A N ACCOUNT O F A COPPER table: containing Two INSCRIPTIONS, In the GREEK and L A T I N Tongues. Difcovered in the Year 1732,, NEAR. HERACLEA, in the Bay of TARENTUM, in MAGNA GRAECIA: By PHILIP CARTERET WEBB Efquire, Fellow of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies of London. Read at a Meeting of the Society of ANTIQUARIES of London, the 13 December 1759 j and ordered to be printed. LONDON, Printed in the Year MDCCLX. C 3 ] My Lord Willoughby of Farham^ T H E Society, with their ufual candour, will, I hope, forgive my trefpaffing on their time, for a few minutes. The Commentaries of Mazochius (a) upon two large Tables of Copper difcovered in the kingdom of Naples, in the year 1732, near Heraclea a town of Magna Graecia, Y^hich this Society received the November 1759, from Don Francifeo Valetta, Secretary to the Society for illujiratmg the Antiquities found at Herculaneum, merit the Society’s ferious attention : and we are greatly indebted to Mr. Valetta and Mr. Hollis, two of our body, by whofe means this very valuable prefent was conveyed to the Society. • The refpedable antiquity of the Tables, and the importance of the In- feriptions upon them which are the objedt of Mazochius’s work, intitle them to the firft place among any Greek or Roman antiquities of this kind hitherto difcovered. The firft and moft important of the Tables, is broken into two ; the firft piece of which is in England, the other is at Naples. It contains on one fide a Greek infeription, relating to lands facred to Bacchus j on the other fide is a Latin Infeription, containing part of a pandedl or digeft of Roman municipal laws. ( brought by an Italian into England, and fold there by him, to Brian Fairfax Efquire, a commiffioner of the cuffoms, a lover of antiquities, and Fellow of this learned Society ( d) j foon after his death, it was purchafed, by me, of his executors. Mr. Mattaire, in the year 1736, publifhed the Greek and La- tin Infcriptions on Mr. Fairfax’s Table, accompanied with a Com- mentary purely grammatical, which, it muff be confefTed, does no greater honour to the Table, than to the Grammarian. Mattaire, in his preface to the Reader, fays he had engraved a few Lines of each Infcription. “ Ex quo fpecimine literarum jigura et pro- “ /»i/r//ofaciliusaeftimetur.” Upon comparing Mattaire’s Plate with the Table, it appears, the fize or proportion of the letters are not obferved, and their form often miftaken. I have therefore, for the fatisfadion of the curious, in the annexed plates N«. i and N°. 2, exhibited a fac- fimile copy of a few of the firft lines of both Infcriptions, of the ex- ad fize and form with the original. (h) Mazoch. Prolog, c. v, vi. p. 5, 6. (c) Mazoch. p. 4. {d) Mazochius, p. 3, fays, Mr. Fairfax bought it in Italy, and, on his return to England, carried it thither. Mr. Fairfax never was in Italy. In £:«f 1:1 TAf Xo:^i ATf E AA AJ o :^>Attoa CE T p irro Y ^ 4 TIE KA p YKE lo N AttoA A I TTErATA A A X I M o : <|>l A^xA:! ht:STlE \ ^ HHPAKae:i AArlarxirt ANlE n>AtANTPlOpI XTAIT«I lVMPEC'ES^T£i:£r 4l NyM'^^^X^rTY^I^AAT^oAAANl V-H?A ^•HPAIjA3t HTTi:^-rYA10N rp A A t-ON Y X-a H A^A:^7w:^ Y-A^t(>HY^jn. ^HT-A Ay^xilMo:^TTYPPA.4-l A AtA^H : i f^^^ANKAi:^YHEMETPH^AAf/TiA'CVRAQIT' l5-f>4rpfA10A1A//A-Q.VA£-£VM • Qyo OPORTCB/r- ITm‘lSDEiAayC'OIEbVJ'^E> COj'PRO FITEMII QyE/A'H±AO-COS-PROnTER.EhOPORT£8mSEf fSPVP -SEIVCEA o VEOM A/ W- W*/ iSOEfA’OiERVS-AD'COS- PPO flTpJA INO lTA Yf BSt^ti'L'PAOFITER FhOFORTER ET C 5 1 XIL. i^M-pRO f! TEREIOPO RTEBI A e*NONfR/T* TVMQ Vf /f / Vi pN£c on A • c VR AB t nsEi roma£‘ ess fT* H • L- PKOFITEKEI ) fa/T* TVMciyf/ Efy/, pv/> VT yf-TVTOA'ERIT- ITPVv-fAi; PavACaV/6VJQ,vrDH6VJ-£vMfAMV£iff PVP*V‘iVf*M)M i .