Corpus Refs: | Huebner/1876:98 Macalister/1945:436 Nash-Williams/1950:316 RCAHMW/1925:448(ii) Rhys/1905:26 |
Site: | LDYSI |
Discovery: | first mentioned, 1860 Westwood, J.O. |
History: | Westwood/1860, 53: `During the last meeting of the Cambrian Archaeological Association at Cardigan, attention was directed to three early inscribed stones, now built into the south outer wall of the church of Llandyssilio, five miles north of Narberth, by two of our members, who had observed them a few days previously. Subsequently, I also paid these stones a visit, and took rubbings of them, which are copied in the accompanying woodcuts'. Rhys/1873, 7, `Aug. 21 -- We found ourselves this morning at Narberth Road Station whence we walked to Llandyssilio, a distance of about two miles. In the wall of the church there are three interesting stones, one with a cross and two with inscriptions on them'. Westwood/1879, 113: `The inscription itself was for the first time published by myself in the Archaeologia Cambrensis, 1860, p. 56, from my rubbings and a drawing sent to me by the Rev. H. L. Jones'. Macalister/1945, 415: `built into the outer face of the S. wall of the parish church'. |
Geology: | RCAHMW/1925, 160: `Structurally they are diabase stones from the slopes of Prescelly, similar to the ``blue'' stones of Stonehenge'. Nash-Williams/1950, 188: `Local diabase'. |
Dimensions: | 1.19 x 0.66 x 0.0 (converted from Macalister/1945) |
Setting: | in struct |
Location: | earliest RCAHMW/1925, 160: `Built into the south wall of the chancel'. Nash-Williams/1950, 188: `Built into church in external S. wall of. nave'. |
Form: | fragment Westwood/1860, 55--56: `The second of the Llandyssilio stones is much rougher than the former [LDYSI/1]...the stone itself [is] 3 feet wide by 28 inches high.' RCAHMW/1925, 160: `A somewhat rougher faced stone [than LDYSI/1]'. Nash-Williams/1950, 188; `Fragmentary pillar-stone. 29" h. x 46 1/2" w. x?" t.'. |
Condition: | frgmntry , poor Macalister/1945, 417: `The slab is traversed by a V-shaped crack'. |
Folklore: | none |
Crosses: | none |
Decorations: | no other decoration |
Westwood, J.O. (1860): | EUOLE{N}VS | F/IL{I} | LITOGENI | HICIACIT Expansion: EUOLENVS FILI LITOGENI HIC IACIT Westwood/1860 56 reading only Westwood/1876 113 reading only |
Rhys, J. (1873): | EUOLE{N}GG{I} | F/IL{I} | LITOGE{N}I | HICIACIT Expansion: EUOLENGGI FILI LITOGENI HIC IACIT Rhys/1873 7 reading only |
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | EUOLE{N}GG{I} | F/IL{I} | LITOGE{N}I | HICIACIT Expansion: EUOLENGGI FILI LITOGENI HIC IACIT Macalister/1945 417 reading only |
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | EUOLE{N}GG{I} | F/IL{I} | LITOGE{N}I | HICIACIT Expansion: EUOLENGGI FILI LITOGENI HIC IACIT Translation: (The stone) of Evolenggus (PN), son of Litogenus (PN). He lies here. Nash-Williams/1950 188 reading only |
Orientation: | vertical down |
Position: | S ; ind ; n/a ; undecorated Nash-Williams/1950, 188: `Latin inscription in four lines reading vertically downwards (?)'. |
Incision: | inc Macalister/1945, 416: `pocked and rubbed in bold lines'. Nash-Williams/1950, 188: `fairly deeply cut'. |
Date: | 566 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950) |
Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
Ling. Notes: | none |
Palaeography: | Rhys/1873, 7: `The other stone alluded to has on it EUOLENGG{I} FIL{I} LITOGENI HIC IACIT. It is customary to read both these stones wrong, especially the latter [this stone], which is made to be EVOLENVS instead of EUOLENGG{I}'. Westwood/1860, 55--57: `the inscription itself, now for the first time published, offers no difficulty, being as follows:-- EVOLENUS FIL{I} LITOgENI HIC IACIT. There are a few palaeographic peculiarities in this inscription: the second letter in the first line being a U, not V, and the N reversed in shape {N}, the U indistinct and injured, and the terminal S greatly elongated below the other letters; the word is also here in the nominative case. In the second line the F and I are conjoined, and the final I placed transversely, as is often the case. In the third line the g is of the Hiberno-British form, and the N again reversed, whilst the H at the beginning of the last line has the transverse bar very oblique, and the A in jacit (for jacet) much elongated below the other letters. With these exceptions the inscription is in Roman capitals, the letters being generally about 4 inches in height...From the more debased form of the letters I infer that it is somewhat more recent than the gravestone of Clutorix. [LDYSI/1]'. Westwood/1879, 113, repeats the above passage, and then adds: `The two supposed terminal letters us offered some difficulty, the seventh letter in Mr. Jones's notes to me being described as `problematical from the stone being injured there', adding, `is the last or eighth letter an s?' In my published figure the break of the stone over the seventh letter was rendered not sufficiently decided and the letter made too much like a U, whilst the eighth letter, which is carried much below the line and with a very slight top cross bar, led me on the spot to regard it as a S. Prof. Rhys, however, having subsequently visited the stone, read the first word EVOLENGG{I} (Arch. Camb., 1875, p. 186); and having shown me his rubbing, which was much clearer than my own, I must admit that the seventh letter is an injured g, that the eighth letter is also a g, and that it is followed by a horizontal {I} which I had overlooked. In the accompanying Plate LIII, fig. 5, I have given the name as it appears in the rubbing of Prof. Rhys, except that the terminal letters are made too decided'. Rhys/1905, 50: `The g is of the usual Hiberno-Saxon type, the n has its diagonal reversed, fi form a ligature, and the lettering is generally somewhat rustic'. Macalister/1945, 416: `in bold lines; the lettering is a mixture of Roman capitals and half uncials...The U is almost square, almost half-uncial shape, not the usual angled V: the N's are reversed: the G's are half-uncial, not sickle-shaped: and the FI of FILI is ligatured as usual'. Nash-Williams/1950, 188: `Large Roman capitals...with half-uncial G, H, and V. Horizontal final -I's in ll. 1 and 2. FI in I. 2 is conjoined. The N's are reversed'. |
Legibility: | good Macalister/1945, 417: `the lettering is in good condition'. |
Lines: | 4 |
Carving errors: | 0 |
Doubtful: | no |
Jackson/1953, 644, sees this name as British.