120 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



with the Doranach Airgid proper : the outer case had not yet been made. 

 And the statement of the document is express : ' aliam partem de reliquiis 

 fecit recondi in scrinio.' Further, there is no hint that there was a book in the 

 receptacle into which the relics were put. And there is nothing in the 

 memorandum to suggest that in 1525 the shrine was used for any other 

 purpose than that which it fulfilled in 1308. 



Finally, there can be no question, in spite of Petrie's assertion that such 

 an act was impossible, that on this occasion the Domnach was opened, and 

 tbat the eyes of at least a few favoured ecclesiastics saw what it contained. 

 There is no improbability in the assumption that " monkish writers " shared 

 the knowledge which they obtained. 



\\'.- may now turn to another part of the Clogher Register, in which we 

 might reasonably have expected to find mention of the Domnach. In the 

 course of this paper I have frequently referred to a fragment of a Life of 

 t Ti i ii ii in the Codex Salmanticensis. Now in 1528, three years 

 after the main part of tin- Register had been completed, Patrick O'Cuillean, 

 Bishop of Clogher, added to it an office for the festival of the patron saint of 

 the diocese. There remain of it the hymn and the lesson. 1 The latter is a 

 ahorl Lil I ' liithinn which has an evident relation to the Salamanca 



fragni'iit. The differencef n them are not such as to forbid the belief 



ili.it they are two recensions of the same original. Apart from blunders of 

 the Bcribes they fall under thra In the Register there are many 



_i.t variations from the Codex Salmanticensis, which maybe described as 

 stylistic, alterations of the order of the words, and so forth, which do not 

 alter the sense. Secondly, I ster omits four passages and abridges 



others, all "f which are found in the Salamanca copy: of the omitted pieces 

 one was certainly in the ultimate, if not in the immediate, exemplar of the 

 lesson in the Reg ster. And lastly, thi r adds a paragraph at the end, 



relating the appearance of the saint in a vision to a woman, and mentioning 

 his death on 24th March. We have sufficient reason to believe that these 

 variant- ges deliberately made by Dishop O'Cuillean in the text 



of the lesson : for at th>- end "f the Otlice he wrote the following note : — 



" Suprascriptum officium fuithic per Beverendum uirum Patricium Culinn 

 episcopum Clochorensem ad utilitatem publicain ecclesie Clochorensis 

 redactum ex antiquis libris ordinis sancti Augustini studiose transcriptum, et 

 secundum osum Rnmanum in melius ordinatum atque reformatum superrlua 

 reticendo ac diminuta augendo et perfectius emendando, Anno Domini 1528." 



Here the bishop avows that he altered the text, and he divides his changes 

 under the three heads of omissions, additions, and emendations, no doubt of 

 style. 



1 Extract xi in my edition. 



