Corpus Refs:Macalister/1945:482
Discovery:first mentioned, 1890 Langdon, A.
History:Macalister/1945, 461: `This stone was in use as a gatepost, and in its original form, when the Rev. W. Iago, of Bodmin, made an unsatisfactory sketch, which is now the only record of the inscription (reproduced Vict. Co. Hist. I, p. 420). It was afterwards trimmed, entirely destroying the inscription as well as the latin cross in relief on the back of the stone'.

Okasha/1993, 312: `The stone was first recorded in 1890--1 by Langdon at Treveneague in use as a gatepost. In 1895 Langdon and Allen [Langdon/Allen/1895, 52] described it as: `Standing at Entrance to East Treveneague Farm, in use as a gate-post'. They described it as having the `Letters obliterated'. Subsequently, Langdon explained that the stone had twice been used as a gatepost, first in its original state and then later when it was `re-cut for the same purpose in a new position and entirely defaced'. In 1896 Langdon said that this had been `Within the last few years' [Langdon/1896, 20]'. A drawing of the text was made by Iago before it was defaced and this was reproduced by Langdon. M. Henderson recorded the stone still in use as a gatepost at the farmyard entrance of South Treveneague Farm in 1960; by 1961 it had been placed in its present position'.

Dimensions:1.34 x 0.22 x 0.0 (Okasha/1993)
Setting:in struct
Okasha/1993, 312: `The stone is now built into a wall on South Treveneague Farm, St Hilary. This wall is on the right-hand side of the unclassified road from St Hilary to South Treveneague, perpendicular to the road and c. 300 m. before the farm-house. The stone is built in at ground level and is c. 5 m. from the road'.
Okasha/1993, 312--313: `The stone is built lengthways into the wall at ground level and it is therefore not possible to be certain whether the visible part is a portion of the face or of a side. A small hole and some tool marks are visible but there is no sign of any lettering...The description and reading of the text are taken from Iago's drawing reproduced by Langdon. The drawing was made before the re-cutting of the stone which resulted in the defacement of the text'.
Condition:inc , inc
CISP: As built into a wall, impossible to state but Langdon shows the stone with many modern holes and states that the text was entirely defaced (Langdon, cited in Okasha/1993, 313).

Thomas/1994, 284: `a much ruined stone (once a gatepost)'.

The drawing from Iago (reproduced in Okasha/1993, 313 and Thomas/1994, 285) shows much damage to the surface of the stone including hinges.

Crosses:1: latin; ind; ind; ind; ind; ind; ind; ind; ind

Okasha/1993, 312--313: `The stone was probably carved, perhaps a carved pillar-stone or possibly a cross-slab, since Langdon described a `long and wide-limbed Latin cross in relief on the back of the stone' which had been `obliterated at the same time as the lettering'.



TRVNG/1/1     Pictures


Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):[--FILIVS] | [NEMIA/NVS]
Macalister/1945 461 reading only
Macalister, R.A.S. (1945):[--FILIVS] | [NEMIAN/VS]
Macalister/1945 461 reading only
Okasha, E. (1993):NL[.]L[I.]TRC | NEMI{A}VS
[--] Nemiavs (PN).
Okasha/1993 314 reading only
Thomas, C. (1994):N[--][FILIIC] | NEMI{A}VS
Thomas/1994 284--85 reading only
Thomas, C. (1994):N[--][FILIIC] | NEMI{A}/NVS
Thomas/1994 284--285, Fig. 17.8 reading only


Orientation:vertical down
Position:ind ; ind ; n/a ; undecorated
Date:400 - 1099 (Okasha/1993)
Okasha/1993, 314: `The stone probably belongs to Category 1a, pillar-stones with a simple memorial text. Category 1 stones date from the fifth or sixth centuries to the eleventh century but this stone cannot be more closely dated'.
533 - 599 (Thomas/1994)
Language:Latin (rcaps)
Ling. Notes:Okasha/1993, 314: `Iago's drawing suggests that the text originally ended -NEMIAVS which could have been part of a name; its origin is unknown although the Irish name Nemanus can be compared. The earlier part of the text is not now recoverable'.

Thomas/1994, 284, argues that the inscription contains the words FILI and (H)IC indicating the language to be Latin.

Palaeography:Macalister/1945, 461: `Mr. Iago's sketch is enough to show that the inscription would have been found perfectly legible if a little trouble had been expended upon it; but owing to the uncertainty of the transcript no scientific value could attach to any attempt at extracting intelligible sense from it. The first line might possibly end in FILIVS, and the name in the second line may have been NEMIANVS (assuming an N ligatured either to the preceding A or to the following V). The first name is hopeless'.

Okasha/1993, 313--314: `No measurements of the letters were recorded and it is unclear whether or not the text was primary. The text appears to have been set without framing-lines or panels in two lines on the face of the stone, letters presumably incised. The script used was a predominantly capital one and the text read downwards facing left. When the drawing was made the text may have been complete but was rather deteriorated...The letters transliterated as [.]TRC, if read as a mirror image, could give F/IL[..]; in my view, however, this is probably coincidental. After the stone had been re-cut Langdon recorded: `Nothing is now left of the inscription except portions of an N and an A''.

Thomas/1994, 284: `It is possible to say it was vertical, in two lines, contained angle-bar A and probably horizontal I and widely spaced capitals...Beyond that lies the difficulty in re-assembling the actual names from the surviving drawing (Iago's). The first line (482) seems to end in IC, preceded by FILI(?), preceded by the name which began with N. The second line reads NEMIAVS and it is possible that it contained a ligature (MEMIAN~V~S)'.

Okasha/1993, 312, states that the only record of the inscription is the drawing by Iago, published in Langdon/1906, Fig. II.71. The stone has since been damaged and the inscription lost.
Carving errors:0