Page images

fragment from the school, which is exceeded only by another legend preserved by the same author in his Collectanea Cambrica, which represents the burying of some pigs from Oxford, in a stone chest, at Dinas Emrys.

I must however leave these pigs at present in area lapidea, and have a few parting words with Mr. S. His rhodomontade is truly amusing, in which he declares his determination at all hazards to ride his hobby, and stick to the last, even should he suffer martyrdom like Tudvyl.

"I am more thoroughly convinced than ever that'the grave of Gwallog the Tall is in Carrog,' Cardiganshire;" and I am equally determined that Gallawg ap Lleenawg shall rest peacably in his grave on the banks of the brook of Carrog in Arfon.

"There are or were some singular monumental pillars in the neighbourhood of Carrog House." Here is a loop hole with a vengeance between two tenses, the present and past, for Mr. S. to secure a timely retreat when in the very act of falling, ben-tra-mwnwgl, into a mouse-trap; but even this will not serve him in such a fearful emergency. For I can assure him that Carrog House, near Aberdaron, is a mansion of much greater antiquity, and surrounded by more lasting memorials of the descendants of Cunedda Wledig, in the form of churches, &c, than any which Mr. Stephens, with all his ingenuity, can point out in any locality in South Vv ties.


Craig y Dinas, March 11,1853.


To the Editor of the Archmologia Cambrensis.

Sir,—The following rather pardonable blunder, extracted from the Histoire des Gaulois of M. Amedee Thierry, will amuse Welsh scholars:—"La collection la plus complete des documens litteraires des Gallois a ete publice a Londres sous le titre anglo-gallois de Myvyrian Archaeology of Wales, que 1' on pourrait rendre en francais par celui d' Archeologie intellectuelle des Gallois."Introduction, p. exxxviii. Note.

I am far from wishing by this notice to lower the value of the work in your readers' eyes: on the contrary, I recommend it strongly to all who wish for anything like a clear view on the very intricate subject of Celtic ethnology.—I am, &c. W. B. J.

University College, Feb. 28,1853.


To the Editor of the Archmologia Cambrensis.

Sir,—I have been requested by the daughter of the late Rev. Walter Davies, to vindicate the reputation of her father, whom I held in great esteem, from some aspersions which she deems Mr. Wynne Ffoulkes to have cast upon him; but on that point I cannot interfere, as it appears to me that Mr. Ffoulkes has not laid himself open to any such charge, and that Miss Davies has taken offence without sufficient cause.

The subject matter is this. In a note to his paper on "The Site of the Last Battle of Caractacus," (Arch. Camb. 1851, p. 144,) he states, on the authority of a Mr. Asterley and his mother, that in his grandfather's time, a piece of silver with a device on it, round like a five shilling piece, and as large as the palm of his hand, with some pieces of metal like the tops of spoons, but very small, were found at Clawdd Coch, and given to the curate at Llanymyneich, for the purpose of being submitted to the Rev. Walter Davies, for his opinion upon it; but "the reverend gentleman, the curate, never had the grace to return it;" and "thus is lost to us an important piece of evidence in the history of Clawdd Coch." Mr. Ffoulkes goes on to observe that "Mr. Asterley believed them to have been Roman reliques. Perhaps the portions of what he described as very small spoons may have been portions of ligulce. I believe there is every reason for thinking that the Romans visited Clawdd Coch at some period or other."

As already intimated, Mr. Ffoulkes is fully exonerated from the charge of having said aught against the late Mr. Davies; but there are grave doubts in the way of accepting Mr. Asterley's statement. Miss Davies states that had such relics been found, her father would have heard of them; and having heard of them, they would not have been lost to the public. I think so too. One thing is clear, that thirty-three years ago, the reputed Roman station at Clawdd Coch was the subject of antiquarian discussion, and frequently supported by the late Rev. Peter Roberts. This will probably correspond to the time of Mr. Asterley's grandfather; and if it be borne in mind that the following remarks were written after Peter Roberts had made known his views, they will be seen to overbalance the testimony of Mr. Asterley, and to leave the Roman character of Clawdd Coch in statu quo, if not to overturn it altogether. In the CambroBriton, of May, 1820, the Rev. Walter Davies wrote some topographical notices of the parish of Llansilin, county of Denbigh, and at p. 339, we find the following remarks:—"They (the editors of the Beauties of England and Wales,) cry 'Ecce Mediolanum!' at Pen y Bont, the extremity of the southern wing of this parish, upon the junction of the Cynllaith with the Tanat. This is the spot fixed upon in the body of the work, but in the map of the stations, &c, prefixed, Mediolanum is not put down at Pen y Bont, but at

Clawd Coch The late learned Mr. Peter Roberts had

viewed this spot, and would fain insist, in conversation, that it was the identical spot where Mediolanum once quartered the legions of ambitious Rome. ... I had myself, some years before, been rather sanguine on the subject; and in consequence of preconceived ideas, hastened to Clawd Coch full of expectations. When I arrived, I found, fortunately, a team in the field ploughing: and the farmer declared, that he had seen the piece ploughed & harrowed occasionally for upwards of forty years past, but had never seen nor heard of any Roman relics, coins, brick, or utensils, the indispensable accompaniments of Roman stations.—W. D." Mr. Davies then goes on to show that Clawdd Coch was probably a foss made for the defence of Carreghova Castle, destroyed about the beginning of the thirteenth century. The farmer's team drew the plough; but if they might be used to draw an inference, it would be this:—the farmer was Mr. Asterley's grandfather, and yet he had never seen or heard of any Roman relics, coins, brick, or utensils, &c.

