The Rev. J. II. Todd on an Ancient Irish Missal. n 



But this supposes only two letters to have been lost in the first line, whilst 

 It requires at least eight to fill an equal space vacant in the second. It is 

 therefore, inadmissible. It assumes also that the last syllable of the mutilated 

 word in the first line is main, not na.n, which is possible; but whether we 

 read m or n, there can be no doubt that this word was the Christian name 

 of he person mentioned. If we adopt the termination mam, it is possible 

 tha marhshamain, or Mahon, may have been the name, which would fit very 

 weii into the vacant space. 



The other mutilated inscription is still more irrecoverable. It is probable 



however, that in this there are not more than four or five letters lost in each 



me, because the vertical plate must have crossed it; and therefore the whole 



breadth of that plate is to be allowed for. All that now remains is as fol- 



lows: — 



Here again it is evident that we have a name; and that the first half 

 of the first hne must have been coup Do. The Christian name of the person 

 here mentioned must have ended with the syllable ano, and his sirname be-an 

 with hu c. . . (or hu D. . . as Dr. O'Conor reads it), and ended with la.g ; but 

 all beyond this is conjecture. 



The following conjectural restoration is suggested, not as likely to be true, 

 but for the purpose of showing what I presume to have been the nature of the 

 inscription : — 



' And for Flann 

 O'Taiculaigh." 



The Four Masters record the death of Mael-Cainnigh Ua Taichligh [or 

 O'Tully], A. D, 1049, which proves that there was such a family name at the 



12 



