^{page 93 note 1} Previous interim reports have appeared in Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 150–94Google Scholar; Antiq. Journ. xliv (1964), 188–219Google Scholar; xlv (1965), 230–64; xlvi (1966), 308–22; xlvii (1967), 251–79; xlviii (1968), 250–84; xlix (1969), 295–329; and 1 (1970), 277–326.

^{page 93 note 2} After these words were in page-proof, the news of Professor Holmes's sudden death reached us from America, and we deeply regret that he did not see this final tribute to his part in the Winchester project.

^{page 94 note 1} Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 278–92, fig. 2, pls. XLI, XLII.Google Scholar

^{page 94 note 2} The excavation is sponsored jointly by Winchester College and Hampshire County Council, who have also, as owners of Lankhills School, given permission for the excavation to take place. Additional financial aid has been provided by an anonymous donor. Very warm thanks are due to the managers and staff of Lankhills School, in particular to the headmaster, Mr. D. V. Teale, for tolerating, and indeed encouraging, so much disruption of the school's recreational space. Most of the equipment for the excavation has been loaned by Winchester City, and by the Winchester Excavations Commitee, and extensive technical help and advice has been given by the staff of the Winchester Research Unit, who have undertaken the conservation and drawing of all the objects found. The volunteers were recruited from the secondary schools of Winchester as part of a joint project organized by the Lankhills Excavation Committee and Mr. J. L. Macdonald. Many of the results achieved in 1970 are due to Messrs. John Butterworth, Simon Cleary, and J. L. Macdonald who were in charge on site for much of the time.

^{page 95 note 1} For previous interim reports see ibid, xlviii (1968), 257–8; xlix (1969), 302–3; and 1 (1970), 292–8, the last of which contains a description of the phases.

^{page 95 note 2} Among Class A graves this type of grave-pit is associated with burials containing the more elaborate grave-goods.

^{page 95 note 3} Ibid, xlix (1969), 302–3.

^{page 97 note 1} Parallels to Features 2 and 6 have been found in the late Roman cemetery at Poundbury Camp, Dorchester, Dorset, Proc. D.N.H. and A.S. xci (1969), 183–6.Google Scholar

^{page 97 note 2} Med. Arch, v (1961), 56–7, fig. 19.Google Scholar

^{page 97 note 3} Mr. Richard Reece has kindly spent much time in discussion of the dating of the Lankhills coins. He finds it difficult to give a date later than 360 to Grave LXXXI (Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 295–6, fig. 5).Google Scholar

^{page 98 note 1} For plans of Graves LXXXI and CVI, see Ibid., fig. 3.

^{page 98 note 2} R. Pirling, Das römisch-fränkische Gräberfeld von Krefeld-Gelhp (1966).

^{page 98 note 3} Med. Arch, v (1961), 1–5, fig. 1.Google Scholar

^{page 98 note 4} For reports on 1965–9 see Antiq. Journ. xlvi (1966), 313–19; xlvii (1967), 259–66; xlviii (1968), 259–68; xlix (1969), 303–12; and 1 (1970), 298–310.Google Scholar

^{page 101 note 1} Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 157–8.Google Scholar

^{page 101 note 2} Myres, J. N. L, Anglo-Saxon Pottery and the Settlement of England (1969), pp. 87–8Google Scholar, map 5b fig. 37. I am very grateful to Dr. Myres for his comments on this pottery.

^{page 101 note 3} Peter Schmid, ‘Bemerkungen zur Datierung der jüngsten Siedlungsphase auf der Dorfwurt Feddersen Wierde, Kreis Wesermunde’, Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Niedersachsen, iv (1969), 158–69. I am very grateful to Dr. Schmid for showing me the pottery from the Feddersen Wierde and for underlining the striking similarities between it and the Winchester material. See now P. Schmid and M. Biddle in Probleme der Küstenforschung (forthcoming).Google Scholar

^{page 102 note 1} Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 298–302.Google Scholar

^{page 102 note 2} Ibid, xlviii (1968), 263, 266–7.

^{page 102 note 3} Ibid. 1 (1970), 301–2.

^{page 103 note 1} Ibid. 302 suggests that there were separate timber water-channels before the reconstruction in stone. It is now clear that the timber channel was a single continuous structure and that two separate channels (Features 86 and 197) were first introduced at the time of rebuilding in stone.

^{page 104 note 1} For an explanation of the phase lettering see Antiq. Journ. xlix (1969), 305–6Google Scholar. The reinterpretation of Phase K means that the church as shown Ibid. 1 (1970), 300, fig. 8, approximates to Phase M, rather than K as labelled. For Phases K, L, and M see now this interim, figs. 2 and 4.

^{page 106 note 1} See also the diagram of Phases O-Z, Antiq. fourn. xlix (1969), 307, fig. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 106 note 2} Ibid. 1(1970), 303.

^{page 107 note 1} An alternative interpretation with the altar against the east wall is probably impossible due to the very limited space between the eastern depression and the wall. It would also have to explain the survival of the central hump, with its defining slots.

