230 Gray — Irish Cromlechs. 
If modern research had demonstrated that all cromlechs were 
originally only chambers of tumuli, it would still be advisable 
to use a term expressive of their present condition. For this 
purpose the author considers the term u Cromlech would be 
the most appropriate. 
The original condition of all cromlechs as chambers in tumuli 
is now incapable of proof, either in Great Britain or the Conti- 
nent ; it would, therefore, be very unwise to adopt a term that 
would express and perpetuate what must be only a conjectural 
idea of the original condition of these monuments. 
This is a fatal objection to the position taken by Dr. Lukis, in 
his controversy on the subject with Mr. Du Noyer, in which 
the former suggests that the terms “Cromlech” and “Dolmen” 
should be discarded, and the term “Chambered Tumulus” 
substituted, employing this term in a generic sense.* 
Mr. Du Noyer, in common with Sir Gardiner Wilkinson and 
Colonel Meadows Taylor, t adopts the term “ Cromlech,” but 
limits it very properly to a distinct form of monument, and 
states his reasons in a most exhaustive and valuable communi- 
cation, published in the journal of the Kilkenny Archaeological 
Society.! 
But the restrictions imposed by Mr. Du Noyer are embai- 
rassing and confusing, because he would limit the term 
“Cromlech” to such monumeuts as have been always sub- 
csrial — a character that is incapable of proof in any case ; and 
he further perplexes the matter by suggesting that the cromlechs 
were not in themselves places of sepulchre— an opinion quite 
untenable. See extract from O’Curry’s lectures quoted above. 
Besides, the character of the remains and objects found in the 
chambers of so many Cromlechs proves they were places of 
sepulchre. , 
Objections have been urged against the use of the term 
“ Cromlech,” because of its modern introduction, and because 
* Journal of Kilkenny Archaeological Society. Vol. V., page 495. 
f Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy. Vol. XXIV. Part 5. 1865. 
+ Journal of Kilkenny Archaeological Society. Vol V. N.S. Page 474. 
