² By a metal-detectorist on a site with evidence of Roman occupation, probably a villa, part of a hoard of 161 copper-alloy fragments, presumably scrap metal. The plaque's original location is thus unknown, but would have been a temple. It is now in the Oxfordshire Museums store at Standlake, where Edward Caswell, county Finds Liaison Officer, made it available. It was first studied by John Pearce from photographs, and autopsy confirms the accuracy of his observation. This entry uses his interim report.

³ Much of the surface is encrusted with corrosion-products, but except in lines 4 and 5 (see next note) the surviving letters are complete and legible. The line-endings observe a vertical setting-out line 20 mm inside the right-hand edge, which must have corresponded to a line on the left, but this is now obscured. The lettering seems to have been centred between them. Average letter-heights by line, varying slightly: (1) 22 mm; (2) 16 mm; (3) 14.5 mm; (4) 11.5 mm; (5) 11 mm; (6) 11 mm; (7) 12 mm; (8) 11 mm. Except for an elaborate leaf-stop in line 6, word separation is by three-pointed interpuncts, an arc joined midway by a shorter arc. At the foot of the plaque is incised a fillet or wreath, now incomplete, between two palm branches, the left one now lost. In the broken edge at the very bottom is a round hole, no doubt to secure the plaque to something, but there are no corresponding holes elsewhere.

⁴ Line-by-line notes. (1) INE is ligatured. (2) RVDVPIAE is certain, separated from Mineruae by interpunct. By analogy with the goddess Sulis at Bath, who is often Sulis Minerua, Rudupia (nominative) is surely a local goddess ‘identified’ with Roman Minerva. But she is otherwise unattested, and the etymology of her name must be left to the Celticists; any connection with the place-name Rutupia (Richborough) seems unlikely. (4) Only the tips remain of three or four letters before IVLIANVS, but they include the second diagonal of V, and are quite consistent with IVL. (5) This line, like those below, has lost its left-hand half. Since it is preceded by IVLI (genitive) and the second dedicator is described as […] FILIA, someone's ‘daughter’, [FILIVS] for ‘son of Iulius’ (Iuli) is an easy restoration. There are two instances of the name Iulius Iulianus from Britain, a legate of Legion II Augusta (RIB 1138) and a soldier of that legion (RIB 360), but neither should be identified here. The line ends with BRIC (its R obscured by corrosion products, but still recognisable), which must be the beginning of the name of a second dedicator. Brico– is a Celtic name-element, but uncommon; compare Bricomarus below (item No. 9, with note), and note Brica (RIB 686 and 744). But if regarded as a variant of Brigo– it does suggest more possibilities, for example Brigomalla (Tab. Sulis 30.1, with note). (6) This line must have completed the name of Bric[…], but the surviving FILIA which follows raises a problem. It should have been preceded by her father's name, but there cannot have been room for this as well. Instead, it is easier to suppose that no father's name was stated, since it could be taken for granted that filia identified her as the ‘daughter’ of Iulius Iulianus, her fellow-dedicator. This seems to be the best solution, even though a man and woman making a dedication are inherently more likely to be husband and wife than father and daughter. (7) EX VOTO would have been preceded by the object dedicated, such as a ‘statue’ (signum), or by a verb of dedication; but soluerunt (compare RIB 744, libentes ex uoto soluerunt) or posuerunt would be too long for the likely space. However, posuere would fit nicely, even if this form is usually found in metrical epitaphs. If so, the plaque would have been attached to the dedication they ‘placed’. (8) The placing of M mid-way in its half of the line shows that it was balanced in the missing left-hand half by L, for the formulaic l(ibentes) m(erito).

⁵ During excavation by Ecus Archaeology, from where Stuart Ross sent photographs and other details. It will be published with commentary in the final report.

⁶ Letter-heights by line: (1) 60.5 mm; (2) 51.8 mm; (3) 51.5 mm; (4) 48 mm; (5) 42.5 mm; (6) 41.5 mm; (7) 42.9 mm. There is no spacing between words, but abbreviations and word-endings are indicated by leaf-stops or medial points.

