Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 9.djvu/162

 112 PROCEEDINGS AT MEETINGS OF A communication was read, addressed to the Society by the Rev. J. L. Petit, now in the south of France, describing a specimen of decora- tive coloured brick-work, near Rouen, and illustrated by his drawings. It is given in this volume. (See p. 15, ante.) Mr. Fueeman read a memoir on some architectural peculiarities in the church of Whitchurch, near Bristol, and exhibited a plan afid sketches, showing its interest as an example of transitional work between Norman and early English. It contains also some Decorated windows well worthy of attention. Mr. Freeman then read a short paper on the Nomenclature of the Styles of Gothic Architecture. In a review of Mr. Sharpe's " Seven Periods" in the last number of the Archaeological Journal, that gentleman was stated to have proposed a new classification. Mr. Freeman, on the other hand, contended that Mr. Sharpe's division into " lancet, geometrical, curvilinear, and rectilinear, — the four out of his seven periods which relate to Gothic architecture, — was not new as a classification : being identical, except in the designations of the two latter styles, with the classification which had been developed by himself and other members of the Oxford Architectural Society from hints of Mr. Petit's, between 1843 and 1846. Mr. Freeman referred to various papers by Mr. Poole, Mr. Basil Jones, Mr. G. W. Cox, and himself, showing that the matter had been fully worked out before Mr. Sharpe had publicly propounded any view on the subject. Mr. Freeman had formally proposed the identical classification now adopted by Mr. Sharpe in a letter printed in the Ecclesiologist for April 1846, and again more afc large in his History of Architecture published in 1849, — the proposed nomenclature being "lancet, geometrical, flowing, and perpendicular." Mr. Sharpe's proposal to substitute the names " curvilinear " and "recti- linear," for the two latter, was first made in a paper read at the Lincoln Meeting of the Institute in 1848, consequently later than Mr. Freeman's letter in the Ecclesiologist, and repeated in his Seven Periods, in 1851, since the publication of the History of Architecture. Mr. Freeman said that he had no wish to accuse Mr. Sharpe of plagiarism : he was willing to believe that Mr. Sharpe on the one hand, and himself and his friends on the other, had worked out the same conclusions quite independently ; but certainly the latter had been the first to make their views known. Mr. Greyille Chester gave a notice of the discovery of ancient warlike relics on the New Farm, Blenheim Park, in 1850 ; he sent a drawing repre- senting nine iron arrow or javelin heads, and pheons of unusually large dimensions.- A considerable number had been found deposited together very near the surface. There was no appearance of any interment at the spot, and they had speedily been dispersed ; so that Mr. Chester had been miable to trace into whose possession they had fallen. Amongst the relics found at Woodperry, communicated to the Journal by the President of Trinity (vol. iii., p. 120), there occurred various arrow-heads, and a pheon very similar to one of those found at Blenheim. One of the barbed heads drawn by Mr. Chester measured 4^ in. from the point to the extremities of the barbs, which expanded to the width of 2| in. He remarked that one of the javelin-heads (not barbed) exactly resembles a specimen in his - A singular specimen of the pheon, of Vulliamy, and may be seen in their col- exaggerated size, found in the Thames, lection. y-as presented to the Institute by Mr.