YGYNL/2

Corpus Refs:Huebner/1876:56
Macalister/1945:347
Nash-Williams/1950:76
Site:YGYNL
Discovery:first mentioned, 1855 Westwood, J.O.
History:CISP: The stones appear not to have been moved since their first mention by Westwood in 1855 and Nash-Williams in 1950, but Macalister/1945, 332 states: `now built into the wall of a lean-to coal-cellar against the S.E. corner of the modern parish church'.
Geology:Macalister/1945, 332, sandstone or ironstone, Macalister does not make clear which stone is which!
Dimensions:0.6 x 0.17 x 0.01 (converted from Nash-Williams/1950)
Setting:in struct
Location:earliest
Westwood/1876, 63: `The second of these stones (fig. 3) is built into the outside of the east wall of the same church, near the south-east angle.'

Macalister/1945, 332: `now built into the wall of a lean-to coal-cellar against the S.E. corner of the modern parish church'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 82: `Built into external S. wall of church at E. end (with No. 75 [YGYNL/1])'.

Form:plain
Macalister/1945, 332, calls it a fragment. Macalister notes Westwood's discussion of whether the two stones (this one and YGYNL/1) were part of the same monument and notes that had Westwood seen the stones the question would not have arisen as they are different types of stone.

Nash-Williams/1950, 82: `Lower portion of a roughly quadrangular pillar-stone'.

Condition:frgmntry , good
Folklore:none
Crosses:none
Decorations:no other decoration

References


Inscriptions


YGYNL/2/1     Pictures

Readings

Westwood, J.O. (1855):HICIA{C}IT
Expansion:
HIC IACIT
Westwood/1876 63 concise discussion
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):HICIA{C}IT
Expansion:
HIC IACIT
Macalister/1945 332 reading only
Nash-Williams/1950 82 concise discussion
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):HICIA{C}IT
Expansion:
HIC IACIT
Translation:
He (or she) lies here.

Notes

Orientation:vertical indeterminate
Position:n/a ; ind ; n/a ; undecorated
Nash-Williams/1950, 82: `Latin inscription (incomplete) in one line reading vertically downwards'.
Incision:inc
Nash-Williams/1950, 82: `lightly cut'.
Date:500 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950)
Nash-Williams/1950, 82: `6th century AD'.
Language:Latin (rbook)
Ling. Notes:Westwood/1876, 64: `the usual false Latinity IACIT is adopted'.
Palaeography:Westwood/1876, 63--63: `The inscription is simply HIC IACIT, but it cannot have been part of the preceding inscription, as the letters are much smaller (being only 2 1/4 inches high, and much better formed)...The inscription is in good Roman capitals, except the terminal T, which has a more minuscule form, the bottom of the vertical stroke being a little angulated to the right; the A has the cross bar angulated'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 82: `Roman capitals, with half-uncial T, all lightly cut in fairly good style. The A (damaged) appears to have an angular crossbar. The C's are enlarged'.

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

Names

References