ABSTRACT

Latin Inscriptions in the San Antonio Museum of Art

Gunhee Isaac Lee

Director: Alden Smith, Ph.D.

The purpose of this thesis is to introduce the reader to Latin inscriptions found in
the San Antonio Museum of Art. These inscriptions are epitaphs produced during the
time of Roman Empire, and studying these inscriptions will broaden the understanding of
Latin epigraphy. The first chapter consists of introduction and background of Latin
epigraphy. Chapter Two contains inscriptions from the San Antonio Museum of Art
along with complementation, direct translation, and evaluation of these inscriptions
followed by the examples from ILS for further classification and scholarly research.
Finally, Chapter Three contains the criticism of epigraphy and the importance of
inscriptions.
 APPROVED BY DIRECTOR OF HONORS THESIS:

_______________________________________

Dr. Alden Smith, Classics Department

APPROVED BY THE HONORS PROGRAM:

_______________________________________

Dr. Andrew Wisely, Director

DATE: __________________________
LATIN INSCRIPTIONS IN THE SAN ANTONIO MUSEUM OF ART

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of

Baylor University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Honors Program

By

Gunhee Isaac Lee

Waco, Texas

May 2013
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT .........................................................................................................................

SIGNATURE PAGE ...........................................................................................................

TITLE PAGE.......................................................................................................................

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................... vi

 
CHAPTER ONE:
Introduction and Background.......................................................................................... 1

Introduction to the Subject .............................................................................................. 1

Background ..................................................................................................................... 2
Characteristics and Importance of Latin Inscription.................................................... 3

Types of Latin Inscription............................................................................................ 4

Building  Inscriptions  ............................................................................................................  4  

Honorific Inscriptions ......................................................................................... 5
Dedicatory  inscriptions  ........................................................................................................  5  
Sepulchral  Inscriptions  or  Epitaphs  .................................................................................  6  
Inscriptions  on  Portable  Objects  .......................................................................................  6  
Graffiti  and  Dipinti  .................................................................................................................  7  
Materials of Latin Inscription ...................................................................................... 8

Dating Latin Inscriptions ............................................................................................. 8

Modern Scholarship on Latin Epigraphy ..................................................................... 9

Roman Names ............................................................................................................ 12

  ii  
CHAPTER TWO:    
Inscriptions from the San Antonio Museum of Art ..................................................... 13

Cinerary urn of Saturnia ................................................................................................ 13

Cinerary urn of Flavius .................................................................................................. 18

Cinerary urn of Lepidia ................................................................................................. 22

Cinerary urn of Sulpicia ................................................................................................ 27

Funerary relief of Lucius Gallonius Ascanto, Lucius Gallonius Philodamus, and

Gallonia Laais ................................................................................................................ 31

Funerary Inscription ...................................................................................................... 35

 
CHAPTER THREE:
Criticism and Importance .............................................................................................. 38  
Criticism of Epigraphy  ...................................................................................................................  38  

Importance of these inscriptions ................................................................................ 40

   
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................... 43

  iii  
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my genuine gratitude to my thesis director Dr. Alden

Smith, who has been my mentor, friend, and brother in Christ. I have often gone astray
during my four years of my undergraduate life and especially in my senior year, but you
have always shown me the grace that I needed. This thesis is made possible by your
encouragements, threats, and advice. I have seen God’s grace in your life, and I wish to
reflect that in my life too. You have been a father figure throughout my Baylor life.
I also would like to express my gratitude to Dean Thomas Hibbs, who has given
me so many opportunities throughout the Honors College and Residential College. You
have often turned a blind eye on me whenever I have committed rather serious
misdemeanors. I thank you for that. You have not only encouraged me, but also given me
grave advice for my future academic career. I will heed your advice well. If I ever choose
to become a Catholic, I want you to be my godfather.
Great honor and thanks belong to Dr. Lynn Tatum, my favorite professor who
encouraged me to get out of my long-held complacency, to think and evaluate things that
I used to take for granted, and to pursue my dream. You are my tutor and liberator. You
made me to become a thinking-Christian through some of the most unlikely, even
uncomfortable, lessons. I know I will keep my faith strong wherever I go due to your
teachings. I am ready to explore! If I a choice to have a weird uncle, I would love for you
to be one for me.
I am ever grateful to Dr. Brent Froberg, who has spent so many hours helping me
to complete my thesis. It is your unselfish investment in my thesis that saved me from a
certain failure, and I cannot thank you enough for this. I will make sure to lend help to
those who are in abject despair and horror. What a savior you are!
I extend my gratitude and sincere affection to my dear friends Wesley Beck,
Adaobi Ekweani, Jacob Imam, Ross Rohlmeier, Will Simmons, and Dillon Stull, who
prayed, fasted, encouraged, and believed in me while I was struggling to finish all my
works. You guys are great gifts in my life, and I love you all so much. May the blessings
of our Lord be upon all of you and your families!
Finally and most importantly, I express my great love and appreciation to God,
who provided me with fantastic family, friends, professors, and education. You have led
me here, and you are the best screenwriter ever. I love you Lord with all my heart, soul,
and might. I cannot wait to find out your plans for my future.
 
Entrances  to  holiness  are  everywhere.  
The  possibility  of  ascent  is  all  the  time,  
even  at  unlikely  times  and  through  unlikely  places.  
There  is  no  place  on  earth  without  the  Presence.  

  iv  
  

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction and Background

I. Introduction

The title of this thesis is Latin Inscriptions in the San Antonio Museum of Art. The

purpose of this thesis is to present and to examine six Latin inscriptions found in the San

Antonio Museum of Art. During the last spring break, Dr. Smith and I visited the San

Antonio Museum of Art, searching for inscriptions worthy of further research and

examination. There we found a number of artifacts, namely funerary urns and

tombstones. We realized that for each entry there is only minimal information available

regarding its functional name, origin of style, time period, material, and inscriptional

translation. After speaking with the curator, we further discovered that none of these

inscriptions was previously researched on or published by scholars. Upon realizing this, I

decided to do my thesis project on these inscriptions. The majority of inscriptions to be

considered in this thesis are sepulchral inscriptions and epitaphs. Expansion, direct

translation, and evaluation of these inscriptions will be followed by examples from the

Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae and Harvard University’s Sackler Museum for further

classification and scholarly research. I dedicate this thesis to aspiring Latin scholars who

wish to apply their scholarship of Latin language beyond classroom readings and

translations. In the practical, first-hand field of epigraphy, one can utilize his or her

  1  
learning of language as well as acquire further knowledge of translating, cataloguing, and

understanding inscriptions based on the previous academic work of epigraphers. It is my

wish that every Latin scholar has a chance to visit local museums and inquire practical,

everyday inscriptions from Roman civilization. This opportunity will not only broaden

his or her understanding of Latin, but also encourage him or her to investigate the life and

values of Romans to whom we owe a significant part of our Western civilization.

