NBRTH/1

Corpus Refs:Macalister/1945:444
Nash-Williams/1950:352
RCAHMW/1925:742
Site:NBRTH
Discovery:first mentioned, 1698 Lhuyd, E.
History:RCAHMW/1925, 249--250: `In British Museum Ms., Stowe, 1024, is a sketch of a monolith'.

Macalister/1945, 423, dates this MS. to 1698.

Westwood/1882, 41: `A third of these drawings...representing a stone `found at a place called Shoreditch, near the town of Narberth'. It is hoped that some of our Pembrokeshire correspondents will be able to rediscover and send us a rubbing of this hitherto unpublished stone'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Now lost'.

Geology:
Dimensions:0.76 x 0.43 x 0.0 (converted from Lhwyd (RCAHMW/1925))
Setting:Lost (present 1792, missing 1882)
Location:The stone was drawn in 1792, but was unknown to Westwood until he published a note regarding it in 1882 (Westwood/1882).
Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Now lost'.
Form:plain
RCAHMW/1925, 249: `a monolith, stated to have been 2 feet 6 inches long and 17 inches broad'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Rough pillar-stone'.

Condition:n/a , n/a
Folklore:none
Crosses:none
Decorations:no other decoration

References


Inscriptions


NBRTH/1/1     Pictures

Readings

Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):ROT{I}F/ILIUS | [..]STACAT{I}
Expansion:
ROTI FILIUS [..]STACATI
Macalister/1945 423 reading only
Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950):--]MOG{I}F/ILIVS | [--]S[--]LACAT{I}
Expansion:
--]MOGI FILIVS [--]S[--]LACATI
Translation:
(The stone) of [...]mogus (PN), son of [...]lacatus (PN).
Nash-Williams/1950 195 reading only

Notes

Orientation:vertical down
Position:ind ; ind ; n/a ; undecorated
Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Latin inscription in two lines reading vertically downwards'.
Incision:inc
Date:566 - 599 (Nash-Williams/1950)
Language:Latin (rcaps)
Ling. Notes:none
Palaeography:Westwood/1882, 41--42, (from Allen's drawing): `I cannot precisely decipher the inscription, of which the letters appear to have been carelessly copied. Is the second line intended for STACATI, or does the inscription terminate with the IACET?'.

RCAHMW/1925, 250, (from Lhwyd's drawing): `it seems probable that the upper part of the stone has been broken off, so that the full name is irrecoverable. The remaining letters appear to read: ...MOGI FILIUS...SLACATI, or perhaps...S LACATI. It is tempting to see in the small strokes and dots at the top of the picture parts of an Ogam inscription, but they may represent only the draftsman's attempt to express the presence of a letter which he could not decipher'.

Macalister/1945, 423: `Both copies are too indefinite to give any certain reading'.

Nash-Williams/1950, 195: `Apparently Roman capitals, with half-uncial L, M, and U, and the S approximating to that on No. 346. Horizontal final -I's in ll. 1 (?) and 2. FI in l. 1 was conjoined...The reading, which is very uncertain, is based on sketches of the inscription made in the 17th and 18th centuries'.

Legibility:n/a
CISP: Both Lhwyd's and the 1792 drawings of the inscription pose problems with the reading.
Lines:2
Carving errors:0
Doubtful:no

Names

References