|Discovery:||first mentioned, 1680 Lhuyd, E.|
|History:||Allen and Westwood/1884, 46: `During the meeting of the Cambrian Archaeological Association at Fishguard in August 1883, the attention of the members was for the first time drawn...to the existence of two new ogham stones at Castell Villia...A short time previously, Mr. Harris, the occupier of Castell Villia Farm, informed the Dean of St. David's that he had observed some curious scorings on two stones near his house. In consequence of this intimation, the Dean visited the spot on the 13th of August 1883, in company of Mr. J. Romilly Allen, who made rubbings and sketches of the stones...The discoveries just mentioned were considered so interesting by Professor Westwood... that he determined to inspect the stones personally'.|
Allen and Westwood/1884, 49: `The ogham stone now used as one of the gateposts at the entrance of the farmyard of Castell Villia is built into a short projecting wall'.
It would appear that Westwood confused this stone with BRAW1/1 which is usually considered to have been used as a gatepost due to the presence of what appear to be gate-hanger holes.
Rhys/1895a, 184: `Across the brook lay one of the inscribed stones until it was removed by Mr. Harris to the spot where it now lies on the roadside near the house. Till he brought it away it served as a footbridge, and had done so probably long before his time. This is very unfortunate, as the tread of generations of feet has worn out the inscription which was on the face of the stone'.
RCAHMW/1925, 28: `It has been found that the British Museum manuscripts - Stowe 1023 and 1024 - consist of sketches which appear to be the original or duplicate drawings made by the antiquary Edward Lhuyd or one of his companions during their journey through the Principality in the years 1680--1700. Amongst them, by good luck, is a sketch of the Latin inscription, that was then more legible than at present...A second sketch of the stone appears in MS. 1024, where it is also stated that the stone was then (c. 1700) `upon a stone bridge', by which is probably meant that it was forming part of the bridge. The absence of any notice of the Ogam characters in either sketch is accounted for by the fact that the dots and strokes of the Ogam characters were not understood in Lhuyd's day to represent letters'.
Macalister/1945, 399: `Drawing by E. Lhuyd [Lhwyd] in RCHAMW/1925, 28,...in use, when the inscription was first noticed in recent years, as a footbridge on the farm of Caswilia (O.S. ``Castle Villa'') near St. Edren's...[it was] afterwards removed, first to the churchyard, then to the porch of Brawdy church, were it now lies'.
|Dimensions:||2.06 x 0.53 x 0.38 (converted from Macalister/1945)|
Nash-Williams/1950, 180: `Inside church porch'.
The stone was still in the porch in August 1996.
Macalister/1945, 399: `A rounded pillar stone'.
Nash-Williams/1950, 180: `Rough pillar-stone. 84" h. x 24" w. x 16" t.'.
|Condition:||complete , some|
The stone was used as part of a bridge and therefore the surface is very worn (RCAHMW/1925, 28; Macalister/1945, 399).
|Decorations:||no other decoration|
|Westwood, J.O. (1883):||N[--]N[U^E][G^O/N^G]FAC|
Allen/Westwood/1884 49 reading only
Westwood/1876 49 substantial discussion
|Rhys, J. (1894):||VENDOGN[I^E]|
Rhys/1895 184 reading only
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):||VENDOGNI|
Macalister/1945 399 concise discussion
|Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):||VENDOGNI|
(The stone) of Vendognus (PN).
Nash-Williams/1950 180 concise discussion
|Position:||n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated|
Rhys/1895a, 184: `The Ogam is on the right-hand edge of the stone'.
Macalister/1945, 399: `[There are] Oghams on its sinister edge [but]...owing to the rounded edge, there is no formal stem line'.
Nash-Williams/1950, 180: `The Ogam inscription is incised along the r. angle of the face reading upwards'.
Macalister/1945, 399: `pocked'.
|Date:||500 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950)|
500 - 599 (Thomas/1994)
|Language:||name only (ogham)|
|Palaeography:||Allen and Westwood/1884, 49--50: `...and is marked with scorings extending for 32 inches along the angle towards the farmyard. These scorings, commencing from the bottom, are as follows, as shown in the various rubbings and drawings...First, a group of five straight stokes to the left (N), occupying 5 inches; then an apparently blank space of seven inches, in which are several irregular impressions which can scarcely be intended for letters, so that the continuity of the writing seems to be doubtful in this part of the stone. Above this space is another group of five strokes to the left (N), occupying 4 1/2 inches. Then follows another space of 5 inches, in which are three or four uncertain equal sized impressions (U or E), of which the lowest is the largest. Then follow two long oblique strokes extended to the right, the first forked at its right end, with a third more indistinct line, if indeed it be more than a dot (GO or NG). These strokes occupy 3 inches, and are succeeded by three short lines to the left (F, 3 inches), followed by a space of 2 inches, in which is a dot (A), and ending at top with four straight lines to the right (C, 3 inches)...The uncertainty in deciphering this inscription arises chiefly from the blank spaces, which appear destitute of decided letter markings. Whether this difficulty arises from the abrasion of the surface of the stone in such parts, or from the incompleteness of the inscription itself, is perhaps impossible at the present time to be determined'.|
Rhys/1895a, 184--85: `...It may be Vendogne ; I am not sure as to the vowel at the end'.
