Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien

Ogam-Inschrift: CIIC-Nr. 218

Ogam Inscription: CIIC no. 218

Original location: Whitefield

County: Kerry

Year of discovery: 0

Actual location: Dublin, N.M., RIA c.


Fig. 218, w01 Fig. 218, w02

Actual reading:

Latin Transcription: [ ] || MUCO TUCACAC

Ogam Transcription: [ ] ||

Ogam Transliteration: ()[ ]()[ ] ||

Direction of reading: du-su

Other readings, history, comments etc.:

Location and history:

For the original locality and treatment history, cf. {215}.

The present stone was assigned no. 12 in the RIA collection.

Size according to Brash, OIM 192: 4'2" x 11" x 8"
Size according to Macalister, CIIC: 3'3" x 0'10 1/4" x 0'9"

Published illustrations:
Brash, OIM, pl. XIX ("RIA no. 12") (draft);
Macalister, CIIC 1, 212 (draft).

Reading Brash, OIM 192:

"On the opposite angle are a few scores which have some resemblance to Ogam letters, but are unreadable". The same formula is to be met with on the Trabeg stone {180} where we have OC OC; "from the commutable nature of vowels in the Irish, this is not a matter of any difficulty". The name appears "in our records in the form of Muchatocc, an ecclesiastic who lived in the fifth century": cf. Tirechn's Annotations on the Life of St. Patrick within the Book of Armagh; but this does not mean that it was the same person as the one mentioned there ("Muchatocc of Inis Fail").

Reading Macalister, Epig. 2, 111 (109.):

First line:
(This line "at first sight seems hopeless", and Macalister had not attempted at reading it in Epig. 1, 15. - LAGOBBE is "already found, as Luguvve, at Aghacarrible {140} .. and as Luighbe many times in the MSS. The H-side of the angle, and the vowels, are all chipped away; the slope determines the g, the length of the interspaces the vowels".
Second line:

The same reading was proposed in Epig. 1, 15. This is "an adjective in -ac, from muco-Tucac, the muco-Toicac(i) of the Coolnagort stones. Luighbe was probably a fellow tribesman of the persons commemorated by the latter monuments" {197, 198, 200}.

Reading Macalister, CIIC:

First angle:
"The first angle has been chipped away, leaving nothing but the distal ends of" this "with vague traces of scores on the H surface near the top."
Second angle:
"The final AC is probably an illiterate lapidary's mistake for I. We should then have MUCO-TUCACI, recalling the MUCOI TOICACI on three stones at Coolmagort" {197}, {198}, {200}.

Interpretation Korolev, DP 85:

a. L[A]G[O]BB[...
The reconstruction of the vowels in the first line is purely hypothetical. In the last word, the five scores of AC might have substituted the five I-notches as was proposed [by Macalister].

Reading McManus, Guide 65:


Reading Gippert (1988):

Dexter angle up || sinister angle up:
[ ] ||
)[ ]()[ ] ||
(No reading should be attempted for the dexter angle. Macalister's BB is not identifiable, instead of his G only to B-strokes (= L?) can be seen. The slanting is not such as to ascertain a G.

Last changes of this record: 27.04.97

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