SVNSS/1

`The late Lady Mackworth, possessor of the Gnoll, was either making or embellishing a grotto in her grounds. To further her views she had all the curious stones that could be collected brought to this grotto; and this, among many others, was removed from the grave, apparently, of M. Collatinus to this cave, which was to be converted into a grotto; and, being too heavy to be removed entire, was broken. Shortly, after this grotto had been completed, the rock gave way, and the whole structure was buried beneath the ruins...[David the under-gardener] described the place to me so precisely and exactly that shortly after I went on a visit to the grotto, and explored and easily detected the spot. I mentioned the circumstance to Mrs. Grant, and begged permission to search for the Gnoll and stone, and also petitioned to have it replaced over his grave, for that was the supposition. The lady kindly promised to put labourers to work immediately; and if the stone should be found, I was to have it to replace on the tumulus by Clwyda'r Banwan. The grotto and stone were found; but ladies having the right to change their opinion, Mrs. Grant requested me to search for the other piece of the stone, and send it to her, as it looked exceedingly well in the grotto ; and there, I believe, it is at the present time' (1853).

The inscribed part of the stone certainly was there when I visited the Gnoll, and found it embedded into the upright bank of a recess, or grotto, in a terrace about one hundred yards to the south of the house, overlooking Neath; but it was then nearly immersed in decayed vegetable rubbish; and as it contains the whole of the inscription recorded by Gibson, I presume that the portion broken off was only the uninscribed base of the pillar'.

Rhys visited the site in 1873 but was unable to find the stone (Rhys/1873, 8). In 1874 Rhys, with the help of Westwood's 1865 paper and a workman, rediscovered the stone (Rhys/1874, 332).

Westwood/1879, 6: `The earliest notice of this stone is that given by Edward Lhwyd in Gibson's Camden, p. 620 (copied in Gough's Camden, ii. p. 502, and ed. alt. iii. p. 132), where it is stated that `in Panwen Brydhin, in the parish of Llangadoc, about 6 miles above Neath, is the Maen dan Lygad yr ych, two circular intrenchments and a stone pillar, inscribed M. CARITINI FILII BERICII'. The stone is about a yard long and 8 inches broad. From a letter, with which I was favoured in 1853, by the Rev. T. Williams[1] of Tir-y-Cwm, Ystrad, near Swansea, it appears that about the year 1835 the late Lady Mackworth, then the possessor of The Gnoll, near Neath, collected together all the curious stones found in the neighbourhood for the embellishment of a grotto she was forming in a terrace about one hundred yards to the south of the house, in the ornamental ground overlooking Neath. Being too heavy it was partially broken before removal, the extremity of the inscription receiving some injury. Shortly after the grotto had been completed the rock-work gave way during a heavy storm of lightning and thunder and the whole was buried from sight...Mr. Williams...induced Mrs. Grant, the then occupier of The Gnoll, to have the ruins removed, when the stone reappeared without having suffered any further injury. The place however became neglected, as in 1846 I found the grotto filled with dead leaves and garden rubbish so as nearly to hide the stone again.

[1] Mr. Williams's letter appears in extenso in my article on this stone in the Archaeologia Cambrensis, Ser. 3. vol. xi. p. 59'.

The stone is listed by Nash-Williams/1935-39, 169, under `Neath Higher'.

Macalister/1945, 378: `Lhuyd in Gibson's Camden describes this stone as being `at a place called Panwen Byrdhin in the parish of Kadokston or Lhan Gadok about six miles from Neath'. It was then well known under the name Maen dau Lygadyr (sic read Lygad yr) ych `the stone of the two ox-eyes'. These ox-eyes were `two small circular entrenchments, like cockpits', of a kind unknown to Lhuyd elsewhere; we need not trouble ourselves with his guess at an explanation of them. Till shortly before, the stone had been in the middle of one of these enclosures; but, when Lhuyd wrote, it had been appropriated as a gatepost. About 1835, Lady Mackworth, owner of the estate called The Gnoll, near Neath, took the stone to decorate a grotto: `being too heavy [it] was partially broken before removal' (1920), to the detriment of the inscription: and shortly afterwards the grotto collapsed and the stone was buried. Westwood in 1846 found it hidden in rubbish (1865) and Rhys (1874) was obliged to have it dug up for inspection. In 1920 it was removed to the museum of The Institution, Swansea, where it now stands'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `first recorded notice by Lhuyd about 1693,[1]...Its original location at Clwydi Banwen by Lhuyd is confirmed by Strange,[3] but before 1800 the stone was removed to The Gnoll, Neath, and subsequently damaged.[4] Since 1920 it has been in the Museum of the Royal Institution, Swansea, though mounted in an inverted position.

[1] Camden, Britannia (ed. Gibson), p. 620; Stowe MS. 1024, fo. 8; Lhuyd, Parochialia, III, pp. 69-70.

[3] Archaeologia, 1 (1769), p. 323 with wrong illustration; ibid., IV, p. 7.

[4] Arch. Camb., 1865 pp. 59--62; 1920, p. 370'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `hard laminated sandstone'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 166: `Rough pillar-stone...41" h. x 7" w. x ?" t.'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `The surviving fragment of a pillar-stone (Plate 1), 1.1 m long, 20cm wide and 24 cm thick'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `The surviving fragment...represents about half the original length and width...The fracture of the stone ante-dates its first recorded notice by Lhuyd about 1693, and flaking of the face has made the reading of some letters uncertain'.

