sign in sign up
<<
Home , Forfeda, Irish language, Luis (letter), Ogham, Ogham inscription, Old Irish

Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1995)5 12 , 677-696

The -inscribed spindle-whorl from Buckquoy: evidenc Irise hr languagefo pre-Vikinn ei ? Forsyth*

ABSTRACT On the basis of a detailed re-examination, a new interpretation is offered of the text of the ogham- inscribed spindle-whorl excavated 1970in from Buckquoy, , Orkney. fromFar beingin unintelligible non-Celtic Pictish, the text appears, it is argued, to be in . The whorl provides, therefore, important evidence for knowledge of the Irish in Orkney in the pre- Viking period. The implications of, and a possible historical context for, this Irish influence are discussed.

INTRODUCTION The spindle-whorl was discovered by Anna Ritchie in 1970 during her rescue excavation at the Poin f Buckquoyo t , Birsay Mainlann o , d Orkney (NC 243282)Y s RdescribeH wa t I d . an d illustrated in her excavation report (Ritchie 1977, 181-2, 197 fig 8 no 84, 199 pi 13a, item 84 in the catalogue of finds) with a detailed discussion of the inscription by Jackson (Jackson 1977) and of the geology of the stone by G Collins (Collins 1977). The inscription has been further discussed in two unpublished MLitt theses (Padel 1972, 73-5; Holder 1990, 66-70) and by Dr Ritchie herself (1983, 62,65). Along with all the other finds from the Buckquoy excavation, the ogham-inscribed whorl is now in the Tankerness House Museum in Kirkwall (ref no 1976.56).

THE SITE The threatened site, known locally as Sinclair's Brae, was a long, low mound (20 m long, maximum height 0.5 m), truncated at one end by coastal erosion (Ritchie 1977, 174). Ritchie estimated that, by 1970, at least half the original site had been lost over the encroaching cliff. Ten weeks of digging revealed a series of farmsteads, dating from the seventh century to the 10th, built and re-built one on othere e Buckquoth f Th .o p to y excavation proved seminal t providei fo , firse th dt identified exampl distinctivela f eo y Pictish house-type f cellulao , r form, which subsequent discoveries have shown to have been widespread (Ritchie 1977, 174, 175, 182-3; 1991, 72). In the absence of other clear indicators, the remains were interpreted on the basis of the contrasting and distinctive house-types. Ritchie identified two major phases (I-II) of Pictish

Hilda't :S s CollegeY , Oxfor1D 4 dOX 678 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF , 1995

occupation, followed, after a period of disuse, by three phases (III-) of Viking settlement. The Viking occupation appears to have been short-lived because the site was ruinous by the time it was isolaten a use r dfo d burial, databl coin eo n evidenc thire th do et quarte e 10tth hf o rcentur y (Ritchie 1977, 190-1). inscribee Th d spindle-whor discoveres wa l d immediately outsid south-wese eth t entranco et e maith n hal f houso l (ibid,e4 181). This structure, whic s beehha n describe s havinda ga 'distinctly anthropomorphic air' (Ritchie 1983, 56), is perhaps the most sophisticated example yet uncovere Pictise th f do h 'figure-of-eight' house-type t differI . s fro oldee mth r cellular typn ei having its cells arranged in a linear plan, not set in a circle round the central area of the house. Not enough is known about Pictish domestic structures to date this type closely (Ritchie 1977, 182-3). A similar, though simpler structure at Coileagan an Udal, North Uist, was dated by its excavator betwee sevente nth nintd han h centuries (Crawford 1974 . Figure-of-eight-shape9) , d houses made of wattle have been excavated more recently at Deer Park Farms, , (Lynn 1989), which calls into questio assumptioe nth n that this typ dwellinf eo necessarils gi y diagnostic of Pictish inhabitants. Most of the artefacts found in the pre-Norse layers at Buckquoy were of simple types common in various parts of north-west in this period, though the painted pebble was recognized as being diagnostically Pictish (Ritchie 1972). The ogham was also listed as a characteristically 'Pictish' item, without referenc emphaticalle th o t e y Irish backgroune th o dt (McManus 1991). The possible Irish connotations of the Buckquoy inscription are discussed more fully below. The settlement at Buckquoy was not itself of high status (Ritchie 1983, 54) but its position at norte th hstrategicalle sidth f eo y important Birsay Bay, very tidae closth Broughle o et isle th f o t , give it an importance beyond its size. The name derives from the ON bygg-kvt 'bere quoy', ie barley enclosure, and is a reminder that, traditionally, the soils of Birsay were considered the most fertil f mainlano e d Orkney (Ritchie 1977, 174) e animaTh . l bones recovere excavatioe th n di n indicat mixeea d farm wit emphasin ha pastorale th n so , especially cattle (ibid, 191). Ritchis eha put forwar e persuasivth d e idea that Buckquo s 'thywa e hom e inhabitante th far r e mfo th f o s Brough' (1985, 198). The Bay of Birsay is one of only three sheltered bays on the west coast of the mainland of Orkney and is ideal for fishing (Ritchie 1977, 174). More importantly, perhaps, it is, as Ritchie has pointed out, particularly well suited for boats setting out to the or (1983, 47).

DATING The discovery of an in the course of an archaeological excavation conducted to modern scientific standards raise excitine dth g possibilit firse th tf yabsoluto e datin oghan a f go m inscription. Sadly, however, very little dating evidenc survived eha finale th r any r d,fo stagba , f eo activity at Buckquoy, and in the report it was the ogham which was used to date the context, not vice versa (Ritchie 1977, 192) inscribee Th . d v/hor recoveres wa l d fro secon e Pictise mth th f do h phases of occupation (ibid, 181). Unfortunately there was nothing to allow the close dating of either phase. Onl artefact7 y2 somd an s e pottery sherds were Pictise founth n i dh levels. These artefacts were, in the main, simple domestic items such as bone pins, a comb, and a spoon, none of which is closely datable (ibid, 179). lacke Th , until recently f properlo , y excavated ogham inscription mads sha t impossiblei o et construc accurateln a t y datable typology basie th certaif sn o O . n assumptions abou relationshie th t p betwee e scripforme th nth t f o tar s use e e basi th Irelann Scotlandn di th i f o n sd o dan d an , FORSYTH: THE OGHAM-INSCRIBED SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 679

historical dating of the slabs on which some inscriptions appear, it has been customary to assign most so-called Tictish' to the eighth or ninth centuries, with simpler ones perhaps slightly earlier (Jackson 1955, 139). Since the script of Buckquoy is not typologically the most simple, Jackson's dating of the inscription to the eighth century was in keeping with general opinion at the time. Ritchie use s dat dhi assigo et eighte n th phas o ht I centureI seventhe th phasd o yan t eI . While the other finds are not incompatible with this dating, they could be older. In the interim since Jackson gave his opinion, however, radiocarbon analysis of the contexts of ogham stones excavated at Pool, Sanday and the has stretched the chronology of Orkney ogham back to the sixth and seventh centuries, and thereby thrown open the question of dating all the Scottish oghams, including the whorl (Hunter 1990, 185; Morris, pers comm). It would be rash, however placo t , muco eto h emphasi thes n radiocarboo sw ene n date advancn i s f finaeo l publicatio excavatione th f no s concerned. terminusA ante abandonmen e quernth r fo farmsteade th f o t thereford an , depositioe eth f no the ogham, is provided by the conventional date of the beginning of Norse settlement in Orkney, bees 800c ha n t I .assume d tha arountd sitean n sdi Birsay would have been settled , sincyon e Birsay was an important centre in the Pictish period (Ritchie 1983, 47). If one accepts this, and allows 'a brief interval, perhaps half a century' (Ritchie 1985, 194), for the ruins to develop, the conclusion is that the buildings fell out of use in the mid-eighth century. In recent years, however, authors have com admio et t that firthero n mt s 'aei localye s , historica r archaeologicao l l evidence' for the date of the landndm, and that c 800 'is not a comfortable assumption' (Bigelow 1992, 10; see also Morris 1985, 210-13). While raiding bases might indeed have been established at the beginning of the ninth century, permanent settlement may not have got underway for at least another generation (Crawford 1987, 40-2) t Finta Life S f e.Th o n paint pictursa Orknen a f eo y still Pictis840e th sn h i (Thomso n 1986; Lowe 1986). Therindependeno n s ei t Vikine datinth r ggfo phase t Buckquoysa , instead thes retrospectivele ear y dated fro buriae mth ruin e lth (phassn i ) eVI lase oth ft farm, e securelwhicb n hca y mide date th lato t -o dt e 10th century (Ritchie 1977, 190-1). Thus, while Ritchie's relative chronolog site s inherentlth ei r yfo y plausible, both upper and lower limits for the Pictish occupation are fluid. Jackson's dating of the ogham may well be correct t cannobu , reliee b t withoun do t independent corroboration scripe fore th f mTh .to uses di compatible witdaty han e fro sevente mth h centur llthe fale th lo W .y t back , thenchronologa n o , y interpretatioe baseth n do histor e sitee th th f .nf o yThi o provid n sca datea moro en e refined than the seventh, eighth, or early ninth century.

OGHAM-INSCRIBEE TH D SPINDLE-WHORL

DESCRIPTION (ILLUS 1 & 2) A chalk/limestone spindle-whorl inciseface on e witn do h ogham arranged roun dcirculaa r stem.

