Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien

CIIC no. 201

  CIIC:   201   Epigraphy:   178   Ferguson:   92   ECMW:  

  Original site:   Coolmagort   Irish name:     Surroundings:   Cave of Dunloe
  OS map:   0   Coordinates:   0.0 / 0.0   Description:  
  Parish:   Knockane   Barony:   Dunkerron North   County:   Kerry
  Present site:   =
  OS map:   0   Coordinates:   0.0 / 0.0   Description:  

  Romanization:   -
  Ogam transcription:   -
  Ogam transliteration:   -


Location and history:

For the locality and discovery, cf. {197}.

According to Macalister, CIIC, this was the fifth lintel of the souterrain. It appeared not to be readable to Brash (OIM, 234: "no. 5") and J. Rhys (JRSAI 16, 1884, 314).

Size according to Macalister, CIIC: 4'3" x 1'6" x 0'4 1/2"

Published illustrations:

Macalister, CIIC 1, 195 ( draft).

Reading Macalister, Epig. 2, 93 (92. / V.):


i/? maci ge

"This stone was split longitudinally before being put into its present position. The whole of the inscribed angle has gone". The surface showing scores was regarded as the B-surface by Rhŷs [where?]; taking it as the H-surface, a "consistent reading" can be acquired. - "There is clear evidence of ᚕ, near the end of the inscription .., immediately preceded by a g. In this collocation ᚕ must be taken in its vocalic value, e; this indicates a late stone, and makes the restoration maci .. certain." The name after MACI could be restituted as Sogeni similar to Sogini appearing on "one of the Roovesmore stones" {126}.

Reading Macalister, CIIC:


The stone "had suffered serious injury" before "being laid in the cave", in that "a slab .. had been split from all but a few inches of the bottom of the inscribed face, carrying away all the vowels and all scores on the B-surface". The inscription had covered "two angles (up-top-down)" originally. The two E's were written as forfeda. On the top of the stone, *MAQI is "obviously indicated".

No interpretation is given by Korolev, DP (84).

No reading is given by McManus, Guide (65).

Reading Gippert (1978/1981):

No reading is attempted. Although the existing scores on the (dexter) angle are quite clear, it is not certain whether they form part of an inscription. There is no clear indication that the frontal surface was split off by a secondary flake. The scores on the top and on the sinister angle as read by Macalister and indicated in his draft cannot be ascertained.

End of output

Next query
Back to the TITUS OGAMICA homepage
Copyright Jost Gippert, Frankfurt 2000-2001. No parts of this document may be republished in any form without prior permission by the copyright holder. 28.2.2001.