fronts suggesting that they were shops-stood a temple, measuring about 95 feet by 55. The entrance to the courtyard was by a portico having six columns; the massive blocks of sandstone of which the podium is built are very striking. Fragments of two altars, of statues, and of architectural work lay around. North of this again came a building having a frontage of 115 feet, and running back 200 feet from the street. Among its many rooms, four were furnished with hypocausts, and several had roughly tesselated floors. In a small courtyard was a rectangular well, built of large slabs, which would appear to have been taken from some building of importance. The massive blocks that formed the portico in front of the house suggest that they had a similar origin. Some four hundred and fifty coins collected from the site this year seem to indicate that, subsequent to a late first-century occupation, the period of greatest activity extended from the middle of the third century to the close of the fourth. The occurrence of coins of Theodosius I. somewhat prolongs the known period of the life of the town. At the annual meeting of the local Archaeological Society, held in October, Lord Barnard emphasised the impracticability of keeping the excavated site open. The branch of the Watling Street which Mr Bushe-Fox has been laying bare crossed the Severn at Wroxeter, and ran southwards to the fortress of the Second Legion at Caerleon. If we follow this Roman road into Herefordshire, we find the Woolhope Club (represented by Mr G. H. Jack and Mr H. E. Jones) at work upon the site of the Roman town of Magnae, or Magna (the name occurs only in the ablative plural in the Itinerary), which lies close to Kenchester, a few miles west of Hereford. This site, which was walled, and is unspoilt by modern buildings, is hexagonal in shape, and covers over twenty acres. Excavations extending over twelve months have brought to light a number of houses containing a bath, hypocausts, two fine tesselated pavements (now in the Hereford Museum), and interesting examples of wall-painting. The pottery and a fairly large collection of coins (examined in detail by Mr Hayter) may indicate an occupation beginning in the first century, but most intense from the middle of the third to the middle of the fourth century. Further excavations may of course modify this estimate. At present, out of nearly 350 coins, only fifteen are earlier than 200 A.D. At Caerwent, in Monmouthshire, Mr A. E. Hudd reports the excavation of several more houses, but the examination of the interesting structure mentioned in last year's Report (p. 182) cannot at present be continued, as the owners will not grant permission. The excavators (including Dr Thomas Ashby) are now inclined to think that the building is a temple. On the Fosse Way, near Nottingham, the exploration of the reputed site of Margidunum has been taken in hand by an enterprising committee, with the Duke of Portland as President. A portion of the site has been actually purchased, but Dr Davies Pryce (who, with Dr Oswald, initiated the work two years ago) reports that the scope of the excavations is as yet too limited to warrant definite conclusions. The coins found so far include those of Galba (unworn silver without head on obverse), Vespasian, Claudius Gothicus, and Tetricus (?). One interesting feature is the occurrence of Roman pottery which may possibly prove an occupation earlier than the reign of Vespasian. This, of course, might reasonably be anticipated. Before passing from the subject of Roman towns, we should refer to Dr Haverfield's new book, entitled 'Ancient Town - planning,' which has been announced by the Oxford University Press. Only one 'villa' calls for notice, viz., the site at Latimer Dell, near Chesham, in Buckinghamshire. Mr Moray Williams's conjecture as to this house1 has been confirmed. His complete plan shows a well-designed courtyard-house, typical of those of the late third century. The rooms (there are nearly thirty) fall into three groups, the living rooms being ranged as a nave between two corridor-aisles. 