Material: 'A fine-grained cream coloured sandy limestone, with grains up to 0.5 mm in diameter' (Collins 1977, 222). Dimensions diameterm thickm m 6 m 3 0 .: 1 , Condition: gooIntacn i d d an tcondition , inscription well preserved.

A spindle-whorl is a heavy ring, in this case a perforated stone disc, attached to the pin of the spindle to give it the necessary weight and momentum for spinning thread by hand. A total of six spindle-whorls were recovered from Buckquoy, all of very similar size and shape, though made 680 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1995

fro mvarieta materialf yo s (Ritchie 1977 82-6)s no , . othere Nonth f markes eo si decorater do n di anexampleo ytw waye Th .s from ) wer phas84 e & I (noboteI 3 s8 h mad f chaleo k 'presumably chosen for its creamy colour and tractable nature' (ibid, 181). Geological analysis of the three limestone whorls showed them to be 'made from closely similar rock type, varying only in detail' (Collins 1977, 222). Collins concluded that they 'could well have been made from chalk pebbles, obtained from local glacial deposits' (ibid, 223). Several other chalk/limestone whorls are known from Orkney, includin froe Broce gon m th Lingrof ho w (NMS GE11; MacGregor 1974 ) whic92 , h is made from very simila (Ritchi4 r 8 roc o n thao k t f eo t 1977, 181) likelihooe Th . d thawhore th t l s madwa e from locally obtained ston s importanei t becaus t implieei oghae th s s carve mwa n di Orkney rather than thawhore th t l was, say, imported from Ireland ready-carved. Ritchi s surpriseewa spindle-whorlw d fe tha o s t s were recovered from Buckquod yan concluded that any sheep at the site were kept more for their meat and hides, a view supported by the evidence of sheep bones recovered. None the less, the presence of the ogham inscription on no 84 would seem, she felt, 'to imply that the whorl was special to its owner' (ibid, 182).

THE INSCRIPTION

Carving technique The ogham inscription was lightly, though clearly, incised with a fine sharp blade. Such a text would be easily and quickly produced on as workable a medium as chalk and can have taken no more than a few moments to carve. The inscription is complete and well preserved. Jackson remarked that 'almost every stroke is quite clearly made out when the whorl is held to a strong angllighn a examined t a etan d wit magnifyinha g glass' (Jackson 1977, 221) carvine Th . moss gi t readily seen on the photograph of the whorl taken under magnification by the Institute of Geological Science r sfurthe (illuFo . r1) s written description Jacksoe se s n (1977 Paded an ) l (1972). A close examinatio photogrape th f no h reveal zigzaa s g line (illu ) trace2 s d very lightly across the surface between the perforation and the stem-line. It underlies the first two strokes of re-crossed lettean 2 1 r s unde steme rth just before lette numbering)o t (sey 3 r ke e r illufo s2 . This feature appears not to have been noted before, but evidently is prior to the ogham. The strokes are less substantial than oghae thosth therconfusioo d f en mo an s ei n betwee twoe sweee nth Th . f the stem-line away from the perforation may have been to avoid this zigzag, but in any case the ste mfairls i y haphazardly placed. The stem-line, which is c 120 mm long, was incised only once and not re-cut on top of the subsequent -strokes. Thi moss si e t Th clearl . M) ycase & see th f letter1d eA o 1( n ni an 5 s individual letter strokes are c 3-4 mm in length, with 5 mm for the serifed A and 12 mm for the M, and were carved with one knife-score each. There appears to have been no re-cutting or augmentation of strokes (though see discussion of 7 & 12). The spacing of letter 9 (N) requires some explanation. The second and third strokes are full- length, parallel spaced an ,mighslopee d don an s tda expect firste Th . , however eccentrin a t a s i , c angle, meetin e secon g th steme poina th n dt i .a t Even more strangely fourte th ,fiftd e han ar h squeezed intinadequate oth e space befor , crampe10 e suco dt extenn ha t thafinae th t l stroke intersects wit followine hth g stroke well belo steme wth . This indicate t leasa firss r sit to that, 10 t stroke, must have been carved before 9, or at least its last two strokes. This is puzzling since it would imply that the letters were not carved in the sequence in which they were to be read. If the carve copyins rwa gcirculaa mighe r mode r points ty o stare an wa h l t e ,a t especiallsh r o e h f yi FORSYTH: THE OGHAM-INSCRIBED SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 681

ILLUS 1 Inscribed spindle-whorl from Buckquoy, Orkney (Crown Copyright: Institute of Geological Sciences, NERC)

not fluen oghamn i t t surelbu , t woulyi d have been apparen lase th t y strokt b tha8 f teo spacs ewa running out and all the letters of 9 would need to be tightly spaced. That this was not done implies an alternative explanation. The parallel second and third strokes of 9 appear firmer than the other three. They are accurately sloped and, if one ignores the first, fourth, and fifth strokes, are nicely spaced relative to the letters on either flank. Could it be that, having completed the text, the carver realized he or she 2 68 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1995

had carved two strokes where five were needed and squeezed in the first, fourth, and fifth strokes as best they coul Perhapd? s closer examinatio depte th f individuaf ho no l strokes thereford an , e the pressure with which they were cut, migh instructivee b t . Miscountinge stroketh s i y thin si swa kind of slip that even an experienced oghamist might make and need not imply that the carver was following an exemplar he or she did not understand. Several features combin givo et Buckquoe eth y ogha mcursiva e appearance. These are, principally t equidistan e stemno th :s i t fro perforatioe mth roundy wa parallelise l th ; al n f mo component letter-stroke s maintainesi d only erratically; ther s disparitei lengte th f n strokeyi ho s both withi betweed nan n groupslettere th unevenle d sar an , y spaced (note especiall crampine yth g of 9 and 12/1). These are the kind of features often attributed to ignorant copying by an illiterate e perceivecarverth t ye , d shortcoming Buckquoe th f o s y t blunderoghano o t e e mar du s miscomprehension. Sinc legibilite eth f oghayo m depends entirel layoun yo spacingd an t e on , cannot help feeling that someon fullt eno y comfortable wit scripe hth t would have taken more care to lay it out properly. While the use of exemplars is highly likely in grand monumental ogham , such as at Brandsbutt (Aberdeenshire), Whiteness (), or Dupplin (Perthshire), the text f whico s carvee har d with special, labour-intensive carving techniques t seemi , s scarcely appropriat casuaa r cursivd efo an l e text suc s Buckquoyha speciao N . l equipmen r carvino t g ability would have been require scratco dt h suc inscriptionn ha , anyon coulo ewh d write could have carved it. While it can never be proven, I feel the features mentioned above are most naturally explained in terms of a text carved straight onto the whorl by the person who composed it.

The Provided the curve is in keeping with the scale of the lettering there is no particular difficulty in reading a circular ogham, that is, as long as one knows where to start and in which direction to go. Indeed, a circular stem seems a very natural arrangement of a type II ogham (ie one with draw-in stem-line)1 on a disc: much more obvious than, say, the peculiar configuration on the bead (CIIC 53). Since ogham always reads from lef righo t t t (whether horizontall r vertically)yo poine th , t a t issu : doe stande is centrt weree i son th loos d a t , a e,an k out, thus reading clockwise r stano , n do the perimeter looking in, and read anti-clockwise. If one were keen to preserve the convention of reading vertically up the left, then one would adopt the former stance. This appears to be the directio e Logith f eno Elphinstone ogha s indicatem a letter-strokese slope th th f y eo d b . Both Jackso Paded nan l preferre reao dt Buckquoe dth y ogha thimn i s direction, too, thoug slope hth f eo the Buckquoy letters unequivocally indicates tha t shouli t reae db d ann'-clockwise. Padel attempted establiso t directiopattere ha th r nfo f readin no g circular oghams (1972, 13-15), but, since eth wheel oghams in the are quite different in character, the only true parallel is the circular ogham from Logie Elphinstone, which reads clockwise f anythingI . Buckquoe th , y ogham precedene shoul th muc e t th dse r h fo tmor e inscrutable Logie Elphinstone ogham t thero n bu , s ei need to set the authority of one against the other, since the letters of each slope in opposite directions and leave no room for doubt. Jackson recognize (11d M tha)e wasth t wouls a , expectede db , diagona stem-linee th o lt , but, becaus convinces wa e eh d that 'the other stroke evidentle sar l intende t right-angleyal a e b o dt o st t sufficientlno s wa it'e yh , sensitiv lettere pitce th th f shfac- o n 'moso ei t te morar t lesr eo t sa right-angle poine th o tt s where they whic w reac fe line'e concedee e hh th Th . d were 'more sloping' coul explainede db opinions hi distortine n th i , y b , g effec circulaa f o t r base-line (Jackson FORSYTH: THE OGHAM-INSCRIBED SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 683

