VII.

A REVISED ACCOUN E INSCRIPTIONTH F O E TNORTHER TH F O S N 1'IGTS. BY JOHN RHYS, M.A., LL.D., HON. MEM. S.A. SCOT., PRINCIPAL OF JESUS COLLEGE, AND PUOFESSOB OF CELTIC, OXFORD.

Some live years ago I attempted a comprehensive account of the ancient inscriptions north of the Forth, and ventured on speculations as to the language and race of the (see these Proceedings, vol. xxvi. 263-351, als'b pp. 411, 412), It seems to me that it is now time to survey the materials again, partly because their number has since increased, and partly because I committed various blunders in my paper, some of fact and some of conjecture. I attempted then to prove the Pictish language relate o Basquet d t whethe bu ;s relate i t i notr r o d , my attemp o prov t s tbee ha e n s i thapronounced t i t d doubtlesan , s justly pronounced, a failure. As regards those, however, who believe the Picts to have spoken as their native language a Celtic dialect, either • like Goideli r Brythonico c y positiom , s unchangedi n I :stil l regard Present:e Paste th n Th 1i What Civilisations i ) 8. . (p ? INSCRIPTION NOETHERE TH 5 F 32 O S N PICTS.

Pictise th h languag t Celtic challengno y t Aryanm s a eno , o S e. still remains, that if Pictish resembled Gaelic or Welsh, or in fact any Aryan language, those who think so should make good their opinion by giving us a translation of such an inscription, for instance, as the following from. Lunasting n Shetlani , d :— ttocuhettsx : ahehhttmnnn : her.vvevv: nehhtonn. weaknese Th theif so r argument bees sha n evident r somfo e tm oyear n turninso pastd an g; ovee e leaveth th r f o s Revue Celtique, . 398I fin pp n voli ,d. 399vi . e followinth , g passage, whic hventurI point:—"Ae stils quoteth o i e t o t lt i s questio,a e th o st n of the Pictish language, it is useless to. try to decide what it was, by mean f Peanfahel,so e Englisth h spellin e Pictisth f go h pronunciation of a Brythonic word; and the fact is generally overlooked that a language e positioth more n i ,f th thano e f o tsouther n Picts must have been full of Brythonic and Goidelic words. To try in the usual way to settle its affinities is accordingly like proving Welsh to be an Aryan language, by means of its loan-words, which used some years ago to be done." The same view has lately been better put by Professor Zimmer in the Zeitschrift fur Reclitsgeschiclite (Rom. Abth.), xv. 217. After rejecting my argument for connecting Pictish with Basque, and penning some severe criticisms on Skene's treatment of the Picts as Celts usee e h ,followin th s g words :— i seine"Be r mangelhaften sprach- wissenschaftlichen Durchbildung kommt der richtige Grundsatz gar nicht zur Geltung, dass bei den piktischen Namen aus christlicher Zeit nich s ausschlaggebenda t n ihnea d s istn wa , irisch oder kymrisch ist, sondern dasjenige s wedewa , r irisch noch kymrisch, noch keltisch sein kann. Zudem allerdinge di la'ss . ersr e tTh t . z spates r aufgefundenen Inschrifte f Piktenbodenau n ganz ausser Betracht, woraufr Rhyde n i s oben im Text genannten Abhandlung (Pro. Soo. Ant. Soot., 1892, s. 305) mit recht Nachdruck legt. In ihnen tritt das nicht-keltische (nicht- arische) Substrat unter leichter irischer Decke noch kla Tage.u z r " The burden of his paper is, that the distinct racial origin of the Pict s provei s y theib d r institutions, especiall e yPictis th tha f o ht succession t therI shoul Bu , is e. d say a thir, d sourc f argumento e s making for the same conclusion, namely, the study of Pictish art, as I have been recently reminded by Professor Ramsay of . This 326 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898. however, cannot conveniently be discussed till Dr. Anderson and Mr. Romilly Alien have issued their complete descriptio e Sculpturedth f no Stones of _". In the'meantime, one may say that wherever the Pigts found the: subjects.of their pictures e treatmenth , t bolo Jd s dan characteristi r,eadiln ca e yc on mistaketha o n t , it.' /•• : '.. : 1 Since; I. wrote before .on' the Pictish. inscriptions, my friend Mr. Nicholsqn,--Bodley's Librarian, has published^ volume -entitled The Vernacular" Inscriptions of the Ancient .Kingdom !of Alban, 'transcribed, translated, d explained,an d I an hav d Valuableha e hintsn i - from mhi the . matter of ./readings; but when'they come to-be'interpreted, we visually .agree.-to differ. Lord -Sojithesk's papers also, with the excellent

. Fig . 1 .Table t. found'a . , t Colchester , ' ' . r (From photographa supplied Britishthe by Museiim.) photographs accompanying them, have alway se utmos o beet th f e no us t e me.formeTh - r wer e eSociet e th followinrea th o t dt y a g dates:— Dec. 13, 1882; Feb. 11, Decd 188an . 4 ; 14, ' 1885. Recently I .hav e had the help of the descriptions of the .stones from Fordoun and Keiss in the Proceedings of 1892 and 1897, and I have :to thank the Society for permission to use some of their illustrations for the purposes'of this paper. Lastlyo thest d e I ,ad wis reference o t h a s mention of the notices which have appeared in the Proceedings of the Society f o Antiquaries f e o 'LondonColchesteth f o r bronze tablet, which, thoug e countrt founth hno n i d yPictse .oth f , still form mosa s t INSCRIPTION NOETHEEE TH 7 F 32 O S N PICTS.

appropriate introduction to their inscriptions: see a letter of Mr. Haverfield' e seconth n i sd e Proceedingserieth f o se Londo th f o sn Society, vol. xiv. p. 108. The tablet appears to have been found in the course of excavations e grounmadth n o ed formerly occiipie e cemeterth y b d y belongin, to g and situated within, the walls of the site of the ancient monastery of St. John, of the of Benedictine monks, in Colchester; for the monastery is believed to have stood on the south side of the town, and outside of the Bomaii walls. The tablet, soon after it was found, was sent, in December 1891, to the London Society of Antiquaries, and it has since been acquire e Britisth y b dh Museum, wher I ehav e see. it n Mr. Haverfleld goes on to say, that the tablet is "of an ordinary shape, oblong wit he endsth ansce t a , measurin 8 incheg n lengti s y 3-b hJ inche n widthi s d inscribean , d with five line f lettero s s formeds i s a , often the case on metal tablets, of small points hammered in. The reading is O • MARTDE • MEDOC1I 0 • CAMP ESIVM • ET VICTORIE ALEXAN DRI • PII FELICIS AVGVSTI • NOSI DONVM • LOSSIO • VEDA • DE • SVO POSVIT • NEPOS • VEPOGENI • CALEDO."

This is Englished thus by Mr. Haverfield :—" To Mars Medocius, god of the Campenses, and to the Victory of the Emperor Alexander, a gifn purstow efro s fromhi m Lossio Veda, grandso f Vepogermso n , a Caledonian;" and he points out that the emperor meant was Alexander Severus, whose reign extende o 235dt o thafro2 s , 22 mt we have the date of the inscription within thirteen years in the earlier portiothire th df no century lateA . r communication (xiv. 183) con- tain lettesa f mineo r whicn i , hI suggeste d explaining OAMPESIVM by means of the of Campsie and the Campsie Fells, in Stirling- shire. But having regard to the fact that we have to treat the inscriber's NOSI as standing for NOSTRI, I am now of opinion that we cannot safely make anythin s CAMPESIVhi f o g t CAMPMbu - ESTRIVM, whatever that may here have meant. Canvpestres occurs 8 32 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F . O SMA ,

iu Roman inscription e nortth f e Englano southn i th s f d o h an d Scotland (see Hiibner's JSTos. 510, 1029, 1080, 1084, 1114, 1129)d an , it lends some countenance to the idea that Lossio Veda was a gladiator, or a man who took some part in the doings in the Campus Martius or e similath r institutions whic e Romanth h havy ma se establishen i d imitatio f theno m wherever they were quartered. The inscription has many points of peculiarity, on which I would . refeHaverfield'e readeMr th r o t r s accoun e tabletI wilth d f lo an ,t onls otherwisi yd poingo t thae eou t th tunknown , though there ar e in Irish literature which would fit fairly well, as far as the phonolog fore th m f y o Medocius concerneds i f theso e Miodhach,s ei On . borne by a son of Dian Cecht, in the story of Nuada's silver hand ; anothe s Afiadach,i r e patronymith n i c O'Miadaig, anglicised O'Meyey (seethe Four Masters, A. D. 1186); and in connection with these may be mentioned the fact that O'Davoren's Glossary records the two words, midliacli, " brav r valiant,eo miadhach,d "an " arrogant, proud," either of which migh e regardeb t e nam th s akia do et n Medociuse Th . name Lossio may or may not be of Pictish origin, but it seems to bear a Celtic form suggestiv a Brythoni f o e c genitive Lossion-os, Goidelic e Lossen-as,continueb o e Welst th d n i dan h , e otheLleision.th n r O hand e epitheth , t Vedahardln ca Celtice b y , and we have it in the list of Pictish kings, where it has been made into uecla, in consequence of the well-known difficulty, in certain manu- scripts distinguishinf o , e comw th g o no betweeet e W d.d n tala an d l name Vepogeni, genitive th regulaa f o e r Gallo-Brythonic name, which would nominative th n i , s mosit n eti ancient form, have been Vepogenos. It claims relationship with the following from the Continent, as will be e Berliseeth n ni Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum: Vepo (vol.. iiiNo . 5232), Vepus (xii. No. 2623), Veponius (iii. see index; and Gliick's Celtic name n i Caesars . p 73), , Vepoialus (iii. 5350) d lastlan , y P COEFVE n abbreviatioa , n which occur n coino s s from Yorkshire (see Evans's Coins of the Ancient Britons, pp. 411-13). There seems now to be no reason why this legend should not be completed, say, into VEPOGENI COROTICI FILIVS, and why we should not take it as an indication of the direction from which the name Vepogenos INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 329

