Castle Rushen is one of the most interesting castles in the British Isles, both because of its remarkable state of preservation and by reason of its position as one of the chief seats of authority in the island from the time of its erection down to and including the present day.

An aeolipile is a device whose essential feature is that vapour confined in it under pressure can issue from it only through a small aperture. Although the Oxford English Dictionary agrees with the French Academy in deriving ‘aeolipile’ from a combination of the name of the god of the winds, Aeolus, and the Latin pylae or the Greek Πύλαι, implying thus that originally it meant something like ‘doorway of Aeolus’ or ‘gates of the winds’, I am inclined to accept rather its derivation from ‘Aeolus’ and the Latin pila, a ball, and an original meaning ‘ball of Aeolus’ or ‘of the winds’. Vitruvius, writing during the reign of Augustus, says, in a passage concerned with the winds, ‘id autem verum esse ex aeolipilis aereis licet aspicere … fiunt enim aeolipilae aereae cavae. hae habent punctum angustissimum quo aquae infunduntur conlocanturque ad ignem, et antequam calescent non habent ullum spiritum, simul autem ut fervere coeperint, efficiunt ad ignem vehementem flatum’. This seems to show pretty clearly, by both the form of the word and the description of the object to which Vitruvius applies it, that the word was based on pila and not on pylae. Conceivably it was the spherical shape of early aeolipilic fire-blowers which suggested the trunnioned steam-filled ball provided with projecting L-shaped tubes from which the steam could issue and, by its reaction, cause the ball to revolve, which Hero of Alexandria describes in his Pneumatika, and which is still used to demonstrate to students a jet of steam's inherent reactive force. Hero's text does not, however, include any word relatable to the term Vitruvius applied to his fire-blowing spheres.

The great medieval citadel of Damascus has not apparently received any serious notice in English; the important monographs, in French and German, which have been devoted to it are concerned principally with general architecture on the one part, and with epigraphy on the other. It is not intended in this article to deal further with these particular topics—indeed, the author is not qualified to do so—but to describe the citadel as a fortress and a monument of Islamic military art.

The sanctuary at Mekka, in the time of Muhammad, merely consisted of a small roofless enclosure formed by four walls a little higher than a man, accordining to Ibn Hishām, or about 9 cubits (say 4·50 m.) according to Azraqī, built of rough stone laid dry. It was oblong in shape, the following being the measurements of its sides: NE. 32 cubits, NW. 22, SW. 31, SE. 20, proportions approximately 3:2. Within this enclosure was the sacred well of Zemzem.

In 1937 Dr. W. A. Munro, H.M. Chief Inspector of Schools, Edinburgh, sent me a large number of stone artifacts which he and his family had collected in Morar, Inverness-shire, whence nothing of the kind had ever been reported. Recognizing from his specimens and description of the site that a peculiar interest attached to the relics, I determined to visit the place. Since this lies in what during thewar was a strictly prohibited area, my desire was not realized until August 1946.The examination and additional finds made then showed the need for extending inquiries, by surveying much ground and by reviewing evidences of coastal settlement obtained previously in the extreme west, before the assemblage from Morar could be assessed. The results of these researches are now laid before the Society.

The treatise called Pictor in Carmine is notable as containing the largest known collection of types and antitypes intended to be used by artists. I have often called attention to it, and for many years have been on the look-out for its occurrence in manuscripts, in the hope that I might ultimately be able to produce an edition of the whole text. Whether that may yet see the light I do not know; it is a work of considerable bulk, and perhaps hardly merits a great expenditure of time and print, but comparatively few pages will suffice to give a conspectus of the contents and character of the book.

Five buildings in Venice are cited by Ruskin as illustra ‘the last degradation of the Renaissance. San Moisé is the most clumsy, Santa Maria Zobenigo the most impious, St.Eustachio the most ridiculous the Ospedaletto the most monstrous, and the head at Santa Maria Formosa the most foul.’ In respect, however, of St. Eustachio (or S. Stae as it is known in the Venetian dialect), the verdict is mitigated on a later page, where we are told that the church is remarkable for the dramatic effect of the group of sculpture on its façade. Would this effect, we wonder, have been further enlivened for Ruskin had he been aware that ‘our own Saxon Oswald’ (as he speaks of him elsewhere with a touch of affection) was represented by a large baroque statue in the niche on the left-hand side?

For many years I have entertained considerable doubts in regard to the generally accepted chronology of some of the fine jewellery belonging to the early period of the great migrations in south-east Europe in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. This paper is an attempt to submit the evidence for reconsideration.