266 



NATURE 



[January 23, 1908 



it. We must not forget to mention, midway between 

 the incised and decorated pieces, six monuments with 

 sunk bacliground or design. 



These pre-Scandinavian crosses vary greatly in 

 shape, particularly those of the earlier groups. Among 

 those incised in outline we find some pure Latin, some 

 equal-limbed, some with expanded arms, one crux 

 ansata, &c. At first, at any rate, we are not con- 

 fined to the type with recessed limbs and joined ends, 

 which it is customary to associate with Celtic art, and 

 which came to predominate here as in other Celtic 

 countries. The art motives remind us, if anything, of 

 those of the Irish school, but it would be a mistake to 

 suppose that the Manx artists were slavish imitators 

 of foreign models, Irish or otherwise. Some well- 

 known designs, viz. the step, the key-fret, and tlie 

 spiral, are feebly represented or altogether missing. 

 Nor do we meet with the lacertine and bird-like figures 

 with interlaced top-knots, tongues, tails and legs, 

 which are regarded as Irish par excellence, the nearest 

 approach being the dragon-plait on the fragment from 

 Cardie (Maughold 60). On the other hand, these 

 monuments boast a certain number of patterns, e.g. 

 the double twist with diamond ring and the various 

 developments of loop-plait, which cannot be matched 

 elsewhere, and show originality of conception as well 

 as technical skill. 



Except at Maughold and Braddan, the Scandinavian 

 monuments are most numerous where there are few 

 or no Celtic, as at Andreas, Michael, and Jurby. A 

 few pieces are unadorned — these are late, strange to 

 say — the remainder are handsomely decorated on both 

 fronts, sometimes even on the edges. As we have 

 pointed out, this series is to all intents and purposes 

 a continuation of the earlier one. The crosses are 

 Celtic in form; the decorative treatment and the de- 

 signs are of Celtic origin. For one feature, indeed, it 

 is not indebted to any Celtic, or indeed anv Christian, 

 model; we allude, needless to say, to its inscriptions 

 in Runes. These occur on twenty-six out of the total 

 of forty-five stones, eighteen in the northern and 

 eight in the southern district. All are Scandinavian, 

 in the Norwegian tongue excepting, perhaps, that on 

 Maughold 104, which Prof. Bugge believes to be in 

 Swedish. The one Anglo-Saxon example occurs on a 

 stone of the Celtic group. 



A good deal of space is devoted to this subject, not 

 only to the Runes of Man, but to runes in general, 

 and we do not doubt that this section will prove of 

 great value to the student. Though the designs on 

 these monuments are based on Celtic types, it would 

 be a mistake to imagine that the men who made 

 them drew their inspiration from pieces already in the 

 island. On the contrary, several of their patterns, the 

 step, the divergent spiral, and the chevron, are en- 

 tirely absent from the Celtic pieces. The tendril and 

 the forms of link-twist introduced by Gaut, Mr. 

 Kermode believes to have been suggested by the carved 

 stones of Scotland and the north of England ; the other 

 designs on these later pieces he derives from the Celtic 

 MSS., basing his view on the frequent use of the 

 triquetra and other local peculiarities. The origin of 

 the figure-drawing is harder to determine. It is true 

 that some of the stones have zoomorphic patterns of 

 NO. IQ95, VOL. ']'j'\ 



Norse type, and scenes from Norse mythology. Yet 

 for all that, these latter have no more in common 

 with the drawings of Scandinavia proper, which arc 

 inferior and rare, or the Viking-pieces of the lake- 

 district, than with the rude efforts of the Welsh or 

 the later Irish work. They have some affinities with 

 the drawings on the stones of East Scotland, but 

 what we find on them for the most part are original 

 representations taken direct from nature. Generally 

 speaking, these Scandinavian monuments show less 

 regard for accuracy, a bolder treatment, and greater 

 freedom than the earlier pieces. 



It remains to sav something as to individual crosses, 

 no easy task when the space is so limited, and there 

 is so much to detain the artist and antiquarian. We 

 must be content to touch very briefly on a few of those 

 inost worthy of attention. Of the stones of the Celtic 

 group a great number are interesting mainly for the 

 light they shed on the development of the figure or 

 the design ; the most striking in itself, far more strik- 

 ing than the more highly decorated pieces, is the stone 

 found in the Calf of Man (50) with a unique example 

 of the Byzantine treatment of the Crucifixion, We 

 have alluded more than once to the Ogham stones of 

 the fifth century Irish type. To these must be added 

 two monuments, not Celtic, by the way, but .Scandin- 

 avian, inscribed with scholastic or Pictish Oghams. 

 On one of these, the beautiful Mai Lumkun Cross 

 (Michael 104), along with Runic legends we find 

 one of the earliest instances of the Ogham alphabet. 

 Of the Latin inscriptions, that on Maughold 48 is 

 perhaps the most interesting, the Guriat to whom it 

 refers being connected in all probability with Cynan, 

 King of Gwynedd, whose daughter Etthil he may be 

 supposed to have married. The Anglian Runes on 

 Braddan 25 form the word " Blagkimon," a known 

 Anglo-Saxon personal name. 



Among the Scandinavian monuments the most re- 

 markable beyond a doubt, though not always the best 

 preserved, are those with Norse mythological scenes 

 (Jurby 93, Malevv 94, Andreas 95, Bride g-, &c.). 

 The representations of Sigurd slaying the dragon 

 Fafni, or Heimdal blowing his horn, of Vidar spearing 

 the Wolf, show great vigour and originality. 



We have endeavoured to give an idea, however im- 

 perfect, of the contents of this long and interesting 

 volume. We have but little to offer by way of criticism. 

 One thing strikes us, and that is that the author is 

 not of those antiquarians who are for ever wresting 

 facts to support a theory. If anything, he is afraid 

 of being thought dogmatic. In expressing his own 

 opinions he is careful not to shut out possible alter- 

 natives. He agrees, for instance, with Mr. Romilly 

 Allen in deriving the Celtic cross from the monogram 

 of Constantine's dream; he points out, none the less, 

 that it might we]l have been developed from a form 

 similar to that of the lost cross at Braddan, with equal 

 limbs and circles between them. So, too, in the chap- 

 ter on runes already mentioned, he places at the dis- 

 posal of the reader a complete r&sunxe of all the views 

 on the subject. Except for many repetitions the ar- 

 rangement of the work is admirable, and the style, all 

 things considered, unusually lucid. The erudition dis- 

 played in it is considerable, and the standard of accu- 