Commending these remarks to the attention of Mr. Ffoulkes and your other readers,—I am, &c,

Merthyr Tydfil, Feb. 28,1853. T. Stephens.

3GBtittllfitmi jKititu.


I Have seen a very simple and effective mode for taking impressions of carved or inscribed stones in use at the British Museum. It is in fact so effective that the recent engravings of the arrow-headed inscriptions from Nineveh have been made from impressions taken in the following manner:—The surface of the stone is carefully cleaned with a soft dry brush, and then a sheet of thick porous paper is laid over it, such as thick blotting paper, which has previously been damped, and then the paper is gently tapped with a slightly wetted soft brush, such as a common hat brush, (the paper being held firmly down at the corners,) until it gradually sinks into the impressions of the stone. Should the impressions or incisions be deep, of course the paper cracks in the deepest part of the incision, and then a second, or more, layers of paper are added, or bits laid on to the cracked parts, and the tapping continued until the paper is pressed into every hole and crevice of the stone. The repeated tapping of the brush upon the porous paper has the effect of uniting the several layers into a solid mass, which must be left on the stone till the whole is thoroughly dry, when it is easily removed from the stone, and a perfect impression (of course reversed) is obtained. J. O. W.


In reply to the inquiry of a correspondent in the last Number of the Archceologia Cambrensis, we submit the following:—

I can procure a copy of the Inq. from the Tower, if your correspondent will pay the expense. From the extracts already published, vol. i. First Series, p. 349, and vol. iii. New Series, p. 222, he will perceive that the Extent gives particular information, whereas the Inquisition only givesgeneral; a transcript of the latter as regards Lancashire is in the Harl. MSS., and some names of that county do appear, (vol. iv. First Series, p. 69.) The Extent of Denbigh gives a perfect description of the lordship, with the tenants' names, holdings, rate and amount of rent paid. As a further example of each, I add, (from the Extent),— Fol. 2b. Manerium de Kylforn.

Item Johannes de Romworth1 et Ricardus del Peek tenent juxta Cloyd quandam placeam terra? pro xij acras; qua? >continet xij acras et xxviij perticas, reddendo pro acrae xviij denarios ad terminos praedictos (Sc Pentecost: et 8' Michael).

Fol. 21. Villata de Lleweny. Ricardus del Peek tenet eodem modo (sc haered:) xl acras j rodam, dimidium; reddendo per annum in grosso xxviij* iid

Idem Ricardus tenet iij acras terra? praetio acrae viijd et j rodam, praetio iijd reddendo (&c.) ijs iijd

Ed idem Ricardus tenet iiij? acras terrae, praetio acrae viijd reddendo (&c.) ij* iiijd

Fol. 22. Thomas filius Ricardi del Peek tenet vj acras terrae, pretio acrae viijd, & iij rodas, praetio,

ixd, (&c.) iiij5 ixd*

Fol. 24. Parcus de Lleweny. Ricardus del Peek tenet iiij acras, iij rodas, et v perticas terrae, pretio acrae, ut supra, (sc xijd) reddendo (&c.)

Fol. 24b. Le Polflat, in Villata de Lleweny.

Rogerus del Peek tenet iij acras j rodam, dimidium praetio acrae, xxd v* vijd

(From the Inquisition),—

Caymerth.—Et dicunt quod praedictus comes habuit apud Caymerth de redditu assiso liberorum tenendum Wallensium

xxi' viijd ad festa Natat Domini, Apostolorum

et Jacoft Sancti Petri et omnium

Sanctorum, aequis portionibus. Item habuit in Roweynok de redditu assiso tarn liberorum tenentium

quam villanorum xv", et lxs tam de liberis quam de nativis pro

quadam custuma quae vocatur Tung,4 (&c., &c.)

London, January, 1853. Richard Pbake.

l Another name from Lancashire place. See vol. iv. First Series, p. 69; vol. i. New Series, pp. 137,163; ii. pp. 69, 79,165; iii. pp. 69, 70, 79, 80, 222.

* The above 52 acres, but little doubt, part of the present Perthewig. See vol, iv. First Series, p. 66.

'But little doubt the present " Peake Meadow." See vol. i. First Series, p. 349. What were these customs Tung and Amob*?


[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »