Corpus Refs:Macalister/1949:907
Okasha/Forsyth/2001:Tuamgraney 1
Discovery:non-arch dig, 1909 Westropp, T.J.
History:Macalister/1949, 92, states that the stone was found by T.J. Westropp `in the cemetery surrounding the ancient church at this place'. He goes on to say, that he `sought for this slab in vain, and Mr. E. MacLysaght was so kind as to make a further and exhaustive search on my behalf, on which he spent four hours, with the same negative result. Not deterred, however, he returned and on this second occasion was rewarded with success. The stone will now be properly cared for'.

Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 113: `The stone was first recorded by Westropp who drew it in 1909 ... Along with another, apparently uninscribed, cross-slab, it was `unearthed in digging graves' in the churchyard at Tuamgraney and was then still in the graveyard ... It was still in the graveyard in 1912 ... In 1947 Macalister recorded that when, some time previously, he had been unable to find the stone at the site, he had sought the assistance of Dr Edward MacLysaght ... After an extended search MacLysaght found the slab and sent Macalister a sketch. He took what Macalister described as `steps to secure that the stone will now be properly cared for on its own site .. The East Clare Heritage Society has copies og correspondence from June 1944 concerning responsibility for the cross-slabs, which presumably arose from MacLysaght's intervention. A letter from H.G. Leask, dated 7 June 1944, explained that the slabs could not be taken into state care since the graveyard was controlled by Clare County Council. The stones were taken to a nearby house where they stayed for some time but then were lost, probably in the 1950s. The East Clare Heritage Society made an extensive search for them but eventually abandoned it as fruitless'.

Dimensions:0.6 x 0.5 x 0.0 (Okasha/Forsyth/2001)
Setting:Lost (present , missing )
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 113: `The stone is low lost'.
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 113: `The stone was a slab'.
Condition:inc , inc
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 113, notes that the stone, even before it was lost, was `apparently broken at the top and either broken at the bottom or set in the ground'.
Crosses:1: inc; outline; straight; other; plain; none; none; none; decorated

Macalister/1949, 92: `bearing a cross formed of a double band, intersecting at the centre and with arms ending in triquetra terminals'.

Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 113--114: `One face was incised with a Latin cross formed of a two-strand interlace, with triquetra knots at the three visible terminals'.





Westropp, T.J. (1909):CO[S/R]HIDE
Westropp/1909 397 reading only
Macalister, R.A.S. (1949):DORCHIDE
Macalister/1949 92 reading only
Okasha and Forsyth (2001):[.]ORCHIDE
Dorch(a)ide (PN).
Okasha/Forsyth/2001 114 reading only


Orientation:vertical down
Position:n/a ; broad ; within quadrants ; quadrant
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 114: `The text was set in one line in the top left quadrant of the cross, parallel to the upper arm of the cross. It read vertically downwards, with the bottom of the letters to the viewer's left'.
Date:866 - 999 (Okasha/Forsyth/2001)
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 115: `later ninth and tenth centuries'.
Language:name only (rbook)
Ling. Notes:none
Palaeography:Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 114: `The text used half-uncial script'.

CISP: The lettering is half-uncial, of even height except for the H. The 'ascender' of the D bends to the left over the closed bow, and is horizontal.

Macalister/1949, 92, talks of the `very obscure first letter'.

Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 114: `was legible'.

Carving errors:0