II. Background

Epigraphy is indispensable to numerous academic disciplines, and it is applied in vast

areas of studies including history, archeology, sociology, and linguistics. In order better

to understand the lives and customs of antiquity, one must examine artifacts, writings,

and remains of the ancients. Scholars who are specialized in the study of inscriptions are

known as epigraphers or epigraphists. Upon discovering or studying an inscription,

epigraphers identify the grapheme, translate its message, clarify its meaning, and classify

its uses by date and according to context. Then, epigraphers draw conclusions about the

writer and his/her intention(s), historical relevance, and cultural circumstance. Thanks to

ongoing excavation, (re)discovery, and continuous investigation of remaining writings

and artifacts, scholars can reconstruct lives, traditions, culture, and history of ancient

civilizations.

Roman Epigraphy

Characteristics and Importance of Latin Inscription

  2  
 The study of Roman inscriptions is distinguished from other inscriptions (e.g.

Greek, Hebrew, or Egyptian) in terms of number, range, time, and orthography.

According to Lawrence Keppie, as of 1991, there were over 300,000 known inscriptions

with more inscriptions discovered at a rate of a thousand per year1. Roman civilization

lasted well over a thousand years, and its range stretched from the British Isles to Asia

Minor. Crucial to its extensive scope of influence was the road system, well-developed

and maintained by the Romans. During this thousand-year period, Latin was propagated

throughout the entire Roman world, and scholars discover Latin inscriptions from Italy,

Greece, Egypt, Turkey, and even Yugoslavia. Another distinguishing feature of Roman

epigraphy comes from its letters. Because Latin alphabets did not change in their forms

and are still used in the Romance languages, Latin inscriptions in good condition provide

an orthographic distinction for scholars:

The capital letters used in classic Roman inscriptions are the most living
element in the heritage handed down to us by antiquity. No other
civilization has endowed its letters with such an unmistakable character,
familiar to all those who read and write—a form which has lost none of its
validity and still constitutes the means of communication on the languages
of many people.2

Finally, the significance of Latin inscriptions as historical artifact is great. Apart

from forgeries, they are authoritative because they are generally legible and incorruptible.

Thus R.G. Collingwood claims that the inscriptions are, “the most important single

source for the history and organization of the Roman Empire.”3

                                                                                                               
1
Lawrence Keppie. Understanding Roman Inscriptions (London, 1991), 9.
2
Giovanni Mardersteig, ed. Felice Feliciano veronese, Alphabetum Romanum (Verona 1960, Editiones
Officinae Bodoni), 9 (transl. R. H. Boothroyd).
3
R. G. Collingwood and I. A. Richmond. The Archaeology of Roman Britain (Oxford, 1930), 162.

  3  
 Types of Latin Inscription

Upon discovering and examining inscriptions, epigraphers classify them by their

intended functions, media of the writing, and the time of their production. Among these,

the most common method of categorization is the function, by which scholars identify the

intent or purpose of an inscription. In addition, combinations of above-mentioned

classifications were also used in categorizing inscriptions.

Building Inscriptions: These inscriptions record the construction or reconstruction of

temples, baths, theaters, and other public works (tituli operum publicorum). They often

indicate the person or the community responsible for the building project, as well as any

individual to whom the work might be dedicated. Many aqueducts, bridges, and arches

bear the names of their builder in the nominative case and the description of achieved

project in the accusative case.

Pantheon (CIL VI. 896):

M . AGRIPPA . L . F . COS .

TERTIVM . FECIT.

M[ARCUS] AGRIPPA L[UCII]

F[ILIUS] CO[N] S[UL] TERTIVM

FECIT.

Translation: Marcus Agrippa, son of Figure  1  Pantheon  

Lucius, made this building when consul for the third time.

  4  
Honorific Inscriptions (tituli honorarii): These inscriptions, often found on the base of

statues of distinguished men, honor the life and achievements of a particular individual.

This practice was originally a Greek custom, and early Roman honorific inscriptions

display the Greek influence by having the name of the person honored in the accusative

case with the verb omitted. Later honorary inscriptions present the name of the person

honored in the nominative case followed by his title.

Inscription found on a pedestal at Saguntum (CIL II. 3828):

C. Caesari Augusti f(ilio)

Pontif(ici), co(n)s(uli) design(nato).

Translation: To the son of Caius Caesar Augustus, Pontifex, appointed consul.

Dedicatory Inscriptions (tituli sacri): These inscriptions appear on the objects that are

consecrated to the gods or goddesses. Dedicatory inscriptions are found on altars, vases,

and votive tablets. The name of the divinity is usually written in the dative case except

for those written occasionally in the genitive case. The name of the dedicator often

appears with indications of his rank, profession, and achievements.

An inscription found at Terni in Umbria (CIL XI. 4170):

Saluti perpetuae Augustae

libertatique publicae

populi Romani.

Translation: For perpetual good health of Augustus and to the public freedom of the

Roman people.

  5  
Sepulchral Inscriptions or Epitaphs (tituli sepulcrales): These inscriptions are often found

on tombstones, cinerary urns, and burial grounds. These indicate the name of the

deceased in the nominative case with some in the genitive case, the profession of the

deceased, the duration of his or her life, and the name(s) of the individual(s) responsible

for the monument. In other cases, one may find the life and achievement of the deceased

along with ornamentation and poetical eulogy.

An inscription found in Celma (Calama) and Constantine (Cirta) Numidia (CIL VIII.

5682):

d(is) m(anibus) M. Munatius Victor v(ixit) a(nnos) XXX, h(ic). s(itus). e(st)., o(ssa) e(i)

b(ene) q(uiescant).

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, Marius Munatius Victor, who lived 30 years. Here

he is located. May his bones rest well.

Inscriptions on Portable Objects (instrumenta domestica): These are inscriptions found on

smaller, movable objects of different shapes and uses. Some are made of metal while

others are made of clay, gems, or tiles. Examples of these are weights, armors, missiles,

rings, and stamps.