reached the Picts. "We next come to CALEDO, which is the only instance known of the nominative singular of the national name of the Caledones or . The genitive survives in the name of Dunkeld, which occur s Duncaldea s n (Skene's Chronicles, . 8-9)pp , that is, the diin or fortress of the Caledonian or Caledonians, and it is also supposed to survive in the name of the mountain of Schiehallion, written in Gaelic by Mr. Macbain as Sith-Cliaillinn, which he regards as pointin o Perthshirgt e rea th Caledonese l s th eseaa f wore o t Th s i d. n Welsi h Gelyiton, d Nenniuan s gives Coit Celidone Welsth r s fo a h Silva Celidonis. At one time I thought this word might be referred to the same root cold, as Gaelic coille, " wood," and English holt; but as Welse th h congene f theso r e word s cell-i,i s "a grov r copse,o es i t i " impossible to refer CdySon to the same origin, although some Celtic scholars, ignoring this fact, go on repeating the old conjecture. But until they find an etymology which is at least phonologically admissible, one may assume that the name is not Celtic, and that its etymological meaning has not been ascertained. On the other hand, we can at all events say that our Caledo was a Pict, in the ordinary acceptation of probably tha ma y tha te o furthe sa g yw wordt d Caledoned an ran ; s was another name for Picts, or else that it was the name of a particular brancPictise th f ho h natio e vielattee e th th th w n ns : o i r , whic am hI whole, inclined to take. The name Vepogen-i, in a shorter form, is to be detected in the list of Pictish kings, where it appears as Vipoig; this forobtaines mwa droppiny db case gth e terminatio f Vepogenio ni , and the resulting Vepogen sounded as a Pictish genitive in en, and from a genitive Vepogen s inferrewa e simpleth d r form Vepog, whicn i h Goidelic spelling we have as Vipoig in the list. But this was not a treatment which could have been either Brythonic or Goidelic : in the former language Vepogeni would simply dro s thematipit casd can e vowels and make Vepgen, Vebghen, while in Irish it would have been Vequageni, yielding later fiachghen, or some such a form, while, as a fact, the Gaelicised form of Vepog appears to have been Fiachacli. Thus, though Vepog was of Celtic origin, the form in which we have it shows a treat- ment t whiccompatiblno s hi e with Celtic phonolog s usuallya y under- stood. Another point worth mentioning is the close vicinity in which 330 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

Veda arid Vipoig Pictise occuth n i hr Chronicle. e entrieHerth e ear s in ^questio e ordeth whicn n i rni h the there yar e placed :•— ' ' ' Vipoig namet xxx. annis regnavit. • Canutulachama iiij. annis regnavit. Wr'adecli ueda ij. annis regnavit. Lastly, the fact .that Lossio Veda makes no mention of his father noticede b io st e describeh ; s himsel s Neposa f Vepogeni, which, having due regar o the,naturt d e Pictish-successionth f eo translatee b o t s i ,d probably Nephew of Vepogen, and that most, likely in .the restricted sense of Vepogen s Sister's Son. Compare Nepus JBarrovadi,1 from Galloway, and'Nepus Carataci (Archwologia Cambrensise th d -foan r , 189130 . p , Academy, September 5, 1891), from Winsford Hill, in Somerset. In late Latin neposmeay ma n nephew.

I. E ROUNDETH i. L STONE, Townhead, Greenioaning, near Ardoch, PerthshireSmite th n hi Institutew no , t Stirlinga , . The peculiar condition of this stone makes it necessary to gather togethe e informatioth l al r discoverene b than ca t d concernin t i frog m observer noticeo wh s d it year attentio sy r havin agom Fo d . gha n called e stontth o I ehave , firsd foremostan t o thant ,. CraigiMr k f Orieo e l College, and Mr. A. Hutcheson of Broughty Ferry, who introduced me to Mr. Cook of Stirling. Mr. Cook was, in his turn, good enough among other things to put me in communication with a gentleman who' has long been observantly intereste antiquitiee th n ddistricti e th f so , namely, . HutchisoF Mr . A . Birkhillf no , Stirling t beforbu ; I equot e fros mhi letters to me, I premise an extract copied by him for me from the Stirling'Journal for October 9, 1823. The article, he informs ine, was signed "A Lover of Antiquity," and dated Ardoch, September 30, 1823communicatioe Th . n read follows sa s :— Academye th e September 1Se witd fo an h ; Barrovadi1 , 18915 20 r . p , compare Bairedha in the name Cellach mac Bairedha, borne by one of the three Mormairs of Alban, whose death is given by Tigernach A.D. 975. As to those three see Reeves's Adamnan, . 395p d Skene' an , s Chronicles e Pictsd Scots,th an f . o 77 p o what : t provinces did they belong respectively ?•

2 33 PEOCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F .O SMA ,

" In the spring season of last year, whilst the servants of Mr. Finlayson were engaged in clearing the ground for the plough, they came in contact with a large stone about 18 inches below the surface. After trenching round it and removing the superincumbents, it was raised, though not without considerable difficulty, when theio t , r astonishment, they discovered burnt ashes underneath. This excited in their minds suspicions of no ordinary kind, which induced the cleamo t invertee rth dstonee sidth f eo , when they wer t leseno s gratified— that actually contained letters l eyeAl s. werintenw eno searco t t d Q'r hsfo an A's and M's in order to unriddle the mysterious arcanum. At length, however, not belonging to the class of Virtuosi themselves, and of course unable to un- fol ambiguitys it d everw no yotherso t d ,urchi e recoursd th An ha . n ns i ewa Academic grove—every smatterer in the classics who had been wont to cry Reddam rationem (but I am now on college ground)—every Domine who could derive pes from irots between Dan and Beersheba (if such places be betwixt Doune and Dunning) wer l invariableal y called upo explicateo nt shortn I . , neved di r literarye th world evince more importance (impatienc ascertaio t ) e? Personae nth propriae Greath f o t Unknown allowee b y plebeiane dma ,th tha I d f ndi (i the term) to have its darkest secret explored. Observe, I speak thus to their commendation. But alas ! man is given to change. The inscription being some- thin a Belshazzar f go kind n interpretatioa , t readilno s ywa n given, whico hs much thwarted their expectation . FinlaysoMr t s no that nd interfereha , d (forbid it common sense and feeling !), the same persons would have consigned it to an untimely grave—would have recommitte e bowel mothers th it o f t so t di , there repose downo t th n eo y couc f oblivioho n for, perhaps, another centuryw Ho . apropos is the saying of Sallust, vwlgus est ingenio mobili. "I scarcel y dare presum enteo et r int wide oth e fiel f conjecturo d e respecting probable th e intentio f thino s stone . consideree b Indeed y ma t i d, presumptive for one who makes no pretensions to be a Virtuoso or a literary, where so many respectable literati have given it tip as unintelligible. However, from an appre- hension tha inquirn a t y int subjece o th leadiscovera y o dt ma t f somyo e import- ance followine ,th s humbli g y submitte readere th o dt . firse Butth t n placei , , dimensione th stonfeee 6 inche0 1 th e t ef ar y s o b sfee inches6 t d abouan , t 1 foot 2 inches thick. The characters seem to correspond with a manuscript of Cicero de.Kepublica, lately discovered, a fac-simile of which is now lying on m these y linar a table ep n e :I —to nea . e rth

QAM DONAT Qams ancientlwa y used upon monument a contractio s a s f quemadmodnm.no Now these two, joined together, make simply as to what proportion Tie, she, or iI tthin t gives. t muski Bu t have some other meaning here. Howevert le , us try the second line :—

VERSAMEBONOTVO This -migh versae b bonote m tuo, tumbl' e ove r youm egood.n fo r ow r ' Near lefe stonth e tmiddl e t fivth side a th ef ar eed o lettersean t bein,bu g very much erased, it is difficult to distinguish their similitude. The majority of those who have seen them suppose them to be the date of the stone ; but unless they INSCRIPTIONS 01' THE NORTHERN PICTS. 333

