E INCHYRTH A STON SOMD EAN E OTHER UNPUBLISHED EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS

by ROBERT B. K. STEVENSON, M.A., F.S.A., F.S.A.SCOT.

THE main purpose of this paper is to publish notes on some sculptured monuments or fragments that have either been foun Scotlann di recenn di t year r whicso e har insufficiently published. Seven of them are Pictish or later Picto-Scottish (1-4, 6-8), two are Northumbrian (10) and three are Strathclyde British (12-13). Attention is also drawn to particular features of three better-known monuments, Pictish (5), show w BritisNorse b no o ne t eh on (i/j.).(n) d an ,1 For though the number and variety of the sculptured stones of Pictland has led writer concentrato s t othe e th f ro ancient themn ar e o e th t, kingdoms belongs equally of cours Scotlano et presens it n di t sense.2 Indeed interesmuce th f hmoderr o fo t n study lies not only in the differences of style conditioned by their ethnic and political history, but in the repeated interaction of those styles within a country which, despite them, shared what was no doubt broadly a common culture. Some dis- cussio thesn no e line alreads sha y been attempte writee th Pictis r y drfo b h art,d 3an for crossee somth f Scotief o s o c Dalriada, bried 4an f general comments seem parti- cularly called for here by the British sculpture to which little attention has been paid fo lona r g timee opportunitTh . alss yi o take prino nt summara t chronoe th f yo - logical schemes propounded by various writers on Pictish sculpture; agreement is evef of relativn stil no r fa l e chronology l absolutal d an , e date intendee sar d onls ya approximations. The Society and the writer are indebted to more people than it has been possible to name, for reports, information, and action to safeguard the stones described in notee th s that follow. i. THE STONE, ST MADGES, (PI. III-IV) igtn O h February 194 cover-stone 5th grava strucplougf s e eo th e wa y kwhan b h i t beed ha n parkland 130 yds. sout Inchyrf ho a House Carse th f Gowrin ei o , milee6 s from Perth (37/190211) mounA . d 120 yds e buria. westh f s markei o lt d Witch KnowO.Se th . n mapeo Jamer M . s Wood, then Curato Pertf o rt Galler hAr d yan Museum, and Mr Harold de Pass the proprietor examined the site, and some weeks late rd bee wheha nl levelleal n d harrowedan e latr Thomath dM e s McLaren, illustrationr 1Fo descriptiond an s stonef o thesef o d s san ,referre comparisor fo o dt n- unles s other refer- ences are given - see Alien, J. Romilly, Early Christian Monuments of , m. 2 Yet the , by far our most important sculptured monument, has several times been omitted from professed surveys of Early Christian Monuments in Scotland. Probleme Th 3 Pictse oth f (1955) . Wainwrighted , , 97-128 bibliographs T. it . F ,o T . y shoul addee db d Henryd an Curie, L. , F.. C ,, 'Early Christia Scotland'n i t nAr , Gazette des Beaux-Arts (U.S.A., 1944), 257-72, which has important stylistic descriptions. The well-illustrated article, 'Some carved stone monuments in East and Central Scotland', in IPEK, xvn (Berlin, 1943-8), 52-76, by Mary E. Boyle is very subjective and chronologically unconvincing; cf. P.S.A.S. (1937—8), 115 if. 'J.R.S.A.I. (1956), 84-96. 4 3 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1958-59 F.S.A.SCOT., Burgh Surveyor of Perth, made a record and examined the cover-stone, on which there were carved symbols. Following a paper read to the Society by r McLareM Januarn i y 1946, Dr Jame . RichardsosS n re-examine stonee dth e H . recognised a third set of symbols and two further sets of ogam letters. He also noted that several fragments belonged to the same stone and added to the main inscription symboa o t d l an group r McLaren'M . s death later that year prevente amende dth - papers men hi incorporates i t f muc o t i bu ; f h o t togetheaccoun e pu th n w di no tr at the request and with the help of Mr William Davidson, Director of Perth Art Galler Museumd yan , wher symboe eth l ston preserves ei gifa s Passte da d fro r .mM Though the stones were dug out before any bones were noticed, it would seem that above and around the skeletal remains there were forty-nine water-rolle1 d stones thesn O cover-slae eth 5. y b £in 9 y 1o bt b 2 . restedin varyin6 y , b 7 g froy b m8 aligned WNW.-ESE., with its upper surface about a foot below ground level. The sla slightls bi y wedge-shaped taperind , en 5. lon ^17d ft e . wid g$an 1on o in g t 2 t ea at the other; the thickness varies from 2f to 3\ in. The rock is local sandstone, reported by Dr A. G. MacGregor of the Geological Survey to be very fine-grained mica-richd an , containing both biotit muscovited ean r RichardsoD . n noted that while one surface is smooth and undulating the other is flaky, suggesting that it was obtaine cleavagy db e fro mwater-wora n exposure. Both lon narroe g th side d wsan smoothe ar d d theien an , rsmoote edgth o et h surfac roundes i e d whil othee eth r edge is sharp. Part of one side was shattered at the time of the discovery but some fragment t weri f o set fac flakee d narrorecoverede bu on eha f th t d of a w en d an , was also rescued e wideTh . r end, whic towary hla weste d beedth ha , n roughly truncated in antiquity. A groove right across the smooth surface as well as several short ones see havmo t e been made afte shatteredsids e th rprobablewa o s d an , y while the stone was being moved from the site: a similar groove on the same side but neare ene rth doveral e (noth n i t l photograph unfortunatels wa ) y mad maro et e kth woodea n i t nse e standb dept o f somt stone I .s hth eewa more erratic scoringn so rouge th h surface were ploug e madth y eb h they would indicate that that facy ela uppermost. The symbols There are three and evidently successive sets of Pictish symbols on the stone. (a) On the smooth surface, which will be called the front, at the narrow end there is a 'spectacles' symbol (with no Z-rod) and below it a fish. The position of the fish and its fins make it obvious that the sculptor considered the narrow end to be stonee e symbolth f Th o . p sto were th e first pockina marke n i t r stuggingdo ou g technique thed an ,n deepene smoothedd dan , possibl obliquy yb e 'chiselling' with the same round-nosed tool. The initial pocking did not follow at all carefully any drawing in some impermanent medium, for many strokes landed outside the final quite broad outline. This is particularly clear at the rear of the dorsal fin. An changa unfinisheo t minde f eo du obliqu e e :th b d y lineema liny behine ema ey e dth

uppee Th wese r parth skula tt f end)o t(a l arm-bonn a , shoulded ean r socket were identifier M y db Woo thed 1dan n re-interre proprietore wise th spoe th f ho t th a t n do . THE INGHYRA STONE AND OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 35 be double or triple on other stones.1 But in spite of these defects the artist was definite and accurate in the final execution. Unfortunately the stone has flaked at the fish's mouth, which was probably drawn as a single line slanting back and up with a loop at the inner corner, as at Easterton of Roseisle.2 The angular notches on the 'spectacles' should be noted. (b] On the same side but at the other end, which was thought of in its turn as tope th , lowethere th s e i rtale parth l f bifito d rectangl 'tuning-forkr eo ' symbold an , belo mirrora wt i . These were never completed pockine th : onls gywa beginnino gt form grooves - on the legs of the rectangle and the upper part of the mirror's rim work had gone further than on the circles of the handle. The natural surface of the stone has sprung off much of the area of the design, which makes it hard to see and also prevents certainty as to whether, as seems probable, there was some further symbol to the left of the rectangle. Certainly to the left of the mirror, on one of the fragments broken off, there is an L which may be the remains of a very unfinished comb. The pocking goes so much across and below the legs of the rectangle that any mere irregularity of striking such as noted on the fish provides no explanation. The symbol has in fact been deliberately defaced. Possibly this was due to some antagon- ism. Yet it seems equally probable that the surface of the stone scaled under the strokes of the sculptor to such an extent that he decided not to continue; but later he or another took the rejected stone and made the half-finished symbols inconspicuous pockiny b g ove mose th r t complete part successfullo (s s y tha r McLareM t no d ndi notice them), and cut other symbols in a technique that did not cause such impact. (c) For on the back of the wide end, again treated as the top, there is a third pair of symbols; above, a fish now headless, rather less well drawn than the other, its dorsal fin a simple triangle (not clear in the photograph where it looks longer than t is)i ; below, snaka e witslightlo htw y oval pupil-less eyes separate lina y ed b tha t bifurcates to the back of the head. These creatures are not pocked, but executed in a V-sectioned groove which Mr C. A. Gordon considers to be chisel cut,3 but which could have been engraved with a knife. Though the line does not always hold its direction accurately it is less irregular than appears in the photograph, for the undulations of the stone result in uneven depth and shadows, even though there has been some smoothin preparo gt surface decoratede th b o et f . o Jusp ti t e shorth f o t the snake's tail part of the outline has flaked off, giving an illusory scorpion's tail. A line acros centre snake'e sth th f eo s bod similarls yi flakingo t e ydu , from which e fisth h also suffered. Some small dots neare e e centrstonth th r f eo e thae nth snake's back are natural holes, as may be other little depressions elsewhere. Although the broad end was broken in antiquity, destroying two pairs of symbols, therevidenco n s e i thi w seho happene r doed no t hel si deduco pt e ordee th eth f o r symbols e woulOn . d suppose, however, thasymbole naturalle th t th n so y smooth side wer rougee earlieth n ho sidet rthad stabilitr se tha an ,tfo e n th broa e yth d den would hav r edescriptio e groundou bee th o s nn i f s followebes I t . nha se t e th d chronological order, and the preservation of the fish and 'spectacles' is due to their 1 Easterton; Dunrobin. below6 3 . p .e Se 2 3 P.S.A.S. (1954-6). 42 , 36 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1958-59 groune th beinn i dt gwhese snakd fise nan th h e were uppermost. Some supporr fo t this vie wprovides i relationshie longeo th tw y db e r th ogams f po t befor Bu . e con- sidering these some comparisons shoul made db e with other stones. Comparisons From the conclusion that the Inchyra stone was intended by its sculptors to stand erect in two or three successive positions it follows that the use as the cover-stone of grava laters ewa , perhaps much later, tha carvingse nth . Ther indeee ear d quitea numbe othef o r r instance symbof so l stones incorporate laten di r graves alsd f an o,o symbols cut successively; though only on the symbol-less is there a possibilit successivf yo e ogam Scottisa n so h monolith. symboo Tw 1 l stones seemo t have been re-use Vikine th n di g period: one, barely describe bearins da eaglen ga , covered a cremation urn in an ancient mound (broch?) in Birsay, Orkney2; another cover-stonee th f o wae lona son f sgo cist containin bodieo gtw pard whaf an so t t might have been an iron spear-head, near Dunrobin in Sutherland. No dating^