Coins of Arcadius and Honorius (CIL VII 1196):

EX OF(FICINA) FL(AVII?)

HONORINI.

Translation: From the office of Flavius Honorius.

  6  
Graffiti and Dipinti: These inscriptions are writings and drawings scratched (graffiti) or

painted (dipinti) on walls. Dipinti include advertisement of gladiatorial shows and

election. Graffiti are casual and unofficial scribbles that mention nearly any topic such as

statements of happiness, slander, and threat.

Many of the inscriptions can fall into multiple categories described above. For

example, the Arch of Titus has both a building inscription and an honorific text that

commemorate the achievement

of Titus, who conquered

Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and

suppressed the rebellion of the

Jews.

Inscription: Figure  2  Arch  of  Titus  

Senatus

Populusque Romanus

divo Tito divi Vespasiani f(ilio)

Vespasiano Augusto.

Translation: The Roman Senate and People (dedicate this) to the divine Titus

Vespasianus Augustus, son of the divine Vespasian.

  7  
 Materials of Latin Inscription

The vast majority of surviving Latin inscriptions are cut or carved in stone of

various kinds. Some are scratched or stamped on the surface of metals such as gold,

silver, bronze, or lead. Others are incised on wax tablets, potteries, and earthenware. In

rare instances, some inscriptions are painted on walls and form mosaic messages with

small pebbles4.

Dating Latin Inscriptions

Although some inscriptions

provide relatively accurate dating in

their contents, many inscriptions lack

this information. Because few

inscriptions bear exact dates of their

production, epigraphers must

investigate and offer conjectures Figure  3  Fasti  Consulares  

concerning dates of inscriptions. In Understanding Roman Inscriptions, Lawrence

Keppie mentions the general lack of exact dating in Latin inscriptions. However, he

claims, this lack of precision occurs not because they did not have a calendar system or

means of expressing a date. On the contrary, the Romans had several ways of conveying

a date. First, each year was known by the names of the two senators elected as consuls. A

                                                                                                               
4
Arthur E. Gordon. Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy (Berkeley: University of California, 1983),
5.

  8  
list of consuls of Rome down to the end of Augustus’ reign in a fragmentary condition

exists as the Fasti Consulares.

In addition to the above-mentioned manner, another system calculated a date

“from the foundation of the city” (ab urbe condita= A V C). However, few inscriptions

contain this dating method. Finally during the imperial period, dates were indicated by

the names of the incumbent emperor. Both governmental records and private writings

provided ample information about the known dates of each emperor’s reign and their

titles and authorities:

For even more exact dating, particularly valuable information is provided

by the number of times the emperor had held the power of a tribune
(tribunicia postestas), which was conferred on an annual basis. For most
emperors of the first century AD, the tribunician power was renewed
annually on the date of accession, but from the end of the first century
most emperors, whatever the exact date of accession, had the tribunician
power renews on 10 December, the tradition day on which the tribunes of
the Roman Republic came into office; thereafter a new emperor would be
given the designation tribunicia potestate II (and so on)5

For inscriptions that bear no dating system, epigraphers estimate the dating based

on their media, their ornamentations, their circumstances of discovery, and their contents.

For example, if multiple inscriptions are found in a proximal location, one is considered

older than others if it is excavated from a lower stratum. The grammar and words used in

an inscription itself often provide hints for assuming the date.

Modern Scholarship on Latin Epigraphy

Although scholars did not reach a general consensus on the nature and beginning

of modern Latin epigraphy, many regard Count Bartolommeo Borghesi (1781-1860), a

renowned Classical scholar of San Marino, as the founder of the modern Latin epigraphy.
                                                                                                               
5
Keppie (1991), 26.

  9  
During his research career, Borghesi investigated much about the Fasti Consulares and

produced multiple volumes of books dedicated to Latin inscriptions. 6 Borghesi also

trained a number of contemporary epigraphers such as Olaf Kellermann of Copenhagen

and Theodor Mommsen.

A major breakthrough in modern Latin epigraphy began when a group of

epigraphers devised a plan to examine, record, and catalogue all known Latin inscriptions

and to publish them in one place. This ambitious project was endorsed initially by the

French Academy, but ultimately taken up by the Royal Prussian Academy at Berlin.

Instrumental to this project was Theodor Mommsen (1817-1903), a German classicist,

historian, and archaeologist who received the Nobel Prize in Literature (1902). While he

was conducting research in Italy, Mommsen, trained by Bartolommeo Borghesi and W.

Henzen, wrote in 1852 “Inscriptions of the Kingdom of Naples” and demonstrated a

superb scheme to gather and examine known inscriptions in order to present the history

and development of the laws of Italian communities. The Berlin Academy adopted

Mommsen’s proposal for a project to catalogue all known Latin inscriptions, now known

as the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (commonly referred as CIL). The first volume

appeared in 1863, and the complete CIL consisted of seventeen volumes, of which

Mommsen wrote five and edited many more. From its inception, the CIL became the

authoritative source for Latin epigraphy, with its approximately 180,000 inscriptions.

The Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum is today’s standard collection and edition of

Latin inscriptions, spanning a period from the sixth century B.C. to the end of the sixth

century A.D. It is organized by the location of inscriptions and by the time of their
                                                                                                               
6
De La Blanchere. Bibliothèque Historique Et Littéraire. Histoire Naturelle Pittoresque, Mémoires D'une
Ménagerie, Frosch Et Pécopin (Paris: Albanel, Baltenweck, 1876), 45-58.

  10  
production. Each volume contains inscriptions from different regions ruled by Rome. For

example, the Oriental (Asia, Egypt, and the Greek provinces) inscriptions are covered in

Volume III while those of Central and Southern Italy, Sicily, and Sardinia are covered in

Volumes IX and X7.

Although the CIL is a comprehensive publication of more than 180,000

inscriptions, many found it simply too long and extensive to search for a particular

inscription. Part of the problem comes from its organization: the inscriptions are grouped

under the location or town name rather than their subject matter. Readers are tempted to

suppose that location indicates the artifact’s original findspot. However, this supposition

is not always accurate because the location or town can be a major collection center or a

museum rather than a findspot. Moreover, the insufficient organization based on the

subject matter further frustrated epigraphers who wished to compare and contrast

inscriptions by their kind and functions. Recognizing this problem of CIL, a German

epigrapher named Hermann Dessau (1856-1931) edited and published the Inscriptiones

Latinae Selectae (commonly referred as ILS). ILS offers a five-volume selection of about

9,000 Latin inscriptions organized in categories according to subject matters with

supporting materials and notes to guide epigraphers for further research. Upon studying

an inscription, an epigrapher may consult ILS for the classification and organization and

then gather further materials from CIL8.

