Abstract: We call a monument Ara Pacis without any support from ancient tradition. It was Friedrich von Duhn who first so called it in 1879 and he justified it in the briefest fashion. He considered three sacrificial slabs and three processional slabs. He did not produce any analysis but based his case on the fact that some of those reliefs were discovered in the grounds of the Palazzo Fiano, that is on the Campus Martius, and that the Ara Pacis was built on the Campus Martius. That was all. Nevertheless, his conjecture was enthusiastically received: it was the golden age of classical archaeology, when numberless monuments were assigned to great Greek artists and great historical events and thus the foundations were laid for a more critical and sceptical study of Greek art. This scepticism destroyed many identifications but it never reached the Ara Pacis, and that I believe for special reasons. There was great excitement in the years after 1873 when Carl Humann discovered the great altar of Pergamum ; excavations began in 1878 with sensational results. Friedrich von Duhn made his ‘discovery’ in the following year and it concerned another great altar, but this time in Rome. He was clearly spellbound and so were his contemporaries. They did not ask for proof. In that atmosphere such credulity was natural. Yet however much the altar has been studied during the last eighty years the question has never been asked why it should be the Ara Pacis. My answer is that it is not. My first task, however, is to reconsider the evidence about Pax and I shall do this as if our altar did not exist. I shall return to it in the second part of my paper and end with the interpretation of a specimen relief, the sacrifice of Aeneas which seems to me the most revealing of the reliefs.

Abstract: The collected philosophical essays of Plotinus—to which we still unfortunately give the senseless and unplotinian title Enneads —constitute a nodal point in the evolution of Western ideas. In this book converge almost all the main currents of thought that come down from 800 years of Greek speculation; out of it there issues a new current, destined to fertilize minds as different as those of Augustine and Boethius, Dante and Meister Eckhart, Coleridge, Bergson, and Mr. T. S. Eliot. And the historian cannot but ask himself what is the secret of this transmutation by which the old is taken up in the new and given a fresh direction and significance. Such a question admits of no complete answer and none is offered here. The present paper seeks merely to illustrate a few aspects of the problem for the benefit of readers who are not deeply versed in Plotinus. It omits much that a Plotinian specialist would rightly think important; and it uses broad terms where an expert might well insist on the need for qualification.

Abstract: This inscription (pl. XII, 1, 2), a dedication to Castor and Pollux, the Kouroi, was found in 1959 during Professor F. Castagnoli's and Dr. L. Cozza's excavations at Pratica di Mare, the site of ancient Lavinium, by the eighth of a series of thirteen altars. It has been published by Castagnoli with a valuable commentary. It is engraved on a bronze tablet (29 cm. by 5 cm.), reads from right to left, and is attributed by Castagnoli, with reference to the inscriptions of the Forum (CIL 12, 1 = ILS 4913 = Degrassi 3) and of Tivoli (CIL 12, 2658 = Degr. 5), to the fifth century B.C. Another more recent inscription engraved on a bronze tablet of the same size was found a few years ago in the same place: ‘Cerere auliquoquibus/Vespernam poro.’

Abstract: The circumstances in which Roman rule over Britain came to an end have always been something of a puzzle to historians. There is of course no contemporary record giving a continuous narrative of the relevant events, and the few brief notices in ancient sources about British affairs in the first two decades of the fifth century come from writers of various dates and degrees of authority, none of whom seems to have had any first-hand knowledge of what took place. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that what they say should be subject to wide differences of interpretation, differences all the wider because some of the interpreters have been viewing the events from the standpoint of later English history and without an intimate knowledge of the Roman Empire in the fifth century. And it must further be admitted that, among scholars familiar with the conditions of this age, there has been something of a gap between those concerned with matters of history, whether political, administrative, social, or economic, and those concerned with thought and opinion, and primarily, of course, as theologians with the development of Christian doctrine in the great age of Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine. It is easy for theologians to forget that the immense creative achievement of these thinkers was carried out at a time when the foundations of the society they knew were collapsing under external pressure and internal strain, and it is easy for historians to forget that a society riddled with corruption and precariously held together by the barbarous methods of a repressive tyranny was yet the seed-bed for an extraordinary flowering of the human spirit. It is difficult for either to remember that the forms which that flowering took and the imagery within which it found expression inevitably reflected the social and political conditions, the legal and judicial practices, familiar to those who gave it birth.

