175 



dwell on other less striking coincidences, it is enougli to 

 state, generally, that a comparison of the results obtained by 

 tabulating the inscriptions and the Irish of the Book of Ar- 

 magh, furnished conclusive evidence, both by the repetition 

 and combination of characters, in favour of the correctness of 

 the received method of reading. 



The correctness of the ordinary key is maintained by the 

 strongest internal evidence. Nor does it want the support of 

 external evidence likewise. The Book of Leinster, a MS. of 

 theraiddle of the twelfth century, contains a passage in which it 

 is briefly given. The Book of Ballymote, written about the 

 year 1370, contains an elaborate tract, which furnishes us with 

 the keys to the ordinary Ogham, and a vast variety of ciphers, 

 all formed on the same principle. 



The Book of Lecan (written in the year 1417) contains a 

 copy of the Uraicept, a grammatical tract, probably as old as 

 the ninth century, in which are many passages relating to the 

 Ogham alphabet, and all agreeing, as regards the powers of the 

 characters, with what is laid down in the treatise on Oghams 

 in the Book of Ballymote. Dr. O'Connor, indeed, speaks of 

 a manuscript book of Oghams written in the eleventh century, 

 and once in the possession of Sir James Ware. Mr. Graves has 

 ascertained that this is merely a fragment of the above-men- 

 tioned Ogham tract. It is now preserved in the library of 

 the British Museum, and does not appear to have been written 

 earlier than the fifteenth or sixteenth century. 



The prevalence of the opinion that the ordinary key was 

 inapplicable, is attributed by Mr. Graves to the ill success of 

 those who have attempted to make use of it ; and he accounts 

 for their failure by reference to the following circumstances : 



1. The nature of the character is such that it does not at 

 once appear which, of four different ways of reading, is the 

 right one. 



2. The words, as in ancient MSS. being written conti- 

 nuously, there is great chance of error in dividing them. 



