the discoverer of those at Aghadoe and Kilmalkedar; an account of all these was published by Mr. Pelham in the sixth volume of Vallance's Collectanea in 1804. In the illustrations most of the monuments are incorrectly represented, the inscriptions invariably so. Neverthe

less, his labours were of great value in keeping alive the interest of Irish archæologists in this interesting subject. In 1836, the late Mr. John Windele took up the matter with great zeal and perseverance, exploring a large district to the north and north-west of Cork, in which he discovered a considerable number of these monuments; and, extending his researches into Kerry, he reexamined and copied all the existing inscriptions and discovered several others; he was followed in his labours by the late Mr. Richard Hitchcock who made a laborious exploration of the county Kerry, adding a large number of new inscriptions to those already discovered.

Two valuable papers on the nature and probable age of the Ogham were read before the Royal Irish Academy by the present Lord Bishop of Limerick, then Dr. Graves, on February 14th and May 22nd, 1848. These were really the first attempts made to treat the subject in a philological manner. Though dissenting from his lordship's conclusions, I consider his treatment of the question of the greatest possible value to the Ogham student. Papers on the same subject were also contributed by the late Mr. John Windele to the Ulster Journal of Archæology, and the Proceedings of the Kilkenny Archæological Society, while several minor contributions have appeared in the above, and other antiquarian publications. On the whole, however, the subject is in a very undecided state, as theories were propounded and insisted on before sufficient discoveries had been made

for the necessary purposes of comparison and illustration; these theories must in all probability have to give way before the light thrown on the question by more recent finds. The limits of the present paper, and the scope of my subject will not allow me to go into the arguments which the facts of Ogham discovery suggest

to me in support of my firm belief in the great antiquity of its introduction into these islands, an antiquity reaching in all probability to many centuries before the Christian era. The importance, however, of the subject will be admitted, when I state, that in Ireland up to the present date, I have ascertained the existence of about one hundred and fifty inscribed Ogham monuments. The classification, comparison, and translation of these inscriptions by a competent Gaedhelic scholar is greatly to be desired, and cannot but throw some light upon the primitive history of the Gaedhal. The existence of these inscriptions out of Ireland, at one period was not dreamed of; some indeed thought it possible, that Scotland, well known to have been colonised by the Gaedhal at a remote period, might have produced some examples; but the idea of a number of them being found in any part of England was not entertained. The discovery, however, of Ogham inscriptions in Wales, and one in Devonshire, does not now appear strange to us in the light which early Welsh and Irish history has thrown on the remote connections existing between the two countries. It is therefore a matter of some interest and importance to examine critically these Welsh monuments, comparing the nature of the inscriptions found on them, with those found in Ireland in order to ascertain if any definite conclusions can be arrived at as to how the character found its way into Wales.

THE KENFEGGE STONE.

The first of these inscriptions noticed as Ogham was that on the pillar-stone near Kenfegge, in Glamorganshire, discovered by Mr. J. O. Westwood, and a drawing and description of which was supplied by that gentleman to the Arch. Camb., i, p. 182. This monument was well known before Mr. Westwood's paper. It is an undressed monolith, standing on the side of the road between Kenfegge and Margam, about 4 ft. 6 ins. in height above ground; having on one face the following

inscription, in capitals, PUNPEIUS CARANTORIUS; and on the two angles of the same face several Ogham characters. Those on the left angle are as follow:

They are situated at the top of the stone, where there is a considerable fracture, or flake off the angle; consequently the inscription is imperfect. The diagonal direction of some of the scores of the two first characters have been remarked on; but there is nothing peculiar in it, beyond some freak or inadvertence in the engraving, as I have seen them similarly marked on other monuments. The second inscription on the right angle is as follows:

