em[ensi: only the first part
of the letter after e is preserved and this is compatible with
either m or n. em[pti
is the obvious alternative (cf. 343.i.7, spicas me emisse, 181.3, lignis emtis) but we prefer em[ensi on the ground that the account
is not a record of purchase but of amounts of wheat disbursed; cf. Augustus, RG
3.12, duodecim frumentationes .... emensus sum. For the passive
meaning of the participle see OLD, s.v.
quo: there is room for this restoration at the end of the line but quod
is also possible and would give the same general sense, see line 2 note.
in cupam: we are confident of
the reading despite the fact that the writer has curiously left a rather large
space between u and p (he also does this elsewhere
for no apparent reason, cf. line 3, mihi). See Frontinus, Strat.
3.14.3, salem ... cupis conditum, Alfenus, Digest
19.2.31, quod si separatim tabulis aut heronibus aut in alia cupa clusum
uniuscuiusque triticum fuisset. For the use of dedi see
perhaps OLD, s.v. do 9a. The leaf is broken after the
middle of m and we cannot tell
whether the line will have contained anything else. This is a point of some
importance since it materially affects the meaning. If we have lost m(odios)
plus an amount, the sense would be: "Account of wheat measured out, from
which I myself have put into the barrel x modii". But we
regard this as less attractive.
ad panem: for this use of ad see OLD,
s.v. G44. The entry is duplicated in line 37. Since the amount of wheat is not
preserved in either case, it is impossible to tell whether the bread was for
personal consumption or for re-sale. For supply of loaves to a military unit
cf. O.Claud. 3-5 and note Rustius Barbarus sending loaves in O.Wâdi
Fawâkhir 1.4-7 (= CEL 73). For bread in the military
diet see Davies (1989), 191.
Felicio Victori: the name occurs again in line 19. For an
occurrence of the gentilicium in Britain see RIB I
690 (York), Felicius Simplex a soldier of Legio VI Victrix. For
Spectatus see 343.iv.42 and introduction, above.
comodati: perhaps read co<m>modati but the form
comod- is cited by TLL III 1993.43. The noun commodatum
usually refers to a loan of imperishables, but it could be used of a valid loan
of perishables, see J.A.C.Thomas (1976), 274-6. Here we can hardly have the
noun in the genitive and we suppose that we must have the participle, agreeing
with m(odii); the verb can be used of things provided but not
necessarily as a loan (see OLD, s.v.3).
We have considered the possibility that patri (cf. lines 16, 33)
is to be taken as a proper name but we have not found it attested as such.
bubulcaris: for bubulcariis, for which see CGL
II 259.44; it seems likely to refer to rations for oxherds, perhaps
non-military personnel, working in woodland.
for the use of in see OLD, s.v.A8.
item: the force and referent of this word is unclear here and in
several other entries (lines 31, 34, 37). Contrast 182.i.7 and
there appears to be an extra stroke after m which suggests the
reading amiabili, but such a name is not attested and an earlier
photograph makes it clear that this is an offset.
fanum: this might refer to a local shrine and its guard or caretaker
(who might perhaps be a civilian, compare the use of non-military personnel to
man watchtowers in Egypt, O.Flor., pp.25-6). Alternatively, it is
worth considering whether it might be a reference to Fanum Cocidii (we note
that Caesar, BC 1.11.4 refers to Fanum Fortunae as Fanum). If the
identification of Fanum Cocidii with Bewcastle is correct (PNRB
363), this suggestion must be abandoned, since the Bewcastle site is not
pre-Hadrianic, see Austin (1991), 41-3. If Fanum Cocidii is Nether Denton,
however (see Jones and Mattingly (1990), 275 and cf. Jones (1991)), it would be
an appropriate place to which supplies from Vindolanda might have been sent.
Only a trace of one digit of the numeral survives; it might be i or v, slightly inset. There is no abbreviation mark for Septem(bres).
It is very odd that there are two dates in the middle of the account but none
at the beginning. The only area in which there might have been a date, now
lost, is at the end of line 2, but the space would only allow something short,
e.g. K(alendis) Septem(bris).
the name occurs again in line 21. A centuria Crescentis occurs in 128.4
There is a loose fragment which might be placed so as to supply the bottom of
the letter after iussu and part of the first letter after item
in line 13. Of the names which survive in this text F[i]rmi could be
might here refer to iussu plus name in the previous line but the
word seems to be used rather capriciously in this account (see line 10 note).
macr[: the reading of the
surviving letters is virtually certain. What follows, after a gap of not more
than three letters, seems to rule out a restoration of Macr[ino (cf. line 4, above). Therefore,
perhaps e.g. Macr[i(ni)]o Ius[to; for gentilicium and cognomen
see lines 5 and 19. Both Macrius and Macrinius, though fairly rare, are
attested in Gallia Belgica (see NPEL).
ma.[: the third letter cannot be read as c; note e.g.
the photograph of this leaf there is a tiny scrap with part of one letter which
is misplaced after item in line 13.