(the letters) express it in Arabic characters, I doubt much if such a solution be applicable. The letters have a strict resemblance to these IMLIV. Now, as there appears to be a point (.) after IM, it might, very justly, be rendered Imperator Legionis IV., 'commander of the fourth legion.' And the only objection to this reading is that imp. is the usual abbreviation of imperator. The reader, no doubt, will observe there is a vast difference in point of signification between precedine th thid san woul go firse linesth tw t r d fo ,indicat e thastone d th t eha bee receptacle nth f somethineo g valuable, whils e thirth t r lasdo t recorde th s sepulchree th e b manspoa f o t to . Suc differenceha , however leave w , e with antiquarians to reconcile. Meantime, it may be observed that the ashes found unde stone rth e were undoubtedly thos burnf eo t huma thers na a bone d s ei an s; tumulus or cairn, composed of stones, beside the relic, it had in all likelihood been used as a place of interment. It must also be remembered that some 80 or 90 years since, coinss (coin 1) to a great extent was dug up on this farm, bu t whaa t t particular spo I trathe r thinuncertains i t ki . helThiy o pt ma s clear the second line. " To conclude, Mr. Editor : As the stone is well worthy the minute investigation of the antiquarian and the visit of the tourist, I trust they will satisfy them- selves by ocular inspection, and not fail to communicate their sentiments on the subject. It is a few yards1 to the south of the direct road and a little to the elevente th eas f o t h milestone from Stirling." Thus far the Stirling Journal of three-quarters of a century ago; and now I cannot do better than append Mr. Hutchison's notes on it and on the stone. I refer to a letter of his dated February 2, 1897, as follows:— acquaintancy "M e witQreenloanine th h g stone began abou year0 2 t s ago. Since that time, I have frequently visited it and made inquiry regarding it among the people of the neighbourhood. I could gather very little information. No traditio kinr y legennd connecteo an dha f do d itself wit e stoneho th N . one could tell or guess how long it had stood where it was. Even the planting clume oth f treef po s calle' roundel e th dforgotten—althougs wa ' observay hm - conjecturo t e m tio d nele that the ymore yearb coul0 8 t er dthao sno old0 n7 . whosn ma ee memory~goeTh s furthes . tJoh bacMr n s k i Sharp occupieo ,wh e sth far f Townheadmo whicn o , stone hth stora es telo y standst ha n con i le H -.

lettering on reckon this to have been about 50 years ago. Mr. Sharp affirms that he altered nothing, but was careful simply to deepen the lines of the letters as he found thems honestHi . s beyonyi d doubt t ther Bu roos ei . questiomo t n whether a ' herd loon' (a boy somewhere between 10 and 15 years of age, as Mr. Sharp further denned the term) was qualified to trace with undeviating accuracy the worn apparentln linea f so y ver inscriptiond yol . This re-cuttin confines gwa d to the upper or main line of the inscription, and included the letters BVAH— letters whic hI suspecte havo dt e been comparatively late additions reo t - d an , 1 This is singularly incorrect, unless I am much mistaken. 334 PROCEEDING F THO SE SOCIETY , 18989 Y . MA ,

present nothing more serious tha initiale nth f perhapso sa pai f rustiro c lovers.• That has been my impression all along regarding these letters. I.shall not trouble you with my reasons for thinking so. That would take too much time, an facearlien de i th t r reading, whic h I senherewith u dyo , render t unnecessarysi . I may state also that I have been inclined to regard .the stone as a memorial rather-tha nboundarya stone, because the circular clum edge f treespo th f eo n o , whic e stonhth placeds ei ,others d appearean carefue n o ,m o dt l examinationo t , have been planted' on what was a dilapidated cairn or the site of a ruined building. letterine stonee th "A th o st I n ,wis go spea o ht k wit e greateshth t caution. Your experienc n readini e g such inscriptions doet requirno s d froy ai e man observation I have been able to make. Nevertheless, as my reading was: taken, directly fro stone mth e some years ago ,I ventur e submith o t e youo n t O t i .t upper part of the stone, in the space marked by the intersecting zig-zag lines, I found traces of letters. These I was disposed to regard—like the BV and AH—as initials. In fact, the AH is repeated above. What Mr. Nicholson believes to be 'pointers' I had resolved into IP. The main line I read 0 (or Q) ATH'DONAT: but of course that is Mr. Sharp's super-literation. Cath seems like Gaelic, while-donat had the look of Latin. At the same time, parentheticalld ad y ma I y that Oath. (Catherine) Donat gooa s i d enough Scotch personal name. Next, and below this line, I found, on the left-hand side of the stone, trace f inciseo s d characters like letters, which seeme o fort d m eithea r short lin f inscriptioeo e f beginninwhico th e e portior no hth on f .tho go nt e right had been entirely obliterated. If you have a very good photograph, you may be able'to find" some vestiges of these characters still remaining. The third , line I read VE (or II) RSAMC (or U) BONOTVO., The, fourth letter S . Q r o migh C e b t " That is the transcription I made a good many years ago. I have since found an older one, made before the letters were tampered with, and when the stone d jus ha fro p tgroun e u beemth g d lainwhicdu n i dha n t buriehi d beyon- dre collection e stonTh e. was e sprinfounth f n 1822i gdo nexd an , t year there appeare Stirlinge th n di Journal accoun n finde a th ,f o witt hreadina g ann da attemp t 'interpretatioa t e inscriptionsth f no n ful i ln I copyo . r yfo thit sou and. verbatim. Ther a goo s ei d dea f surplusageo l e thine stylth th f g et o bu , may amuse you. It is redolent of the fine manner of the rural correspondent of a country newspaper. It seems to convict itself of being- the work of the village schoolmaster. " Beneath the verbiage of his account —and whatever may be thought of the suggested interpretation—i possibls i t discero et n acute and careful observation. stonA e jusd sth eha t been turnet thaa p t u dtime , freshene s lonit gy b dres t in the ground, I should be disposed to allow considerable weight to the reading e letteroth f s give y 'Anb Love remarko f Antiquity.tw o r r o sI shoul e On d' lik mak. o eit t First n eo , it confirm rejectio y lettere sm th f sno BVAe th H : transcription wilu yo l, observe, begins wit . hNextQ t wouli , worte db h while making a careful scrutiny of the stone, or a photograph of it, with a good glass, to ascertain whether, tinder Mr. Sharp's cutting of the TH, traces of the M still remain. Again, this observer gives the confirmation of his statement to my own observation, of several .years ago—that there appeared to be a third line or, portion of a line of inscription. • About the readings of the other lines he has uo doubt. He boldly states that the letters are so-and-so. About this, how- . INSCRIPTION F THO SE NORTHER5 33 N HCTS.

s noeveri te h ,certai onle h ny: venture thay e charactersa th t o t s s resemble IMLIV readins hi f t possiblI corrects g.i no t i es i , enoug h that, after all, they may represen datee th t 1054 ? And, lastly e mentionh , caire th ss actuall na y existing then noted burnee an , sth d human bones beneath stone.e ,th " In reply to a variety of subsequent queries of mine I had the follow- g notein s . froHutchisonMr m e ,greates th som f f o whico e te ar h importance, as will be at once perceived : — havp "Thto ee ebeeth mark t na I clearlI s y much interfered e withTh . perso re-cuo nwh t the evidentls mha y secone takeTh f nthesdo . theII er mfo letterformerld ha sI I canno y t trac w reacurve.e bu eno tth dP " Bather below this and to the left is A, followed by what I once read H (of rathe uncertairw smalleno f whico m a nt r —hI sizbu althoug, e A) tha e nth h t beari s more resemblanc othey thaan H ro n t lettera nex e o t eTh t . lins i e doubn i t tno : — H. QATH DONAf There is no doubt that Mr. Sharp intended TH as his reading. I have now looked carefully for traces of M under these letters, and I think I can still discern them. I should not, of course, have observed this had I not been specially looking for it — so that the necessary qualification can be made on that account." thay e plos developesa th t tthiha y tA s ma stag e deon considerably, and the reader must now see that a good deal depends on the letters BVAH,1 — that is, whether they originally belonged to the inscription or not. At first I felt less confident than Mr. Hutchison in the negative evidence of the Stirling journalist of 1823, especially as his words are : these ar lina ep e" n :I to —nea e th QAr M DONAT." "y OnAsa et lin naturallreadno p e to d nea se di "th re —y h asky swh or somethin thao gt t effect , s omittinunleswa e sh g portioa e linth e f no t reduciblasno whao t ewantee h t mako dt I eventure Latio S n? n do sora f cross-examinationo t . HutchisonMr f o orden i , elicio t r t still more clearly the fact that he had independently arrived at the conclusion that e letterth s Bwer YH t originall A no ee stone y th n replI m n .yo o y t questionings, he called my attention to a paper of his .on the "Standing Stones and Stone Circles in the Neighbourhood of Stirling," reprinted

1 Since the above was written I had an opportunity of submitting Mr. Lindsay's photograph of the stone to Mr. Haverfield's practised eye, and he at once pronounced the IT of B VAU as not likely to be ancient. 6 33 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH 9 Y , F O 1898SMA , .