evidence at all is available for other cases where a symbol stone again3 formed the cover; a short cist at Golspie near Dunrobin4 and a cist in a cairn at Drumbuie near Urquhart, Inverness-shire.5 A very roughly constructed cist, L-shaped, at Easterton of Roseisle in Morayshire, had a symbol stone as one long side.6 The latter stone is also an example of symbols on one face being reversed in relatio other e thoso nt th facn n I e.o treversee parth f to d symbols have been defaced as at Inchyra, but not the symbol and a half which may be assumed to have been invisibl groune th n ei d whe famoue nth s goos fisd hean stood uppermoste th n I . grave the creatures were placed against the earth with the defaced side inward to the cist. It is perhaps worth noting that both at Inchyra and Easterton the animals on theifollon row w schematic symbols casy an e ;rarn i the southere n ei yar n Pictland. Another stone with similarly defaced symbols back to back, but the same way up, is that from St Peter's, S. Ronaldsay, . Reversed symbols occur again at opposite ends on one of the stones from Kintore, ; on the smoother side presumable th e ar y older symbols thesf o d e hal an , 'elephante fth bees ha ' n carefully defaced, the granite over an extensive area being pocked away; but curiously this is juspare th t t that woul sune db k deepes groune th n i t d whe othee groue th nth n rpo side was uppermost — while the 'spectacles' that would then be higher up are un- touched. No one previously appears to have commented on any of these defacements. Stones with the symbols the same way up front and back at Dingwall and Kintore (E.C.M. . i) havNo t beeeno n examine thin di s connection. Ther alse ear o two monuments with sculpture on the second face, Nos. i and 2, Perthshire, whil t Logiea c Elphinstone ther palimpsesa s ei t with 'spectaclese th n o ' same sid lates ea r symbols similaa e ; b thery r casema t Fetteea r Angus, likewisn ei Aberdeenshire.

1 P.S.A.S. (1954-6)- 44 ,

ibid. E.C.M.(1854-7)n i t R.C.A.M.r no o , 60 , 2 3 ibid. (1851-4), 297; E.C.M., m, 42. " ibid. (1942-3), 26. 5 ibid. (1885-6), 355, and added details in E.C.M., in, 99. 6 ibid. (1894-5), 449, (i933~4), 55! E.C.M., in, 124. THE INCHYRA STONE AND OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 37 Though pocking seems to have been the normal method of incising symbols, and Mr Gordon in his study of the subject has only noted the Inchyra fish and serpent as examples of V-shaped profiles,1 narrow unpocked grooves do occur elsewhere - for exampl Golspi e . RonaldsaeS th d ean y stones mentioned above. e notcheInchyre Th th n so a 'spectacles unusuae ar singla ' t bu el round notch occurs at Newton in the Garioch, and at each side of the square-ended bifid rectangle (related to the 'tuning-fork') from Mill of Newton, also Aberdeenshire. Other rectangles, however, have enclosed circles or circles connected with a notch. It may be relevant that rectangular notches are found in two representations of square shields on later monuments, the tomb-shrine at and the cross-slab at Ardchattan, Argyll. Mrs S. H. Pritchard has suggested to me, quite independently of the question of notches, that the 'spectacles' symbol represents or is derived from otherwisn a e unknown for parryinf mo g shield. ogamsThe Quit remarkabls ea e sequencth s ea f symbol o e Inchyr th n o s a e stonth s ei presenc sequenca f eo ogaf eo m inscriptions. These have recently been publishey db Dr F. T. Wainwright,2 and he has kindly agreed to his findings being summarised here, followin descriptionsn ow y gm . Professo Jackson. examines H . ha K ro e ,wh dth stone along with us, is in general agreement. None of us offers any interpretation of the readings. (a) When the narrow end with the fish and 'spectacles' was uppermost very boldly pocked-and-rubbed scores and a central stem-line were cut, starting from a point 31 in. down the left-hand edge and running across the top, but not down onto the other edge. Unluckily the back of the stone has tended to flake away, and though a large piece was recovered, and placed in position by Dr Richardson, thus complet- topletter e e lefe th th tth , n g sidso in equalls ei y defective witplacen i clear,s i t h i t I . however, tha stem-line th t e continues rounscored cornee ha stone dth d sth f ean o r alon. git slae th b f havo ende d etheirth f en s o lettere e th Th scoren so s joine linea y da b , peculiarly Pictish trick. These particular lines are completed grooves, but curiously enoug uppee hth r groupside th e n havso e simply pocked lines while e thosth f eo middle group e lightlar s y incised, indistinc e photograpth n i t t witbu h h every appearance of being ancient. The lowest groups seem to have had no ligatures at all. noticeabls i t I e tha lowese tth t group lese ssar distinct tha otherse nth , particularly the first letter, and this is due to irregular punching of their margins: which suggests some defacement of that part of the inscription that would be visible if the fish were sunk in the ground to its tail. The transliteration of this inscription is as follows: INEHHETESTIE[TD]/INNE c D T D H p_ 1 P.S.A.S. (1954-6), 40 ff. 2 OGAM, xi (Rennes, 1959), 269-78, with map and bibliography of Scottish ogams; reprinted in The Inchyra Ogams, Museum, 1961. 8 3 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1958-59 The first nine letters and the last four are reasonably certain. For the tenth Dr Wainwright prefer balancn o s spacind ean , thregT e scores, instea possiblee th f do s with four, or three and a space. After the fourth E only the last two scores of an H-series letter are recognisable on the long side, but there is rather too much space e suggestedar evefive-scorD a r T nfo r e othe o th : T e rstem-linD th o_sido s ,f o e e is clearly unmarked. same th e n stone e (bedgO th ) f eo , starting . 1belo1in bole wth do ogas d man probably later r RichardsoD , n notice faintla d y incised inscription 17 . long!in . Thi scarceln sca preliminara e yb y sketch intende deepenede b stem-lino de t th r fo , e is far from carefully and centrally set on the stone, indeed it is extremely erratic, and the score oftee sar n very clos havy e togetherma e t beei t nquica Ye . k e noteb o t , temptet s bettei se ou te r On associato dlatet . ron t wite i unfinishee hth d symbols,

Inohyfix O § h a m s (b) ) an(c d

Inches FIG. i. Inchyra, sketches of ogams an t doed i t stretc sno beyonr hfa mirroe dth eithen ri r direction othee th rn hanO . d it bear similasa r relatio snakee th mighd o nt an , t have been mad ligha y eb t appli- catiosame th f eno tool t thi unlikelbu s :si anothes ya r oga mdefinitels i y associated wit snakee hth eithen I . r case this inscription shoul reae db d upwards towarde sth broad end of the stone. It may be noticed that though the scores are very irregular in length there seems tendenca e b o vowele t thosr shortee th yfo b f eo o st r than consonantse thosth f eo , reminiscen f Iriso t h ogam unlikd an sprevioue eth s inscriptio stonee d th An n .no ligatureso thern e ear . The following is Dr Wainwright's transliteration, with some alternative sugges- tions drawine baseth offeredn dw o gno , fig indees . i saye it h ;i s d a ofte n doubtful scoreifthe s cros stem-linesthe , partly becaus confusineof g cracks whetheand , r they are meant to be vertical or oblique in relation to it:

