So far as the author knows, no other recension of this much-quoted text has appeared since the original publication by Hunt, reprinted with only slight changes by the New Palaeographical Society. Yet it is a document of the highest importance both palaeo graphically and historically. As some sort of pridianum, that is, an annual report of a military unit's condition in respect to personnel, it is valuable for Roman military organization. It is unique in being the report of a unit stationed in Lower Moesia; and its value is further enhanced by its date early in Trajan's reign, during his preparations for his first Dacian war. The papyrus is therefore worthy of every effort to establish an accurate text, the more because Hunt himself conscientiously emphasized the provisional nature of his own transcription. The present paper, then, though unsolved difficulties still remain, is intended to make available the numerous improvements in reading and interpretation which result from a new study of the original which the author was able to undertake in the winter of 1956–1957.

The Nerva Inscription in Beroea still lies, where Delacoulonche first reported it, on the right hand of the entrance to the Orta Cami. During a visit to Beroea in 1936, in the company of Mr. C. F. Edson of Harvard University, I was enabled to gather some fresh information about this dedication.

The slab of marble which bears the inscription is embedded in the ground on its side, so that the left half of the inscription has not been seen since the building of the Mosque, the raising of the heavy marble flags of the entrance being a formidable task without some mechanical aid. A rough-surfaced margin surrounds the smooth inscribed field. The lettering is elaborate Imperial, with many ligatures. H. 116 m. Exposed W. at top 0.53 m. Exposed W. at bottom 0.50 m.

This survey is intended primarily to assess the impact on Roman studies in general of recent work in Roman epigraphy — whether newly published inscriptions, revised editions, or texts that have been reconsidered or newly analysed in the light of specific themes. We mean to draw attention to those epigraphic studies that make a significant contribution, in particular, to Roman history. Hence the considerable space we devote below to the newly published Senatus Consultum on Cnaeus Piso, of which any future study of the reign of Tiberius (or of the relations between senate and emperor in the early Principate) will have to take account. Other highlights include a centurion's own reflections (in verse) on his unit's building works at Bu-Njem in Tripolitania; a major revision of the inscribed texts of Roman laws; the first known letter of Lucullus; and a new text from Messene orchestrating the city's responses to the death of Augustus. At the same time, in this introduction, we note one or two developments in recent epigraphic practice. Though these aspects are necessarily more technical, we include them in order to help readers to find the epigraphic data they might need (publication is increasingly diverse, and in an ever wider range of media); and then to assess the texts, the dates, and the conclusions the epigraphists are offering. ‘What you get’ in epigraphy is not necessarily ‘what you see’.

The Tabula Alimentaria of Veleia records the details of two second-century a.d. imperial alimentary schemes at the northern Italian town of Veleia, providing a rare insight into the workings of these schemes. Imperial loans are made to local landowners in exchange for pledges of specified property. Interest paid by landowners is used to fund cash subsidies for the upbringing of selected local children. In the early twentieth century, the French scholar Félix de Pachtere came close to demonstrating a consistent arithmetical relationship between a landowner's declared property value and the loan received. However, anomalies remained. This article proposes a revised formula which establishes a precise and consistent linkage between loan amounts and property declarations. Based on this arithmetical dataset, the paper proposes some hypotheses about how these fractional computations might have been performed in second-century Rome.

This paper begins in the year 1569, when a hefty commentary on the Lives of Cornelius Nepos was published in Paris by one of the Royal Professors, Denys Lambin (known to classicists as Lambinus). The event intrigued me for two reasons. Firstly because, in France at that time, history was not a proper subject for professors. A professor could deal in Greek and Latin poetry, in oratory, philosophy, maths or Hebrew, or of course in the degree subjects theology, medicine and law; but history, including ancient history, was mostly a popular interest among the cultured ruling class, who preferred to read it in elegant vernacular versions, like Amyot's Diodorus and Plutarch, not in the dusty didactic form of text and commentary. So why did a professor, famous for his work on poetry and philosophy, suddenly devote himself to Nepos? The second puzzle was that, within weeks of publishing this commentary, Lambinus was violently attacked for it, and came close to losing both his job and his life. How, I wondered, could commenting on Nepos so seriously endanger the health?

When we consider the information concerning the history of the earliest days of Rome which ancient authors have handed down to us, we have to ask ourselves : which parts of it are acceptable and which are not ? What, after all, do we really know about early Roman history ?

Modern scholars view these problems from very different psychological standpoints. Some of them ask why we should refuse credence to a venerable tradition which has been given an artistic form of great beauty by writers of genius, and which is full of lessons of political and moral importance. Others, however, seized with the full frenzy of the critic, and with uncompromising devotion to logic, discard all, or practically all, the tradition. Whatever the cost, they intend to reach the truth. These two conflicting tendencies prevail turn and turn about in accordance with the views dominating in different periods or with the different temperaments or ages of individual scholars.

The inscription of Iconium published on p. 37, no. 19, gives us our first certain example of an east-Phrygian variety of the early Christian formula against violation of the tomb, which Professor Callander and I had already restored in a small group of inscriptions.