|Discovery:||recognised, 1782 Pelham, H.|
|History:||Macalister/1945, 149: `the stone...still remains on its old site'.|
|Geology:||Macalister/1945, 149: `Grit'.|
|Dimensions:||1.73 x 0.51 x 0.18 (converted from Macalister/1945)|
Macalister/1945, 144: `still on the original site: it was for long buried in the sand, but has now been re-erected on the knoll, at or near the original site'.
|Condition:||incomplete , inc|
|Decorations:||no other decoration|
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):||CUNAMAQQICORBBIMAQQ ||| [--] ||| [--]S|
CUNAMAQQI CORBBI MAQQ[I MUCCOI DOVVINIA]S
Macalister/1945 149--150 reading only
|McManus, D. (1991):||[CU]NAMAQQICORBBIMAQQ[--|
[CU]NAMAQQI CORBBI MAQQ[--
McManus/1991 66 reading only
|Orientation:||vertical up down|
|Position:||n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated|
Macalister/1945, 149: `pocked and rubbed'.
|Date:||366 - 466 (McManus/1991)|
|Ling. Notes:||McManus/1991, 51, states that the wording CUNAMAQQI CORBBI MAQQ[I--] on this stone is one of very few examples were parentage is indicated through the use of the possessive genitive, rather than through use of the word 'son'. Also see McManus/1991, 171.|
|Palaeography:||Macalister/1945, 149, hypothetically restores the letters [I MUCCOI DOVVINIA]. He states that not a single trace of these letters survive.|
Macalister/1945, 149: `in good condition'.