Macaustkk — Temair Breg : Remains and Traditions of Turn. H79 



the stone of the Mata at the south end of the ridge, and the mound of the 

 Luch-donn, the Brown Mouse — really a terrible monster, in spite of his 

 insignificant name — at the northern end. But it is the cult of real animals 

 which was by far the most important. 



The only name common to the three versions of the "epic" dynasty, which 

 we have set forth in a previous section, is Fiachu. "We infer from this thai 

 Fiachu is a name from the original epic; indeed this one word is the only 

 fragment of the epic which has survived. In two of the versions of the 

 dynasty, this Fiachu is associated in a curious way with cattle; and we have 

 already inferred that in the Celtic epic Fiachu was a culture-hero, who taught 

 the arts of the pastoral life to his people. 



The invaders found their predecessors worshipping a cattle-divinity on 

 the ridge. The cult of this deity took the form of the maintenance of a 

 sacred cow, or of sacred cattle, in which the god was doubtless supposed to 

 be immanent. The existence of sacred cattle on the ridge is testified to by 

 the name Duma na £6, the "mound of the cow," so called from Glas Temrach, 

 the grey cow of Temair, and by the name of the two wells, that of the White 

 Cow and that of the Calf. 



With this aboriginal cow-divinity the invaders probably identified the 

 Fiachu of their own traditions. 



At this stage a question naturally arises. Was the " Grey Cow " or the 

 " White Cow " one animal, which lived and died once for all and was buried 

 within the mound called Duma na 116; or was there a succession of sacred 

 animals, each talcing the place of its predecessor when the latter went the 

 way from which even divine cows are. not exempt ( The latter alternative 

 is by far the more probable. All analogy is against the maintenance of < 

 sacred animal, without provision for a successor. There would ho no reason 

 in so doing; for the purpose of the sacred cow was doubtless I" insure the 

 presence of the cattle-god in the midst of his people, and so to secure 

 fruitfulness in the herds. 



But in that ease, it will be objected, we ought to have not one " Mound 

 of the Cow," but a whole cemetery of sacred cattle. The objection is not. 

 however, valid, and may be met in one of two ways. In the first place, it 

 remains to be determined whether Dii/mn no 116 was a burial-mound or not ; 

 and the most unfortunate doubt which exists as to the identification of this 

 mound makes it improbable that this vital point will ever be satisfactorily 

 settled. If it was a mound in which the remains of a sacred cow had been 

 buried, we may at least remember that the burial of a single individual sacred 

 animal is not unprecedented. Thus, we may recall the grave-monument of the 



