| Corpus Refs: | Davies/etal/2000:F4 |
| Site: | PLOIN |
| Discovery: | first mentioned, 1640 Le Grand, A. |
| History: | Davies et al/2000, 121--128: `Le Grand knew of four inscriptions in the vicinity of Plourin -- three within the parish and a fourth in the neighbouring parish of Landunvez [LDVEZ/1] -- all of which he thought had been erected soon after the arrival of St Budoc. He stated that the stones were still standing in his day and illustrated each one with an engraving after a sketch made by the local seigneur, the Baron de Kergroadès. There is an independent check on the accuracy of the engravings reproduced by Le Grand: in the original manuscript version of Dom Le Pelletier's Dictionnaire de la langue bretonne there are autograph sketches of two early inscriptions, one of which had previously been drawn by Kergroadès ... By then [1712], however, only one [PLOIN/3] was still in place, the others having already disappeared. ... More than a century later Le Menn published first Le Pelletier's account and then Le Grand's. Le Menn reproduced and transcribed the relevant texts and illustrations. ... Le Grand describes the second of the Plourin stones as being built into the fabric of the parish church: "above the first pillar which one encounters on the right side of the entrance to the church, above the door on which are the arms of the lords of Kergroadès". By the time Le Pelletier visited at the beginning of the 18th century this stone had been knocked down (renverser) and taken elsewhere, although he recorded that a priest of the church assured him that he had seen and read it. Thinking that the stone might have been taken to the Kergroadès château, Le Pelletier searched for it there, but found nothing'. (LeMenn/1981a, Le Menn/1981b). The site was visited by members of the CISP team in May 1997 and October 1998. |
| Geology: | Davies et al/2000, 128: `granite'. |
| Dimensions: | 0.0 x 0.0 x 0.0 (Unknown) |
| Setting: | Lost (present 1640, missing 1712) |
| Location: | Davies et al/2000, 121--122, state that it was seen by Albert Le Grand in 1640 but was lost by the time of Le Pelletier in 1712. Davies et al/2000, 128: `Le Grand describes the second of the Plourin stones as being built into the fabric of the parish church: "above the first pillar which one encounters on the right side of the entrance to the church, above the door on which are the arms of the lords of Kergroadès"'. |
| Form: | fragment Davies et al/2000, 128: `Le Grand describes the second of the Plourin stones as being built into the fabric of the parish church: "above the first pillar which one encounters on the right side of the entrance to the church, above the door on which are the arms of the lords of Kergroadès"...No dimensions are given and no description, other than that it was made of granite. Le Grand's engraving could suggest that the stone had been cut down to a straight-sided oblong block for use in walling, but there is no need to suppose this'. |
| Condition: | n/a , n/a |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | none |
| Decorations: | Davies et al/2000,128--129: `The inscription begins with a monogram, perhaps a damaged "chrism".' |
| Davies, W. et al. (1999): | {*}IOCILINX Expansion: {*} IOCILIN X Translation: Iocilin (PN). Davies/etal/2000 129 reading only |
| Orientation: | Incomplete Information |
| Position: | n/a ; broad ; n/a ; undecorated |
| Incision: | ind Davies et al/2000, 129: `The inscription is different in character from the other Plourin inscriptions: the letters are portrayed as being thinner and more elongated; hence, they could have been roughly incised on the stone rather than deeply carved'. |
| Date: | 1075 - 1199 (Davies/etal/2000) Davies et al/2000, 130: `The balance of the available evidence would suggest that the carving was done in the later part of the central middle ages, in the very late 11th or 12th century'. |
| Language: | name only (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | none |
| Palaeography: | Davies et al/2000, 129--130: `All the letters lean to the right. If they are all taken as capitals, then the only letter of any distinction is N, with an oblique stroke which joins the ascenders medially; this indicates little more than a probability that the inscription is post-Roman. If the 2nd and 3rd letters were to be read as an `OC' A rather than as OC, then this would indicate the use of Insular script, a possibility supported by the drawing of a wedge-shaped finial on the L. However, if, as seems more likely, there is no `OC' A, then the date of production could be anywhere within the 5th- to 12th-century period. The Chi-Rho monogram, if that is what it is, simply indicates Christianity, and little can depend on the form seen on the drawing'. |
| Legibility: | n/a |
| Lines: | 1 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |