334 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. 



the natural weathering of the stone is evident. Macalister ascribes such 

 occurrences to local tribal hostilities. It seems to me that local enmities 

 would not have so carefully confined their expression to a demonstration 

 against a remote ancestor. I suggest a different solution. 



There is reason to believe that the eponymous ancestors of ancient Irish 

 tuatha belonged to pagan mythology. Conmac, for instance, ancestor of the 

 Conmaicne, was son of the god Mananiian. Cian, ancestor of the Cianachta, 

 was father of the god Lugh. It will not be doubted that ancestors of this 

 kind, as long as paganism lasted, were objects of worship to those who 

 claimed to be their descendants. I suggest that the violent defacement of 

 eponyms was merely an Irish form of idol-breaking. In No. 32 (on which 

 see also Macalister, vol. ii, p. 8) there is an apparent example of the contrary 

 process, the engraving of an eponym by itself, which does not belong to the 

 legend of the monument : [a]nme Dovinia, " the name of Duibne," eponymous 

 ancestress of Corcu Duibne, Kef erring to certain remarks of Macalister upon 

 this monument, I may observe that the occurrence of female names in 

 genealogies of this kind is no more a proof of matriarchy or polyandry among 

 the Irish than is the occurrence of names like Demetrius, Athenion, or 

 Musaeus among the Greeks. 



III.— ORTHOGEAPHY. 



The orthography of the Ogham inscriptions represents a definite and 

 consistent system. 



The Ogham alphabet is based on the Latin alphabet. The same vowels 

 are used in both. Nevertheless, the Ogham alphabet is not a mere cipher 

 of the Latin alphabet. It exhibits original and independent treatment. The 

 consonants F, P, X, appear to have been rejected from the original code as 

 unnecessary. Two new consonants, V and NG, were added. The entire 

 order of the alphabet was changed. The vowels were segregated, and 

 apparently subclassified. These are not features of a mere cipher alphabet. 



It does not appear that the inventors of Ogham writing knew anything of 

 Latin writing beyond the symbols. Unlike the early British inscriptions in 

 Eoman characters, the Ogham inscriptions do not show any importation of 

 Latin inflexions, or of Latin words like filiiis, hie iacet, etc. Except a few 

 obscure inscriptions in the Pictish region of Scotland, all the Ogham 

 inscriptions, so far as they can be deciphered and interpreted, appear to contain 

 only forms and terms belonging to the Gaelic branch of the Celtic language- 

 group. 



The Latin alphabet which was the basis of the Ogham alphabet was 

 that of the early classical period. There are no ascertained Ogham equivalents 