                                                                                                               
7
John Edwin Sandys. Latin Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions (Cambridge,
1919), 31.

8
Keppie (1991), 37.

  11  
 Roman Names

Although some of the earliest inscriptions contain single names such as Duenos or

Bonus, scholars generally agree that, by the beginning of the Republic, Romans had at

least two names, his/her praenomen (forename) and nomen (family name). Most of the

freeborn Romans had three names: the praenomen, the nomen, and the cognomen.

Examples of this are Marcus Tullius Cicero and Gaius Julius Caesar. In an inscription,

the praenomen and nomen of the individual are followed by the praenomen of the

person’s father. Next would come a surname (cognomen), which provides further

distinction and identification for a growing Roman population.

The praenomen was the personal name given to a boy after his birth. In earlier

times, praenomen was often omitted in inscriptions. However, after the ordinance of

Marcus Aurelius passed to oblige all people to report the birth of a son, more inscriptions

contained children’s praenomina. The nomen was common to both men and women of

the household, and many of them were formed by adding a suffix such as –ius or –anus.

The cognomen, invented later than the nomen, was often abbreviated or omitted in many

inscriptions. Cognomina derived from personal traits (e.g. Longus) or accomplishment

(e.g. Africanus) of an individual or a family9.

                                                                                                               
9
Sandys. (1919), 201-222.

  12  
 CHAPTER TWO

Inscriptions from the San Antonio Museum of Art

1. Cinerary urn of Saturnia

Figure  4  Cinerary  urn  of  Saturnia    

Roman,  1St  century  A.D.    
Marble  
Dimensions:12.2”*8.5”            
Inscription:  6.75”*6”  
Diagonal  Across:  14.5”*14.5”    
 

  13  
Inscription:
DIIS . MAN. SAC.
SAT. VRNIAE

VIX. ANN. XVI.

PAIDEROS.

CONSER.DVIC.

BEN. MER. FEC

Expanded Inscription:

DIIS MAN(IBUS) SAC(RUM)

SATURNIAE

VIX(IT) ANNOS XVI

PAIDEROS

CONSERVAE DVLC(I)

BENE MERENTI FECIT.

My Translation:

To the spirits of the dead,

For Saturnia

(She) lived 16 years.

Paideros

(For) Fellow-slave, sweet woman

(and) Well deserving (He) made.

  14  
 This inscription is translated as, “Sacred to the spirits of the dead. Paideros made

[this urn] for Saturnia, his sweet, well-deserving fellow slave, who lived 16 years.” From

this inscription, one can deduce that Paideros (Ancient Greek:Παιδέρος) was a slave of

Greek origin who loved his fellow-slave woman named Saturnia. The rosette and

palmetto ornamental patterns and the inscription of this marble urn indicate great artistry

and care during its production. This inscription’s content clearly indicates that this is an

epitaph.

Just as many societies of modern and ancient times, so the Romans were greatly

concerned with recording the life and accomplishments of an individual upon his or her

death. Often, in some instances, a person created his or her tomb monument while still

living. For these, epitaphs usually begin with the letter V(ivus) F(ecit). During the

Augustan age, Romans favored cremation as scholars have noticed in contemporary

literatures (e.g. Virgil’s Aeneid). Ashes from a cremation were collected and kept in a

small stone chest, an urn, or other container. Thus one can assume that this cinerary urn

of Saturnia dates back to the Late Republic and Early Empire era10.

Another hint for the dating of this inscription comes from the letters in the

context. The beginning abbreviation Diis Man(ibus), which corresponds to the Greek

sepulchral formula µνήµης χάριν11. J. E. Sandys indicates that this abbreviation is used

especially in and after the Augustan age. Therefore, both inferential observations agree

that this inscription belongs to the first century A.D.

One minor problem of reading this inscription comes from a misleading spelling

of ‘L' which looks like ‘I’. The abbreviated word DVLC cannot be read this way because
                                                                                                               
10
Keppie. (1991),
11
Salomon Reinach, Traité D'épigraphie Grecque (Paris, 1885), 427.  

  15  
the word engraved seems to be DVIC. According to Elliott’s list of abbreviations from

Latin inscriptions he compiled with the support of American Society of Greek and Latin

Epigraphy (ASGLE), only a few possible entries with letters DVI could be spotted: DVI

for d(i)vi; DVIDC for d(uum)v(iri) i(ure) d(icundo) C(ai); DVIR for d(uo) vir(um).

Because none of these entries fits in the context of this inscription, it is necessary to

consider the third spelling of this abbreviation DVIC as DVLC instead. In fact, DVLC is

an abbreviated form of dulc(is/issimae/issimo), which befits the context of this

inscription. Therefore, one could assume that there was a misspelling (I instead of L) in

this inscription.

Similar types of tombstones occur in Hermann Dessau’s Inscriptiones Latinae

Selectae (Volume 3) that begins with the abbreviations Diis Manibus. Thus comparing

and contrasting the inscription given with two similar inscriptions from ILS can give

further insight for understanding the cinerary urn of Saturnia:

8005 diis manibus | Hateriae Superbae quae | vixit anno I mensi-

bus VI dieb. XXV, | fecerum parentes infelicissimi | filiae suae | Q. Hate-
rius Ephebus et Iulia Zosime, sibi et suis12

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for Hateria Superba who lived 1 year, 6 months,
and 25 days. (Her) most unfortunate parents, Quintus Haterius Ephebus and Julia Zosima,
made (this) for their daughter, for themselves and their own family.
This inscription is comparable to that of the cinerary urn of Saturnia because both
begin with the word diis manibus, a common invocation at the beginning of funerary
inscription. Both inscriptions contain the name and age of the deceased and the name(s)

                                                                                                               
12
This was found in a graveyard and portrays a young girl offering fruit and holding a dove. Further, see
ILS 8005.
 

  16  
of the dedicator. An adjective used to describe Saturnia is dulci (sweet). This contrasts
with the superlative adjective used in this inscription, infelicissimi, which denote the
unhappy parents who lost their child Hateria Superba.

7590 diis manibus | D. Avonio | Thalamo | segmentario, | patrono

bene | merito, | D. Avonius | Heuretus I. | fecit.