*-» «> ai w C 5 ] In 1738, Franclfcus Carolus Conradus a Civilian, repubfiflied thefe Infcriptions at Helmftad, with a long Commentary on the Roman Inlcription. Scipio Maffeius foon after publifhed it in the third Tome of his Obfervation. Literal and in 1740, the learned Muratorius inferted an Exemplar of both the Latin and Greek In- fcriptions, which he had obtained from Ficoronius while the Table was in his poffeffion, in the T^omm Alter of his T^hefaurus Lifcrip^ iionum^ p* 582 (ej. The Greek and Roman Infcriptions on fuch of the Tables as are at Naples, are now Jirfi corredly publifhed by Mazochius, in the work which is fo often commended in the prefent paper. The Neapolitan Tables were about the year 1748, purchafed by his excellency Guevara, late minifter of the king of Naples at the court of Portu- gal: Mr, Guevara with the affiftance of Mazochius, and with an application as remarkable as laudable, made an exad: and fac-pnile copy of both the Neapolitan Tables. “ Qi^ovis depolito pignore decer- “ tamus, nufquam aliter, quam quo modo in impreffis prelo tabulis “ exhibetur, in aere fcriptum, idque non modo litera fed ne apice mi- “ nus” Mr. Guevara afterwards prefented the original Tables to the king of Naples, in whofe colledlion they are now depofited, among the antiquities difcovered in Herculaneum. The thicknefs of the Tables at Naples is about one third of an inch, the breadth 15 inches (g), Mattaire in the preface to his Reader, by an inattention not ealy to be accounted for, fays, Mr. Fairfax’s Table was near an inch thick, and one foot and an half, i. e. 18 inches wide. His words are “ Tabulam ex aere, (fi rede conjicio) Corinthio, (which is a miftake, “ it being of fine copper) Pollicis fere crajjitudine, longitudine pedum “ duorum et dimidii, unius et dimidii latitudine.'* Whereas its exad length is one foot, eleven inches and 4, and its thicknefs and breadth j (^) Mazoch. p. 4. (pj Mazoch. p. 5, -6, 7. (g) Mazochius, p. 2, fays, the Neapelitan Table, of which the Brltifh is a part, is one Neapolitan palm, and fomething more than five inches wide, and about one third of an inch thick, B 2 are CM are exactly the fame, as the thicknefs and breadth of the Table at Naples {h), Th Is (Irange mifreprefentation of the thicknefs and breadth of the Brkifi Table, fo different from that of the Neapolitan^ of which Ma- 2 ochius, from internal evidence, was convinced it was originally a party neceffarily put the learned Neapolitan under very great difficulties. He at firff ( p. i66. note 2.) endeavoured to account for this dif- ference from the different growth of metals, ^egetatione metallorumy and therefore fuppofes, that the different parts of the JirJi Table, having for fo many ages laid buried in ftrata of different qiialitiesy “ diverhmode vegetaffiy eaque gratia nunc demum non poffe con- gruere.'' Not fatisfied with this philofophy, he, with more pro- priety, fufpedted that Mattaire’s defcription might not be correct; and therefore calls upon the Englifh Antiquarians to compare their Table with the account he had given of thofe at Naples, and to communicate the refult of that comparifon to the Literati at Na- ples. ‘‘ Verum cum quas Tabulas hie acre expreffas habes, eae ne la- tum quidem capillum a modulis ipfius monumenti differant (nifi quan- tulum ex chartae madefadlae primum, deinde exficcatae, vicibus acci- dere variationis potuit) liherum Britannis eruditiffimis erit, excuffum Tabulae exemplumy quod hie repraefentavimus, cum aere fuo compararcy ac pro fua humanitate, ecquid deprehenfum fuerit, Neapolim nuntia- re' (i). This requeft I have endeavoured to comply with. The Letters of the Greek infeription, and feveral of the Ro- man are of that kind which Antiquarians call Gemmatae i they ap- pear thicker or deeper at each endy than in the intermediate parts, owing to the manner in which they were cut or engraved, i. e. by