J. H. M.
Bath.
COINS OF VABALATHUS.
(Vol. iv., p. 255.)
There have been many attempts to explain the puzzling VCRIMDR, on the supposition that a Latin sentence was concealed under these letters. Pinkerton suggested "Voluntate Cæsaris Romani Imperatoris Maximi Domini, Rex." I hope to offer a better solution, which, although not new, has been passed over, I believe, by all subsequent writers. The Rev. George North, in the Museum Meadianum, p. 97., gives the following note: "Apud Arabes accepi verbum Karama significare Honoravit, a quo Ucrima, et Ucrim; quo sensu respondet hoc Arabicum Τῷ Σεβαστῷ apud Græcos." On applying to a well-known scholar and linguist here, I found that from the verb Karama there was derived the adjective Karīmat (nobilis), from which again the superlative Akram comes. There can, I think, be little doubt that the word VCRIMDR is originally derived from this verb Karama, and that it is most probably equivalent to Nobilissimus, a title so common shortly afterwards, as applied to the heirs to the empire.[3]
[3] "Nobilissimus, in the Byzantine historians, is synonymous with Cæsar."—Niebuhr.
The word ϹΡΩΙΑϹ or ϹΡΙΑϹ, which appears on the Alexandrian coins of this prince, is of more difficult explanation. Some think it a prænomen, some a Syriac or other Eastern title, perhaps corresponding to VCRIMDR. Pellerin thought so. I hope some Oriental scholar will direct his attention to this point. These coins are very often ill struck, so that the part of the legend below the head, where the word in question is found, is indistinct, for which reason I suppose MR. TAYLOR has followed the erroneous reading of Banduri, ΕΡΜΙΑϹ (properly ϵΡΜΙΑϹ, with lunate epsilon) for ϹΡΩΙΑϹ, which has been corrected by Eckhel. Of three specimens which I possess, one only reads clearly ϹΡΩΙΑϹ, from the above-mentioned cause, but it is unquestionably the correct reading on all. The best arrangement of the legend, from analogy with those forms used by the Romans, is as follows:
ΑΥΤοκρατωρ . ϹΡΩΙΑϹ . ΟΥΑΒΑΛΛΑΘΟϹ . ΑΘΗΝΟδωρου . Υιος.
The existence of coins, of which I possess a specimen also, reading
Α . ϹΡΙΑϹ . ΟΥΑΒΑΛΛΑΘΟϹ . ΑΘΗΝ . Υ.
shows that we must not read ΑΘΗΝΟΥ as one word, but must divide it as above. I think MR. TAYLOR will find his specimen to read as the last-mentioned coin, the ΕΡ (properly ϵΡ) being ϹΡ, and the ΑΥ in like manner ΑϹ. My coin gives the whole legend distinctly, and I can vouch for the exactitude of the above legend.