|Discovery:||first mentioned, 1843 Windele, J.|
|Geology:||Macalister/1945, 94: `Clayslate'.|
|Dimensions:||0.9 x 0.4 x 0.2 (Power/etal/1997)|
|Location:||National Museum, Dublin|
Macalister/1945, 92--93, records the removal of all ogham stones from their original location in the Ballyhank souterrain, and that `in 1849 Windele removed the remaining stones to his own residence...now in the Academy's collection'.
|Condition:||inc , inc|
|Decorations:||no other decoration|
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1907):||CORBAGNI ||| K[OI]MAQIMO ||| CO ||| ITORIANI|
CORBAGNI K[OI] MAQI MOCOI TORIANI
Macalister/1907 81--85 reading only
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):||CORBAGNI || K[OI]M[A]Q[I]M ||| OC ||| COICOROTANI|
CORBAGNI K[O][I] M[A]Q[I] MOCCOI COROTANI
Macalister/1945 94--96 reading only
|McManus, D. (1991):||--][CO]RBAGN[I]K[--]COI[C]ORO[T]ANI|
C[O]RBAGNI K[--] COI [C]ORO[T]ANI
McManus/1991 66 reading only
|Orientation:||vertical up down|
|Position:||n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated|
Macalister/1945, 95: `The inscribed angles run round the circumference of the stone clockwise, not counter-clockwise, which is more usual. The name CORBAGNI occupies the first angle.'
Macalister/1945, 95, refers to cutting and pocking.
|Palaeography:||Macalister/1945, 95: `...the K, here represented by the >< variety of the forfid'.|
Macalister/1945, 94--95: `...it is in poor condition, especially the second line, which is chipped. ... Here the O is broken off, the proximal ends of the B-half of the R scores are spalled away; and N is likewise injured. On the second angle [KOI MAQI MOC], the K, here represented by the >< variety of the forfid sign, is clear, but is followed by a long stretch of angle, which seems to have been cut away with intention. It is far too long for the OI which we should expect: to show this clearly, the letters OI have been written on the diagram, with interspaces proportioned to those in the rest of the inscription. Along this cutting the H-surface is spalled: but about the middle of the spalled surface there appear the distal ends of three scores, diverging outward, cut in fine lines, contrasting notably with the coarse pocking of the rest of the inscription. This seems to imply interference with the inscription by later hand (still ancient, however, as the cutting, and its subsequent injury, must have taken place before the concealment of the stone in the souterrain). An upright feather-mark has no place in the orthodox Ogham alphabet: but it appears in the Book of Ballymote Ogham tract (facs. p. 312, line 13) among a series of "sigla" or monograms, as one of four variant characters for "P or UI". Evidently the character is treated as a monogram of VI; and we may provisionally accept the transliteration suggested, and interpret the combination as KUI (=KOI). It is reasonable to attribute this alteration to some pedant; but his interference is of importance as it adds to the accumulating evidence that the Book of Ballymote variations on the ogham theme are not mere nugae monachorum, as has been too hastily supposed, but genuine collections of cryptographic devices...This leaves unexplained the gap which must have existed in the inscription, in its original form, between OI and the following M - a gap wide enough to hold five scores. Such gaps are rare, but not unknown. Here, conceivably, the KOI was an afterthought, the inscription on the second angle having begun with MAQI; And the lapidary who inserted it, whether the original artificer or another, having begun too low down on the angle, left himself with an excess of room. This adds a slight confirmation to the conclusion indicated above [Macalister/1945, ix] that the word KOI was something more than a mere demonstrative particle pointing to the stone: out of regard for the honour of the owner of the monument it was worth while to take the trouble to put it in; and contrariwise, it was worth the while of a hostile hand to take the trouble to efface it. The engraver, having written MOC on the shoulder of his second angle, passed over the very rough top of the stone, and finished on the third angle; inadvertently (?) doubling the C. The first score of the second C has been cut out of the stone, just as has happened to the vowels on the second angle. The following OI is faint, and the initial C of the next word is battered; but with a little trouble all these letters, as well as the rest of the inscription, can be read'.