BAGLN/1

Rhys/1873, 7--8: `Aug. 26---...I went to Baglan Church, about three miles from Briton Ferry station, to see a stone supposed to bear on it Brancuf; but it could not be found'.

Rhys/1876, 244 (in a review of Huebner/1876): `The stone is lost'.

Westwood/1879, 24: `Previous to the restoration of the little church of Baglan, near Neath, this elegantly carved stone was used as one of the coping-stones of the churchyard wall, close to the stile forming the southern entrance to the churchyard. During the repairs it was, by the care of Col. G. G. Francis, removed thence and affixed upon the wall of the tower of the church'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 130: `Inside the church, mounted on the wall of the vestry'.

RCAHMW/1976, 43: `found about 1850 in the churchyard of the old church at Baglan and more recently re-set in the internal vestry wall of St. Catherine's Church, Baglan'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 130: `Inside the church, mounted on the wall of the vestry.'

Westwood/1879, 24: `The stone is about 30 inches long and 16 wide, being of an oblong form, with the ornamental design and name incised.'

Macalister/1949, 152: `A slab'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 130: `Roughly shaped rectangular slab, decorated and inscribed. 27 1/2" h. x 16" w. x ?" t...The slab is akin in type to the Glamorganshire `Crux Christi' cross-slabs (p. 37), with the formula here replaced by the cross-symbol. The decoration shows Irish influence.'

RCAHMW/1976, 43: `An incomplete slab with carved cross and part inscription'.

Westwood/1851 is quoted almost verbatim in Westwood/1879, 24.

Westwood/1879, 24: `The ornament is formed by the regular interlacing of an endless double ribbon into a Greek +, the arms being united by double ribbons, so placed as to give the head of the cross a circular outline, very much in the style of some of the fine Irish crosses. The lower limb of the cross is smaller than the others, resting on a square base, also ornamented with an interlaced design, the ribbon being double in four of the interlacements, so as to give a more symmetrical idea to the figure. I do not recollect to have met with a more simple and elegant design in any of the numerous carved stones which I have examined.'

Macalister/1949, 152, `A well-designed interlacing cross is pocked upon it'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 130, `Carved Latin wheel-cross in low relief, formed of double-beaded interlacing, embodying Stafford-knots (R.A. 262) in the arm-ends and a square of eight-cord knot-work (R.A. 638) in the stem.'

RCAHMW/1976, 43: `On the surviving part of the rectangular sandstone slab...is a ringed cross in false relief formed by double-beaded cords outlining a Greek cross with rounded angles and making squared Stafford-knots in the lower arm-ends. At the upper arm-end the cords instead of interlacing merge into a squared panel of narrow double-beaded knotwork, while at the foot the smaller knot rests on a stem in the form of a square panel of eight-cord knotwork incorporating a central cruciform break. The double-beaded arcs of the ring joining the arm-ends make circular inter-arm spaces.'

Nash-Williams/1950, 130: `Latin inscription (Fig. 139) to r. of cross-stem, in one line reading vertically downwards'.

RCAHMW/1976, 43: `To the right of the stem an incomplete Latin inscription is incised down the face'.

Westwood/1879, 24: `All the letters are minuscules of the form to which the term Anglo-Saxon has ordinarily been applied, but which might with equal propriety be termed Irish or British, and which is found on many of the inscribed stones both of Ireland and Wales. The rounded form of the b, the p-like form of the r, the y or rather q-like form of the u, and the F-like form of the very distinct terminal f,[1] are all especial forms of these different minuscule letters. The invocation of the Saviour, indicated by the prefixed +, is by no means common on the monumental stones of Wales, although it occurs twice on the stone of St. Cadfan, and several times on the cross of St. Samson at Llantwit (Plates III and IV).

`[1] It has been incorrectly suggested (Arch. Camb. 1876, p. 244) that the inscription `should be read + brancu +, in which case the name would be an early form of Brengi.' '

Rhys/1876, 244 (in a review of Huebner/1876): `Possibly +brancuf is to be read +brancu+'.

Macalister/1949, 152: `preceded and followed by a small cross. The upper terminal of the second cross is bifid, and Westwood erroneously took this figure for the letter F.'

Nash-Williams/1950, 130: `Round half-uncials'.

RCAHMW/1976, 43: `rounded half-uncials'.

Redknap/1991, 55: `round half-uncials'.

Westwood/1879, 24: `The inscription is equally simple and perfectly legible'.