Among the commoner, and certainly among the most distinctive, Roman coins found in Britain are the quinarius ship-issues of Allectus—found in Britain and of course minted here. They seem to merit more comment than they have roused so far.

The linear shape of a galley does not accommodate itself to the circular shape of a coin, and Roman galley coins rate high marks for ineptitude. Prows or sterns by themselves, shown not for their own interest but as items in some larger symbolic concept, are tolerably well done. But with complete vessels we find stem-posts and stern-posts as high as the keel is long, boats shaped like bananas or like staples, and galleys fringed with so many indeterminate oars that they looklike centipedes. Some of the Allectus reverses are of this slovenly class (Mattingly and Sydenham, 1933, pl. xix, no. 16), but the better ones—and they are numerous—show a recognizable and seaworthy vessel.

A note on Long Meg and her Daughters, the monolith and stone circle in Cumberland,

provides excuse to quote both Stukeiey on the whole: ‘A great Celtic temple’; and Wordsworth on Long Meg herself: Speak Thou, whose massy strength and stature scorn The power of years - pre-eminent, and placed Apart, to overlook the circle vast Speak, Giant-Mother!

More to the point, these new findings from air photography report new field monuments to with the standing circle and the second circle that Stukeley drew, and require a reappraisal of the Neolithic to Eariy Bronze Age monuments in Cumbria.

Hacienda Zuleta in the northern sierra province of Imbabura, Ecuador is the location of the largest 'ramp-mound' site of the Caranqui culture dated to the Late Period in the highlands chronological sequence (c. AD 1250-1525) and also of a large 17th-century Colonial period hacienda of Jesuit foundation. The Late Period is characterised by the construction of very large hemispherical or quadrilateral 'pyramid tolos, sometimes with a ramp or a long 'walkway' and up to 22 of these ramp-tola sites have been identified in the northern sierra provinces of northern Pichincha and Imbabura (Gondard & L6pez 1983; Knapp 1992). They are thought to have been the political centres of the region's paramount chiefs and the ceremonial foci for their scattered communities (Salomon 1986). Studies suggest they are contemporary with one another, originating from about the 8th to loth centuries AD (Athens 1978; 1992; Oberem 1975), although the phases of occupation associated with the creation of the large quadrilateral ramp mounds seem to be later, linked to socio-economic and political trends of agricultural intensification and increasing population densities which are also taken to characterize the Late Period.

In January 2001, a team of researchers from the University of Ulster (Northern Ireland) conducted an innovative maritime archaeology project on the East African coast in partnership with the British Institute in Eastern Africa and the National Museums of Kenya. Its focus was Mombasa Island on the southern Kenyan coast, a historical settlement and port for nearly 2000 years (Berg 1968; Sassoon 1980; 1982). The East African seaboard, stretching from Somalia in the north to Madagascar and Mozambique in the south, was culturally dynamic throughout the historical period. This area, traditionally known as the Swahili coast, is culturally defined as a maritime zone extending 2000 km from north to south, but reaching a mere 15 hi inland. The origins of ‘Swahili’ cultural identity originated during the middle of the 1st millennium AD, following consolidation of earlier farming and metalusing Bantu-speaking communities along the coast and emergence of a distinctive ‘maritime’ orientation and set of cultural traditions (eg Allen 1993; Chami 1998; Helm 2000; Horton & Middelton 2000). Previous research produced evidence of exploitation of marine resources for food and an early engagement in longdistance exchange networks, linking parts ofthis coast with the Classical world by at least the BC/AD transition.

