British Archaeological Association. Central Commit.

The Archaeological journal (Volume v. 34) online

. (page 14 of 54)
Online LibraryBritish Archaeological Association. Central CommitThe Archaeological journal (Volume v. 34) → online text (page 14 of 54)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

of a temple to her, and he may have been Mercuricsmm
et [A)pollines{ium servus) but all this is, of course, very

At Silchester Mr. J. Wordsworth tells us in the



Academy, April 18, 1874, there was found a tile bearing
the inscription scratched on it. —

B I R G A *

Is this name Binjaius ?

In the first volume of the Transactions of the London
and Middlesex Archseological Society (Evening meetings),
p. 121, my friend Mr. H. C. Coote described another of the
leaden seals found at Brough-imder-Stainmoor. On the
one side it was inscribed —

On the other-



V A T.

The two t's in the first inscription, not being perpen-
dicular, but leaning inwards towards each other, may
stand for the letter a, but as two I's frequently occur, as
the representative of the letter e, it Ibllows that the
inscription may read either ala sab(iniana) or ala
,seb(oslana). The second portion is evidently VaJfcrius)
Dec(urw). Another seal which may also hav^e belonged
(from its inscription) to a soldier of the Ala Sahiniana
has been found since the commencement of the jjresent
year at South Shields. It must, however, be reserved for
my account of this year's discoveries.

At South Shields also were fnmd in 1873 these grajfiti
inscriptions on fragments of an amphora ; —
(1) (-2)

B E B • S I ]\I JI • V L E S

From these fraOTnents nothino- can be slathered.

To the list of " Anuli" must be added a ring of bronze,
hoop shaped, dug up at Kugby, inscribed within in Greek,
" Esunera Euneiske." As Mr. Bloxam, who gives the
account of the discovery in vol. i of the Journal of the
Associated Architectural Societies, p. 227, does not give
the text of the inscription, and as I am unable to obtain
it from him, I have not given any supposed version of it.
Dr. Hilbner omits it. At the meeting of the Institute on
May G, 1864, Mr. G. Fortescue Williams exhibited,
through Mr. Bernhard Smith, a bronze ring of the lower
Roman empire, inscribed —

FTDES (U) X r' (» RIM a


A\itli the device of a fide or hands conjoined within a
garland ; on the shoulders are the names rvfys and
VIATOR. Mr. Williams informs me that he is ignorant
where the ring was found, but it was probably discovered
in Britain. Dr. Hilbner omits it from his list.

In the inscriptions given by Dr. Hilbner in his large
Avork there are a few errors wliich need correcting, and a
few inscriptions need some su]3plementary remarks and
emendations, which I think could be introduced in the
most fitting manner in the present paper.

There are three inscriptions amongst the list at page 2
of Dr. Hiibner's work of those which he considers doubt-
ful, which are certamly genuine. They are numbered 17,
18, and 19, and are as follows : —





The first was disco\'ered in the Castle Field, Manchester,
in 1796, and was on a stone fifteen inches long by eleven
inches broad, surroujided with a border. It Avas described
by Mr. Thomas Barritt of Manchester in vol. v of the first
series of the " Transactions " of the Literary and Philo-
sophical Society of Manchester, p. 675, and plate vii,
figure 13. It was found in front of the principal entrance
to the castrum, and was in the possession of Charles
White, Esq. F.R.S., who died in 1813, since which time it
has been lost. At the time Mr. Barritt made the dra\Aang
for the Society's volume he also engraved the inscription
upon the handle of an amj^hora.' At the place of junction
of the handle with the vessel he rudely inscribed a
memorandum of the dimensions of the inscribed stone
and the year when it was found, thus " 15 by 1 1, 1796."
This amphora handle after passhig througli several hands
is now^ in the museum at Peel Park, Salford, where
Dr. Hilbner saw it and pronounced it a forgery ; he,
liowever, appears to have known nothing of the description
or engraving of the original stone. The inscription is a
very peculiar one, but the drawing by Mr. Barritt and
the engraving taken from it seem to differ materially in

1 Chctham Society's rrocccdings, vol. IxTiii, p. -IG.


tlie tliird line. In the former it looks like vovinwv.
Is this the centurial mark, followed by qvintiani in a
ligulate form '? Tlie first and second lines are un-
questionably CoJi{o)r{s) \ Frisiavo{num). In the last line
Piedes) xxiiii is preceded by a figure which seems in
shape like a note of interrogation reversed.

