TRLLW/1

Corpus Refs:Huebner/1876:48
Macalister/1945:342
Nash-Williams/1950:70
Site:TRLLW
Discovery:in/on structure, 1856 workmen
History:Anon/1872, 389: `The Rev. Garnons Williams having kindly invited the members to Abercamlais, a special train conveyed them thither, where they were received by Mr. and Mrs. Williams with a welcome as heartily given as it was appreciated.

Mr. Williams, with thoughtful consideration, had ordered the removal of the Trallong Ogham stone to his own grounds, where, placed on a convenient table, it was examined with the greatest ease and comfort, which had not always been the case on such occasions'.

Rhys/1873, 9: `Sept 3. --...Turning again to the modern road, I proceeded on my way to Trallwm or Trallong, which is only about a mile from the station of Aber Bran. In the church is a remarkable cross-inscribed stone'.

Westwood/1876, 61--62: `The church of Trallong...having been rebuilt about twenty years since, a stone was found at the side of one of the windows of the old church bearing an inscription...This information and figure are derived from the memoir which the late Rev. H.L. Jones published on this stone in the Arch. Camb., 1862, p. 52, in which it is stated that the stone was carefully placed within the church in the part at the west end screened off as a vestry; but in the same work (1872, p. 389) it is mentioned that the stone had been moved, (it is hoped only temporarily,) by the Rev. Garnons Williams to his grounds at Abercamlais for the convenience of the members of the Cambrian Archaeological Association during the Brecon Meeting in 1872'.

Macalister/1945, 328 : `It was found in taking down the old church, in which it had acted (with inscribed face turned inward) as a jambstone in one of the windows'.

Geology:Westwood/1876, 61: `from one of the hardest beds of the Old Red or Silurian series'.

Macalister/1945, 328: `red sandstone'.

Dimensions:1.75 x 0.36 x 0.13 (converted from Macalister/1945)
Setting:in display
Location:on site
Macalister/1945, 328: `now clamped to the wall of the church, just inside and to the right of the door'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 81: `Inside church, affixed to wall of nave near door'.

Form:cross-marked
Westwood/1876, 61: `The stone is about 6 feet long and 18 inches wide at the upper part, but tapering down to a point at the lower, uniformly about 6 inches thick.

In a paper on the Ogham Stones of Wales (Arch. Camb., 1869, p. 162) the late R. R. Brash considers that the broad end of the stone was manifestly the bottom when used as an Ogham monument, but was certainly made the head when it was turned into a Christian monument by the engraving of the cross upon it. The stone was selected and inscribed with a Gaedhelic inscription, as usual, on the angle, and leaving a space at the broad end of about 16 inches to secure it in the ground; subsequently a Roman inscription, embodying a portion of the Gaedhelic one, was inscribed on the stone as it stood, from the top downwards, as we find the custom in all such examples, after which the cross was engraved on the broad part and the stone reversed'.

Macalister/1945, 328: `pillar'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 81: `Rough pillar-stone. 69" h. x 14" w. x 5" t.'...The stone was subsequently reset in the ground head downwards'.

Condition:complete , some
Westwood/1876, 61: `One end of the stone had been broken off and some of the 0gham letters injured, but, on the whole, it was in a state of excellent preservation'.
Folklore:none
Crosses:1: latin; linear; straight; plain; plain; none; outer curv; none; n/a
Decorations:

Westwood/1876, 61: `The cross within a circle, with the lower limb extending downwards to about the length of the cross itself, is formed of double fine incised lines cut with great precision, and still quite sharp'.

Macalister/1945, 329: `A plain cross in a circle, with prolonged stem, is cut upon the original base of the stone: this is obviously later than the inscriptions'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 81: `The stone was subsequently reset in the ground head downwards and a linear Latin ring-cross (Fig. 5, ii) incised on the new head, partly overriding the tip of two of the end-letters. in l. 2 of the Latin inscription'.

References


Inscriptions


TRLLW/1/1     Pictures

Readings

Jones, H.L. (1862):CUNCAENNIFIILFFETO
Expansion:
CUNCAENNI(?) FI(?) ILFFETO
Westwood/1876 62 concise discussion
Rhys, J. (1873):CUNACENNIVIILVVETO
Expansion:
CUNACENNI VIILVVETO
Rhys/1873 9 reading only
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):CVNACENNIVIILVVETO
Expansion:
CVNACENNIVI ILVVETO
Macalister/1945 329 reading only
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):CVNACENNIVIILVVETO
Expansion:
CVNACENNIVI ILVVETO
Translation:
(The stone) of Cunacennivus Ilvveto(s) (PN).
Nash-Williams/1950 81 concise discussion

Notes

Orientation:vertical up
Position:n/a ; arris ; beside cross ; undivided
Macalister/1945, 328: `on the dexter angle, reading upward'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 81: `The Ogam inscription is incised along the (original) l. angle reading upwards'.

Incision:inc
Macalister/1945, 328: `pocked and rubbed'.
Date:400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950)

500 - 550 (Jackson/1953)
Language:Incomplete Information (ogham)
Ling. Notes:Anon/1872, 389: `the last portion of the Oghams has not been explained'.

Rhys/1873: `[the inscription] has not yet been explained'. Whitley Stoke's copy of this pamphlet, housed at University College London library, has an annotation inserting a different word break as later suggested/accepted by Macalister and Nash-Williams.

