82 Tue Brus INscrRIpTION AT ANNAN. 
Hence it is evident that as there were only two earls of 
Carrick and lords of Annandale the limits of time for this 
inscription to be applicable were between 1295 and 1306— 
nine available years for the father, and two for the son. A 
merely arithmetical calculation thus gives a slightly greater 
probability in favour of the former (1295-1304) rather than 
the latter (1304-1306). 
With what object the inscription was made it is not 
possible to dogmatise. The stone seems to be complete, so 
that there is no room for suspecting that the inscription was 
an epitaph. Besides, Robert de Brus (V.) was buried at 
Holmcoltram. Most probably it may have been a slab built 
‘“castle’’ of the Bruces on or 
near the Mote—possibly a new residence constructed during 
the time of the future King’s father. 
It is for epigraphists and antiquaries to discuss the 
question, and the decision may not be simple. Meanwhile 
this Society may well congratulate the burgh of Annan on 
the re-discovery of this heirloom of history, and may be 
grateful to Professor Halliday for his keen and unselfish 
interest in it. His near relationship to Miss Halliday, the 
lady who owns and treasures this unique relic of ancient 
Annan, is an additional and happy guarantee that the stone 
is being preserved with more than ordinary appreciation and 
archeological care. 
A SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE. 
In view of the importance of the questions discussed, I 
thought it expedient to consult Mr George F. Hill, and sent 
on the photograph to him. He was kind enough to give the 
matter his attention, and wrote as follows :— 
Department of Coins and Medals, 
British Museum, London, W.C., 
April 6, 1916. 
into some manor-house or 
My Dear Sir, 
‘*T am afraid that my opinion on the epigraphic ques- 
tion is not worth the paper it is written on. But I am con- 
sulting Mr C. R. Peers, the Secretary of the Society of 
Antiquaries, whose opinion will be really worth having. 
Meanwhile I have the impression that the date is doubtful. 