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for Decimus Avonius Thalamus the tailor, a patron
who has merited well, Decimus Avonius Heuretus the freedman made (this).

An inscription from Harvard’s Sackler Museum confirms to the formula of an epitaph:

Inscription:

Diis Manib(us).
Athicto, Thr(e)pti
Sallustiaes Lucan(aes)
dispesator(is), vicari
Hermetis f(ilio); vix(it)
ann(is) III et men(sibus) III,
diebus III.

Figure  2  Epitaph  of  a  salve  

Athictus  
Cambridge,  Harvard  
University  Art  Museum  
1977.216.1881.  
(Courtesy  Arthur  M.  Sackler  
Museum)  
 

This epitaph is dedicated to the deceased man Athictus, who was the son of Hermes,
the underslave of Threptus, the household manager of Sallustia Lucana. Note that the tall
second letter I in Diis matches perfectly with that of the cinerary urn of Saturnia.

  17  
 2. Cinerary urn of Flavius

Figure  3  Cinerary  urn  of  Flavius  

Roman,  2nd  century  A.D.  
Marble  
Dimensions:  12.5”*8”  
Inscription:  7.5”*4.5”  
Across:  14.5”  
 
 
Inscription:

D.M.T. FLAVIO

IERACI. F.EVT

YOHIA. COIVGI.

B.M.F.

  18  
Expanded Inscription:

D(IIS) M(ANIBUS) T(ITO) FLAVIO

IERACI(S) F(ILII) EUT-

YOHIA CO(N)IUGI

B(ENE) M(ERENTI) F(ECIT).

My Translation:

To the spirits of the dead, For Titus Flavius,

Son of Hierax.

Eutychia, for her husband

well-deserving, (she) made (this).

This inscription is translated as “To the spirits of the dead. Eutychia made [this

urn] for her well-deserving husband Titus Flavius, the son of Hierax.” This is also a

marble cinerary urn probably created around the first or second century A.D. Frequently

Romans managed the construction of their own graves and inscriptions before death, and

the uninscribed parts of a tombstone were often chiseled with scenes, patterns or symbols

representing the activities or work of the person. This inscription shows two male heads

with rams’ horns at the sides of the urn. The figure represent a syncretic deity, God

Jupiter Ammon, who combines a Greco-Roman deity Zeus/Jupiter with an oriental

(Egyptian) deity, Ammon. This image provides a hint for dating this inscription, because

the Roman domination over Egypt began after Octavian’s campaign against Mark

  19  
Anthony and Cleopatra (32 to 30 B.C.). The syncretism of deities might have happened

decades after the Roman Empire secured a foothold in Egypt.

This inscription is particularly interesting

because a few misspellings occur in the cinerary

urn. The misspelled words and letters are marked

and highlighted above. First, the genitive form of

the Greek name Hierax (Ἱέραξ) in Latin is Ieracis.

However, this inscription is missing the letter “s”,

thus giving the dative form Ieraci. Furthermore, the

“c” in “Eutychia” has been written as an “o”. While

having the dative form Ieraci might be acceptable

Figure  4  Jupiter  Ammon,  1st  
century  AD  (Museo  Barracco,  
convention of the time, the misspelling in the name Rome)  

Eutychia was an obvious mistake.

An essential part of a typical Latin funerary inscription is B. M., which stands for

the word bene merenti/merens, and it is translated as “well-deserving.” This usually

indicates the family relationship between the deceased and the bereaved. In their book,

The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment, Space, Beryl Rawson and Paul Weaver

write about their observation:

For instance, it has long been recognized that bene merens appears more
frequently on tombstones than any other epithet; Nielsen asserts that
patrons and clients are commemorated with this epithet much more
frequently than with any other, while for children it runs a distant third.
Both the literary sources and the epitaphs support the notion that bene
merens "seems primarily to have been used to characterize relationships
based on obligation."13

                                                                                                               
13
Beryl Rawson and P. R. C. Weaver. The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment, Space. (Canberra:
Humanities Research Centre, 1997)

  20  
 Other examples from ILS (Volumes I and II) provide funerary inscriptions that

have similar structures. Typical funerary inscriptions often contain d(is) m(anibus), name

and age of the deceased, name(s) of the dedicator, relationship between the deceased and

dedicator, and b(ene) m(erenti):

1606 d. m. | M. Ulpi Aug. lib. | Eutychi | tabul. viae Appiae, | vix.

ann. XXXX, | Flavia | Daphne | coniugi b. m. | fecit.

Romae (VI 8466 vidit Henzen)

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for Marius Ulpius Eutychus, freedman of

Augustus, who lived 40 years. Flavia Daphne made (this) on the Appian Road for her

well-deserving husband.

4967 d. m. | T. Aur. T. f. Pomt. | Clito dec. coll. fid. | R.1, vixit

ann. VIII m. | IIII [d.] XXII, Aur. Nice|phorianus et Filume|ne filio dul-

cissi|mo b. m. f.

Romae ut videtur rep., nunc Neapoli (VI 2192 vidit Mommsen). — 1) Decu-

rialis collegii fidicinum Romanorum.

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for Titus Aurelius Pomt(inus), son of Titus,

decurion of the guild of Roman flute players, who lived 8 years, 4 months, and 22 days.

Aurelius Nicephorianus and Filumene made (this) for their most sweet, well-deserving

son.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
 

  21  
 3. Cinerary urn of Lepidia

Figure  5  Cinerary  urn  of  Lepidia    

Roman,  ca.  A.D.  100-­‐125    
Marble    
Dimensions:  13.75”*14”  
Inscription:  8.25”*5.25”    
Across:  18”*18”  
 
Inscription:

D. M

L.EPIDIAE C FLVPERCAE

VIXIT.ANN.XIX

MENS.VI

  22  
Expanded Inscription:

D(IIS) M(ANIBUS)

LEPIDIAE G(AII) F(ILIAE) LUPERCAE

VIXIT ANN(OS) XIX

MENS(IBUS) VI.

My Translation:

To the spirits of the dead,

For Lepidia Luperca, daughter of Gaius,

(Who) lived 19 years (and)

6 months.

This inscription is translated as “To the spirits of the dead. For Lepidia Luperca,

the daughter of Gaius, who lived 19 years and 6 months.” This cinerary urn is decorated

with two carved lions whose manes are draped with wreaths of laurel leaves and berries

and donkeys on the lower corners. According to the museum’s notes, this marble urn

dates to A.D. 100-125.

