indeed to require, that it should have ended with the diphthong *ae*, instead of the vowel *a*, as it does in the inscription; tho as that letter stands at the very edge of the stone, the workman might find himself obliged to leave it so. But as nothing further appears concerning this goddess Nemetona, it seems most reasonable to suppose her to have been one of those topical deities, several of whose names are found once only in Roman inscriptions, but never mentioned by their writers; some of which occur among our British inscriptions, as --- (1) The Florentine MS. has *et* in this place instead of *sed*, and so it was read by Sir Henry Savile. (2) Hist. Lib. iv. cap. 64. Brigantia, Brigantia, Cocis, Matunus, Setlocenia, and others, which may be seen in Horsley (1). The last line of the inscription acquaints us with the cause of erecting this altar, which was the performance of some vow, formerly made by Peregrinus. And it is not improbable, that he had laboured under some bodily disorder, which occasioned his going to Bath for the benefit of the waters, which in the time of the Romans were in so high esteem. And the good success, which he met with by the use of them, may be concluded from the tenor of the inscription, wherein he makes his acknowledgement to the deities above mentioned, for the benefit he had received thro their favour, in consequence of his addresses to them for that purpose. For as it was a common notion of the antient pagans, that all human affairs were under the direction of their deities; so in any danger or misfortune they used to solicit them for releif, with vows and promises of erecting altars and other buildings to their honour, in case of a favourable answer. Which, when performed, they were said Votum solvere, as the letters v. s. here imply. 11. The other inscription, on the lower altar, when expressed in words at length, may be read in the following manner: Sulevis Sulinus Scultor, Bruceti filius, sacrum fecit libens merito. (1) Brit. Rom. Ind. cap. i. Spon has published a small treatise upon this subject, with the following title: Ignotorum atque obscurorum deorum arae. Studio Jacobi Sponii. Lugd. 1676, 12mo. That the first word *Sulevis* denotes a name given to certain rural goddesses, called *Sulevae*, is plain from an inscription found on a stone at Rome, and published by Fabretti, in which they are joined with *Campestres*. Most of those female deities, which consisted of a plurality, whether benevolent or hurtful, are commonly represented as three in number. Such were the *Eumenides*, *Gorgons*, *Graces*, *Harpyes*, *Hesperides*, *Sirens*, *Sibylls*, and some others mentioned by Fabretti (1). And agreeably to this notion three female figures in a group, cut on stone, have been found in three different places at *Homesteads*, a Roman station in Northumberland, and published by Horsley (2). And tho no inscriptions now remain, to inform us whom they were designed to represent, the stones being very much broken; yet by their several attributes they all appear to be deities, or their attendants. But in the draught of the stone given us by Fabretti, three female figures are exhibited in a fitting posture, and under them three male figures standing, with an altar placed between them, and a swine prepared for sacrifice; and below this sculpture stands the inscription, in the words following: *SULLEVIS ET CAMPESTRIBVS SACRVM* *L AVRELIVS QVINTVS > LEG VII X GEMINAE* *VOTVM SOLVIT LAETVS LIBENS* *DEDICAVIT VIII K SEPTEMBRE BRADVA ET VARO COS* (1) *De Aquis et Aquaeduct. in Graev. Thesaur. antiquit. Rom. Tom. iv. p. 1733.* (2) *Brit. Rom. Northumb. xlviii, xlix, l.* (3) That inscription was afterwards republished by Spon, in his *Miscell. erudit. antiq. p. 107*; tho not altogether with his usual accuracy, as Fabretti elsewhere complains, *Inscript. antiq. etc. p. 690.* From this monument Montfaucon concludes, that as it contains only three female figures, the Sulevae and Campestres were the same goddesses; tho the origin of the former name, as he sais, is not known (1). Nor indeed did the name itself, so far as I can find, anywhere appear, but in that inscription, till the late discovery of this altar at Bath. And I cannot but think with that learned writer, that the same deities were intended by both those appellations. Tho I do not apprehend, that Sulevae and Campestres were in all respects synonymous names, and of equal extent in their signification; but that Campestres was the common name of those rural goddesses, who were distinguished by particular titles in different places, where they were worshiped as tutelar deities. Hence we have an altar in Gruter, inscribed to them only by the general name of Campestres, without any additional title there given them (2). The two next words SVLINVS SCVLTOR must, I think, stand for the names of the person, who dedicated this altar; as the two following, BRVCETI F. acquaint us with that of his father. Had the word Scultor been so written thro a mistake for sculptor, and designed to signify his employment; it should, according to the usual form of such inscriptions, have been placed after his father's name; as in this following given us by Reinesius: Jovi Optimo Maximo, et Dianaee Victrici Sanctae, Lucius Valerius Lucii filius, (1) L'Antiq. explic. Tom. i. pag. 411, and Supplem. Tom. i. p.236. (2) Pag. mxv. Num. 2. filius, Palatina (tribu), vascularius (1), dicat, dedicat (2). Besides, it can scarce be supposed, that he could have been guilty of such a mistake, as to omit the letter p in writing the name of his own art, had that really been his intention. The words Sacrum fecit, in the last line, are of the same import with dedicavit; in which sense likewise sacrum alone is often used. And sometimes the reason of the dedication is added, as: Sacrum, voto suscepto, fecit, in Gruter (3). But that not being mentioned here must remain unknown. There is nothing said in either of these inscriptions, which can afford any light towards settling the time, when they were erected. But so far as appears from the form of the letters, they may not improbably be supposed of somewhat a later date, than that mentioned above (4), as found near the same place. (1) Vascularius was an artificer, who made vessels of any sort of metal, but chiefly of plate. Cic. in Verr. iv. cap. 24. Leg. 20. §. 2. D. de praescript. verb. (2) Clas, i. Numb. 258. (3) Pag. lxxxii. i. and mlxxii. 8. (4) See pag. 285.