Scottishe th n i Journal f Naturalo History for March 1890 (pp. 45-50) fro e Proceedingsmth Stirlinge th f o Natural History Archaeologicald an Society. In that paper he states that he had detached the letters in questio nline fro t th hise res m;f th bu .o t word lettea Marcf n si o r h , 189716 , give more detail follows a , s :—

" In my last letter I was perhaps not sufficiently explicit. I did not mean to convey that the letters B.VAH. were added by Mr. Sharp. My supposition is that they had been cut sometime between the discovery of the stone in 1822 and recuttine Shar. th lettere Mr th pf y g so b perhap s thirty years later. reasony "M thinkinr sfo g tha lettere th t s originawere t parth ef no to l inscrip- tion were, first, that they wer ee lef closth e stonet th o sidt e f e,o wherease th , inscription terminate righe th n td o sid t somea e distance fro e edgemth that o s , , if these four letters were removed inscriptioe th , n e wouldb o t s s nearla , wa s ya expected, occup centre stone.e y th wer th V f eo d e 1 separatean NextB e th ,y db a space, which seeme havo t d emara k thus, BxV imperfectl,e sucth s ha y educated often put between the initial letters of their name. Less space was now left for the A and H, which are therefore crowded more closely together, and after the H occurs the mark . Moreover, there seemed to me also to be the mark x between the A and H. "This impression I had formed, not only before seeing the article in the Stirling Journal, but also before I had seen Mr. Sharp, and got his account of e recuttin intervie y th e lettersm th t f A o gw. accomwits . Sharwa hMr pI - panied by Mr. G. Lowson, M.A., B.Sc., Mathematical Master in the High School of Stirling membea e Stirlind th ,an f ro g Archaeological Society kneo y wwh , m opinion in regard to the four letters—we had just been carefully inspecting the stone—an hearo specialle . Shardwh dm Mr pk whetheyas foune h rfoue th dr letters on the stone and recut them with the others. His reply was, ' Oh, just everythin more b y o egt an t definitetha t go a s there.i t e t coule b t H bu , 'dno rate he declared that he added nothing, so I was driven to the inference that lettere th d beesha n added befor s timeehi . Afterwards I foun e articlth d n ei the Stirling Journal."

So far, I have given Mr. Hutchison's account of the stone; but it has been describe. , 1896Mr 23 y e Academyy db , Th Ma als n r i o fo Nicholson, who, after giving detaile letteringth f o s , o analysetw e th s lines into BVAH QAT VUECAMTd IDOan T NAI U BONOI; O TN lid e an adds thainscriptioe doubte th par y h tt befor f an o cu t f s i e nwa e tentth h century sorrm a diffeo yt I . r fro. NicholsomMr n boto t s ha e interpretatioe th th e inscription o I t e th dat th f s . ea o it d f no nan first place I ,fin d myself constraine a largrelo dt o yt e e extenth n o t tha. Hutehisoe se I fai Mr t o t l n caii make thaf muco t t argumenthou looa s a k, 1 photogrape th t a h will show. INSCBIPTIONS OF THE NOBTHEBN PICTS. 337

Stirling Journal of 1823 and on Mr. Hutchison's notes. So I would eliminate the BVAH1 as no part of the original, also the AH above the stilIP l stonethe HutchisonhigheQQAT the of Mr. .and on r, it , wil observede b l , could lately rea lattee dth r , d thoughonlII ha s ya e h formerly found them to have been IP, but it is worth noticing, to his credit a photograp s ,n clearl i i e madtha b t P I o tou yet h whic. hMr Nicholson kindly gav e somm e e time agod whican , h lies before m e now. Then there are certain lines "straight and diagonal," as Mr. Nicholson describe se uppethemth n e rstoneo ,th par f o .t These, together with a curved line running through the letters ATTIDO, I regard as scratches never intended to convey any meaning. Lastly, I can make nothin e Stirlinth f o g g journalist's gues f IMLIVo s d an ; whatever it was, I cannot see how it could belong to the reading lineo formintw s e stilth g l visible stoneth n e.o Briefly, I should say the original writing consisted of the letters whic e Stirlinth h g journalist read QAM DONA d VERSTan E AM BONO TVO. Taking the former first, we can partly check his read- ing, as his DONAT is unmistakably DONAT, with TI conjoined, after the fashion of Roman inscriptions; and this occurs again, namely, in e othe th mors i r lines O reae r wha accuratelha d TV fo , e h t y represented as TVO, that is, TIVO. Donati I take to be the genitive of the Latin name Donatus,- which occurs in Eoraan inscriptions found in Britain, and was adopted by Christians in the island. It is known, for instance, havo t e bee ne abbo th that Augustinef Bangorf o tme o t e o th wh , s a , former is called in Welsh Dunawd or Dunod, the forms under which Donatus would regularly appear in Welsh. But what could the earlier e lin, seeinth parbe ef o gt thae journalisth t t rea t dQAM,i . thaMr t Sharp treate CATs a t di QATIIHr o tha. Nicholsod an Mr ,t n regards a t si QATTI? QATTreadingn ow s alsy i I, m othoug inclinem a I h o t d hesitate between it and QATFI, which would admit of one's construing the whole as QAT FI [lius] DONATI—" Cat, son of Donatus." The com- bination TFI would also explain why Mr. Sharp read TH, and almost

vers i yt 1I tempting, nevertheless regaro t , d the first lin s beginnina e g witha name Buahqatti, and to compare it with the Irish genitive Bucket, or with the Bucket Water in Aberdecnshiie. Y VOL. XXXII. 8 33 PKOCEEDING SOCIETYE , 18989 TH Y F O S.MA ,

equally well why the journalist gives the reading as M, for what he thought he saw was probably not the capital M but an ["["]. Whether he or the printer is to be held responsible for making it into a capital cannoe Mon t say f I QA. T FI [lius] DONAT rejectede b o t s Ii , the next best reading, perhaps QATTI-DONATIs i , , wit twe hth o namen si the genitive. Both.these readings imply that Mr. Hutchison is mistaken in thinking that he detects traces of an M; but, on further scrutinising photographe th . Sharp' n i Mr H noticee sT on , s tha t beed lieha n busily engaged in deepening the top strokes; but the connecting line of his H runs obliquely upward begind san s lower thashoule non d expecd an , it t lower than whore the middle bar of the. F should be. The exact positio s e i coverelin f th thar o e n y ba twhicb d I hhav e already mentioned as sweeping through the letters ATTIDO. Although that lin shallows ei t i bee d n ha ,time therth et ea whe n Shar amusins pwa g himself, he would probably have followed it in making the bar of his insteaH f scratchindo obliqun ga irregulad an e lowee on r r downt Bu . non f theso e e lines coincide witpary f whao an ht I tinfe r woule b d traces of Mr. Hutchison's M. As to Mr. Sharp's work, I am not sure that I can trace it beyond the corners of the D, both of which he has clumsily elaborated. He has possibly touched the corners also of the N, but he has left his mark most palpably on the V and H of BVAH. It is to be noticed, that the A of DOS"ATI has a cross bar, while the A lowee th suco n rn i linbarhs a eha . This might suggesr tba thae th t in the former is due to Mr. Sharp, but I hardly think so : it is much too neatly and lightly cut to have been his work. remarkhandy e firse m on th p t ,e sorryn u line sm o th a m T n I o,o su , o havt o rejecet . Hutchison'Mr t s M ; e other,andth failury n ,o m , o t e , supposinF n a f lowee o tracfiny gth r an df tharba eo t letter once there, compel giv o t preference e eth sm readinge th o t e —

QATTI-DONATI.

The other line of writing is so far down the face of the stone that we t forcearno e o regart d t i dae sams th par f eo tinscription e th d an , letters seem to be somewhat more carelessly formed. On the whole, INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NOKTHEKN PICTS. 339

however, I am inclined to think that they were cut by the same hand, thad reae b an td o t the togethere yar Stirline Th . g journalist givee th s last line merely as VERSAMEBONOTVO, the value of which is diminished by the happy thought, that he had at last found something he could understand, Versa ma bono tuo, "Tumble me over for your own good." Mr. Hutchison gives up the journalist's intervening traces of letters, and writes as follows:— " The next line, mentioned in tho Journal article, is now not to be read. There are certainly still marks to be traced, and ten years ago these were so distinct as to impress me with the belief that there was a line of inscription there. lowee "Th r lin eI rea d thus :— V||RSAM|jBON 'IVO.

