| Corpus Refs: | Macalister/1949:990 Nash-Williams/1950:108 |
| Site: | HENFN |
| Discovery: | in/on structure, 1880 Barnwell, E. L. |
| History: | Westwood/1880, 299: `In the fine collection of drawings of Welsh antiquities formed by the Rev. E. L. Barnwell is preserved a representation of an old inscribed stone fixed over the north door of the church of Henvynyw, Cardiganshire, near Aberdaeron. It is now built into the wall, with the inscription placed inwards, having been stupidly regarded as superstitious by a dissenting churchwarden when the church was rebuilt'. Rhys/1896, 110: `During a short stay at Aberaeron last summer I was shown some ancient inscriptions by Mr. Thomas Davies...[I went] to see a stone inserted high up in the east end of the church of Henfynyw. It was placed there when the church was restored about 1865. It had previously been over the doorway, as I am told'. Macalister/1949, 139: `A fragment, built upside-down into the outer face of the church wall, to the N. of and flush with the springing of the head of the E. window'. |
| Geology: | |
| Dimensions: | 0.36 x 0.15 x 0.01 (converted from Macalister/1949) |
| Setting: | in struct |
| Location: | earliest Macalister/1949, 139: `A fragment, built upside-down into the outer face of the church wall, to the N. of and flush with the springing of the head of the E. window'. Nash-Williams/1950, 95: `Built into external E. chancel wall of church about 13 ft. above ground'. Thomas/GW/1994, 412: `reset inverted in the east gable of the chancel, north of the window'. |
| Form: | fragment Nash-Williams/1950, 95: `Rough stone block, fractured in two (? part of a larger pillar-stone). 15" h. x 6" w. x ?" t. (approx.)'. |
| Condition: | incomplete , some Macalister/1949, 139: `broken in two'. Nash-Williams/1950, 95: `fractured in two'. |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | none |
| Decorations: | no other decoration |
| Rhys, J. (1895): | TIGEIR[N] Expansion: TIGEIR[N] Rhys/1896 110--111 reading only |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1949): | TIGE/IR[N-- Expansion: TIGEIRN[-- Macalister/1949 139 reading only |
| Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | TIG[EI]R[N-- Expansion: TIGEIRN[-- Translation: (The stone) of Tigernacus (?) (PN). Nash-Williams/1950 95 reading only |
| Jackson, K.H. (1953): | TIGERN[.] Expansion: TIGERN[I] Jackson/1953 446, note 3. reading only |
| Orientation: | Indeterminate |
| Position: | n/a ; ind ; n/a ; undecorated |
| Incision: | inc Macalister/1949, 139: `pocked'. Nash-Williams/1950, 95: `apparently fairly deeply picked'. |
| Date: | 600 - 899 (Nash-Williams/1950) 600 - 699 (Jackson/1953) Jackson/153, 446: `seventh century'. |
| Language: | name only (rbook) |
| Ling. Notes: | none |
| Palaeography: | Westwood/1880, 299: `The accompanying engraving must speak for itself; but it is possible the drawing may not have quite been accurate. The first letter may be c or part of a d, the fourth character may be s or g, and the last looks like a small mediaeval r'. Rhys/1896, 110--112: `The inscription has now a curious appearance from below, and, fragmentary as it is, the end presents the appearance of the outlines of a mitre or crown; but when we had procured a ladder, and taken a rubbing, I discovered that the whole is upside down...My own reading is tIGEIrN. The t, I and E are perfect. The G is peculiar, and if I had met with it alone, I could not say whether it was a G or an S, though I have never seen either letter assume exactly the form we have here. The stone is in two pieces cemented together and the crack passes through the arm of the r, and through its perpendicular into the preceding I, with the lower half of which it conjoins. On getting off a bit of cement I found the joining of the arm of the r with its perpendicular quite perfect...What puzzles me, however, is the crowding together of the Er, and I think it not improbable that the I was inserted after the other letters were cut. As it is, the top and bottom bars of the E (the middle bar is inferred with the crack), which are rather long, do not quite join the I...Lastly, as to the letter meant is N, I am very doubtful; but I think I saw there a V, which I took for the first part of an N'. Macalister/1949, 139: `in mixed capitals and half-uncials: their rounded forms clearly shew the influence of penmanship, and they were probably copied unintelligently from a MS. model by an illiterate stone mason...The EI is ligatured, and the G is of a peculiar shape. The end fracture cuts across the N'. Nash-Williams/1950, 95: `The lettering is mixed Roman capitals (E, I) and half-uncials, apparently fairly deeply picked. The second I, if a letter, appears to be a later insertion'. |
| Legibility: | good CISP: Macalister and Nash-Williams more or less agree as to a reading. |
| Lines: | 1 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |