Interpreting a Roman Building Inscription with Missing Text
A student is cataloguing a building inscription from a provincial Roman town. The stone is broken on the right edge, so the ends of lines are lost. Surviving text includes: 'IMP CAES ... TRIB POT ... COS ... PATER PATRIAE ... AMPHITHEATRVM ... DE SVO ...'. The student dates the inscription by the tribunician power and consulship numbers, but those numbers fall in the lost portion. The student's draft says the emperor 'personally paid for the amphitheatre from his own funds' because of DE SVO, and dates the stone to the emperor's reign as a whole. A second fragment found nearby, not joining, reads '...SVA PECVNIA FECIT'. The student wants to treat the two fragments as one text.
1. Assess the student's translation of DE SVO and the claim that the emperor personally paid.
Read the worked answer
DE SVO means 'from his own resources', but this is a conventional formula in honorific building inscriptions and does not establish personal payment in the modern sense. It distinguishes the funding from public treasury money, but the funds may have come from the emperor's provincial revenues or from a grant, and the actual construction may have been carried out by the army or by local contractors. The formula is also part of a status language: it advertises generosity and distinguishes the donor. The claim that the emperor 'personally' paid overreads the phrase. A defensible statement is that the inscription attributes the funding to the emperor's own resources rather than to the town's funds, while noting that the precise financial mechanism is not recoverable from the text.
2. Evaluate the student's proposal to combine the two fragments and to date the inscription to the reign as a whole.
Read the worked answer
The fragments do not join, so combining them is a hypothesis, not a reading. SVA PECVNIA FECIT is a common formula and could belong to a different monument, a different donor, or a different date. The student should present the second fragment separately and only combine the texts if the stone type, letter forms, line spacing, and findspot support it. The dating is also too coarse. Tribunician power and consulship numbers are precisely the data that allow year-level dating, so the student should reconstruct the lost numbers from the surviving letter spaces and from the emperor's known sequence, then check the reconstruction against the consular list. If the numbers cannot be recovered, the inscription should be dated to a range defined by the emperor's reign, with the reason stated. Dating to a whole reign when the dating formula is present but damaged is a failure to use the evidence that survives.