| Corpus Refs: | Huebner/1876:145 Macalister/1945:392 Nash-Williams/1950:77 RCAHMW/1964:1479(i) |
| Site: | ADARN |
| Discovery: | first mentioned, 1700 Stowe |
| History: | This stone is not mentioned in Lewis Morris' notes (Owen/1896) but is so similar in form to the stone that is (ADARN/2) that it is extremely likely that both come from the same site, recorded by Morris as Capel Anelog (see Site Description). Westwood recorded that the stones came from a chapel on the farm of Gors but `About fifteen years ago...the stones were removed, for safety, to their present resting place' which was `on the lawn...at Cefn Amwlch' (Westwood/1859, 53). When Rhys saw them (prior to 1873) they were `under some trees near the house' (Rhys/1873, 10). By 1945 they had been moved to the garden shed (Macalister/1945, 368), although the photograph published in 1928 suggests that they may have been moved there already by that date (Macalister/1928, 306). Nash-Williams perceived a contradiction between Lewis' and Westwood's accounts (Nash-Williams/1936, 72). The Royal Commission noted that a drawing of the stones dated to c. 1700 (Stowe MS. 1024, pp. 125--6) shows the stones as present and records them as at Cappell Yverach' (RCAHMW/1964, 9). Between 1950 and 1998 the stone was moved to Aberdaron Parish Church. |
| Geology: | Macalister/1945, 368--369: `...pulvinar'. |
| Dimensions: | 0.91 x 0.58 x 0.2 (converted from Macalister/1945) |
| Setting: | unattch |
| Location: | Aberdaron parish church; Current location. The stone is now in the Aberdaron Parish Church (A. C. Thomas, pers. comm. 1998). |
| Form: | boulder The stone is highly rounded and water-worn. Westwood/1859, 53: `The stones themselves [ADARN/1 and ADARN/2] are almost cylindrical in form, with rounded pear-shaped ends, very smooth in surface, and seem to be water-worn boulders, brought perhaps from the sea-shore.' (Repeated in Westwood/1876, 177). Macalister/1945, 368: `a...rounded block'. Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `Rough pillar-stone formed of a natural water-worn boulder.' |
| Condition: | complete , good From the published record it appears that the stone is complete and in good condition. |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | none |
| Decorations: | no other decoration |
| Westwood, J.O. (1859): | M/ER{A}CIVS | PB~R~ | HIC | I{A}CIT Expansion: MERACIVS PBR HIC IACIT Westwood/1859 55--56 reading only |
| Rhys, J. (1873): | VER{A}CIVS | PB~R~ | HIC | I{A}CIT Expansion: VERACIVS PBR HIC IACIT Rhys/1873 10 reading only |
| Huebner, E. (1876): | VER{A}CIVS | PB~R | HIC | I{A}CIT Expansion: VERACIVS P[RES]B[YTE]R HIC IACIT Huebner/1876 50 reading only |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | VER{A}CIVS | P~B~R~ | HIC | I{A}CIT Expansion: VERACIVS PBR HIC IACIT Macalister/1945 369 reading only |
| Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | VER{A}CIVS | PB~R~ | HIC | I{A}CIT Expansion: VERACIVS PRESBYTER HIC IACIT Translation: Veracius (PN) the Priest lies here. Nash-Williams/1950 84 concise discussion |
| Orientation: | horizontal |
| Position: | inc ; broad ; n/a ; undecorated The inscription is on the `broader' face. |
| Incision: | picked Macalister/1945, 369: `pocked'. Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `neatly picked'. |
| Date: | 400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950) Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `5th--early 6th century'. 900 - 1099 (Westwood/1859) Westwood/1859, 56: `I should be inclined to regard them as tenth or eleventh century, that is some time before the introduction of the angulated Gothic or rounded Lombardic (as they are miscalled) letters.' 450 - 525 (RCAHMW/1964) 500 - 533 (Jackson/1953) |
| Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | Anon/1926, 442--443: `Mr Willoughby Gardner remarked upon the large number [of inscriptions] in North Wales, and especially in Lleyn, where the words HIC IACIT stood for HIC IACET. The letter I would seem to be a regular dialect form in Britain for E; for in examining a large hoard of coins struck in Britain by the usurper Carausius, he had often noted the letter I substituted for E or A/E in their inscriptions, e.g. LA/ETITIA became LITITIA, and so forth.' |
| Palaeography: | Westwood/1859, 55--57: `[the inscriptions] are of a character quite unlike that of any of the inscriptions hitherto published, not only in the form of the letters, but also the style of the inscriptions themselves.' `Except in the conjunction of the first and second letters, the ill-shaped third letter R, (the bottom stroke of which should join the first of the following A,) and the equally ill-shaped B in the second line, this inscription does not offer any observation of note.' (Repeated verbatim in Westwood/1876, 178). Macalister/1928, 306--307: `The ornamental serifs of the lettering are unusual'. Macalister/1945, 369: `The letters are ornamentally treated, with bifurcating serifs...someone has rubbed in an additional line in front of the V, turning it into an M ligatured to the following E.' Nash-Williams/1950, 84: `Roman capitals, neatly picked, with straight and forked serifs and angular cross-bar to the A's. The vertical stroke of the B projects at both ends...The style of the lettering shows Greek influence.' |
| Legibility: | good Whilst there has been some scholarly disagreement over the first letter, the remainder of the inscription is legible. |
| Lines: | 4 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |
Macalister/1945, 369: `Prof. Sir John Lloyd, in describing these stones, throws doubt on the identification, which would a priori seem natural, of Veracius with the eponym of Capel y Verach...(As in the case of the Clochaenog stone (399) [CLOCA/1], the name Capel y Verach appears to have evolved from an early reading of the inscription).'
Jackson/1953, 291, sees the name as British.