^{page 324 note 1} Perhaps this statement is too sweeping. The calendar may have been merely supplementary to an older inscribed calendar which it did not wholly supersede. It is just possible that we may recognise a relic of that old calendar in the fragment No. 471 of Röhl's Inscriptiones Antiq. (see Addenda, and Roberts, ' Introduction, No. 5, p. 29)Google Scholar. If so, this later calendar would only name such festivals as were now ordained for the first time, or were reorganised by this new ritual enactment. I imagine that in all the cities of the Graeco-Roman world there existed authoritative calendars of the public sacrifices, such as Livy describes (i. 20) when he says of Numa Pompilius: ‘Pontificem deinde Numam Marcium, Marci filium, ex patribus legit, eique sacra omnia exscripta exsignataque attribuit; quibus hostiis, quibus diebus, ad quae templa sacra fierent, atque unde in eos sumptus pecunia erogaretur.’ We must wait for fresh inscriptions to come to light before our materials will enable us to deal with this class of documents as a whole. The ritual calendar from Myconos (Dittenberger, Sylloge, No. 373) is at present the most complete and instructive example of the kind.

^{page 331 note 1} Here I would read ἔνδ[ο]ρα τὰ ἐνδερόμενα κ.τ.λ. The τὰ seems to have been doubled by error, and the ο in consequence omitted.