`So, David, you were there', I said.

`To be sure I was -- an under-gardener''.

Westwood/1876, 6: `Fairy influence was believed by the common people to have been at work in revenge for the removal of the stone from the charmed circles, within which the `fairies had been constantly seen dancing on a fine evening', but who had disappeared after the removal of the stone, and who were heard laughing heartily when the grotto was destroyed, according to the testimony of the under-gardener, as amusingly narrated by Mr Williams'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 166: `Latin inscription (Fig. 179) in one line (with vestiges of a second) reading vertically downwards'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `The complete inscription was in two lines (at least) read down the length of the face'.

Rhys notes the descrepancy between Westwood's drawing and his text (Rhys/1874, 332, cf. Westwood/1865).

Westwood/1879, 6--7: `The letters of the inscription are very rudely-formed Roman capitals of unequal height. It is to be read[2]

MACARITIN{I} FIL{I} BERI(CI?)

There is certainly a cross bar between the two strokes forming the second part of the initial M which I regard as forming a conjoined A; the N is reversed in its shape, and the next letter I is horizontal, as is so often the case with the final I in these Welsh inscribed names. The letters FI and LI in the following word are conjoined in the manner also common in these inscriptions, and also in early Irish and Anglo-Saxon MSS. Of the final part of the last word I am in doubt, as the stone has evidently suffered injury since Camden read it BERICII, although his facsimile looks more like BERICCI, the first C having the bottom transverse, and the final CI being now wanting on the stone.

[2] By a lapsus calami (easily detected on an inspection of the engraving of the inscription published with my article on this stone in the Archaeologia Cambrensis. here reproduced in the accompanying Plate II. fig. 3), the first word of the inscription was printed MACARIN{I} instead of MACARITIN{I}'.

Macalister/1930, 424: `The inscription has been read by everyone, since Westwood, MACARITINI FILI BERIC[I], the initial MA being a ligature formed thus -- {M/A}. After careful examination of the inscription on two occasions, however, I have satisfied myself that this ligature should be ignored, and that the name is simply CARITINI. In front of the C there is a character like A, which is certainly a modern addition to the inscription (extending the word `modern' backward to include the time of Lhwyd, for the mark was there when he tried to read the writing). It is in a different technique (punched, not rubbed) from the rest of the letters. Between it and the C there is a quite natural triangular flaw in the surface of the stone, which makes the second half of the supposed monogram.

But further, it seems to have escaped notice that there was at one time a second line of writing on the stone. The tops of three letters are left -- insufficient for a restoration of the text, but at least worth putting on record. These are: a C, underneath (or, having regard to the normal upright position of the stone, to the right of) the horizontal I of CARITIN{I}; an A, underneath the monogram FI of FILI, and an L or an I, underneath the monogram LI of the same word.

There is a very good photograph of the Neath stone in Arch. Camb., 1920, p. 371 (bottom of picture). The letters CARITINI, with the spurious M before it, and the FI of FILI (the first letter with its upright stroke curving backward at the bottom) following it, are quite legible; the rest of the inscription, however, is in obscurity. The curve of the C of the second line of writing, to which attention is now called, is perfectly clear in this photograph, just underneath the NI of the principal name'.

Macalister/1945, 379: `The inscription...[is] upon what is now one of the narrower faces; but the second line of writing is broken away, except the tops of three letters. This is not damage for which Lady Mackworth is primarily responsible, for Lhuyd has nothing to say of this second line, which he could hardly have failed to notice if it had been there in his day. The existing line is badly flawed; the lettering is of the usual roughly-made Roman capitals...In front of the initial C there is a mark like {upside-down V}, which is certainly no part of the inscription, though it was there in Lhuyd's time. It is punched, not rubbed like the rest of the letters. Between it and the C there is a triangular flaw on the surface of the stone: these two marks are erroneously combined in previous copies to make a ligatured MA, but they should be ignored. The loss of the final letter (a horizontal I, preceded by a second C if Lhuyd is to be trusted) is probably to be placed to the account of Lady Mackworth's emissaries, and perhaps the mutilation of the side of the stone was due to some ancient anti-Ogham fanatic'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 166: `Roman capitals, deeply but crudely picked. MA in l. 1 is ligatured; FI and LI are conjoined. The first and last (?) words in the line have the horizontal final -I. The N is reversed; the B has disjoined loops.[2]

[2] See No. 78'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `The first word has been read as MACARITIN{I} with ligatured MA, but the A-s have no cross-bar, and the M is partly formed by surface-flaking (though read as such in 1693). It is possible to read the initial letter as an inverted V followed by I, while the C is followed by another inverted V with open angle.[2] The second word is clearly FILI in two ligatures. As given by Lhuyd the line ends with BERICC{I}, but the edge of the fracture occurring at the fifth letter makes the latter part unconfirmable. This fifth letter is A (with cross-bar) rather than a very angular C. The whole line would thus read VICVRITIN{I} FILI BERIA[C{I} (`Of Vicuritinus, the son of Beria(cus)'). The lettering, in crude Roman capitals, shows a reversed N, the R-s with an open loop, a tall B with separated loops, the ligatures mentioned and horizontal terminal I in the first and last words. The traces of the second line do not confirm the normal hic iacit (`here lies'), but six letters are indicated.

[2] For an inverted V, see E.C.M.W. 297, 132 and C.I.I.C. 461'.

RCAHMW/1976, 36: `flaking of the face has made the reading of some letters uncertain'.