The Early Palaeolithic of Japan may be defined as comprised of any assemblage which occurs before 30,000 years BP, i.e., prior to the formation of Tachikawa loam formation of the Kanto region (Serizawa, 1970, Ikawa Smith, 1978, 247-86). It has been the subject of controversy since the Palaeolithic period was recognized in Japan following discoveries at Iwajuku in 1949 (Sugihara, 1956). Early in the history of subsequent research, debate arose as to the date of man's arrival in the archipelago. This debate is of importance to a wider audience for a number of reasons. First, Japan is located in a region which has traditionally been associated as a source area for the peopling of the New World—early dates claimed for occupation in America should then, perhaps, be relatable to similar finds and dates in Japan. Secondly, there is now increasing evidence for relative early dates of occupation in Siberia. (Boriskovskij, 1978, 27; Yi and Clark, 1983; Okladnikov and Pospelova, 1982). These may find supportive evidence from neighbouring lands. Thirdly, it is interesting from the point of view of hominid evolution to know how far populations of Homo erectus and archaic Homo sapiens had spread in East Asia and what form their adaptations took. Additionally, Japan is a relatively well-explored and published source of data in a poorly known region of the World and may be useful as a source for deriving analogies and ideas in interpreting lithic material, particularly in countries such as Korea where palaeolithic research is still in its infancy (Hwang, 1979; Kim, 1983).

Much has been written about the extraordinary impact of Darwinism during the mid- to late nineteenth century, expressed in the scholarship of 'reception studies' (see for example Ellegård 1958; Glick 1988; Numbers & Stenhouse 1999). A significant focus has been on developing an understanding of the impact of Darwinian thinking on just about every aspect of Victorian society, particularly on literature, science, politics and social relations (see for example Beer 1983; Frayter 1997; Lorimer 1997; Moore 1997; Paradis 1997; Browne 2001). A great deal of attention has also been paid (by historians and philosophers of science) into the specifics of how the Darwinian message was disseminated so quickly and so broadly. Here the interest lies in the links between the rhetoric of scientific naturalism and the politics of the day, be it Whig-Liberal or Tory (see for example Clark 1997; Barton 1998, 2004; Clifford et al. 2006). A consequent interest lies in the ways in which science was popularised in Victorian Britain (see especially Lightman 1997, 2007).

Ever since the first discovery of predynastic cemeteries in Egypt by Sir Flinders Petrie at Naqada in 1895 it was realized that the beginnings of civilization in the Nile Valley had not been found, and that remains of earlier stages might come to light. For nearly thirty years, in spite of active and more or less scientific excavation in all parts of Egypt and Nubia, no earlier settlements or cemeteries were discovered which could then be classed as older than predynastic. Flintwork of palaeolithic man abounded, especially on the high desert; and the flints of the Fayyum, in great variety, were recognized as mainly neolithic. But the ancestors or forerunners of the predynastic people seemed to have left no other trace. Probably the advance of the cultivation with the gradual rise of the mud level had obliterated all that they had left behind them. Steep slopes of desert are obviously covered less quickly than the flatter areas. The eastern desert fringing the cultivation in the Badari district of Middle Egypt presents a succession of more or less high spurs intersected by dry watercourses or wadys running down from the cliffs to the fields. It is here, and so far here only, that the much sought for precursors of the predynastic Egyptians have been revealed to us. They have been called Badarians to distinguish them from the well-known predynastic people (Amratians, Gerzeans and Semainians) with whom they are closely akin both in culture and physical type.

Twenty-two years after the close of his investigations in north-west Syria, Braidwood produced this massive and expensive volume which covers the archaeology of a part of the ‘Amuq plain from the advanced Neolithic period down to about 2000 B.C. More than a quarter of a million words have been penned, and there are many hundreds of illustrations, including ten coloured plates which are good reproductions of sixty-nine prehistoric potsherds. Such lavish and verbose treatment may unfortunately defeat the purpose of the volume, for those who can afford the money, and still more the time required for the mastery of its contents, must be few indeed.

The classification of the material described depends basically on the partial excavation of three mounds: Judaidah, Çatal Huyuk and Ta’yinat, of which the first named produced the most abundant evidence. These excavations were supplemented by operations on a smaller scale at the mounds of Dhahab and Kurdu and by the surface exploration of many other sites.