Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 113 (1983), 379-390 Two inscribed Roman stones and architectural fragments from Scotland G S Maxwell* SUMMARY recene Th t discovery, under widely differing circumstances groupo tw f f Romao s,o n carved stones has cast light upon certain aspects of the Antonine occupation of Scotland. The additional knowledge abou Inglistoe th t n milestone permit smora e accurate datininscriptione th f go , leadin tentativa go t e identificatio governoe th f succeedeno o rwh d Lollius Urbicu possibld san e clarificatio processee th f no s by whic Antonine hth e Wal builts recognitioe lwa Th . name Lusiuth Q f f eno o s Sabinianus proe ,th - curato province th f o r f Britanniaeo , upo ntwice-usea d altar from Inveresk raises important questions about the reasons for his presence in Scotland and the status of the fort and extramural settlement at Inveresk. The inscribed stone itself is a valuable addition to the national collection, at once a historical documen ows it interestinnn n ti a righ d tan Scotland n i g- , uniqu eexampl- Romaf eo n epigraphy. INGLISTOE TH N MILESTONE The Roman milestone which is the first subject of this paper (fig 1) was first recorded at the close of the 17th century in a catalogue of donations made by the Scottish antiquary Sir Robert Sibbald (1697, 203) to the University of Edinburgh. According to the entry, it then consisted fragmentso otw f , whic beed hha n found 'in Inglistons Groun plaia n i dn field, nea whico t r h severall Obelisks are to be seen, some erected, others lying on the ground'. The approximate discovere locuth f o s relativels yi y'obeliskse clearth r fo , standine ' th referre e ar go dt stone s associated wit large hth e round cair t Newbridgea n righe th tn Rivee o ban,th f rko Almond Inglistof 726o 3 (NG12 W ) aboue T nth RN House o t uncertains 1-i m 8t k I . , however, whether the third stone, said by Sibbald to have been found together with the milestone and subsequently 'built int walle near-ba o th f o ' y 'Tennent's House Haverfielf (c ' d 1910, same 321)th thas s ea i , t recently discovered by Dr E A Cormack (1969) in the farmsteading at West Ingliston; the latter bear carvee sth d representatio birda f no , whic feele hon s coul havt dno e faile drao dt wcommena t from Sibbal informans hi r beet do i stone d nth tquestionha n ei . t cleano rs i whethe t I r Sibbald recognize 'pillaro d tw thae ' th tfragment s belonged together, or that either formed part of a milestone. Most of his attention was naturally devoted to the part bearin inscriptione gth , whic latee hh r note dcontaines (1707wa ) 50 , d withi ansatn na e panel, although the ansa on each side was interpreted 'as a Roman Securis, the badge of Magistracy'; the other fragment, it was observed, had carved upon it 'the Figure of a Garland, with something like strings for tying it, hinging down'. When Alexander inscribee Gordoth w sa nd portion, som year0 e2 s College laterth n i , e Roya* l Commissio Anciene th Historicad n no an t l Monument Scotlandf o s Melvill4 5 , , EdinburgeSt h 380 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1983 TV P 0 m c 0 5 I_ FIG 1 The text and decoration of the two milestone fragments from Ingliston brought into correct relationship MAXWELL: ROMAN STONES AND ARCHITECTURAL FRAGMENTS FROM SCOTLAND | 381 Library in Edinburgh, he correctly identified the ansae, but mistakenly assumed that the inscrip- tion recorded the completion of a length of work on the Antonine Wall (1726, 62, pi 12, 3), in other words, that it was a Distance Slab; of the second fragment there was no mention at this time, although it was obviously thought worthy of illustration (Gordon 1726, pi 14, 4). Both stones were probably transferred from the university to the safekeeping of the Society of Anti- quarie f Scotlano s d about t onl1866bu y,e inscribe oneth , d fragment s specificallwa , y listed in the earliest catalogue of the National Museum of Antiquities (SAS 1892, 227). The other appears to have been laid aside, as being of less importance, and eventually seems to have sunk withou tlumbe e tracstore-roome th th n ef i o r . Accordingly, when attempts were mad reao et d inscriptioe th modern i n recognizetimess wa t i , dt onl tha stonno e ys th tseverel ewa y mutilated but also truncated, since an unknown number of lines had to be supplied at the beginning of the inscriptio completo nt generalls