ZTTLIETREN ?OIDDORS

E °_ v The letter o seems to occur in two forms, the first a triangle which may be considered equivalen lozenge th o t f t'scholasti eo c ogam'; from whic eighth-centurn ha y date may be proposed. THE INCHYRA STONE AND OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 39 (c) The remaining 9 in. of the edge are blank, up to where the stone is truncated. But for this it would have been possible to suppose that ogam (b) had extended right round the broad end. For letters are to be seen on the other edge, in an exactly similar style though perhaps with more pronouncedly short-scored vowels. From where the original flat edge now starts, 3! in. from the broken end, they can be traced for g| in., but all in an area damaged at the time when the stone was found. This inscription does not appear on the loose fragments farther down the edge. r WainwrighD t notes that several letter completele sar firse yth t lost d recogan ; - nisable letter may have lost one or two scores. Reading towards the broad end of the stone he records traces of UHT o PAGEU? D E NG i (d) On the surface of the slab, to the right of the fish with the snake, Dr Richard- son also recognised scores in the same technique as those symbols. They form an inscription that runs parallel to the edge of the stone and differs fro1 m the others in having really short vowe limaginar n scorea d san y stem-line. mose Thith s tsi Irish in style (though in it would have been cut along the arris) and for this reason one might say that the order of the symbols argued above is in contradiction typologicae th o t l inscriptione ordeth f o r s that seem associated with them. Reading upwards, once more towards the broad end, we have s E T u The first two letters are certain; and third almost so, despite an area of flaking which cause fourte sth loso t horiginas eit l surfacscoreso tw perhapd r an eo . e son thire Th underlieu d e scorth f eo s recent damage.

2. CULLAIRD, DORES, INVERNESS-SHIRE (PL V, 2) Parsymboa f o t l 195stony ploughes t Cullair5Ma a e wa n i p du d Farm near Scani- port, 3 miles SW. of Inverness, more precisely in the Ness Castle Field 300 yds. SW. Rivee oth f r Ness (28/63(1-4)84(2-4)) r Joh M . Thomson.F n e farmerth , , pre- sented it later that year to Inverness Museum, and Miss M. O. MacDougall, F.S.A.SCOT., the Librarian and Curator, kindly sent photographs with a request for a report. Further particulars have been provided by Mr D. A. Anderson. One incomplete corner of the original monument remains. It is a slab of pink sandstone, . somthick in d measure 2 ean , e bas y th 14b est a highe 14 . Th !in . left edge is original but the top is missing. The symbols are rather roughly drawn. There is a very simple mirror and a comb with six teeth on one side and three thick teeth on the other. The two larger symbols close up against them are not complete, whic s particularlhi y unfortunat reconstructioe th s a e n eacni h case must remain uncertain. Fig. 2 is very tentative. The symbol that came to the top of the stone was

These are Mr Gordon's 'trial grooves': P.S.A.S. (1954-6), 42. 1 0 4 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1958-59 crosse havZ-roda y y ma edb t beei ; nrectangla e wit hsemicircla e drawn inside each upright side, a variant perhaps of the notched rectangle symbol. The curved lines below this can be made into a rather broad version of the 'horseshoe compar'y symbolma e t witei W . h thos t Clynemiltoea Sutherlann ni d and Congash near Grantown-on-Spey. If Cullaird really had a 'horseshoe', the

FIG. 2. Tentative reconstruction of Cullaird symbols (c. 1/10)

pattern thesn o s e three stones for msimplificatioa n series comparabl whao et s i t foun n cresceno d t symbols. Though poor execution doet necessarilno s y imply relative lateness, the handle of the mirror is clumsy compared with the usual shape tha circleso t includetw r o . e Latenesson s would also othee explaith y r symbolnwh s diverge from normal. 3. LATHERON, (PI. V, 3) While member e Prehistorith f o s c Society unde leadershie th r r Felloou r f pwo M R. J. C. Atkinson were visiting Caithness in the summer of 1956, they learnt that a piece of sculptured stone was built into a wall at Latheron 19 miles south-west of Wick. It forms the lintel of a false window in the south gable of the small farmhouse of Latheron Mains (39/198334 . recogniseBrims K wa s s sd Mr whe wa an ) y e db nsh living in the house. Through her kindness and that of the late Lt.-Col. lan McHardy, F.S.A.SCOT., a photograph was obtained for this note. It shows the common cresecent- and-V-rod symbol, decorated with a straightforward version of one of the forms of patter ncallee whicb y d hma descriptivel y 'dome-and-wing' (see next section).

OSDALEN DU . 4 , DuiRNISH, SKYE A suggested typology of the patterns on crescent symbols was set out in fig. 15 of The Problem of the . One of the diagrams there (0.12) shows the pattern on the THE INCHYRA STONE AND OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 4! Osdaln Du e (Toba Maora rn ) stone wit referencha R.C.A.Me th o et . Inventorf yo the Outer and Skye. As the photograph published in the Inventory was very indistinct and the stone is at Dunvegan Castle, Dame Flora MacLeod of MacLeod kindly supplied a full-size drawing. It was prepared by Mr and Mrs Sandwith with the help of Mr Sim. The pattern is an elegant version of the 'dome- and-wing', and they noted that it repeats in a smaller form the circles to be seen on the wings of a similar pattern at Pabbay near Barra. secone Th Osdaln dDu symboe e th stone n concentrio o l tw , c circles largee th , r io| in. across, seems from its size, and position directly below the i3i-in. crescent, to be complete as it is, and not to be intended to be part of a 'spectacles' symbol. HILTO5. CADBOLLNOF , ROSS-SHIRE (PI iV, ). Probably few people have noticed the bearded profile of the consort of the lady who, riding side-saddle mose th s ti , prominen t greae figurth n t eo monumen t from Hilton of Cadboll.1 Certainly Romilly Alien mistoo hair fo rt k i comin g down ove righr rhe t shoulder, no doubt because it is symmetrical with the long hair on the other side of descriptios r headhi he d an ,repeate s nProceedingse wa th n di whe stone nth e camo et the Museum nearly forty years ago.2 He did, of course, note that her horse 'has a double outline as if to show another horse in perspective'. A new photograph shows the male rider better than the usual small-scale repro- ductions, though it obscures the corrugations | in. long that do indicate the lady's hai than ro overlooto t sidhel d e e an pman on e kth . Fro mirror-and-come mth d ban r prominenche stone eth e woul interestins i t di herse t seeb Ye mo .t g tha coule h t d not be left out when she took the place of the leading man whom the sculptor found on the prototype of the scene, to judge from the all-male, and fuller, version on the largese Aberlemnth f o t o monument measurA se man' . th (E.C.M. 3) f . o es No importance is the awkwardness of the device needed to get sufficient depth of relief quadrangulae th - t on i brin m ghi balancee r fac s b reces o hi e t a r thad y sfo d b ha t similar one not really necessary for her hair. e photograpTh h also bring t whasou t Romilly Alien called 'something heln di her hands in addition to the reins'. It is three-quarters of a hoop. And the circular knobs at its ends do not look very like hands, are over-prominent compared with the nexe hanth tf do ride t comno r righ n eo i below d td relatioe an ,fold e th th f o so nt sleeves s temptini t I . thino gt k instea exaggeraten a f do r outsizdo e penannular with disc ends, fastenin mantle gth e acros breaste sth . Wha bees ha t n sup- posed to be the second rein may be the pin placed horizontally across the brooch, towarn ru fo t doe i e 'hand't r dth no e spuzzlin Th . g verticae on le featurb y ma e uprigh tmantlee edgth f belod eo roundean a , wt i d area whic perhaps hi true sth e hand. do not seem to be represented on Scottish stones, unless one includes the pai f circleo r s marked wit seee hcrosa b eacn three no o st th h f eshouldeo o tw f o r e cross-slath me n o n b from e shown Irelanar I . n n dme wearin ga