⁷ The same cohort dedicated another altar at Papcastle to Mars (Britannia 46 (2015), 388, No. 6), describing itself as milliary and part-mounted but commanded by a prefect. It was probably drafted to Britain in a.d. 61 (Tab. Lond. Bloomberg 48, with note) and is explicitly milliaria in the Malpas diploma of a.d. 103 (RIB II.1, 2401.1), but at Benwell, where it preceded ala I Asturum as the Hadrianic garrison, it was still commanded by a prefect (RIB 1328). Its other inscriptions are later, and except for RIB 1482 they all come from Risingham. Two are explicitly Severan: RIB 1234 (a.d. 205–7), in which the cohort is still m(illiaria) eq(uitata) but commanded by a tribune; and RIB 1235 (a.d. 213). The others are RIB 1231 (explicitly [e]q(uitata) mil(liaria)), 1215, 1216 and 1217, four altars dedicated by the cohort and various tribunes; a fifth altar (RIB 1230) names it, but has lost almost all its lettering; and there is RIB 1241, a slab which records its building-work commanded by another tribune. That the cohort was commanded by tribunes is confirmed by RIB 1482 from Chesters, the tombstone of Fabia Honorata, the daughter of Fabius Honoratus tribun(us) coh(ortis) I Vangion(um) by his wife Aurelia Eglectiana, who is probably ‘the wife of Fabius the soldier’ named by an altar at Risingham (RIB 1228, miles … Fabio nupta).

It is likely that the Vangiones garrisoned Papcastle before Hadrian's Wall was built, and were established there by Cerialis in his advance to Carlisle. The question of why this double-strength cohort was commanded by a prefect, not a tribune, at Papcastle and Benwell, but later by a tribune at Risingham, is discussed in Britannia 46 (2015), 388–90, n. 15. Compare the milliary cohors I Tungrorum, which is likewise commanded by prefects at Vindolanda and Housesteads, for which Eric Birley found ‘an explanation ready to hand’ (The Roman Army: Papers 1929–1986 (1988), 356): it was divided between two stations at the time. The Vindolanda strength report (Tab. Vindol. II, 154) now supports this idea, since it gives the cohort 752 men, too many for a ‘quingenary’ cohort, but names its commander as the prefect Iulius Verecundus. Is this because 337 men had been posted to Coria, leaving a quingenary ‘rump cohort’ (in Birley's phrase) at Vindolanda appropriate to a prefect? But Birley, in Vindolanda Research Reports II (1993), 8, pointed to RIB 1981 (Castlesteads) in which the milliary cohors II Tungrorum is also commanded by a prefect; and since he is described as praef(ectus) Tungrorum, Birley now accepted Strobel's suggestion that Tungrian and Batavian nobles retained the title of ‘prefect’ (from praefectus civitatis) when they commanded a milliary cohort of their fellow-tribesmen. In this he was followed by Anthony Birley in ZPE 186 (2013), 294, even though it would imply that the Vangiones at Benwell were still being commanded by their own nobility, more than half a century after the unit came to Britain. It is easier to suppose that they were divided between Benwell and Papcastle, and later reunited took part in the advance into Scotland; at Benwell they were then succeeded by the ala I Asturum, becoming the garrison of Risingham.

The Papcastle prefect's origin is unknown, his name being written as NIVENTIAN, abbreviated by omission of the nominative termination –VS. A cognomen *Niventianus is not attested, nor is the nomen *Niventius from which it would have derived. Since the cohort had a centurion as acting-commander (cura<m> | agent<e>), the prefect's name would have been unfamiliar, and it is likely that NI is the stone-cutter's mistake for IV: the cognomen Iuventianus is quite common. The centurion's first name is abbreviated to SEX, which is not the praenomen Sex(tus) since it is directly followed by a cognomen, but a nomen derived from it, either Sextius or Sextilius, both quite common. Neither officer is otherwise attested.

⁸ By Harry Hall of Thorngrafton, who bought it from a local builder, recognising it was Roman. He showed a photograph to Segedunum Museum, which Alex Croom duly forwarded, but he died before he could provide further details. Presumably it came from Hadrian's Wall since Thorngrafton is just south of Milecastle 37 and Housesteads, but was then re-used in a farm building or field wall. It now belongs to Sue Wilson (Lady Gibson) who has deposited it temporarily at Vindolanda, from where Andrew Birley sent a photograph and other details.

⁹ Most of the letters are c. 52 mm high. TT in Vetti is formed by raising the height of the first T and extending its cross-stroke over the adjoining E and T. This is balanced by also raising the height of final I. The centurion is otherwise unattested.

