61 
with this country, we should expect it to be at least of equal 
authority to the Itineraries of Antonine. That the necessities of 
the case required a perfect list we may rest assured ; otherwise 
what use would an inverted list—accidentally inverted, too !—be 
to a Roman general, unless indeed to lead him on to disaster. 
That such was not the characteristic of the Roman topographer 
we may readily allow. 
Baines, in his story of Yorkshire, bt I, vol. i, p. 316, says: 
“Tt gives one a very high impression, not merely of the industry 
of Ptolemy and the earlier geographers, but of the immense pains 
taken by the Roman government, that even an attempt should 
have been made to fix the position of so many places, especially 
in the British Islands, at a time when not more than one half of 
their total area was subject to the Roman dominion, and when 
even that portion which they professed to rule was very partially 
subdued.” And this statement applies to those of later date with 
even greater force. 
Clearly, then, the Romans were very particular as to having a 
correct knowledge of the leading topographical details of the 
country. Their military roads, as given in the various Itineraries 
of Antonine, are wonderful specimens of their work, and show the 
places in almost unbroken sequence ;—as military lists they would 
otherwise have been valueless. It would seem very unlikely that 
the Notitia should be of less authority than the older Itineraries. 
But it has been remarked that many of the sepulchral monu- 
ments refer to the heirs of the deceased persons, and that this 
might be looked upon as a proof of continuity. Thus, amongst 
others found near the Maryport camp, is one inscribed :— 
D. M. 
Mori REGIS 
Filit Heredes 
Eius Substitue 
Runt vix a lxx 
But this proves little, as, even should it prove continuity, it does 
not necessarily prove the continuity of the Spanish cohorts ; for 