  23  
 Figure  6  Cinerary  urn  of  Lepidia  

In a typical Latin epitaph, the name or names (forename and family name) of the

deceased occur in the nominative case (so that the deceased is the ‘subject’ of the

subsequent sentence), in the dative case (for it is dedicated ‘to’ the deceased), or in the

genitive case (so that the inscription ‘belongs to’ the deceased). After the name of the

deceased, the name of his/her father (in the genitive case) and the voting-tribe or surname

will follow. Then the age of death follows in the form of vix(it) ann(os). During and after

the Augustan age, funerary inscriptions begins with popular, introductory invocations e.g.

“D(is) M(anibus)”14.

Particularly interesting in this inscription is a correction made in the name Gaius.

It seems that the stonemason intended to chisel in the letter “C” as shown above. Later,

this letter “C” becomes “G” by careful addition of an extra, horizontal stroke. This

misspelling was a rather fortunate mistake for the mason because this ingenious editing

amended the misspelling. As seen in previous urns, frequent misspelling and erroneous
                                                                                                               
14
Keppie. (1991), 106-107.

  24  
forms of the words were commonplace in ancient inscriptions on stones. On the other

hand, the plethora of mistakes may indicate the varied multiplicity of Latin grammatical

forms and spellings during the Roman times.

Multiple funerary inscriptions of ILS contained similar formats described above:

7536 d. m. | L. Lepidius L. lib. Hermes | negotiator aerarius et |

ferrarius1 sub aede Fortunae | ad lacum2, et | Obellia Threpte |

fecerunt | L. Lepidio L. f. Pal. Hermeroti, | qui vixit annis VIII mense |

diebus XII, et | Lepidiae L. f. Lucillae | quae vixit annis V diebus VIII, |

filis dulcissimis et piissimis erga se, et | lib. libertabusque posterisque

eorum. | Haec taber. cum aedif. huius monum. tutela est. | H. m. sive

aedificium quod est, heredem non sequet.

Romae (Vl 9664 cf. p, 5470 saepius descripta saec. XVI), — 1) Alius nego-

tians ferrariou II 1199, Fabros ferrarios habes infra N. 7723 seq. — 2) Locus urbis

Romae praeterea ignotus.

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, Lucius Lepidius Hermes, freedman of Lucius, the

bronze and iron broker and Obellia Threpte, near the shrine of Fortune near the lake of

Aretes, dedicated (this) for Lucius Lepidius Hermeroti, son of Lucius Pal(atius) who

lived 8 years, 1 month, and 12 days, and for Lepidia Lucilla, daughter of Lucius, who

lived 5 years and 8 days, their children, most sweet and pious toward them, and to their

sons and daughters and their posterity. This shop together with the structure of this

  25  
monument are to be the object of their care. This monument or building that it is will not

follow the heir.

7994 dis man. | Claudiae Lepidillae | ex provincia | Belgica Am-

bianae, | fecerunt liberi | eius Lepidus et | Trebellius matri | optimae.

Hic matris cineres | sola sacravimus ara; |

quae genuit Tellus, ossa | tegit tumulo.

Romae (VI 15493 aliquoties descripta saec, XVI), Buecheler carm. epigr. n. 1129.

Ossa dedi Terrae, corpas Volchano dedi(di) Vl 21975 = Buecheler carm.

epigr. n. 67.

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for the best mother, Claudia Lepidilla Amebiana,

from the province of Belgica, (her) children Lepidus and Trebellius made (this). Here, we

dedicated the ashes of our mother on one altar. Earth, who gave birth to her, covers her

bones with a mound.

  26  
 4. Cinerary urn of Sulpicia

Figure  7  Cinerary  urn  of  Sulpicia    

Roman,  2nd  century  A.D.    
Marble  
Dimensions:  11.75”*7.6”  
Inscription:  5.75”*4”    
Across:  14”*14”  
 
Inscription:

D. M.

SVL.PICIAE

EXSOCHE

  27  
Figure  8  Cinerary  urn  of  Sulpicia  

Expanded Inscription:

D(IIS) M(ANIBUS) SULPICIAE EXSOCHE

Translation:

To the spirits of the dead,

For Sulpicia

Exsoche (made).

  28  
 This inscription is translated as, “To the spirits of the dead. Exsoche [made this

urn] for Sulpicia.” Empty area of the cinerary urn is decorated with two eagles holding a

garland of fruits. There are also two small birds between the garland and the inscription.

This urn dates to the second century A.D. The funerary inscription typically begins with

invocatory words “dis manibus”.

Particularly interesting are the traces of black paints on the inscription itself. This

hints that some Latin inscriptions were carved and painted. This would explain how

painting of letters in the inscription might have offset minor misspellings. For example,

the misspell error mentioned in the Cinerary urn of Lepidia (confer figures 3 and 4), in

which “G” was originally written as “C”, could have been amended by the coloring of

letters.

Inscriptions with the names Exsoche and Sulpicia were searched and found in

ILS:

4996 d. m. | T. Flavio Aug lib. | Liberali aedituo | aed. Martis

ultoris, | Ciaudia Exoche | coniugi | bene merenti et | sibi fecit, | vixit

ann. LVll.

Romae (VI 8709 vidit Smetius).

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for Titus Flavius Liberalius, freedman of

Augustus, a custodian of the Temple of Mars Ultor, Claudia Exoche made this for her

well-deserving husband, who lived 57 years, and for herself.

4421 diis manibus sac. | Ser. Sulpicio Aug. l. | Alcimo aedituo | ab

  29  
Isem pelagiam, | vix. an. XXXVIl, aeditu|avit an. X, fecit uxor | Ventria

Aprodisia (sic) | vir. bene merent., mul. | infelicissuma, et sibi suis | l. l. p. eor.

Romae olim, nunc Florentiae (VI 8707 vidit Henzen).

Translation: To the spirits of the dead, for Servius Sulpicius Alcimus, freedman of

Augustus and custodian of the temple of Isis Pelagia; he lived 37 years, taking care of the

temple for ten years. His most unhappy wife Ventria Aprodisia (sic) made (this) for her

well deserving husband and for herself, and for their children, and their many

descendants.

