Macai.ihter — The History and Antiquities of Inis Cealtra. 147 



stone stands on what seems to be a low earn, covered with earth, and grass- 

 grown. Delany told nie that in the process of cleaning out the cemetery a 

 large number of small rounded stones, about the size and shape of a turkey's 

 egg, were here found. These he had collected together, but they were soon 

 dispersed by mischievous people. A similar hoard of rounded stones was 

 found in a grave of about the eleventh century, uncovered during the recent 

 restoration of lona cathedral. 



(12). Immediately west of the round tower. Plate XVI, fig. 2. A cross- 

 base, 3 feet 1 inches high, 1 foot 8 inches by 3 feet 3 inches at base, tapering 

 to 1 foot 10 inches across at top. The sides are curved in outline. Socket, 

 1 foot 2 inches by 9 inches across by 9 inches deep. None of the crosses or 

 fragments now on the island will fit this base. This is the stone of which a 

 legend is told, set forth in Part III of this paper. 



(13). Lying beside G 28. A stone, 4 feet 6 inches long by 1 foot 5i inches 

 broad, with a worked face containing a socket o feet long and 6 inches broad 

 by 5 inches deep. 



(b) Grosses. 



(14). CNN 5. Plate XVI, fig. 3 ; BW, plate 7, no. 1. A slab 2i inches 

 thick, cut into the shape of a cross, hollowed at the angles, but without a 

 surrounding wheel. Total height, 6 feet 1| inch ; the breadth was 3 feet 

 1| inch, but the sinister arm is lost. There is no ornamentation except a 

 groove following the line of the edge. At the bottom are two square panels, one 

 at each side of the base, jneasuring 1 foot 1| inch high by I foot ^ inch across, 

 each containing a saltire in cava rilievo. The other face of the cross appears 

 to be quite plain. In outline this cross resembles no. 15, and is doubtless of 

 the same date, if not from the same hand. 



(15). CNN 10. Plates XVII, XXV, fig. 1 ; CllL 54 ; BW, plate 7, no. 2. 

 This very important monument was smashed in pieces, which were collected 

 and cemented together by the Board of Works. Wakeman found only one of 

 the fragments — the sinister arm — and copied the inscription on its edge in 

 the Ordnance sketches thus : OK "OO AK'Opei. This sketch is repro- 

 duced in CIIL, but in the letterpress of that untrustworthy work there 

 is a hopeless confusion between this stone and the Deche7iboir monument, 

 no. 11, ante, and the further erroneous statement is made that the stone 

 has disappeared. It is strange that Wakeman made no reference to the 

 ornamentation on the face of the fragment which he found. In the Board of 

 Works Report, the interlacing work with which the face of the stone is covered 



