ADARN/2

The Royal Commission notes that a drawing of the stones dated to c. 1700 (Stowe MS. 1024, pp. 125--6) shows the stones as present and records them as at Cappell Yverach' (RCAHMW/1964, 9).

Between 1950 and 1998 the stone was moved to Aberdaron Parish Church.

Macalister/1945, 367: `A pulvinar, apparently water-worn'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `Rough pillar-stone formed of a natural water-worn boulder'.

Rhys/1905, 92--93: `When I saw it years ago I read it...The spelling multitudnem with the final m in the ablative, is owing partly to the fact that the case consonants had ceased to be sounded, so that when it was thought fit to write them, there was no certainty where they belonged and where they did not ; but the elision of the second unaccented i of multitudine is explained by the metre. This may possibly be Greater Asclepiad, but I regard it rather as an instance of the Archilochian verse as in the case of the Llanerfyl stone:--

`Sena | cus presby | ter hic | iacit cum | multi | tudne | fratrum

`But even that is not right, since there ought to be a break at the end of the tetrameter, and it is not unlikely that multitudine was intended as a trisyllable. In that case the verse would run thus:

`Senac | us pres | byter | hic iacit | cum mul | titudne | fratrum'

Anon/1926, 442--443: `Mr Willoughby Gardner remarked upon the large number in North Wales, and especially in Lleyn, where the words HIC IACIT stood for HIC IACET. The letter I would seem to be a regular dialect form in Britain for E; for in examining a large hoard of coins struck in Britain by the usurper Carausius, he had often noted the letter I substituted for E or A/E in their inscriptions, e.g. LA/ETITIA became LITITIA, and so forth.'

Macalister believes that CVM MVLTITVDNEM FRATRVM indicates an otherwise unknown massacre (eg. Macalister/1945, 369).

Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `In l. 5 the Accusative case is substituted for the Ablative, illustrating a confusion of cases following a preposition that becomes increasingly common in these inscriptions from the 5th century on. Cum multitudinem fratrum presumably refers to the other graves in the (?monastic) cemetery where Senacus was buried.'

Rhys/1918, 183: `This photograph is cut off pretty close underneath FRATRVM ; but is so excellent, as far as it goes, that it convicts me of having misrepresented our ``Prespiter'' at two points:--- (a) Line 4 ends in the middle of a word yielding MVLTITV, but the second V is followed by a mark indicating, as I suppose, that the word is continued in the next line ; at first I saw an oblique line like the first arm of a V, only one-half as tall as the letters of the inscription, but on scrutinising it further it seems rather V [upside-down]. (b) The D seemed to me to be followed by NE ligatured but the photo shows clearly that the ligature is to be read ENE, so that the whole word proves to be not multitudinem but multitidenem.'

Macalister/1928, 307: `The word PRESBYTER on the Senacus inscription is written in an abbreviated form, PR~S~B. Someone has kindly cut the expanded form of the word at the bottom of the stone [ADARN/2/2]---the only example in Britain, so far as I know, of an epigraphic equivalent of the marginal explanatory glosses so frequent in manuscripts.' (A similar comment is given in Macalister/1945, 369.)

Macalister/1945, 368--369: `The reading is nowhere in doubt, though the engraver seems to have found a childish pleasure in devising ingenious ligatures'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `Roman capitals...with straight and forked serifs...and four ligatures; CV in ll. 1 and 4 is also conjoined. The A's are written with both straight and angular cross bar. B in l. 2 has disjoined loops. The F in l. 6 and the R's generally follow Roman cursive forms. PR~S~B in line two, an abbreviation by suspension, is one of the numerous variant abbreviations of the word presbyter (cf. No. 77 [ADARN/1/1]), though in this precise form does not occur elsewhere in this country or apparently in Gaul.'

NB. Many of the early readings regarded the separate word at the bottom of this stone [ADARN/2/2] as part of this inscription. These have been split in this database as per Macalister and others.

Huebner/1876, 50, uses Westwood's 1859 drawing which shows FRE ET but expands this as prespiter? citing Rhys/1873.

Rhys/1905, 92: `lower down I thought I could read PRESPITER'.

Macalister/1928, 307: `The word PRESBYTER on the Senacus inscription is written in an abbreviated form, PR~S~B [ADARN/2/1]. Someone has kindly cut the expanded form of the word at the bottom of the stone [this inscription]---the only example in Britain, so far as I know, of an epigraphic equivalent of the marginal explanatory glosses so frequent in manuscripts.'

Macalister/1945, 369: `A later hand has pocked the word PRESBTER near the base of the stone, evidently as an explanatory footnote to the contracted second word [in ADARN/2/1] : a rare example of a gloss on a lapidary monument. This must have been done before the end of the 17th century, for the word appears in a sketch of the stone made by Edward Lhuyd (1726)'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `The [inscription]... is apparently a later (? late sixth century) gloss on the unusual abbreviation [in ADARN/2/1] ... The lettering is mixed Roman capitals and half-uncials (E, ? T). The B has disjoined loops as before.'

Westwood/1859, 56: `The lower part of the stone is much rubbed and the letters... are almost defaced'.