Obrázky na stránke

for its genuineness and correctness; and I have invariably stated the place

1865, cite this inscription as genuine. Bosio's great work in Italian, on the catacombs of Rome, is chiefly known by the edition in Latin of Paul Aringhi, who published what professed to be Roma subterranea novissima post Antonium Bosium et Joannem Severamtm, in two volumes, that have a reputation far beyond their merits. There is no doubt that a second Ligorio imposed on both Severano and Aringhi. See De Rossi, p. xxvi. Again, Boldetti, who published what may be regarded as a supplement to Bosio, was so deficient in scholarship and critical acuteness, and so regardless of accuracy, that no reliance can be placed on his copies, even of inscriptions that he himself saw. As this may appear to some to be too harsh a censure on a writer whose authority was once held in high estimation, I subjoin one of the many adverse opinions pronounced on him by De Rossi, who was thoroughly acquainted with his work in all its details: Ilujus (scil. Boldetti) in id genus apographis excipiendis imperitiam el incuriam non ctntena, sed millena exempla testantur. See p. 24.

In p. 82, 2nd edit, of "The Church in the Catacombs," Dr. Maitland remarks: "A curious epitaph found at Verona, probably not older than the seventh century, states why Felicianus wished a tomb reserved for himself alone: (Gruter.)

D. M. FELICIANI • VERONEN MIHIMET • FELICIANVS ■ VERONEN ■ • SACRVM • CONST • QVI INQVIETVS VIXI NVNC TANDEM MORTVVS NON LVBENS QVIESCO SOLVS CVR SIM QVAESERIS [tie] VT • IN • DIE ■ CENSORIO • SINE IMPEDIMENTO ■ FACILIVS RESVRGAM To the Divine Manes of Felicianus of Verona. I, 'Felicianus, of Verona, have consecrated this tomb for myself. I, who lived restless, being now at length dead, rest unwillingly. Do you ask why I am alone? That in the day of judgment I may more readily arise, without impediment."

There are, I think, but few epigraphists whose suspicion as to the antiquity of this epitaph would not be excited by its style and language, and their suspicions would, unquestionably, be just, for this Felicianus of Verona, the author of it, lived about the middle of the 15th century. He was a collector of inscriptions, medals and curiosities, and wasted much time and money on the application of chemistry to the production of gold. He is also known by his edition, in conjunction with Ziletti, of Petrarch's Degli uomini famoti, Verona, 1476. Maitland's mistake regarding this inscription is the more remarkable, as Fleetwood, in 1694 {Sylloge, p. 198), warned his readers not to accept this epitaph as ancient, and stated that its author flourished about 1463 A.d.; and similar information is given by Gudius, in the edition of Gruter's Thesaurus, Amsterdam, 1101. (when known) where each was found, with the authority both for this statement and for the text that I have adopted.

The figures in the * lithographic plates are t fac-similes of the originals, as they are represented in De Rossi's work; the other inscriptions are given, according to common usage, in ordinary type. In these, consequently, there are omissions of various particulars, such as leaf-points, monograms, symbols, and other pictorial characteristics, but the signification of the words is in no wise affected, and the copies are printed with as much accuracy as I could attain.

The notes that I have given are few and generally brief, as many of the difficulties are explained in the expansions and translations. In the present publication, I have prefixed an Introduction, which will, I venture to believe, be regarded as a useful addition, especially as some of the topics that are treated in it have never before, J so far as I am aware, been dis

Other authors might be mentioned in illustration of the necessity for examining the authority for each inscription, but, probably, enough has been said on the subject. It is a more agreeable duty to bear my testimony to the remarkable merits of the Cavaliere De Rossi's elaborate volume, a work which is facile princeps of all that have been published on the subject, and to which I am largely indebted for assistance.

* I have added to those that appeared in the Journal a frontispiece, in which are given three inscriptions that have special interest, one on account of the Bymbols, another on acount of the unexplained letters, and the third as presenting the earliest example of a cross in a dated inscription. They, also, are copied from De Rossi's work, but the first and second do not exactly represent the forms of the stones, as the lithographer, in order to get the figures into the page, was obliged to make one lap over the other, and to omit the lower line of the second. In every other respect, however, they are faithful copies.

f I have examined Perret's splendid volumes, but have not taken any extract from them. Their accuracy, even pictorially, cannot be relied on. Cardinal Wiseman notices them with the mild censure " perhaps somewhat overdone;" but Burgon does not hesitate to call them " simply a romance." De Rossi handles with tenderness " la grandioza edizione," that "malgrado i suoi difetti" has assisted in spreading a taste for the study of the Catacombs, and which has cost the French nation " duecento quarantamila franchi." The plates subjoined to his own "Roma Sotterranea Cristiana," Roma, 1864, 1867, 4 vol., 2 of text (Italian), and 2 of plates, will bear close inspection.