Abstract: Civil wars are not always murderous to the upper order in society. Many of the nobiles managed to weather the storm and prosper thereafter in the years of peace, happily exploiting the new dispensation. Some had ancient pedigree and nothing else to commend them, but the stock of the dynasts Sulla, Pompeius, and Crassus enjoyed high prestige and carried dynastic pretensions: peers and rivals to the Caesars of the Julian and Claudian line. Their alliances and vicissitudes are a large chapter in the annals of the first imperial epoch. Discreet, obscured or held down by Caesar Augustus, the descendants of Pompeius Magnus begin to come up again in the last decade of the reign (after A.D. 4), and enjoy favour with his successor.

Abstract: My friend Mr. M. R. Popham, of the Government of Cyprus, was kind enough to inform me in a letter dated 9th July, 1959, of his discovery in the village of Nikoklia, some 2 km. to the north of Kouklia, site of the ancient Palaipaphos, of this important inscription.A slab of fine white marble, 0·545 m. high, 0·605 m. wide, and 0·08 m. thick (pl. x), found during the spring of 1959 in the renovation of a floor of the village church and removed on 3rd May to the Epigraphic Museum at Kouklia: undoubtedly transported from the famous site of the Aphrodite temple of Palaipaphos, the source of so many inscriptions alike of Ptolemaic and of Roman date, it has thus now been restored approximately to the place from which it came. The stone preserves original surfaces above, to right and left, but below it is broken away.

Abstract: In a recent paper N. J. Miners has challenged the view that Gaius Gracchus' law ‘ne quis iudicio circumveniatur’ should be interpreted as part of his attempt to reform the quaestio de rebus repetundis and has maintained that it cannot therefore be used as evidence for a stage in Gaius' legislative activity when he envisaged the retention of senators as indices in this court. Mr. Miners states well the principal objection to this theory, that Gaius' law, to judge from the references to it in Cicero, pro Cluentio, was concerned with unjust condemnations, while Gaius' preoccupation, as far as the extortion court was concerned in 123–2 B.C., was with unjust acquittals. Mr. Miners shows that our scanty information about the law will bear a very different interpretation and he returns to the view of Mommsen, that it should be associated with the Gracchan law de provocatione (and perhaps even identified with it).

Abstract: In 49 B.C., on 23rd January by the contemporary calendar, now running over six weeks ahead of schedule, nearly a fortnight after Caesar had crossed the Rubicon and nearly a week after the Republican exodus from Rome, Cicero at Minturnae wrote to Atticus, who had remained behind, as follows (VII, 13a, 2): L. Caesarem vidi Minturnis a.d. VIII Kal. Febr. mane cum absurdissimis mandatis, non hominem sed scopas solutas, ut id ipsum mihi ille [sc. Caesar] videatur irridendi causa fecisse, qui tantis de rebus huic mandata dederit; nisi forte non dedit et hic sermone aliquo arrepto pro mandatis abusus est.

Abstract: The Composite capital was described by D. S. Robertson in his Handbook of Greek and Roman Architecture (2nd ed., 1945) as ‘essentially a mixture of four-sided Ionic and Corinthian, in varying proportions. The invention is probably Augustan, but the earliest strictly datable examples are perhaps to be found at Rome in the Colosseum, dedicated in A.D. 80, and in the slightly later Arch of Titus: both these have a double row of acanthus leaves which gives them a more Corinthian look’.Since the Handbook was written, very little has been added to the history of the Composite capital. Robertson's explanation of the origin of the type, which seems to have been pointed out first by Patroni, is still the accepted one.

Abstract: Both the value of inscriptions to Roman studies and the basic techniques of epigraphy were, of course, well-established long before our fifty years began. The record of those years is, therefore, essentially one of development along lines already indicated—aided by the chances of discovery that have from time to time suggested new interpretations of texts published in the past, as they have added new items in very considerable numbers to the stock.