1977, 221) closA . e examination, however h-aicmed an ,- revealb e consonantth f s o tha l al t e ar s oblique.2 Compare, for instance, letters 4 and 5 (DA). There can be no doubt that the slope is deliberat e- acros individuay san l letter-grou effectn i , be , shorstraighsteo o e t s t ps mth s a i t bu - t this sloping is exactly what one would expect. h-aicmed e slopinan - Th b f go widespreaa s si d featur f typeo I inscriptioneI n si Scotland. Although the gradient may vary, the incline is always in the same direction relative to directioe th f readingno wite i ,proximae hth furthed en l r 'forward' tha distale nth . Placed nexo t anothere on correctla , y orientate wilH d l foran arrow-hean dmB a d which pointdirectioe th n si n of reading pitche m-aicmef Th . o , which slope left-to-right (up) acros t steme no sth s i , diagnostic since their outline is maintained even if the inscription is inverted, and read back-to- h-aicmed frontan - B . consonants, however, would sucn i , h circumstances, poin wrone th t g way. e slopEveth f consonantf eo ni s wer t sufficienno e indicato t t directioe eth f readinno e gth Buckquoy text, further, unequivocal evidenc provides ei seriffee th y . This/or/Wdb d A appearn so

five other Scottish ogham inscriptions always with the serif 3 on the right/lower distal end. There doubo n ca e nb t that Buckquo e reab do t anti-clockwiss yi e wit b-surface hth e nearese th t perimeter. In Irish, dessel, 'sun-wise', 'right-hand-wise', mean extensioy b s n 'lucky', 'favourable', 'propitious', (Diet Ir Lang s.v.), and a similar semantic association is reflected in other Celtic . Given this well-attested preferenc r motiofo e sunwis a n ni e directio t mighni t firsa t t glance appear surprising that the Buckquoy text reads anti-clockwise, but it is all a question of perspective: though the text runs anti-clockwise, to read it one must turn the whorl clockwise. Thus as the spinner spins her yarn, and the spindle turns sun-wise, the text passes legibly, if at speed, before her eyes. The presence of the pin would in any case make it exceedingly awkward to carve and read the text if it ran in the opposite direction, if, that is, one assumes the inscription was carve dspinningr whilfo whore e estils us th n .i lwa l The only remaining question is where to start. Circular texts in any script are not a common feature of Insular epigraphy. Where they occur their layout is usually a result of the shape of the whicn o s h the e carvedyar r instancefo , , rings, coins, seal stond an s e fonts e mosTh . t common device for indicating the starting point of a text is the small square cross (eg the Aldborough sun-dial: Okasha 1971, 47). Occasionally spacing is used to indicate word-division fone th t g fro(e m Partrishow, Cardiganshire: CIIC 988) t quitbu , e ofte texe nth continuous i t d san inscribee th readee r skile th relie f th discerninn o li rn so g wher Attleborouge th star o et g (e t h ring (Norfolk): Okasha 1971, 49-50). Since circular text usualle sar y short, thi rarels si yproblema . There are marked differences in the spacing between the various letters of the Buckquoy ogham, and it might seem logical to start after one of the larger gaps, 5/6 and 1/2, ie at C or N. In both cases, however resultine th , g tex unintelligibles i t t seemi d an ,s more likely thavariatioe th t n merels i whiccasuaresuln e e i yth th carvedy texs e f hth o tlwa wa t . In most cases it is obvious where an ogham texts begins, but in some type II Irish oghams, whether manuscrip t Gal(S t l Priscian r epigraphio ) CIICg c(e Ballyspella 7 2 : n brooch Killalo4 5 , e slab Tullycommo2 5 , n bone Colma9 74 , n Bocht slab, ) non-phonetia , c charactes i r used to indicate the starting point and direction of reading. Both Padel and Jackson interpreted Buckquoy' instancn a s sa lettethi) f eo (x s 1 r'feather-symbol r 'feather-mark'o ' preliminara t Ye . y surve f Irisyo h epigraphi manuscripd can t oghams showed tha evern i t y cas e 'feather-mark'eth , perhaps more aptly labelled 'arrow-mark', is shaped >- or ->-, never X- or —x- (Brash 1879, 322-3). There are two Scottish examples (from Shetland) of inscriptions beginning with X (Lunnastin Cunningsburgd gan botn i t h bu case , h3) t seem si s preferabl tak o et charactee eth s a r the first forfid and accord it its usual phonetic value (Id). There are no Scottish examples of a >- 4 68 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1995

or ->- shaped directional indicator t appearsI . , therefore . takeThie Id b s o snt a , s thai 1 t interpretatio s s unambiguoubaseni it n do addee th ss dshape ha advantag t bu , f removineo n ga otherwise unfeasible cluste f consonantsro . The stem of the Buckquoy ogham is not a seamless ring, like that of Logic Elphinstone, but rathe loopera d line witdistinco htw t ends. These overlap slightly, jus t wouli t abovd an d , seee1 m natural to take this break in the stem as the start of the text. This leaves the problem of the relationship of 1 to the rest of the text, because it is out of alignment with the other characters, and lies outside (below) rathe steme r thath n .n o Strictl y speaking firse th , t letter afte breae e th th r n ki closa t ebu ste, examinatio2 ms i n show facn si thats i attache1 t steme left-hane th f o dTh .t o d den stee th m curves down slightl meetd yan uppee sth f th o e r forfidlefm ar t just abov intersections eit . It is as if 1 was indeed sitting on the tip of the stem, but that the whole thing had been bent down 90°. There is ample space for 1 to sit on the stem between the break and 2 and there is no obvious reason why it should be suspended from rather than intersected by the stem. e precisTh e arrangemen f strokeo t thin i s st easportio no e texrationalizeo yt th s i t f no , however one chooses to interpret it. It is clearly confused to some degree - the final stroke of 12 is hard-up agains e X-forfid partiallyd th t t unequivocallyan no t bu , , differentiated fro firse o mth tw t strokes of 12. Why the large gap before 2 ? Why the intersection of the two ends of the stem and differena placinn e o th 1 f t go alignmen Olive? t r Padel suggest thae -oue m th t o st e th f o t ste deliberata ms i e devic shoinscriptioo e t stare th wf th o t n (pers comm). While thi withous si t parallel, certainl possibilitya s i t yi . e palaeographicaTh l convention f oghao s m e deducehavb o et d solely from observatiof no the extant inscriptions. Since there are relatively few post-seventh-century examples and these are heterogeneous s sometimei t i , s difficult analysinn i , g variation individuan i s l inscriptionso t , differentiate the deliberate and telling from the incidental and insignificant. This is particularly tru f informaeo l inscriptions suc Buckquoys ha , wher difficulte eth furthes i y r compoundee th y db virtually unique circular arrangemen texte th .f Generallyo t , unambiguous mistake t i raree t sar bu , would be foolish, either to see errors everywhere, or to deny that they ever happen; a corrected mistake is the obvious explanation of the configuration of Buckquoy 9. If one were prepared to accept the possibility of another mistake, or at least a change of plan, a possible explanation is suggeste observatioe th y db stee endo th m nf tw so tha overla e th t foro pt mlittla e cross. Perhaps, having quickly cut the stem, the ogham-carver was struck by this x-shaped intersection and decided to press it into service as an X-forfid, but, having cut the rest of the letters, concluded that thi st sufficientl devicno s ewa y unambiguou added an s dseparata (1)X e , side puttinth o e t o t t gi avoi t beindi g interprete secona s da . dE Balancin e demandgth unforcen a f o s d interpretatio e carvinth f no g against plausible of the text is the epigrapher's perennial problem. We might feel intuitively that the beginning and end of the text should coincide with the break in the stem, but given the obvious casualness with whic inscriptioe hth carveds nwa pooe th , r spacinface lettere th tth d thaf go st an a t least one mistake was made and corrected, how much confidence can be placed in such a hunch ? If an intelligible reading is provided by starting with the stroke before 1 to what extent should this be allowed to influence our interpretation? For the sake of convention only and without prejudice to the final reading, I take the X-forfid firse th t s lettea read ran d anti-clockwise followss a , :

1 A small cross below the line, consisting of two short lines intersecting more or less at their mid-point angle th , e betwee uppee narmth o rtw s being more thae th n f 90°o p ,ti joine e th o dt ste s describema d above. This character e X-forfid,th , appear totaa f n seveo o sl n Scottish FORSYTH: THE OGHAM-INSCRIBED SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY I 685

10 9 11 12

oghae Th ILLUm S2 inscriptio nnumberino t wit y hke g

oghams including Buckquoy e initia, th althoug n i l s positioi t hi n onl Lunnastinn yo d gan Cunningsburgh 3, both from Shetland. In both cases the letter is followed by TTE, and, even though neither texbees ha t n satisfactorily interpreted, give e apparennth t avoidancf o e double letters in word-initial position, it seems preferable to take the symbol as having its normal phonetic (vocalic) valu . AboveId for/id,e stee th th m curves round sharply, crosses its other end, then starts its circuit. There is a generous gap before the next letter. Jackson describe sufficiens a t di fivr fo te strokes, althoug hdoubI t couli t d have taken more than two, properly spaced. Given the comfortable spacing of the next few letters, it need not be considered remarkable and is certainly no bigger than the gap after 5. Five strokes to the right of the stem, sloping forward: N. The first stroke is somewhat doubtful, bein slightla t ga faind yan tgreate r angle tha rese nth t (makin allowance gdu r efo the curve of the stem). Tw osteme stroketh lefe f ,o th t slopino st g very slightly forward roughle . Thesar D : o eytw parallel for most of their length but converge at their distal ends. According to Jackson, they joint firse no Th .to d stroke appear over-shooo st stee th tm very slightly. Ther linea s ei , like bind-strokea , which continue sfirse welth tf stroke.o l beyond en e Jacksodth n dismisset di

as 'a fortuitous scratch', but it is possibl4 e that it is indeed a bind-stroke, similar to one found Burriae onth n stone whicsingla s hha e curve bind-stroke dth duto r lind e yfo th o e t d ean final letter-stroke of the group. 4 As above slightle . Thesar D : o yetw closer together tha previoue nth sharpea t s a pair d ran , stemangle th o e.t 5 A single long stroke almost perpendicular across the stem with a horizontal line across its lower distal end - the so-called 'serifed A'. This letter is clear and definite. Padel thought the serif unusually long. There follows a generous gap, the largest in the inscription. Four strokes to the left of the stem, sloping forward with constant gradient: C. Jackson described the second stroke as crossing the stem slightly. 686 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1995

7 Three strokes to the left of the stem, sloping forward with increasing gradient: T. Padel saw a very short possible score just after thes t decide probabls ebu wa letter e t di t parth f yt no I o . t should be noted that there are a number of nicks and scores in the surface of the stone which clearle ar y just casual damage.

