On 13/05/16 23:54, Stewart Baldwin via wrote: > It certainly looks like the symbol following "eo" is the usual > abbreviation mark that would stand for "rum" in this context. Thanks. > Are there other copies of the book that can be easily checked to see > if the damage is due to printing? After a bit of googling I can do better. Here's a modern photo: http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/03/01/04/3010404_7f6140a4.jpg The right hand side is slightly cropped and out of focus, but the word 'filius' seems much clearer than in the book. Richard

On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 4:19:40 PM UTC-7, Richard Smith wrote: > After a bit of googling I can do better. Here's a modern photo: > > http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/03/01/04/3010404_7f6140a4.jpg > > The right hand side is slightly cropped and out of focus, but the word > 'filius' seems much clearer than in the book. Here is one with the full inscription visible: http://photos.geni.com/p13/a3/fc/ea/7b/5344483d3b546642/t_echingham_original.jpg taf