Abstract: The first decade of the twentieth century ended with a substantial sum of important discoveries in the Forum to its credit. Between 1898 and 1903 Giacomo Boni's intensive work had resulted in sensational finds—the Lapis Niger, the republican Comitium and the archaic cemetery ; he had finished excavating both on the north side of the Forum, uncovering the front of the Basilica Aemilia and the Curia, and to the south, where the shrine of the Fountain of Juturna had returned to light, together with the approach from the Forum to the Imperial Palace and the series of early Christian paintings in S. Maria Antiqua. Excavation of the House of the Vestals was also brought to completion. Interest in republican and archaic development had led to investigation beneath the paving of the Forum itself (Equus Domitiani, Lacus Curtius, underground galleries and ritual wells and pits), and to a search for the ancient track of the Via Sacra, with exploration of its shops and wells of Republican date. A mass of information and material collected as a result of these excavations has unfortunately, although scrupulously catalogued, remained largely unpublished. Aerial photographs made at this time give a clear picture of the Forum valley during the first years of the century : one vast excavation stretching from the Vulcanal to the Arch of Titus.

Abstract: The events which led up to the formation of the Society are recorded in the history of the Hellenic Society written by Mr. George Macmillan and published with the Jubilee issue of the Hellenic Journal in 1929. We read that Dr. Ashby, Director of the British School at Rome, in the Session 1908–9, sent a memorandum to the Council of the Hellenic Society requesting it to approve the making of a grant comparable with that made to the British School at Athens. The Hellenic Society, unable to meet this request, recommended, on the advice of a special committee, that members of the Hellenic Society, the Classical Association and other bodies should be asked to approve the inclusion of Latin studies in the purview of the Hellenic Society with a corresponding increase in its annual subscription, or alternately, to support some other scheme which could command adequate financial support. The great majority replied that they were in favour of the creation of a new Society on the lines of the Hellenic Society, but for the promotion of Roman studies, and this solution was endorsed at a joint conference of the Hellenic Society, the British School at Rome and the Classical Association. The Hellenic Society most generously undertook to work in harmony and collaboration with the new Society and to offer it access to the Library, with the same facilities for borrowing books and slides as those enjoyed by its own members.

Abstract: When, in 1911, the first volume of JRS appeared it contained among other matter an article by W. Warde Fowler on ‘The Original Meaning of the word Sacer’. This was later (1920) reprinted in Roman Essays and Interpretations, 15–24, and is characteristic of its author, not only because of its keen insight into Roman ways of thought and full acquaintance with the relevant passages in Latin authors, but in its cautious and moderate use of the Comparative Method in dealing with the history of an ancient and imperfectly known religion. A scrap of Polynesian information on the meaning of ‘tabu’ was got from R. R. Marett, whose Threshold of Religion was then a new book (1909), and whom Warde Fowler knew and appreciated. About this time, Fowler, who was meditating an elaborate edition of Plutarch, a project which his failing sight compelled him to drop, passed on to me some notes on the Roman Questions (see below, p. 163), a typical piece of readiness to help and advise a young scholar. So far as his contributions to Roman religion went, the first two decades of this century were his flowering-time. Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic had appeared in 1899; his Gifford Lectures of 1909–10 appeared in book form (The Religious Experience of the Roman People) just in time to have a cordial and appreciative review from E. R. Bevan in the first number of JRS.

Abstract: Within the past five decades a great volume of work has advanced our knowledge of the Roman Empire. No single essay can hope to describe this mass in detail or even to consider fully the many cross-currents of opinion. If there is a common tide in recent scholarship, it flows less clearly than did the course of investigation in the nineteenth century. Here I shall try first to single out some of the main forces which have shaped the views of the present and past generations; then shall comment on developments in the utilization of evidence and on shifts in the areas of our principal concern; and finally shall suggest an assessment of the present position of research on the Roman Empire.

