NEVRN/1

Corpus Refs:Macalister/1945:446
Nash-Williams/1950:353
RCAHMW/1925:782(iii)
Site:NEVRN
Discovery:first mentioned, 1904 Allen, J.
History:Anon/1905, 167, during a visit by the Cambrian Archaeological Association in 1904: `Archdeacon Thomas called the attention of the Editor to a slab with interlaced ornament on it, serving as a lintel-stone of the staircase leading to the priest's chamber above the transeptal chapel on the south side of the nave; and on examining it he was delighted to discover on the adjoining lintel a hitherto unknown Ogham inscription'.

The site was visted in August 1907 by Rhys, who was able to get `a mason to clear away patiently the mortar and stones alongside in the direction of the beginning [of the Ogham inscription], which in time he got clearly visible'. Turning his attention to the Latin inscription Rhys guessed its termination but was `quite wrong; for as the stone was long and had an ample grip of the wall, the mason punched away until he had the under surface of the lintel clear well past the last letter, and the name completed itself'. The Latin inscription made Rhys more curious about the Ogham and so `further punching revealed the notches for u...It was impracticable to make a hole further in that direction, or in pursuit of the Ma of Maglocuni [in the Latin inscription] (Rhys/1907, 83--84).

The Pembrokeshire County Guardian published an account of another visit by Rhys on November 26, 1909, by which time the stone had been removed from the staircase (Rhys/1910, 65).

Anon/1922, 499--500: `The `Cambrians' would remember how at their last visit to Nevern Church, in 1904, two inscribed stones were discovered which were not previously known. Of the little group of actual discoverers there assembled on the stairs leading to the chamber above the Henllys Chapel -- Archdeacon Thomas, J. Romilly Allen, Mrs. Tom Allen, Mr. Herbert Allen, Mr. Edwd. Owen and Mr. Eyre Evans -- only the last two now survived...The stone had, by the liberality of the late Dr. Henry Owen, been fixed on the cill of one of the two windows of the Henllys Chapel'.

RCAHMW/1925, 263: `This bilingual stone, now in the Henllys Chapel, was found built into the wall of the staircase leading to the priest's chamber by the Cambrian Archaeological Association when at Nevern in 1906. A little later it was carefully fixed in its present position'.

Macalister/1945, 423--424: `A fragment...discovered by Mr. Romilly Allen acting as a lintel in the parish church: now inserted into the sill of the easternmost window of the south side of the south aisle'.

Geology:Rhys/1913, 376: `Mr. Lloyd informed us that the place whence that sort of stone comes is known as the Garn Goedog in the Pressely Mountains'.
Dimensions:1.59 x 0.33 x 0.1 (converted from Macalister/1945)
Setting:in struct
Location:earliest
Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `Inside church in S. transept, built into sill of E. window in S. wall'.

Thomas/1994, 63, shows a photo with the stone still in this position.

Form:plain
Rhys/1913, 376: `The inscribed stone measures 5 ft. 2 1/2 in. long by 13 1/2 in. across its widest part...the stone shows signs of the inscribed face having been artificially levelled before the lettering was cut on it; but as the material has imbedded in it small bits of a harder and older stone, these stand somewhat out while the softer stuff about them has got weatherworn in the course of centuries before the vandal masons did their work'.

RCAHMW/1925, 263: `The stone measures 5 feet 2 1/2 inches long and 13 1/2 inches across its widest part'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `Rough pillar-stone...61 1/2" h . x 13 1/4" w. x?" t.'.

Condition:incomplete , some
RCAHMW/1925, 263: `it is incomplete, a portion of the smaller end having broken off, probably when it was placed in the staircase wall'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `top partly fractured away'.

Folklore:none
Crosses:none
Decorations:no other decoration

References


Inscriptions


NEVRN/1/1     Pictures

Readings

Rhys, J. (1907):MAGLICUNASMAQICLUT[--
Expansion:
MAGLICUNAS MAQI CLUT[--
Rhys/1907 83--84 reading only
Rhys, J. (1909):MAGLICUNASMAQICLUTA[R--
Expansion:
MAGLICUNAS MAQI CLUTA[RI]
Translation:
The monument of Maelgwn (PN), son of Clydor (PN).
Rhys/1910 328--329 reading only
Rhys/1913 376--378 reading only
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):MAGLICUNASMAQICLUTAR[.]
Expansion:
MAGLICUNAS MAQI CLUTAR[I]
Macalister/1945 424 and Fig. reading only
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):MAGLICUNASMAQICLUTA[R.]
Expansion:
MAGLICUNAS MAQI CLUTA[RI]
Translation:
(The stone) of Maglicu (PN), son of Clutarias (PN).
Nash-Williams/1950 197 reading only

Notes

Orientation:vertical up
Position:ind ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated
Macalister/1945, 424: `on the adjacent dexter edge'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `The Ogam inscription is incised along the l. angle of the face reading upwards'.