Macalister/1945, 399: `The last vowel looks at first glance like IIA, on account of a score-like mark after the preceding N (not, however, on the central line, but below it), and the separation of the last notch of the I from the rest. Rhys in his decipherments wavers between -gni, -gne and -gnea, with a preference for the first, in which he is certainly justified'.
Macalister/1945, 399: `[This inscription] is easily read'.
Thomas/1994, 75--76: `If O .. has replaced A under Latin influence - the stone is possi.bly sixth-century - the Irish name *Wend-agnas (*uind- `fair, white', etc., with diminutive) is shown'. Also see Thomas/1994, 122, and 129 note 17.
|Rhys, J. (1894):||[…...]N | [..][IL/LI][--]|
[VENDOG]N[I] [FI]LI [--]
Rhys/1895a 184 concise discussion
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):||[UENDO]GNI | [FILIH]OCI | DEGNI|
[U]ENDOGNI [F]ILI [H]OCIDEGNI
Macalister/1945 399--401 concise discussion
|Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):||VENDAGNI | FILI V[-- | --]NI|
VENDAGNI FILI V[--]NI
(The stone) of Vendagnus (PN), son of V[--]nus.
Nash-Williams/1950 180 concise discussion
|Thomas, C. (1994):||VEND[.]FILIV[.] | GNI|
VENDO FILI V[.]GNI
VENDA FILI V[.]GNI
Thomas/1994 75 reading only
|Position:||n/a ; broad ; n/a ; undecorated|
Nash-Williams/1950, 180: `The Latin inscription...is in two lines reading vertically downwards'.
|Date:||500 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950)|
|Palaeography:||Rhys/1895a, 184--85: `I was attracted by traces of Roman letters near the opposite edge of the face of the stone. Mr. Harries, noticing this, told me that he had detected letters there one day as he was passing by on horseback, when the sun was shining right on the stone. I seemed to find there traces of two lines running parallel with the edge, and in the direction contrary to the Ogam, which is en regle. The outer line seemed to me to end with N --- minus the second upright of the N, which I could not detect. If my guess proves well founded, it should be the end of the name Vendogni, which probably constituted the whole of the line. Of the second line I thought I identified IL or LI, which I took to be remains of the word FILI. But as it was raining torrents during most of the time of my inspection, I am by no means satisfied that more cannot be made out when the weather is more favourable and the sun is shining'.|
Macalister/1922, 211: `The other reads VENDOGNI with an echo on the side of the stone, which strangely enough is not in the usual capitals but in minuscules'.
Macalister goes on to decipher the inscription in the same way as described in Macalister/1945, 399, cited below, concluding: `I put these suggestions forward in no spirit of dogmatism, but in the hope that someone else will either confirm or disprove them'.
Macalister/1945, 399--400: `He [Rhys] describes it as being in two lines; it is, however, in three. A sort of cartouche, formed of five short strokes arranged in a curve, confines the inscribed surface at its lower end...In line 1 the G is quite clear, as is also the O in line 2, just below it; the tail of the G and the O make a `figure-of-8,' which the reader's eye should catch first. The I's concluding each line are also clear. Having fixed G and I in line 1, the N between them can be traced with no great difficulty; and then, working backwards from the G, we encounter in turn O, D, N, E, but not the initial U, which has disappeared absolutely. In line 2, between the O and the I, already fixed, there are traces that look like C; before the O there is an appearance of a much-battered H; before that again are relics of ILI, but none of F. The DEGNI which forms line 3, can be traced, but doubtfully, by standing where the light can be seen to strike obliquely on the stone -- a midnight visit with a strong electric torch might possibly make the letters more certainly legible. The porch where the stone lies is small and cramped, and it is difficult to find a suitable view-point. Lhuyd found the stone already in use as a footbridge: his drawing gives UENDAGNI as the first line, and FILIU* *NI as the second, the asterisks here representing nondescript letters of which the first might by [sic] SP or R, and the second some form of G. The third line is ignored'.
Nash-Williams/1950, 180: `Roman capitals, with half-uncial V. The reading is based on a transcript made by Edward Llwyd in the late 17th century'.
Thomas/1994, 129, note 17, states that the lettering is half-uncial.
Nash-Williams/1950, 180: `mostly obliterated'.
Jackson/1953, 512, and Thomas/1994, 75, 122. 129 note 17 provide modern discussion of this name, seeing it as Irish.