166 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



of the process. That a fabricator ingenious enough to devise so artifi- 

 cial an adjustment of his elements should have gone out of his way to sow 

 these needless seeds of disruption amongst them, is exceedingly impro- 

 bable ; and, if the case went no further, we might well pause before 

 giving any serious attention to the suggestion that the legend is the 

 work either of 0' Flanagan or of any person in privity with his theory 

 of the reading. 



But the case goes much further, and tends to the absolute acquittal 

 both of O'Flanagan and Lloyd when, turning from their own representa- 

 tions of the inscription, we look at its authentic reproduction in the cast 

 before the eyes of the Academy. This cast was taken from the stone on 

 the 18th of July, 1872. I had already, in 1869, made a tracing by a 

 process of rubbing, almost amounting to a reproduction of the surface, 

 which I also exhibit : but, warned by repeated delusions into which 

 I have been led both by drawings and tracings, I took the opportunity 

 of visiting the site again, when travelling from Limerick by Ennis last 

 summer. This was my third visit; the first, in 1868, having been 

 productive only of the disappointing results recorded in a former com- 

 munication to the Academy. 



I found no change in the condition of the stone or in the aspect of 

 the place since I first saw it. The stone, which was about eleven feet 

 long by about eight inches thick in O'Flanagan's time, has been split 

 into two slabs of about three to four inches thick respectively. The in- 

 scribed half lies on the top of the other half. Both are propped up by 

 a few broken fragments of the same kind of clay-slate beneath. To all 

 appearance, save that the flag is split into two plates, things remain 

 exactly as they were when O'Flanagan wrote his description nearly 

 ninety years ago. But I learn from Professor O'Looney that the monu- 

 ment has in point of fact undergone various vicissitudes in the interim. 

 His account of these I shall ask Mr. O'Looney to allow me to annex 

 to this paper in his own words. But for the enthusiasm of this ener- 

 getic inquirer, and his power of enlisting the hands as well as the hearts 

 and spirits of his Irish-speaking countrymen, my visits would have 

 been in vain, and the question of forger or no forger should have been 

 debated over the ashes of men unable to speak in their own defence, upon 

 verbal assertions and fallacious hand-made sketches. I may, however, 

 refer to a drawing, executed on the spot, for the general aspect of the 

 place, showing the position of the stone in reference to the central emi- 

 nence of the mountain and to the little tarn of Loch-looleynagreine, 

 which lies about 300 yards to the west. 



The other monument mentioned by 0' Flanagan stands about a mile 

 further westward. It is a remarkable trilithon-cromleach, known by 

 the name, commonly applied to monuments of the class throughout the 

 country, of Leaba Dhairmada as Grainne. A drawing of this monument 

 also is presented to the Academy. The scene still realises its wild and 

 vivid description by O'Flanagan. The road from Ennis to Miltown-Mal- 

 bay,passing behind the eminence seen to the left of the picture, has only 

 been constructed of late years; and between the " Hand" cross-roads and 