].as: most probably ]tas.
ben]eficiar[io: this is likely to be the beneficiarius
praefecti and may well be the same person as the beneficiarius
mentioned in 344.i.10; cf. the later inscription from Housesteads
(RIB I 1619) commemorating Hurmius son of Leubasnus, beneficiarius
of the praefectus of cohors i Tungrorum. There is a
small fragment with traces of two letters which may fit in this area. If the
first letter, which is likely to be the foot of r, belongs to [O]ctobr[es
in line 17, the second might allow us to read b]e[n]eficiar[io here. The spacing would allow a restoration of Lu[cconi
or Lu[cc]o[ni before it, cf.
lines 27 and 30, but it is surely very unlikely that a beneficiarius
would be looking after pigs.
Felicio Victori: cf. line 5 and note.
only two readings seem possible, turias
and turtas, and we think turtas more probable, accepting that only
a vestigial trace of the cross-bar survives. turtas is an
explicable alternative spelling of tortas, see Adams (1994); for torta
meaning a "twisted loaf", see Vg.Exod. 29.23, Num.
6.19, 1.Sam. 2.36, 10.3, (1.Chr. 16.3 1.Par.
16.3), Jer. 37.20 and cf. tortula, Vg.Num.
Crescenti: cf. line 11 and note.
militibus legionaribus: for the change of suffix in the adjective
see Adams (1994) and note that at Caesar, BC 3.2.2 there is a
variant reading legionarium militum, cited at TLL
VII.2 1109. The entry is important since it proves the presence of a group of
legionaries at or near Vindolanda in the period before the building of
Hadrian's Wall. Given the evidence for movement and fragmentation of units,
this is not surprising. For an early legionary tombstone at Carvoran see RIB
Firmi: there may be a short apex mark after iussu but the
writer does not use this elsewhere and it may well belong to the foot of s
in militibus. He has left a large space between r and
m in Firmi; since the leaf has split down the grain
at this point it may be that there was a fault or irregularity in the surface
which he was avoiding (though he has not done so elsewhere). The name Firmus
occurs in the tablets only here and in 343.iv.43 (but see above,
lines 12-3 note), where it may well refer to the same person; see introduction,
Candido: a Candidus is the recipient of 343 and the
name occurs elsewhere at Vindolanda in this group of texts and outside it (see
introduction, above and 181.2 note). Since it is a very common
name it would be unwise to attempt to identify the recipient of wheat with any
of the other Candidi.
in folle br.gese: for folle
see above, line 7. The word which follows must be an adjective agreeing with folle
but we are unable to explain it satisfactorily. The third letter is damaged by
a break in the leaf but is most likely to be i; the fourth is
quite certainly g; after that ese
is virtually certain. If we have brige(n)se, could it be a sack
from Briga or a particular kind of sack associated with the place? For Briga
see 190.c.38, 292.c.v.2
and note that AS I 542 records an adjective Brigiensis,
cf. Pliny, NH 5.30, Tagasense (wrongly recorded in LS
Lucconi: NPEL cites six instances from Italy and the
Danubian provinces; cf. note to line 18, above.
porcos: see also 183.4 and cf. line 33, below. This will
mean that Lucco is in charge of the pigs, not that the wheat is to be used to
feed them (cf. line 30 note).
Primo Luci: the second name could be a patronym but it is also
possible that Primus is a slave (LC 291 shows that it is a common
servile name) and that Lucius is the name of the owner; perhaps Lucius the scutarius
(184.ii.22) or Lucius the decurio (299-300).
The name Primus also occurs in 181.6, where it may refer to the
in ussus suos: for the geminate s see Tab.Vindol.I,
p.73. The phrase implies personal use and should presumably be contrasted with
the entry in line 27 which might, for instance, be issued as rations for Lucco
and his (agricultural?) workers.
The writing on this, the third, section of the tablets is more abraded than
that on the other two, as is natural if it was unprotected by a facing leaf
The indentation of line 32 suggests that these two lines should be taken as one
entry, with the amount missing at the end of line 32, but we have not been able
to solve the problems of reading and interpretation.
]uos: there cannot be more than two
letters lost before this and there is unlikely to be more than one lost here or
after m. The reading can hardly be doubted and it seems equally
certain that a new word begins with m; this seems to reduce the
possibilities to duos, quos, suos, tuos
or uos. Then we could read a name such as M[a]ttia[no
but we cannot see how to make sense of it. As a possibility we tentatively
suggest item [q]uos m[i]ssi m(odios)[
followed by a number.
in[.]uotur[.].: there may, but
need not be, a letter lost after in and the same applies after r.
