| Corpus Refs: | Macalister/1945:399 Nash-Williams/1950:176 |
| Site: | CLOCG |
| Discovery: | first mentioned, 1693 Lhuyd, E. |
| History: | The stone and its roman alphabet inscription were known locally when visited by Lhuyd. He refered to `strokes upon the edges of the stone' but was unaware that they were ogham letters (Macalister/1945, 375, 376). Nash-Williams/1936, 82: `stone subsequently moved to Pool Park, Llanfwrog.' Macalister/1945, 374: `removed by Lord Bagot, builder of Pool Park House near Ruthin, to the grounds of that mansion about 1810.' Now in the National Museum of Wales. |
| Geology: | Macalister/1945, 375: `many quartz nodules are embedded within it'. Nash-Williams/1950, 121: `Local felspathic sandstone.' Best discussion in Williams/Nash-Williams/1937, 1-2. |
| Dimensions: | 2.0 x 0.64 x 0.58 (converted from Nash-Williams/1950) |
| Setting: | in display |
| Location: | National Museum of Wales (Cat: 36.473) Now in the National Museum of Wales, on display in the permanent gallery. |
| Form: | plain Irregular pillar. Macalister/1945, 375, gives dimensions as: 4'10" x 1'10" x 1'10" Nash-Williams/1950, 121, gives them as: 84" x25" x 23" (approx.) [= 7' x 2'1" x 1'11"] |
| Condition: | complete , some Macalister/1945, 375: `much weathered'. |
| Folklore: | Jones/1898, 375 states that he was told of a battle which the local people thought had taken place at the site. |
| Crosses: | none |
| Decorations: | no other decoration |
| Rhys, J. (1874): | S[U]B[E]L[I]N[O] | [TO]VISACI Expansion: SUBELINO TOVISACI Redknap/1991 54 reading only |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1922): | S[U]M[I]L[I]N[I] | [TO]VISACI Expansion: SUMILINI TOVISACI Macalister/1922 219 reading only |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | S[U]B[I]L[I]N[I] |[TO]VISACI Expansion: SUBILINI TOVISACI Jackson/1953 186, 483, 518 reading only Macalister/1945 376 concise discussion |
| Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | S[I]B[I]L[I]N[I] | [TO]VISACI Expansion: SIBILINI TOVISACI Translation: (The stone) of Sibilin(i)us(PN) Tovisacos Nash-Williams/1950 120 reading only Redknap/1991 54 reading only |
| McManus, D. (1991): | S[I][B^M][I]L[I]N[I] | [TO]VISACI Expansion: SI(M/B)ILINI TOVISACI McManus/1991 65 reading only |
| Orientation: | vertical up up |
| Position: | n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated The ogham is carved on the two angles flanking the face which bears the roman alphabet inscription. |
| Incision: | chiselled Macalister/1945, 376: `chiselled: the scores look like knife cuts, sloped at an angle to the stem-line.' |
| Date: | 400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950) 466 - 499 (Jackson/1953) 400 - 699 (Dark/1992c) |
| Language: | name only (ogham) |
| Ling. Notes: | Jackson/1953, 187: `On the Latin M versus Ogam B … the name is probably British *Similinos with µ, and the Ogamist wrote B … by mistake for the not very different sound µ, unless, indeed, it is a simple error of engraving. Jackson/1953, 483, argues that the B in the Ogham inscription may have been a confusion resulting from the pronounciation of both B and M, but thinks it is more likely to have been a carving error. The word Tovisaci was first recognised as giving 'tywysog' or 'prince' in a letter by Lhuyd in 1693, publishhed as Lhuyd/1848, 309--313. Jackson/1953, 186--87: `The second word is the genitive of CC. *touissacos, "prince"; as it existed both in British and Irish (OI. toisech, W. tywysog)'. |
| Palaeography: | none |
| Legibility: | poor Macalister/1945, 376: `The vowels of the first word can be determined by their breadth only: none of the notches remain, except [the first two strokes of the third I]. There is not sufficient room for an I after the S to correspond with the Roman inscription. The B is certainly not the lower half of an M, as I was at first inclined to suppose. The initial TO of the second angle is spalled away: the shallowness of the fracture sufficient to destroy the letters is remarkable.' |
| Lines: | 2 |
| Carving errors: | |
| Doubtful: | no |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | SIMILINI | TOVISACI Expansion: SIMILINI TOVISACI Macalister/1945 375 reading only |
| Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | SIMILINI | TOVISACI Expansion: SIMILINI TOVISACI Translation: (The stone) of Similin(i)us(PN) Tovisacus Nash-Williams/1950 121 reading only |
| Redknap, M. (1991): | SIMILINI | TOVISACI Expansion: SIMILINI TOVISACI Translation: Similinus(PN) the Prince. Redknap/1991 54 reading only |
| Orientation: | horizontal |
| Position: | n/a ; broad ; n/a ; inc |
| Incision: | incised Nash-Williams/1950, 121: `fairly thinly but sharply incised.' Macalister/1945, 376: `the letters are cut, not pocked.' |
| Date: | 466 - 499 (Jackson/1953) 400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950) |
| Language: | latinised celtic (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | [CISP: is this inscription in Latin, or Brittonic?] |
| Palaeography: | The inscription is in mostly unremarkable roman capitals, although we can note that the T has a small cross-bar at the bottom of the upright, and that the M is sloped to the right with the middle strokes and the right-side strokes joining into one line before they end. This is also found in the V. |
| Legibility: | good Macalister/1945, 376: `A stroke, certainly artificial, runs downwards from the top point of the S, slightly concave to the sinister side, giving the letter a fantastic appearance as though it were a reversed R: and this is complicated further by a small flake-matrix, uniting the letter to the horizontal line of the enclosing frame. This intrusive line is responsible for variant readings: it has been combined with the S to make an eccentrically shaped A, or with the following I to make a U.' There was a protracted debate as to the first letter of this inscription in the pages of AC. The letters were variously read as AE, AI, SU, SA. See Anon/1854, Westwood/1855, Rhys/1874a, Rhys/1874b, Westwood/1874, Westwood/1879. |
| Lines: | 2 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |
Jackson/1953, 185--87 and 518 note 1, leaves the linguistic origins of the name uncertain. It could be either British, from *Similinos, or Irish.