  30  
 5. Funerary relief of Lucius Gallonius Ascanto, Lucius Gallonius Philodamus, and

Gallonia Laais

Figure  9  Funerary  relief  of  Lucius  Gallonius    

Roman,  Late  1st  century  B.C.-­‐early  1st  century  A.D.    
Marble  
Dimensions:  54”*24.5”    
Inscription:  36”  (Upper)  and  30.5”  (Lower)  Slightly  
skewd  to  Left  
Letter  Size:  1.5”(Upper)  and  1”  (Lower)    
 
Inscription

L. GALLONIVS. L. GALONIVS. GALLONIA

L.L. ASCANTO L.L.EPHILODAMUS L.L.LAAIS

  31  
Expanded Inscription:

L(UCIUS) GALLONIUS. L(UCIUS) GALLONIUS.

(LUCIA) GALLONIA.

L(IBERTUS) L(UCII) ASCANTO L(IBERTUS) (LUCII) PHILODAMUS

L(IBERTA) L(UCII) LAAIS

My Tranlation:

Lucius Gallonius. Lucius Galonius. Lucia Gallonia.

Freedman Ascanto Freedman Philodamus Freedwoman Laais

This inscription is unique because it contains only the names of three figures: two

men and one woman. As the names Lucius/Lucia and Gallonius/Gallonia are common to

all three, scholars believe that these were emancipated slaves whose former master was

Lucius Gallonius. During the time of the Roman Empire, freedmen had three names just

as did free Roman citizens. Customarily, freedmen followed the praenomen and nomen

of their master, to whom they owed their liberty. For the cognomen, they used their slave

name15.

In addition to their names, they wear clothes that indicate the elevation of social

status. Both Ascanto and Philodamus are wearing togas, raiment reserved only for Roman

citizens. Laais is wearing a veil, a symbol of modesty and chastity, just as an ideal

Roman matron. This inscription shows the possibility of social mobility in the Roman

                                                                                                               
15
Sandys (1919), 219.

  32  
Empire. Several entries from ILS contain the word libertus, which refers to an individual

status as a freedman:

7462 C. Iulius Aug. liberti | libertus Eros | pistor candidarius1 |

per annos quos inter | mortales fuit ante eum diem | qui fuit VI idus

Mai. vixit | annos ⊥. Huius sacravit | Iulia Glaphyra colliberta | et prae-

stitit officia | M'. Aemilio Lepido T. Statilio Tauro cos.2

In agro Albano (prope Castel Gandolfo) rep., est Romae (XIV 2302 vidi). —

1) Alius pistor cand. XII 4502. — 2) A. p. Chr. 11.

Translation: The freedslaves of Caius Julius Augustus, Eros, a baker of white bread

through the years during which he was among the mortals, before this day, which was six

days before the ides of May and Julia Glaphyra, freedwoman, performed the offices and

was in charge of the rites during the consulship of Marcus Aemilius Lepidus and Titus

Statilius Taurus.

7466 Ti. Claudius Primigenius | pistor, decur.1, | Antoniae Claud.

f. lib.2 | s. et coniugi suae.

Romae (VI 9802 bis vel ter descripta saec. XVI), — 1) Decurio (collegii ali-

cuius, cf. N. 7353 cet.). — 2) Claudii filiae libertus.

Translation: Tiberius Claudius Primigenius, the baker and menber of the college of

Decurii, made this for himself and his wife, Antonia the daughter of Claudius the

freedman.

  33  
 The name Lais appears in the inscriptions from Harvard’s Sackler Museum:

Figure  10  Epitaph  of  Thais,  Lais,  and  two  Lucii  

Aveii    
Cambridge,  Harvard  University  Art  Musuem  
1977.216.3180.  (Courtesy    Arthur  M.  Sackler  
Museum)  
 
John Bodel asserts that this inscription dates to the first century A.D. because the

formula of this epitaph, along with the explicit indication of freed status and the carving

of the letters (the letter Q with its long, descending tail16), are typical of the inscriptions

from early Roman Empire.

                                                                                                               
16  The letter Q found in the second line of rightside, with a long, descending tail is a characteristic of the
lettering of the Julio-Claudian era after Augustus: Gordon 112-13.  

  34  
 6. Funerary Inscription

Figure  11  Funerary  inscription    

Roman,  1st  -­‐  3rd  century  A.D.    
Marble  
Dimensions:  10.5”*8.25”  
 

Inscription:

D / M

FRUCTOSAE VERN

CLAUDI.AUG. LIB TA

BLARI VIX AN. II. ME

XI -D- VIII

  35  
Expanded Inscription:

D(IS) M(ANIBUS)

FRUCTOSAE VERNAE

CLARI AUG(USTI) LI(BERTUS) TA-

B[U]LARIUS VIX(IT) AN(NOS) II ME(NSES)

XI D(IEBUS) VIII.

My Translation:

To the spirits of the dead,

For Fructosa Verna,

Of Clarus’ (household), freedman

and accountant of Augustus.

(She) lived 2 years,

11 months, (and) 8 days.

This inscription is translated as, “To the shades of the dead. For Fructosa Verna, a

slave born in the household of Clarus, an accountant and former slave of the emperor.

She lived 2 years and 11 months, and eight days.” Because the exact age of Fructosa is

written on the inscription, one may presume that Fructosa was dear to this household.

This inscription dates to the first to third century A.D. and was discovered outside of the

city.

  36  
 This typical sepulchral inscription follows the general formula that includes Dis

Manibus, the name of the dead, the dedicator of the monument, and the age of the

deceased. Tombstones constitute most surviving Latin inscriptions.The form and type of

tombstones differ based on the times and places, but this particular one is described as

part of columbarium, a burial-room in the walls of which were several niches for holding

the ashes of the dead. Most tombstones derive from the cemeteries outside the walls of a

town, because the law prohibited burial inside the walls of the city17.

One particularly interesting characteristic of this inscription comes from its

lettering. The letters carved in this inscriptions are those of grafitti rather than those of

inscriptions. Reading and interpretting of this inscription were particularly challenging

with its letter “B” written like a letter “a”.

                                                                                                               
17
J. C. Egbert, Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. (New York,1896), 241.

  37  
 CHAPTER THREE

Criticism and Importance

I. Criticism of Epigraphy

While inscriptions are a valuable source for understanding personal and societal

conventions of antiquity, one must not overlook the fact that surviving inscriptions do not

constitute complete documentation of the past. Rather, inscriptions present only a part of

the whole that is readily expressed by their creators. This relationship denotes that some

inscriptions may contain misleading messages skewed or even fallacious. Because the

purpose of an inscription is to present information to others to see and understand, its

creator reflects his or her worldview consciously or unconsciously.

For these reasons, there has been hypercriticism over the authority of inscriptions.

