The true history of Antony and Cleopatra will probably never be known; it is buried too deep beneath the version of the victors. But here and there a few broken words of the under-writing can, with care, be deciphered; and as regards the battle of Actium, chance has made it possible to get at something approaching the truth, provided that we follow the elementary rule of starting from the contemporary evidence and not from the secondary narratives. Except for Ferrabino's study, every historian known to me has drawn his account of Actium solely from the secondary writers—Plutarch, Dio, the epitomators of Livy—in varying proportions; and I have not found that their accounts convey any real meaning to me. My own conclusions, I imagine, may seem strange to some readers; but the method here followed is the right one, whatever be the imperfections in my handling of it.

Not every Greek who bore a Roman name was a Roman citizen. Dittenberger formulated the rule by which the possession of Roman citizenship may be inferred. He writes of the inscription Κορνήλιος Άφροδεισιεὺς ἐποίει

‘Da auch kein Cognomen steht, ist der Gentilname offenbar nicht als solcher, sondern als Individualname gebraucht, was in römischer Zeit in Griechenland zuweilen vorkommt und da am sichersten zu erkennen ist, wo der Vatername im Genetiv dazutritt (Αντώνιος Μενάνδρου, CIA iii, 1133), oder der Name selbst ‘patronymisch verwendet wird (Βειτάλιος Πομπωνίου, IG Sept. i, 2445), oder beides zugleich stattfindet (Αντώνιος Άντωνίου, CIA iii, 1120). Alles dies hat bei einem wirklichen Gentilnamen absolut keinen Sinn; aber auch die Bezeichnung eines Griechen bloss mit einem nomen gentile kann nur so verstanden werden, dass dies an Stelle eines griechischen Individualnamens gebraucht ist. Folgeweise hat man in diesen Fällen auch nicht das mindeste Recht, aus dem lateinischen Namen auf den Besitz des römischen Bürgerrechts zu schliessen.’

Mathrafal, the ancient seat of the Princes of Powys, has in the past been regarded as a Roman site, on the strength of certain tiles found there. Mr. F. N. Pryce has investigated the site; he finds that the tiles are not Roman and are associated with much modern pottery, and suggests that they belong to the seventeenth or eighteenth century.

The tower at Coed-y-Garreg (Whitford parish, Flints.), whose identification as a Roman lighthouse was long ago rejected by Haverfield, is dated by Mr. B. H. St. J. O'Neil to the sixteenth or early seventeenth century.

Since the publication of my article on the work of the potter Acaunissa, Mr. E. B. Birley, F.S.A., has discovered two more signed specimens of his bowls from Corbridge, as well as examples from York and Kirkby Thore, which were undoubtedly executed by Acaunissa. This additional material greatly increases our knowledge of his style and of his figure-types. Moreover, not merely can the period of his activity be determined by the character of his designs, but the shape, texture and execution of his decorated bowls enable this date to be determined more closely. Hence Acaunissa's ware becomes chronologically important for excavators of Roman sites, especially in the north of England, for no trace of his work can be detected farther south. Perhaps this may indicate that his ware came all the way by sea from Gaul to Newcastle, and not first of all to London.

Of the five great lead-producing districts of Roman Britain, the limestone uplands of the Mendips in Somerset have yielded evidence of Roman mining activities which, however incomplete, is still the richest and fullest from a material and chronological point of view so far discovered in this country. To the Mendip mines we owe not only the earliest and latest dated specimens in the British series of inscribed pigs of Roman lead, but also the heaviest. Since the appearance at the beginning of this century of the classic article by Gowland, the full number of the Mendip pigs has been listed by various authorities, but a recent examination of two of them shows that the existing accounts need supplementing and correcting in certain important details. Furthermore, a re-examination of the remains of Roman mining in another district, in the light of the evidence thus revealed, shows that some interesting features have hitherto escaped notice.

In a previous article I discussed the urbanization of the territory of the Jews. In this I propose to treat the administrative development of the territory of another backward people of Syria, the Ituraeans. The history of the two peoples is somewhat similar. The princes of the Ituraeans, who like the Maccabees were at the same time high-priests, like them took advantage of the disintegration of the Seleucid kingdom to carve out for themselves an independent dominion at the expense of the neighbouring tribes and cities. Their progress was similarly checked by the Roman conquest, and their principality was similarly curtailed and divided, until eventually it was absorbed into the regular provincial administration.

I cannot send these notes to be printed without a few words in affectionate remembrance of Dr. Thomas Ashby, ὁ τριπόθατος without whose help and guidance they could never have been written. His premature death makes a void, of which others will speak, in the ranks of archaeologists, not in Rome and England only, and of the many friends by whom his memory will be cherished. Our deepest sympathy goes to Mrs. Ashby.