Tue Brus INSCRIPTION AT ANNAN. 717 
blunder?) So you have Sentvu, or Sentu. The concluding 
letter (or letters if there are two) of the word could not be 
recovered by anyone. There is a mark near the edge, 
but I don’t think it is a chisel mark. The surface is simply 
destroyed. Even the D is only the bottom layer of the 
letter, but it is quite certain; so is the U. (The line crossing 
the stone here represents a fracture.) DU. VA Lis certain, 
though I shouldn’t like to dogmatise on the original shape 
of the L. It is now as you see it. From the stop to the N 
at the end of the line the surface has gone, but D E. seems 
to me certain. The stop is there, (I’ve put it a little too 
high), and you will see the fragments of the letters, about 
which I am fairly confident. After the stop there is an 
indeterminate mark, which looks like a chisel mark, but 
nothing can be got from the stone until you come to N. 
As, however, there is room for two letters [A N]N AND 
seems to me the certain restoration. 
‘“T’d looked carelessly before, and had thought that 
AND of the bottom line had something to do with A N N O. 
It hasn’t; it is AND, and I think there is a stop after it. 
Jones thought he was certain of a cross before the numerals. 
It is just possible, but seems to me very dubious. The 
fracture runs right across it, and on both pieces the stone 
has broken away to the fracture. 
+ROBERT.. DE. BRUS . 
COUNTE,, DE.. CA 
PRR LE (KEP SENEU 
— DU. VAL. DE. [AN]N 
AND . 1300 
‘*T don’t think that you can do more from the stone 
than this. First two lines certain; line 3, two letters miss- 
ing, probable I (letter missing), et sentvu quite certain; 4th, 
one letter (possibly, but improbably, two) missing, du . val . 
de . (difficult to read, but pretty certain), two letters missing, 
n. 
‘* Of course, on any questions you like to ask in detail I 
will consult the stone for you. The surface is in parts rather 
soft; it is a soft sandstone. It might be possible to take a 