£ While these sheets containing the Preface and Introduction are in progress through the press, I have had my attention called to the Edinburgh Review, No. CCXLV, containing a paper on De Rossi's and other works relating to Christian and Jewish inscriptions. If I had seen it at an earlier period, I should have referred in more than one place in my notes on the Epitaphs to this very interesting article.

cussed in English. For further information on many of these, the reader is referred to De Rossi's Prolegomena. In order that requisite facilities for reference may be afforded to students, I have also subjoined an Index.

Although I have endeavored to make this little work as complete as possible with a view to the purpose for which it is intended, yet I am sensible that I have not accomplished all that I desired. A sufficient apology will, I trust, be found in the difficulties and disadvantages under which, in young communities, the rarer subjects of investigation are studied and the results of such study are published. I gladly acknowledge the benefits that I have derived from the use of the fine collection of epigraphic works belonging to our University, but I have often had occasion to regret my inability to consult other books, such as can be found only in Libraries that are the growth of centuries.


Univ. Coll., Toronto,

December, 31, 1868.



I. Those In Which Only The Name And Date Are Stated
II. Those In Which Only The Name, Age And Date, Are Stated-

Pages. 1 to 4 4 to 8

III. Those In Which Some Characteristic Of The Deceased Is


8 to 12

IV. Those In Which The Relationship Of The Deceased Is Stated

12 to 28 (a) Father, p. 12. (b) Mother, p. IS. (c) Husband, pp. 13 to 16. (d) Wife, pp. 16 to 20. (e) Son, pp. 20, 21. (/) Daughter, pp. 21 to 24. (g) Brother, p. 24. (A) Sister, p. 24. (t) Foster-father, pp. 25 to 28.

[ocr errors]

V. Those In Which The Occupation Or Position In Life Of The
Deceased Is Stated

Secular: (a) Member of the Imperial household, pp. 28,
29, 80. (6) Lawyer, p. 80. (c) Prefect of the City, p. 81.

(d) Physician, pp. 31, 32. (e) Baker, pp. 82, 83. (/) Gar-
dener, p. 33. (g) Ex-qusestor, pp. 88, 84. (ft) Soldier, p. 34.
(i) Praefect of the Market, p. 35. (k) Keeper of a public
granary, p. 35. (I) Book-keeper, p. 36.

Ecclesiastical: (a) Bishop, pp. 86, 87. (b) Presbyter,
p. 87. (c) Wife of Presbyter, pp. 87, 38. (d) Deacon, p. 38.

(e) Deacon's wife and children, pp. 88, 38. (/) Sub-Deacon,
pp. 39, 40. (g) Acolyte, pp. 40, 41. (A) Exorcist, p. 41.
(i) Reader, p. 42. (Tc) Custodian, pp. 42, 43. (I) Deaconess,
p. 43. (m) Sacred Virgin, pp. 43, 44.

VI. Those In Which There Is Mention Of Or Reference To The
Place Of Burial

44 to 53
(a) Locus /actus, pp. 44,45,46. (6) Locus emptus, pp. 46,47.
(c) Locus donatus, pp. 47, 48. (d) Locus bisomus, p. 48.
(«) Locus trisomus, pp. 48, 49. (/) Locus quadrisomus, pp.
49, 50. (y) Mvriuilov, p. 50. (h) In Basilica, pp. 50, 51.
(«') Sepulerum, pp. 51, 52. (k) Sarcophagus, pp. 52, 53.

VII. Those Which Contain *ctclic Marks Of Time

(a) Day of the month, day of the week, and day of the
moon, without the year, pp. 53, 54. (6) Hour, day of the
month, and day of the moon, with year, pp. 54, 55. (c) Day
of the month, octave of Easter, and year, pp. 55 to 58.

VIII. Miscellaneous

(a) The most ancient dated epitaph, p. 58. (b) Unexplained

numerals, pp. 59, 60. (c) Specimen of palaeography, p. 60.

(d) Use of D.M. by Christians, pp. 60 to 63. (c) Specimen of

palaeography, p. 63. (/) Use olpuer as applied to persons of

mature age, pp. 63,64. (g) Mention of time of sickness before

death, p. 64. (h) Domini nostri applied to consuls not

Augusti, p. 65. (t) Opisthographa, pp. 65, 66. (£) Specimen

of palaeography, p. 66. (I) Posture in prayer, pp. 66, 67.

(m) Interval between death and burial, p. 68.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Prcesente et Extrkato II. 217" 29

Max. et Urb 234" 21

Albino II. et Maximo 263" 5

Claudio et Paterno 269" 22

Die. IIII. et Max 290" 1

Hannibaliano et Asclepiodoto 292" 2

Diocl C 296" 60

Anicio Fausto et Virio Gal 298" 8, 60

Fourth Century

827" 53

Nepotiano et Facundo f 336" 17

Urto et Polemio 338 42, 63,64

* Depending on the revolutions of the earth and moon, to which may be added the cycles
of Indictions. Such marks, then, include days of the week, of the month, of the moon, Easter
day, &c. The term Hypatic (from i/7rctroc = consul) is applied to the mode of marking the
year by stating the Consuls or Consul.

t Printed by mistake, in p. 17, as 335.

« PredošláPokračovať »