| Corpus Refs: | Macalister/1945:204 |
| Site: | CURMO |
| Discovery: | first mentioned, 1939 Macalister, R.A.S. |
| History: | Macalister/1945, 198, cites himself in an article of 1939, as the first record of the stone, and states that the stone is `lying prostrate in a field at the upper end of the townland'. |
| Geology: | Macalister/1945, 198: `Sandstone'. |
| Dimensions: | 1.17 x 0.71 x 0.38 (converted from Macalister/1945) |
| Setting: | in ground |
| Location: | earliest Macalister/1945, 198, states that the stone is `lying prostrate in a field at the upper end of the townland'. |
| Form: | plain |
| Condition: | incomplete , some Macalister/1945, 198--199: `the top of the stone appears to be cut off, but without injuring the lettering'. |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | 1: latin; linear; straight; plain; plain; none; none; none; plain |
| Decorations: | Macalister/1945, 199: `a small Latin cross pattee on the side of the stone'. McManus/1991, 54, notes that this is one of a number of cross-marked stones whose inscriptions contain late linguistic forms. |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | ANMMAGANNMAQINUADAT Expansion: ANM MAGANN MAQI NUADAT Macalister/1945 198--199 reading only Ziegler/1994 269 reading only |
| McManus, D. (1991): | ANMMAGANNMAQIN{*}DA[D!] Expansion: ANM MAGANNMAQI [N]DA[D!] McManus/1991 67 reading only |
| Orientation: | vertical up |
| Position: | inc ; arris ; beside cross ; undivided |
| Incision: | chiselled Macalister/1945, 198: `chiselled'. |
| Date: | 400 - 900 (Ziegler/1994) Ziegler/1994, 201, dates this inscription to before 900. |
| Language: | Goidelic (ogham) |
| Ling. Notes: | See McManus/1991, 80, 81, 95. |
| Palaeography: | none |
| Legibility: | some Macalister/1945, 198--199: `in good condition...The UA is represented by the forfid, which here by a unique exception has its late, dipthong, signficance. It follows that this Ogham must be one of the latest on record'. McManus/1991, 176, note 48: `I could not be sure as to whether the consonant following the A was D or T, or whether this was the last letter, as there appeared to be at least one vowel score on the top angle. ... It is highly improbable that the symbol following the initial N (an arrow-head in shape which bears no resemblance to Uilen) of the last name is correctly interpreted as the dipthong úa'. McManus/1991, 67: `it is highly unlikely that the symbol between the N and the D of the last name should be read as an otherwise unatttested epigraphical forfid with the diphthong value ua'. |
| Lines: | 1 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |