The FINA wiki is currently being maintained. You can safely read all content, but please don't edit anything here!

William Lloyd - Antoine Pagi - 1690

From Fina Wiki

William Lloyd - Antoine Pagi - 1690
FINA IDUnique ID of the page  7890
InstitutionName of Institution. Oxford, Bodleian Library
InventoryInventory number. MS Cherry 1, f° 177 (b), 186 (a) and MS Cherry 29, f° 34-95.
AuthorAuthor of the document. William Lloyd
RecipientRecipient of the correspondence. Antoine Pagi
Correspondence dateDate when the correspondence was written: day - month - year . 1690
PlacePlace of publication of the book, composition of the document or institution. St Asaph 53° 15' 27.22" N, 3° 26' 37.90" W
Associated personsNames of Persons who are mentioned in the annotation. Enrico Noris, Jean Foy-Vaillant, Henry Dodwell, Nicolas Thoynard
LiteratureReference to literature. Noris 16911
KeywordNumismatic Keywords  phoenician, samaritan
LanguageLanguage of the correspondence English
LinkLink to external information, e.g. Wikpedia con=He%20asks%20where%20Toinard%20is&baseurl=/forms/advanced&start=0&type=advanced&numFound=1
Loading map...
Grand documentOriginal passage from the "Grand document".

-Lettre sans date (de St Asaph, Wales): This is a reply of several thousand words to Pagi’s questions It deals with the chronology of the games, festivals and titles held by the emperors, and triumphs, arguing with great minuteness, referring to coins, and quoting Martial Dio Tacitus Pliny etc Incidentally he places the date of Pliny’s death. ...He discusses the QUINQUENNALIA i.e. how regularly they were celebrated. He refers to coins. Dodwell will gladly help with material e.g. on Irenaeus on which he is expert. Norisius and Valliant are mentioned, the former is pursuing further Syro-Macedonian chronology interpreting the characters inscribed on Phoenician and Samaritan coins. He hopes Norisius will be able to supplement from Italian libraries the mutilated fragment of Porphyry edited by Casaubon and Scaliger. He asks where Toinard is, laments the death of Cotelier, and mentiones Pezaron. (Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Cherry 1 fols. 177 (b), 186 (a)).

RemarksRemarks regarding the annotation. (fr)

Date: c. 1690 ? (Enrico Noris est décrit comme travaillant à Noris 1691). Voir aussi (apparemment la même très longue lettre): -Lettre sans date ni lieu: Though engrossed in various business he puts it aside to reply to P. He does not propose to deal with all the points P. raised but with the most urgent ones, which relate to the period up to Domitian. He advises him on the correct dating of the secular games, which he argues in documented detail that is impossible to summarise. He refers to coins, quotes the «hateful» Martial for evidence on the date of Domitian’s Dacian campaign and the signification of his various «IMP.» titles, for Martial is the only official recorder of this period month by month. He quotes «The Danube hot with hoofbeats» etc. He proceeds to deal with the precise dating of Trajan’s Dacian campaign and his proclamation as IMP. on the banks of the Danube. He adduces many testimonies from Pliny’s Panegyric. He confutes P’s objections to his view on the date of Trajan’s second Dacian campaign, and refers to EUSEBIUS’s and MALELA’s authority. He proceeds to support further conjectures against P’s arguments, e.g. on the date of Hadrian’s tibunate; and on the occasion, of each of the series of Trajan’s proclamation as «IMP». He quotes many references to Pliny’s letters with a view to fixing the years of his office as legate to Bithynia and the editing of his letters. He speculates on the date of Pliny’s and Martial’s deaths. He proceeds to a detailed examination of the date of Ignatius’ martyrdom, referring to Ussher’s edition of his letters and to COTTONIAN parchments. He concludes that he way martyred in 116 A. D., the same year in which Dodwell argues that Simon CLEOPAS. Bp. of Jerusalem, perished. He differs from P’s view that the quinquennalia were celebrated regularly from Tiberius’ time onwards, and holds that coins were struck in several years in public thanksgiving without a specially solemn occasion. He passes on to P. Dodwell’s requests to be allowed to copy any Greek texts on IRENAEUS that may lurk in his libraries. He craves acquaintance with NORIS, who to his research on the Syro-Macedonian eras will, he hopes add interpretations of the coin inscriptions in Samaritan characters, a perhaps impossible task, unless N. can from Italian libraries supplement the precious mutilated fragment of PORPHYRIAN edited by Scaliger who received it from CASAUBON. But he is glad to hear that N. hopes to complete LAMBECIUS’ edition of the consular Fasti, for none is so well as he fitted by skill and ties of affection to carry on and use the text of a forerunner and perfect it as a monument redounding to the honour of both of them. He mentions his friendship to TOINARD, and regret for COTELIER’s death. (Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Cherry 29, f° 34-95). (fr)


  1. ^  Noris, Enrico (1691), Annus et epochae syromacedonum: expositae in vetustis urbium Syriae nummis praesertim Mediceis expositae, Florence