Macalister/1945, 329: `giving us a formula resembling the VITALIANI EMERETO of the Nevern bilingual. Ilvveto is, as Rhys has seen (Y Cymmrodor 21: 33) a territorial designation, indicating the owner of the stone as belonging to a place called Elmet, Elfed, or Elvet, as it is variously spelt. As there were apparently different places so designated, it cannot be defined more closely...Mr. Brash adds that although the word NI does signify a warrior, it is here the genitive case of the preceding proper name. He further mentions the discovery in the cave of Dunloe, near Killarney, of another Ogham stone bearing the name Cunacena, `another link in the chain of evidence which connects the province of Munster with South Wales at a remote prehistoric period.

Prof. Rhys, however, read the `Celtic letters Cunacenni Viilveto; the latter has as yet not been explained' (Early Inscr. Stones of Wales, p. 9). Subsequently he admits this reading to be incorrect, and that it `can only be Cunacennivi Ilvveto, where Cunacennivi may be regarded as the equivalent of Cunacenni films Cunaceni, and Ilvveto as an epithet not rendered in the Latin version, the same person being commemorated in both'. (Arch. Camb., 1875, p. 371). A third reading is also suggested by Prof. Rhys (Arch. Camb., 1874, p. 92), that the FIIL is the Oghamic equivalent of the FILII of the Roman inscription'.

Palaeography:Westwood/1876, 62: `The Oghams are equally clear and well defined, and are to be read as usual in the opposite direction to the Roman letters, as shown in the detached figures below the stone in Plate XXXVI. They were read by the Rev. H. L. Jones as there represented, with doubts as to two or three of the equivalents of the central letters,

CUNACENNI(?) FI(?) ILFFETO

the first word being identical with the first of the Roman inscription, except that A is inserted in place of O, a peculiarity of which a similar instance occurs in the Sagranus stone...The bilingual character of this stone renders it of great interest with reference to the question of the origin and date of the Ogham letters...The Oghams were read by Mr. Brash `CU NACEN NI Fl IL FETO', i.e. `Cu Nacen, a warrior pierced (by) many wounds, (lies) beneath in silence'; `a rendering in accordance with our knowledge of the Gaedhelic language, and without violence to the original'.

Macalister/1945, 328: `The scores of the Ogham become smaller as the writing proceeds, the engraver having found it necessary to save space'.

Legibility:good
Westwood/1876, 62: `One end of the stone had been broken off and some of the 0gham letters injured, but, on the whole, it was in a state of excellent preservation'.

Macalister/1945, 328: `on the whole, in good condition'.

Lines:1
Carving errors:n
Doubtful:no

Names

References


TRLLW/1/2     Pictures

Readings

Rhys, J. (1873):CVNOCENNIFILIVS | CVNOCENIHICIACIT
Expansion:
CVNOCENNI FILIVS CVNOCENI HIC IACIT
Translation:
Here lieth (the body) of Cynghen (PN) the son of Cynghen (PN).
Rhys/1873 9 concise discussion
Westwood, J.O. (1873):CVNOCENNIFILIVS | CVNOCENIHICIACIT
Expansion:
CVNOCENNI FILIVS CVNOCENI HIC IACIT
Westwood/1876 62 concise discussion
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):CVNOCENNIFILIVS | CVNOGENIHICIACIT
Expansion:
CVNOCENNI FILIVS CVNOCENI HIC IACIT
Macalister/1945 329 concise discussion
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):CVNOCENNIFILIV[S] | CVNOGENIHICIACIT
Expansion:
CVNOCENNI FILIVS CVNOGENI HIC IACIT
Translation:
(The stone) of Cunocennius (PN), son of Cunogenus (PN). He lies here.
Nash-Williams/1950 81 concise discussion

Notes

Orientation:vertical down
Position:n/a ; broad ; above cross ; undivided
CISP: There is a secondary cross below which the primary text occurs, the stone having been inverted.

Nash-Williams/1950, 81: `The Latin inscription is in two lines reading (originally) vertically downwards'.

Incision:inc
Macalister/1945, 328: `pocked and rubbed'. Nash-Williams/1950, 81: `lightly picked'.
Date:400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950)

500 - 550 (Jackson/1953)
Language:Latin (rcaps)
Ling. Notes:Westwood/1876, 62: `It will be noticed that the first name is written with two N's at the end, and terminates with the letter I, apparently in the genitive, which occurs in many of the Welsh stones, the next word, FILIUS, showing however it to be in the nominative. In the second line the first name is repeated, but only with one penultimate N, the false Latinity of the terminal word IACET showing that the knowledge of the sculptor was defective'.
Palaeography:Westwood/1876, 62: `quite sharp, as is also the inscription...

CVNOCENNI FILIUS

CVNOCENI HIC JACIT[1].

The letters are carefully formed, evenly spaced, of nearly equal size, and not much debased, resembling those of the Sagranus stone at St. Dogmael's.

[1] In the second line there is an oblique impression on the stone at the bottom of the second C, which gives it the appearance of a G'.

Macalister/1922, 202: `Trallong. -- Westwood's CVNOCENI has already been corrected, by Rhys and Romilly Allen, to CVNOGENI, and I verified this correction'.

Macalister/1945, 329: `Rhys (1918) questioned the existence of the S in FILIVS, but it is certainly there'.

Legibility:good
Macalister/1945, 328: `on the whole, in good condition'.
Lines:2
Carving errors:n
Doubtful:no

Names

References