" Following the V appears what looks like ||—I do not trace a curved con- e letter th e sainectio e bottomb f o dth e samy followint Th a nma e . g M, although here the curved line is more distinct, but it looks to me like an after addition. Bot he Journal letterth y e reab sar E dcorrespondent . Some on e has been quite recently (since I saw the stone last) rescratching this as well as the upper line. The O, which was quite distinct after the N, is now obliterated. unusuat reae b no d o t t thir i U s s fo i l,i s | | lette e I appeao th fsamrt e th en ri line of inscription in the two separate forms, with the rounded bottom (U) and with the angular bottom (V) ? The last letter may be Q, with the tail now gone. Ther taio n l s etraceabli e nowt thiBu s. letter differ n shapi s e fro othee mth r unmistakable O's in the inscription, because while they are quite rounded at botto muppee (0)th n pointers i , i line.this e i sQ , on exactl " d0 e th s ya

. Hutchisou'Mr f o thad y e Beginninsen sa th t y notese th ma t I ,a g doubt—in i s wa I o s ns a fact, m a raises me I , wa y db questio Q e th f no still—whethe e latter Q,o reao th t r f preparewhics 0 do r wa hI o dt regard as an abbreviation of -QVE "and." While admitting the cor- rectness of Mr. Hutchison's description of the letter as it now looks, I t fee ae originamno l th o thay forcecertai d o sa t I t o ls dt a n shap f o e uppee operates th n wa ri t lines i Q . Sharpds ha e a ,upo Mr o th y nwh ,b managed to give the part near the tail the appearance of a small, separate triangle. I see, however, no reason to go so far as to suppose that he found a C and made it into Q, not to mention that Q for C is to foune b d eve Eoman ni n inscriptions. "Whe nI visite e stond th n Marci e h 1896 . Craigi witMr ,s ehwa me, 0 34 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F O .SMA ,

and we soon found that no rubbing we could take with lieelball or e expedienth n o f puttint o thi e h g t paper bu f muc; o gras-e s hus wa s lettere onth s which looked hopeles f rubbino d an s g the paper with the. point of a lead pencil until it had been carefully blackened: this was foun e form brinth o shalloe dt t f th moso s g ou f o wt letters makinp gu this line. We thus ascertained that the 0 between the N and the 't- was round, whil et nearl thano s o ts y e Nwa betweeth d e Ban th n round cam t R middle,t e closed narrotale no th ou ean lth t : n d i wbu , anlettee dth r followin e reaping-hooth f go appeareG e b k shapeo t d , e secon th e cas seventd f th eo an d n I h . letterS n coule a w ,t dno find no trace of the parallels || being joined at the bottom to make U. I ought perhap havo st e mentiones e fac1Vit f o th s d tO V ha tha e th t second arm nearly perpendicular, as if we had to do with the latter o sucn hn i clos s i o t et s i portioa contiguit Nt n T a ;bu e f no th o t y suggest an N conjoint with the latter. Moreover, this kind of V is well known in Latin, as will be seen in Thompson's Handbook, e.g., in the facsimil mentio o . t 186p t n no ,o e n implies thafore i t th i mt y b andd . history of U. So, taking into account the fact that we are here reminde e letter e forth th f mn Romao i f s d o n inscriptionse botth y hb incline m r TIa fo I , thino T dt e kth Ay b withoud an crose r th t ba s that we have in the 11 the Roman E of that shape, introduced here probabl archaismn a s ya e readin Th accordingly . gma representee yb s da

VERGAMEBO NOTIVO.

Whethey ma r e Vergamebo w t sure t no e nam bu , m on r a two o es i I , e perhapendine dativth th s f a o ge s language o casetrea th e s th a ,t e whic e writeth h r s thoughusinwa ge h seemt o havt s e been Latin.. f Vergameb-oo b Thee e nth recalls such Pictish names,as "Thalarg filii Ythernbuth«6 d " Duptalaican " h filii Bergi'6," which occue n "i Th r Legen. AndreSt f o dw s give"a s y ChroniclesSkenb nhi e n i eth f o Fiats and Scots (p. 187), and the form Frobbacenne«w in the Ogam at Aboyne Castle, of which more presently. All this raises the question why I fix on the o of Vergamebo as ending a name, and the answer is— becaus eI believ e tha I tdetec attesten a t d remainde e namth e n ei th f o r INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 341

line; but, before discussing this, I may be allowed to explain that I should translate the whole as " (the Gift) of Qatt (and) Donat to Vergameb (and) Notiu." This will bo found to fall into its place as a paralle e mosth o tt l probable interpretatio e inscriptionth f o n s e onth St. Vigeans and Kilmaly stones. It is, however, open to an objection, namely, that the names of the men commemorated would in that case occup lesya s conspicuou se stonplacth n eo e tha e nameth n f thosso e who wished to commemorate them. With nameregarlase e th th t o linen dt si I ,detec t Notiv Notivor o n i the Natlii or Ndtlii of Irish literature, which also now and then betrays an older form e Noth, th suc s a hi give n Stokes'i n s Patrick, . 301p . Compare also such related forms as the feminine Nothain in the Kennes Dindshenchas (Rev. Celtigue, xvi. 37), and the masculine Notlidn, geni- tive Nothain, in the Book of Ballymote, fo. 19If. The fh regularly takes the place of vowel flanked t, and in b had the sounds both of our b and of our v, while the sound represented by v in Notiv- was probably our w or v,, which flanked by vowels has, in Goidelic, disappeared in the oldest specimens in manuscript of the ninth or eighth century. So NotM correspond NOTIo t s V jus s Irisa t h ii, " colour," doe Welso t s h lliw, " colour, especiall ya dar k colour suc s blue,a h " Latin livor, limdus. If it be borne in mind that b and v were a good deal confounded in Latin spelling from the fourth century down, one will at once recognise the name Notiv- in the Natliabeus of the Legend . AndreoSt f w (Skene's Chronicles, . 187)p ,n i which v r fo , b wit s it h this name, shows it to have been suggested by some early document. phonologe th s e casa r th s concerned ei f fa y o s A t wouli , admissible db e to regard Notiv-, NotM, Natlii as the Latin Nativus or Notivus borrowed, provided reasons should be found for conjecturing this to be the origin y Notivr ou ma Nathir I hav o t s o i name e ideao t oen th wa f Wh bu , . be wort e whilth h o mentiot e n here, that Reevess Adamnan'hi n i , s Vita Columbce, speaks (pp. 121, 220-1 a Nathi f o ) , brothe. St o t r Cainnech moc : amon s ubor0 Dalonn wa 51die60 i nd g o 7n an di wh , other churches he was regarded as the patron saint of that of Kennoway in . The other name, Vergamabo, s perhapi e analyseb o t s d into Ver- 342 PEOCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

gameb-, e Gaulisth witn i hs prefia a namer xve s Vercassivettaunosd an Vertingetorix s comparea d with Gassiodlawios and' Cingetorix. With y compar e ma nam th e e res f w eth eo t such namee s th Gaina s n i Benues Diridshenchas (Rev. Celtigue,- xvi. 145), and a woman's name, Gamlorga, e Boo th f Ballymoteo kn i . 152|-fo , t stilbu ; l nearer comes Gamebach, fo. 153|, which seems to be a derivative from Gameb-, as in Ver-gamebo. The prefix is probably that which has in Irish become For-chellachn i fos a r (Bk Leinsterf o .Wels d Ol . 340hn i fo , guar, d a),an guor, gur, later mostly gor, of the same origin as Latin s-uper, English over, and Sanskrit upari, " above, over," What the exact meaning of it Gauliso tw e hth namen i r sve abovs a e mentione havy ma ed beenI , cannot sayt Welsbu ; h pedigrees show sometime a remarkabls e us e . made it BritisThu th f eo n i s h Museum MS., Harleian e 3859th f o , tenth century, we have the following :—Tacit map Cein map Guorcein map Doli map Guordoli map Dumn map Gurdumn, which might be rendered—T. sou of Cein son of a previous Cein son of Doli son of a previous Doli son of Dumn son of a previous Dumn. In the list of the Pictish kings, the prefix in the form of ur is somewhat similarly used, except that the sequence would seem to require us to render it by later, noprevious.y b I hesitatt t Bu d rendee an r Brude Uip, Brude Uruip, Brude Grid, Brude Urgrid, thu s: Brud e Uip earlien ,a r Brude Uip, Brude Grid earlien a , r Brud tiln o l e o thes Grid d y makan , e twenty-eight Brudes texte trues alln i i Th t i .,, calls themissinge ar m o e thirtytw se :t bu , Skene's Picts and Scots, pp. 5, 26, 27, 324, 325; also the Book of Ballymote Pictise th n fore i . 43ah r Th mfo ,listu .contrastes a , d with Welsd Ol e h th guor gur,d an supporte s i e analogth y db f suc yo h names as Fergus, Gurgust, which appears in Pictish as Urgiist and Urguist, Goidelia c genitiv f Urgust:o e Skenee , 400se 29 , .,8 ib., . pp This shows that these vocables were borrowed fro mBrythonia c source some time or other before they had developed the initial