Incision:inc
Date:400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950)

500 - 540 (Thomas/1994)
Thomas/1994, 66, 82, 136.
450 - 499 (Jackson/1953)
Jackson/1953, 624, sees this stone as `mid- or later fifth century'. On p. 463, however, he prefered a fifth-century date.
Language:Goidelic (ogham)
Ling. Notes:Jackson/1953, 463, note 2, states that although this inscription contains a British name - Maglicunas - the language of the inscription itself is Irish.
Palaeography:Rhys/1907, 83, described how he got a mason to clear away mortar etc. to reveal the name, stating: `To my joy, the name revealed itself as Maglicunas', and then later `and there also the scores for cl showed themselves. Further punching revealed the notches for u. I could not see the writing any further, but I thought I could just feel the three scores for t'.

Rhys visited the stone again in 1909 after it had been removed from the wall and stated: `I expected to get the whole of the father's name; but alas! the masons who put the stone into the wall long ago seemed to have found it too long, so they knocked off a piece of the narrower end: the piece is probably still in some part of the wall...and we read one more syllable than before...The scores for the R are incomplete: the first three only are intact, the top of the fourth is gone, together with the whole of the fifth; there can, however, be no doubt that the consonant meant was R' (Rhys/1910, 328).

Legibility:good
Lines:1
Carving errors:0
Doubtful:no

Names

References


NEVRN/1/2     Pictures

Readings

Rhys, J. (1907):--]GLOCV{N}FILICLVTOR{I}
Expansion:
--]GLOCVN FILI CLVTORI
Rhys/1907 83--84 reading only
Rhys, J. (1909):MAGLOCVVIFILICLVTOR{I}
Expansion:
MAGLOCVVI FILI CLVTORI
Translation:
The monument of Maelgwn (PN), son of Clydor (PN).
Rhys/1910 328--329 reading only
Rhys/1913 376--378 reading only
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):MAGLOCVVIFILICLVTOR{I}
Expansion:
MAGLOCVVI FILI CLVTORI
Macalister/1945 424 reading only
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):MAGLOCV{N}FILICLVTOR{I}
Expansion:
MAGLOCVN(I) FILI CLVTORI
Translation:
(The stone) of Maglocunus (PN), son of Clutorius (PN).
Nash-Williams/1950 197 reading only

Notes

Orientation:vertical down
Position:inc ; ind ; n/a ; undivided
Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `The Latin inscription is in one line reading vertically downwards'.
Incision:pocked
Macalister/1945, 424: `pocked'.
Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `lightly picked'.
Date:400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950)

450 - 499 (Jackson/1953)
Jackson/1953, 624, sees this stone as `mid- or later fifth century'. On p. 463, however, he prefered a fifth-century date.
450 - 499 (Thomas/1994)
Thomas/1994, 66, 82.
Language:Latin (rcaps)
Ling. Notes:none
Palaeography:Rhys/1907, 84--85: `The G seems to be {g}; the L inclines to be {acute L}, while the C approaches <, and the N is written {backwards-N}, but the latter perpendicular is lengthened, possibly to indicate the I, somewhat after the fashion of Roman inscriptions, but the I may be there as a very close parallel to the {N}: I could not decide with the light from below. The F is much the usual type, with its lower arm drooping a little. The second limb of the V tends to end with a slight curvature, except the last V, which ends well under the roof of the T. The R is rather an elegant letter, but its perpendicular is prolonged somewhat beneath the line. The final I is of the usual horizontal kind. I had no time to try to take a rubbing of the stone, and even had I time, I do not think it could have been done to any advantage while the stone is in its present position. The letters GLO are very faint, and some of the others are not much less faint; so I gather that all that face had been a good deal exposed to the weather, or more likely, to the tread of feet, before the stone was placed where it is now'.

Rhys visited the stone again in 1909 after it had been removed from the wall and stated: `a difficulty which still remains, as to the NI. What I represented as fairly certain consisted of V and an I, which taken together, would make an N with an inverted diagonal, and leave the I a matter of doubt. I am now inclined to read the whole word MAGLOCVVI'.

Rhys/1913, 68: `now that the whole has been got out and cleaned the readings allow no room for doubt except at one point in the Latin version...Now the M and A come out large and sprawling, except that the top of the A is damaged; the G is not of the shape I had supposed, as it is of the ordinary reaping-hook form. The L tends to have its perpendicular prolonged somewhat below its horizontal line. The first V seems joined to the top of the preceding C, and that of CLUTOR{I} ends under the roof of the T, which is a rather tall letter, though not so tall as the R, which is taller than all the letters near it, just as the O is somewhat smaller than the other letters. The F is a rather decadent letter with its short bar drooping; the last and final I is horizontal. There is no trouble as to the reading of any of the letters except at the end of the first name. The previous time I suggested {backwards-N}I, though I could not closely examine the spot. Now, on closer scrutiny, I cannot satisfy myself as to the presence of {N}I: if one reads {N} there is no I, and if one reads I there is no {N}. I was not a little influenced by Lloyd, the mason, who insisted that the last letter but one was a V, like the V immediately preceding it. So far as the roughness of the stone permits one to decide, the I does not seem to touch the nearest writing before it: that is, it could not be {N} but VI, though there is no objection to {N} as such, for it occurs on the Vitaliani stone close by. On the whole I think one must read the Latin gentive as MAGLOCVVI ad the whole as MAGLOCVVI FILI CLVTO{I}'.

Macalister/1945, 424: `the VV is an engraver's mistake for a ligatured VN'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 197: `Roman capitals...with N reversed and horizontal final -I'.

Legibility:good
Lines:1
Carving errors:0
Doubtful:no

Names

References