^{page 111 note a} Archaeologia, lix. 87–97Google Scholar.

^{page 112 note a} From the evidence of coins it must be attributed, at earliest, to the time of Valentinian I., one of whose coins was found 4 feet below grass level, 12 feet north of the east pier of the gate. A coin of Helena was also found here, and one of Constantine the Great, 7 feet below grass level, 5 feet north of the west pier; and on the road level, 15 feet north of this pier, a coin with the legend Urbs Roma.

^{page 113 note a} In this accumulation (no doubt rubbish thrown in) a considerable number of small whelk, oyster, and mussel shells were found, also some charcoal, some of the earth showing traces of burning.

^{page 113 note b} It was no doubt this layer that was taken to be an “earlier road level” in 1904. (Archaeologia, lix. 310.)

^{page 1116 note a} A worn halfpenny of George III. dated 1805 was found 2 feet below grass leveJ under the tree.

^{page 117 note a} This was not discovered in time to be shown on the plan in Archaeologia, lix. pl. lxviGoogle Scholar.

^{page 118 note a} Archaeologia, lix. 113, fig. 11Google Scholar.

^{page 120 note c} The following reasons may be adduced: (1) it is full of loose stones; (2) there are pieces of modern pottery at various depths; (3) the greater part of the paving has gone, but yet there are few loose tesserae to be found; and (4) the modern boundary wall above the portion not now excavated has at some time been removed.

^{page 121 note a} Mr. E. T. Newton, to whom some of the bones were submitted for examination, reports that “many of these bones were clearly portions of a small ox, about the size of Bos longifrons. The whole contents of the box may have belonged to this species. All the bones were much broken, even the limb bones being in fragments,… indicating that the flesh and marrow had been used for food.”

^{page 121 note b} Catalogue of the Collection of London Antiquities in the Guildhall Museum,, p. 71, No. 33, and pl. xv. 2.

^{page 122 note a} See Roach Smith, Collectanea Antiqua, vi. 48–75; Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archæological Society, xv. 504–505; Revue Archéologique, 3rd series, xxxviii. 386–391.

^{page 122 note b} See Archaeologia, lix. 93Google Scholar.

^{page 123 note “} Outside its north-west angle is a small pit 5 feet 10 inches deep.

^{page 124 note a} Isca Silurum, plate xxiii. figs. 15–19.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note b} The socket stones exist in four cases; they measure from 1 foot 4 inches by 1 foot 7 inches to 1 foot 9 inches by 1 foot 10 inches, and the dowel holes about 4 by 6 inches.

^{page 124 note c} Archaeologia, lvii. 298.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note d} Archaeologia, lix. 308.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note e} In Room 6 was found the stone finial shown on Plate XVIII. fig. 3.

^{page 126 note a} Mr. E. T. Newton, who was kind enough to examine these bones, reports that “among the very fragmentary pieces of bone contained in the first pot, all of which had evidently been burned and much cracked, there are a few which can be recognised as human, and most probably all are portions of one individual. There can be no doubt that this was a funereal urn containing the ashes from a human cremation,” and considers that the fragments in the second pot. though none of them certainly identifiable, were of a similar nature.

All the animal bones, as far as they were recognisable, belonged to small oxen (possibly Bos longifrons), and the animals had most likely been used for food. As he remarks, the discovery of two burial urns in this pit needs some explanation.

^{page 127 note a} This is the branch referred to in Archaeologia, lix. 105, note b.

^{page 128 note a} The fragment with the letters VI upon it does not fit into the rest; and its position is therefore conjectural. Its present place in the illustration is due to a mistake.

^{page 130 note a} See Archaeologia, lix. 112Google Scholar.