The second of these, which occurs on a tile found at
Leicester, Dr. Hilbner says is, " without doubt," the title
of the sixth legion, instead of the eightli. Having
inspected the tile, and also having a rubbing of it, I can
confirm, "without doubt," the reading lviii. In the case
of the third, which Dr. Hlibner s^iys should probably be
of the second legion, the discovery of tiles at the same
place, Caerhun, inscribed leg. xx v v shews that it
was a portion of one of these latter that had been found.

In his inscription No. 12, found at Chichester, Dr.
Hlibner includes Gough's restorations (erroneously), and
thus makes it appear entire, which an inspection of
Gough's plate will shew was not the fact. Nos. 67 and
69 are now preserved in the Gloucester Museum. Nos.
68, 70 and 71 in the Cirencester Museum ; and No. 74 in
the wall of a summer- house at Watercombe House, Bisley.
Nos. 166 and 169 are now in the Chester Museum. No.
167, which had been reported as lost, I found in 1874 in
the possession of the Rev. Mr. Prescot, Vicar of Stock-
poi't. He died in 1875, and his heirs presented the altar
to the Chester Museum. In the same place also is No.
168rt, Avhich Dr. Hlibner erroneously gives as deae
MATiii. From personal inspection I find it should be —

51 A T R I

* vs

. . V M

i.e. Deab(us) Matrlhus, &c.

No. 211 was last heard of in the Leverian Museum, sold
and dispersed in 1806 (Chetham Soc. Proc, vol. Ixviii, p.
54). No. 284 is in the possession of my friend, T. H.
Dalzell, Esq., of Clitlon Hall, Workington ; whilst No.
285 is built up into the wall of the study at Halton Hall
near Lancaster. The hrst and second lines of No. 415 are
imdoubtedly from a lithograph of the stone taken when it
was fiist discovered —



Lilt tlie upper I'iglit hand corner has, Lord Leconfield
informs nie, since been consideraljly broken. The above
reading of these hnes I first published in the ArcJueohxjical
Journal, Yo\. xxviii., j). 131.

With regard to Dr. Hlibner's No. 484 a peculiar ques-
tion arises. In the year 1838, Avhen cutting through the
Castle Hill at Northallerton, for the formation of tlie
railway, amongst a number of other Tioman remains there
was found a stone bearing the following inscription : —

I N s T A N E


L E G • V I • V .

(See Ingledew's "History of Northallerton," 1858, p. 124,
and the Appendix, in which latter the insciiption is given).
This stone was lost immediately after it was found, but in
1841 attention was drawn to a stone built into the
Chapter House of Hexham Minster, inscribed —

I X s T A N E

F L • H Y G I N

L E G • V I • V .

(Gent. Mag., Sept. 1841, p. 302).

The similarity is so remarkable that the c^uestion arises,
are they one and the same, the inscription having been in
the first instance badly read ? In the first line of each
Instante is the word indicated, the second t being ligulate
with the N. Dr. Hlibner places this stone under the head
of Hexham, but omits any i-eference to Northallerton.

No. 5026, which Dr. Hlibner gives under the head of
Newcastle, being uncertain where it was found, is evi-
dently the same inscription as that found at Carrawburgh
(Procolitia) described in Ahhofs Roman Wall (1849), p.