tirft making a large dott at the extreme parts of the letter, and (h) The exaft breadth of the Neapolitan Table is afeertained by the breadth of Mazoch. Tab. I. Seg. i, 2, 3. p. 252. So that after the care Mazochius mentions, p. 166, to have been ufed in taking off the exemplar of the Neapolitan Table, there cannot remain the ieaft doubt of both parts of the Table being of the fame breadth. This makes it unneceflary to reduce the Roman or Neapolitan palm to the foot of Great Britain, which might be liable to miftake and uncertainty, (i) Mazoch. p. 166. n. (2). then c c c r ALFHABF.TUM HEIiACLIENSIUM TABZTLAB UM C 7 ] then joining thofe dotts by a line, not fo deep, with the help of a ftraight ruler. Inftances of this fort of letters occur frequently on the coins of Philip of Macedon, and fome of the Syrian and Aegyptian kings (k). The care and accuracy of the engraver of the Greek Infcriptions is fo remarkable, “ ut raro et vix ufquam fcul- ptoris viriculum quam leviffime ab orthographia aberraverit.” The fame cannot be faid of the Latin part, which abounds with the en- graver’s miftakes ( 1 ). The aera or date of the Greek Infcriptions on thefe Tables, Mazochius, by a deduction which appears to be conclufive, afcertains to be about the 430*^ year of Rome j i. e. more than 300 years before the birth of Chrift (m). This gives an antiquity to the Greek In- fcription of more than 2060 years. The date of the Roman In- fcription he fixes to be near about the time of paffing the Plotian or yuliaji law, a period very interefting to the Roman Colonies : this was about the year of Rome 663, or 665, fomething more than 80 years before the Chriftan aera (n). The form of feveral of the Greek charaders on both Tables, is fngtilar and unufual j differing remarkably from the moft an- cient Greek charadlers hitherto difcovered : the two letters H or C: , Mazochius fays, do not occur in any other ancient In- scription, fave that the afpirate H is to be feen on an an- cient vafe of Terra Cotta, in the colle6lion of Felix Maftril- liis, a man of quality at Nola, and on fome coins of Heraclea, and other Greek colonies, fituated on each fide of the coafl: of Italy (0), Mazochius (in a plate inferted p. 124.) hath exhibited the figures and fhape of fuch of the letters in thefe Infcriptions^ as differ from other ancient or modern Greek letters : a copy of this, for the fatis- fadion of perfons who may not have an opportunity to perufe Mazo- chius’s work, I have annexed in the Plate N^’. 3. {k) Mazoch. p. 123. { 1 ) Mazoch. p. 136, {m) Mazoch. p. 133, 134. (n) Mazoch. p. 382. and p. 488, to 493 * {0) Mazoch. p. 7. and p. 122. § 2. and p. 126, to p. 130. and p. 112. note (82.) The [ 8 ] The Greek Infcrlption of this Table is in the Doric dialefl, and gives an account of the dimenfions^ menfurations^ and terms of leafing, of a large territory of land belonging to the god Dionyfms, or Bac- chus, part of which had been encroached upon and taken from the temple, by private perfons ; which, by means of this furvey and ad- meafurement, was recovered back. The Infcription on the other Table, which, by the names of the public olhcers, appears to be of nearly the fame antiquity, is of the fame nature, relative to lands the property of the temple of Minerva— (p). I fhould intrude too much on the Society’s time, were I to attempt to enumerate the many new and furprifing helps thefe Infcriptions furnifh for explaining the Grecian antiquity j the difcovery of new towns, the forms of new letters, new words and terms of art, the names of office of new magiftrates, are only a few among many other intereffing particulars, which a careful infpedlion of thefe Greek Infcriptions and Mazochius’s learned commentary will afford to the curious (q)^ The Latin Infcription on the back of