to \vit, Drusti filii Wrthrosst, -whic hI shoul d construe "of f Droso n so t Uur-Drost or Drost senior" : see Skene's Piats and Scots, p. 187. As to the prohable date of the inscription, more than one feature has been pointes indicativa t s antiquityit ou d f o e e ,Koma th suc s a hn ligature of T'and /, the A without a bar, the archaism of parallel lines f Notiv-o v retentioe s contraste a th e d th f an o nfo, dE r with Nothi. Taking everything into consideration, I cannot see that it could be later than the sixth century, and I should be disposed to regard it as belong- ing e fifthratheth ,o t runles whollm a I sy misle y archaismb d f o s lettering; but I am very anxious to know what others may think of it. Lastly, I ought to say that I have derived much help in studying e inscriptioth n froe photograpmth . McliolsonMr h y giveb d e an ,m n f photographo especiallt se a y yb s kindl y Professob y e takem r rfo n . MT . Lindsay e valud all th s ,veri f an ,themt o D.D ee yBu on ,. seriously reduced by the lichen covering the stone. Last September I went for the third time to see the stone ; but my journey was in vain, as the stone had been removed to his residence at Keir Mains, near Stirling e landownerth y b , . ArchibalMr , d Stirling. Howevers wa I , glad this had been done, as the stone was subject to the persistent attacks of idlers with a mania for cutting their initials wherever their vandal hands have free play. Moreover, I learned from Mr. Stirling and his agent that the stone was now covered up, so as, in the course of a few weeks, it might be possible to free the surface of the lichen. It would hopeds thenwa foun e t i b ,, d better practicablfa a rt photograpge o et h t otha i hithertfy nan o taken. Since the foregoing notes were written the stone has been deposited in the Smith Institute at Stirling, where Dr. Anderson has seen it. He quitw t verno e writethas e no i cleany s m t t i i tfavourtha o se t bu , h t - ably impressed by it, as the lettering is scratchy and badly formed in several cases. He calls attention, in particular, to the second and seventh e letterseconth f o sd linee readH . s them U wit roundeha d e linbottomth e d accordinglan , y would begin wit e improbablth h e combinatio viee n th VUw t entertainebu , . HutchisoMr y db n would dri e necessitth f o f recognisino ys u s belongina e originalU gth o t g . 344 PROCEEDINGS 01? THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

Further . AndersoDr , e nquee th say f rso letter following BVAH, that, though lie formerly read it C, it now looks more like a Q. He adds, however, that it cannot have been originally Q, but possibly a G. So I .shoul inclinee db represeno dt lase th tguesset y statreadine m th f eo f so g lineo tw s e thusoth f , °ATT DONAT• I I O NOTIVO, givin e preferencgth e doubtfuth n i e l lettee caseth o rt s abov linee eth . Soon after receivin e last-mentionegth d communication fro . AndermDr - sonkindle h , y sene proof-sheetm t ss accoun'oe t hi stoni f th s f a eo t now stande Society'th n si s Proceedings f 1897o . 303-4,pp , Lastly, just before goin photoe pressth o g t e . Anderso-m Dr , t ge s abl o nwa t e graph printed herewith, representing the stone cleaned of lichen and as it now looks at Stirling. Among other things, the reader will have noticed that this photograph mor o showtw er lineo se f traceso on f o s lettering littlA .e below V||EG e seemA on o detec t s t some thin shallow characters, which, however, do not appear quite convincing ; n hardlca e y on hel t pbu being convince e existencth f o d f lettero e s lower down towards the right-hand edge. They appear to end a line and to read iTy, which, together with the other vanishing traces, force me to suspect this ancient monument of being a palimpsest.

ij. THB SCOONIB STONE, Fife, now in the National Museum, Edin- burgh. My former reading of the Ogam on this stone was Ehtarimonn, but T T~ on examining the lettering again I should now give it as \ t E Ua.

Owing to the pedestal in which the stone now stands, I could not see

more than three of the scores of the initial vowel; but I read it forr merly four scorest wouli d an d, have mad seriouo en s difficultd ha t i f i y five, which would make the vowel into i instead of e. A difficulty, INSCRIPTION NORTHERE TH 5 F O 34 S N PICTS.

however, docs occur further on, as the inscribe! had not been able to kee e connectinpth g virgul e Ogar fleasth ao f m go e wor cleath n kf o o r e stag'th f e avoidedso b e stonee forelego th t e fac On f th d o e.: ha s e fleasg th anothed f lesn i (o an ;shenc p p consequencega ga r ea ) occurs where the snout of the beast crosses the line just where the last scores e shoulon t de las bu joioth e fleasgn ft th n . Immediately before th e stag's leg occur letters which at first sight would seem to make /11111 bav, or /| 111, ms ; but on scrutinising the scores I cannot there discover exactl blundea e inscriber'st , in,/ th y bu r f o eitheo r, seema o , { rwh , s havo t e begu cuttiny b n a scorg e lik ee r thosimmediatelth f o e y pre- cedin g.wha: intendee h t t was shoule cu W ,o I believe dt d. n thu n a ,s have Ehtarrnonn, evidently the same name as Eddarrnonn on the Dyke Stone. In any case, I cannot help believing in the substantial identity of these names, and if the reading Ehtarrnonn is rejected, the next best reading would be EMarranonn, with a crooked /, a, and the missing n supplie e line th scorth e y f b formindeo e outside stag'th gth f so e leg r elso , e EMarrmnonn, n reckonewit e e samth th h en i d manner. Phonologically EMarranonn might be regarded as having an irrational vowel not expressed in the spelling Eddarrnonn. If, however, EMarrm- nonn should be preferred, one would be inclined to consider this as etymologicall e oldeyth r spelling, namely s showina , n ma g whicd hha been elide Eddarrnonnn di t thibu s; hardly nee e consideredb d e th s a , name is probably derived from the Latin ^Eternus, through some such a Goidelic form as Ethern, which is given (under May 27) in the Martyr- ology of Donegal as the name of a bishop of Domhnachmor. The objectio e readinth o nt g EMarranonn s beeha n pointem da I out d ,an unable to follow Lord Southesk in reading Eddar Balmonn\en\, though the stone firsth te I thoughw tim bavmsa w eI sa balm, s I twher ha e eh but furthe rals s scrutinoha cont i d -y an compelle , up o givt t i e m d vinced me that there is no trace of writing after onn. The whole inscriptio therefors ni e represented by namee thion s , whicl I iventur e to give as Ehtarrnonn and to equate with the Eddarrnonn, first deciphere s Lordshi hi e Dyk th y b dn eo p Stone.

E ABERNETHiiiTH . Y e NationaFRAGMENTth n i w l no Museum,a, t 346 PEOCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

Edinburgh, belongs to a stone representing a hunting scene and an Ogam of which the only remains are —ffffj——A\\\<: = imn or chiefls i y interestin specimea s ga ne kin occurrinth df o y Ta g soute th f ho of bundle Ogam better know stonen no s from Orkne d Shetlandyan .

. VIGBANST E iv.TH S STONE, near Arbroath, Forfarshire. This stone, which is not inscribed in Ogam, I read still as I did before, an dI divid legene eth d into Drosten-ipe Uoret t Forcus.et where Drosten is the genitive of a man's name, Drost, depending on ipe, which is placed t beforafteno migh e , eit ron its ta ,legene expecth d d ha tbee kiny nan d of Celtic; and this vocable ipe may provisionally be taken to mean loy or nephew, but hardly son, as Drost, so far as we know, was only a man's name d paternitan , t supposeno s yi havo dt e been recognise Pictisn di h descent, but birth alone. As to Uoret and Forcus, they are proper names ; interpretatioe th anrese f dth o t n e worturnth dn s o ett, concerning which several view se Latisuggesth e nb etty themselvesintendema t I ) d(1 .

CUP

Pictise reath e to b s da h wor r and,dfo jus whes ta meet e non s witn i t he Iris Anglo-Saxor ho y n ma text t d readet an s t ) i ocuss (2 r and; o t bu have bee nPictisa h tha n wordi d t casshoulan e , eon d probably identify Kilmale t witth i edde n ho th y pronunciatioe Stoneth d an ; n whice hth analog othee th f ryo inscriptions would see indicatmo t e woul ethe dr b o e#. This vocable may have meant (a) and, et, or else (b) let us say INSCEIPTION NORTHERE TH 7 F 34 O S N PICTS.

benefite r for o th . of r Accordin fo e formeth o gt r conjecture e transth , - lation would be as follows :— Drosten-ipe Uoret ett Forcus. Drost's nephews Uoret and Fergus. inclinew no givo m preferencde t a th e I e othet th Bu ro t en -viewi d an , so doinpartlm a gI y influence e facth t y extremels thab di t i t y raro et meet amon r inscriptiongou s wity intendean h o commemoratt d e more than one person. So I should translate thus : — Drosten-ipe Uore t Forcuset t . Drost's nephew Uore r Fergusfo t .

