The first commercial contact of the Greeks with Etruria is certainly earlier than the foundation of the Greek colony at Cumae. Vulci, Chiusi, Terni, Bisenzio, Vetralla, Capodimonte, Leprignano, Veii, Falerii, Tarquinia, Cerveteri, have produced evidence of the importation of Greek pottery of a style considerably earlier than that of the contents of the earliest Greek graves of that colony.

The general conclusions which can be derived from this evidence for the history of Greek commerce with the Western Mediterranean have been discussed elsewhere; it is the particular significance of it as evidence for the earliest Hellenization of Italy that I wish to consider here.

In volume xx of the Journal (pp. 55–70) there appeared an article by Mr. Syme on the imperial finances under Domitian, Nerva and Trajan. Briefly, his object was to shift on to the shoulders of Nerva the financial embarrassment often attributed to the reign of Domitian, and also to strive for a fairer recognition in general of Domitian's qualities. The following notes deal with some of the principal points at issue, and attempt a reconsideration of the financial policy of the period.

This paper had its origin in an attempt to elucidate the connexions of three fragmentary mould-blown glasses in the Ashmolean Museum (infra, pp. 172–3, nos. F i d and e and ii c) which bear the complimentary motto ΚΑΤΑΧΑΙΡΕ ΚΑΙ ΕΥΦΡΑΙΝΟΥ, ‘Your very good health.’ The first two of these on close examination proved to be so much alike in every detail that they must have come out of the same mould.

The paper by Messrs. Davies Pryce and Birley on ‘The First Roman Occupation of Scotland’ is so obviously a friendly challenge addressed to myself that I cannot in courtesy allow it to pass un-noticed. My critics indeed were good enough to give me timely warning of their impending attack. Now that it has been delivered, my first impression is one of disappointment. I had expected them to deal with the various arguments that I have from time to time advanced, and I had hoped that their discussion of these would throw fresh light on what is at the best a very obscure episode. Instead, they have elected to concentrate on a single branch of the evidence, and that a branch in which the interpretation of the facts is beset with so many uncertainties as to make it peculiarly ill-fitted to serve as our sole guide. Being on the defensive, I have no alternative but to conform to the prescribed initiative. Hence the title I have chosen. For the rest, I can only ask those interested to read (or re-read) what I have written on the subject elsewhere. In particular, they might find ‘The Agricolan Occupation of Scotland’ a helpful tonic.