I am grateful to Dr. Soricelli and to the Editor for the opportunity to see this interesting article in advance of publication. The evidence presented here of chronology, distribution and petrology seem to me to offer compelling reasons for supposing the ware discussed to have been produced in Campania, and this is further supported by the names of the potters and their occasional use of the Greek alphabet. (This was a factor to which I had not given adequate weight in suggesting an origin in Punic North Africa). As to the precise origin of the ware within the region, I am dubious of the significance of two wasters found on their own in separate excavations: an accident in the later life of a vessel may on occasion be indistinguishable from an original fault in firing, and a greater concentration of wasters would be necessary to have the force of definite proof. Besides which, the foot of the cup illustrated in Figure 3.24 is not typical for Production A/‘Tripolitanian’ Sigillata. Soricelli is undoubtedly right in suggesting that a plurality of similar wares was produced in different parts of Campania (and probably other parts of Southern Italy and Sicily) during the first centuries BC and AD. Their individual characterisation will depend on the publication and study of a great deal more material from the region and the present article represents an important step along that road. And as we know that the products of Campania could so readily find their way into distant markets throughout the Mediterranean, so the identification of more of these products is likely to be of relevance to excavators working in many different parts of the Roman World.