The size of this huge window is 1,680 square feet. It measures 72 ft. high by 31 ft. wide. The tracery compartments number 144; the main panels, each 1 yard square, 117. In addition there are 27 canopy head-pieces. Thus in all there are no fewer than 288 openings, all filled with ancient glass.

Of the 117 panels, 27 compose an Old Testament series from the Creation to the Death of Absalom. Below these, 81 (9 rows of 9 panels) make up the Apocalypse series. Below these again are 9 panels of Saints, Kings, and Ecclesiastics.

In the spring of 1857 a ploughman on The Law Farm, in the parish of Urquhart, Morayshire, Scotland, turned up a group of gold ornaments. The exact number of objects is uncertain, and the relics were widely dispersed. This paper records the results of an attempt to discover the whereabouts of the surviving pieces, and makes some suggestions about the significance of the find. Although a considerable number of the torcs have been located, several still remain hidden to view, and it is one of the purposes of this paper to publicize the find in the hope that the missing objects will be identified and made known. I would be grateful for any information which could be sent to me at the Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge.

The discovery of the kiln described in the first part of this report is a pleasing instance of the value of publicity in the field of archaeology. One feature of the post-war campaign waged by the Council for British Archaeology in order to induce the general public to report archaeological discoveries was the issue to sand and gravel companies throughout the country of the illustrated pamphlet entitled Sand and Gravel in History. In due course a copy reached the Apex Sand and Gravel Limited, which has its pits by the Foss Way at North Hykeham, southwest of Lincoln. In October 1951 an employee, Mr. E. Clifton, noticed in the bank of one of the water-filled workings a pit-like structure with a scatter of pot-sherds and fragments of clay bars, some of which he collected and handed to the Manager, Mr. W. C. Acott. The latter compared the sherds with the illustrations in his copy of the pamphlet, deduced that they were Romano-British, and reported the discovery to Mr. F. T. Baker, F.S.A., at the City and County Museum, Lincoln, who, from the description given and an examination of a sample of the pottery, was quick to realize the possibility of yet another kiln in the Lincoln area.

Before proceeding to a description of the Deeds and Seals, it will be convenient to give a short account of the early history of the Sydney family and of the means by which the lands to which these deeds relate came into their possession. The original home of the Sydneys was a farm, which still bears their name, in the parish of Alfold, on the borders of Surrey and Sussex, about ten miles south of Guildford. The first member of the family of whom we have any knowledge is a John de Sydenie, who occurs as acquiring land on the south of Chiddingfold wood (a few miles west of Alfold) sometime in the reign of Edward I. He may be the John atte Sydney who occurs as witness to a deed in 1313. This John was probably the father or grandfather of a John atte Sydenye, son of John and Isabella, who with Gunnilda his wife held lands in Surrey and Sussex, part of which had come to him through his mother. His home is described as La Sydenye, and one of the deeds in which he is mentioned was executed there: these deeds are dated between 1331 and 1345. Nearly eighty years later, in 1420, a Nicholas Sedenye of Alfold gave to his daughter Alice lands in Cranlegh called ‘le Thondurslaghus’, which came to him at the death of Gunnilda, his mother. Though the interval is a little long, one may conjecture that he was a son of the John atte Sydenye of 1331 to 1345, and younger brother of the first William Sedenye, who in 1393 acquired a tenement called ‘le Rotlond’ in Shalford, near Guildford, and ten years later a share in the manor of Loseley. In 1408 there is mention of William, and his son William, in connexion with Rudgwick, just over the Sussex border. This second William is probably the father of William Sydenye, the younger, who appears in 1427, for in the next year Alice, daughter of William Sydeneye, the elder, married Arnold, son of Thomas Brocas. In 1435 we meet with William Sydeney, the elder, of Cranlegh, and William Sydeney, his son, of Sussex, who in 1445 is styled William Sydeney of Kingsham, a house on the south side of Chichester. William Sydeney of Cranlegh died on October 8, 1449. On August 15, 1451, William Sydeney of Kingsham executed at Baynards a deed providing for the descent of certain of his lands. He died about a year later, but certainly before October 1452. This William Sydney of Kingsham is the first person of any importance in the genealogy. Though the family had gradually acquired considerable estates in Surrey and Sussex, they were till about this time at the best but small country gentlemen. William Sydney of Cranlegh used a seal with a simple capital W.; his son was the first to use an armorial seal, showing the Sydney pheon, on the deed of August 15, 1451. As the heads of the Kingsham and Cranlegh family of Sydneys had been for fifty years named William, it is possible that the long-continued use of a seal with a capital W may have been the origin of the pheon.

This curious horn, or rather elephant's tush converted to the use of a horn, is the property of the Right Honourable Thomas Lord Bruce, who, with equal politeness and generosity, has favoured the Society with a sight of the original, and the public with a representation of it in the annexed copper plate.

By kind permission of the owner, my friend Mr. Edward F. Elton of Burleigh Court near Stroud, I am able to call attention to an unpublished antique bronze head in his collection (pi. ix).

Nothing is known of its history before it came into his hands, but it has obviously been at one time buried in the ground, and particles of earth are ingrained in the patina over a portion of the surface. It has evidently been roughly broken off from the body, the edge in front being jagged, while behind it is flush with the bottom of the helmet. The scale is two-thirds of life size. The head is hollow-cast and shows considerable variations of thickness, some parts being so thin that they have worn through; in particular about half the surface at the top of the crest has perished. The head should probably be pitched more forward than the position in which it is now mounted.

This article is in four sections. The first, by the Bishop of Gibraltar, describes his original visit to the church and the impression made upon him by its interior. The second, by Major Vivian Seymer, gives an account of the fabric and the main features of its probable history. In the third section Mr. William Buckler catalogues the frescoes, with brief notice of each, and transcribes the inscriptions on them in cases where these seem to be of special interest. Lastly, Mrs. William Buckler states reasons, based on the evidence of the three historical inscriptions, for believing that the church was probably erected in 1106 by Nicephorus, son-in-law of the emperor Alexius Comnenus and brother-in-law of Anna Comnena the historian. The plan and sections are by Major Seymer.

A Roman kiln was discovered in 1906 by Mr. Harold Falkner, a member of the Surrey Archaeological Society, and described by him in the county Archaeological Collections, vol. xx, pp. 228–32, with diagrams of the kiln and representative pottery ; but Mr. Falkner states that this kiln was empty when he discovered it, and that he never properly understood this site.

A few months ago I ventured to communicate to the Society, through your hands, some observations on the structure of ancient castles, and the mode of fortifying them; apprehending an enquiry of that nature might possibly have a tendency to illustrate the more early periods of our history, and to fling light upon the relations of many particular events, which are interesting in themselves, but not capable of being fully understood, without some acquaintance with the ancient manners, customs, and arts, that prevailed in those times. The very favourable reception which that attempt met with, induces me now to trouble you still further, with a short account of a single fragment of antiquity, a very extraordinary piece of old Ordnance; which, although it may, at first sight, be deemed an object unworthy the attention of the Society, may perhaps contribute to illustrate some few historical facts, equally with more magnificent and important remains. And I connot help adding, that perhaps the collecting a number of such ancient fragments, of various ages, and preserving faithful accounts of them, may even be a means of furnishing a very useful comment on history.