Problem of the Picts, cit. 116-17. 1 E.C.M., P.S.A.S.; m62 , (1921-2). 62 , 2 42 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1958-59 penannular brooch on the left shoulder, on Muiredach's cross at 1 and most clearly on one of the figures at White Island in Lough Erne. 2 6. OLD CHURCHYARD, , ANGUS (PI. VI) In April 1952, Mr Charles Ruxton, keeper of the Old Churchyard which is situated mila e wes moderf o t nyds0 Edzel50 . SSWCastlee d th lan f o . , discovere dstona n ei the churchyard burie dinches w onl fe showee ya H . Captaio t . Duket di G . nR , R.N., F.S.A.SCOT., Edzell, and Mr F. A. Ferguson, F.S.A.SCOT., , who recognised it as the arm and central boss of a free-standing cross sculptured in bold relief. It is indee f considerablo d e importanc s beina e a gfragmen f probablo t e earliesyth t known free-standing areae crosth sn si where Pictish cross-slabs predominatedd an , the only one in the style of their most elaborate monuments.3 Mr Ferguson took photograph kindld san y communicated wit presene hth t writer. fragmene sandstoned Th re f o s ti broad, 7 . lon1 3d in t tapergI an . s slightly from the centre of the cross-head, yj in. thick (excluding the boss) to 6| in. at the end of arme e originath Th . estimatee b l arme y spath f sma n . o t 2(figd a 1in . 3). There was no continuous 'Celtic' ring joining the arms nor were the circles of the armpits complete Pictisn di h fashion t aparbu , t from this last featur fore eth f crosm o s will have been like thos relien ei cross-slabn fo t Aberlemnsa oEassie.d (Noan ) n 2 .O 4 obliqun a s wha doubtless ha e wa tmeandem ar frone e sth th t r pattern wit linee hth s ending in small knobs, very like that on the stone in churchyard (E.C.M. centree th . 2)n I ,. No however, ther larga s ei e hemispherical . acrosbosin d s5 san rising i £ in., covered wit hclosa e mes interlacef ho . Such bosse characteristie ar s c oa fewf t outstandingbu , , example f sculpturo s n Scotlandi e e cross-slabth : t a s Aberlemno (No. 3, by the roadside) in Angus and at Nigg in Ross-shire, the tomb- shrine at St Andrews and the free-standing ringed-head crosses at lona and Kildalton, . They mark the climax of Pictish sculpture and that of the Scots at a still disputed date, perhaps around A.D. 825. Edzele bace th Ove th f kl o lal r fragmen t therarrangemenn a s ei f mediumo t - sized and small bosses, much weathered. They are linked by the tails of spirals which had covered the bosses. Such groups of bosses, particularly with spiral work, are another characteristic of some of the monuments already mentioned. Dr Francoise Henr compares yha d spirathee th mo t l illuminatio Booe th Kellf f kno o . A.Ds(c . 800) .

The end and the upper and lower surface5 s of the arm are intact and quite plain. A rounded hollow 2 in. deep and 4 in. across has been sunk into what may be presumeunderside th e transome b th f o dr t thieo Fo s. hollow seem originan a s l feature: it is almost symmetrically placed behind the boss, and centrally between front and back, leaving two flat surfaces (one of which is reasonably intact) each 11

1 Alien, J. R., 'The and how it was worn', Illustrated Archaeologist (1894), 162-75. • Ulster J.A. (1959), . PIVI . 3 To the same half-century may be ascribed the fragment of what seems to have been a miniature cross, shafe th tthick 2 . widonl d in ye,4 an from Lethnott z\ miles further west. 4 We may note that the comparable Glamis No. 2 has cusped armpits derived from Anglian spatulate heads like fig. .4 Earlye th 6n i IrishChristian t Ar Period (1940), 148alse presene Se oth . t writer, 'Chronolog somf yo e Irish and Scottish Crosses', in J.R.S.A.I. (1956), 84 ff. THE INCHYRA STONE AND OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 43 in. wide. These can be identified as the seatings by which the cross-head rested on shafe th t made fro mseparata e block, which wil lroun a hav d edha tenon projecting tiltes i m d ar upward e th f o s d int relativ hollowe e planen e o th th th e f o eo eTh t . best preserved seating, an irregularity which may or may not have been corrected by making the corresponding seating on the shaft also depart from the horizontal. The problem of crosses made of more than one piece of stone, e.g. Ruthwell and two at lona, are of considerable interest and complexity and merit more study than the writer has been able to give them. Deep hollowe mark interpretatioe th th n i sf i , a contemporar s na y mortic1 s ei correct, are a valuable indication of the tool used, and strongly suggest that the relief monuments were fashioned t finisheno f i , d off, wit same hth e kin f round-nosedo d punch, which sculptors call a 'point', as made the characteristically 'stugged' incised sculpture of an earlier date (above, p. 37). Certainly the later carvings from Greens in Strathclyde, that are described in section 12 below, bear marks of a similar tool. Captain Duke suggest havy s thama e t beei t n thi large s th cross-ar et no d man parslaa f bto with debased sculpture that standLindsae th n si y vault,2e whicth s hwa fragment with interlace othed dan r carvings foun 187 n di reported 0an Wardey db n in 1882 as lost again.3 7. , ANGUS (PL V, 4) There were dug up in 1943 in the manse garden at Menmuir, 5 miles SW. of Edzell, three sculptured fragment staircasa kep w n so no t thae ear t window-ledge th n ei churchquits i e e enigmaticOn . . Anothe irregulan a s ri r sandstonblocd re f ko e about a foot square, wite flahon t sid whicn o e ha cros s with cusped armpit s beeha s n stoncarvee th brokenf s e i o 'falsn d i d emissinen s i .relief e m th s ar g a ; e paron f o t e thirTh d belong same th eo st earl stoneo ytw groue s previouslth s pa y known outsid churche defectiva e th s i t I . e square abou bee s tacross. ft iha nt para bu , f o t larger monument. It is of grey sandstone and was originally 3! in. thick. One side bears parrathea f o t r crudely drawn hunting scen shore th flan ei tn t o relie d an f edg eoriginae parth f o t l rounded border moulding. Belo scene wnarrowea th s ei r moulding separating it from a lower panel. The other side has had its carving almost obliterated t therbu , tracs ei meandea f eo r patter curvea n no , probably part ocross-heada f . . FergusoA . F r nM dre attentioy wm theso nt e stone provided san photoe dth - graph. 8. BULLION, INVERGOWRIE, ANGUS (PI. VII) drinkine Th g horsema appeareo nwh Ordnanccovee e 193n th dth i f n ro 8 o e Survey Dar f Britaie o kp Ag nMa (North Sheet) presents more problems than jusface th tt that he is evidently from a sculpture in relief such as O. G. S. Crawford excluded from the east Scottish part of the map and text. This is the stone which was briefly 1 J.R.S.A.I., cit. 86-S8. 2 P.S.A.S. (1909-10), 358-60, (1914-15), 296-7. 3 Jervise, A., Epitaphs, i (1875), Landofthe307d an , Lindsays (and ed., 1882) . Warden3 , , Angus,J. . A , m (1882), 214: references kindly provide Captaiy db n Duke. 44 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1958-59 recorde Proceedingse th n di f 1934o , having been found before mid-March that year at Bullion west of Dundee during the making of the Kingsway by-pass (37/34333054) .* gref e slao s Th byi (no . widetin bacrede 5 th ,. k)ft sandstone2 . hig d in h2 an . ft 6 , irregular as removed from its bed, the front where necessary smoothed by pocking; in the same way as a panel has been lowered 0-3 to 0-5 in. to leave the figure in flat relief with rounded edges. The front corners of the slab have been rounded similarly, whil sharpnese eth oblique th f edgp so eto e suggests tha originae bees th tha n p to l broken off; another irregular sectioe stonth s missinf ei no g belo e sculpturewth . After it was presented to the Museum by the County Council a cast was made and sen Lifto t f Church GrahaDr . m Callander never wrot promiseehis d communica- tion about it, but did correspond with Scandinavian scholars in an endeavour to find parallels. Nothing strictly comparable is known there, nor in Britain for that matter, whether artisticall r archaeologicallyyo . Artisticall strikinyo thertw e gear features; horse th representes ey i wa first e th , d head-down plodding uphill, mor r lesn eo o s its own even if the reins are presumably held in the warrior's hidden left hand; second, the dominating drinking-horn which the man holds to his out-thrust lips with his righ hore tth s nhandf i e o bird' stare d p Th ti .an s se heam dowth hi t da t n a emphasise projectiny db g beyon frame dth e sune madth ky ebackgroundb . Mounted warriors are of course not uncommon, along with hunters, on the early monument easterf so n Scotland latee somd th an ,rf e o one s include panel whicn so h ther singla s ei e rider examplr fo , stifdeformee d eth an f d figure t Benviesa . Perhaps the earliest and certainly the finest of the single figures is that, now wanting its upper part, which occupie smal e bace t elaboratth th f kbu l o sal e cross-slab Meigl . 5-2eNo Neare Bullioe styln rth i o et n ride Meigls ri . 3.rideA e No r goes uphilscene th n eli Inchbrayocn o k acciden n (Montrosea e e b placin f th y t thi o t. in 3bu ,sma o No )s ga earlier No. 4.* All these have spirited mounts with their heads held high. Those carrying shields are usually shown riding to our left, to allow the round shield show e normas b it o t n ni l lefe placeth t armlinen o o , sTw . slopin frop e gu mth e Bullioshielth n o dn stone represent- carrying straps, also see n ridero n s from Burghea foot-soldiere th Benvied n d o Dupplie an (E.C.M.d ) th 8 n an ,. so nNo cross. Bullioe Th n rider's 'cut-away coat alss i ' o paralleled, most clearlmonumente th n yo s t Fordoua Aberlemnd nan o (No. 2) . But on none of these monuments is there a drinking scene. There seem to be only two other representation drinking-hora f so earln no y Scottish sculpturee th n O . tenth-century cross-shaft from , als Angusn oi e pai f th stif,o r f doll-like men that stand full-face above a seated harpist hold horns mouth-upwards at their waist. Then on the Norse-influenced cross at Barochan in Renfrewshire (below, p. 49) a mounted man with a spear confronts a person holding a drinking-horn by its mouth, strongly recallin gscena e fiequen eighte th eleventn o ht o t h century monu- P.S.A.S. (1934-5), 15. Map reference from Mr D. B. Taylor, F.S.A.SCOT. *1 E.C.M. numbering: No. 7 in the new Ministry of Works site-guide, and their Early Christian and Pictish Monuments of Scotland, whicn i Bullioe hth n Ston PIs ei . 8 . 3 ibid., No. 10 and PI. 34. 4 ibid., No. 3 and PI. 31. THE INCHYRA STON D OTHEAN E R EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENT5 4 S ments on Gotland in the Baltic, supposed to represent a Valkyrie' welcoming the deceased warrior to Valhalla. onle Th y other entirely solitary horsema Scottisa n no h stone, Dunkel . is ,i dNo spearmaa n blowin ghorna , likhorne eth s blow fooy nb t soldier e bace th th f ko n so Barochan cross s uniqui t i ; beinn i e g incised like presumablth e y earlier symbol stones, and in being at one end of a slab placed sideways. Gotlane Th othed dan r continental stones provide rather distant parallele th o st horsema Pictisn no h sculpture, both bein doubo gn t descended fro mlata e Roman tradition; but nothing suggests that the peculiarities of the Bullion stone are due to 1 foreign impulses n particulaI . e Scandinaviath r n archaeologists consulter D y db Callander denie dScandinaviaa n drinking-horn.e origith r nfo They pointet dou