¹⁰ When it was seen by Alexander Gordon in a barn at Westerwood during his journey along the Antonine Wall later published as Itinerarium Septentrionale (1726). He noted Roman stones for his patron, Sir John Clerk of Penicuik, drawings of which with Clerk's annotation survive: they are published with full commentary by Keppie, Lawrence, in ‘Searching out Roman Inscribed and Sculptured Stones on the Antonine Wall in 1723’, Britannia 45 (2014), 11–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This stone is No. 8 at p. 19. Unlike the other inscribed stones (except for three, which perhaps were uninscribed or not Roman), it was not included in RIB I. This is probably because the drawing of it in Itinerarium Septentrionale, pl. 12, has no caption or explanatory text, which prompted Huebner to ‘guess’ (coniectura) it was a samian potter's stamp or signature. So he published it as CIL vii 1336.1281, without provenance (loco incerto).

¹¹ It is not known who made the drawing annotated by Clerk (see previous note), but it was probably copied from one made by Gordon, since it is closely related to the drawing in Itinerarium Septentrionale (pl. 12) just mentioned. This, however, is schematic with its un-Roman ‘M’ and the uninscribed surface shown to the right of IMP. By contrast, the Clerk drawing draws M correctly and locates the broken edge against P. The Clerk drawing also puts a medial point between IV and S, where Itinerarium, pl. 12, indicates quite a wide space. Both drawings (see fig. 4 (a) and (b) above) indicate a lesser space between R and I, and between S and I. Thus the exact form of the text is uncertain. RIVS IMP, as read by Huebner and Keppie, is the likely reading, with the implication that RIVS is a name-ending, […]rius followed by imp[…]. But the spacing raises the possibility that IV S is the numeral ‘4½’, and even that MP is m(ille) p(assuum), ‘mile(s)’; which would suggest a measurement of distance, like other stones from the Antonine Wall.

¹² By a metal-detectorist, PAS ref. OXON-A9C17E, and currently held by the British Museum. Edward Caswell, Finds Liaison Officer for Oxfordshire, sent a photograph and other details.

¹³ The first three letters are certainly EXI, but a name *Eximorinus is not attested whereas Memor and its derivatives such as Memorinus are quite common. This would suggest the engraver bungled ME by mis-reading the diagonals of M and reversing it with E. For other ring-bezels inscribed retrograde with uiuas and a personal name, see RIB II.3, 2422.25; Britannia 38 (2007), 353, No. 11; 45 (2014), 446, No. 28 (with in deo and thus Christian). Britannia 29 (1998), 436, No. 10 (also Christian) is not said to be retrograde. Similar inscriptions but rectograde are found on ring-facets: RIB II.3, 2422.14 and 70, both Christian (in deo). And for bezels without a personal name, see RIB II.3, 2422.15 (uiuas in deo) and 42 (uiuas).

¹⁴ Museum of Archaeology, Durham, DURMA.U24. Details of this and Alienum (b) below come from the Museum website and the Curator, Gemma Lewis. Its provenance has not yet been established, but is thought to be one of Eric Birley's excavations.

¹⁵ The sherd is more or less rectangular, as if trimmed into a ‘counter’, but if so, the graffito is unrelated. Since it observes the turning-marks left by the potter's wheel, it was evidently written towards the top of the circumference of the foot-ring, like most ownership graffiti. The owner's cognomen Rufus is very common.

¹⁶ During excavation by Colchester Archaeological Trust, with a drawing of the dipinto in R.P. Symonds and S. Wade, Roman Pottery from Excavations in Colchester 1971–86 (1999), fig. 3.3, No. 55. Now in Colchester Museum (COLEM.1988.44.A2391), from where Glynn Davis sent a photograph and other details.

¹⁷ The loop of the first o was not completed, and the downward stroke of d was continued into ligatured i. Three modii are quivalent to 26.25 litres. The average capacity of Dressel 2–4 is 25.20 litres, according to D.P.S. Peacock and D.F. Williams, Amphorae and the Roman Economy (1991), 52.

¹⁸ During the excavations published as Jo Draper, Excavations by Mr H.P. Cooper on the Roman Site at Hill Farm, Gestingthorpe, Essex (1985), in which this graffito is item No. 473 on p. 83 with fig. 41.473 (by Warwick Rodwell).

¹⁹ Unless it is a name derived from Victor such as Victorinus.

