As a schoolboy in the early 1960s the writer discovered a series of Iron Age and Roman salt-production sites along the shoreline of Chichester and Portsmouth Harbours (FIG. 1). These areas were visited intermittently over the next ten years and many of the observations made at that time were published in 1975. That study described the topographical setting of these sites and the character and chronology of the surface finds. It also included some discussion of the economic context of salt-making and its place in the settlement pattern.

The evidence for an altar tomb of the Procurator of Britain, C. Julius Classicianus, consists of a richly carved bolster stone and two substantial lettered fragments, found at the foot of a Roman bastion of London's city wall during two excavations separated in time by eighty years. Reunited. at the British Museum in 1935, they form one of the most important and beautifully lettered archaeological documents of Roman London.

The purpose of this study is to reassess the information contained in the worked faces of each fragment, to review the assumptions which led to the disposition of the fragments in their present setting, and to consider whether a measured survey of lettering and layout might contribute to a fuller reconstruction of the tomb and its text.

An unusually complex fourth-century infant grave excavated in Baldock in 1988 produced a complete Dea Nutrix figurine. Whilst not uncommon as site finds, Deae Nutrices are less frequently encountered as grave gifts in Britain than in Gaul. The reasons for its inclusion as a grave gift are explored, as are wider questions of Romano-British burial practice in the town, the significance of Dea Nutrix as a deity, and the nature of funerary ritual. An assessment is also made of the status of the Roman town.

The economic aspects of metallurgy in the distant past have been relatively little studied, largely owing to the absence of detailed records for periods preceding medieval times. This paper takes advantage of a rare survival, an account from the Vindolanda tablets in which a price for iron is recorded, to explore some of the economic characteristics of the metal during the first and second centuries a.d. in Britain. The inherent difficulties in employing evidence of this kind are examined before looking at the price information from the rest of the Vindolanda tablets to assess the value of iron relative to other commodities at the fort. The value of the metal is then examined compared with that of labour, thus illuminating the potential economic opportunities that became available to iron producers following the establishment of Roman rule in Britain.

In his discussion of the nomenclature of auxiliary regiments, G. L. Cheesman stated his belief that the adjectival form of a provincial name such as Cyrenaica, Moesica, or Syriaca implied not original recruitment in those provinces, but recent, perhaps lengthy, service in them. The existence of such units as cohortes II Hispanorum scutata Cyrenaica, I Lusitanorum Cyrenaica, and I–IV Thracum Syriaca lend solid support to his argument. It would have been entirely reasonable for a unit serving on an expedition to be known by the province with which it was usually associated, e.g. ‘the Syrian regiment of Thracians’. This would be especially true where there were a number of other regiments with the same ethnic title and otherwise indistinguishable, e.g. the numerous regiments of Thraci and Hispani. Here, the sense is rather, ‘the Syrian regiment of Thracians’. Subsequently, Cheesman qualified his generalisation when he observed that there must have been occasions when a form such as Cyrenaica would equal Cyrenaeorum? His modification was prompted by difficulties associated with regiments lacking an ethnic title and bearing only an adjectival form of a provincial name. He cites as examples the units simply designated as I–III Augusta Cyrenaica. It is to be assumed that he saw the same argument as applicable when he appended the ala I and the cohors I Britannica to the list of units whose origin he gives as Britain.

Tacitus's account of the Claudian invasion of Britain and the campaigns that followed it down to the year 47 is unfortunately lost, and historians have to be content with Dio, who gives the only consecutive account, supplemented by scattered references in other sources. This short note is an attempt to extract a few more fragments of information from these literary sources and in particular it concerns the part played by Rome's Batavian auxiliaries.

The site, which was in medieval times the precinct of St Oswald's Priory, is close to a now-vanished channel of the River Severn, on which, a little to the south, was the Roman quay (FIG. I). The site is outside the NW corner of the Roman colonia of Glevum. It was excavated in 1975-6 in advance of re-development, with the aid of a grant from the Department of the Environment. Building plans were cancelled in 1976 and the site ceased to qualify for ‘rescue’ grants. Only limited archaeological work was therefore done on the Roman levels, which are still available for future research.

Bells are recorded in many published excavation reports from Roman sites, but there has been no previous study of the British material. This paper explores the significance of bells in the Roman world from both a ritual and a functional perspective. We create a first typology of Romano-British bells, provide an understanding of their chronology and examine any spatial and social differences in their use. Special attention is paid to bells from funerary or ritual contexts in order to explore the symbolic significance of these small objects. Bells from other parts of the Roman world are considered to provide comparisons with those from Roman Britain. The paper demonstrates that small bells were used as protective charms and may have been preferentially placed into the graves of children and young women. The paper identifies a new, probably Roman type of bell that has no parallels within the Empire, although similar pieces occur in first- and second-century graves in the Black Sea region.

