Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 9.djvu/363

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE. 287 upriglit stroke, which is rather higher than is represented in Mr. Chahners's plate, its top being dilated into a triangular incision. The second letter is an Anglo-Saxon niinuscule r; the fourth letter of the same line is clearly an Anglo-Saxon long f, the upper curved oblique stroke extending over the following t, as far as opposite the commencement of the down-stroke of the latter ; the horizontal top of the t extends almost to the upper part of the following e, the top of which is not closed, as in Mr. Chalmers's plate, and the second stroke of the following n is regularly curved and not angulated at its origin. The second line is correctly given by Mr. Chalmers. The first letter is, I suppose, intended for i, but the slightly forked top seems like the commencement of an r. The first letter of the third line is an e, the horizontal line being omitted by Mr. Chalmers, and the third letter of the fourth line (the last of the inscription) is certainly an f. " The following is then to be read as the interpretation of the letters. d r o f t e n i r e u o r e t e t t F o r c 11 r " The Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy for 1847, vol. iii. part 3, contain a paper, entitled ' Memorandum respecting some ancient inscrip- tions in Scotland, by John Ramsay, Esq.,' in which an attempt has been made to decypber the above inscription in a manner which I must confess appears to me to be about as far from the correct one as it could well be. Concurring in the observation of the Kev. J. Muir, that the cross was monumental, and that it was the production of the latter end of the tenth century, (the ornamentation being of a similar character to that found in similar monuments in Ireland, ascribed to that period by Mr. Petrie, St. Vigean himself having also lived during the latter portion of that century,) Mr. Ramsay considers that the inscription, 1st, is written partly in the old Irish and partly in the Roman character ; 2nd, that it seems to be only part of that which originally belonged to the cross of St. Vigean, the first part having been cut on the top part of the cross now- lost, (the inscription having been divided into two compartments as in those figured in Borlase's Cornwall, pp. 398, 400 ;) 3rd, the part before us is sup- posed not to be the commencement, wanting the usual prefix of a small cross ; 4tli, that it may be restored by adding letters at the end of the lines, thus : — CHROS. TEM(PU) S. DEYORET. ET. TE. OR. (PRO.) GUIS (AXIMA.) translated, ' Cross ! Time may destroy thee too. Pray for his (the person named in the first part of the inscription) soul.' 5th, By 2 In objects executed in such out of the mented with dcsif^ns precisely similar to way places as St. Vigeans, and the west those of the manuscripts of the Hibenio- of Ireland, we must hesitate in adopting Saxon school of the 8th and 9th centuries, such a i-ule for fixing their date. Some of the carved crosses of Wales and Ireland of the Highland shields in the armory of of the lOth and 11th, and of the Irish the Tower, of the 1 7 th or 1 8th century' are metal work of the 1 Jtli centuries, covei-ed with thick leather, and oriia-