This first half of the text takes up two-thirds of the stem, thus, although the first seven characters vere ar y comfortably spaced rathee ar nexe x th ,r si tcramped .

singleA 8 stroke acros steme sth . ThiA : s strok f vero s yei similar d lengtan 0 thoso ht 1 f eo substantially shorter that 11therdoubo o s n , s ei vowela t s thai t t i occupietI . middle sth e two-third oghae th f mso band appeard 5an slopo st e very slightly backwards. 9 Five strokes to the right of the stem, sloping forward at markedly different angles: N. The second and third strokes almost meet at the stem, and the final stroke intersects the first thud an s strok 0 fail1 reac o f t s eo steme fore hth f thiTh m.o s lette bees ha r n discussen di detail above; justificatiothero n s ei takinn ni 2+3 s a t gi . 10 Five strokes fairly perpendicular across the stem: I. Though the individual strokes are a little straggly, they are all more or less parallel, of similar length, and spaced as widely as 2, 6, and 7. 11 A single long stroke obliquely across the stem, sloping forwards: M. This is the longest strok allf eo , about doubl lengte precedine eth th f ho g -strokes verd an ,y firmly sloped. There follow generousa s gap, perhap underlyine th f o s d lef avoio en gt t e zigzagdth . 12 Three strokes to the right of the stem, sloping forwards. The first two are exactly parallel and very tightly spaced thire th , d follow slightla t a s y more gentle gradient afte largea r r gap. Ther soms ei e doubt over whether these shoul takee dsinglb a s na e grou f threpo e strokesn i , whic separato tw hs casa er o representt letterse i , V) r , (o 2+1 . ElsewhersF LB : texe e th th t n ei component strokes of individual letters are generally evenly spaced, but in contrast there is considerable variatio gape sizth e sf th e o betwee n i n letters intervae Th . l betwee secone nth d and third comparabls strokei 2 1 f so thao et t between 4/5l al ,t a 7/88/9 d p an ,. ga Ther o n s ei between 9/10 oghae Th . m text doe t appeasno havo t r e been carefully lai dcarvee outth f i ;r was running out of space this may have been the maximum spacing possible. There is certainl largeya betweep ga r secone nth third dan d strokes than betwee thire nth d strokd ean the intersection. Furthermore secone th , d strok longer fa s ei r tha othee nth r twoe .b Thiy sma nothing more tha bladee nslith a f po , but intentionalf i , , migh intendee b t differentiato dt o etw closely packed though separate letters of the same aicme. On balance I would prefer to take 12 separato astw e letters (cf. Holder 1990), though Jackso Paded nan l tooones a t ki .

This give followine sth g reading:6 ENDDACTANIM(f/lb)

In essential sn agreemen i thi s i s t with Holder's more tentative readin - gE(s/n ) DDACTA(n/lv)IM(v/lb) - and the possible variant passed over by Jackson and Padel - (e/ )(s/n/ )DDACTANIMV; their preferred reading was (e/ )TMIQAVSALL(c/q).

Form scriptof used Buckquoe Th y whor inscribes i l simpla n di e typ I oghaeI m script wit incorporatioe hth e th f no twoforfeda most commo Scottisn no serifehe ogham Th serifee occur. th d A 1 (/e/ d X dA s- )an s othex si n r o Scottish ogham stones: BurriaBirsad an . 1 yn (Orkney), Lunnasting (Shetland), FORSYTH: THE OGHAM-INSCRIBED SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 687

Latheron (), Golspie (Sutherland) and Formaston (Aberdeenshire). The X-forfid, which is found on numerous Irish pillars inscribed with type I ogham, is used on Burrian (three times), Newton Aberdeenshirn i , e (once), Golspie (twice), Cunningsburg Lunnastind an h3 g (once eact ha the beginning before TT), and at Formaston (twice). All the consonants of the Buckquoy text are sloped vowelse Th . , witforfeda, o exceptioe htw th e th f consisno f perpendiculao t r strokes across the stem, taking up, perhaps the middle two-thirds of the ogham band, though the variation in length of individual strokes makes it difficult to be accurate on this last point. Within letters, the stroke fairle sar y paralle evenld an l y spaced. Substantial gap lefe sar t betwee l lettersnal just no ,t successiv esame oneth f eso aicme.suggestee th f I d readin corrects gi , therattempo n s ei t worda t - division. In general term scripe sth vers i t y simila cross-slae th tha o rt n o t t Latheronba , e whicth s hha serifed A and consonants which slope, though not as consistently as Buckquoy. The other ogham- inscribed cross-slab from Sutherland, Golspie alss i , o simila scripn ri Buckquoyo t angles ha t dbu , letterd an generousl,o s s t whicno e har y spaced Buckquoe Th . y scrip simples i t r than those used on the three Birsay stones. Birsay 1 has the serifed A and sloping vowels, but, like Golspie, has angled vowels. Birsay 3 is written with bound letters. The Burrian ogham provides an example of the final stroke of a letter group being a continuation of the bind stroke, and it is possible that Buckquoy' attempn a s i t sucs3 a tmer a letterha e bladeb e equallt y slith bu , f pma o . t yi The only exceptional aspect of the Buckquoy ogham is that it is carved on a circular stem- line. This, however, doe t affec saspecte no scripe th t th f tso mentioned above. Changin shape gth e of the stem is one of the ways to create a cryptic ogham mentioned in the Ogham tract in the Book of Ballymote (Macalister 1937, 48), although, interestingly enough circulaa , rt give steno s ms na i an example. Whil e onlth e y other instanc a circula f o e r ogham, Logie Elphinstone (Aberdeenshire) indeey ma , cryptice db , ther nothins ei g enigmatic aboua t Buckquoyf o e us e Th . circular obviousten a ms i s solutio practicae th o nt l proble f fittinm, objeco e is texe th d gth o t an t isensena , comparabl 'up-top-down'e th o et boustrophedonr o , , arrangemen oldese th n tto Irish pillars. Therneeo n assumo s dt ei e influence between Logie Elphinston Buckquoyd ean eithen i , r direction. The circular stem is a simple innovation which may have arisen independently in differen t reae areas ar opposit n e facdi o Th t.tw thae eth t directions e verar yd differenan , n i t contextlengtn i d han sufficiens i , suggeso t t t that therdireco n s ei t relationship betwee twoe nth .

THE TEXT

Interpretation For the reasons given above, eTMIQAVSALL(c/q), the favoured transliteration of Padel and Jackson incorrecbases n i ,a n do t readin texe musd th rejected an te f b tgo . Ther slighs ei t doubt over lette (probabl2 1 t coulr bu e rest, dth possibl yLB t , bu , e interpreteyb V) r o F s da ENDDACTANIM-, is secure. The only other doubt is over where to start. Though Jackson did in fact give ENDDACTANIMV as one of his eight alternative readings, he rejected it as 'wholly unintelligible and cannot be Celtic', so strong was his conviction about the nature of Pictish. In conclusion he stated himself to be 'content to write off this inscription as unintelligible, like all othee th r "Pictish" inscriptions' (Jackson 1977, 222) s simpl i tha y l Pictist .I t tru sa al t yo no et h inscriptions are unintelligible. Although a number do continue to resist interpretation, eg Brandsbutt and Logie Elphinstone (Aberdeenshire), I have tried to show, following Padel (1972), that many, eg Latheron, and Ackergill (Caithness), and Scoonie (), contain recognizable Celtic personal-names (Forsyth 1996) I hav. e argued against Jackson's hypothesi seconda f so , 688 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1995

