III. INSCRIPTIONS

Abstract

1 Inscriptions on STONE (‘Monumental’) have been arranged as in the order followed by R.G. Collingwood and R.P. Wright in The Roman Inscriptions of Britain Vol. i (Oxford, 1965) and (slightly modified) by R.S.O. Tomlin, R.P. Wright and M.W.C. Hassall, in The Roman Inscriptions of Britain Vol. iii (Oxford, 2009), which are henceforth cited respectively as RIB (1–2400) and RIB III (3001–3550). Citation is by item and not page number. Inscriptions on PERSONAL BELONGINGS and the like (instrumentum domesticum) have been arranged alphabetically by site under their counties. For each site they have been ordered as in RIB, pp. xiii–xiv. The items of instrumentum domesticum published in the eight fascicules of RIB II (Gloucester and Stroud, 1990–95), edited by S.S. Frere and R.S.O. Tomlin, are cited by fascicule, by the number of their category (RIB 2401–2505) and by their sub-number within it (e.g. RIB II.2, 2415. 53). Non-literate graffiti and graffiti with fewer than three complete letters have generally been excluded. When measurements are quoted, the width precedes the height. No curse tablets from Uley have been included this year. The whole corpus will now be published by Oxford University Press in its series Oxford Studies in Ancient Documents, as R.S.O. Tomlin, The Uley Tablets: Roman Curse Tablets from the Temple of Mercury at Uley (Gloucestershire). 2 Later in the same series of excavations as the two Purbeck Marble fragments published as Britannia 46 (2015), 383, No. 1 (SF 1964) and 384, No. 2 (SF 2577), neither of which it conjoins (SF 3527). Mike Fulford made it available. 3 The first vertical stroke is no more than a ‘chamfer’ on the broken left edge, preserving half the original width; and the very slight broadening downwards of both strokes suggests they should be viewed this way up, as in FIG. 1. The two letters cannot be identified, but the first would have been an abbreviation; and together they would have resembled the middle part of T Δ T in RIB 87 (Silchester).