In No. 513, found at Benwell, Dr. Hlibner adopts
Baxter's reading whilst giving a different expansion, but
both Baxter's and Horsley's readings are erroneous. In
the Ashmolean MSS. (826, fo. 37) in the Bodleian Library
at Oxford tliere is an account of the discovery of this
stone, with two drawings of it, one of them being in a
letter from Dr. Geo. Davenport to Mr. Dugdale, dated
May 30, 1670, a few months after it was found. In both


of these co})ies the second, third, and fourth hnes are thus
given —




The I in the last hue is hgulate, being formed by an
upward prolongation of the last stroke of the N, and is
probably meant for part of the letter e, the rest having
been obliterated. In any case the correct reading of tlie
stone is established, showing that the word Felix, instead
of being a proper name, is used in the same sense as in
tlie inscription lately found in the forinn at CilarmDH
(Lap. Sept, No. 943). Dr. Hilbner's No. SG5 found at
Amhoglanua (Birdoswald), and reported both by him and
Dr. Bruce as lost, I was foitunate in re-discovering at
Caton, near Lancaster, in 1873. (Vide Lajj. Sejjt. Ap-
pendix, p. 474).

No. 948rt, given inider tlie head of Driunburgh, was
certainly not found there, but at Kirkby There in 1859
(Lap. Sept., No. 751). In No, 1021, Dr. Hlibner gives
tlie third line as ''''aiivn, and Dr. Bruce as falivn. I
think there is little doubt that the letters are F al tvn,
and are part of the words Praef (ectus), Al {ae), Titn-
{grorum). We find the abbreviation al tvn applied to
this ala in an inscription found at Burgh upon Sands
(Dr. Hiibner's No. 941). In No. 1047 I take the second
line to be ti trie mil avg, from Hodgson's engraving of
the stone, taken when it was much more perfect. The
first I is formed by the upward prolongation of the upper
stroke of the t, and the abbreviation trie is formed in
identically the same ligulate manner, as in the ninth line
of Dr. Hilbner's No. 1003. In mil, the i and l are both
formed by upward prolongations of the first and List
strokes of the M.

In No. 1055 Dr. Hlibner reads part of the third line as
COH I DA, but he fails to see that the figure which he gives
as I simply is a ligulate Fi {Lap. Sept., No. 5G5), and tliat
it thus forms the word FID A, the prefix to the name of the
cohort which garrisoned the station. No. 1082 Dr. Hlibner
will find from the Archwologia, Scotica, vol. ii. p. 1G3, was
l)uried iiofain amoiio:st the rubbish on the site of its dis-
covery. The stone No. 1085 I agree in callhig with Dr.


McCaiil (Brit. Rom. Inser., p. 283), a milestone, and if
Dr. Hllhner's reading^ of the last line . . monti Mr is
correct, it evidently marked the number of miles from tlie
place where it was set up to Trimontium. It is uncertain
where the stone was found, but it was in the neighbour-
hood of i\\& Scotch Wall. Trimontium was apparently
at Newstead near Eildon, in Koxburghshire. Of No.
11 G8, which is the Tloman milestone, found at Buxton in
18G2, I have already given the corrected reading [ArclKe-
olofjical Journal, vol. xxxiii, p. 51). In the Sydenham
Ta1)ida, No. 1194, I think that in the seventh line the
cohort of Spaniards named is probalily the tenth, as stated
by Mr. Lysons in the Reliquiae Britannico Rornanae (ivAYt
4, pi. i). In Mr. Lysons' plate the x seems plain, but of
late years every trace of a numeral has been obliterated.
Mommsen (/nscr. Neap., No. 5024) gives P. Septimius
Paterculus, who was Pra?fect of the lirst cohort of tlie
Pannonians in Britain, as Praef. Coh. X ITispanorinn, in
Cap]jadocia. In the liiveling Tal)ula, No. 1095, tlie name
of the aid, given l)y Goughin the missing plate (fifth line),
as QV . . . liv, I think is qv(ado)rv(m). The (^>^^rt(7/ were
a people who i-esided on the Danul;)e near the Bohemian
frontier. From a recent inspection of the pig of lead. No.
1212, found at Chester, I hnd that instead of the last
letters being vadon they are probal)ly -snadon, or sandon,
the N in each case beino* reversed. I consider them as
being the abbreviation of the name of the town sandon-
IVM, or SAVDOXIVM, given hy Ravennas as existing between
Conovium (Caerhun) and Dera (Chester), which in a recent
l^aper read before the Historic Society of Lancashire and
Cheshii'e, I placed at Croes Atti, near Flint, where im-
mense heaps of lead scoriae, mixed w^ith lioman coins,
fibulae, implements, pottery, &c., occur, and many founda-
tions of buildings.'

