^{page 2 note 1} They are cited in the text as Nett. and Vitt.

^{page 2 note 2} See Papers vi. p. 489.

^{page 4 note 1} On the Topham drawings the localities are generally noted—not always correctly—but never on the Holkham drawings.

^{page 5 note 1} The small caryatid there alluded to is no doubt that from the House of Livia (Turn bull, 34; Naples Museum 8303; Jordan-Hülsen, , Topogr. i. 3, 62, n. 62Google Scholar).

^{page 11 note 1} The reference is to the Appendix Veterum, Musivorum et Picturarum added to the 1750 edition of Bartoli's Picturae Antiquae (which itself is cited as Pict. Ant.).

^{page 14 note 1} At Praeneste, as Michaelis was told; but no such temple is known to have existed there.

^{page 14 note 2} Weege does not mention that this and the other drawings in vol. 194 are by Giuseppe Mannocchi: some of them bear the date 1773.

^{page 15 note 1} With other mosaics, to be described below, it was given by Charles III. to the Biblioteca Nacional in 1787, and has the number 195 worked into the field, corresponding to its earlier collocation there.

^{page 18 note 1} Bartoli mem. 13 apud Fea, Misc. i. p. 225 Google Scholar. ‘In tempo di Clemente X. (1670–6) fu cavato nell’ orto contiguo a quello de Mattei incontro la Marrana, doue si purificano le lane, e vi furono ritrovate vestigia di molte stufe [i.e. hypocausts]: una tra le altre con bellissimo pavimento di musaico tutti figurato [cf. Vitt. 89, 90 (Inv. 9666, 9667): Nett. 1516 (Inv. 11397): Bartoli Pict. Ant. 19 = Caylus 32 (Eng. T. xxix. 2): App. 1)] e tra le altre cose due tegoloni di musaico, quali ebbe il cardinale Massimo.'

The legend to Vitt. 89, 90 (see Michaelis, Jahrb. 1910, 120) gives further particulars. The room was 30 palms (6·67 metres) square, and was paved with the large mosaic (App. 1), which seems from the drawings in Vitt. and Nett. to have been patched in places with rough pieces of marble, on two of which are shown fragments of inscriptions—D·I·M· and SVRAM. In the centre was an outlet for water, and the pavement was supported upon a hypocaust: while numerous lead water-pipes were found round about. The two mosaics with gladiatorial scenes were inserted as panels in the walls.

^{page 19 note 1} Cf. Papers vi. p. 491.

^{page 25 note 1} Not 79, as Lanciani 181 says.

^{page 30 note 1} Cod. Vat. Lat. 3225 (published in fac-simile as vol. i. of the series of codices e vaticani selecti phototypice expressi).

^{page 34 note 1} The site of the discovery is given by Caylus, who has a plan of the building (a corridor with several rooms) on Pl. i. (Eng. T. xxiv. 1): Fabrica anticha scoperta l'anno 1668 nelle rovine della casa di Tito dalla parte occidentale del colosseo e lontano da esso palmi 250 (55 metres), cf. Lanciani 176. Hülsen, , Röm. Mitt. xi. (1896) 217 Google Scholar: Hülsen-Jordan, , Topogr. i. 3, 322 Google Scholar. Bartoli Mem. 3 apud Fea, Misc. i. 222 Google Scholar, facendosi la cava nell' orto di una tal Signora de' Nobili, nella parte settentrionale del Colosseo, furono trovate diverse stanze sotteranee, etc.

Hülsen considers that Eton Mahog. 2 was also found here (Lanciani refers the paintings of fabbriche antiche to Eton, ii. 12, 69, 70): and this seems certain for Bartoli, , Pict. Ant. ii.–vi.Google Scholar; Caylus v. vi. (Vitt. 32–35, 93 = Inv. 9596–9, 9673: Nett. 158, 173 = Inv. 11407, 11419–22), and for Eton, ii. 2, 19 q.v. (ib. 71 is doubtful, for there is no warrant for ii. 3 having been actually found here). Cf. also Cors. 135 (Eng. xiii. 3), which, as Michaelis points out (Jahrb. 1910, 117), was not found in the Tomb of the Nasonii, but ad Montis Coelii radices qua Amphitheatrum Flavium spectatur, in hortis Sertoriorum anno MDCLXXIII. inventa est; praeter hanc aliae quoque repertae fuerunt picturae et imagines antiquae, quae coloribus suis vestitae, una cum istac, quam attulimus, in supra laudato Cardinalis Camilli Maximi libro exhibentur. (Bellori ad Bartoli Sep. Nas. T. xxiv. p. 160 ed. 1738. Cf. Papers, vi. p. 489).

^{page 38 note 1} These are very similar to the stuccoes of the tomb figured by Paoli, Antichità di Pozzuoli, Pl. 32, 34 (see Dubois, Pouzzoles antique (Bibl. des Éc. Franç. fasc. 98), p. 351): and, though the correspondence is in no case exact, it is probable that they belonged to this or a similar tomb at Pozzuoli.

^{page 44 note 1} 11 on back: 9 on front.

^{page 48 note 1} ‘A Bathing Chamber, supported by Pillars of Giallo and Verde Antico, and of Porphyry, whose Bases and Capitals were of Brass, with a Soffito and Pavement all of Mosaic, and the richest Incrustations that Art could be capable of, was scarce sooner discovered than lost again, being pulled to pieces by these Vandals, merely for the intrinsick Value of the Materials, which were scandalously retail'd to common Stone-Cutters and Dealers in Pietre Commesse.

‘A vast Salon [which he conjectures to have been the Iovis Caenaculum] underwent the same fate.’

^{page 50 note 1} Cf. infra, 20, 35, 41.

^{page 56 note 1} Nos. i, ii of this set are Mahog. 11, 12; while 7, supra, must be No. vii. of this set.

^{page 61 note 1} The numbers refer to an inventory lettered outside Palazzi di Roma, with the following title within: Bassirilievi, Pitture Antiche, Gruppi, Statue, Busti, Vasi, Are, etc., in Diversi Palazzi di Roma. It forms an index to the great series of drawings of sculpture which Topham not only ordered to be made (cf. Lanciani, Bull. Com 1894, 165, who however did not see this volume) but is a complete inventory of the contents of the various collections, including the pieces which Topham did not think it worth while to have copied; and it is thus a document of capital importance for the condition of these collections in the early eighteenth century. I hope before long to be able to publish it in its entirety.

^{page 62 note 1} Turnbull states that this and the previous No. were, according to the traditions at Rome, found in a subterranean chamber in digging the foundations for the Palazzo Barberini. This is certainly incorrect as regards No. 8.