non-Indo-European (Forsyth, forthcoming 1997 prefed t an ) no vieo t re wth inconsiderable difficulty of many Pictish inscriptions as an inevitable result of trying to interpret inscriptions (whic e oftehar n damaged P-Celtin i ) c language whic s otherwishi e only minimally attested e proportioTh . f doubtfuno r disputeo l d Anglo-Saxon runic inscriptions s givea , y nb Page, is a forceful reminder that epigraphic opacity is not an exclusively Pictish phenomenon (1973; 14-15). Irish-speakers were moving into Pictland from the earliest days of the Dal Riadic settlement, just as Norse-speakers did towards the end of the Pictish period; at certain periods bilingualism was probably common. It should not surprise us then that the extant inscriptions reflect this complex linguistic situation, most famousl ogham-inscribee th n yi d cross-slab from which incorporates word f Gaelio s Norsd can e origin (Jackson 1955, 142). Ogha ms mereli scriptya . Although invente represeno dt sounde th t f Irishso , demonstrabl adapteds wa t t yi wayye n i ,t sno fully understood, to render Pictish. The use of the ogham should not then necessarily imply anything abou language th t texta f eo , except s unlikelthai t i Latine t b o yt . (There exisa t very few manuscript examples of ogham used to write , but these are scholarly curios: McManus 1991, 133.) For this reason I object to the division of Scottish inscriptions into 'Pictish' and 'Irish-looking' (Jackson 1955; 1983; Padel 1972) labele Th . s 'Pictish 'Irishd an ' ' shoule db applied only wit discernede hb respec n opinionlanguage y ca th m texte t i o n t th I te .f i f ,th ,eo palaeographic feature whicn o s conventionae hth l divisio mads reflectioa ni e date ear f th eo f no the inscriptions concerned, not their ethnic milieu. Sinc scripe eth Scotlanf n oghai to takee inventes a e b mIrishs e n us nwa a d th e ca th y ,d b reflection, ultimately, of Irish influence, although how long direct Irish associations persisted is not clear. Some Scottish epigraphic oghams exhibit a number of features also found in later Irish manuscript oghams (Sims-Williams 1992), suggesting that ogham in Scotland was not an isolated development followin one-ofga f introduction. Rather t appeari , s that Scottish oghamists were part ocommoa f n traditio f continueno d ogham use whicn ,i h innovations passed bac fortd kan h across Irise th h Sea .extan e Mosth f o tt ogham inscriptions from Pictlan showe b writtee b n o a ndt ca n ni language other than Irish, but, given the ecclesiastical associations of in the period, and the major role played by the Irish in the early Pictish church, we must always bear in mind the possibility that a newly discovered text is in Irish. It is my contention that the Buckquoy ogham is just such an inscription. If one is prepared to begin with the stroke before 1, then the reading BENDDACTANIML suggests itself. This I would segment BENDDACT ANIM L, which I take to be Old Irish bendact anim L, 'a blessing on the soul of U. According to this new interpretation, BENDDACT is Old Irish bendacht, 'a blessing', from Latin benedictum (Diet Ir Lang; Vendryes 1959 s.v. bennacht ; Thurneysen 1946, 450 §727), and ANIM, Old Irish anim, 'soul' (Vendryes 1959 s.v. anim; Diet Ir Lang s.v. ainim(m); Thurneysen 1946 §333)4 t standi 21 , s A . s anim coul nominativee db , accusative dativr o , e singular Irisd attestes Ol h a ,curren e e Glossesth th n n di i t contexbu , moss i t t likeldative b o yr accusativt e o e (see discussion below) .confusee Thib o t s t wordno s witdi d hOl Irish ainm 'name', which occurs, in its older form ANM, on a number of classic ogham pillars in southern Ireland (McManus 1991, §118 6.27) whicd an . h continue usee technicaa b n do i dt l sense Irise inth h phrase ainm n-oguim 'funerary inscriptio oghamn ni ' (ibid, §8.8)4 15 . spelline Th g anim relativels i y straightforward, thoug accusativs ha dativr eo t alternateei n si the Glosses with the forms anmuin/anmain (Thurneysen 1946, 214 §333). BENDDACT for bendacht perhaps i s more interesting geminatioe Th . consonantf no muca s si h discussed featurf eo ogham (McManus 1991, 124-6 §6.30; Harvey 1987a), and is particularly common in Scottish ogham. To the extent that it can be determined, there is an apparent tendency for non- FORSYTH OGHAM-INSCRIBEE TH : D SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 689

initial D to be doubled in Scottish ogham texts (exceptions being Blackwaterfoot 2, Latheron, Lochgoilhead) though whether thiphonetid sha c significanc unclears ei t weri f I .e thought thae th t Buckquoy text perpetuated aspects of the traditional ogham orthography, DD could be taken as indicating (non-lenited) /d/analogn o ,representinT T d y an wit C hC g (non-lenited ) IIId /kan / (McManus 1991, 125). Similarly, single C for /x/ could be an example of the same geminate/non- lenited-simplex/lenited distinction. However, as McManus has pointed out to me, there are numerous parallel r sucfo s h spelling Irisd Ol h n manuscripsi t orthography s equalli t i d yan , possible that the Buckquoy ogham is merely a cipher for the manuscript spelling. In Old Irish the spelling ct is 'not infrequently represented' cht (Thurneysen 1946, 21 §28), and bendact is attested Glossee inth s (Stracha Stoken& s 1975: Wurzbur romae gon 19bl5n no alphabed )an t inscription (CIIC 868).

Discussion formule Th a bendacht r anim fo , 'aN. blessin soue f th N.' o ls wel n i ,go l atteste Irise th hn di epigraphic record, mainly on recumbent cross-slabs (eg. bendacht for anmain N. CIIC 551, 933, 935; bennachtfor anmain . CIIN C 916, 917). Other related form ben[dach]te sar r an[main]fo e Di N. (CIIC 529) and bendacht ar N. (CIIC 586, 958). Of particular interest is the example from Lemanaghan, (CIIC 868): bendact for an[mai]n ailbertig - with c for /x/, as appears, mutatis mutandis, in ogham at Buckquoy. All of these are written in the roman alphabet, but there is a single, very late, example of the use of the formula in an ogham inscription - the 11th century, bilingual, runic-Norse/ogham-Irish slab from Killaloe (CIIC 54) which has bendacht [ar] N., wit firse hth spelleE t d wit e X-forfid:hth BXNDACHT. l thesInal e example accusativee sth animn i s i , governe prepositioe th y d b for,e r o th r na latter occasionally abbreviated CIIn o ,a 529, 916917 d / (Thurneyseo an ,t , n 1946 §251)2 16 , . The omission of the preposition from Buckquoy therefore demands an explanation. Epigraphers are usually quic identifo kt y grammatica othed an l r 'errors inscriptione th n i ' s they study (see Macalister's attemp 'correcto t ' Pictish , 1940) Buckquoe Th . y oghamis certainls twa y casual; it could be that he or she was careless or ignorant as well. With further study, however, it often turns out to be the epigrapher who is ignorant, and 'bad' Irish should be invoked in this case only onc l otheeal r possibilities have been exhausted factn I . , alternativthern a s ei e explanation. In his discussion of Archaic Irish, Greene confirmed that 'the elimination of unneccessary particles is one of the outstanding features of the archaic ', which he says 'accounts for the consistent use of the independent dative where Old Irish would require a preposition' (1977, 19). Thurneysen makes brief mention of the prepositionless dative in his Grammar of Old Irish, characterizing this nominal construction, which is attested in certain Irish legal texts and paralleled in Gaulish inscriptions s 'archaia , extremeld an c y rare' (Thurneysen 1946§251)2 16 , f I . Buckquoy's anim dativ e werth n ei e case, the mighe nw t have her exampln ea 'independene th f eo t dative' extreme Th . e rarit f thiyo s constructio Irisd Ol h n nwarranti s caution s McManua , s ha s reminde t archaiye , cdme f keepinsyntao t ou x ge woul b wit t seventhha dno r eighth-centuro - y Buckquoe th dat r efo y whorl. However s relicearlien a ,a f so r periolanguagee th f do , 'archaic' features continue Irisd stylisti a use e s Ol b h a n o ddi t c device (Breatnach 1984, 458-9). This need not, of course, rule out an early date for our text, especially since a heightened literary register is unlikel casuaa n yi l epigraphic context suc thiss ha . Non lesse eindependenth n a , t dative f indeei , d tha s wha, neei t t is necessaril t di no t y indicat earln ea y date thu d texe an ,sth t canno datee b t n do basie th syntaf so x alone. | SOCIET 0 69 ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1995