The inscription on the ring, No. 1304 (corrected in
Additamenta, p. 314j, I would expand as O(ptimo)
V(iro) N(umerius) V{oturn) S{olui() L{ibens). I con-

' Dr. Hiibnor's Xos. 1173-4 !iro now Ffarinoton of Wordcn Hall near Pros-
preserved at LunoclilFo near Ijancaster ton. In the Hisf. of X. IJ'ales liy W.
by E. B. Dawson, Esq. ; his No. 1170 at Catherall (Manchester, 182H) the first
Brougham Hall by Lord Brougham, line of Dr. Iliibncr'a No. 11G4 is o-ivcn
and the only example of the tiles No. as nym.vs instead of xvmc. Is tliis an
I'i.")" now extant is preserved by IMiss abbreviation oi NKiniids .'


sider the gift of it, to have been the result of a vow,
made by Numerius to his intimate friend.

Of Roman inscriptions which have ])een fonnd in modern
times, and again l:)e3n lost or destroyed without copies of
them having been preserved, the following are to be added
to the list already given : —

A. Roman urn, "red-like coral, with an inscription,"
was found at Salndy, Bedfordshire, according to Aubrey
(Ai'cJuooloc/ia, vol. vu, 412). It contained ashes. Another
inscription on a stone which perished by being exposed to
the Avet in a frosty season was found at Cirencester, with
that to Julia Casta, in the last century (Stukeley, Itin.
Curiosum, p. 63). The liev. Thos. Keynolds, in his Iter
Bntanniarum, p. 448, says :—" Kil) worth, Leicestershire,
between Harborough and Leicester. — A stone is said to
have l^een found with a Roman inscription upon it. — T.R."
At Exeter fragments of Roman inscriptions appear to
have been built up into the town walls, in a manner simi-
lar to those at Bath ; but while copies of those at the
latter place have been preserved, those at the former have
entirely perished. Leland says of them (Hearne's Leland,
17(39, vol. iii, p. GO), " Ther appere 2 fragmentes of inscrip-
tions of the Romaincs sette by chaunce of later tymes in
the Town WauU, renewid on the bak side of the House
sumtyme longging to the Blah Fveren. One of them
standith in a tower of the Waul, the other is in the Waul
hard by."

At t-astleshaw, near Saddle worth, Yorkshire, an in-
scribed Roman stone was also found and destroyed in the
last century. — Archceologia, vol. i, p. 236.

Camden informs us that a numl^er of Roman inscrip-
tions were found on the site of the castriun, at Over-
biuTow, Lancashire (Galacuw). They are generally sup-
posed to have l)een lost again in a vessel in which they
had been shipped (with some others) by Sir Robert Cotton
and Camden himself, through her foundering. — Gibson's
Camden, p. 976.

At Lancaster, in 1776, a Lar bearing an inscription was
found and again lost (Archceologia, vol. v, p. 98.) Two
years previously, at Quernmoor, near that town, a number
of bronze utensils bearing inscriptions were brought to
light, but dispersed amongst the residents in the neigh-


bourhood (ride p. 105, vol. iv, 3r(l series, Transactions of
Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire). At Kenches-
ter also within the last foity years inscribed stones have
been foiuid and destroyed (Wriglit's Wanderings of an
Antiquari/, pp. 30, 40). At Headington, in Oxfordshire,
an inscril)ed stone, though much ol)literated, was found
among the ruins of a Roman villa in 1848-9 (Journal of
British ArcJueological Association, vol. vi, p. OG). At
Tilne or Tylney (Notts) there were found in the last
centmy, A^4th other Roman remains, " several agates and
cornehans, with inscriptions and engravings" (Beauties of
England and Wales), vol. xii, pt. I, p. 309). In the Win-
chester volume of the Congresses of the Archaeological
Institute, Mr. Hartshorne, in an article on Porchester
Castle, says at p. 25, "Fragments of Roman inscriptions
are built into the wall to the right of the entrance into
the inner baly." As these inscriptions do not appear
to be visible at the present day, it is to be hoped that
some copies of them may have been taken by residents of
the neighbourhood, and that they will publish the same.
No inscription from this large cast rum has heretofore been
edited. '

