|Discovery:||recognised, 1954 Jones-Davies, C.|
|History:||Tomlin/1975, 68: `In August 1954...Canon Jones-Davies went for a walk at Aberhydfer... In a hedge-cum-drystone wall...blocking a disused trackway along the Usk, the Canon was pleasantly surprised to recognize an Ogam-inscribed stone. It was moved to his church at Llywel...'.|
|Geology:||Tomlin/1975, 68: `local grey, faintly pink, fine-grained sandstone'.|
|Dimensions:||1.82 x 0.33 x 0.22 (Tomlin/1975)|
|Location:||Llywel Church (current location); |
Tomlin/1975, 68: `It was moved to his church at Llywel...where it still is, standing against the west wall of the nave.'
Tomlin/1975, 68--70: `a tall slab...whose bedding plane is marked by a vertical fissure. The stone tapers very slightly towards top and bottom from a maximum width of 0.33 m. Its height is 1.82 m. Its maximum thickness 0.22m., but from a height of 1.22 m., it tapers back to an ultimate thickness of 0.13 m. This seems a natural feature; it means that the primary (Latin) inscription is cut on a gently sloping face. Examination of the stone reveals a complicated sequence of events...'.
Summarising, these are: (1) stone cut; (2) latin inscription carved; (3) crude lines cut under lines 3 and 4; (4) from a height of 0.94 m., the stone was chamfered. This is unrelated to either inscription; (5) between the heights of 0.82 m. to 1.43 m., but no higher, the face was pock marked with a tool like a masons point. This tooling destroyed yet more of the Latin inscription; (6) at a point 1.18m high up the stone ogham letters were scored up the left hand side, over the chamfer and the primary Latin inscription.
|Condition:||complete , some|
|Decorations:||no other decoration|
|Tomlin, R. (1975):||[..]CIVS | [...]VS: | [..]AV[R] | [.A]NVS[--|
[LU]CIVS [FILI]VS [T]AVR[I]ANVS [HIC IACIT]
Lucius (PN), the son of Taurianus (PN), lies here.
Tomlin/1975 70 substantial discussion
|Position:||n/a ; broad ; n/a ; undecorated|
|Date:||400 - 499 (Tomlin/1975)|
|Ling. Notes:||Tomlin/1975, 71, suggests the hypothetical reconstruction, [Lu]cius [fili]us [T]aur[i]anus [hic iacit], going on to state: `The ungrammatical nominative for genitive in the patronymic is paralelled'. |
This inscription is significant in that it is the only Latin inscription overlaid with Ogham (Tomlin/1975, 72).
|Palaeography:||Tomlin/1975, 70, noted that the number of missing letters is reconstructed on the basis of the width of the stone, and then states: `S [in line 2] is followed by an apparently medial stop indicating the end of a word (in itself likely with VS), but it may be only a random pock-mark'. |
In lines 3 and 4 the letters are larger and clumsier than lines 1 and 2, but still seem to be part of the same inscription. In its lettering this stone is not unlike some third and fourth-century milestones from Wales, such as that from Trecastle Hill (RIB 2260 and 2261), but the fact that this inscription contains a correct formula suggests it is early medieval, probably dating from the fifth century.
Deliberately defaced (Tomlin/1975).
|Tomlin, R. (1974):||TARI[C]OR[O]|
(Stone) of Taricoris (or -us) (PN).
Tomlin/1975 71--2 substantial discussion
|Position:||n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated|
Left hand edge of the stone.
|Language:||name only (ogham)|
|Ling. Notes:||Importance of this inscription is that it is the only Ogham that is over a Latin inscription (Tomlin/1975, 72).|
|Palaeography:||Tomlin/1975, 72: `The 5th and 8th letters have been damaged. The 5th is probably a cramped C, four leftward grooves, of which only the first and fourth are plain; their spacing, and faint surface traces, suggest there were two more grooves between them. For the 8th, surface traces suggest the two notches of O'.|
Tomlin/1975, 71: `...all but two of its letters are well-preserved'.