Recent debate about the dating of Building XXVII 2 at Verulamium highlights a potential conflict between archaeological and stylistic dating of mosaics. The stratigraphic and artefactual, particularly the numismatic, evidence for the dating of the construction of Building XXVII 2 and subsequent phases of activity are examined in detail. The coin finds indicate a late date (after c. a.d. 380) for the initial construction of this building and its mosaics, with a sequence of development suggesting the continuation of urban life well into the fifth century. This dating has been challenged, however, and it has been suggested that the mosaics, stylistically, are significantly earlier. Comments are offered on the stylistic dating of the Verulamium mosaics in an Appendix by Patricia Witts. In conclusion, there would appear to be no compelling reason why the historically important sequence of structures, suggesting the continuation of urban life in Verulamium well into the fifth century, as originally proposed, has to be rewritten.

Roman Scotland provides a unique opportunity to examine archaeological sites which represent uncomplicated, often single, phases of activity. Rather than the usual palimpsests seen in the sites in the rest of the island, resulting from centuries of occupation, Scotland has been the archaeological equivalent of a highwater mark, only briefly inundated by the Spring tides of the Roman Empire during the Flavian, Antonine, and Severan periods.

It has become fashionable in British archaeological circles to criticize airphotographers for continuing to reconnoitre the better-known districts such as the upper Thames valley or the Yorkshire Wolds, when they might be using their limited flying time to explore areas where little or nothing has yet been recorded from the air. The importance of making flights over the less rewarding ground is undeniable, but it is quite wrong to assume that the ‘classic’ crop-mark areas have nothing more to reveal. Every year brings major aerial discoveries on the chalklands and river-gravels of southern Britain, and their value is enhanced – not diminished – by the body of knowledge already available for each locality. Individual sites, although revisited year after year, may display vital new information only after literally decades of scrutiny, and continued surveillance is called for if air-photography is to play a fully effective part in archaeological exploration.

Severn Valley Ware has long been recognized as one of the most widespread and enduring classes of Roman coarse pottery found on sites in the west of England. It is usually represented in a distinctive orange, or less commonly, light grey-coloured fabric in a characteristic range of forms including jars, tankards and bowls. A detailed distribution of these wares on a national scale has never been compiled, although it is known that Severn Valley Wares have been found in greater or lesser quantities from Somerset in the south up to the Antonine Wall in the north. It is generally believed that the centre of the Severn Valley Ware industry was, as the name suggests, in the lower Severn Valley, particularly the area around Gloucester. This is supported by the high proportion of Severn Valley Wares in all contexts of Roman date at sites in central Gloucestershire and by petrological analysis of Severn Valley Wares which suggests that clays matching those used for making the pottery were available in the area. The actual production sites are less well documented with only two identified kilns known from the area; at Alkington and Malvern (see FIG. I).

The Roman invasion of Britain in A.D. 43 was an event of great importance both for the future history of the island and for the emperor Claudius' attempt to establish for himself a reputation as a great military commander, and it is unfortunate that there is not more reliable information on the campaign. The chapters of Tacitus' Annals that covered the years A.D. 37–47 are missing, and the summary of events in Britain in the Agricola says very little about the invasion. Suetonius' review of the campaign (Claud. 17) is very brief and (to Claudius) extremely hostile. Accordingly, so far as literary evidence is concerned, we must rely almost entirely on the account provided by Dio (60. 19–24). His description of the campaign seems relatively straightforward, but there are places where modern historians have felt inclined to treat his judgement with caution. For example, his apparent acceptance at face value of the arrangement that Claudius would come to the aid of Plautius in the event of a genuine emergency seems naïve. However, the possible weaknesses of Dio's judgement on this and similar points are not too difficult to discern; it is in points of detail that his errors have, in fact, been most misleading, and it might be useful to draw attention to two chronological errors in his account of the invasion that have escaped comment.

A major late Roman hoard of coins, gold jewellery and silver table utensils was found in November 1992 at Hoxne, Suffolk. The finder, Eric Lawes, located the treasure on 16 November 1992, and together with the tenant farmer of the land, Peter Whatling, immediately reported the discovery to Suffolk County Council, the landowners. This prompt action enabled a team from the Suffolk Archaeological Unit, under the direction of Judith Plouviez, to carry out a controlled emergency excavation of the remainder of the deposit on 17 November. This was completed on the same day, and the finds were collected and taken to the British Museum on the following day. The deposit was lifted in small context blocks, and the recording and detailed excavation was therefore completed under laboratory conditions in the Museum. The hoard was declared Treasure Trove at a Coroner's Inquest in Lowestoft on 3 September 1993.