|Discovery:||recognised, 1702 Lhuyd, E.|
|History:||Cuppage et al/1986, 255: `This ogham stone was the first to be recorded in this country. An account of it is included in a manuscipt note by Edward Lhwyd dating to about 1702-1707...At that time the stone stood upright in a field near the strand at Trabeg. By the early 19th century it lay on the adjacent shore, washed by the high tide...According to Macalister (1945, 172--173), it was removed to Chute Hall about 1849 but was soon returned. It now lies recumbent on a concrete base on the seashore near its original location'.|
|Geology:||Macalister/1945, 172: `Grit'.|
|Dimensions:||2.39 x 0.61 x 0.28 (converted from Mcalister/1945)|
Cuppage et al/1986, 255: `It now lies recumbent on a concrete base on the seashore near its original location'.
|Condition:||inc , some|
|Crosses:||1: latin; linear; straight; plain; plain; none; none; none; plain|
Macalister/1945, 173: `It bears a cross which is not a later addition, but older than the Ogham, for the L2 of CALIACI has been shortened to avoid running into it'.
|Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):||BRUSCCOSMAQQICALI ||| ACI[AS]M[AQQIMUCOI][--|
BRUSCCOS MAQQI CALIACI[AS] M[AQQI MUCOI][--
Macalister/1945 172--173 reading only
Ziegler/1994 267 reading only
|McManus, D. (1991):||BRUSCCOSMAQQICAL[I]AC[I]|
BRUSCCOS MAQQI CAL[I]AC[I]
Cuppage/etal/1986 255 reading only
Gippert/Web Ogham 180 reading only [Gippert 180]
McManus/1991 66 reading only
|Position:||inc ; arris ; beside cross ; undivided|
Macalister/1945, 172: `pocked and rubbed'.
|Date:||400 - 500 (Ziegler/1994)|
366 - 433 (McManus/1991)
See McManus/1991, 93--94.
|Ling. Notes:||See McManus/1991, 116, 125.|
Macalister/1945, 173: `As far as CALIACI everything is clear and perfect: the second I is on the shoulder of the stone. After this the top and the sinister edge are violently spalled; the lower tip of M remains to show that we have here once more an example of hostility to the maqi-mucoi formula'.
McManus/1991, 66: `Ignore the letters after CALIACI in Macalister'.
Cuppage et al/1986, 255: `Macalister claimed to have seen the lower tip of an M along the upper edge of the stone and, on the strength of this, he suggested that the inscription read CALIACI(AS) MAQQI MUCOI... This suggested restoration is not supported by any marks on the stone and even the M score is very doubtful. The second L score appears to have been shortened to avoid the arm of the cross. This suggests that the ogham inscription was carved after the cross though the time lapse may not have been great. Macalister noted some small scores at the bottom of the inscribed angle which appeared to form OBAM. These are probably natural or accidental marks'.
Gippert/Web, Ogham 180: `There are no indications in favour of Macalister's assumption that the inscription continued after CALIACI'.