Particularly in regard to its influence on the County of Wilts. 199 
Annals (xii., 31), describing the action of Ostorius Scapula, the 
successor of Aulus Plautius in the government. You will pardon 
me for a short digression on this important text. After touching on 
the tumults which awaited Ostorius on his arrival, and the prompt 
measures which it was necessary for him to take, Tacitus goes on to 
say, according to the MSS., “detrahere arma suspectis cunctaque 
eastris Antonam et Sabrinam fluvios cohibere parat.” These words 
are obviously not good grammar as they stand, and require some 
emendation. Ritter and others alter Antonam to Avonam, following 
Camden’s Aufonam, because they do not know the name of so com- 
paratively insignificant a stream as the Anton, and insert wsque 
after Avonam. Halm conjectures cis before the first rivername. I 
myself think cs more probable, as more likely to have dropped out 
than wsgue. If the Anton was the first river met with by Claudius’ 
expedition, the prominence given to it is easily explained. This is 
interesting by itself, but it is even more interesting, in view of the 
question raised about ten years ago as to the genuineness of the 
Annals, to notice the use apparently made of this passage by the 
geographer Ptolemy, who lived about a generation later than Tacitus. 
In his description of the south coast of Britain, after noticing the 
outlets of the Kenion, Tamarus, Isaca and Alaunus, which may, 
perhaps, represent Falmouth, Plymouth, Exmouth and Axmouth or 
Weymouth, he mentions the “ Great Harbour” (probably the Solent 
and the inlets generally at the back of the Isle of Wight), and then 
the mouth of the river Zrisanton. No one has been able to identify 
this curious name, and I therefore suggest that the ¢ris in it is 
simply a duplication of the -éris in castris in the sentence of 
Tacitus, “ castris Antonam et Sabrinam fluvios.” If the original text 
castris cis antonam was corrupted to castris trisantonam, we could well 
understand both the omission of the cis in our present MSS. andthe . 
origin of Ptolemy’s mistake. Such a blunder might seem almost im- 
possible, were it not that we have a very similar and more ludicrous 
one already recognised in Ptolemy. In Tacitus’ account of the Frisian 
rebellion occurs the sentence, “ad sua tutanda digressis rebellibus ” 
(Ann., iv., 73, 1), “the rebels having dispersed to protect their own 
homes.” Ptolemy evidently took this for the name of a place, 
VOL, XXV.—NO. LXXIV. P 
