Corpus Refs:Davies/etal/2000:M4
Discovery:first mentioned, 1856 Keranflec'h, C. de
History:Davies et al/2000, 201--203: `This striking monument stands south of the chapel at Langombrac'h, set into the ground, within a small flower bed, in the middle of a wide road junction. It was first mentioned by Keranflec'h [Keranflec'h/1856, 238], lying `beside the small chapel dedicated to St Mamert'; the stone was already damaged at that time. He also mentioned a granite coffin inside the chapel, with a lid and some bones, which had been excavated at a `more or less ancient date'. Keranflec'h soon discussed the stone again, when he indicated that he could read only the first few words and added that the bones discovered in the chapel `might well have been exhumed from the foot of the pillar' [Keranflec'h/1857: 105]. Keranflec'h returned to the subject again in the next year ][Keranflec'h/1858, 331] when he recorded that there was no local memory of exhumation; and that the stone was 213cm tall, with its eastern face inscribed. He thought that some `relatively recent' shaping of the stone had occasioned some loss of text.'

The site was visited by members of the CISP team in May 1997, and May and June 1999'.

Geology:Davies et al/2000, 203: `pink granite'.
Dimensions:1.67 x 0.64 x 0.4 (Davies/etal/2000)
Setting:in ground
Davies et al/2000, 201: `stands south of the chapel at Langombrac'h, set into the ground, within a small flower bed, in the middle of a wide road junction'.
Davies et al/2000, 203: `The stone is made of pink granite and is of truncated pyramidal form, with rounded top and rectangular base.

It is very well shaped and worked, with flat smooth sides, perhaps suggestive of an Iron-Age stele of quadrangular section. Height from the ground is now 167cm, with the width of each side at the base respectively: 38cm (N), 40cm (S), 64cm (E), 63cm (W); and at the top: 23cm (N), 21cm (S), 24cm (E), 23cm (W). Given the discrepancy between its current height and that observed in the 19th century, the stone has presumably been reset in the ground, with less of its mass revealed'.

Condition:complete , poor
Davies et al/2000, 204: `The stone is damaged: at about 100cm above present ground level two chunks have been broken off the carved face, and then cemented on; another chunk is missing, with cement infilling. There is also a chunk, c.85cm long, missing from the arris to the right of the carved face; it starts 40cm from the ground, with a depth of 9cm and width of 11cm, tapering to the top. Local tradition has it that the notch so formed was used as step for mounting horses'.
Crosses:1: equal-armed; outline; expanded; expanded; square; none; none; other; plain

Davies et al/2000, 205: `The east face remains the carved face, as it was in the 1850s. At the top there is a double-armed cross, the bottom of the lower arm of which has been lost in the fracture: the head is about 27cm tall and 22cm wide; the shaft is 25cm long with a scrolled terminal. There is an irregular T-shaped extension, one arm curved and the other splayed (wedge-shaped), surmounting the cross; this is 9cm tall and 13cm wide, making the height of the whole 61cm'.



LDAUL/1/1     Pictures


Bernier, G. (1982):CROXBRIT[--] | ETMULIER[--] | J[..]DRILEG |[--]LI CONB[..] | CIHOCOP[..]E | ORUMQUICOM | QUELIGAVERI | T
Bernier/1982 176 reading only
Davies, W. et al. (1999):CR{O}XB/RIT[..] | ETMULIER[..] | [.]DRILE/GO[..] | LICONB[..] | T~IHOCOPU[..] | ORUMQUICUM | QUELIGAUIRI | T
The cross of Brit(ou) (PN), son of Conbritus(PN) and of his wife Drilego(PN). Whoever shall read this work of theirs, (pray for N)
Davies/etal/2000 206 reading only


Position:E ; broad ; below cross ; undivided
Davies et al/2000, 206: `There areeight lines of text underneath the cross'.
Davies et al/2000, 206: `The carving technique is pocked and smoothed'.
Date:800 - 999 (Bernier/1982)

750 - 899 (Davies/etal/2000)
Davies et al/2000, 211: `Lettering, language and formula all combine to indicate a date for the inscription within the later 8th or 9th century'.
Language:Latin (rbook)
Ling. Notes:Davies et al/2000, 208: `CROX The change of u to o in Latin crux could be taken as a Breton, or south-west Brittonic (Breton and Cornish), feature. However, in this particular word, Welsh shows the change as well. Thus, Welsh croes implies that Latin crux had been treated as British *cruxa (later *croxa), to bring the word into the more common class of Old Celtic feminine nouns in -a.

Inscriptions with a complete formula that invokes prayers from the reader can be found on 9th- and 10th-century stones from France and on earlier graffiti from Spain; this type of formula also occurs on an 8th-century inscribed stone from Ireland and in a 9th-century colophon in the Macregol Gospels (Okasha and Henderson 1992: 8-10); hence, from Tullylease `Quicu[m]quae hunc titulu(m) legerit orat pro Berechtuine' (CIIC: no. 908 [TULYS/1). A variant formula, invoking benediction from the reader, can be found on 9th- to 10th-century Welsh stones; hence, from Llanwnnws the 9th-century inscription `[IHS] XPS q(u)icunq(ue) explicav(er)it h(oc) no(men) det benedixionem pro anima Hiroidil filius Carotinn' (ECMW no. 125 [LWNNW/1]'.

Palaeography:Davies et al/2000, 207--208: `The inscription is in half-uncial. Some of the letters indicate a debt to Insular forms, such as the `OC' A in the penultimate line, the Gs and the Rs, while others, such as the Bs in lines two and four, appear closer to late Merovingian forms. In particular the B of line four appears similar to the B of the so-called `A-B' script from Corbie and other late Merovingian scripts. Many of the letters are unexceptional, such as the rounded majuscule Es, the half-uncial Ts (one of which has a wavy contraction mark over it, of uncertain function), and the rounded and flat-bottomed Us. Some letters, in particular the Is and majuscule Ls are serifed, and this is also found on the N of line four and the minuscule H and P of line five. In lines two and seven, Is are tucked within the angle of a preceding L, and in the first line the O has been placed above the line between the R and X. Three quite different forms of M appear within the inscription. The first has ascenders one and two joined by a curved top, and ascenders two and three joined at their bottom. This is a most unusual form, but it is paralleled by a 7th- to 9th-century stone from Llanllyr, Ceredigion, in south-west Wales. The second M has the first two ascenders joined at both top and bottom, while the final example has a simple curved top stroke joining all three ascenders. The minuscule D of line three with a flat-topped bow is also very unusual, although paralleled at St Lawrence's on Jersey [STLAW/1].

The inscription contains two ligatures: in line three the middle stroke of the E extends to become the top stroke of a half-uncial G, and in the first line the vertical right side of an open-bowed B also serves as the ascender for an R. The use of Bs to form ligatures in this way has been seen as a distinctive Merovingian feature. The script therefore appears to be in half-uncial with both Insular and Frankish features. This mixture, as well as the mixture of forms and the presence of serifs, appears to indicate an 8th- or 9th-century date for the carving'.

Davies et al/2000, 206: `There are eight lines of text underneath the cross, with one letter set above the first line. Two lines are complete and five are incomplete, while the last line has one letter only and is clearly (for textual reasons) unfinished; at least two letters have been lost from the right edge of the first five lines'.
Carving errors:1