Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien

Ogam-Inschrift: CIIC-Nr. 201

Ogam Inscription: CIIC no. 201

Original location: Coolmagort

County: Kerry

Surroundings: Cave of Dunloe

Year of discovery: 1838

Actual location: =


Fig. 201, 001 Fig. 201, w01

Actual reading:

Latin Transcription: -

Ogam Transcription: -

Ogam Transliteration: -

Direction of reading: -

Other readings, history, comments etc.:

Location and history:

For the locality and discovery, cf. {197}.

According to Macalister, CIIC, this was the fifth lintel of the souterrain. It appeared not readable to Brash (OIM, 234: "no. 5") and J. Rhys (JRSAI 16, 1884, 314).

Size according to Macalister, CIIC: 4'3" x 1'6" x 0'4 1/2"

Published illustrations:
Macalister, CIIC 1, 195 (draft).

Reading Macalister, Epig. 2, 93 (92. / V.):

i/? maci ge
"This stone was split longitudinally before being put into its present position. The whole of the inscribed angle has gone". The surface showing scores was regarded as the B-surface by Rhs [where?]; taking it as the H-surface, a "consistent reading" can be acquired. - "There is clear evidence of , near the end of the inscription .., immediately preceded by a g. In this collocation must be taken in its vocalic value, e; this indicates a late stone, and makes the restoration maci .. certain." The name after MACI could be restituted as Sogeni similar to Sogini appearing on "one of the Roovesmore stones" {126}.

Reading Macalister, CIIC:

The stone "had suffered serious injury" before "being laid in the cave", in that "a slab .. had been split from all but a few inches of the bottom of the inscribed face, carrying away all the vowels and all scores on the B-surface". The inscription had covered "two angles (up-top-down)" originally. The two E's were written as forfeda. On the top of the stone, *MAQI is "obviously indicated".

No interpretation is given by Korolev, DP (84).

No reading is given by McManus, Guide (65).

Reading Gippert (1978/1981):

No reading is attempted. Although the existing scores on the (dexter) angle are quite clear, they seem not to form part of an inscription. There is no indication whatsoever that the frontal surface was split off by a secondary flake. The scores on the top and on the sinister angle as read by Macalister and indicated in his draft cannot be ascertained.

Last changes of this record: 27.04.97

Copyright Jost Gippert, Frankfurt a/M 1996. No parts of this document may be republished in any form without prior permission by the copyright holder.