1 ;52 TrattsactioiiK. 



737, and this early date is continued by tlie handwriting and 

 by the close agreement of the lines with Bede's Latin prose 

 translation, which runs thus : — 



" Nunc Lainlave debeinus auctorem rcgni coelestis, potentiam Cieatoris 

 et consilium illius, facta Patrls gloriae. Quomodo ille, cum sit aeternus 

 Dens, omnium miraculorum auctor exstitit, qui primo filiis hominun coehiin 

 pro culmine tecti, deliinc terram custos humani generis oninipotens creavit." 



" CADMON ME FyEUOTHO." 



I have already mentioned that tiie runes on the top stone have 

 been interpreted " Cadmon me made," and on this point I think 

 there can be no doubt. Now, we only know of one Cadmon, 

 and we know him chiefly as a poet, and we are further told by 

 the venerable Bede that this Cadmon composed poems on " The 

 creation of the world and the origin of the human race, and the 

 whole story of Genesis, of Israel's departure out of Egypt and 

 entrance into the land of promise, of many other parts of the 

 sacred history, of the Lord's Licarnation, Passion, Resurrection, 

 and Ascension into heaven, of the coming of the Holy Spirit, 

 and the doctrine of the Apostles," &c. Yet, notwithstanding all 

 this, it is asserted by many scholars that the " Dream of the 

 Rood " was not composed by Cadmon, but by another poet — 

 Cynewulf. Thus Mr Sweet, in his " Anglo-Saxon Reader " 

 (fourth ed., 1884), tells us that the poem was written by Cyne- 

 wulf, on the strength of Cynewulf's name being introduced into 

 another poem in the same manuscript (Ver. cod.), in the 

 form of an acrostic in Runic letters ! He also informs us that 

 " The Runic inscription of the Rutliwell Cross in Dumfriesshire 

 also fives a fragment of the poem in the old Northumbrian 

 dialect of the seventh or eighth century." On the other hand, 

 Prof. Zupitza, in his "Alt und Mittelenglisches Uebungsbuch " 

 (3d ed. Wien, 1884), gives us the Runes with the various read- 

 ings, but ignores the top stone altogether, and yet he cites among 

 his authorities the " Vetusta Monumenta " and Prof. Stephens' 

 "Runic Monuments!" In conclusion, I cannot do better than 

 quote the thoughtful words of Dr Anderson in his lecture on the 

 Cross. He says — "This, then, is the story of the decipherment 

 of the Runes on the Rutliwell Cross. I know nothing in the 

 whole raiio'e of monumental history that surpasses it in interest. 

 It makes us regard the monument not only as a finger-post in 

 the history of Christian art, but as a landmark in the history of 

 EnMisli literature. In its sculptured decorations it preserves to 



1 



