In these days the compilation of a bibliography of the publications of recent years is an exasperating occupation: if a book or journal has not been destroyed by bombing, it will probably be out of print, and it is not easy to understand why so many obstacles are set in the way of a free commerce in books. The result has been that students have tended to limit themselves to recording the works published in their own country. Take, for example, the field of Byzantine studies: A. Grabar has reported on ‘La Byzantinologie française pendant la Guerre 1940–45”, Byzantion, 17 (1944–5), 431–8; Wilhelm Ensslin has written a valuable critical report on German work on Byzantine history for the years 1939–47, Byzantion, 17 (1946–8), 261–302, cf. Klio 33 (1940), 349–68, 35 (1942), 164–77; in Byzantinoslavica there has appeared a series of bibliographical reports: Grabar for France in 9 (1947), 126–32, Ostrogorsky and Radolchich for Yugoslavia, ibid., 133–42; Lebedev for Russia (1936 to 1946), ibid., 97–112; M. Paulova for Czechoslovakia, ibid., 144–7; Runciman for Turkey, ibid., 143–4; A. Elian for Roumania, ibid., 393–405; Anguélov and Dimitrov for Bulgaria, ibid., 355–78; Moravcsik for Hungary, ibid., 379–92; Charanis for the United States, ibid., 342–54; for the British Isles Hussey and Baynes, ibid., 113ñ26, while Soloviev has written on Byzantine work published in Yugoslavia (1937 to 1947) in Byzantion 17 (1946–8), 303–10 and Delvoye has reported on Travaux récents sur les Monuments byzantins de la Grèce (1938ñ47), ibid., 229–60 and has studied L'Ecole Française d'Athènes et les Etudes Byzantines, R.E.B., 6 (1948), 86–93.