Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 8.djvu/230

 [66 ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS ON ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE BULLA WORN BY ROMAN BOYS. BY JAMES YATES, M.A., F R.S. &c. I OFFER these remarks as a supplement to my " Account of a Roman sepulchre at Geldestone, Norfolk," published in the Fifth Volume of the Arcliaeoloo;ical Journal. Havino; in illustration of my subject described the golden bulla, which was brought to England by Dr. Conyers Middleton, I concluded my notice of it in these words : — " Probably this fine relic is in England at the present time, but in whose possession I cannot tell." Not long afterwards Lady Fellows communicated to me the gratif)dng intelligence, that it was in her possession, and by her kind permission I am now enabled to exhibit it to the Archaeological Institute. At the sale of the effects of Dr. Middleton, it was purchased by Horace Walpole, Lord Orford, for his splendid collection at Strawberry Hill. There it remained until the sale in 1842, when it was purchased by William Knight, Esq., by whose decease it came into the possession of his widow, the present owner. Probably no finer specimen of an ancient bulla has yet been discovered than that belonging to Samuel Rogers, Esq., by whose great kindness and liberality I am enabled to exhibit this precious relic. It was discovered among ashes and burnt bones in an urn of red earth by some labourers in a vineyard about twelve miles from Rome, on the way to Albano. From its first discovery in the year 1794, it remained in the possession of Signer Antonio Bellotti till 1821, when it was bought by Mr. Rogers. As the Chigi Bulla has upon it the name catulus, which, as I formerly observed, " is supposed to have been the name of the wearer," so Mr. Rogers's is marked with the letters host. hos. These admit of being read in two ways, HOSTUs HOSTiLius, Or HOSTiLius HOSTiLiANUs. In either case we must suppose the boy, referred to in the inscription, to have belonged to the Hostilia Gens, Hostilius being his nomcn gcntilitium. We have then the alternative, either to take HOSTUS for the prcEnomen, or hostilianus for the cognomen. But we are informed, that the preenomen was