that bird's-head terminals on horns go back i2 n Britain to the Taplow horn, and that

such terminals found in their Viking graves are considered to have been3 brought home from the west. None of these actual terminals have a beak projecting sharply thee fro naturalisticar e horne o curvy s mth r th f no e,o Bullioe e anglth th ; f eo n r artistifo termina e b c y effectlma , deliberately humorous likhorse'e eth s posd ean the rider's lips and jutting beard - perhaps the only indisputable humour on a pre-Norman stone carving in Britain. The Bullion stone, in short, appears to be the work of an unusually imaginative local sculptor, at a period when sculpture was becoming stiffer and more barbaric, say during the first half of the tenth century. 9. ABERNETHY, PERTHSHIRE (PI. VIII, 2) In 1957 Lt.-Col. R. L. Hunter, F.S.A.SCOT., was shown in Abernethy a piece of sculp- ture that had been built into a house on the east side of the town, and the Museum was subsequently abl acquiro et l thae Al it.t remain whaf o s t must have beena

cross-shaft, recut as part of a windo4 w frame, is a rectangular block of cream sand- . widston in 15y 3 eb e2 ! hig 1d 0h an thick facbeee s eha On n . chiselled off entirely and the sides are also defaced, doubtful traces of interlace remaining only on one. The other face fortunately retains its high-relief sculpture in fair condition up to i in. deep. An upper row of five human figures, now headless, stand close together facing full front. Their feet are splayed in profile, except for one with feet both going to centrae th r fo l paid lefe an th tr whic apparentle har y foreshortene forwardd an d - pointing. The arms stretch downwards and each figure holds an object in its hands: (from lefrighto t t croziea ) r with curved tip ,paia scalef ro s (?) bunca , fruif ho r o t a scourge with'four knotted lashes, a harp or a noose, and again a crozier. Of a presumably similafiguresf o w rro , directly below wit intervenino hn g frame, onle yth heads remain. They are more or less damaged. The faces are framed by hoods or hair which comes cheste dowth o nt .

The Problem of the Picts, 114; to references there add W. Holmqvist, Germanic Art (Stockholm, 1955), 72-881 . Scandinavian influences were reaching Angus Danise th ,f probablo hy par wa Northumbriaf o ty yb s a ,

show2n by animals on the Monifieth cross-shaft and on Invergowrie No. I. Leeds3 , Anglo-SaxonT. . E , t andAr Archaeology, PI. xxi. 4 P.S.A.S. (1957-8)- 6 4 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1958-59 figuree Th headsf o resembl shoulderd w san ro see e e b neth o s t belo w para f o t Crucifixion on another piece of cross-shaft from Abernethy (E.C.M. No. 4). It has similaa rfrot samhistorye no m th s i e t monumen,bu beed ha nt i onls a t y . wide15in . An advanced tenth-century date may be supposed for both fragments. The rows of figures, as on Sueno's Stone at Forres and No. 2, suggest influence from rather late Irish High Crosses. 10. TYNINGHAME, EAST LOTHIAN ) Cross(i , (PI) IX . About 193 0fragmena Angliaf o t n sculptur masonre corfoune s th th f e wa o n di y twelfth-centure towee oth th f f o r y churc t Tyninghamha e between North Berwick and . Though one of St Baldred's churches, and destroyed in 941 by Olaf Godfreyson, Kin Dublin,f go pre-Normao n n remains were previously known there. 1 Preserve chape e mansione th th n df i o l illustratew , thino s si described dan kiny db d permissio Eare th Haddingtonf f o ln o , K.T., F.S.A.SCOT.

FIGS, a and 3. Reconstructions of cross-heads, Edzell and Tyninghame (c. i/io) Carved out of pink sandstone with red streaks in it, the fragment formed the upper part of the shaft and the lower part of the head of a free-standing cross. Enough remain shoo st w tha heae quite beed th tth dha f e no common design that . CollingwooG . W d calls spatulated, eachavinm har gdoubla e curve wit hcusa p between. shafwidte e th ios Th originae 2i f t h£o th in.thicknese d th ,an l . spain ns7 of the arms may be estimated at 221 in. (fig. 4). The fragment does not quite reach up to the centre of the head, where a daisy design would have been normal. On the downwar therawkwardln m a dar s ei y drawn full-face human figure with bushy hair, and very stylised drapery. The arms form a central bar, quite horizontal, but unfortunately damag hande th t esa make t impossiblsi decido et e whethe hande rth s Anderson , EarlyO. . ,A Sources, i, 444. Northumbrian Crosses (1927). 83 , 1 a E INCHYRTH A STON OTHED AN E R EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENT7 4 S were clasped or whether they held something. Below the hands the central folds of the clothing turn in to suggest, despite further damage there, a V-shaped pattern of knees, legs and feet such as can be seen more elaborately on seated figures in illuminated manuscripts. If this interpretation is correct a plain broad bar across the stone represent seatsa t alsI . o serve divido st figure eth e fro panee mth l belowe th , poin t whica t shafe hth t prope Thornhile th r n beginso s l(A .cros e th s t therno s ei usua head.e l base th offsethin th f O eo st ) a tpane remaine l o therth tw e f ear o s inward-facing animal heads, perhaps horses, their tongues starting an interlace pattern. On the right side of the shafts two birds like gannets with short crests, in the tra- ditioLindisfarne th f no e Gospels, facanothere on e , their necks sloping backwards. Between the formalisea ms i d spra leavef yo berried san s growing downwardsa d an , pai leavef ro s occupie angle sth e between lefe nec shafbackth te d sidth kn an f tO e.o ther curioua s ei s versio e 'inhabiteth f no d vine-scroll' thica : k stemo endtw n si bunche jusf so t three grapes smala each d lan , animal turn heas sit d backwardo st gras bunce pon h betwee curline nth jawsg incomplets w tipit bods f It no s.o s yi d ean shape th e uncertain reae th rt portiobu , n form uprighn a s t triangle fro apee mth x of which a pair of legs project, one horizontally and the other downwards. Lastly the back of the stone is covered with thick double-strand interlace. e clumsTh y drawin maie foldd th gf nan o s figure charactee th , vine d th ean f o r its stylisatioanimale th othe e sprad e th th an , n r f y o no side l suggesal , data t e later in the ninth century than most of the other fine examples of Anglian sculpture from the Lothians. The double outline of the birds and animal, popular in tenth-century alreads i , y cross-shaf e founth n do t from Aberlady t Carlowriea w no , , whic bees eightd hha mi n he date th centur o dt t mighybu earle b t y ninth.e Th 1 shaft from Morha aboue b same y th trat y m reliee ema an eth date. bot f t fo A s hi

