By the death of Sir George Macdonald on 9th August, 1940, the Roman Society and its Journal have lost a pillar of strength. As a Vice-President of the Society since its foundation, and as President for five years after the last war, when a fresh impetus was needed, he rendered very valuable service, and as a member of the Editorial Committee from the outset he worked silently but untiringly to ensure the maintenance of the high standard of scholarship which the Journal has consistently displayed. Among his qualifications for editorial work was a notable gift for proof-reading, which made it for him a sort of diversion: typographical errors, bad punctuation, oversights, omissions, obscurity of language or of thought on the author's part—nothing escaped his vigilance. A personal notice of him is not contemplated here; he would not have thought it in place, nor could it be limited to what primarily concerns members of the Society, his contributions to our knowledge of antiquity, which were but a by-product of a busy life of which the later stage was spent in the public service. But it will be generally recognised as appropriate to complete the bibliography of his writings which was prefixed to the papers dedicated to him in 1932, in celebration of his seventieth birthday (JRS xxii, 1). All that he wrote exhibited the qualities of a great scholar, mastery of the evidence, a sure touch, sound judgment, and fine historical insight. Such work is of lasting value, and the author's attractive style makes it pleasant to read.

The city state was the most characteristic expression of the Hellenic way of life; and it is appropriate that the most Philhellenic of Roman emperors should have been distinguished as a founder of cities and an encourager of civic institutions. We are ill informed about the constitution and history of most of his foundations, but concerning one, which was in Egypt, a country whose soil preserves so perfectly the antiquities which it covers, we have a considerable amount of evidence. Antinoopolis is thus of interest not only to the historian of Roman and Byzantine Egypt, but also for the light it may throw on Hadrian's aims and ideals as a founder of cities.

Although Plassart, when publishing for the first time the inscription referred to as Text A in this article, mentioned that he had seen it ‘assez rapidement’ and that it ‘mériterait révision’, Crönert did not realise in SEG ii, 398, that he was restoring a text which had not been published in its entirety. I was able, during a visit to Beroea in the autumn of 1936 in the company of Mr. C. F. Edson of Harvard University, to examine the inscription carefully and, in addition to correcting some inaccuracies in Plassart's copy, removed, with the permission of the Δεσπότης of Beroea, a wooden bench which covered a portion of the inscription, and thus was able to read all the extant text. The accompanying photograph (fig. 5) shows clearly the part of the text hitherto unread.

M. Jean Schérer, the editor of P Fouad 21, suggested that the question about the πολιτεία of the missicii was decided the same day as the question of the legionaries in P Yale inv. 1528, and that the space before εἶπον in 1. 11 contained very probably the name of the prefect Tuscus.

In Fouad 21, lines 11–14, Tuscus seems to repeat what he said in P Yale inv. 1528, lines 17 ff.

Comparing P Yale 1528 with P Fouad 21, I would suggest that ἀγωγή does not mean ‘discipline’ but the actio, i.e., the claim of the soldiers, and I assume also that the legionaries in P Yale 1528 are veterans of the legions and not legionaries, because in both documents the prefect spoke to the same people repeating the same things.