are 'good' and one which is ' very good.' The last one, at least, must have been dropped before the Antonine period. This particular piece (No. 78) was minted in Trajan's fifth consulship—that is, between 104 and 111 A. D.—and was therefore probably lost towards the end of his reign or about the beginning of the reign of his successor. It looks as if the abandonment of Newstead might have Coincided with the building of Hadrian's Wall. The thread of argument is, of course, a slender one. But it is certainly not weakened by the circumstance that of the 15 denarii of Hadrian which it was possible to examine personally, there were only two which called for remark as having been obviously in 'good' condition when lost.[1] This rather suggests that the Hadrian coins were dropped during the reign of Pius, and that during Hadrian's own reign the fort had been deserted.

Such are the conclusions to which a scrutiny of the denarii seems to point. It remains to see how far they are confirmed or contradicted by the testimony of the brass or copper. The condition of the latter is often so poor that it is not possible either to date them or to express any opinion as to the amount of usage to which they had been subjected before they were dropped. It is therefore hardly worth while attempting a detailed chronological arrangement; it will be sufficient to note such dates as are definitely ascertainable. As far as may be, the following list reproduces Cohen's order


119* Undescribed.Undescribed.'Second brass.' Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot. i. p. 34. This is perhaps a doubtful entry.[2]
120Bust l. laureate.SC
Victory flying 1., holding shield inscribed S P Q R. Cf. Cohen2 i. p. 298 f., 288ff
'Second brass.' Find-spot doubtful.
121 Similar. SC
Triumphal arch. Cohen2 i. p. 299, 306.
'First brass.' Found in the Baths.

1 Others, of course, may have been so, although the evidence of it was not apparent.

2 No detailed description is given. It may have been a coin of Hadrian, on which only AVGVSTVS was legible.