The ensuing catalogue contains descriptions of seals, for which evidence is available, used by or in the religious houses of Yorkshire, excluding those of the city of York, and omitting the hospitals and collegiate churches. It is to be hoped that the list can be materially increased, as further collections of documents, especially those in private hands, are examined.

The adjective ‘Doric’, as applied to a certain well-defined style of art, has become a convention of such long standing, and so widely spread, that to question its appropriateness would be both meticulous and embarrassing. At the same time its origin affords considerable ground for speculation. It may, as Mitford suggested in the eighteenth century, have expressed to the ancients the idea of an out-of-date, old-fashioned style, at a time when the Athenians were introducing the Ionic or Asia Minor fashions on the Acropolis. At the same time it is difficult to imagine or explain why the Dorians, always regarded as a rude or rustic element in the formation of the conglomerate Greek world of the first millennium b.c., should be credited with the invention of the most refined form of architecture ever known, or how Phidias came to select it for enshrining his sculpture at the Parthenon. We must, perhaps, presume that the unintentional honour conferred upon the Dorians may have been due to some phase of that inter-racial and political antagonism between different factions which constitutes so much of the history of ancient Greece. The term ‘Doric Art’ must have originated long after the erection of the Parthenon, if it was used in any sense as an expression of reproach or contempt, and its connexion with the people from the north who invaded the Peloponnesus c. 1100 B.C. can only be of the very vaguest.

In the year 1814, when the Allied Sovereigns visited London, a tent-like building was erected in Carlton House Gardens on the north side of St. James's Park, wherein the Prince Regent entertained his royal guests. The structure of this building is, I believe, of interest to architects, as it embodies structural details which, although common to-day in factories and exhibition buildings, were considered to be somewhat of a tour de force in the early nineteenth century. The building is circular, 116 ft. in diameter, enclosing about 10,600 sq. ft, the roof being composed of girder ribs meeting in the centre and resting on brick walls. It was originally covered with thin boarding and painted canvas, but in recent years the roof has been covered with lead and a central supporting pillar has been added. In 1819 the Rotunda was removed, by the order of the Prince Regent, to Woolwich Common, near the Royal Artillery barracks, to serve as a model room, or store, for examples of artillery. A small contemporary model of this building is exhibited in the London Museum.

In the absence of historical and epigraphic references to the earliest origin of the Roman occupation of London there is perhaps no material that can be of greater assistance in furnishing evidence on this subject than the red-glazed ware of the Roman Imperial period—the Terra Sigillata—comprising both the Italian Arretine ware and the Gaulish so-called ‘Samian’ ware, and this paper is devoted to a critical study of the earliest types of this class of pottery that have been found in London, to a consideration of their distribution, and finally to a statement of the conclusions which may be drawn from this evidence.

The small town of Caerleon lies upon the banks of ‘full-tided Usk’, on the north-eastern outskirts of Newport in Monmouthshire. In a superficial sense it may, indeed, be regarded as the forebear of the medieval and modern borough which, two miles nearer the Severn estuary, has first replaced and now, spreading inland, threatens to absorb it. At the end of 1925 events moved with unexpected rapidity in this direction. Land in the centre of Caerleon—and therefore in the centre of the site of the Roman legionary fortress—changed hands for immediate ‘development’, and urgent action was necessary. On the initiative of the National Museum of Wales, a representative ‘Caerleon Excavation Committee’, under the presidency of Lord Treowen and the chairmanship of Dr. C. A. H. Green, then bishop of Monmouth, was called into being; whilst the Presidents of the Society of Antiquaries, the British Academy, the Classical Association, the Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, and other bodies, realizing that Caerleon provided the only example in Britain of a legionary fortress which was not almost completely covered by medieval or modern buildings, issued a joint appeal to the press.

The Anglo-Saxon kalendars which survive are so few in number, and are contained in manuscripts which, whether considered from the liturgical or the historical point of view, are of such first-rate importance, that any attempt to elucidate some of the many problems which they present, as for example those of chronology and provenance, must, surely, be well worth while. The present dean of Wells, Dr. J. Armitage Robinson, who has himself thrown so much light upon the early kalendars of Wells and of Somerset, draws attention to the human interest attaching to such documents, to the fragments of history hidden away in them waiting to be pieced together and set in their places; and points out that they are capable of throwing a sidelight now and then on periods as distant and as dark as the tenth century. The dean tells us that he found his task intriguing, and indeed the attempt to unravel the secrets of these ancient kalendars is attended with more than ordinary difficulties, so many are the will-o'-the-wisps besetting the path. The occasional rewards are, however, so great, and bring such satisfaction, that the many disappointments inevitable at some stages of the task are quickly forgotten, and it is likely that these documents will continue to fascinate scholars as much in the future as they have in the past.

In the course of the paper on ‘Elizabethan Sheldon Tapestries’ (Archaeologia, vol. lxxiv), which Mr. John Humphreys read before the Society on 3 April 1924, he dealt principally with the historical and topographical interests of many of the then known examples of Sheldon tapestry-work. In the persons of Mr. Humphreys, Colonel Howard, and Mr. A. F. Kendrick we indeed salute pioneers in research concerning this subject. The object of this present paper is to deal as far as possible with the results of my recent documentary researches concerning William Sheldon's scheme and those who were associated with it. I should at once add that these researches have only been made possible by the financial support of our Fellow, Mr. Rees Price, of Broadway, Worcestershire, who himself has done so much similar work concerning the history of the Sheldon family.