much higher and more rounde2 d than that of the Tyninghame cross. Then of the two main crosses represented at Abercorn the one published by Mr C. S. T. Calder may well be mid ninth century rather than a century earlier as he suggested.3 The other Abercorn cross, long known bees ha , n variously dated fro time m th Bishof eo p Trumwin (681-5 tente th ho t ) century judg4o t ; e panele froe fore th on m th f mn o so side, including prominentl ydula l diagonal meander frod stylisee an m,th d leaves three-grapd an e bunche otheo tw rn sidesso t certainli , t yleasa seeme tb welo st n o l the way to the tenth century, as represented by the main cross-shaft at St Andrews.5 (ii) Hogback tombstone (PI. VIII, i) . RichardsoS . J r D n noticed about 1955 tha trouga t fiela t Kirklandhiln ha di l had carving on it, and recognised it as a cut-down Anglian hogback tombstone. It was therefore moved to the Factor's garden at Tyninghame just across the Tyne, and

Kendrick Anglo-Saxon, D. . T , (1938)t Ar , 135.

1 P.S.A.S. (1932-3), 2-.

3 4I 'ibid2 . (1937-8), 217 ff.

E.C.M., in, fig. 435. Kendrick, cit. 136 eighte , dateth o ht dt centuryi bracketet ,bu witt di t Oswald'shS , Durham4 , whicLates hi n hSaxoni Vikingd t (1949) an re-datee Ar h tenthe , th 95 , o dt . 5 E.C.M., fig. 373. 48 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, 1958-59 later generously e Museugive th e Ear th f Haddington.o t n o l y mb 1 Thero n s ei reason to suppose that it originally came from anywhere but Tyninghame church- yard, erected there rather later tha crose nth s just considered. Of red sandstone and formerly about 5 ft. long, the monument has had its ridge remove d underside en th ane d don dan e hollowed out presens It . t lengt in.2 4 ;s hi at widest it is 21 in. tapering to 18 at the end; the greatest height is 14 in. The relief carvin considerabls gi y weathered remainine th thao s ,n o t therd . jusgn en e eca b t made out a conical shape rising from a broad base. On one of the long sides there is first a narrowed raised upright band of shingle pattern, then a bold chequer as far as the probable centre, where ther. acrosbala in s ei whic6 ln so hstandina g animal places a front paw (fig. 5). The animal's head is missing, but had been turned half or fully backwards, possibly snappinr Joh s bacM it na birs a kn t Brow o dga n suggested when preparin e reconstructioth g n drawinge otheth rn O o sid. tw e animals stand on either side of another ball, each again placing one paw on it, while their heads meet above. Behind the left animal there is a curious device consisting orina f g wit hdoubla e loop rising from behin d therd ita an ;en s ei e d th tha n o t raised band originally presumably shingled.

FIG. 5. Front and back of hogback tombstone, Tyninghame, with tentative reconstructions (c. 1/16)

The many and very varied hogbacks of northern England are often carved with elaborate scenes wels a ,wit s a l h different kind f shinglso r roofineo g patterns,t bu 2 this is only the second of the Scottish examples to have a scene on it: the other is the extremely curious one in Brechin Cathedral, which is nowhere well illustrated. Though territore founth n di severaf yanciene o th f o l t kingdoms, undoubted tenth to eleventh-century hogbacks are not common here, the largest group being at Govan, Glasgow majorite ;th relater ou f yo d monument eithee sar r very fragmentary,

1P.S.A.S. (1956-7), 261. 2 Northumb. Crosses, ch. 16. E INCHYRTH A STON OTHED AN E R EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENT9 4 S or els post-Normaf eo n dat e- shadin g of coped-stonshape n fi th o et r coffin-lieo d of triangular cross-section.1 e Tyninghame sceneth Th n o s e hogbac. A k r mayM y s suggeste,b a e m o t d Fenton, F.S.A.SCOT., represen stora t y likNorse wolveo eth tw e e myts th Skol f ho l and Hati which follow and go in front of the sun and will capture it and the moon. 2 ii. NETHERTON CROSS, HAMILTON, (PI. X) When Romilly Alien described the cross in the grounds of Hamilton Palace near Netherton motte and church site the lower part of its shaft was sunk in the ground.

standw no st I outside Hamilton parish churc basa n eho inscribed 'The Netherton 3 Cross removed from its original site in the Nether Haugh and re-erected here March 1926'.* Recent photographs kindly provided by Mr J. L. A. Evatt, A.R.P.S., F.S.A. SCOT., not only show the present height of 7 ft., compared with 5 J, but make clearer some of its weather-worn details. It can be seen that on the front and one side the interlace continue lowee th o rst border ,bac e whilconcentrie th kth n eo c patters ni complete, wit undecoraten ha d spac fourte th e n beloh O sid . weit ther curioua s ei s pattern of chevrons. It may be noted that the defacing hollow across the back face is, like several other hollows on the edges particularly of the arms, due to much later knife-sharpening - as my father once suggested was the case with the hollows on the ridge of two hogbacks at Govan. While detailed discussion of the sculptures of British Strathclyde as a whole is quite beyond the scope of these notes, some comments to put them in perspective may be useful, particularly because being relatively late they were in the main excluded from Mrs Curie's 1939 paper and are not referred to in the Ministry of Works' recent guide.5 There do not appear to be any stones sculptured before the tenth centur e Strathclydth n yi e series listes a , E.C.M.n di supplemented an y db occasional later finds such as those described in the next sections. Barochan cross in Renfrewshire, referre section i o dt aboven8 probabls i , y relatively early althougs hit side-arms and connecting ring are atrophied. Riders and animals and the frequent occurrence of cross-slabs point toward the Pictish tradition. Even if Strathclyde cross-slab havy sma e been usually recumben t erect undoubteno e d th , an t d recum- bent at Inchinnan has a row of animals along the sides, that is strongly reminiscent of the ninth-century recumbents at Meigle; while in general effect the Govan

cross-shaf vers i t y simila t Andrew thaS o t r t muce a t b need t hsan dno later. n I 7 6 defaul closf o t e t possibl datinno s i decidt go i et e whethe borrowine rth mainls gwa y direct from eastern Scotland whe,5 begu94 ny 'thnsa e Gallic king e Scotif so th r afo first time gained a [temporary] foothold south of the Forth-Clyde line'.8 The 1 P.S.A.S. (1903-4) ff2 ; (1920-1)42 , , 133; (1927-8), 88-9 103-6d 5an ; (1934-5), 4'9; also Wilson . A.,J , Lanarkshire, n, 148—9. Eldere Th 2 Edda (Grimnismal d Snorri'san ) 39 , Prose Edda (Gylfuginning, xn). 3 E.C.M., in, 471 . Scot.cf ; Eccl. Sac. (1917-18). ff 7 24 , 4 Wilson, J. A., Contribution to the Histoiy of Lanarkshire, n, 116-17. above4 4 . p .e 5Se

E.C.M., Nos. 9, n, 12 and 26. ' ibid., figs. 479 and 373. Cf. p. 47 above. 6 Jackson, 'ThKH., . e Briton Southerin s n Scotland', Antiquity Raleg(1955)Mr h87. , Radforda in , lecturGovae th 8n eo n stones delivered after this notwrittens ewa , stresse Anglo-Norse dth e elemente th o st exclusion of the Pictish and suggested a different historical context. 5O PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH F O S , 1958-59 alternative is that the strongest influence was round about, by way of the Isle of Man where the Manx-Norse cross-slabs ultimately inspired by Pictish sculpture may have begun abou middle th t lattee r eveth eo tentn re ni parth f ho t century. Frequent

