¹ In Britain, this style is commonly found in particular in the Saxon Shore forts. In Germany, the style is represented by Haus Biirgel and Deutz on the Rhine frontier, and in Italy there is a small fortification of the same type near Milan (see Calderini, A., in Festschrift Rudolf Egger, i, 236–41).Google Scholar

² Blanchet, A., Les Enceintes Romaines de la Gaule, Paris 1907.Google Scholar

³ Blanchet, A., ‘Recherches sur les tuiles et briques des constructions de la Gaule Romaine’, Revue Archeologique (ser. 5) xii (1920), pp. 189 ff.Google Scholar

⁴ A description of the walls of Beauvais is to be found in V. Leblond, Bulletin Archéologique, 1915, 26 ff., and regular reports on the excavation have appeared in the Circonscriptions sections of Gallia vii (1949), 112; ix (1951), 82; xii (1954), 144; xv (1957), 165; xvii (1959), 282; xix (1961), 301; xxv (1967), 301; xxvii (1969), 231; xxix (1971), 225. For older information, see Bull. Arch, i (1843), 331 ff.

⁵ Loc cit. (note 4), 28. Blanchet, ‘Les Enceintes…’ (cited n. 2) p. 266 gives a distance of 80 metres.

⁶ For a recent description and the latest references to the defences of Senlis, see Butler, R. M., Arch. Journ, cxvi (1959), p. 32.Google Scholar For a general conspectus of the development and growth of the town in late Roman and post-Roman times, see Roblin, M. E. A., Revue des Études Anciennes, 67, 3–4 (1965), 368 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ Op. cit. (note 2), 114.

⁸ For a further photograph of this tower, see pl. IA (facing p. 28) in Butler's article in Arch. Journ. (cited in note 6).

⁹ Still the only description of the walls of Soissons is in Blanchet, op. cit. (note 2), 103-6. Older references are given there. Mention is also made of the walls in Vercauteren, ‘Etude sur les Civitates de la Belgique Seconde’ Acad. Royale de Belgique, Classe des Lettres, xxxiii (1934), 106 ffGoogle Scholar. For recent finds, see Gallia xxv (1967), 189.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See, for example, Blanchet, , op. cit. (note 2), pl. 11, 2.Google Scholar

¹¹ Lebeuf, L'Abbé, in 1735, quoted in the Bull. Soc. Arch, de Soissons, 1853, 199 ff.Google Scholar

¹² The only other site with comparable tiles seems to be Nantes. The measurements are given in Blanchet, ‘Recherches sur les tuiles…’, cited in note 3.

¹³ On the walls of Le Mans, with a selection of photographs illustrating the type of facing to be seen there, see Butler, R. M., JRS 1 (1960), 34 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁴ On Angers, see Enguehard, and Mallet, , Annales de Bretagne, lxxi (1964), 85–100.Google Scholar

¹⁵ That the patterns of the tooling on the stones were so well preserved may be due to their being covered by the rampart bank, but the function of the tooling might originally have been intended to key a plaster facing.

¹⁶ On Die, see Carte archéologique de la Gaule Romaine 11, Drôme, p. 44 ff.

¹⁷ See Carte archéologique de la Gaule Romaine 12, L'Aude, pp. 166 f.

¹⁸ Though Amiens (see below), has a rectangular tower at one of its gateways which is in many ways similar.

¹⁹ On this, see the article of M. E. A. Roblin, cited above in note 6. M. Roblin has succeeded in demonstrating, both for Senlis and Paris, that there were areas of suburbs outside the defended enceintes in late Roman times. On Paris, see M. Roblin, Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1951, 301 ff.

²⁰ Wheeler, R. E. M., JRS xvi (1926), 192.Google Scholar

²¹ The walls of Perigueux were reportedly 6 m wide. There is a list of wall-thicknesses, now somewhat out of date, in Blanchet ‘Les Enceintes…’, p. 258, repeated in Grenier, Manuel a'Archéologie Gallo-Romaine i, 518.

²² Loc. cit. (note 13), 38.

²³ MacMullen, R., Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, lxiv (1959), 207 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁴ Petrikovits, H. v., Das römische Rheinland, 77 ff.Google Scholar

²⁵ Haberey, V., Bonner Jahrbücher, 157 (1957), 294 ff.Google Scholar The walls of the fort at Remagen are also built with ‘petit appareil’ and triple tile-courses, but these defences may be of first- or second-century date.

²⁶ Leblond, V., loc. cit. (note 4), 32.Google Scholar

²⁷ Blanchet, , ‘Les Enceintes…’, pp. 107–10Google Scholar, and Gallia ix (1951), 83.Google Scholar

²⁸ The text of the Notitia Galliarum is given in O. Seeck, ‘Notitia Dignitatum’, 262 ff. The chapter on Belgica Secunda runs:

In provincia Belgica secunda civitates num. XII:

Metropolis civitas Remorum

Civitas Suessionum

Civitas Catalaunorum

Civitas Veromandorum

Civitas Atrabatum

Civitas Camaracensium

Civitas Turnacensium

Civitas Silvanectum

Civitas Bellovacorum

Civitas Ambianensium

Civitas Morinum

Civitas Bononiensium

²⁹ Vasselle, F., Celticum vi (1962), 323–42.Google Scholar

³⁰ Blanchet, , ‘Les Enceintes’, 100-3.Google Scholar

³¹ Grenier, , ‘Manuel d'Archéologie Gallo-Romaine’, i, p. 430.Google Scholar

³² A plan of the enceinte of Tournai is to be found in Roosens, H., Archaeologia Belgica, 104, Abb. 9 (p. 106).Google Scholar

³³ Bernard, M. H., Revue du Nord, 1962, pp. 339CrossRefGoogle Scholar ff. See also Coolen, G., in Bull, de la Soc. des Antiquaires de la Morinie, xix (1962), 545-65.Google Scholar

³⁴ On Boulogne, see Will, E., Revue du Nord, 1960, 363-79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁵ A description of the walls of Sens is to be found in R. M. Butler, loc. cit. (note 6), 32–4.

³⁶ Favière, J., Revue Arch, du Centre, iii (1964), 303–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁷ Julian, , Convivium, 314b.Google Scholar

³⁸ S.H.A. Probus 9; and Aurelius Victor 37, 4.

³⁹ On the annona, see Jones, A. H. M., The Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1964), 458–60.Google Scholar