Abstract: Fifty years ago, when the founders of this Society looked to the future of Roman studies, the general lines of development in Republican history must have seemed fairly clear. On the technical side Mommsen had opened up the main fields of systematic research, Eduard Meyer was at the height of his influence, and Beloch was testing new methods of historical survey, while Niese had arranged the evidence for Hellenistic politics. Historical scholarship could face a great access of material with confidence, as archaeology and epigraphy extended its scope, though this was less likely to affect Republican than Imperial history. At the same time the problems of historical interpretation had taken shape; for the events of the nineteenth century illustrated the play of power politics, which were relevant to the understanding of Roman imperialism. The ‘economic’ interpretation of history was coming into vogue, and this could lead into ‘social history’. If the influence of family connections and personal ambition was felt less urgently, it could be argued that a ‘scientific’ analysis of Roman politics should probe more deeply into the forces that broke out in the constitutional crisis of the Late Republic. We may admit at once that the main work in Republican history during our period has continued along these lines : we are still heavily in debt to the fundamental study of the older masters. The concept of ‘scientific’ history may have been modified, since it is a task of complicated inference to arrive at historical knowledge; yet the actual methods to which we have succeeded are well fitted for the systematic treatment of detailed evidence. Collingwood did less than justice to the school of Mommsen when he charged it with mastery over small-scale problems but weakness in dealing with large-scale ones. Only strict analysis and reconstruction of the evidence allowed the chief issues of Republican history to be defined critically, and subsequent research has refined on this procedure.

Abstract: In the opening scene of Plautus' Amphitruo the slave Sosia, sent ahead in the night to announce his master's return, approaches Amphitruo's house, where Mercury is awaiting him. In the course of the prologue (113–4) Mercury has already explained that Jupiter has lengthened the night to allow himself a longer stay with Alcumena. Sosia, soliloquizing, suddenly looks up and notices that the stars are not moving; unheard by Sosia, Mercury comments on his words:— Sosia: Certe, edepol, si quicquamst aliud quod credam aut certo sciam, credo ego hac noctu Nocturnum obdormiuisse ebrium. nam neque se Septentriones quoquam in caelo commouent, neque se Luna quoquam mutat atque uti exorta est semel, nee Iugulae neque Vesperugo neque Vergiliae occidunt. ita statim stant signa, neque nox quoquam concedit die.

Abstract: The publication in I934 of the second edition of Sir George Macdonald's Roman Wall in Scotland marked the end of an era in the study of the Antonine Wall. The interest in systematic exploration aroused by the Glasgow Archaeological Society's investigations of I890-3 gained momentum during the years that followed ; and by I934 the structural nature of the Wall had been determined and its course for the most part accurately mapped, while excavation, often on an elaborate scale, had been carried out in the majority of the known forts along its line. With much of this activity Macdonald was personally associated, and his masterly synthesis of the results will always be an indispensable reference-work for those who labour in the same field.

Abstract: The seventeen pieces of wood which together form the tablet here described (Guildhall Museum E.R. no. 444) were found on 10th February, 1959, 15 feet below street level in a timber-lined pit on the site of Temple House, Queen Street, in the City of London. Ink writing on the wood was at once recognized. Even in the wet and sodden state of the tablet Latin words could be made out and a preliminary copy was taken. The surface which showed writing was twice photographed by Mr. M. B. Cookson, of the Institute of Archaeology of London University, using infra-red light. The other surface, on which no writing could be discerned, was not photographed, unfortunately, since when the wood was bleached some traces of ink appeared on this side too, but were subsequently lost. The wood was then dried out, using the carbo-wax process, in the laboratory of the Guildhall Museum; to everyone's disappointment the ink was found to have vanished, and it seems as though the gum adhesive of the carbon ink must have been interfered with. The account given here of the contents of the tablet therefore rests entirely on a preliminary examination of the wood while it was still wet and on the photographs. One of the latter, together with a line drawing, is reproduced in plate XI.

Abstract: In 1958 Edward Drummond Libbey presented the helmet published here to the Toledo Museum of Art (pls. I, II). Its importance warrants at least a brief notice. The helmet is lifesize, that is it can be readily worn by a present-day person of average size. Excepting the possible loss of two ornaments (rosettes) at the sides of the browpiece or area where the pivots of the visor would be, if the helmet had one, the helmet is in nearly perfect condition. The metal is silver of good quality; the ornaments on top, on the browpiece and on the cheekpieces are also silver, with goldfoil coverings.

Abstract: This manual, which is the second volume of a Biblioteca Storica Universitaria under the direction of Professor Levi, is a work of collaboration between the Professors of Ancient History at Milan and Cagliari, both well known for their contributions to their subject. The division of labour is made perfectly clear, even typographically; Professor Levi has written the text, while at the end of every two or three paragraphs Professor Meloni has added in smaller type a paragraph of critical and bibliographical notes. There is an introductory chapter on sources, ancient and modern; then thirty-five chapters covering the ground from early Italy to Theodosius; next come seven appendixes: on weights and measures, the thirty-five tribes, coinage, roads in Italy (why are the Latin and Valerian Viae omitted ?), the calendar, official careers, and the provinces under Diocletian and Constantine. This is rounded off with a chronological table, an index, and sixteen fold-in maps which in clear outline illustrate the expansion of Roman power in Italy and then in the Mediterranean world. The authority of the authors guarantees the general reliability of the work. In books of this kind the question inevitably arises as to the type of reader envisaged. The main text is very slight, while the notes are considerably more advanced. The young student, for whom presumably the text is designed, may find the notes rather detailed, since they give references to works in the usual modern languages, but at least they will help to indicate the need for a critical approach to the subject, while they will prove most useful guides to those ready to advance a little further. Further, the ' average educated reader ' in Italy may find it useful to be reminded of the main historical outline and also to learn the present state of various questions and where to seek further enlightenment. Where so much ground is covered, many questions obviously arise. Thus compression may occasionally puzzle the uninstructed reader, e.g. who is the Drusus that appears on p. 266 without introduction ? Do not Hamilcar and Andriscus deserve mention on pp. 109 and 185 ? Should not the views expressed on Gracchus' attitude to the allies and to the Comitia Centuriata, or on Sulla and the pomerium be advanced less positively ? Why is Baecula rather than Ilipa described as the decisive battle in Spain (p. 132) ? So one could continue raising small points, or suggest occasionally a few bibliographical additions (e.g. BM Catalogue of Coins of the Roman Empire on p. 12, Wallinga on the corvus on p. 103, or Badian and Oost on Illyria on p. 117). On wider issues, limitations of space seem at times to have cramped the exposition unduly : thus appreciation of the achievement of regal Rome is rather scrappy, and the amplitude of the life of the early Empire is not fully suggested, since the chronological treatment, reign by reign, is not supplemented by wider sketches of social and economic development. One sentence may be quoted to illustrate Levi's attitude to one aspect of the Empire : ' ancora una volta, con Caracalla, si era ripetuto il tentativo di dare all'impero romano un prevalente carattere ellenisticoorientale, come era stato progettato da Marco Antonio, Gaio, Nerone e Commodo.' Levi's views on many topics are already well known : it is good now to have his general sketch of Rome's history, while Meloni's notes provide most useful summaries and bibliographical references.

Abstract: Considerable light is thrown on chronological problems : it is established beyond doubt that Lucius Domitius Domitianus was not identical with the corrector Aurelius Achilles and that his first regnal year was A.D. 295-6, the revolt having begun in or about July, 296 (Introduction and 38-9, 62, 139); not only is the introduction of the praepositus pagi by at least A.D. 308 attested but also the existence of TrpoTroXiTev6|jevoi as early as A.D. 297 (1, 125), thus reinforcing the view that the process of municipalization began long before 308 ; the survival of Heptanomia as late as A.D. 314 is confirmed (13), and it is suggested that the fifteen-year indiction cycle was adopted in 312, not 314-5, as Kase believed. There is also much valuable information about the organization of taxes and officials : see 1 for the separation of land and head tax, 2 for a probable change in census procedure between December, 298 and September, 299, 6 for aorropos = appoxos, 13 for irpETaKTcmop = (?) pertractator, 42 for SICCTOTTCOCFIS in its specialized sense of a tax assessed in money or land in accordance with the schedule and CCTTOTOCKTOV = (?) ' total assessment', 54 on the vestis militaris, 61 for Trupol poxriAiKoi, Trpini-nTAov, E âpTiov, 62-3 on crraTffcov = beneficiarius, 64 for TTpco-roo-niTris probably = TrpoaTcnTis, 69 and 127 for XP°S " oxrrnjov = (?) aurum tironicum, 126 for a summary of an edict not preserved in the Codes, 129-30 on the functions of the centurion and eirenarch. There are striking examples of vulgar Greek usage as well as new words which raise fascinating problems of analogy, e.g. cnrocnTopa (34, 38), SCOSEKOCIJ&TIOS (71), dyy&pios (72), •npoKTi'iTcop (111), ocA6(3poTos (sic, 132), TTOCOKOUXIV (for paoKocuAiov) (137) ; -rnoTfoiov, found once in Diocletian's Edict, comes here several times, once as veccpov, rendered as ' unhulled '. The editors have maintained the high standard which one would expect of them, and only a few minor misprints have been noticed.