Such are the additional inscriptions for the year 187G,
and those found previously which have remained inedited.
My additional notes on those already pubhshed seem
necessary for the completion of the readings of the whole
series, which I trust are now before the archaeological
world m as complete a state as it is possible to attain.

P.S. — Since the above pajDcr was written, Prof Hilbner
has published in the third volume of the Ephemeris
Epigrapliica a second supplement to his large work. In
this supplement, which is entitled " Additamenta Altera,"
the inscriptions found in the well at Carrawburgh are
included, and as there are a few of them read difterently
from the copies I have given, it seems needful that the
readings of Dr. Htibner should be added. In No. 2 Dr.
Hlibner adds a after the MS in the last line, and expands
it as m{ea)sa(lute). In No. 4 he reads the fifth line as
AVR . CAMP, the sixth as ester.. , and the seventh as

' A portion of a miliary of granite vol. i, p. 5), and some inscribed tiles

found at Chichester in 1809, with an found in the Roman villa of Roxby,

inscription " too much obliterated to be Lincolnshire (vol. vi, 2nd series, Froc.

deciphered" (Dalla way's IVest Sussex, Soc. of Antiq., p. 115) are to be added.



VET In No. 7 he gives the last line as shnply p.s.

with a leaf stop between the letters. In No. 9 lie reads
the second line as vinoma th, the last two letters being
ligulate, and expands it as Vinomathus, the name of the
dedicator. Nos. 10 and 11, which are more effaced than
any of the others, he reads as —

(10) (11)

D E A E C V N f ' O V V I N T T


N V S . . S ^'

A E T . . . .

j\I V C , . . I ^' , S • L . 51
... A X I jM
I) E D . . . .

But little or nothing can be made out of these. In
No. 1 4 he gives the second compartment as CAI.

I have also to add two iDroken altars, found with others
uninscribed at the Kingshohn, Gloucester, in 187G. They
are much worn and cannot be distinctly made out. The
lower part of each is wanting The inscriptions a'ppear to
he, to the local anti(|uaries : —

(1) C^)

D . "D . E . O

51 A R T I I N I C H C! V R I


The first is plainly D{eo) JSIavti. The second, I think,
may be Deo San{cti) Mercurio, and the name of the
dedicator Orivendns.



Among the venerable and, at the least, poetic traditions
that cluster roinid the older ecclesiastical foundations of
Christendom, and of which Ireland has a full share, is one
which explains the origin of the Abbey, ]3est known as
Muckross, or Mucruss, and the cause of the name of the
group of limestone rock amidst which it stands. It re-
lates that Mac Carthy More, the bearer, in the fifteenth
century, of that distinguished Irish title, being minded
to found a religious house, was warned in a vision that
the site of his foundation was to be at ' Carraig-an
Chiul,' or the ' Rock of Music,' a place to him unknown.
Those whom he, in consequence, sent forth to search his
Avestern territory, returning homeward by ' Oirl)healacli '
or ' the Eastern passage,' between the lower lake of Kil-
larney and its rocky boundary, were arrested l^y the
sounds of music proceeding from a rock, which Mac Carthy
accepted as the indicated sj^ot, and where he erected liis

The choice, Ijy whomsoever dii-ected, was an exceedingly
happy one. The celestial concords indeed no longer
vibrate in the air, Ijut if the eye, like the ear, be admitted
to be a recipient of harmony, it must be allowed that the
site is one to commend itself to all beholders, for around
the sacred spot, wood and water, mountain and glen,
verdant meadows and over-arching trees are seen in their
happiest combination, and if art has contributed to the
beauty of the scene, its efforts are well concealed behind
the ample vesture of Nature.

