^{page 51 note 1} Also in CIL III, 1108 = ILS, 4344, and usually identified with the Palmyrene god Ἱαρίβωλος, see Roscher, Lexicon, s.v. Hierobolus. It is possible that there were Palmyrenes among the soldiers of the Syrian cohort mentioned in 1. 7 below, or that the cult is due to the influence on legion III Augusta of the numerus Palmyrenorum which is known to have served in N. Africa in the late second and early third centuries A.D. (Cagnat, L'Armée romaine d'Afrique, p. 205 f.).

^{page 51 note 2} ; an ivy leaf has been cut over the erased third N. The inclusion of Geta among the Augusti should indicate a date after 208, but he is given the title informally in N. Africa in a number of texts of earlier date, see, e.g. IRT, 913–916 from the fort of Bu Ngem.

^{page 51 note 3} The words piife[licis] have been cut over the erased name of Geta.

^{page 51 note 4} For the formula, cf. e.g. ILS, 428. The omission of any title for Iulia Domna seems unusual.

^{page 51 note 6} This is the first clear indication of the presence of a military detachment at Ain el-Auenia, and confirms previous conjectures that the site is one of the stations of the Limes Tripolitanus. The activity of the garrison recorded here may be compared with that attested at the similar station of Ain Wif in IRT, 868.

^{page 51 note 6} It is just possible that a number was given for the cohort; if so there is hardly space for more than one figure, I. The unit is, in fact, almost certainly to be identified with the Cohors I Syrorum of A.E. 1892, 13, from the region of Lambaesis.

^{page 51 note 7} Presumably fecit, construxit, or some such word stood here. The absence of the name of the person who undertook the work, probably the garrison commander, is singular. Since there is no lower moulding on the block it is possible that his name appeared on a second block which stood below this one on the building.

^{page 52 note 1} This form of stele is characteristic of Romano-Libyan tombstones, cf. PBSR, XXIII (1955) pl. XXXVI, aGoogle Scholar.

^{page 52 note 2} The name is Libyan (see, e.g. CIL VIII, Index Cognominum, s.v. Miggin), although not hitherto attested in Tripolitania. Its appearance here is striking evidence for the recruitment of Libyans into Legion III Augusta, and the absence of a Roman praenomen and nomen are also indications of a lowering of the standards of legionaries.

^{page 52 note 3} Probably the most satisfactory resolution of this abbreviation here.

^{page 52 note 4} It seems probable that the cutter intended to write XXX.

^{page 52 note 5} For this spelling cf. CIL V, 4676.

^{page 52 note 6} For this spelling, cf. e.g. CIL VIII, 164, 4623, 5036.

^{page 52 note 1} Another typically North African form.

^{page 52 note 2} Possibly the cutter intended to write m(ensibus) … or this represents a rejected attempt at the first letter of maritus.

^{page 52 note 3} The text illustrates the existence and a little of the character (a mixture of Roman and native forms) of the civil settlement that grew up beside the military station.

^{page 53 note 1} The inscription lay alongside a stone bearing a sculptured relief of a camel; if its letter forms are correctly dated this association would produce a useful piece of evidence for the presence of the camel in Tripolitania before the fourth century; see Brogan, Olwen, PBSR, XXII (1954) 126 fGoogle Scholar.

^{page 53 note 2} For Tarquitii in Africa see, e.g.. CIL VIII, 2569 1. 6, 22770; the nomen perhaps derives ultimately from the proconsul, Q. Manlius Ancharius Tarquitius Saturninus, IRT, 300.

^{page 53 note 3} Iustini or Iustiniani are also possible; another cognomen giving a genitive in -is presumably followed.

^{page 53 note 4} F(ili) may be the genitive, indicating that Tarquitius was the son of Gabinius, or the nominative, indicating that his sons, whose names followed (see the remains of 1. 4), made the monument.

^{page 53 note 5} Cf. IRT, 833. Bagaus.

^{page 53 note 6} The reading is certain; the text has apparently lapsed from Latin into Libyan.

^{page 53 note 1} A finely-built example of a larger pre-desert fortified farm; the inscription is of particular interest since comparatively few have come from such buildings, and the reliefs on either side of the inscribed panel because these motifs are more usually found in funerary contexts; cf, however, the relief above the doorway of Gasr Nagazza, Nesma, Wadi Sofeggin, showing an eagle carrying off a hare.

^{page 53 note 2} Cf. Metusan, M. at Ghirza, IRT, 900, 1. 2Google Scholar.

^{page 53 note 3} Cf. Fidel and Fydel, both at Ghirza, , IRT, 899, 1. 4Google Scholar, and 900,1. 1.

^{page 53 note 4} Cf. Chullam at Ghirza, , IRT, 899, 1. 1Google Scholar, and perhaps Anachulam in the Wadi Umm el-Agerem, IRT, 906 = PBSR, XXIII (1955), p. 142Google Scholar, 1. 5.

^{page 53 note 5} For the connexion of the second and third generation with a family monument cf. IRT, 898, 11. 13, 14, and IRT, 900,11. 8-10, both from Ghirza.

^{page 53 note 6} Perhaps et hanc tabulam.

^{page 53 note 7} The final lines are in Libyan; two groups of letters—at the end of 1. 9 BVNOM perhaps meaning ‘work’ or ‘monument,’ and in 1. 10 FELV probably meaning ‘made,’—also occur in PBSR, XXIII (1955), p. 141Google Scholar, no. S24, 1. 2.

^{page 54 note 1} The cisterns are Roman in origin; nearby are a large gasr and a Roman cemetery, the monumental tombs of the latter now completely destroyed. There is no place for an inscription above the door of the qasr; the stone presumably comes from the cemetery.

^{page 54 note 2} For S = ST see PBSR, XXIII (1955), p. 128Google Scholar, no. S.8, n. 2.