Corpus Refs:Cuppage/etal/1986:855(4)
Okasha/Forsyth/2001:Kilmalkedar 2
Discovery:first mentioned, 1889 Allen, J.R.
History:Cuppage et al/1986, 311: `Drawings of this slab have been published by both Romilly Allen (1892, 268) and Macalister (1949, 96). It was still at the site in 1965 when Rynne (NMI) noted that two freshly-broken fragments of it lay on a large tomb in the chancel of the church, but is now missing.'

Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 169: `The stone was first mentioned in 1889 as `At Kilmalkedar' ... In 1892 it was described as `lying about in the church-yard at Kilmalkedar utterly uncared for' ... In 1986 Cuppage reported that it was then missing but had still been at the site in 1965 when `two freshly-broken fragments of it lay on a large tomb in the chancel of the church'.

Dimensions:0.45 x 0.3 x 0.105 (Okasha/Forsyth/2001)
Setting:Lost (present 1965, missing 1986)
Location:Seen by NMI in 1965, but missing by the time of Cuppage's survey.
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 169: `The stone is now lost'.
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 169: `probably a cross-incised pillar'.
Condition:incomplete , n/a
The drawing in Romilly Allen (reproduced in Cuppage et al/1986, Fig. 185) shows the stone in a more complete condition than it is in Macalister's illustration (1949, pl. XLI).
Crosses:1: latin; linear; straight; expanded; plain; circular; none; expanded; plain
2: ind; linear; straight; expanded; plain; none; none; ind; plain

Cuppage et al/1986, 311--312: ` face was inscribed with a cross-in-circle, beneath which was a small cross with expanded terminals and the inscription...The cross within the circle also had slightly expanded terminals to the lower and side arms, and the upper arm terminated in a B-shaped motif'.

Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 169: `At the straight end, which may have been the original top of the stone, was an equal-armed cross in a circle. The right, left, and lower arms had slightly expanded terminals and the upper arm ended in a horizontal B-shaped terminal. Below this was the remains of a cross with slightly expanded terminals'.



KMKDR/1/1     Pictures


Macalister, R.A.S. (1949):D~N~[--
Macalister/1949 96, pl. XLI reading only
Cuppage, J. (1986):DNE
Cuppage/etal/1986 311 reading only
Okasha and Forsyth (2001):DNE[--
D(OMI)NE [--]
O Lord [--].
Okasha/Forsyth/2001 170 reading only


Position:ind ; broad ; mixed ; undivided
Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 169: `Since it is not clear which way up the stone originally was, it is not clear how the text was oriented on the stone'.
Date:None published
Language:Latin (rbook)
Ling. Notes:Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 170: `presumably the vocative domine `O Lord''.
Palaeography:Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 170: `half-uncial script'.

CISP: The lettering is half-uncial. The D, like that on KMKDR/2/2 has a vertical ascender and a bow that does not quite close. The N is also in a similar form to that found on KMKDR/2/2, but, interestingly, in a different form to that on KMKDR/2/1. The other letter, E, is not like the form displayed in the alphabet stone. In this case the E is in the rounded uncial form.

The two drawings of this stone (Romilly Allen reproduced in Cuppage et al/1986, Fig. 185 and Macalister/1949, pl. XLI) show varying amounts of the stone, and text, surviving.

Okasha/Forsyth/2001, 170: `The text was legible'.

Carving errors:n