²⁰ PAS ref. GLO-9B010A, drafted by Kurt Adams, Finds Liaison Officer for Gloucestershire, who sent photographs and other details.

²¹ Assuming that M includes Ʌ ligatured, but there is no explicit indication such as a tiny cross-stroke. The name is Celtic and rare (with only one instance in Dalmatia, CIL iii 13975), but both elements are found in other names. No other impression of the seal is known.

²² With the next item, and reported to Cotswold Archaeology where Neil Holbrook informed Peter Warry, who identified both stamps and sent a photograph.

²³ RIB II.5, 2489.4A.

²⁴ RIB II.5, 2489.49.

²⁵ By a metal-detectorist on the site of the temple of Senuna, and noted by Ralph Jackson and Gilbert Burleigh, Dea Senuna: Treasure, Cult and Ritual at Ashwell, Hertfordshire (2018), 200. It is now in the British Museum, acc. no. 2006, 1003.1, where it was made available by Richard Hobbs.

²⁶ The graffito is read when the spoon is held in the left hand, showing that it was incised by the owner himself, not by a professional engraver (using a vice) for it to be read when used. The two strokes after MOD look more like Ʌ or R, but must be a clumsy II for E. The two vertical strokes after S must be meant for TI, not E, but there is no sign of the cross-stroke of T. The next letter is probably N, but might be an incomplete IɅ (for Modestianus).

²⁷ With the next item during excavation by Border Archaeology, from where Jo Mills made them available (respectively <SF 153> and <SF 189>).

²⁸ A mark of identification, perhaps the numeral ‘2’.

²⁹ First incised were the letters V and T, rather widely separated. Then two converging diagonals which cut the tip of V and the cross-bar of T. They do not meet because of the rim, but they are linked by a slighter diagonal from the foot of the first to the second midway. They can be seen as an incomplete A. Finally a long diagonal stroke, also cutting the cross-bar of T, which meets another to its left, at about the three-quarter point. Between them and below is a slighter, detached diagonal stroke. These form a second A, better made and embracing the whole of the circle underneath. V T might be the very common name Vitalis abbreviated, but there is no sign of I in the space between V and T. They were overwritten by A, twice.

³⁰ The graffito is complete, but its letters differ in form. The first is capital P with a neat serif across the foot. The third is also a capital, S, but much smaller. Between them, and rather cramped for space, is a long vertical stroke which trails off left in a downward diagonal, and is topped by a separate short diagonal stroke. This might be read as cursive R, but is more likely to be a cursive or ‘open’ A, since the short, straight diagonal would have continued an upward diagonal from the left for R. Also the sequence PAS is more easily understood than PRS: PRS might be seen as the initials P(ublius) R(…) S(…), but PAS would be the abbreviated name Pas(tor), well attested in Britain at Vindolanda (Tab. Vindol. II, 259 and III, 619), Carvoran (RIB 1795) and Carlisle (Tab. Luguval. 16.25).

³¹ During the excavations published as Niblett, Rosalind, Manning, William and Saunders, Christopher, ‘Verulamium: Excavations within the Roman Town 1986–88’, Britannia 37 (2006), 53–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar, in which it is p. 140, No. 9, and illustrated in figs. 39 and 40.

³² The idea of the lover as ‘slave’ is so familiar (Copley, F.O., ‘Servitium amoris in the Roman Elegists’, TAPA 78 (1947), 285–300Google Scholar) that the phrase seruus amoris must have been a cliché, yet this finger-ring is its first instance as an inscription; indeed, in Classical literature it occurs only in Propertius’ imagined epitaph (Elegies ii.13.35–6): unius servus amoris, ‘the slave of a single love’ [for Cynthia].

³³ During excavation by Network Archaeology, (16288) SF 906, who made it available. It will be published in their final report with eight other graffiti, all rather slight; marks of identification and the fragment of an amphora potter's ‘signature’, probably La[…].

³⁴ R is perfunctory, little more than a vertical stroke joined by two diagonal strokes which intersect, but there is also a curve to the right. A is ‘open’, without a cross-bar. There are other possibilities, such as [C]ar(…) for [C]ar(us) (etc.) and [V]ar(…) for [V]ar(us) (etc.), but for other instances of MAR on samian, see RIB II.7, 2501.322, 323 and 324.

³⁵ C. Cowan, F. Seeley, A. Wardle, A. Westman and L. Wheeler, Roman Southwark Settlement and Economy: Excavations in Southwark 1973–91 (2009), 134, fig. 101 <S67>. At p. 131 said to be ‘inscribed CARA FILIS’, but without explanation. Now in the Museum of London, acc. no. 179BHS89[390]<790>.

³⁶ This Celtic name is not common, but is well attested as that of a samian potter (CARATIM). In Britain it is borne by one of the dedicators of the Foss Dyke Mars (RIB 274); also compare RIB II.7, 2501.127, Caraticu[s].

³⁷ By a metal-detectorist and acquired by the British Museum after being declared Treasure in 2000. For a photograph and other details, see <https://britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H 2005-0403-1>

³⁸ uti (infinitive) felix is a variant of the usual utere (imperative) felix formula found on four other finger-rings, RIB II.3, 2422.41 (Brafield); 2423.29 (Kilbride); Britannia 37 (2006), 485, No. 59 (Ponthir); 41 (2010), 448, No. 10 (Hockcliffe). Abbreviated to VTF and VF, it is found on two more rings: RIB II.3, 2423.28 (Southwark); Britannia 47 (2016), 395, No. 10 (Lydney).

³⁹ During excavation by CFA Archaeology, for which see its Report No. MK 246/22, ‘Land at Poppyfields Drive, Snettisham, Norfolk’, by Alessio Auricchio-Bund and Rebecca Hunt. The graffito is noted on pp. 43 and 149, and was made available by James Walker.

⁴⁰ The graffito is complete and should be read this way up because the second stroke of V can be seen to cut the first. The un-Latin diphthong –ou– is frequent in Celtic personal names, some of which end in –ounus/–ouna (feminine), but only two are known to begin with this element, Ouniccus (CIL xiii 11399) and the god Ouniorix, uniquely attested by CIL xiii 4651. Either name might have been abbreviated here to OVN, but quite likely the first element was compounded with another now lost, which was omitted in abbreviation.

⁴¹ During excavation by the Ise Archaeological Research Society, and published by Looker, James, ‘Another early Christian tank/font from Northamptonshire’, Northamptonshire Archaeology 28 (1998–99), 163–4Google Scholar, where it is said to be intended for Kettering Museum. For other lead tanks with a moulded Chi-Rho, see the next item (No. 21); RIB II.2, 2416.8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14; Britannia 20 (1989), 333, No. 13; 31 (2000, 442, No. 42; and Belinda Crerar, ‘Contextualising Romano-British lead tanks: a study in design, destruction and deposition’, Britannia 43 (2012), 135–66.

⁴² During excavation by Phoenix Archaeology, and published by Paul Booth, Esther Cameron and Belinda Crerar, ‘A Roman lead ‘tank’ from Wigginton, North Oxfordshire’, Oxoniensia 2011, 266–72.

⁴³ By a metal-detectorist, PAS ref. SF1101 (with drawing).

⁴⁴ DE is separated from M by a double medial point like a modern comma: for this very abbreviated legend compare the Narford silver ring inscribed DEM (Britannia 45 (2014), 445, No. 27, with note). A dedication to the god Mercury is suggested by the recent discovery in Suffolk of another silver ring dedicated to him: see Britannia 53 (2022), 524, No. 54 (MER), which cites (n. 82) five others. But these are all explicitly MER, whereas the present ring, like the Narford ring, might have been intended for Mars or Minerva instead.

⁴⁵ By TimeLine Auctions (4 June 2024, Lot 685).

⁴⁶ For ‘knee’ brooches with a similar moulded inscription, but reading VTERE FELIX, see RIB II.3, 2421.56–58. This is the first instance of VITɅ VENI from Britain, or indeed elsewhere, but the reverse sequence VENI VITA occurs on a copper-alloy finger-ring from Mainz (CIL xiii 10024, 80). uita (‘life’) was a term of endearment (OLD s.v. uita 5), used for example by Cicero in writing to his wife (ad fam. 14.4.1), te quam primum, mea uita, cupio uidere. ‘My darling, I long to see you as soon as possible’.

⁴⁷ During the excavations published as N. Hodgson, The Roman Fort at Wallsend: Excavations in 1997–1998 (2003), where this graffito is p. 183, No. 3, and illustrated at 184, fig. 129.3. It should have been noticed in Britannia (2003) like another item (Britannia (2003), 380, No. 49) from the same excavation.

