^{page 40 note 1} 6-in. O.S. Norfolk CVI SE.; lat. 52° 23′ 25″ N., long. 1° 17′ E.

^{page 40 note 2} Antiq. Journ. xx (April 1940), 272Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 1} See Norfolk Archaeology, xxvi (1937), 145–53Google Scholar, for preliminary report: full report forthcoming.

^{page 41 note 2} Clarke, R. Rainbird, ‘The Iron Age in Norfolk and Suffolk’, Arch. Journ. xcvi, 55.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 3} Clarke, op. cit. 54, 56, 57.

^{page 41 note 4} c.g. Corder and Pryce, Antiq. Journ. xviii (July 1938), 262Google Scholaret seq., discussing their penetration to south Yorkshire.

^{page 41 note 5} Op. cit. 61, 63.

^{page 42 note 1} Clarke, ibid. 58.

^{page 42 note 2} Clarke, ibid. 87 et seq.; Hawkes, Proc. Prehist. Soc. E.A. vii, 236–7.

^{page 43 note 1} R. E. M., and Wheeler, T. V., Verulamium, A Belgic and two Roman Cities (1936).Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 1} J. P. Bushe-Fox, F.S.A., The Excavation of the Roman Fort at Richborough, First Report.

^{page 50 note 1} Bushe-Fox, J. P., Excavations at Hengistbury Head, Hampshire (1915).Google Scholar

^{page 50 note 2} Collingwood, R. G., The Archaeology of Roman Britain (1930).Google Scholar

^{page 51 note 1} Op. cit. 86.

^{page 51 note 2} e.g. Caistor. Atkinson in Norfolk Archaeology, xxvi (1937), p. 198Google Scholar.

^{page 51 note 3} The only exception being a Domitianic f. 37 in pit M.

^{page 52 note 1} Prasutagus, ‘longa opulentia clarus’ (Tacitus, Annals, xiv, 31).

^{page 52 note 2} Op. cit. 82 et seq.

^{page 52 note 3} Based on information kindly supplied by Mr. Rainbird Clarke, without whose assistance it could not have been produced. The writer expresses his debt to Mr. Clarke for much help in the preparation of this paper, and in particular for the loan of the typescript of his paper ‘The Iron Age in Norfolk and Suffolk’ (Arch. Journ. xcvi, 1–113, where see the Gazetteer).

^{page 52 note 4} Fox, Archaeology of the Cambridge Region, 87–90.

^{page 53 note 1} Tac. Ann. xii, 31.

^{page 53 note 2} Whose panic recall of debts did much to precipitate the rebellion of A.D. 61. See Dio, lxii, 2.

^{page 54 note 1} See material from, e.g., Postwick, Norf. Arch. xxvi (1938), 271, and Arming-hall, P.P.S. ii (1936), p. 15, fig. 6. Cf. Clarke, op. cit. 56.

^{page 54 note 2} For details of these sites consult Clarke's Gazetteer, op. cit. 91 et seq.

^{page 54 note 3} This site also produced Roman pottery, though not earlier than the Flavian period. Antiq. Journ. xiii (1933), 405Google Scholaret seq. This is what would be expected on the diffusionist theory here advanced.

^{page 54 note 4} The nature of the site is still obscure, but it has produced iron-work which Mr. Hawkes informs the writer is on Colchester analogies definitely pre-Flavian (P.P.S.E.A. i, 321–3; Proc. Suffolk Inst. of Arch. xxii, 269). These objects were dug up about 1905, and the associated pottery has not been preserved. The site, in a gravel pit, has been thought to be a camp (see Antiquity, xiii, 50, p. 189), but the evidence for this is perhaps inconclusive: it may be a village of the Needham type.

^{page 55 note 1} Which, it will be remembered, must denote post-conquest activity, being absent in the true Belgic area on the Stour.

^{page 55 note 2} Warham, Clarke suggests, may have been reached by sea.

^{page 55 note 3} Clarke, op. cit. 63.