This criticism seems unnecessary because most inscriptions are simple records of birth,

achievement, or death. In fact, most surviving inscriptions are epitaphs or funerary

inscriptions that contain names, age of death, and family relationship. This kind of

inscription is rarely fallacious because its focus is on private life. Even if the purpose of

an inscription is to promote or advertise certain achievements or ideas, the other

remaining sources— whether they are inscriptions or writings or artifacts— of the past

will offset the bias. In order better to reconstruct the antiquity, scholars must combine

  38  
compartmentalized disciplines such as epigraphy, papyrology, and archaeology and then

collaborate for a general consensus18.

An epigrapher also needs to be wary of forgeries. Peoples from both past and

present altered part of an inscription or fabricated an inscription in order to gain certain

advantages. However, many of these attempts were exposed and set apart as false

inscriptions. For example, authors such as Ligorius or Pratilli are condemned as

falsifiers 19 . In this case, CIL inserts certain statements against the veracity of the

inscription such as “quamquam fortasse genuina, suspecta tamen utpote a tali auctore

solo relata” or “inter titulos suspectos releganda errant necessario propter auctorem fide

omnino indignum.” Egbert writes that criteria of criticisms include deviations from

general epigraphic formula, unreliable standing of the copyist, and paleographic

violations.

Fortunately, all inscriptions from San Antonio Museum of Arts are epitaphs

dedicated to the deceased. None of these contains a eulogy of achievement or merits of

the deceased, and the minor misspellings and grammatical errors do not invalidate the

veracity of these inscriptions. For the most part, they fit into the general formula of a

sepulchral inscription described below:

                                                                                                               
18
Keppie (1991) 131.
19
J. C. Egbert, Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions (New York,1896) 11.

  39  
 Diis Manibus Sacrum Invocatory Phrase

ille or illius or illi Name of the dead

(qui) vixit annis tot Age of the person

ille The person who dedicates the monument

patri carissimo feit Indication of the relationship

hic situs est Here he/she rests

II. Importance of these inscriptions

Many scholars have stressed the value and importance of Latin inscriptions. The

study of epigraphy broadened the horizon of understanding antiquity, and more

inscriptions are newly discovered and recovered now thanks to advanced technology.

Various samples of different subject matters make it possible for epigraphers to

categorize them into specific types and to establish general formulae of each type. Our

understanding of Roman burials, business transactions, military expansion, and

governance comes from inscriptions. The broad categories of inscriptions, ranging from a

giant arch in the middle of Rome to small coinage found in Britain, reflect the thriving

human history of the Roman Empire. How, then, do inscriptions from the San Antonio

Museum of Art contribute to the understanding of Roman civilization?

First, these inscriptions are relatively simple and harmonious with past

scholarship on the same subject matters. As mentioned above, almost all of funerary

inscriptions from the San Antonio Museum of Art follow with minor variations the

general trend of sepulchral writings in the first and second centuries A.D. Emerging

  40  
scholars of Latin inscriptions would find these entries helpful for understanding the

general progression of funerary inscriptions. Because entries from the ILS and CIL are

not readily available for scrutiny due to their physical remoteness and exclusiveness,

American scholars may find these inscriptions helpful and available for close

examination.

Second, the small variations of these inscriptions provide insights for

understanding the changes in Latin language. Frequent misspellings, uncommon

abbreviations, and incorrect cases are observed in six inscriptions from the San Antonio

Museum of Art. These occur not merely due to the inattentive workmanship of

stonemasons, but also indicate the fluidity of Latin language as Roman influence spread

across Europe, Asia Minor, and Egypt.

Third, exotic imageries and ornamentations of cinerary urns attest to the

expansion of Roman dominion as well as syncretism in terms of language, religion, and

ideas. The palmetto and rosette patterns of the urn signify the southern influence because

these plants are not native to Rome. Even more intriguing is a carving of the god Jupiter

Ammon on the cinerary urn of Flavius, a carving that implies religious syncretism

between Greco-Roman deities with Cush-Egyptian deities. Various names suggesting

exotic origins (Greek) such as Paideros, Eutychia, and Hierax further strengthen this

argument.

Finally, one can examine the social mobility of the Roman society from these

inscriptions. Several contain the word libertus (freedman), which denotes the former

status of the person as a slave. These former slaves now have three-part names, a

privilege of Roman citizens. Because work on stone was not easy, the cost was

  41  
expensive. Thus, these freedmen must have been financially successful in their trades.

Although these inscriptions may not have an academic significance, each contains an

intrinsic value of human resilience. Therefore, social historians, in addition to

epigraphers, value the findings from these inscriptions as an important source of

understanding the social history and strata of the early Empire.

  42  
 Bibliography

Bodel, John. “Thirteen Latin Funerary Inscriptions at Harvard University,” AJA 96

(1992) 71-100.

Collingwood, R. G., and I. A. Richmond. The Archaeology of Roman Britain. London:

Methuen, 1969.

De La Blanchere. Bibliothèque Historique Et Littéraire. Histoire Naturelle Pittoresque,

Mémoires D'une Ménagerie, Frosch Et Pécopin. Paris: Albanel, Baltenweck,
1876.

Dessau, Hermann. Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae. Chicago: Ares, 1979.

Egbert, J. C. Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. New York, 1896.

Feliciano, Felice, R. H. Boothroyd, Ameglio Trivella, Mario Facincani, Rino Grazioli,

and Giovanni Mardersteig. Alphabetum Romanum. Verona: Officina Bodoni,
1960.

Gordon, Arthur E. Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy. Berkeley: University of

California, 1983.

Hartnett, Matthew. By Roman Hands: Inscriptions and Graffiti for Students of Latin.
Newburyport, MA, 2008.

Keppie, Lawrence. Understanding Roman Inscriptions. London: Batsford, 1991.

Mommsen, Theodor, Emil Hübner, and Géza Alföldy. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum.
Berolini U.a.: Reimer U.a., 1933.

Moore, C.H. “Latin Inscriptions in the Harvard Collection of Classical Antiquities,”

HSCP 20 (1909) 1-14.

Rawson, Beryl, and P. R. C. Weaver. The Roman Family in Italy: Status, Sentiment,
Space. Canberra: Humanities Research Centre, 1997.

Reinach, Salomon, and C. T. Newton. Traité D'épigraphie Grecque. Paris: [s.n.], 1885.

Sandys, John Edwin. Latin Epigraphy: An Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions.
Cambridge, 1919.

  43