CLOOM/1

Corpus Refs:Macalister/1945:2
Site:CLOOM
Discovery:first mentioned, 1909 Kennedy, T.
History:Gippert/Web, Ogham 2: `The stone was discovered around 1908. Its first description was published by J. Mac Neill who had been informed by one Th[omas]. Kennedy...At Mac Neill's time, the stone stood opposite the middle of the eastern gable of the ruin of the church inside the churchyard, used to mark the burial-place of the Kellagher family. The stone was removed from that position before 1978 and placed upon a pedestal near the entrance of the churchyard; doing so, it was inverted (top-down)'.
Geology:Macalister/1945, 3: `Silurian grit'.
Dimensions:0.86 x 0.3 x 0.18 (converted from Macalister/1945)
Setting:in display
Location:on site
Macalister/1945: `...marking a modern grave in front of the E. gable of the ruined church'.

Gippert/Web, Ogham, 2: `The stone was removed from that position before 1978 and placed upon a pedestal near the entrance of the churchyard; doing so, it was inverted (top-down]'.

Form:plain
Condition:complete , good
Folklore:none
Crosses:none
Decorations:no other decoration

References


Inscriptions


CLOOM/1/1     Pictures

Readings

Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):QENUVEN[--
Expansion:
QENUVEN[DI--
Gippert/Web Ogham 2 substantial discussion [Gippert 2]
Macalister/1945 3--4 concise discussion
Gippert, J. (1978):QEN[OVE]N[A][--][A] | QI[T] | [--][A]M[A][--]G[--]T[H--
Expansion:
QENOVENAGNI MAQI C MUCOI LUGUDDECCAS
Gippert/Web Ogham 2 substantial discussion [Gippert 2]

Notes

Orientation:vertical up up
Position:inc ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated
Incision:inc
Date:400 - 550 (Ziegler/1994)
Language:Goidelic (ogham)
Ling. Notes:See McManus/1991, 103, 118, 121.
Palaeography:none
Legibility:some
Macalister/1945, 3: `Inscription on two angles, up-down, and much injured. Of the writing on the first angle, all that remains is the initial G; followed by a fracture, into which, at most, two vowel-notches could be fitted; and then a T, of which T1 is damaged but traceable. One more score follows on the same side, most probably the beginning of a second T; and then nothing more is left'.

Addressing the second angle Macalister notes that,`the V is broken and defaced, and someone with more zeal than knowledge has attempted to restore it, producing two Y-like branching figures on the angle'.

Lines:2
Carving errors:n
Doubtful:no

Names

References