sensee eth wa t I . y agreed survivine tha th texe f th to t g fragment should read: N[I]NO . AVG PIO / PP . COS[I]II / 2 lines erased / CO]H I . CVGERNOR / [TRI] MONTI . MP /. The stone was thus identified as a milestone recording the distance from the Roman fort at Newstead (Trimontium) preciss it t bu e, datuncertains ewa . Some scholars believe Birleg d(e y 1966, 230) that only two or three lines had been lost and that the emperor RIB mentioned in the dedicatio Antoninus nwa s Pius, others (cfRIB 2313) tha mans ta fousupplieds e ya b ro t line d s,ha assumptioe th n o n tha missine th t g titles were thos f Septimiueo s eldeSeverus hi rd t sonI san . ma worte yb h recalling Birley's observation thalattee th t r suggestion, involvin a lose f gth o s much larger part of the inscription, would have made the position of the ansae unusually low on the side of the panel; moreover, the tentative ascription to the Severan period might not have been so readily entertained had there not been a 3rd-century occupation at the nearby fort of Cramond. In favour of the later dating, however, it could be argued that it offered an explanation for the two-line erasure, since it might be interpreted as the obliteration of the name of Geta, Severus' younger son, who suffered virtual damnatio memoriae after his death in AD 212. mattee Soth r rested until 1971, whe r JoannnD a Close-Brooks, Assistant Keepee th t a r National Museum of Antiquities of Scotland, learned from Dr E A Cormack of the discovery thire oth f d ston t Wesea t Inglisto instituted nan dsuccessfua l secone searcth r hdfo e parth f o t pillar mentioned by Sibbald. When recovered from the store-room of the museum it was seen exactle b o t describes ya Sibbal y illustrates db a d dan Gordoy db n (1726 . Furthermore3) , , p12 i , it was realized that the parallel horizontal lines visible in the engraving, apparently at the lower edge of the stone, were in fact a rendering of the moulding and incised border at the top of the inscription panel, beneath whic hinitiae parth f lo textt e letteth ,f o Tr coul identifiede db t I . becamw no precise eth necessarf i ee physicase o yt l relationshi fragmento tw e th f spo coule db established, and for this purpose (particularly to facilitate manipulation of the two pieces) a plaster lowemadcase s th twa f ero portio newle th f nyo recovered stone. It quickly became obvious that, although considerable damage had been caused to the fron f eaco t h stonebace th kt a ,the y appeare almost fi o dt t exactly e closenesTh . thif so s join was checked by reference to the correspondence in vertical alignment of the mouldings at each side of the inscription panel; in each case they were exactly in line (pi 24), and additional con- firmatio provides nwa flake-scaa y db r which extended conformabl eithen yo linre f sidth eo f eo fracture. Thus, when the stones were joined it was seen that no more than two lines had to be supplie beginnine th t inscriptionde a th f go generalls i t I . y agreed (Wrigh Hassal& t l 1973, 336-7) tha complete tth e texmorn ra t lesr efollowso s sa : I[mp(eratori) Caes(ari) T(ito) Ael(io)/ Hadr(iano) Anto] nino/ Aug(usto) Pio /P(atri)P(atriae) | SOCIET 2 ANTIQUARIE38 F YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1983 Co(n)s(uli) [/]// line/2 s erased / [Co]h(ors) I Cugernor(um) / [Tri]monti(p) m(illid) p(assuum)/ [...] 'For the Emperor Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, father of his country, thrice consul,... firse ,th t cohor Cugernf to i (set this up). From Trimontium... miles.' milestone Th therefory ema assignee eb earle th y o d reigt yeare th Antoninu f nf o s o s Pius. DISCUSSION Three points, however, remai r discussionnfo e originath ) (a : l provenanc stonee th f eo , precisee explanatioe th th ) ) (b (c erasuredatee d th f an ,n o . Provenance There is probably no way in which we can now ascertain the exact spot where the mile- stone originally stood. It has been suggested (RCAMS 1929, 40-1) that it was brought to Ingliston from Cramond which is the nearest known Roman installation, presumably by an early collector of Roman antiquities; but, although antiquarian collecting is not unheard of in Scotland during 16te 17td th han h centuries unlikels i t i , y tha stoneta brought from Cramon sucy db hconnoisa - seur would subsequently have been abandone losd middl e sighcountryside o dan t th th n f i t eo e before 1690.