The last letter in the line looks distinctly like a centurial symbol. We could
perhaps read in uotur[i] (centuria/-am)?
The name Voturius is cited as a gentilicium in Narbonensis by NPEL
and it is also a Gallic tribal name; for Viturius (sc.
Veturius) in Gallia Belgica see CIL 13.6391, but the reading is
not as attractive. We cannot explain it, however. It should be noted that
Speidel (1984), 107 is unable to cite a single instance of the name of the
commander preceding centuria, but see RMR 9.9.f-n.
[a]d i[uu]encos: we are certain of
the ending, the initial i suits the traces and there is room to
restore [uu]; we are therefore confident of the reading especially
when we compare line 27, ad porcos.
These lines are difficult to understand both in detail and in the context of
the account as a whole. item (cf. line 10 note) suggests that a
new entry begins in line 34 but it is less clear whether this line is a
complete entry on its own, or whether it is to be taken with line 35 or line 35
and line 36.
inter metrum: the reading is clear. There is a space between inter
and metrum which might suggest that we have two words, but this
writer is rather inconsistent about his spacing (cf. line 2 note). We have no
example of it elsewhere (either as one word or two) nor do we see what the
force of inter is likely to be. It is difficult to see what it
could mean, although TLL VIII 899 suggests that metrum
might be used in later Latin to mean "measure" and cites its use with
frumentum (Rufinus, Hist. 3.6.3). We have translated
it literally and wonder whether it might mean something like "on
average", to be taken with what follows (see note to line 35).
have considered another possible interpretation in the light of C.Theod.
13.5.38 and 13.9.5, where epimetrum and diametrum are
found with reference to ships' cargoes, apparently meaning, respectively,
something over and something under the correct amount. This perhaps suggests
that in the Vindolanda text intermetrum is to be taken as a single
word meaning something like "balance". Elsewhere we have found the
terms only in ChLA X 436, a third-century account of annona
militaris, where they are abbreviated to diametr and epimetr,
which might, in a papyrus from Egypt, be resolved in the Greek form -metron.
Both _________ and _________ occur in Greek and it may be that intermetrum
is the Latin equivalent of _________. One meaning of _________ is, as might be
expected, an additional tax. In P.Hib.I 110.14 (cf. P.Tebt.I
91.11, 92.11) the meaning of _________ is unclear (see note ad loc.
and cf. P.Cair.Zen.IV 59669.2 note), although it is translated
"difference on measure". This does not seem very promising.
At the beginning of the line we have either libris xv or libras xv,
at the end librae (or possibly
libras or libris) followed by a number which might be
read iv or lv[ or xv[; of these, the
first would be an unexpected form since iiii is much commoner in
the tablets, the second is palaeographically the easiest and the third
necessitates taking as a cross-stroke a mark which may not be ink. In between redd
is certain and we might have reddo
or reddi. The point of this
passage might be explained with reference to Pliny the Elder's calculations of
the amount of bread which is yielded by various types of cereal and methods of
baking, particularly NH 18.88, siliginae farinae modius
Gallicae xx libras panis reddit; 18.62, Galliae quoque suum genus
farris dedere, quod illic bracem uocant, apud nos scandalam, nitidissimi grani.
est et alia differentia quod fere quaternis libris plus reddit panis quam far
aliud; 18.67, lex certa naturae ut in quocumque genere pani militari
tertia portio ad grani pondus accedat, sicut optumum frumentum esse quod in
subactum congium aquae capiat. If this were a notation calculating the
yield of bread, we might expect something like libris xv reddi(tae) librae xv[iiii,
i.e. 15 pounds of cereal yield 19 (?) pounds of bread, which is within the
range suggested by Pliny (the reading of the first numeral is certain and it
therefore seems impossible to make sense of the second as either iv
or lv[). This would seem to demand a preposition with libris and some mention of panis, which
could be accommodated by supposing that ex is lost at the end of
line 34 and panis at the end of line 35. These two lines, taken
together, might then mean "likewise, on average 15 pounds (of wheat) yield
15+ pounds of bread."
The suggestion made in the previous note does not take account of this line
which is indented and looks as if it ought to belong with what precedes it. The
reading is clear and it must mean "that makes nn modii",
but we are not attracted by the notion that line 34 calculates modii
of wheat, line 35 weight of bread made from weight of wheat and line 36 reverts
to modii of wheat. For a combination of librae and modii
in the same context, though not the same commodity, see Suetonius, Iul.
38.1, frumenti denos modios ac totidem olei libras.
See line 3 note.
A total is appropriate and sum at the start of the line is
convincing. There is a gap between sum and ma and the
two letters following are very spread out, cf. line 2 note.