It appears from a record cited by Petrie that a church
at Irrelagh was burned in 1192, but of this early edifice


notliing- else is known. The fbunda-tion of the existing
structure is flir later, and indeed, as compared with the
adjacent House of Inisfallen, is but as of yesterday.
The Four Masters ascribe it to Donnell, son of Teige Mac
Carthy, who was living in 1340, but O'Donovan, their
translator, points out that it is Donnell, son of Cormac,
who corresponds to that date, and that the real founder
was probably Teige Mac Carthy, described on that
account in the pecligree of the Sept, as Teige-na-Mainis-
treach, or ' of the Monastery,' the father of another
Donnell, known as ' An Dana,,' or ' of the song ;' and he
agrees with Ware, that the actual foundation was pro-
bably some years before 1440, but that the work was
completed by Donnell in that year. Teige Mac Carthy
was Prince of Desmond, and recognized by the Sept as
' Mac Carthy More.' The establishment was Franciscan,
and lasted till 1589, when the brethren were ejected with
some violence. Probably the violence did not extend to
the buildings, which, with their modest demesne of ' four
acres, two orchards, and a garden, valued at IGs. annually,'
were granted to Capt. IlolDert Collon, also the grantee of
Inisfallen, in 1594-5. This did not prevent the Monks,
under Father Holan, from returning hither in 1G02. In
162G, it appears from a contemporary inscription in the
choii-, the buildings were repaired by Brother Thadi Ho
Leni, but only to be inhabited till 1G29, when the frater-
nity retired, once more, though for a few years only,
again to return in 1G41. It seems probable, from this
repeated re-occupation, that the ejected Brethren ever
lingered about the spot they loved so well, and this may
account for the unusually perfect condition of the

The Abbey was naturally the burial place of many of
the name of Mac Carthy. Mac Carthy More, Earl of
Clancare or Clancarty, was laid in the centre of the choir.
Here was also buried in IGOO, Patrick, Loixl Kerry, the
Earl's nephew ; in 15 GO, Eveleen, daughter of Donnel Mac-
Carthy, son of Corman Ladhrach, widow of James Earl of
Desmond, and then of Conor Earl of Thomond ; and, in
1582, Catharine, daughter of Teige, brother of the above
Donnell, and widow of Wm. Fitzma.urice, Knight of Kerry,
a lady who passed her latter days in fear and dread, upon

MUCKROttri. 151

the adjacent lake, moving from one island to another.
Others of, or allied to the family, continue to be buried
within the walls ; and as late as 1804 the Glencare or
Clancare gravestone was obscured by a huge ill-placed
altar t^unb to O'Donoghue More, of the Glens, but very
partially redeemed by an epitaph by Marcus Hare.

The Aljbey is in the barony of Magunichy, and stands
upon the eastern shere of Lough Lean,^ the lowest and
largest of the Killarney lakes, in the bay of Castle Lough,
one of the numerous inlets of that enchanted territory, a
few feet above, and about a furlong distant from, the
margin of the watei'. The Avails, though roofless and ivy-
covered, can scarcely be said to be ruined, so little have
they suffered from time or from violence. The ancient
name of Oirbhealach, corrupted in Sir James Ware's time
into Irrelagh, and so recorded in the Irish Monasticon,
has in these latter days been ill-exchanged for Muckross,
a word derived from the swine that fed upon the mast
shed annually by the beech trees, which with the ash, the
lime, the oak, and the chesnut, there attain almost gigan-
tic dimensions.

The walls, even to the gables, remain perfect. The
roofs have disappeai'ed, with the whole of the timber
work, but the ground floor of the conventual buildings is
mostly vaulted, and the stairs of stone, so that the upper
chambers are still accessible, and the plan and details of
the whole structure evident to the eye of the visitor. A
noble yew tree darkens, but gives solemnity to the inte-
I'ior court of the cloister, and is far more in harmony with
the character of the place than are the heaped-up and

Online LibraryBritish Archaeological Association. Central CommitThe Archaeological journal (Volume v. 34) → online text (page 14 of 54)