the lirft Table appears to be a part of a panded: or colledion of the Laws, by which the mu- nicipals, or Romans who lived out of Rome, governed themfelvesj it is not complete: The reft of the pandedl was probably contained in fome other Tables not yet difcovered. All the ancient Tables or Laminae of laws, that have been dil- covered before the prefent, are, in their nature, confined to one fmgie law each} and Mazochius with great reafon afferts, that this Table, which contains a part of the p.ande6l of the municipal law, affords more real lights to the knowledge of antiquities than can be colledl- ed from all the Tables of Roman laws publiffied by Sigonius, or any that have followed him (r). Of this, in the courfe of his commentary, he has given the moft ample and interefting proofs, which juftifies the veneration and opinion Mazochius, in feveral parts of his work, (tf>) Maaoch. p. 140, 1, 41. (q) Mazpch. p. 141. (r) Mazoch. p. 290, 291. cxpreffes C 9 ] exprelles for thefe Tables ; that they are, auro contra non cara^ & quo^is principe potentijjimo digna (i"). Mr. Guevara upon his becoming poffefTed of the Neapolitan Ta- bles, was defirous of adding the Britijh Table to them j and with that view, in the year 1753, he propofed to the prefent poffelfor to pur- chafe it. This propofition was not then complyed with, the prefent pro- prietor intending that this venerable remain of remote antiquity fliould never go out of Great Britain ; he however then offered to let an exad: or fac-fmile exemplar be taken of it, in order that it might be pub- liflied with the others at Naples. The not attending to this offer ren- ders the work of Mazochius lefs complete and perfedl than it might have been, if an accurate copy of the inferiptions on the Britilh Ta- ble, in the original charaBers^ had been inferted in it. It appearing, from what Mazochius mentions p. 166, and p. 385. that he was pofTeffed of an apograph of the Britifli Table, I expedled to have found it engraved among his other plates, and fufpeded it’s not being in the copy fent to the Society might be the error of the binder j Mazochius’s words are, “ Specimen fcriptiirae antiquae a Mattaire exhibi- tum praetermifi, quippe ledori fupervacaneum \ cui integras quam exadiffime ad aera autographa, inaes incifas,^^^ fin- gulis locis contemplari licebif (t). But whatever Mazochius might, in 1753 or 1754 (when he wrote the paffage laft quoted, and about which time the offer for purchafing the Britifh Table was making) intend or hope to do with refpedt to the publiflaing an exa6t copy of the In- feriptions on that Table; it appears, from the bookfeller’s advertife- ment relating to Mazochius’s work, publifhed in Sept. 1758, that the eight large plates inferted in the work, contained copies of the Neapo- litan Tables only Idem opus Tabulis pluribus in acre incifis inftrui- “ tur : Inter has vero illae oBo maximae tabidae quae aera ipfa^ a. fum- (i) Mazoch. p. 5. § II. I had omitted, in the defeription of the Tables, their weight. — The Britifli Table weighs 57 Roman pounds, the Neapolitan part of the fame Table weighs 112 Roman pounds, and the fecond Neapolitan Table weighs 107 Roman pounds. Mazoch. p, 4, (/) Mazoch. p. 144. <( mo [ lO ] mo ad imuin fart prorfus literarum dimen fione formaque^ ad vivum “ exhibent, quantilibet pretii funt.” ’Now the large plates, which are of the fame breadth as the Tables, relate only to thofe Tables that are at Naples. But lince Mr. Guevara’s Tables came into the royal Neapolitan colledion, his Neapolitan majefty now king of Spain, having ex- prelfed to his excellency Sir James Gray, his Britannic majefty ’s envoy and minifter plenipotentiary at the court of Naples, a defire of add- ing the Britifti Table to the others in his colleIEBVJ’^D cOf'pR.O HTEM/NO QyEM.’H±AO