TINAH/2

Corpus Refs:Macalister/1945:256
Site:TINAH
Discovery:in/on structure, 1873 Foley
History:Macalister/1945, 249: `Two stones raised from the souterrain...on lands in the occupation of a man called Foley...who showed them to Windele.[1] Windele acquired them and removed them to Cork; they are now in the Royal Irish Academy's collection.

[1] Strictly speaking, he first found No. 1 [TINAH/1], and Windele, having seen it, suggested he should makea further search: he did so and found No. II [TINAH/2]'.

Macalister/1945, 249, cites an article by Brash in 1873 as the first publication of the stone.

Geology:
Dimensions:1.78 x 0.43 x 0.56 (converted from Macalister/1945)
Setting:in display
Location:Royal Irish Academy
Macalister/1945, 249: `now in the Royal Irish Academy's collection'.
Form:plain
Condition:complete , good
Folklore:none
Crosses:none
Decorations:no other decoration

References


Inscriptions


TINAH/2/1     Pictures

Readings

Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):ANMT{X}GANNMACDEGLA ||| N ||| N
Expansion:
AMN TEGANN MAC DEGLANN
Macalister/1945 251 reading only
McManus/1991 65 reading only

Notes

Orientation:vertical up
Position:ind ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated
Incision:inc
Date:None published
Language:Goidelic (ogham)
Ling. Notes:McManus/1991, 79, comments on the use of the first supplementary character to represent the vocalic value `E' in this inscription. Also see pp. 89, 175, 179, 184.

McManus/1991, 80: `The ANM formula...is relatively confined in distribution and characterized by late linguistic, palaeographical or orthographic features such as post-apocope forms...In this last sense ANM may be the only formula word to survive into manuscript Irish with a specific connection with Ogam in the phrase ainm n-oguim `an Ogam inscription''.

McManus/1991, 92--93, 96, places this inscription late in the sequence of Oghams on the basis of ANM and the fact that `all the endings are lost but...[it] do[es] not show the reduction brought about by syncope'.

Palaeography:Macalister/1945, 251: `The first E being made with the forfid. Rhys's reading TAPAGANN is impossible. Like its companion, this stone is a second-hand monument; the face opposite the inscription shows signs over its whole surface as of heavy battering with some kind of maul, evidently to remove an earlier inscription which its angles had borne. The process has been carried out with complete efficiency'.
Legibility:good
Macalister/1945, 251: `This stone is a second-hand monument; the face opposite the inscription shows signs over its whole surface as of heavy battering with some kind of maul, evidently to remove an earlier inscription which its angles had borne'.
Lines:1
Carving errors:n
Doubtful:no

Names

References