ring-knots and ring-twists certainl1 y point south-westward, and are found only once east.e th n 2i Related developments took place (without cross-slabs Anglo-Norsn i ) e Cumberland compared to which the sculpture of Strathclyde is less varied, poorer d 'provincial'an , though rather les thao s n tha f Gallo-Norso t e Gallowae th t ya same period e art l t thesleastTh a al , . f eo , state d provincean s s becominwa s g increasingly barbarous, and the sculptors of Strathclyde, starting late, became pro- gressively worse. Their fellow Britons in Wales had similarly failed to make an early respons inspiratioe th o et Northumbriaf no n sculpture (with more excus Ruthr efo - well Hoddam,d an , the o wert t me no jus t ove hills)e rth : Nash-Williams considered 3 that Welsh decorative sculpture began in the middle of the ninth century, which may even be too soon, though Haseloff has suggested earlier still. 4 5 The Netherton Cross is so evidently late and derivative - it might be called tenth to eleventh centur ever yo n late r- interestintha s i featuret s ti thae ha t se ti o sgt that intermediate ar e between better sculptur earlien a f eo r perio monumentd dan s that are so debased as sometimes to have been mistaken for primitive. For example Mrs Curie, when searching for antecedents for the Pictish monuments, classified certain . ScotlanstoneSW n si d with 'Primitive Iris Columbad han n Cross-slabs'.f o e On 6 these, from Drumor n Wigtownshirei e s a ha for, f crosmo s whic e supposesh h d derived fro mpreferablshipa a t bu ; e explanatio vera thas s ni i y t tdebasei d version Angliae oth f n expanded-arm cross . Collingwood, G implies . a , W y db thid s an 7si 'elephano tw e e Netherto th e arm th t y th bornf earsb o s n t o ' eou n crosse Th . swastikas on the Greens and Netherurd stones (described in the next sections) are paralle e Craignarge th thao t ln o t t stone, whic anothes hs i Curie' Mr f o sr 'early' crosses and linked to that from Drumore by a curious type of crosslet. A late date for all of them allows a Norse derivation for the swastikas to be presumed, as Collingwood suggested. Again parallels to the pattern of chevrons and curves on one side of the Netherton cross are to be found on stones at Rathdown near Dublin. These stones also have concentric rings rather like those on the front of the cross, but generally with cup- e centremarkth recenn A i s. t well-illustrated pape . n RathdowP o r r M y b n O hEalidhe recognises a relationship with the Craignarget stone and assumes an early date. degenerationA simplificationr o , , from ring-cros interlacd san concentrio et c

rings 8 seems much more probable, even apart fro analogye mth Nethertonf o e th r fo , same sor thinf happeninto s gwa norte th England f hn go i Wales.n i d 9an 10 Cup-and- rings, however centre smale seee th th als e b f n nei lar o ,o t cross-slab s from Hartle- Lindisfarnat pooand l erathe be whic r hmay earlier. ver1The y1 curious cup-and- ring desig whan havy no ma et bee cross-shafna t Innerleithena t , Peebleshire, could

belowe . Se 54 I . p , t VigeansS » . 10.No , 3 T.D.G.A.S. (1952-3), 174 ff. 4 E.C.M. of Wales (1950), 202. 5 Germania (1951), 106. 6 P.S.A.S. (1939-40), 71-72. 7 T.D.G.A.S. (1922-3), 230, and Northumbrian Crosses, 14. 8 J.R.S.A.I. (1957) . ff 5 7 , • Northumb. , 179C. . 10 Nash-Williams, . cit236.No . II Northumb. C., :i; Archaeologia (1923-4) ff5 . 25 , E INCHYRTH A STON OTHED AN E R EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 5! explainee b ultimatels da y derived fro mdesiga n like tha anothef o tLindise th f o r - farn addee b e y stonesd ma tha t I cross-heaa .t t Killegarda . WicklowCo , , which ha cup-and-rinsa crucifixio a bac e d th front e ktentativelan s n gth o wa n , no y dated Scay aboub n0 O'Riordain.90 t 1 12. GREENS, CARNWATH, LANARKSHIRE (PL XI, 2) In 1957 Mr Robert Allison of Greens Farm kindly gave to the Museum, at the suggestion of Mr N. K. McCallum, two stones recently found there during plough- ing. They were 200 yds. from one another in fields on the left bank of the North Medwin, about hal milfa e nort Newbigginf ho g (36/01446 014469)d 6an e siteTh . doe t appeasno hav o knowt ry ean n associations.

FIG . Smal6 . l tombstone from Greens (1/8) (i) The smaller sculpture is of unweathered red sandstone 15 in. wide, 5^ in. presumeonle w b thickyy no . high1d 6ma in havan ,t o d t I . e bee nsmala l cross-slab. paneA interlacf lo . wide crosse in shaf e eth 8 mor d th f , ,o t an start e. abovin s6 e eth irregular foot. Much of the back is broken away but was probably plain. On the dexter edge there is a simple two-strand interlace, occupying the whole width and starting fro same mth fronte e paneothee leveth th Th n s .r o la l edg abrades ei d probabls wa t bu y similar interlace fronte Th . th n ,e o forme unsmoothey db d pocked lines and hollows, is not only irregular in thickness but does not have quite regular overs-and-unders. One of the loops at the bottom forms a loose end, while the band iJ.R.S.A.1. (1947), 84-85- 2 5 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH F O S , 1958-59 running up the centre from the other loop crosses two transverse bands, one of which has forked from a vertical on the left. e secon(ii Th smala ) s di l upright tombstone, uniquely shaped wit hslightla y conve belop xto w which projected stumpy cross-arms (fig. f reddis6)O . h sandstone, more weathere r pooredo qualitn ri y tha othere nth presens it , t heigh 27s i t ^ in.s it , thickness 3^ and its width across the arms originally i6|. Unfortunately about half the decorated front surface has scaled away: the back and sides are smoothed down but plain. Low rounded relief has been quite carefully executed. The raised parts slightle ar y pock-marked hollowe th , s rough. Mosoutlinn a f o t e Latin cross remains in the centre of an upper panel, surrounded by interlace within a two-line border. This interlace includes three regular Stafford knots but appears to be irregular at either side of the cross, and makes no distinction between over and under. Less remain lowee th f rso panel whicn o , hring-twisa flankes wa t meandery db . Lastly a swastika is neatly sunk on the end of the remaining arm. The irregularities in interlace on these two stones are characteristic of tenth to eleventh-century work and have been noted for example as far afield as East Anglia.1 Small headstones, though probably going much further back, particularly at Lindis- farne, seem also generally to be late in our period. The central cross on Greens

No. 2 is somewhat reminiscent of that on a small ston2 e from Sinniness in Wigtown- shire (a double outlined cross potent however) that had been flanked by meander. The Sinniness stone was linked by Collingwood with the swastika-bearing Craig- narget stone as both have groups of three dots. Swastikas it should be noted are uncommo Scotlandn ni onle th ,y exampl t mentioneno e previoue th n di s section being the large double-outlined one on the cross-shaft from Cambusnethan, 12 miles WNW Greensf o . . When found e Greenth , s stones wer e mosth e t easterly known examplef o s Strathclyde sculpture. 13. NETHERURD MAINS, KIRKURD, PEEBLESSHIRE (PL XI, 3) A further late exampl Strathclyde th f eo e style, providin glina k perhaps towarde sth Innerleithen stone mentioned on p. 50, was recognised 6 miles east of Greens in 1958 by the staff of the Royal Commission on Ancient Monuments, to which we are indebted for the accompanying photograph. The small monument of coarse white sandston beed eha n ploughe somp du e fifteen years befor t Netherura e d Mainn si Peeblesshir generousls ha d ean y been presente Nationae th o dt l. MuseuA r M y mb Sanderson crese sligha th f e find-spo o tn tTh o .ris s ewa t j mil efare westh m f o t buildings angle th en i , betwee convergino ntw g tracks (36/104440). Now 18 in. high, the stone has lost its foot and one of the two projecting arms tha onle ar t y parallele Greensy db sidee Th s. slop thao es t g. s whili | in flap e eto th t wid botto e t leasea th s t m carvine wa 14! Th . vers gi y crud desig e mosd th ean f o tn within the plain border defies description but is probably broken-down interlace. Whatever the intention the effect is generally of deep incision rather than of relief. Central between the arms there is however a small boss. Below it to the left a bold Camb.. 1P A.S. (1920-1). 21 ff. 2 ibidT.D.G.A.S.d an , (1952-3), 190. THE INCHYRA STONE AND OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENTS 53 swastika has been unequivocally incised. The back of the stone is uneven and undecorated. 14. DOID MHAIRI, PORT ELLEN, ISLAY (PL XI, i) Haakon Shetelig unfortunately only discussed one West of Scotland monument in his 'Norse Style of Ornamentation in the Viking Settlements'. There he described 1 the well-known stone from Kilbar, Barra, as a simplified copy of the Scottish type [of cross-slab] and wrote, 'Apparently this first and crude attempt at an imitation of Christian monuments had no further consequences in Scotland, while it is highly important as the starting point of the remarkable series of Norse monuments in the Isle of Man.' While agreeing that the Manx-Norse cross-slabs must derive from Scottish, ultimately Pictish, prototypes, it is hard to believe that the isolated Kilbar stone is anything but a still later derivative. It has irregularities of interlace such as we have noted at Greens, and extremely simple S-spirals and meanders flanking the cross; further a date in the first half of the tenth century has always run counter to Magnus Olsen's observation that one of the contemporary and seemingly clear runic letters on the back is first known about A.D. iooo. An early eleventh-century date

