| Corpus Refs: | Huebner/1876:112 Macalister/1945:349 Nash-Williams/1950:121 |
| Site: | LDYSL |
| Discovery: | first mentioned, 1703 Lhuyd, E. |
| History: | Rhys/1873, 4: `Thence we drove to Llandyssul, which at present is the furthest point reached by the railway destined to be extended to Cardigan. In the wall of the churchyard is to be seen a fragment of a stone'. Westwood/1876, 134: `This stone, for rubbings of which I was indebted to the Rev. H. L. Jones, is about 12 inches high by 14 wide, and is built into the churchyard wall at the right-hand of the western entrance at Llandyssil, near Newcastle Emlyn'. Macalister/1922, 213: `now built into the interior of the church tower'. Macalister/1945, 335: `When first noticed it was built into the churchyard wall, near the entrance, to serve as a style-step; but it is now inserted as a building-stone into the inner face of the church tower, about 6' from the floor'. Thomas/WG/1994, 412: `The fragment as it now is was noted in the churchyard in 1703 (by Lhuyd -- NLW MS 21,001B) and Meyrick saw it in 1810 built into the west gateway. Since about 1905 it has been set into the internal north face of the vestry at the base of the west tower'. |
| Geology: | |
| Dimensions: | 0.44 x 0.36 x 0.0 (converted from Macalister/1945) |
| Setting: | in struct |
| Location: | on site Nash-Williams/1950, 100: `Inside church, built into tower'. Thomas/WG/1994, 412: `Since about 1905 it has been set into the internal north face of the vestry at the base of the west tower'. |
| Form: | plain Macalister/1922, 213: `The inscription...has been cut out of the middle of a monumental stone, which has also been inscribed with Oghams'. Macalister/1945, 335: `A block'. Nash-Williams/1950, 100: `Upper portion of a rough pillar-stone (?). 17 1/2" h. x 14" w. x ?" t.'. |
| Condition: | incomplete , poor Westwood/1879, 134: `Is it possible that a portion of the stone at the right-hand side of the inscription has been broken off'. |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | none |
| Decorations: | no other decoration |
| Meyrick, R. (1810): | VELVOR | HLIM | BRCHO Expansion: VELVOR HLIM BRCHO Westwood/1876 134 reading only |
| Westwood, J.O. (1856): | VELVOR | F/ILI{A} | BROHO Expansion: VELVOR FILIA BROHO Westwood/1876 134 concise discussion |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1922): | VELVOR[-- | F/ILI/{A} | BROHO[-- Expansion: VELVOR[IA] FILIA BROHO[MAGLI] Macalister/1922 213 reading only Macalister/1945 335 reading only |
| Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | VELVOR[-- | F/ILI{A} | BROHO[-- Expansion: VELVOR[IA] FILIA BROHO[MAGLI] Translation: Velvoria (PN), daughter of Brohomaglos (PN), (lies here). Nash-Williams/1950 100 reading only |
| Orientation: | Indeterminate |
| Position: | ind ; ind ; n/a ; undecorated Nash-Williams/1950, 100: `Latin inscription in three lines reading vertically downwards (?)'. |
| Incision: | pocked Nash-Williams/1950, 100: `lightly picked'. |
| Date: | 500 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950) 525 - 575 (Jackson/1953) Jackson/1953, 463: `mid sixth century'. |
| Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | Westwood/1879, 134: `Dr. John Jones, History of Wales, p. 315, with his usual inaccuracy read the first word as cedvor, and thought it alluded to Cedifor ab Dinawol, contemporary of William Rufus, and lord of Casthe Howel in this parish. The whole inscription was read by him (p. 69) as `Cedvor filius Greho', the H often used for N, and so becoming Cadifor the Son of Grono, A.D. 1116. (!)'. |
| Palaeography: | Westwood/1876, 134: `The letters are rudely cut, varying from 2 1/2 to 4 inches in height. They are Roman capitals of a debased form, with a single minuscule H in the third line. The two letters FI at the beginning of the second line exhibit the ordinary conjoined form...Is it possible that a portion of the stone at the right-hand side of the inscription has been broken off, and that the names both of daughter and father are not here found in their entirety? The stone has already been engraved by Meyrick in his History of Cardiganshire, p. 149, P1. 4, fig. 1, but not correctly, and the reading there given is VELVOR HLIM BR CHO, the conjoined FI in the second line having been mistaken for A H, and the A with its angulated cross-stroke having been considered as a M; the O also in the middle of the third line having been mistaken for C, although its round form is quite clear. (J. 0. W. in Arch. Camb., 1856, p. 144.)'. Macalister/1945, 335: `in three lines of Roman characters; the lettering is rather worn...The FI of FILIA is ligatured. There are some marks in the second O of the third line, suggesting that another letter had been cut here erroneously, and then corrected'. Nash-Williams/1950, 100: `Roman capitals, lightly picked, with half-uncial H. Fl in l. 2 is conjoined; the A in the same line has an angular cross-bar'. |
| Legibility: | good CISP: The remaining text appears very legible. |
| Lines: | 3 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |
Nash-Williams/1950, 100: `The name Brohomaglus occurs again on No. 183'.
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1922): | [--V.R--] Expansion: [VELVORIGES] Macalister/1922 213 reading only Macalister/1945 335 reading only |
| Orientation: | Indeterminate |
| Position: | n/a ; arris ; n/a ; undecorated Macalister/1945, 335: `Tips of ogham scores remain, along the present lower margin of the stone'. |
| Incision: | inc |
| Date: | None published |
| Language: | name only (ogham) |
| Ling. Notes: | Macalister/1922, 213: `The loss of the inscription is exasperating, for not only would it have given us another illustration of the declension of feminine names, but it would have told us how the Ogham carver would have treated the H in the father's name'. |
| Palaeography: | Macalister/1922, 213: `The tips of the last two scores of the second V of the daughter's name, and of the five scores of the following R, are clearly visible on what is now the lower edge of the stone'. Macalister/1945, 335: `the surviving traces -- mere distal tips of the scores -- of the Ogham suggest a V and an R, probably relics of the name [VEL]V[O]R[IGES]'. |
| Legibility: | poor CISP: Only Macalister thinks he can see the remains of the ogham inscription. |
| Lines: | 1 |
| Carving errors: | n |
| Doubtful: | yes |