A possible objection to the reading BENDDACT ANIM L is that the use of an initial letter, in this case L, to represent a personal name is unprecedented in a Goidelic context at this period. In the ogham tradition, as in the runic, each character was identified by a meaningful name on the acrostic principal letter-name Th . r oghaefo mluis,s Lwa though ther soms ei e doubt whether this is luise/loise 'flame, blaze' or lus 'plant, herb' (McManus 1991, 36). Later glossators identify a treesa , eithe (McManurowae m rth el r no s 1988, 150). Rune-writers exploite letter-namee dth o st great effect in writing riddles in which the runic character was made to stand for its name (Page 1973, 203-11), but there do not appear to be any examples of such a conceit in the ogham corpus. Luis is not attested as a personal name, so 'L' would have to be interpreted as a straightforward abbreviatio somf no e other personal name. concepe Th f abbreviatioo t f divinno e name epithetd an s s welswa l knowf o e n us fro e mth the nomina sacra but does not seem to have been extended to profane personal names. To establish this beyond doubt, however, is not easy since there are few close comparisons. Irish personal names are too varied for a comprehensive system of abbreviations such as was used in Roman epigraphy thir Fo s. reaso contexte nth whicn si t woulhi possible db appropriatr eo abbreviato et ea Goidelic personal nam limitede ear . Unless ther s somei e cryptic intent personaa , l nam likels ei y to be abbreviated only if the identity of the individual is obvious and widely known. Perhaps the most usual circumstance is the marking of ownership on a personal belonging. Most of the extant, non-monumental, insular inscriptions are on objects of great value, usually highly-accomplished pieces of secular or ecclesiastical metalwork such as brooches, weapons, and shrines. One would not expec namee ownerse th tth f so , patrons, maker commemorateer so abbreviatee b o st sucn do h formal somn i , e cases public, items inscribed with posterit mindn y i s instea i t I . instrumentan do domestica, transien f littlo d e economian t c value, thamighe on t t expec fino initiale t t n dth a f so owner or maker. But, of course, such objects are rarely preserved in the archaeological record. Thoug hcleao thern e r ear example s from Celtic-speaking areas corpue th , f Anglo-Saxoso n runic inscriptions includes a handful of examples of objects inscribed with a single letter, or a pair of letters, most readily interpreted as owner's marks (the wooden spoon, the Sleaford brooch, the Willoughby-on-the-Wolds bowl, mentioned by Page, 1973, 172). Reasons why the alleged personal name was abbreviated in the Buckquoy text when the rest was written out might be the obvious lack of space (if the individual was well known to all the inhabitants of the farmstead, to give it in full might have been considered superfluous), or perhaps the Irish-speaker who carved it was unsure how to commit an unfamiliar native name to writing. Of course abbreviaten a , d message inscribe gifa n t do provide sharea s d understanding between giver and recipient thereby enhancin intimace g th bon e th df y o betwee nsufficiene b them y thid san ma , t explanation of itself. An appropriate analogy might be a locket engraved with a sweetheart's intials. On the semantic level, one might object that 'a blessing on the soul of N.' is an essentially commemorative phrase and as such scarcely appropriate for a spindle-whorl. Certainly all the examples of bendacht ar/for cited thus far occur on funerary monuments. The formula, however, wat restrictesno gravestoneso dt : Macalister read bendacht CrosArtgale r a th Kellf n so o s (CIIC 586); in metalwork, the mid-llth century Stowe Missal Shrine (CIIC 932) has bendacht De ar cech anmain as a hdirilliuth: 'God's blessing on every soul according to its deserts'. These are commemorative or dedicatory without being funerary, as are the occurrences of the formula in the scribal colophons of manuscripts. An example of the latter with Scottish provenance is the colopho Gospee th o nt l extract Booe th Deef kn o si r (Cambridge Library MS.I.i.6.32). Written in the same hand as the main text it is to be dated to the ninth century. It asks of the reader bendachta f[or] anmain truagdinn i ro-d scribai: 'his blessinpooe soue th th rf o lwretcn go o hwh has written it' (Jackson 1972, 8; Stuart 1869, Ix, 89). FORSYTH OGHAM-INSCRIBEE :TH D SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 691

The examples are all public texts on high status items, written, clearly, with posterity in mind and thus still rather far from the informal domestic object from Buckquoy. Perhaps a closer parallel s providei inscribee th y db d pebble foun n 182i d grava 2n i t Templea e Brecan a SeachN , t dTeampaill, Inis Mor, (CIIC 532; Higgins 1987, 23, 26-7, 137-9, 268-9, fig.l, plate 54). The black limestone pebble, 75 mm in diameter, was lost for many years and was known only from drawings. It was then widely interpreted as a stone lamp, and thus appeared to provide a cognate exampl domestia f eo c implement inscribed wit dedicatorha yyearw textfe s A .ago , however re-discoveres wa t i , Nationae th n di l Museu f Irelandmo , enablin mose gth t recent writer to rule out this explanation (Higgins 1987, 26). Instead it belongs to a class of 'decorated pebbles' of uncertain (probably religious) use. The circular inscription in Insular minuscule reads +or(oit) ar bran n-ailither, 'a prayer for Bran the pilgrim' (Macalister 1949, 6, 202-3 ill.). This formula, Or(oit) ar/do, is by far the most common of Irish roman alphabet inscriptions and is found widely, thoug t exclusivelyhno funerarn o , y monuments. Accordin Higginso gt th , e Brecan stone 'has all the signs of wear from use and handling to suggest that it had a previous function' (1987, face th s discoveret 23) t thawa ye ,t i t grava n di e does clou issue dth e somewhat s uncleai t i ; r whethe inscriptioe th r beed nha n presen carves t whilusen wa i itee r s d,o e th m expresslwa r yfo deposition in the grave. Whatever the precise interpretation, the existence of another informal, portable, personal belonging inscribed with a formula that is more familiar from grave slabs makes the Buckquoy whorl seem less exceptional.

Parallels A numbe f inscribeo r d spindle-whorls have been recovered from Insula Continentad an r l excavations. Suc intimatn ha personad ean l item migh e considereb t d particularly suitablr efo inscribing, thoug surprisine hth g frequency with which inscribed whorl recoveree sar duee b y , dma perhaps theio t , r relative durability, coupled wit ease hth e with which they were lost, rather than because they were particularly favoure inscriptionsr dfo . Historicall cross-culturallyd yan , spinning activitn a s i y most closely associated with women, openin possibilite th p gu f interestyo r eveo , n skill literac n pari ,e f womenth o t n yo spindle-whore Th . l texts vary widel lengthn yi , complexity and meaning. Most simple are those that carry merely a personal name, presumably that of the owner. An example is the seventh- or eighth-century Anglo-Saxon jet spindle-whorl from Whitby Abbey inscribed with three (Peerr We ,Radfor s& d 1943, 74), whic bees hha n interpretes da a (male) personal name (Page 1973, 171-2) .writer/make e Nexth s i t r formul instancer fo - a , another rune inscribed spindle-whorl, this time fro Northere mth n Isles (exact provenance unknown), which reads 'Gautr wrote the runes' (NMS BE 360; Liest01 1984, 232). Personal belongings, especially tools and weapons, are sometimes inscribed with talismanic or protective inscriptions, whether pagan or Christian. Scottish examples would be runic futhorks, such as the seal's tooth from Birsay (Liest01 1984, 232; Curie 1982, 59-60, illus 37), or the St Ninian's Isle chape (Smal t ale l 1973) Buckquoe Th . y whor faly l ma lint o this category mighs a , pseudoe th t - ogham-inscribed whorl from Burrian (MacGregor 18)g 1974fi , fourt.A ,91 h category, though attested much earlier, shows that such inscriptions may have a ludic rather than strictly practical or talismanic function . corpue Thesth e f Gaulish-o sear , Gallo-Latin- Latin-inscribed an , d whorls from eastern (Whatmough 1949; Lambert 1994, 122-5). Mei interpretes dha d these texts sa subtly morr o , e directly, erotic messages, from implied male speakers, addresse youno dt g women. As suc characterizee hh s them reflectins a g 'spinning room amusements' (Meid 1992, 52-4, ill.). Accordin Lambero gt t such objects, bearing 'des souhait compliments de u o s s amoureaux', were given 'en galants cadeade r supa dont les intentions sont claires' (1994, 23)face tTh . that whorls 692 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1995

gived wer an women o net n madme y e,b especially sweethearts othen i , r cultures too indicates i , d by a Norse example in Rekjavik Museum, Thord mig frd Hruna Thora owns me, from Hruni' (referred to on NMS label for spindle-whorl BE 360). The Christian sentiment of the Buckquoy whor lonfroa y double-entendree s i mlgwa th Gaulise th f st o inconceivabl hno carvings i t i t sbu e that 'L' was a man (an Irishman ?) who inscribed the Orkney spinster's whorl in the hope of future remembrance. Page gives as an alternative interpretation of the wer of the Whitby spindle-whorl the northern for Wesf mo t Saxo r 'tokenwa friendshipf no ' (1973, 171). All of these comparanda are examples of inscriptions carved while the whorl was still in use for spinning morn I . e recent times, however, former spindle-whorls wer ee Scottis useth n di h Gaidhlteachd as charms (John Maclnnes, pers comm). It is possible that the Buckquoy text relates to a time when the whorl had ceased to be used for its primary function and had taken on talismanic significance. There are no explicit early medieval references to whorl-charms, but Adomnan provides seventh-century evidence of the use of pebbles as amulets. In Vita Columbae e referreh d smalla o t t , unspecified benedictio ('object thas beeha t n blessed'), whics hwa housed in an inscribed box, and, once dipped in water, was used to cure a broken hip (VC ii.5 p. 103 n.134), and to a piece of rock salt blessed by the saint which was hung on the wall above the bed of an invalid (ii.7 p. 105). Most relevant to Buckquoy is the lapis Candidas, 'white stone', which was taken from a Scottish river, blessed and used to work cures among the heathen . Adomna Columbs nha a say, Signate . hunc.. candidum lapidem, r quernpe dominus gentilic ho n i populo multas egrotorum perficiet sanitates, 'Mark this white stone. Through it the Lord will work many sice cureth k f o amons g this heathen people ii.33)C (V ' . Though signate doubtless means mar Buckquoe th k t crosse wit sige th no hf th s ni ,yo spindle-whor whita l e stone, marked witha Christian messag Thouge? h ther considerabls ei e doubt abou interpretatioe th t oghae th f n mo o the famous Ennis bead (CIIC 53), it should be noted that it was believed to be of assistance to women in labour, and efficacious in the treatment of eye complaints (Brash 1879, 321; see Meaney discussioa 198 1for Anglo-Saxonof n curing stones).

Historical context As a complete, legible but, according to the two authorities, unintelligible ogham, Buckquoy might e consideree strongeb th f o e r plankdon e argumen th n non-Indo-Europeaa i s r fo t n Pictish language. If it could, however, be proved to be comprehensible, and the proportion of uninterpreted inscriptions thus reduced, the case for non-Indo-European Pictish would be weakened accordingly f course O oghae .Irishd th Ol f i m,,s i thi s implies nothing abou nature th t e of the Pictish language, merely that there were Irish speakers in Orkney in the eighth century. Thus f acceptedi , interpretatioe th , Buckquoe th f no y ogham Christiaa tex s a t n phrase written ni Old Irish is an important breakthrough, not only for the linguistic information it provides, but also becaus whaf eo t indicatei t s abou spreae th t Irisf do h Christianit Northe th o yt . When discussing external influences on pre-Viking Orkney, commentators have, quite rightly, tende streso dt e easterth s n connections with mainland Pictlan Northumbrid dan a (see, most recently, Lamb 1993) importance Th . westere th f eo n seaboar conduia s da r influencefo t s from Ireland should not, however, be overlooked. There is documentary evidence for voyages by Irish peregrini Orkneo t beyond yan sixte dth a hs y a century . Both Brenda Cormad nan a cU Liathain, who, according to Adomnan, visited on Hinba, came from areas well stocked with ogham stone i.6C ,s(V ii.42, iii.17) numbea , f whicro h have explicitly Christian associations. Of those marked with the cross, two refer to ecclesiastics - Arraglen (CIIC 145) QRIMITIR 'priest', Maumanorig (CIIC 193) AILITHIR, 'pilgrim' (thoug readine hth s problematic)gi . FORSYTH: THE OGHAM-INSCRIBED SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 693

Continued familiarity wit oghae hth m Irise scripth hn i tchurc s suggestehi presence th y db f eo ogham marginali manuscriptn ai ninte th f hso centur laterd yan , writte Irisy nb h scribes t leasno , t oghae byth m signatur Stowe th n ei e Missal ( MS.D.II.3 Sonie f.llr)on f do , who describes himsel 'peregrinus's fa (Warner 1915, xlii, plate viii). Peter Harbison has amassed archaeological and art historical evidence for a long tradition of pilgrimage along a western maritime arc stretching from the far south-west of Ireland to Shetland (1991, 192-4, 221). A spindle-whorl would be an unlikely piece of baggage for a monk on pilgrimage, unless, that is, it was already functioning as a relic or charm. The geological evidence, however, indicates thae Buckquoth t yt importe oghano s mwa d from Ireland t insteabu , d carved locally e implicatioth , n being that there were peopl t Birsae eighta th n yi h centuro ywh understood the , either Irish settlers or bilingual Picts. Orkney was regarded by contemporarie s Pictisa s h territory (Dumvill t inconceivablno es i 1976)t i t bu , e that there might have bee Irisn na h colon manyo s theren i y s othea , r area f westero s n maritime Britaine Th . similarit house-typf yo t Deeea r Park Farms Udale Buckquoyth d , an , juss feature ,i on t e worthf yo further investigation in this regard. Not all the Irish speakers need necessarily have been there of theivolitionn ow r . Adomnan referIrisn a ho st slave woman, peregrina captiva, 'captive exile'n i , househole th Pictise th f do h kinOrknee th g . 33)d BrideII yan ,C Pictwely (V i ma sl have been involve Irisn di h slave-raidin tradinr go g too. Christiae Th n sentimen Buckquoe th f o t y text throws interestin gcurrene lighth n o t t debate ove relative th r e strengt Irise Northumbriad th han f ho n contributio evangelizatioe th o nt e th f no (Morris 1990, 9). Continuing links between the Irish church and Orkney are demonstrate reference th ninth-centure y db th n ei yt Finta S Lif f eo f Rheina no u (Thomson 1986; Lowe 1986) to an Orcadian , presumably a Pict, who had studied in Ireland in his youth and who could speak fugitive Iristh o ht e Fintan onle th ys . perso couldThaaree o wa th e awh h t n n i , implies that knowledg t widesprea no Iris f es o hwa Orknen d i 840s e th n y.i It is impossible to evaluate the Buckquoy ogham without reference to the excavated remains Brouge th n o f Birsayho hundre,w jusfe a t d metres away. Although Buckquo farmsteada s ywa , higa t hno status site proximits it , Brouge th o yt h mean t cannosi disassociatee b t d fro . Mighmit t e Buckquoth y farmers have been monastic tenant e Brougth f so Perhapsh? , although recent interpreters have been turning away from the traditional identification of the pre-Viking structures on the Brough as a monastery (Hunter 1986, 171; Morris 1990, 15; 1993, 287). The ogham text implies no more than that the owner was Christian, certainly it need not imply that he or she was a mon r nun kr thao no ,t Buckquo ecclesiastican a s ywa l siteoghame Th . s most closely comparable Buckquoyo t , those from Gurness away,m k onl 6 ,1 y from Pool frod c Mhian ,mBa c Connain (North Uist), appear to have no ecclesiastical connotations. They share with the oghams from the Brough itsel informalitn a f y which suggests that ogham t highlliteracno s y ywa restricted r o , reserve r solemndfo , formal purposes t woulI . wronge db , therefore assigo t , ecclesiastican na l interpretation to the Brough on the basis of the presence of ogham.

CONCLUSION In this discussio I nhav e attempte o explait d e evidencth n s besa e I , while frankly acknowledging the difficulties in both reading and interpretation. It is a frustrating reality of early medieval Insular epigraphy that inscriptions confort whicno firmlo a h d m o t y established textual formula rarely yield an utterly unambiguous reading (eg Williams 1949; Clancy 1993). Even the intensely studied runic inscriptions of Anglo-Saxon , written in a language vastly better attested than Pictish, present numerous difficultie muce ar d h an disputes d (Page 1973)e th n I . 694 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1995

circumstances it is perhaps unrealistic to expect such an informal ogham inscription as Buckquoy, from a little understood period in the development of the script, to be completely unequivocal. The most I have been able to show is that mine is a possible interpretation. If I have been unable to demonstrate that it must be so, then I await with interest a more convincing explanation.

NOTES 1 typd Typ : Thian eII e I s merel i s convenienya t labe r distinguishinfo l g between e scripformth f to s withou drawn-in-stem-lina t e (for instance thos whicn o e ston e arrith hth f e o s servesteme th s )a s thosed (typan ) eI , usually acros flasa t surface, wit stem-line hth e actually draw (typn ni e II). Typs i eI the norm on early pillars, type II on later slabs, but there is a degree of overlap and it is not yet clear to what exten distinctioe th t simpls ni functioya f dateno . 2 Aicme (pi . letterorigina0 aicmi):e 2 th e f so Th l ogham alphabe dividee ar t d into four groups (aicmi)f o five letters each, thes labelle e firs e name ar th th t f letteey o d b eacn ri h group, i.e, b-aicmef e , th .1 , b - s, n; the h-aicme - h, d, t, c, kw; the m-aicme - m, g, gw (?), st(?), r; the a-aicme - a, o, u, e, i [McManusl991, 3§ 1.4]. 3 forftd (p\. ): Over the centuries a number of 'supplementary letters' or forfeda were added to the original inventory of 20 ogham letters. 4 Bind-stroke: In some later type II ogham inscriptions the component strokes of individual letters are joined at their distal ends by a horizontal bind-stroke parallel with the stem. Such bound letters are easie reao rt d sinc lettere e th thu e sar s rendered quite distinct. 5 Ogham band: The ogham band is the area occupied by the ogham letters. The stem is the mid-point of this s outeribboit d r nan edg defines ei distae th y llongese db endth f so t consonant strokes voweA . l strok e sam er th h-consonant o e - lengtb a s ha , placed centrally acros e stemth s , would occupe yth middl quartero oghae tw th f smo band one-quartee i , r eithe stemre sidth f e.o folloI conventioe wth 6 transliteratinf no g ogham inscription capitan si l letters, giving doubtful lettern si lower case, and by enclosing alternative readings in round , separated one from another by an oblique stroke.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I gratefully acknowledge a grant from the Society, which enabled me to travel to Orkney to examine ogham inscriptions, including that from Buckquoy. Thanks also to Anne Brundle of Tankerness House Museu r hel thahe n po r mt fo visit mosm a I .t gratefu Anno t l a Ritchi answerinr efo queriey gm s about Buckquoy, for alerting me to the importance of the Deer Park Farms excavation, for providing me with a copy of the Institute of Geological Sciences photograph of the whorl, and for several enjoyable and stimulating discussion f thingso s Pictish. Oliver Universite Padeth f o l f Cambridgyo e rea drafda f o t this paper and offered a number of helpful and perceptive comments and criticisms, for which I thank him associatiny . wa Withou y wit an interpretatiom y gn hi hm i t nI wis recoro ht thanky dm s also t Damian McManu Trinitf so y College, kindlr fo , y commentin drafa thif n go o t s paper, pointing out errors, and offering helpful criticisms. This study is based on a section of my PhD dissertation The Ogham Inscriptions of Scotland: Editedn A Corpus (1996) mosm a I t. gratefu Departmene th o t l f o t Celtic Language Literaturesd san , Harvard University especialld an , supervisory ym , Joh KochnT r fo , their continued support errory An .facf sjudgemeno r o t t are coursef o , , entirel owny ym .