^{page 107 note 2} Ibid. 303–4.

^{page 107 note 3} Ibid. 305–6.

^{page 108 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xlviii (1968), 261, fig. 3: Bay XI. IGoogle Scholar.

^{page 108 note 2} Ibid. 1 (1970), 306, fig. 8.

^{page 109 note 1} Ibid. 307.

^{page 110 note 1} Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 307–9Google Scholar.

^{page 111 note 1} It should be emphasized that the structural history of House XII is very complex and that there is considerable evidence for many alterations and piece-meal repairs that cannot be considered in an interim report. The sequence described here is a simplification based on the major floors and structural changes.

^{page 111 note 2} Ibid. xlix (1969), 312.

^{page 113 note 1} Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 309–10, fig. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 113 note 2} Ibid. 290.

^{page 114 note 1} From this point on the features described were fully excavated in 1970.

^{page 115 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xliv (1964), 202–11.Google Scholar

^{page 116 note 1} Summarized Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 317–21Google Scholar; for references to previous interim reports see Ibid. 311 n. 1 and add for 1969, Ibid. 311–21.

^{page 116 note 2} Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 165–72.Google Scholar

^{page 117 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xliv (1964), 206–7.Google Scholar

^{page 117 note 2} See Quirk's, R. N.original discussion of the site of New Minster in J.B.A.A., 3rd ser., xxiv (1961), 49–54Google Scholar, fig. 6, as modified by the trial excavations of 1962–3 and republished in Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 175–82Google Scholar, fig. 6.

^{page 117 note 3} See, for example, the outline plan published inthe last interim, Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 311, fig. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 117 note 4} This conclusion, and the evidence for it given below, must finally disprove E. C. Gilbert's wayward attempt to interpret Building E as a Romano-British church: T.B.G.A.S. lxxxvii (1968), 71–95Google Scholar, with my reply and his rejoinder, Ibid. lxxxix (1970), 179–81.

^{page 117 note 5} Antiq. Journ. xliv (1964), 203–4.Google Scholar

^{page 117 note 6} Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 155–6, fig. 2, Building 1 (S.E.).Google Scholar

^{page 117 note 7} Ibid. 155, 157, fig. 5.

^{page 119 note 1} It was the south wall of Phase E, with its northward returns to east and west, which Dean Kitchin found in 1885–6 and which has given rise to the term ‘Building E’, now extended to the whole south range and to its return wings to east and west.

^{page 122 note 1} Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 165–72.Google Scholar

^{page 123 note 1} New Minster possessed an infirmary (domus infirmorum) as early as 966, perhaps as a result of rebuilding following the reform of the house in 964; Cartularium Saxonicum, 1190, cap. xii.

^{page 123 note 2} Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 180.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xliv (1964), 210; xlvii (1967), 267–8; xlviii (1968), 280, pls. LXVIII, LXIX.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note 2} William Godson, Map of Winchester (1750), reproduced in Atkinson, T. D., ‘Winchester Cathedral Close’, Proc. H.F.C. xv, i (1941), 9–26, pl. 111.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note 3} Rudborne, c. 1400: Arch. Journ. cxix (1962), 181. A two-flue kiln of updraught type found in 1970 between Building E and the north transept and dating from the fifteenth century might be interpreted as a malting kiln.Google Scholar

^{page 124 note 4} In 1532–3 stone was carried a Paradiso for use on the Hordarian's porch, suggesting that Paradise Garden was still a mason's yard on the eve of the Reformation: Kitchin, G. W. (ed.), Compotus Rolls of the Obedientiaries of St. Swithun's Priory (Winchester, 1892), p. 220.Google Scholar

^{page 125 note 1} For previous interim reports see Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 322 n. 1, and the references there cited.Google Scholar

^{page 126 note 1} Antiq. Journ. 1 (1970), 323–4.Google Scholar

^{page 126 note 2} The northern opening was eventually incorporated into an added external garderobe.

^{page 127 note 1} Ibid. 324–5.

^{page 127 note 2} Ibid., xlvi (1966), 326–8; xlvii (1967), 272–6; xlviii (1968), 280–4.

^{page 127 note 3} Ibid., xlvii (1967), 273–5; Biddle, Martin, ‘Wolvesey: the domus quasi palatium of Henry de Blois in Winchester’, Château Gaillard, iii (ed. A. J. Taylor, 1969), 28–36.Google Scholar

^{page 128 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xlix (1969), pl. LXVIII shows part of this facade.Google Scholar

^{page 129 note 1} Ibid, xlv (1965), 260.

^{page 129 note 2} Bishop of Winchester's Pipe Roll, 1441: Hants Record Office 159437, m. 16d.

^{page 130 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xlvii (1967), 276.Google Scholar The thirteenth-century date given there to this pipe-line was based on sherds of what is now called ‘developed Winchester Ware’ of early twelfth-century date which was then regarded as a typically thirteenth-century fabric (above, p. 122).

^{page 130 note 2} For the attribution of the west hall to Giffard see Ibid. 1 (1970), 323.