Location and history:
For the location and discovery, cf. {148}.
Size according to Brash, OIM 210: 4'3" above ground.
Size according to Macalister, CIIC: 4'0" x 0'9" x 0'11"
Size according to DPAS, no. 792 (3), p. 251: 1.16m x .34m x .14m
Published illustrations:
- Macalister, CIIC I, 146 (draft)
Reading Brash, OIM 210 (no. 3):
ᚅᚐᚃᚔᚉᚐᚄᚋᚐᚊᚔᚋᚒᚉᚑᚔ
NAFICASMAQIMUCOI
"(Stone of) NAFIC THE SON OF MUCOI"
"The proper name Nafic is of the same family as Nathi, A.D. 430, Nainid, A.D. 557." - "There is some evidence of an inscription on the opposite angle of the same face in the appearance of a C towards the top, but nothing further". - Ferguson [where?] read `(g?)Raficas Maqi Mucoi'; "how he committed this error I cannot divine." Instead, Naficas appears in J. Windele's copy, in Brash's own one, and on the cast "taken by the Dr. .. The temptation to deduce Graficas seems to have led that gentleman astray." A further copy was taken at Brash's request by one Mr. Brenan in 1871; his copy reads "Naficas Maqi Mucoi" too. - The inscription is also mentioned by Brash in JRSAI 16, 1884, 124 because of the mucoi formula.
B/GRAFICASMAQIMUCOI
(g)raficas maqi mucoi
Here we have a "genitive in as instead of ias of other examples".
ᚌᚏᚐᚃᚔᚉᚐᚄᚋᚐᚊᚔᚋᚒᚉᚑᚔᚄ
u/?]GRAVICASMAQIMUCOI[ ]S
The stone "has all the appearance of having been washed by the sea. The inscription ran over the head and finished on the shoulder of the right-hand arris, but the top is all broken away and the concluding letter of the eponym's name alone survives." The H-surface of the left angle is spalled. "I am .. inclined to reject three nicks before the g, which would make u, and read the name Gravicas. This is one of the frequent derivatives in -viq-, from a base which also enters into Gracolinea at Stradbally in Waterford" {270: Ballyvooney}.
GRAVICAS MAQI MUCOI DOVVINIAS
"Inscription on two angles (up-down)". The second one "had been intentionally chipped away, as usual to remove the mucoi-name. But the restoration is certain". "On the second angle, DO is broken away, VV is clear, and is followed by I234 (vague but traceable). The distal ends of the N scores, though only just traceable, cannot be mistaken; the following I234, the A, and the distal ends of the S can also be detected".
GRAVICAS MAQI MUCOI / [DO]VVἅINἅIAS
Although the end of the inscription is destroyed, the restoration seems undisputed. The inscription has to be dated not later than the first half of the 5th cent.
Reading DPAS, no. 792 (3), p. 251:
( )NAVICAS MAQI MUCO(I) ( )S
"The reading of the full inscription is uncertain .. The scores preceeding the N are extremely faint; O'Kelly (annotation to personal copy of Macalister's corpus) and Windele (1848 [= MS 12 C 11], 448) interpreted these as OD .. The final word, occupying the diametrically opposed angle of the stone, is represented by only a single letter." Macalister's suppletion of DOVVINIAS "may have been a conjectural restoration".
Reading OSDP, 8:
GRAVICAS MAQI MUCO(I) (DOVINIAS)C
[The final C is not commented upon; a misprint? Note that the reading differs from the one given in DPAS.]
Reading Gippert (1978/1998):
Dexter angle up || [sinister angle down??]:
][N]A(V)ICAS MAQI MUCO[I] || [ ](S)
ᚂ](ᚃ)ᚐ(ᚃ)ᚔᚉᚐᚄᚋᚐᚊᚔᚋᚒᚉᚑ(ᚑ)[ ᚐ ] || [ ](ᚄ)
ᚁᚁ](ᚁᚁᚁ)ᚐ(ᚁᚁᚁ)ᚐᚐᚐᚐᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆᚐᚁᚁᚁᚁᚋᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆᚆᚐᚐᚐᚐᚐᚋᚐᚐᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆᚐᚐ(ᚐᚐ)[ ᚐ ]
[ ]ᚁᚁᚁᚁ
On the 
second angle, nothing can be read except for four strokes which would represent VV if read sinister-down as indicated in 
Macalister's drawing in CIIC; if read sinister-up, they would have to be regarded as H-strokes instead, excluding Macalister's restitution as *DOVVINIAS as suggested by his drawing. Note that in Epig. 1, 29, the same author had suggested that the inscription "ran over the head"; in this case, the four strokes could indeed represent the final character of a name like *[DOVVINIA]S. - The beginning of the inscription on the dexter angle is not readable because it is below ground. There is hardly any justification for reading the first (five stroke) character as an R instead of an N.
Dexter angle up || [sinister angle down??]:
second angle, nothing can be read except for four strokes which would represent VV if read sinister-down as indicated in 
Macalister's drawing in CIIC; if read sinister-up, they would have to be regarded as H-strokes instead, excluding Macalister's restitution as *DOVVINIAS as suggested by his drawing. Note that in Epig. 1, 29, the same author had suggested that the inscription "ran over the head"; in this case, the four strokes could indeed represent the final character of a name like *[DOVVINIA]S. - The beginning of the inscription on the