REFERENCES Anderson Anderson& O transl. & 199O A , d 1M (e , ) Adomndn's Lifef Columba.o Oxford (ref o vd e Anderson & Anderson 1961 Adomndn's Life of Columba. ) (= VC). Batey, C E, Jesch, J & Morris, C D 1993 (ed) The in Caithness, Orkney and the North Atlantic: FORSYTE OGHAM-INSCRIBEE TH : D SPINDLE-WHORL FROM BUCKQUOY 695

Select Papers from the Proceedings of the Eleventh Viking Congress, Thurso and Kirkwall, 22 August-1 September 1989. Edinburgh. Bigelow, G F 1992 'Issues and Prospects in Shetland Norse Archaeology', in Morris, C D & Rackham, J (ed) Norse and Later Settlement and Subsistence in the North Atlantic. Glasgow. Brash, R R 1879 The Ogam Inscribed Monuments of the Gaedhil in the (ed G M Atkinson). London. Breatnach 198L , 4 seculad earl'Canon i an yw w rla Irelandn la significance th : Brethf eo a Nemed', Peritia,3 (1984), 439-59. CIIC = Macalister 1945. Clancy, T O (1993) 'The Drosten Stone: a new reading', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 123 (1993), 345-53. Collins, G H 1977 'Chalk spindle-whorls from Buckquoy, Orkney', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 108 (1976-7), 222-3. Crawford, B E 1987 . . Crawford, I A 1974 'Scot (?), Norseman and Gael', Scott Archaeol Forum, 6 (1974), 1-16. Curie, C 1982 Pictish and Norse finds from the Brough of Birsay 1934-74 (Soc Antiq Scot Monogr Ser, 1). Edinburgh. Diet Ir Long Royal Irish Academy 1983 Dictionary Irishe oth f Language, based Middled an d mainlyOl n o Irish Materials: Compact Edn. Dublin. Dumville, D N 1976 'A Note on the Picts in Orkney', Scott Stud, 12 part 2 (1976), 266. Fenton, A & Palsson, H 1984 (ed) The Northern and Western Isles in the Viking World: Survival, Continuity and Change. Edinburgh. Forsyth (forthcominK , g 1997) Language Pictland:n i Casee Th Against Non-Indo-European PictishG A ( van Hamel lecture 1995), Utrecht. Forsyth, K (1996) The Ogham Inscriptions of Scotland: An Edited Corpus (PhD dissertation, Harvard University) Arborn An . . Greene 197D , 7 'Archaic Irish' Schmidtn i , (edH )K , Indogermanisch and Keltisch: Kolloquiumr de Indogermaischen Februar. 17 Gesellschaftd un . 197616 Bonn,n m i a 11-33. Harbison 199P , 1 Pilgrimage Ireland:n i Monumentse Th People. e th d an London. Harvey, A 1987 The Ogham inscriptions and their geminate consonant symbols', Eriu 38 (1987), 45-71. Higgins 198EarlyG e J , 7Th Christian Cross Slabs, Pillar Stones Relatedd an Monuments of County , IntIrelandR Ser,BA = ( 375). Holder, N 1990 'Aspects of Ogham with Particular Reference to the Ogham-Inscribed Portable Objects', unpu dissertationA bM , Univ London. Hunter 199R J ,0 'Pool, Sanday Casa : e Late StudVikind th er an Iroyfo e g nag Periods Armitn i ' I (ed, ) Beyond the Brochs: Changing Perspectives on the Later Iron Age in Atlantic Scotland, Edinburgh, 175-93. Jackson, K H 1955 'The Pictish Language', in Wainwright, F T (ed) The Problem of the Picts (reprint 1980 Perth), 129-66. Jackson, K H 1977 'The ogham inscription on the spindle-whorl from Buckquoy, Orkney', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 108 (1976-7), 221-2. Karkov Farrell& C , 199R , 1 (ed) Studies Archaeology d Insularn i an n A (American EarlStud , 1) ydMe Miami. Lamb, R G 1993a 'Church and Kingship in Pictish Orkney: A mirror for Carolingian Continental Europe', Medieval Europe 1992: Pre-printed papers Religion: 6 Belief,d an 101-6. Lamb 1993G R , b 'Carolingian OrkneTransformation's it d yan Bateyn i , , Jesc Morrih& s (1993), 260-71. Lambert 199Y Languea P- ,4L gauloise: Description linguistique, commentaire d'inscriptions chaises. . Liest01, A1984 'Runes', 224-38, in Fenton, A & Palsson, H 1984, 224-38. Lowe, H 1986 'Findan von Rheinau: Eine Irische Peregrinatio im 9. Jahrhundert' Deutsches Archiv fiir Erforschung Mittelalterss de Hef2 4 , Fuhrmann 1 t Schaller& , KolnH , M H ,, 25-85. Lynn 198C , 9 'Deer Park Farms Earl n visia :a o yt Christian settlement', Curr Archaeol, (1989)3 11 , 193-8. Macalister, R A S 1937 The Secret with special reference to the Origin and Nature of the Language. Cambridge. 696 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1995

Macalister, R A S 1940 'The Inscriptions and Language of the Picts', Essays and Studies Presented to Professor Eoin MacNeill (Feil-Sgribhinn Edin mhic Neill), ( , ed)J , , Dublin, 184-226. Macalister, R A S 1945, 1949 Corpus Inscriptionum Insularum Celticarum. Dublin (= CIIC). MacGregor, A 1974 'The of Burrian, North Ronaldsay, Orkney', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 105 (1972-4), 63-118. McManus 198D , 8 'Irish Letter-name theid san r Kennings', Eriu, (19889 3 ) 127-68. McManus, D 1991 A Guide to Ogham, ( Monogr 4). Maynooth. Meaney, A L 1981 Anglo-Saxon Amulets and Curing Stones. Oxford. (= BAR Brit Ser, 96). Meid 199W , 2 Gaulish Inscriptions: Their interpretation e light th f archaeological o n i evidence theird an value as a source of linguistic and sociological information (Archaeolingua, Ser Minor 1), Budapest. Morris, C D 1990 Church and Monastery in the Far North: An Archaeological Evaluation (Jarrow Lecture 1989). Jarrow. Morris 199D C , 1 'Nativ Norsd ean Orknen ei Shetland'd yan Karkon i , Farrelv& l (1991), 61-80. Morris, C D 1993 'The Birsay Bay Project: A Resume', in Batey, Jesch & Morris (1993), 285-307. Okasha 197E , 1 Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Non-Runic Inscriptions. Cambridge. Padel 197O , 2 'The Ogham Inscription Pictland'f so , unpub MLitt thesis, Univ Edinburgh. Page, R I 1973 An Introduction to English Runes. London. Peers Radford& C , , CAR 1943 'The Saxon Monaster Whitbf yo y Abbey', Archaeologia, (1943)9 8 , 27-88. Renfrew 198C , 5 (edPrehistorye )Th of Orkney BC 4000-1000 AD, Edinburgh (repr 1990). Ritchie, A 1972 'Painted pebbles in early Scotland', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 104 (1971-2), 297-301. Ritchie 197A , 7 'Pictis Viking-Agd han e Farmstead t Buckquoya s , Orkney', Proc Antiqc So Scot,8 10 (1976-7), 174-227. Ritchie 198A , 3 'Birsay around AD 800' Thomson i , n 1983, 46-66. Ritchie, A 1985 'Orkney in the Pictish kingdom', in Renfrew 1985, 183-204. Sims-Williams, P 1992 'The Additional Letters of the Ogham Alphabet', Cambridge Medieval Celtic Stud, 23 (1992), 29-75. Small, A, Thomas C & Wilson, D M 1973 St Ninian's Isle and its Treasure ( Univ Stud 152). Oxford. Strachan Stoke& J , 197sW 5 (eds), Thesaurus palaeohibernicus vol2 supp.d ( an s , Cambridg Halle& S ea. 1901-10, repr. Dublin 1975). Stuart, J 1869 (ed) The . Edinburgh. Thomson, W P L 1983 (ed) Birsay: A Centre of Political and Ecclesiastical Power (Orkney Heritage 2), Kirkwall. Thomson 198L P 6 W , 'St . Pictish-Norse Findath d nan e Transition' FirthBerryn & i , J (edsH ,e R , Th ) People of Orkney (Aspect Orknef so , Kirkwally4) , 279-87. Thurneysen 194R , Grammar6A Irishd oOl f (rewitn ved h supp), trans BinchA BerginD lO y& , repr. 1980, Dublin. . Andersoe VCse Anderson& n 1991. Vendryes, J 1959 Lexique etymologique de I'lrlandais Ancien. A. Paris. Warner 1906F G , , 191 Stowee 5Th Missal (Henry Bradsha 31-2)c wSo . Whatmough 194J , 0 'Gaulish uimpi', Language (1940)5 2 , 388-91. Williams, I (1949) The Towyn Inscribed stone', Archaeol Cambrensis C, 160-72.