Corpus Refs: | Huebner/1876:89 Macalister/1945:378 Nash-Williams/1950:169 |
Site: | LWNIO |
Discovery: | non-arch dig, 1846 inc |
History: | Francis/1867, 446, records that the stone was found at Llanwinio Carn while making foundations for a new church. Doubt as to the authenticity of the stone was cast by Rhys/1876, 245--246, in a review of Huebner/1876. In response Francis/1877, 74-75, states that he has now ascertained that the stone is in the possession of Mr Adam of Middleton Hall, where it was `stowed away against the wall of some outlying sheds'. According to Anon/1919c, 2b, the stone remained at Middleton Hall until 1919 when `Major Wm. J. Hughes and Mrs Hughes had it conveyed to the Society's custody at Carmarthen'. The stone is still in the Carmarthenshire Museum. |
Geology: | |
Dimensions: | 1.19 x 0.38 x 0.29 (converted from Macalister/1945) |
Setting: | in display |
Location: | National Museum of Wales (Cat: Cast no. 14.306/5) The stone is now in the Carmarthenshire Museum. |
Form: | plain Nash-Williams/1950, 118: `rough pillar-stone'. |
Condition: | incomplete , good Nash-Williams/1950, 118: `rough pillar-stone (top fractured away)'. Macalister/1945, 359: `the top of the stone is broken'. |
Folklore: | none |
Crosses: | 1: latin; outline; straight; round; square; none; inner curv; none; plain |
Decorations: | Nash-Williams/1950, 118: `On the (original) butt is an incised linear Latin ring-cross between oblique bars (one wanting), suggesting that the stone was later reset head downwards'. Macalister/1945, 360, does not show the oblique bar, but the photo in Nash-Williams/1950, Plate III, shows it clearly. |
Francis, G.G. (1867): | BIAD{I} | ACIBO6IBE | VE Expansion: n/a Francis/1867 446 reading only Huebner/1876 31 reading only |
Rhys, J. (1877): | BLAD{I} | FILIBODIBE | VE Expansion: BLADI FILI BODIBEVI Rhys/1877 139--140 reading only |
Westwood, J.O. (1879): | BIVAD{I} | FILIBODIBE | VE Expansion: BIVADI FILI BODIBEVE Translation: (The stone) of Bivadus (PN) son of Bodibeva (PN). Anon/1919c 2b reading only Nash-Williams/1950 118 reading only Westwood/1876 91 reading only |
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | BIVAD{I} | AVIBODIBE | VE Expansion: BIVADI AVI BODIBEVE Jackson/1953 180--181 reading only Macalister/1945 359--360 reading only McManus/1991 63 reading only Thomas/1994 75 reading only |
Orientation: | vertical down |
Position: | n/a ; broad ; below cross ; undivided Macalister/1945, 359--360, and Nash-Williams/1950, 118, both argue that the cross on the stone dates to a period after the inscription. Thus although the inscription is described as 'below cross', the cross was possibly not there at the time of carving. |
Incision: | pocked Macalister/1945, 359: `pocked and rubbed smooth'. Nash-Williams/1950, 118: `coarsely picked'. |
Date: | 400 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950) 500 - 533 (Jackson/1953) 500 - 533 (McManus/1991) |
Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
Ling. Notes: | Macalister/1945, 359-360, does not refer to the inscription as `Latin', but Nash-Williams/1950, 118 does so. This is partly because he read AVI as F/ILI, which would make the inscription Latin. Jackson/1953, 180--181, who reads the word as AVI, still, however, sees the inscription as Latin, arguing that `the engraver did not attempt to translate Pr.I. avi (by nepos as elsewhere) but simply transliterated it'. Thomas/1994, 75: 'the avi(/awi/) is a `latin' imitation of avvi (/awi/)'. |
Palaeography: | Nash-Williams/1950, 118: `Roman capitals...with horizontal final -I in l.1, VA in the same line is ligatured...B in l. 2 has disjoined loops. Some of the I's have straight serifs'. The V/A ligature is strange in that the leftwards stroke of the V comes from half way up the left ascender of the A, rather than from the bottom. The V in line 2 has one vertical ascender, with straight serifs, and the right stroke is at a great angle so as to almost be horizontal. Macalister/1945, 360, argued that the carver started to carve a V at the end of line 2, but, realising there was not the room, started the letter again on a third line. |
Legibility: | good Macalister/1945, 359: `letters are in good condition'.
|
Lines: | 3 |
Carving errors: | 0 |
Doubtful: | no |
McManus/1991, 112-113, treats the name as Irish.
McManus/1991, 112-113, treats the name as Irish.
Thomas/1994, 75, sees the name as Irish.
Francis, G.G. (1867): | AVVIBOCIBA ||| UTTEH Expansion: n/a Francis/1867 446 reading only |
Rhys, J. (1877): | AVVIBODDIB[--] ||| BEVV[-- Expansion: BEVV[--] ||| AVVI BODDIB[--] Translation: (The body of) Bew (PN), grandson of Boddibew (PN). Rhys/1877 140 reading only Westwood/1876 91 reading only |
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | AVVIBODDI[BA] ||| BEVVE Expansion: AVVI BODDIBEVVE Macalister/1945 360 reading only |
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | BIVVA[--]||| AVVI BODDIB[-- Expansion: BIVVAIDONAS ||| AVVI BODDIBEVVAS Translation: (The stone) of Bivvaidu (PN), descendant of Boddibevva (PN). Jackson/1953 180-181 reading only Nash-Williams/1950 118 reading only RCAHMW/1917 201 reading only |
McManus, D. (1991): | BIVV[U--] ||| AVVI BODDIB[-- Expansion: BIVVU[--] ||| AVVI BODDIB[-- McManus/1991 97 reading only |
Orientation: | vertical up up |
Position: | n/a ; arris ; below cross ; undecorated Macalister/1945, 359--360, and Nash-Williams/1950, 118, both argue that the cross on the stone dates to a period after the inscription. Thus although the inscription is described as `below cross', the cross was possibly not there at the time of carving. Nash-Williams/1950, 118: `the ogam inscription...is incised along both angles of the face reading upwards'. |
Incision: | inc |
Date: | 400 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950) 500 - 533 (Jackson/1953) 500 - 533 (McManus/1991) |
Language: | Goidelic (ogham) |
Ling. Notes: | none |
Palaeography: | Macalister/1945, 360: `the Ogham has in this case cartainly been cut subsequently to the Roman'. Rhys/1877, 140, argues that the four strokes to the left make up two Ds rather than a C, in spite of the fact that there was no gap to mark the new letter. |
Legibility: | some Macalister/1945, 359: `the top of the stone is broken, carrying off some of the Oghams; and there must have been a third line of Oghams on a back angle, which has been split off and lost'. |
Lines: | 2 |
Carving errors: | 0 |
Doubtful: | no |
Thomas/1994, 75, sees the name as Irish.
McManus/1991, 112-113, treats the name as Irish.
Thomas/1994, 75, sees the name as Irish.