⁴⁸ Despite the samian bowl (RIB II.7, 2501.307) inscribed with a list of names followed by uas communis, ‘(their) common dish’, communis here is the owner's name. It is quite a common cognomen, well attested in Britain: see RIB II.7, 2501.140; II.8, 2503.232; III, 3041; Britannia 24 (1993), 317. No. 9; Tab. Lond. Bloomberg 53.2 (with note).

⁴⁹ By a metal-detectorist in a hoard of copper-alloy scrap, PAS ref. WILT-DA6C21. Sophie Hawke, Finds Liaison Officer for Wiltshire, sent photographs and other details.

⁵⁰ The graffito is apparently complete. First a vertical stroke with a horizontal stroke at mid-height; then a gently curving stroke not wide enough for C; and finally XX. To judge by cruder graffiti found on two other trullae (RIB II, 2415.40 and 44), this is the numeral ‘1’ followed by an incomplete denarius sign (properly X with a horizontal stroke to the left), and then the numeral XX, ‘20’.

⁵¹ During the excavations published as S.S. Frere and J.J. Wilkes, Strageath: Excavations within the Roman Fort (1989), where this sherd is p. 268, No. 13, with fig. 134.13; for its date, see 212, S3 (stamped by Chresimus). It should have been included in RIB II.7, 2501, like the other samian graffito (268, No. 12) which is now 2501.523.

⁵² Rufus is much more common than Rufius as a cognomen, but a diminutive I is squeezed in between F and V, below the cross-strokes of F.

⁵³ In field-walking; noted by L.J.F. Keppie in Britannia 31 (2000), 381, as ‘stamped for P. Cipius Polybius’.

⁵⁴ Now in the Hunterian Museum (GLAHM:112523), its inscription described by the University of Glasgow Collections website as ‘P CIPI’. It is presumably incomplete. For other trullae stamped by this Campanian bronze-smith, his cognomen variously spelt, see RIB II.2, 2415.17–27 (with p. 44) and Britannia 37 (2006), 484, No. 56.

⁵⁵ At the National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh, by invitation of Fraser Hunter, with whom the readings were discussed. He is responsible for the new photographs and Marion O'Neil for the new drawings.

⁵⁶ F. Hunter, A. Kaufmann-Heinimann and K. Painter (eds), The Late Roman Silver Treasure from Traprain Law (2022), 286–309.

⁵⁷ As noted in Britannia 40 (2009), 362, Add. (f) with note. RIB draws the graffito as if it were flat, without stating that the fragment is still folded upon itself (see fig. 17 (a) above). Its drawing does not show that ON was written first, then corrected by being over-written with I and a ligatured N. C was written with its second stroke extended downward and then to the right (where it is now lost in corrosion and damage due to the folding); thus forming the lowest horizontal stroke of E, before the other two were added.

⁵⁸ The drawing in RIB omits the third incomplete diagonal-pair of (b), which shows that they should be read as MɅ inverted as to (a), not as VV. The diagonals of Ʌ cut the first N of (a), showing that (b) was incised after (a). Many names are possible, but the only common one is Maior and its derivatives.

⁵⁹ The graffito was first published by Collingwood Bruce in Arch. Ael. n.s. 10 (1884–5), 252–3, the only source of RIB II, 2493.77, which notes the sherd as ‘now lost’. But the same sherd was drawn by Wright in 1940 when it was in the Museum of Antiquities, Newcastle, and his record is the source of RIB II, 2502.25, which notes its identity with 2493.77, ‘which should now be deleted’. However, he described it as ‘part of a jug’, apparently because it was stored with part of a stamped amphora handle in the same fabric. This is now evident because, when the Museum closed in 2008, both fragments were transferred to the Great North Museum: Hancock, where they are inv. no. NEWMA:1956.128.4.A. Photographs of them were sent by the Assistant Keeper of Archaeology, Jo Anderson. The same ‘signature’ has also been found at Vindolanda (Britannia 53 (2022), 520, No. 44, and see fig. 18 (b) above), prompting Add. (d) on p. 530, which by mistake attributes RIB II, 2493.77 to ‘Wallsend’.

⁶⁰ As noted by D.F. Williams in L.P. Wenham and B. Heywood, The 1968 to 1970 Excavations in the Vicus at Malton, North Yorkshire (1997), 114. Photographs were sent from Malton Museum by David Snowden.

