Corpus Refs: | Macalister/1945:443 Nash-Williams/1950:349 |
Site: | MELIN |
Discovery: | first mentioned, 1746 Lewis, D. |
History: | The Ms. record of this stone is in the fly-leaf of Lewis Morris' copy of Geoffrey of Monmouth and records that, `In a loose stone 4 ft. long...Mr David Lewis [of Pant y benne] found the following inscription, 1746' (Owen/1896, 131--132). Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Now lost'. |
Geology: | |
Dimensions: | 1.22 x 0.0 x 0.0 (converted from Lewis (Owen/1896)) |
Setting: | Lost (present 1746, missing 1896) |
Location: | Has not been reported since the original note (Owen/1896, 131--132). |
Form: | Indeterminate Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Rough pillar-stone (?)'. |
Condition: | n/a , n/a |
Folklore: | none |
Crosses: | none |
Decorations: | no other decoration |
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | [HICIACIT--] | [--BRAN--] Expansion: [HIC IACIT --] Macalister/1945 422 reading only |
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | [HICIACITCA/MV] | [MLOR][.][BRANN..] Expansion: HIC IACIT CAMVMLORI[X] BRANN[VS] Translation: Here lies Camulorix (PN) Brannus (PN). Nash-Williams/1950 195 reading only |
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | [-- FILICA/MV] | [MLORIBRANNI] Expansion: [--] FILI CAMVMLORI[S] BRANN[I] Translation: (The stone) of (So-and-so), son of Camulorix (PN) Brannus (PN). Nash-Williams/1950 195 reading only |
Thomas, C. (1994): | HICIACITCAMV | LORIBRANNUS Expansion: HIC IACIT CAMVLORIX BRANNVS Thomas/1994 93 reading only |
Orientation: | vertical down |
Position: | ind ; ind ; ind ; inc Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Latin inscription (indeterminate) in two lines reading vertically downwards (?)'. |
Incision: | ind |
Date: | 400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950) |
Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
Ling. Notes: | none |
Palaeography: | Macalister/1945, 422: `His copy is unintelligible, and attempts at emendation are futile. We seem to detect an adumbration of HIC IACIT at the beginning of line 1, and a name containing the syllable BRAN in line 2. Only re-discovery of the stone could help us further'. Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Apparently Roman capitals, with one ligature in l. 1 and a reversed N in l. 2'. |
Legibility: | n/a Macalister/1945, 433: `unintelligible'. Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Latin inscription (indeterminate)'. |
Lines: | 2 |
Carving errors: | 0 |
Doubtful: | no |
Jackson/1953, does not discuss this stone but on 597, 619, 625, 627--28 and 633 he does discuss the name Camulorix.