| Corpus Refs: | Huebner/1876:9 Macalister/1945:473 Okasha/1993:46 |
| Site: | SCLEM |
| Discovery: | first mentioned, 1754 Borlase, W. |
| History: | Okasha/1993, 224: `The stone was first mentioned in 1754 by W. Borlase who said: `This stone serves, at present, to hang a gate to, on the Vicarage of St. Clement's'...In 1845 Haslam noted: `The cross...is released from the servile position which it long occupied as a gate post'. When rescued...the stone was presumably moved to the rectory garden where it was recorded in 1863. It remained there until it was moved to its present position on 8 November 1938'. |
| Geology: | Macalister/1945, 451: `granite'. |
| Dimensions: | 2.26 x 0.4 x 0.37 (Okasha/1993) |
| Setting: | in ground |
| Location: | on site Okasha/1993, 224: `The stone is now in St Clement churchyard, on the south side of the church, near the south door'. |
| Form: | Incomplete Information Okasha/1993, 224: `The stone is a cross...It is likely that the stone was originally an inscribed pillar-stone and was subsequently made into a cross'. |
| Condition: | complete , some Macalister/1945, 451: `good condition'. |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | none |
| Decorations: | Macalister/1945, 451--452: `On each face at the top of the stone there is a cross within a circle, in cavo rilievo: the head is shaped to carry this cross by cutting a nick in the stone just below it'. |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | VIT{A}L{I}FILITORRICI Expansion: VITALI FILI TORRICI Macalister/1945 451--452 reading only |
| Okasha, E. (1984): | VIT{A}L{I}FILITORRICI
[NB splitting reading] Expansion: VITALI FILI TORRICI Translation: [The stone] of Vitalus (PN), son of Torricus (PN). Okasha/1993 226 concise discussion |
| Thomas, C. (1994): | VIT{A}L{I}FILITORRICI Expansion: VITALI FILI TORRICI Translation: Of-Vitali (PN), of the son of-Torrici (PN). Thomas/1994 270 concise discussion |
| Orientation: | vertical down |
| Position: | E ; broad ; n/a ; undecorated The inscription is below the secondary one (SCLEM/1/2) but in line with it. |
| Incision: | inc |
| Date: | 500 - 533 (Thomas/1994) Thomas/1994, 270: `This can be dated as VI.1 (or perhaps early in VI.2)'. 500 - 799 (Okasha/1993) |
| Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | Okasha/1994, 224--226, takes this inscription and SCLEM/1/2 as a single inscription whilst acknowledging that there is substantial evidence that it was two (226). As all other authorities see these as two inscriptions, they have been sub-divided here. |
| Palaeography: | Thomas/1994, 244, caption to 15.7: `Note angle-bar A...and use of Demetian-originating horizontal I'. Thomas/1994, 245, notes that this is the only Dumnonian inscription that uses an angle-bar A in a Latin-name. |
| Legibility: | some Okasha/1993, 224: `legible'. |
| Lines: | 1 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |
Thomas/1994, 270: `Vitalis is a Roman name, one of some distinction'.
Jackson/1953, 610, discusses the name as though it were Brittonic, and argues that it does not show internal affection.
Thomas/1994, 270: `Torricus (or Torricius) is not [Latin], and it is hard to see what could be Latinized thus'.
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | IGNIOC Expansion: IGNIOC Macalister/1945 452 reading only |
| Okasha, E. (1984): | IGNIOC
[NB splitting reading] Expansion: IGNIOC Translation: Ignioc (PN). Okasha/1993 226 reading only |
| Thomas, C. (1994): | --]IGNIOC Expansion: --]IGNI OC Translation: (The stone) of ...gnus(PN)... here. Thomas/1994 270 reading only |
| Orientation: | vertical down |
| Position: | E ; broad ; n/a ; undecorated The inscription is above the primary one (SCLEM/1/1) but in line with it. |
| Incision: | inc |
| Date: | 500 - 699 (Okasha/1993) 566 - 600 (Thomas/1994) |
| Language: | Incomplete Information (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | Okasha/1994, 224--226, takes this inscription and SCLEM/1/1 as a single inscription whilst acknowledging that there is substantial evidence that it was two (226). As all other authorities see these as two inscriptions, they have been sub-divided here. However, Thomas/1994, 270, argues that these letters make up two words [--]IGNI OC, with IGNI being the end of a name such as Cunigni, and OC being for IC < HIC. If this is so the language of the inscription would be Latin. |
| Palaeography: | The letters in this inscription are smaller than those in the primary inscription (SCLEM/1/1). Macalister/1945, 452: `The topmost word [of all those on the stone] is in smaller and more cursive letters than the other three'. Okasha/1993, 226: `the letters of IGNIOC are smaller than the rest; the script of IGNIOC includes one certainly insular form, G, and another that is probably insular, N, while the rest of the text uses only capitals'. |
| Legibility: | good Okasha/1993, 224: `legible'. |
| Lines: | 1 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |
Thomas/1994, 270, argues that these letters make up two words [--]IGNI OC, with IGNI being the end of a name such as Cunigni, and OC being for IC < HIC.