Kilbae foth r r stone would seem more probable. 2 e fineTh cross-sla t Ardchattaba Argylln ni , also apparently relate Mano dt x sculpture bees ha , n considere presene th y db t write anothen i r r paper, while what 3 may even be part of an actual Manx cross brought to lona has been discussed by several writers.4 One monument whose date and entirely different style do not seem to have been commente t allfouna s n ,wa do d t 'Mary' a lonn o i gag w s no Croft s i Islan o d ' yan Nationae th l Museum cross-slaba s i . tope higt . widd I 1in th 4. in han t 3 , a e3 , which must similarly belong to the Norse-Christian period. Its ringed cross, fluted lik t lona,smalea a e flankes lon 5i d abov whay eb t Romilly Alien suggested were eth moone th belod d su an ,wha y nan wb describee h t 'interlacins da g bands crossing each othe t righa r t angle whan terminatini d p an st to resemble e th t ga s foliage'. e band disorganisea Th e sar d for triple-ribbof mo n interlace bess (seeit n o t na Ardchattae th n stone) into which hal rina fbees gha n introduced foliage Th .n o e othee th r han stifa s di f versio tendrile th f n o 'Ringerike f so ' style that occu mann ro y notable stones and other objects in England and Scandinavia. The best Scottish example, very different fro Doie mth d Mhair fror i fa stonm d stift alsean bu folate a - looking varian little stylee th th es f i ,o tdrago n incise Macn di s How Orkneyn ei , whose characte demonstrates rwa r HugD y hdb Marwic 193n kpapee a i th n 7 i n ri Proceedings.6 A gilt bronze strap-end found at Jarlshof in is also described

1 Acta Archaeol. (1948), 69-113; also in Viking Antiq., v. 2 Viking Antiq., (1954)v , 174-7 Sheteligd an , , cit note.0 8 . ' 3 J.R.S.A.I. (1956), 93-94. As the late date there proposed for the related Donegal monuments has not been generally accepted, attention may be drawn to the occurrence of their peculiar type of interlace in the late loth-nth century 'Southampton Psalter': P.R.I.A. LXI (1960), 34 and pi. XI. 4 Collingwood, W, Saga-Book.G. of Viking Club, in (1901-3), 304-6 Shetelig. Gf . , ibid., ix (1914-18), 340; also ill. Drummond, J., Sculpt. Man. lona, PI. XXIX. 5 Drummond, J., cit. .4 PI, II . 6 P.S.A.S. (1936-7), 157-73- 4 5 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE TH F O S , 1958-59 as Ringerike.1 Agai hogbace nth Brechin ki n Cathedra tendrils ha l s that muse b t derived from this style. The origins of Ringerike have been reconsidered, by W. Holmqvist.2 He stresses southern English rather than Scandinavian factors, and proposes a later initial dating. This would affect the dating of those Manx crosses that may contain early Ringerike features (none have the developed style) and modify only in detail the pre-Conques te mai th dat f no e example n Englandi s e IslaTh y. cross-slaa s ba provincia datee lb echy d osometimma e after 1050. 1 Hamilton, J. R. C., Excavations at Jarlshof, 149 and PI. XXIX. 2 ' in the Eleventh Century', Ada Archaeol. (1951), 1-56.

APPENDIX

RELATIVE CHRONOLOGIE F PICTISSO H SCULPTURE Site numbers according to E.C.M., in. . ANDERSOJ N (Early Christian Monuments of Scotland, i, 1903) Incised symbol stones (Class I), 7 and 8 c. Cross-slabs and symbol stones with carving in relief (Class II), g—10 c. Relief without symbols (Class III), overlapped with Class II and lasted till 12 c. C. L. CURLE (P.S.A.S., 1939-40) Incised symbol stones: not earlier than 6 c, majority 7 c, some as late as 8 c. Burghead bulls and 'elephant' symbol, late 7 c onwards. Cross-slabs, J c: Papa , Raasay (late 7 c), . Figures at Balblair and Burness; Brough of Birsay - relief, begins mid 7 c. [Irish late 7 c crosses and slabs: Fahan Mura and Carndonagh] [Ardchattan, ], Bressay, Papil i. Early Eastern Cross-slabs, late 7 c - early 8 c. Glamis 2, Fowlis Wester 2, 7, Golspie, . Main Group, 8 c: (a) Tall Cross-slabs: Meigle 2, Meigle i, Rossie Priory, Aberlemno 2, Dunfallandy, St Vigeans i (Drosten). (b) Small Cross-slabs :, Scoonie 6 Meigl d an e5 , Inchbrayock. (c) Recumbent monuments: Meigle t VigeansS , , . (d) Rectangular slabs: and Meigle. Northern Cross-slabs, 8 c: Fordoun, Dyce 2, Aboyne, etc. [lona Crosses, before 806] Elaborate Eastern Monuments, late 8 c or early 9 c: St Andrews shrine, Nigg, Hilton of Cadboll, Rose- markie, Shandwick, Aberlemn , Tarbato3 . 9 and 10 c Cross-slabs: Aldbar, i and 4, Elgin, Brechin, , Benvie, Invergowrie i, etc. etc.; Forres (Sueno), arch. Crosses: 9 and 10 c - Dupplin, St Andrews 14; 10 c - Monifieth, Strathmartine, Abernethy, Forteviot. E INCHYRTH A STON OTHED AN E R EARLY CHRISTIAN MONUMENT5 5 S C. A. R. RADFORD (Antiquity, 1942) Incised symbol stones ?4/5 c - mid 8 c. Relief begins after 750. Late 8 c — 850, Meigle 2, 26, 5, St Madoes, Fowlis Wester and Dunfallandy. Hilton of Cadboll c. 800; St Vigeans i mid 9 c. Bressay and - Papi halc 9 f l earlier. St Andrews Small symbol-less slabs 8-9 c. Cross, No. 14, 9 c. Shrine 900-940. NiggAndrewt S s a , s shrin e- symbol s dying after 900. Class III. 900/950 — early 12 c.: Benvie, Invergowrie i etc.

. STEVENSOK . B . R N (Problem of the Picts, 1955, with addition d adjustmentssan ) Incised symbol stones 650-9 c laterr : o crescen frod 0 ro ,m 65 animal d tan s alone (bulls, etc.; c ) lat8 e7- 'elephant' from end 7 c; latest examples, Aberdeenshire (cf. Dunrobin part-incised cross-slab). Early cross-slabs, Southern Pictland, second Scoonie? hal ) c:f8 (a Glami) (b ; s Aberlemn ) 2(c ; , o2 Monifieth 3, Meigle i, Strathmartine 5 and Meigle 9 recumbent; (d) Rossie Priory, Fordoun; (e) . Later Development of same style Late 8-early 9 c. Woodwray; St Vigeans 7, Fowlis Wester church. Later g c. Cask, ; Meigle 4; Kirriemuir 2, Glamis i, St Vigeans i (Drosten); Cossins. Cadboll Style, Ross-shir 800. ec : Hilto Cadbollf no , Tarbat. Boss Style early 9 c. Aberlemno 3, St Andrews shrine, Nigg, Edzell (free cross), [lona Crosses - St Oran's, St John's and St Martin's] mid-lat . NORTc e9 H Shandwick: , Rosemarkie, Glenferness, Brodie. SOUTH: (traditional): Dunfallandy t MadoeS , s i, Fowlis Wester i. SOUTH (Meigle School): Meigle 2, n, 26, Murthly. NE. Cross-slabs, mid-late 9 c: Aboyne, Formaston, Dyce 2, Garioch; later, Migvie. Far North Relief-monuments: late 8 c, Papil i and Brough of Birsay; late 8-early 9 c, Ulbster and Dunrobin , Skinnetc 9 d ,mi ; Clyne Kirkto ; latn3 e 9-1 , CoIIieburn0c , Farr; later, Bressay. Free Crosses: earl , Edzelc y9 l (bosses); mid-lat , Dupplinc e9 t Andrew;S 1, 0c s 14, Monifiet, h4 Abernethy 2 and 3. g-io Cross-slabs:c Crieff, Benvie Andrewst S l al , , Inchbrayock, Kineddar; Forres (Sueno), Dunkel, d2 Bullion warrior. do. full-face figures, Invergowrie i, Aldbar Vigeant S , s n, Elgin. 10-11 c: [Ardchattan and Kilmartin (Argyll), Fahan Mura and Carndonagh (Donegal)], Dunblane.

. F£K . JACKSON (ibid.) Sculpture dated by lettering of inscriptions: Fordoun, 8 c; scholastic ogams 8-10 c; St Vigeans i (Drosten), 9 c.