Abstract: In 1910, when the Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies was founded, the study of Roman Britain was already firmly set upon its path. Earlier brilliant treatments by F. Haverfield, in Traill's Social England, in the Victoria County History and in his own Romanization of Roman Britain, had set a general picture which was an attractive and cogent synthesis of the evidence provided by literature and archaeology. There already existed, thanks to a long tradition of private enterprise and to enlightened action of such bodies as the Society of Antiquaries of London, a substantial body of archaeological material, extending not merely to objects, but to buildings and their plans. Thus, by 1911, John Ward could publish a volume on Romano-British Buildings and Earthworks which, for its day, curried a volume of detailed information quite unsurpassed in any other province of the Empire. Here the antiquities of the military area and of the countryside were illustrated with particular vividness. But highly important work had already been done in the urban areas. The excavation of the Romano-British cantonal capital of Silchester, organized by the Society of Antiquaries of London, had already been estimated by Haverfield to have made it ‘better known, perhaps, than any provincial town of the Roman Empire’. Excavations of the same type, directed to the wholesale uncovering of foundations over wide areas, were also in progress at Caerwent and were revealing the striking differences which might obtain between communities in different areas of the province.

Abstract: as synonyms (meaning, roughly, ' barrister '). From its strict legal meaning the word patronus is said (19-118) to develop into denoting a looser and less formal relationship—one of protection rather than mere power—based on the old ritual of applicatio ; thus, while retaining various aspects of the original meaning, it comes to include the particular case of the ad hoc relationship between a litigant (especially a defendant) and his counsel. That this was still felt to be connected with the original concept is shown by the lex Cincia, forbidding payment to a patron for his services, which applied throughout the range of the concept. Orator (119-165), originally a 'speaker', comes to mean, in particular, ' one who speaks for another,' i.e. either as an envoy ( = legatus: not common in Classical Latin except in Livy), or before the People and the law-courts (i.e. a politician or a barrister); in the late Republic it is used to translate the Greek rhetor and comes to be used almost exclusively for the trained orator, so that in Cicero it is a title of honour. In conclusion (166-206), the author investigates the particular line in the development of each of the two words, which led them to be used as synonyms, and he tries to show why this coincidence was not lasting and the meanings of the words began to diverge again before long. There is an index locorum, but no bibliography or general index. Misprints are not too numerous. The collection of material from the literary sources is meritorious and enables the reader to see a great deal of the evidence for a view which, in outline, most scholars have long held. That this work is nevertheless not a significant contribution to our understanding of Rome is in part due to the limitations the author has set himself: he claims to be writing Wortgeschichte, not history of ideas or institutions ; and he limits himself to the literary sources. For the latter limitation he does not even advance any excuse: it is hard to see of what value an investigation can be, which ignores the abundant epigraphical evidence on the use of patronus. The former limitation, though he tries to defend it, is no more excusable. An investigation into patronus so circumscribed that it ignores (e.g.) patrocinium and patrocinari—not to mention cliens and its family—is surely the sort of blinkered research that has brought doctoral dissertations into disrepute. There would have been room for a great deal more material of real use in this book, if repetitions and the constant summaries of background information taken from standard works had been