艹

H Q DD N

AH C

D NG G 0

A

From the long spaces between several of the characters it is quite evident that this inscription is imperfect; that several of the letters have been obliterated, principally vowels, which being usually small circular or oval dots on the angle, are generally the first to be defaced either by violence or weather. From the skeleton of the Ogham which remains, it is, however, quite evident that this is not a bilingual inscription, as any filling up of the missing letters could not produce the equivalent of the Roman inscription. It is also worthy of remark in this, as in all similar cases, that the inscriptions are always reverse,-the Roman reading from top to bottom, the Ogham from bottom to top. It is therefore evident that they are by different hands, and at different dates. To my mind the evidence of this worn and mutilated Ogham pillar-stone is, that it was appropriated as the monument of a Romanised Briton, after having long performed a similar office for some invading Gaedhal. Camden notices the Roman inscription; but his copy, which he states was supplied by the Bishop of Landaff,

is incorrect. For the above copies of the Ogham inscriptions I am indebted to Mr. Longueville Jones, as the artistic sketch of Mr. Westwood necessarily omitted some of the scores.

TURPILLIAN STONE.

This stone, as described in Jones' Brecknockshire, lies prostrate, close to a field-hedge on the farm of Ty yn wlad, on the northern road from Crickhowell to Lanbedr, about a mile and a half from the former. The first notice of this monument will be found in Gough's Camden (vol. ii, p. 476, with a plate at 473). The plate is incorrect as regards the Ogham scores, which are marked, but of which no notice is taken in the text. In a paper by Mr. Strange, entitled a "Further Account of Antiquities in or near Brecknock, contributed to the Archæologia (iv, p. 19), he mentions this stone, which he states he visited, and found it lying neglected in a ploughed field. He describes it as "about 6 feet long and 2 feet broad." He gives also an engraving of this stone, which is a facsimile of that in Camden, shewing the same errors in the Ogham; of which, strange to say, he also took no notice. Jones describes it as being" 9 ft. long by 13 ft. broad, and 6 ins. thick." He also gives a plate, and is equally incorrect in his representation of the monument. In the Gentleman's Magazine for June 1786 (plate 1, fig. 7, p. 473) is a notice of this stone, with also an incorrect engraving. I should remark that Jones notices the scores on the angles, but ridicules the idea of their being alphabetical characters.

To Mr. J. O. Westwood we are indebted for an accurate engraving of this stone, and for a carefully drawn up paper published in the second volume of the Arch. Camb., p. 25. Owing, however, to the position in which the stone is represented, the Ogham scores on one side of the angle are not shewn. This prostrate monolith is rough and undressed, having on its face an inscription, in Roman capitals, as follows:

TVRPILLI IC IACIT

PVVERI TRILVNI DVNOCATI.

These letters, Mr. Westwood states, are quite legible. On an angle of the stone, of the same face as that occupied by the Roman, are the remnants of an Ogham inscription, the principal part of which is obliterated. It originally occupied two-thirds in length of the angle, commencing at about one-third from the original base, and occupying the remaining space to the top, as follows:

サ

The intermediate spaces were certainly filled up by letters, all the angle being worn or damaged. There was originally a piece out of the top of the stone, and the Ogham followed the retreating angle; but on this angle is also a fracture, and the letters on it have suffered accordingly. Mr. Westwood, when writing his paper, was rather doubtful whether the characters on this angle were identical with the Irish Oghams; he writes:"With respect to the Ogham-like marks on this stone, it will be observed, that we have here another element in the x-like mark below the D; whilst it will not fail to be noticed, that the simple oblique strokes occur in groups of twos and fives, just as in the Kenfegge stone and the Irish Ogham stones; so that I should think after what has been adduced no one will now be inclined to follow Jones in his jeering remarks against the Ogham characters of these markings.'

There can, however, not be the smallest doubt that the remaining characters are portions of a long and important Ogham inscription, identical with the Gaedhelic, and not having the remotest resemblance to the "Alphabet of the Bards." The small and x-like mark which is given in the book of Ballymote as the diphthong æ; and which alone of the five diphthongs described in that MS. is found on stone monuments, completes the identification of this inscription as Gaedhelic.

From the mutilated state of the angle letters we have