In other words, the deceased bore the Goidelic name of Forcus or Fergus, and the cross commemorating him was put up by Uoret, whose slonnud or surnam Drosten-ipe,s ewa say o that ,s i tperhaps , Nepos Drosti, meaning Drost's sisters son. Lastly, I may remark that the placing of the y otheb importan d rs jus i le Pictisl d s ti whaen e t e ion namt th t a e inscription expecto st . Moreover, Forcu n thai s t case must have been welo s n l knowtreates contemporariema hi a o s ndt a s tha inscribee th t r thought it needless to describe him further.

v. TEE FOBDOUN STONE, Kincardineshire. The lettering on this well-known stone is in the top corner to the left of the cross, and it consisted originally of at least two lines, but only just the lower ends of the letters in the upper line are visible, and that not extene th f enablino t o tmak o t e egon the mothee outTh r .lin e consists of mixed characters which are approximately PIC1QRNOIN. When I first saw this stone with Mr. Craigie in 1896, I was inclined to read the first letter as an imperfect uncial M ; but on a more careful examinatio nI fin donl n thaedge ca y th ts intactI suppos ei o S . e that the letter is either p or r. The third letter is also hard to read : Eomill. Mr y Alien (Proceedings Society, e oth f 1891-92 . 253 ,p take s )ha n it to be a d, but it may possibly be a kind of G of the reaping-hook shape, which means that it might perhaps be an s. The a is thoroughly minuscule lase th t letted onet ,an rbu , whic hI hav e read I, would seemo t s '348 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18C89 TH Y F . O SMA ,

have a sort of continuation to the right which makes it look rather like an angula r Greeo rs k T. Thi followes si lesa lase y sd b th talt , limlN b of which is lost in a groove forming part of the outline of the cross ; otherwis t mighei describeo b t smala s da upsid V l e down. On the edge to the right of the figures with which the face of the ston s ornamentedei seemee w , deteco dt t trace Ogaf so m writing. Their position would be similar to that of the Ogam on the Kilmaly Stone in JHuirobin Museum ; but, as in the case of the latter, the Ogams here must have been ver r gonfa y emako smalln s thad theca e ean I tar ,y nothin f themgo . As to the name Pidarnoin, if one is right in regarding it as ending in fiin, its form may be conjectured to be that of a Goidelic genitive of a name Pidarnon comparee b o t d with Elitarrnonn Eddarrnonn.r o

vj. THE AQUHOLLIE STONE, near Stonehaven. a hurrie d Wheha d I n look befor t a thie s stone I rea, t i d incline ream o t a t thudi I w t dsno :Bu — . v ) ~) (o (y n (e ) )V-Jt (o jn

e o d t I n o V n _!_ amu The vowels are very indistinct, and the first of them has its second hollow somewhat irregularly prolonged, whic possibly ma h y indicatn ea • m, so that, instead of Vin, one would have to read Vamun, possibly , Vabun ; and I once thought there was one vowel hollow more and one consonant score less shoul;e thaw , instean is dt Vi hav f d Viasdo er ha o Vames = ( Vabes), but I could not satisfy myself as to the presence of s possibli I t cannoI t e. abu s n , tha ta tn a beforv ther s e ewa th e say ; and whether we should give the v the value of / must depend on initian whethea s lwa here t i rd whethe an , e inscriptioth r earln a s yni e wholeth n ,oneO y perhapsregare . th ma e Ogams th n de i w t , cu , e anglth f thiancienn eo o sy rougwa t h monolith, devoi l ornamenal f do - .tatio r dressingno s earla , y enoug dato ht e beforbeed ha n v eprovecte d in Goidelic into /. Lastly, I could find no certain traces of writing after pary m o trea s t rast I e thinwhol n th d wa o hovt t Goidelis an k,i e a c INSCRIPTION NORTHERE TH 9 F 34 O S N PICTS.

rather than Pictish. If it is Pictish, analogy would suggest dividing the legend into Vinon Itedov, whatever that may prove to have meant.

ABOYNE vijTH . E t STONEAboyna w no ,e Castle, Aberdeenshire. This is a fragment of a cross, and if anyone wishes to know exactly what the cross looked like he has only to go to the wood in the ground f Aboyno s e Castle, where ther s whai e s callei t a Druidicad l Circle: a little beyond stands a cross, which was brought there from a e bankth spo f n Loco so t h Kinnord, near e Dinnet th t onls No ywa . ornamentatio e crosse th samee t nth sbu e sam, th wer ef o edimensions , a sI foun placiny b d rubbiny ge Aboynm th f go e fragmen corree th n -o t sponding part of the Kinnord cross. The only difference which I noticed between the tha s formee mirroa inscriptionn m wa th a td d ha rr an o t ni , e inscriptionth o t e y latter s foune th ma b A n t o .i t o , d t whicno e har have been due to an after-thought; at any rate, it was cut after the cross had been carved, and I have read it Maqqo Talluorrnehllt Vrobbac- cennevv. e OgarnNonth f e doubtfulo e interpretatioar s th t bu , f o n their values is not certain in all instances. On the whole, I should now prefer to transliterate the legend as MaqqoTalluorrn-eliht Frob- liaccennevo, thus:

Ma q q c

———X————^-/////-»—————————X———;———————— n e h h t F r o b b a c c e n n e v v The name Frobbaecennevv is doubtless represented, in Irish at any rate, iu par thay Srobcennf b t o t figureo wh , Irisn si h legendary historyr Fo . the initial / of Early Irish appears superseded in Old Irish by s, which remains in all the later stages of the language. Similarly, the initial Earlf r 10o o v y Irish become t otherwisei t pu s o lateT ,t stili r . s /is ,a l e Ogath m s use -j-pjo wa transliteratt d- e Latit firsta t late v bu nt ,i r initially became, owin a chang o t g f pronunciationo e e symboth , r fo l e otheth rn O hand_/. , Pearl y/ having becom e symboth / r , ,s efo l namely {j-fj-, became forgotten in Ireland, so that the Book of Ballymote of the 15th century gives it as the equivalent of z, which was treated 0 35 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F O S.MA ,

as another way of writing st. The old value of //// as / was never- theless not wholly, unknown to the Picts, as we have an instance .of it to be mentioned presently; but in writing the last name on the Aboyne Stone e inscribeth , r preferred using jjj, which must have initially acquired by his time the value of /, while m appears to be here used for the sound of our v. Besides the use of -ppj- = /, there is another thing which marks this inscriptio a e comparelat s on ea n d with Early Irish Ogams o witt n equivalen, a e treatmen s ,th a q d f c o an f ;t o t this applies to other Pictish inscriptions. I regard Talluorrn as a geni- tiv f Talluorr,eo perhap contractioa s f Talluorranno n r Talluorrenn;o compary ma .bue eon t wit e shortehth r for e slonnudmth r surnamo f eo Mananna Lirc wito ma ,nt , maccu Imrame Lirn,th n i Brain Voyagr o e of Bran, edited by Professor Meyer in Nutt's Voyage of Bran, i. 24, 25. Ther es Moninndnstanzha 0 c Lir,5 a ma "Manannan f Ler,o n "so , whil e nexe callth ee sam on tth s e personage Monann macffu Lirn, rhyming with the feminine accusative Cdintiyirn ', and one cannot help regarding LirnPictisa s a h genitive here, used insteaordinare th f o d y Goidelic Lir: it forms a parallel to Talluorrn. Here may also be cited fro legen e . Andremth St f d o nam e wth e Ytlieriibufhib, mentione t pagda e 0 above r Tthem34 Fo s probabl. wa y either etymologicall genitiveya , or mad functioo et s sucha n thao e whols , th t e agglutinatio havy nma e somd ha e such a significatio ^Eternis na Servus r ^Slernio Calvus : com - pare Calvus Pain'aY = Mael Patraic, "Patrick's tonsured Man or Slave." The word ehht was discussed in my previous paper, xxvi. 275, where I identified it with the icht given in Cormac's Glossary as meaning offspring, progeny, race, whic e Norshth remindf eo wore on sd dtt, " family." But the resemblance is probably accidental: at any rate e worth d which we hav s ehJita e s presumabli a Pictisy h loan from Goidelic.1 Proceeding wit e interpretatioth h e inscriptioth f o n e w n niay next consider the.word maqqp.

Irise 1Th h ichts recentlha y been equated with Welsh earlien iaith,a r fo r with " language or speech," in a most ingenious paper contributed by Dr E. Zupitza to Meye d Stern'an r s Zeitschrift fiir celtische Philologis: . 191ii e f ZupitzI se . s i a right Irish ieht cannot be related to Norse dtt. from an earlier act-, which may be connected rather with Welsh ach, "a generatio menf no , lineage, Irisd "an h aicme, '" tribe or family." • . - - . . . . . INSCRIPTION NORTHERE TH 1 F 35 O S N PICTS.