⁶¹ The centre letter looks more like V than (inverted) Ʌ or O, as shown in fig. 19 above. To its left, the tip of a letter such as Ʌ or M, followed by O or S, looks more likely than a very wide O. To its right, a vertical stroke (for I), but with possible trace of a horizontal stroke mid-way for F or P.

⁶² Not Maur[i]. Only the tip survives of the letter after R, but its angle indicates V, not I. The two medial points enclosing VR cannot be explained.

⁶³ Britannia 46 (2015), 388, No. 6 and item No. 2 above.

⁶⁴ What was read as T is the numeral ‘I’, a vertical stroke with a fine horizontal line at top and bottom, the first probably a superscript bar identifying it as a numeral. In the two altars just cited, this numeral was preceded by COH and followed by VAN, both abbreviated. This is almost certainly so here, but the grammatical case of COH is unknown.

⁶⁵ For the final publication of the Priors Hall site by Oxford Archaeology (East).

⁶⁶ The graffito was probably three lines in all, the first line (a batch-total or date) having been lost entirely. F was made with an elongated top-stroke, the tip of which survives. Above it, the first surviving letter is an incomplete vertical stroke. This was tentatively read as T for [Po]tenti[nus], but the space to its right is rather wide if T were made with a short cross-stroke like T in FECIT. P seems more likely, therefore, as if for [Re]penti[nus]. Kajanto (The Latin Cognomina, pp. 247 and 296) notes 14 instances of Potentinus in CIL compared with 47 for Repentinus.

⁶⁷ Information from Liz Friendship-Taylor, who has spoken to the finders, Mick and Lynn Gardner of Piddington, in whose possession it remains. They brought it to Piddington Roman villa Museum for identification, which then made it available with items actually found at the villa (Britannia 47 (2016), 404–6, Nos. 19–21).

⁶⁸ In 2021 or later, according to BBC News (20 March 2024), https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9706nq2nvjo. Also stolen was another Roman stone, not identified, but perhaps the uninscribed altar mentioned in the note to RIB 1230.

⁶⁹ Acc. no. KINCM:2005.1221.163. The curator told Anthony Lee (who discusses the die in ‘Making a good impression’, his contribution of 18 February 2018 to the Roman Lincolnshire Revealed website) that it was acquired for the museum by its first curator, Thomas Sheppard (1876–1945). Sheppard was born in South Ferriby, a Roman site, prompting the assumption that he found the die there.

⁷⁰ It is there said to be ‘ap(ud) Greppo abbatem’, meaning that it was owned by Jean-Gabriel-Honoré Greppo (1788–1863), priest of a parish in Lyon who wrote on Roman archaeology. Since he had been dead by then for half a century, the implication is that nothing was known of its subsequent history; certainly it is not now in Lyon Museum (information from Laure de Chavagnac). A metal die, even if duplicated, would only be used in one place of manufacture; duplicates would not be found hundreds of miles apart. It is much easier to suppose that Greppo's collection was dispersed after his death, and that the ‘signaculum’ was ultimately bought by Thomas Sheppard, well known as a collector of antiquities.

⁷¹ Acc. no. DURMA.1985.81.334. Part of the Oswald-Plicque Collection which Eric Birley bought for Durham University in 1950, for which see Sally Elizabeth Cottam, A Study of the Work of Dr. Felix Oswald on the Oswald-Plicque Collection of Samian Pottery, Now at Durham University (1991), Durham e-thesis online. She notes this sherd at p. 40 (drawn as pl. II, No. 4), observing that it was inscribed during manufacture ‘as the slip has coated the inside of the letters’. The graffito is thus the potter's signature, not an ownership inscription.

⁷² The first letter is much more like P than A, the only other possibility. The second letter is certainly R, followed by a space, and then S. The next letter looks like O, but can be taken as C which was completed by a second stroke curving down to the foot of I, which must be the genitive termination. (The alternative sequence OI would be difficult.) The space between R and S suggests that a diminutive I was ligatured to the tip of R.

⁷³ Cottam does not offer a reading, but is otherwise doubtful of Oswald's attribution of this sherd to the potter Butrio of Lezoux. It is one of 94 sherds Oswald attributed to him, 91 of them from Lezoux, where Alfred-Edward Plicque excavated.