1 Year's Work, 1910, p. 129. The wall-painting is described as 'lavish and highly decorative.' If buildings existed on the other three sides of the large yard, they must have been of secondary importance. The remains are being preserved with great care by Mr Calcott Stokes, Lord Chesham's land-agent. Until a detailed Report is available, it is not quite easy to classify the Romano-British site which Mr Heywood Sumner is excavating on Rockbourne Down, in Hampshire. A pastoral or village settlement is suggested, recalling in some details (e.g. the T-shaped hypocausts) the settlements at Casterley, in Wiltshire, and at Woodcuts, in Dorset. The coins found on all three of these sites run into the fourth century. The detailed Report1 issued this year by Mr and Mrs Cunnington (of Devizes) on their excavation of the Casterley Camp is a valuable contribution to the study of sites of this character, which seem to afford us an interesting glimpse into the life of the native population during the Roman period. Among a number of finds of minor importance, we need only refer to the pottery taken from Roman graves on the Syndale estate, near Faversham; and to the fact that Roman remains have come to light at Maiden Bower, near Dunstable. It is to be hoped that the excavation of this important site (the Roman Durocobrigae) will be undertaken before long. The Royal Commission on Ancient Monuments in England has issued its report on North Buckinghamshire, completing the survey of that county. Several volumes issued by the Scottish Commission this year deal with counties barren of Roman remains; the survey of Dumfriesshire, however, is complete, and its publication next year will be of interest to students of Roman Britain. In Wales the Commission has been busy in several counties, but the only report issued is that on Radnorshire. F. A. BRUTON. 1 Wills. Arch. and Nat. Hist. Magazine, vol. xxxviii. V SCULPTURE, ARCHITECTURE, AND MINOR ARTS 1. SCULPTURE.—Photographs have now been published of the archaic pedimental sculptures from Corfu,1 but a full and detailed publication of these important figures has still to appear. In the meantime, Sir Arthur Evans has drawn attention 2 to the value of this group for the history of Greek art, especially in regard to the now prominent theory which holds that classical Greek art is based on a renaissance of Minoan. Another theory referred to in last year's record has been fully published in a paper by Ernest Gardner,3 which gives some good reasons for doubting the authenticity of the Boston counterpart of the Ludovisi throne. In archaic art we have to note a very fine specimen of the Apollo type in Parian marble, which has recently been acquired by the Munich Glyptothek. A head of a statue of the same type, which resembles the Strangford Apollo, has come to light in Cyprus. 5 Schröder has taken up the problem of the head of the Aristogeiton of Kritios and Nesiotes. The main difficulty in setting the so-called Pherecydes head on the torso, as Treu suggested, was its small size. Now Schröder has identified a herm in the British Museum as a better replica of the Pherecydes, which fits the torso very well. He defines the difference between the two heads by saying that the artist of the Pherecydes was more intent on the portrait of Aristo 1 Πρακτικά, 1911. 2 J.H.S. 1912, pp. 277 ff. geiton, while the artist of the British Museum herm was more concerned with the style of this fine head. Wolters has published a series of three papers discussing some of the problems of the Aeginetan pediments.1 He deals particularly with the question of the restoration of the west pediment. Fresh light has been thrown on the connection of Phidias with the Parthenon pediments by Dinsmoor's study of the building inscriptions.2 It seems that the theory mentioned last year which dissociates Phidias from the actual execution of the sculptures must be greatly modified, if not entirely abandoned. Premerstein has published a long article on the interpretation of the Parthenon frieze in relation to the Panathenaic peplos.3 Svoronos has devoted a very long paper based largely on the evidence of coins to the problems of the Parthenon pediments, of which he publishes reconstructions. He believes that there were in Athens the pedimental groups made for the Parthenon by Alcamenes in competition with Phidias. He identifies some of the figures from them, and believes that some of the difficulties in the reconstruction of the pediments are due to a confusion between the two sets. He also puts forward a new explanation of the frieze of the temple of Nike Apteros. 6 In relation to other fifth-century sculpture, we have a paper by Bulle 5 on the Athena of Myron, and one by Pallat on the frieze of the Erectheum. Boulanger publishes a Polycleitan bronze,7 and Preyss & discusses the Hope Athena and Winckelmann's Pallas in an article to be read in connection with his paper noticed last year. A. von Salis9 has a long paper on the Mother of the Gods of Agorakritos, the type of which he determines by a statue in Athens, and the 1 Bay. Sitzungsberichte, 1912. 2 Am. Journ. Arch. 1913, pp. 53 ff. See also p. 61. 4 Journ. Intern. 1912, pp. 193 ff. 5 Jahrbuch, 1912, pp. 175 ff. See also p. 53. 6 Am. Journ. Arch. 1912, pp. 175 ff. 7 Rev. Arch. 1913, xxi., pp. 214 ff. 8 Jahrbuch, 1913, pp. 244 ff. 9 Ibid. pp. 1 ff. |