Macalister/1945, 52: `...the side bearing the latter angle has been split off from the stone`, concluded Macalister, adding, in a footnote, `I am now inclined to doubt whether there is any such split, and to consider that the inscription is complete as it stands - an illustration of the prudential aposiopesis noticed above, p. xiii`. McManus/1991, 172, notes, `Macalister`s `prudential aposiopesis` theory...[is] quite far-fetched`. (xsd:string)