|Discovery:||recognised, 1782 Pelham, H.|
|History:||According to Macalister/1945, 144, this stone was found `in an ancient burial-ground, callled Kilvickillane, on the shore of Smerwick Bay'. It was subsequently transferred in 1848 to Burnham, the seat of Lord Ventry, where it remains.|
|Geology:||Macalister/1945, 146: `slate'.|
|Dimensions:||1.22 x 0.23 x 0.28 (converted from Macalister/1945)|
According to Macalister/1945, 144--146, this stone was found in an ancient burial-ground, callled Kilvickillane, on the shore of Smerwick Bay. It was subsequently transferred in 1848 to Burnham, the seat of Lord Ventry, where it remains.
Macalister/1945, 146: `...a broad angled rhombus in horizontal section'.
|Condition:||complete , good|
Macalister/1945, 146, refers to one of the angles of the stone being chipped away.
|Decorations:||no other decoration|
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1897):||--]GRAVICASMAQIMUCOI[--]S|
GRAVICAS MAQI MUCOI [--]S
Macalister/1897 28--29 reading only
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):||GRAVICASMAQI | MUCOI[DO]VVINAS|
GRAVICAS MAQI MUCOI [DO]VVINAS
Macalister/1945 146--147 reading only
Ziegler/1994 264 reading only
|Cuppage, J. (1986):||[--]NAVICASMAQIMUCO[I][--]S|
[--]NAVICAS MAQI MUCO[I][--]S
Cuppage/etal/1986 251 reading only
|McManus, D. (1991):||[GR]AVICASMAQIMUCO[--
[G][R]AVICAS MAQI MUCO[--
McManus/1991 66 reading only
|Orientation:||vertical up down|
|Position:||n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated|
Macalister/1945, 146--147: `Inscription on two angles (up-down). The first is intact, the second had been intentionally chipped away, as usual to remove the mucoi-name. But the restoration is certain...The first line is clear, except for the loss by spalling of the H-half of the R and of the second M. On the second angle, DO is broken away, VV is clear, and is followed by I234 (vague but traceable). The distal ends of the N scores, though only just traceable, cannot be mistaken: the following I234, the A, and the distal ends of the S can also be detected'.
Cuppage/etal/1986, 251: `The reading of the full inscription is uncertain...The scores preceded by the N are extremely faint...The final word, occupying the diametrically opposed angle of the stone, is represented by only a single letter. Macalister supplied the name DOVVINIAS but no earlier accounts allude to this and it may have been a conjectural restoration'.