By the Rev. E. H. Goddard. 403 



first century B.C., placing Fig. 17 as possibly later in the same 

 century. This specimen, found on Great Cheverell Down, and 

 presented to the Museum by the Eev. E. Wilton, is of more usual 

 form, and several similar ones were found by Gen. Pitt-Eivers in 

 the Eomano-British villages round Eushmore. It is to be noticed 

 that in these and in the succeeding examples, indeed in all this 

 type of fibula, the loop of the spring, after completing two spirals 

 on one side of the bow, passes to the other side inside the bow 

 instead of outside of it, as is always the case in those of the earlier 

 " La Tene I." type, which has already been described. 



Figs. 18 — 21 represent a later modification of the same simple 

 form in which the bow is flattened out, and in some cases has a 

 simple dotted ornament. Figs. 18 and 19 are in Devizes Museum. 

 The former came from West Lavington Downs, the latter (Fig. 

 19) was found many years ago " with a pot of Eoman coins at 

 Easterton." As so often happens, however, there is no record of 

 the precise amount of association between the fibula and the coins, 

 which were those of Constantine II., Constans, and Magnentius, 

 and were probably all struck not later than A.D. 337. Wilts Arch. 

 Mag., X., 178 — 180. If the fibula was really associated with the 

 coins, this would of course tend to show that this type of fibula 

 continued in use until the fourth century A.D. 



Fig. 20 is from Mr. J. W. Brooke's collection. It was found at 

 Upper Upham, near Fig. 5, in 1907, Eoman coins found near it 

 ranging from Vespasian to Constantine II., the majority being of 

 the time of Carausius, Diocletian, and Maximian. 



Fig. 21, also from Mr. Brooke's collection, was found at Marl- 

 borough in 1906. It is an unusually small specimen. These 

 fibulae (Figs. 18 — 21) Mr. Eeginald Smith would place in the first 

 or possibly in the second century, A.D. In the case of all these 

 fibulae, however, it must be borne in mind that the suggested dates 

 are only approximate, and that a definite and settled chronology 

 has not yet been reached. 



The tendency with some archaeologists, in the reaction against 

 the old assumption that all such things were " Eoman," is to place 

 many of these simple fibulae early, perhaps in pre-Eoman times. 