severely pruned. The author's reading of his texts has, on the whole, been careful; but he is not to be trusted where he advances new interpretations. An attempt at emending Plautus, Vid. 62 (in ' quor, malum, patronum quaeram, postquam litem perdidi ? ' he suggests ' perdidici' for the last word !) ruins both sense and metre. A new interpretation of Livy ix, 20, 10 (' Antiatibus . . . dati ab senatu ad iura statuenda ipsius coloniae patroni'), where the author takes ' ipsius coloniae' with ' iura ', produces peculiar Latin and doubtful sense. In Cicero, Balb. 25, the author thinks that ' patronus foederum foederatorum ' (sic) applies to Balbus himself. His knowledge of law and history is taken entirely from modern authorities, not always perfectly understood. Thus Wenger is made responsible (157) for the statement that the Greek rhetors were again expelled from Rome in 92 B.C., but—we are glad to know—not for long. Communities that have performed deditio to Rome are municipia, with precarious tenure of their soil (43); the relation of Rome to those communities is never called patronatus (which the author seems to think is the abstract noun corresponding to patronus) or clientela, but foedus (44)! An example of the clientela automatically won by a conqueror and his family over the conquered is that of the knight M. Satrius, patron of the ager Picenus et Sabinus (92). Needless to say, the author has no idea of Cicero's connection with Sicily before the Verrines (93). When the Rhodians seek the support of their hospites and patroni in Rome (Livy XLII, 14, 7), the use of ' hospites' shows that Rhodes was still autonomous, since hospitium was the official form of the relationship of Rome with her socii (p. 104—a footnote informs us that the legal form was the foedus aequum, which, as the author himself says, Rhodes did not have). These few specimens will suffice. They are typical. The author's reading is practically confined to the German masters—necessary (if properly understood), but not sufficient. One need hardly dwell on the numerous instances where new work is simply unknown ; but ignorance of Heuss's Volkerrechtliche Grundlagen is surely inexcusable in a German-speaking scholar. However, the harm this book is very likely to do will be confined to German-speaking elementary students. The careful and well-informed reader will find much that is profitable in the author's collection of evidence. Nevertheless, the question must at least be asked whether dissertations like this are worth publishing in substantially unaltered form. E. BADIAN.

Abstract: Gianfilippo Carettoni, Excavations and Discoveries in the Forum Romanum and on the Palatine during the last Fifty Years. Plate xvi. Rome : Basilica Aemilia in the Forum : 1. Wall and eastern entrance to the hall, before restoration. 2. Foundation for the colonnade of the Republican Basilica (second period), xvii. Rome : the Curia of Diocletian after restoration. xvin. Rome : Palatine (i, 3, 4) and Forum (2) : 1. Marble head of Apollo. 2. Porphyry statue of a magistrate. 3. Marble head of an Ephebus. 4. Marble head of a child, xix. Rome : Palatine : 1. Lower peristyle of the Domns Augustana. 2. Large hut of the first or second Iron Age of Latium on the Germalus. Roman Britain in 1959. Plate xx. 1. Caerleon (Isca): mask on early second-century jug handle. 2. Thistleton Dyer, Rutland : cast bronze figure found with late secondcentury pottery. 3, 4. Welshpool: bronze ewer and patera, xxi. 1. Brough, Derbyshire (Navio): S.E. fort wall. 2. Landwade, Exning, Suffolk : barn-plan dwelling. XXII. 1, 2. Catterick Bridge (Cataractonium): second-century ornamental fountain and column. 3. Lincoln (Lindum Colonia): south tower of Colonia east gate. XXIII. Verulamium: 1. Building xxvn, 1 and 2. 2. Timber-lined late third-century cellar. xxiv. Verulamium : bronze statuette of Venus found with a bronze jug in the late third-century cellar, xxv. Verulamium: 1. Mosaic in Insula xxv, 2, Room 4. 2. Insula xxv, 2, Room 4, showing plaster panelling in situ. 3. Catterick Bridge : flues between caldarium and tepidarium. xxvi. Walesby, Lincolnshire : part of lead tank with Christian monogram and details of the relief.