The use of stones erect, for marking boundaries, must be very ancient;
perhaps, indeed, this was one of the earliest purposes to which such rude
monuments were applied. An interesting notice of this custom is given in
the “Iliad,” where Homer, speaking of the great stone thrown by Minerva
at Mars, says, as King renders the passage, that “she retreating, seized
in her strong hand a stone lying in the field—black, rough, and
vast—which men in former times had placed as a boundary of cultivated
land.” How long and how effectually this custom existed, Olaus Magnaus,
archbishop of Upsal and metropolitan of Sweden, speaking of his own
parts, about the middle of the seventeenth century, bears testimony with
justifiable pride:—“There are also high stones, by the aspect and
signature whereof the ancient possessions of provinces, governments,
forts, communities of noble and country men, are suffered to continue to
every man in peace, without laws, suits, or arbitration, giving an
example to other nations, that among these nations there is more right to
be found in these stones that are boundaries than elsewhere in the large
volumes of laws, where men think themselves to be more learned and
civil.”
Stringent laws were given by Moses to the Jewish nation in reference to
these boundary marks. “Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark,
which they of old time have set in thine inheritance.” (Deut. xix. 14.)
“Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set.” (Prov.
xxii. 28.) Job complained that some in his day removed the landmarks
(chap, xxiv. ver. 2). Every one will remember the fearful denunciation
in the book of Deuteronomy,—“Cursed be he that removeth his neighbour’s
landmark. And all the people shall say, Amen,” (chap, xxvii. ver. 17).
In Hosea we have the following strong language, which shews in what light
Jehovah viewed this sin:—“The princes of Judah were like them that remove
the bound: therefore will I pour out my wrath upon them like water,”
(chap. v. ver. 10).
The “_maen terfyn_,” i.e., the boundary stone of the Ancient Britons, is
considered to be very common in this Island, the removal of which was
punishable with death. _Maen terfyn_ was not to be removed, according to
the laws of Dyvnwal Moelmud, under pain of death:—“There are three
stones, which if any man remove, he shall be indicted as a thief: the
_boundary stone_; _maen gwyn_ (sacred stone), of the convention, and the
guide stone; and he that destroys them shall forfeit his life (or be
guilty of capital offence).” In reference to this stone another triad
remarks:—“It is ordered and established, for the purpose of preventing
the uncertainty of a claim, that the Bards shall keep an orderly record
of pedigrees, nobility, and inheritances. For the same purpose also is
the memorial of the back-fire stones, the _maen terfyn_ (boundary stone),
and the horse-block, that he that removes them offers an insult to the
Court and the Judges.” These passages will forcibly remind our readers
of the penalty in the law of Moses above quoted. Whenever we hear of
ancestral domains terminating here and there at some particular stones of
notoriety, as is frequently the case, we may fairly presume that such
stones are some of the old _meini terfyn_ (boundary stones) of the Welsh
laws.
On the right hand of the road, in a corner of the field before you reach
Plas farm, is a stone measuring 4 feet high, by 5 wide, and about 12 feet
in circumference. I consider this stone a perfect relic of what our
ancestors denominated _maen terfyn_, or the boundary stone.
And now, courteous reader, farewell! may you enjoy your visit to this
interesting locality: but it is high time that the writer of these pages
fixed his boundary mark.—FINIS.
* * * * *
* * * * *