| Corpus Refs: | Huebner/1876:136 Macalister/1945:393 Nash-Williams/1950:101 |
| Site: | PMCH1 |
| Discovery: | in/on structure, 1856 workmen |
| History: | Westwood/1879, 175: `The stone here figured (for a knowledge of which l am indebted to Miss F. Wynne of Voelas Hall) was first mentioned by the Rev. H. L. Jones at the Bangor Meeting of the Cambrian Archaeological Association in 1860, and is now securely placed in the church of Penmachno'. Macalister/1945, 369: `The first three [PMCH1/1, PMCH/2, PMCH/3] of the four stones preserved in the present church of Penmacho were discovered in taking down the old building'. Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `Churchyard'. |
| Geology: | |
| Dimensions: | 0.71 x 0.28 x 0.13 (converted from Macalister/1945) |
| Setting: | unattch |
| Location: | on site Macalister/1945, 369: `secured in a locked cupboard inside the entrance of the modern church'. Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `Inside church against the N. wall of nave at W. end'. |
| Form: | cross-marked Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `Rough pillar stone'. |
| Condition: | complete , good |
| Folklore: | none |
| Crosses: | 1: latin; linear; straight; plain; square; none; none; none; n/a |
| Decorations: | Westwood/1879, 175: `bears on the upper part a large representation of the Labarum monogram of the name of Christ [chi-rho]...The introduction of the monogram of Christ is of very unusual occurrence on the stones of this country (see ante, p. 145), the peculiarity in the present instance consisting in the Greek chi (X) being + shaped, the upper arm of the figure representing the Greek rho, whilst the lower part of the figure represents the l, making together XPI for Christi. Other instances occur both at St. Just, St. Helm's and Phellock in Cornwall, and in the pavement of the Roman villa at Frampton, Dorsetshire; at Jarrow, Durham (in the dedication stone of the church); and at Kirkmadrine and Whithorn, Wigtonshire, Scotland. Its presence here seems to indicate a very early date, probably of the fifth or sixth century'. Macalister/1945, 370: `a chi-rho symbol, in the form with a single horizontal transom'. Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `Chi-Rho (with closed loop and straight cross-bar)...The Chi-Rho symbol... above the inscription appears here in its later form as the so-called `monogrammatic cross''. |
| Westwood, J.O. (1863): | CARA/VSIVS | HICIACIT | INHOCCON | GERIESLA | PIDVM Expansion: CARAVSIVS HIC IACIT IN HOC CONGERIES LAPIDVM Westwood/1863 255--257 reading only Westwood/1876 175 reading only |
| Macalister, R.A.S. (1945): | CARA/VSIVS | HICIACIT | INHOCCON | GERIESLA | PIDVM Expansion: CARAVSIVS HIC IACIT IN HOC CONGERIES LAPIDVM Macalister/1945 370 reading only |
| Nash-Williams, V.E. (1950): | CARA/VSIVS | HICIACIT | INHOCCON | GERIESLA | PIDVM Expansion: CARAVSIVS HIC IACIT IN HOC CONGERIES LAPIDVM Translation: Carausius (PN) lies here in this heap of stones. Nash-Williams/1950 92 reading only |
| Orientation: | horizontal |
| Position: | inc ; broad ; below cross ; undivided |
| Incision: | picked Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `fairly deeply picked'. |
| Date: | 400 - 533 (Nash-Williams/1950) Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `5th-early 6th century A.D.'. |
| Language: | Latin (rcaps) |
| Ling. Notes: | Westwood/1879, 175: `The statement that the deceased was buried under a mound of stones (in hoc congeries lapidum) is, so far as l am aware, the only instance on record of such a fact, and proves that the raising of cairns or mounds of stones is not necessarily evidence of the paganism of the person interred beneath the mound'. Rhys/1905, 95--96, interprets the stone in terms of Latin metre, stating that the Latinity of the inscription is bad. Rhys/1918, 183--184: `A sketch of the Carausius stone at Penmachno (C.) The final s of in hoc congeries will serve as a convenient illustration of my reference to the uncertainty of the final consonants m and s. I know of no excuse for the false gender unless while the inscriber was cutting congeries he was thinking of aecervus'. Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `The false case and gender in 11. 3-4 reflect the progressive breakdown of Latin syntax in this period (cf. No. 78). The formula used in the epitaph is probably a variant of the stock formula In hoc tumulo iacit (see No. 294)'. |
| Palaeography: | Westwood/1876, 175: `the whole (with the exception of the letters A and V in the first line, an unusual angulation of the upper part of the letter S thrice repeated, and a rather peculiar formed G in the fourth line) being written in tolerably well-made Roman capitals'. Macalister/1945, 370: `The AV in the first word is ligatured'. Nash-Williams/1950, 92: `with a ligature of AV in 1. 1. The A's have the straight and angular (?) cross-bar variously. The E in 1. 4 has the vertical stroke prolonged top and bottom'. |
| Legibility: | good CISP: from published drawings etc. the text appears very legible. |
| Lines: | 5 |
| Carving errors: | 0 |
| Doubtful: | no |
[1] Sir Gardner Wilkinson (Arch. Camb., 1871, p. 141) disproves the supposed Menavian (South Wales) origin of Carausius as supposed by Stukeley and others, showing him to have been `Batava/e lumnus', according to Eumenius'.
Evans/1888, compares the inscription with a Carausius coin from Richborough and would like to suggest that this coin is of a second, post 400 Carausius. This suggestion has not met with acceptance amongst modern numismatists and the coin is probably an ancient copy.