Library at Truro, but without a notice that it is purely imaginary.

Then, further, the shape was detected as suited for carriage in the bottom of a boat, as the curved part would fit under, and the corner points, when resting between the ribs of the boat, would prevent shifting; then, one such block being in place, the flat surface uppermost, two or three more placed adjoining, one in front of the other, would form a continuous floor, fitting exactly, in fact, as would be the case with any cast or shaped ballast made for a Falmouth harbour boat of the day.

With all this ingenuity, the shape of the bottom of a coracle has been overlooked, and it has not been considered what weight or cargo a prehistoric coracle could bear, nor has account been taken of such a craft being six days at sea. Those projecting points too, each a foot long, would hardly be welcome with any motion within hide-covered wicker-work.

If, at first, this block were made for ballast as a passing fad, no special notice would be taken of it by the maker, and it may have remained for some years out of sight, until presented in 1829. After a lapse of thirty-four years to the time of the paper in 1863, all concerned in the making may have disappeared, and so nothing more could be known about it. After another lapse of forty years until now, all is blank-one more myth in this mythical story.

Another local episode, or "find," may be noticed, as it is sometimes quoted in evidence of Roman occupation and of Roman tin. In the autumn of 1869, only six years after the above-noted paper, some workmen at Caerhayes Castle, near Truro, found in a tin can some thirty copper Roman coins. The tin, or a piece of it, was sent for analysis, and the report returned that the quality was as good as that of common tin of the present day.1 The early seekers for tin sought it, as we do now, to use as an alloy only, with copper for bronze, with lead for pewter. As a metal, it has never been and cannot be

1 Royal Institution of Cornwall, v. 3, No. 12,

used alone. No utensil, domestic or otherwise, ever was made of tin, save perhaps as an experimental failure. It cannot be beaten or hammered into shape; it must be cast, and this necessitates a mould for the required form: not easy work for an aboriginal people, with only a hole in the ground for a furnace. If cast thin it would be weak, would easily indent, and would not bear its own weight; if cast thick enough to be strong, its weight would make it useless. By itself, in fact, tin is useless. We know fairly well the history of our own tin production, but in our domestic history there are found no tin utensils.

What we see and buy as tin is a new metal-an alloy, or amalgam, of tin and iron called tinplate. In the process" the tin seems to absorb the iron, the result still looking like tin. This tinplate, however thin, is rigid and strong, and capable of use in ways innumerable. The "process was introduced about 1740, and moved at first somewhat slowly, until some cheapening improvements gave it an impulse about fifty years after that date. A writer on old pewter tells us that after 1745 "white iron-" smiths took the place of the old pewterers.

These Roman coins, then, at Caerhayes were found in a "tin," the common tin of the present day, an entirely modern metal, something no Roman ever saw, and moreover in a place whereon, we may say with fair certainty, no Roman foot ever trod.

Whilst we have no record of any tin workings in Roman times, so it is the same in post-Roman days. Tin is not mentioned in the Cornwall Domesday-an ominous. and sufficient silence. It was not worked there until after that date. Then Devonshire produced tin before Cornwall, and in greater quantity; yet the district about Tavistock-only a few miles from Roman Exeter -was left unnoticed and untouched.

Archæology should be more severe in its criticisms of these early myths. Stories, imaginary and fabulous, should be more often strongly marked, or promptly and entirely swept away.

THE TENTH ITER AND THE ROMAN STATIONS

IN THE NORTH OF ENGLAND.

By R. H. FORSTER, Esq., M.A., HON. TREASURER.

(Read April 18th, 1906.)

HE Tenth Iter of the Antonine Itinerary, and the western fortresses per lineam valli of the Notitia, have been the subjects of much speculation since the time of Camden; and though it is impossible, in the present state of our knowledge, to come to a definite conclusion, it may be useful to sum up the circumstantial evidence, and to point out where research is likely to produce good

results.

The Tenth Iter1 begins at Glanoventa, and ends at Mediolanum, in Cheshire, but it is more convenient to trace it in the reverse direction. It has been generally agreed that the route runs through Manchester (Mancunium), Wigan (Coccium), and Ribchester (Bremetonacum), to Overborough, near Kirby Lonsdale, where there was an important Roman town. This place is about the required distance (27 miles) from Ribchester, and it may therefore be set down as Galacum. From Overborough a Roman road continues in the same line up the Lune 1 Iter a Glanoventa Mediolano, m. p. cl., sic.