as it most certainly was; they being admitted no further than the outer court of all, out of which our Saviour whipped the buyers and sellers, and being forbidden by an inscription set up on purpose to enter further.

You are pleased to add that nothing in the sanctum was a secret. If you mean the people were admitted there, what I have said before is a sufficient answer. If you mean they knew what was there by common fame and the report of the priests, your argument will turn upon you; for, at that rate, nothing in the sanctum sanctorum itself was a secret, and consequently Florus could not have styled it the Grande Arcanum; for it is certain that all the Jews knew, as well as the High Priest, what was contained there; the Scripture and other writers having informed them.

Your next objection is, that there was no vine in the second temple. I foresaw that objection, and tried to obviate it in my former letter, and will now answer your arguments to the contrary. Your first is drawn from the silence of the Jewish writers con

cerning the vine of the second temple, though they have at large described that of the third, which indeed is the true reason why they make no mention of the vine of the second temple; because, in describing the ornaments of the third, they actually described those of the second likewise; for Herod's temple was, as all the Jewish writers allow, a perfect imitation of Zorobabel's, which must be understood of the model, the fashion, and the ornaments, for it exceeded it in dimensions, insomuch as it seemed rather the old temple repaired than a new one erected. This the Christian writers must also allow; otherwise, what becomes of Haggai's prophecy, that the Messiah should appear under the second temple? From whence it may naturally be inferred, that the vine of the third temple was either the same with that which I suppose to have been in the second, or at least an imitation of it; either of which will suit my purpose.

For the authority of Tacitus, you answer that he is to be understood of Titus, not Pompey; and to the argument I urged to the contrary from the silence of Josephus, who makes no

mention of it among the other ornaments of the temple borne in triumph by Vespasian, you say that the vine was too large to be carried in triumph. But, with submission, I think, the larger the vine, the fitter for such a solemnity. They wanted neither hands nor instruments to have conveyed it. Aristobulus's vine was every whit as large; for it weighed 500 talents, or 30,000lb. weight English. Yet Pompey made a shift to carry it in triumph, as Pliny assures us (Lib. 37. c. 2).

I shall only add one testimony more, that there was a vine in the second temple; and that is the nameless author of the Fasti Siculi, collected (as Scaliger supposes) from the writings of Eusebius and Africanus. This author expressly affirms it.

[N. B. There are several things hinted at as contained in the letter here answered, not to be found in the foregoing, which is, perhaps, but the original draft, or a very imperfect copy; unless this is rather an answer to a second letter not preserved.]

Note. The reading "uti" is retained

by Duker in his edition of Florus, with a note in justification of its retention. (See Florus Dukeri, Lib. 3. c. 5. s. 30.) The entire passage is, "Hierosolymam defendere tentaverunt Judæi. Verum hanc quoque intravit, et vidit illud grande impiæ gentis arcanum patens, sub aureo uti cœlo."

THE extensive labour in the formation of the London and Southampton Railway being now so nearly completed here as to preclude the hope of further Roman discoveries, I am induced to communicate to you some particulars of those which have come within my observation. I cannot, however, avoid expressing my regret, that no person of ability and experience in antiquarian pursuits had given his attention from the commencement; for, although the hurry and confusion attending a work of this magnitude, render accurate examination scarcely possible, yet, I think, his zeal might have been much gratified, and some valuable information obtained, contributing essentially to a correct knowledge of the ancient topography of this interesting portion of our suburbs.

The present Romsey turnpike is described by Milner, in his History of Winchester, as the Roman road to Old Sarum, through the intermediate station at Broughton,- one of those firm, straight roads, still remaining to attest, the genius and magnificence of that powerful nation; in forming which, their soldiery were employed to enure them to toil and hardship.

Distinguished as there is every reason to believe this city was, it can scarcely be matter of surprise, that in the vicinity of this road, many remains of the Roman era should be discovered.

Along the whole distance in front of the King's house (now the barracks), little was seen requiring par ticular notice, with the exception of the pits, described by your able correspondent Mr. C. R. SMITH, in the October Magazine, p. 372, and these, from their number and contents, would ead to the supposition, that at some distant period the spot had been

fully inhabited. The labour in sinking them through the solid masses of chalk must have been very great.

Proceeding northwards, abundant evidence was obtained, by the discovery of extensive flint foundations, scattered tessellæ, and various other remains, to prove it a site of considerable importance. Besides the antiquities given in your plate, were several fibulæ, vase handles beautifully modelled, spear and arrow heads, and a variety of minor objects in bronze; pottery of all kinds, some urns, two in my possession, perfect, which from the close resemblance to those found here a few years ago, in ranges of sepulchres,* may be presumed to be of a funereal character; and vases of various shapes and fineness of workmanship and material, now in the hands of gentlemen in the neighbourhood. The fragment of a vessel represented in the annexed engraving, is not the least extraordinary of the number.

I am not aware of the finding of a single gold coin, or many in silver; but in brass they were very numerous, generally in fair preservation-those of the Lower Empire much predominating.

When I was observing the remains discovered in London, in the neigh. bourhood of the Roman way in Great East Cheap, a vast number of pits were laid open, which I thought at the time to be domestic cesspools of the Roman houses erected near the highway. In them were found sundry vessels of domestic pottery, horns of goats, sheep, &c.; which last circumstance seemed to indicate that the Roman butchers might have established themselves at East Cheap, as 1 believed some writers on Londinian topography assert.

With regard to your correspondent who wonders at the number of Roman coins which are constantly turned up from our soil, I see no reason to share in his surprise. If we look at the practice of depositing a coin with the ashes of the dead (together with sundry household utensils, articles of clothing, ornament or food), the preservation of numerous specimens will be readily accounted for; if the Romano-British population throughout the kingdom could be taken at a million souls, and the annual mortality at ten per cent. one hundred thousand coins would yearly be buried in this way; to which, if we add the accumulation by the well-known practice which the ancients had of laying up hoards of money concealed in urns in the earth (many such hoards being never reclaimed by the circumstances of war or other accidents of life), there is, I think, no cause whatever to consider the quantity of Roman coins which our soil produces from time to time for numismatists as remarkable.

All the Roman villas and stations in Britain shew marks of having been abandoned in great haste, and of having been devastated by fire, &c. Almost all of them abound in coins; every summer's ploughing at Richborough (Rhutupia), at Silchester (Cal

IN answer to the question of Mr. MANGIN, in p. 458, as to the probable cause why so large a quantity of Roman coins are almost daily unearthed in various parts of Britain, allow me, in a few words, to offer what appears to me a satisfactory solution of his difficulty.

The principal quantity, indeed almost the whole, of Roman coins are found at or near the military stations of that people; and as the Imperial forces, as we well know, usually received their wages in heavy copper money (æs militare), much too ponderous a metal to allow the legionary to carry any amount of it about his person, he was necessitated to find some place where it might be secure from the depredations of his comrades; or, in other words, out of sight. That the earth (or, as Tom Hood would say, the bank), was the customary banker of those times, we may gather from the 18th verse of the 25th chap. of St. Matthew, and from several expressions in the Classics. But the hoard thus deposited upon the decease of its owner, (which in the unsettled state of the country, "conquered but not subdued," might happen suddenly,) from the very means he had taken for its safeguard, be lost to his heirs; and thus would remain until time and accident should gradually lay bare to us in this remote age heaps, which in numerical quantity, if not in value, far exceeds all the remaining "Fiorins," "Bezants," or "Angels," of comparative modern times.

Yours, &c. W. DENTON.