CIIC no. 218

Location and history:

For the original locality and treatment history, cf. {215}.

The present stone was assigned no. 12 in the RIA collection.

Size according to Brash, OIM 192: 4'2" x 11" x 8"

Size according to Macalister, CIIC: 3'3" x 0'10 1/4" x 0'9"

Published illustrations:

Brash, OIM, pl. XIX ("RIA no. 12") ( draft);

Macalister, CIIC 1, 212 ( draft).

Reading Brash, OIM 192:

ᚋᚒᚉᚑᚈᚒᚉᚐᚉᚐᚉ

MUCOTUCACAC

MUCOTUC AC AC

"MUCOTUC ALAS! ALAS!"

"On the opposite angle are a few scores which have some resemblance to Ogam letters, but are unreadable". The same formula is to be met with on the Trabeg stone {180} where we have OC OC; "from the commutable nature of vowels in the Irish, this is not a matter of any difficulty". The name appears "in our records in the form of Muchatocc, an ecclesiastic who lived in the fifth century": cf. Tirechán's Annotations on the Life of St. Patrick within the Book of Armagh; but this does not mean that it was the same person as the one mentioned there ("Muchatocc of Inis Fail").

Reading Macalister, Epig. 2, 111 (109.):

First line:

ᚂ:ᚌᚌ::ᚁᚁ::::

LAGOBBE

(This line "at first sight seems hopeless", and Macalister had not attempted at reading it in Epig. 1, 15. - LAGOBBE is "already found, as Luguvve, at Aghacarrible {140} .. and as Luighbe many times in the MSS. The H-side of the angle, and the vowels, are all chipped away; the slope determines the g, the length of the interspaces the vowels".

Second line:

ᚋᚒᚉᚑᚈᚒᚉᚐᚉᚐᚉ

MUCOTUCACAC

The same reading was proposed in Epig. 1, 15. This is "an adjective in -ac, from muco-Tucac, the muco-Toicac(i) of the Coolnagort stones. Luighbe was probably a fellow tribesman of the persons commemorated by the latter monuments" {197, 198, 200}.

Reading Macalister, CIIC:

First angle:

L[A]G[O]BB[...

"The first angle has been chipped away, leaving nothing but the distal ends of" this "with vague traces of scores on the H surface near the top."

Second angle:

MUCO-TUCACAC

"The final AC is probably an illiterate lapidary's mistake for I. We should then have MUCO-TUCACI, recalling the MUCOI TOICACI on three stones at Coolmagort" {197}, {198}, {200}.

Interpretation Korolev, DP 85:

a. L[A]G[O]BB[...

b. MUCO TUCACAC

The reconstruction of the vowels in the first line is purely hypothetical. In the last word, the five scores of AC might have substituted the five I-notches as was proposed [by Macalister].

Reading McManus, Guide 65:

LaGoBB ... MUCO TUCACAC

Reading Gippert (1988):

Dexter angle up || sinister angle up:

[ ] || MUCO TUCACAC

[ ] || ᚋᚒᚉᚑᚈᚒᚉᚐᚉᚐᚉ

ᚁᚁ)[ ](ᚁᚁ)[ ] || ᚋᚐᚐᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆᚐᚐᚆᚆᚆᚐᚐᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆᚐᚆᚆᚆᚆ

(No reading should be attempted for the dexter angle. Macalister's BB is not identifiable, instead of his G only to B-strokes (= L?) can be seen. The slanting is not such as to ascertain a G.

End of output