This is the spelling of a vocable which occurs in Irish, as maccu, for instanc e namth f -Dulthachn eo i e Maccu-Lur/ir, h cen9t - e th n i tury MS. of the Book of Armagh, in that of Muirchu Maccu-Machtheni, and the Latinised name of Lasrian, to wit, Maccu-Lasrius: see Stokes's Stokes'd Goidelica,an , , 8762 86 ,s . Patrick,pp . 269-71p t CodeBu . x f Adamnan'Ho s Vita . },S dating froe beginninmth e th f o g 8th century, shows this vocable repeatedly as moeu, which is sup- ported by an ancient Irish Ogam from Ballyquin, Co. Waterford, reading Catabor Moco ViriCorl[i]. The genitive occurs as moco-i, but very rarely, the usual form being neither moeoi nor macoi, but mucoi, now and then written muccoi. The spelling in early Ogam should be mocu, with one c, as moccu would mean mocliu, but in the Latin orthography it did not much matter whether the c was single or double. So in the maqqo of the Aboyne Cross, and in the maccu of such as Maccu-Lugir, the old word muco or moco was modified under the persistent influenc e Goidelith f o e c magq, mace, r mac,o "son.n I " fact, Irish mediaeval scribes went further triedd an , , without rhymr o e reason o analysword t , ol s maccu a de c liui,eth ma c intd Jtuaan oma usually written me hua (and me Jim respectively), which they wished to regard as meaning " films nepotis." 1 If we cast about for a parallel to the Aboyne inscription, two such are foun o offet d r themselves:—(1) MaqqoTalluorrn-elilit FroUaccennevv runs nearly paralle o ancient l t Irish inscriptions wite commoth h n formula maqui mucoi. Take, for instance, the following from Dunloe, n Kerryi , Dego maqui Mocoi Toicapi " (the monumentf o f Deg o )n so ,

Stokes'e 1Se s Calendar of Oengus, . eclxxxviii.p , wher pointe eh t certaisou n pas- sages in which maccu has to be restored into the text. Some of the manuscripts, as they stand, violate the elementary rules of Irish phonology ; thus Jan. 22, me liuabcogna, should be—wer sense—y an t i e me hwambeogna, "Maccu Beogna,"and Feb, me7 . huachuind, " maccu Cuinn, stils "i l more wrong. Thes froe ear m Laud othee manuscripto th d tw r610 an , s published have undergone more careful editing, —tha sayo t s , i t more tamperin hande th t f theiga so r scribesdiscrepanciese th r fo , , servin e originao pointh t g o t t l reading, have been eliminate y writinb d a gm huibeona and me hwichuind. This was, however, by no means confined to the scribes. Take, for instance, Abban mac ua Charmaig, that is to say, A. Maccu Chormaic, mentioned by Forbes in his Kal. of Scottish Saints, p. 299, as leaving his name to KM Vie o Charmaig, "Call of Maccu Chormaic," at Keills, in Argyll. 352 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

Moco-Toicap." If we translate tlie Pictish inscription into Early Irish, substituting the genitive for the nominative, which seldom occurs,— that is to say, making Frobbaccennevv into " (the grave or monument) of Frolbaccennevv," t follows wouli a n dru s :— Frobbaccennivvi maqui Mucoi-Talluorri.

The Pictish sequence being the same as that of the words on the St. Vigean d Newtoan s n stones e principath , l name comes las Pictisn i t h but first in Goidelic, and in the former the genitive MaqqoTalluori-n precede e nouth s n governin , namelyit g , ehht, whil e nouth e n must, in Goidelic, as in Celtic generally, come before its governed genitive. Ther s herei e , however n apparena , t exceptio e perth -o t n mutation of the genitive and its governing noun, and one might at first suppose that the analogy indicated would require Talluorrn-Maqqo instea f Maqqo-Talluorrn.o d e exceptioth t Bu s onli n y apparentr fo , in the first place MaqqoTattuorr is put in the genitive, making Maqqo- Talluorrn, as a single term, governed by ehht, with which it is agglu- tinate e dnex th ;and- tn i , place, whe u analysyo n e that term into Maqqo-Talluorr, e relationshith p betwee e componenth n t word s noti s " a e genitivthanou th f whicn o to nd an he that genitive dependsn I . other words, the difference consists in Goidelic using a genitive where explaio t T admiPictisno . nit d tnecessarthis s hdi i t i , studo yt e yth use made of mooo or maccu ; and the facilities for that are chiefly afforded by Adamnan. One of the meanings of the word, as used in Goidelic, was tha f genso tr genus, o s treatei cla t i r tribeno d an sometime, s a s the equivalent of (Ml, " a division," and of corco, corcu, or corca, another word entering into tribal designations. Thus Mom Sailni = Ddl Saline (Eeeves' Adamnan, p. 29), Mocu-Themne = Corcu-Temne or Corcu-Teimne (Bk. of Armagh, 13, b, 2, 14, a, 1), Mocu Dalon = Corca Dallann (Adam- nan . 220)p , , lfocM.RwKfo DalRuintir(Adam.>= 4:7). p ,degenereBuntir = (Patrick, . 306) p d Cloclierum an , Filiorum Daimeni (Adam. . 5ii ), = . Clochar maou Doimni (Patrick, . 178p , wher s i printe t i e d Clochar mace, nDomini, t correctebu e indexth . n 622i dp , , s.v. Clochar)e th : place intende s Clogherwa d n Tyronei , t mocus alsBu wa o. appli- cabl singla o et e man Stokeo ,s s (Celtic Declension, ) think84 . p s that it- INSCRIPTION NOETHEEE TH 3 F 35 O S N PICTS.

probably meant " descendant, late th e d Bishoan " p Reeve nota s eha s concernin e nameth g s Ddl Sailni,m Sailnemo r o tha t "n i ever n yma the clan Dal-Sailrie was a mac Ui Sailne," that is to say, macu Sailne (Adam. . 29)p , n factI . , however e worth , d cannot have meant pre- cisely race, stock r clano , r descendano , t either t rac r stocbu ,o e k minus the abstraction which attaches to those terms: it was race in the strictly concrete t for go f sommt o no e e Pic d individuaTh ha t . it f o l able b racee spea o et o f th AB t o r AB'sf s o ko a r fa race,o s racr r fo eo kin as an .abstraction or something capable of being contemplated as e otheth d rseparabl an relate , dDC e , individualsfroAB mo n d ha , meaning for him : he did not think in that way. On the other hand, every individual of a clan was an incarnation of the kin or race : he was not of tlie kin of AB—he was kin AB; and when you had counted all the individuals reckoned ha u whole yo ,dth e kinabstraco t n ther ,s bu ewa t comprehensivd an f speakino e wholy th ewa f go e kin. This looks very e difficultsubtleth t bu , y arises fro r habimou f expressino t r meanou g - abstracn i g in t terms d fror helplessnesan ,mt ou i o d o t sy whetr e nw without theme differencTh . e betwee Pictise nth h ane Celtidth y cwa of thinkin s regarda g s this matter wil seee b lt oncna lookiny eb w gho Adamnan deals with tribal names of the kind here in question; and this leads me to the other parallel to be mentioned. ) Sometime(2 leavee sh e tribath s l name incompletely translateds a , in Laisranus mocu-Moie, "Laisran kin Min," and Lugbeus mocu-Min, "L. kin Min" (i.. 18, 15). At other times he Latinises and becomes more abstracs languagehi n i t s whea ,e latteth n s i describer s a d Lugbeus, gente mocu-min, "L., by race Moccu Min " (i. 24, 28), and so frequently. Similarly n Tirechan'i , s text, publishe Stokes y b dhi n i s Patrick (p. 306), we find certain individuals mentioned as being de genere Runtir;e f Pictisthinkino th y t hbu wa g lefo roo n r tany mfo - thing correspondin genusd prepositione th an , o gt by Buntir r o e sd would have been e originalneareth o t r . Taking Runtir, howevere b o t , genitive, and Bunter nominative, the literal rendering would be genus e relationshiRunter.th r Fo f appoo e p -betweeon wordo s tw e swa nth sition, Jcin Hunter. So the Aboyne inscription put into Adamnan's language woul e Frobbaccennevvb d gente Mocu-Talluorri s alreadA y VOL. XXXII. Z 354 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1893.

suggested there is nothing in the inscription to represent the force of the ablative ; still this is a closer parallel than the other, as the meaning of ehht was probably that of gens and not of jttius, especially if one may regard ehht as a Pictish word borrowed from the Goidelic ioht, " race, tribe, offspring." The distinction indicated above between Pictish and Celtic is im- portant to bear in mind as the key to some of the apparent anomalies kine i nth f surnam do e her questionn ei e firs th t n I place usuas .i t i , l n agglutinativ a e cas f th eo n i e languag nouno tw apposition r i s efo o nt have the case characteristic only used once, namely, at the end of the agglutination n otheI . r terms vocable ,th e following moco, moccu, would alone hav e casth ee ending, while moco than i t position coul t havdno e any such exponent Adamnao S . n never decline s moccu,hi s wherean si the Ogams of the south of England, of Wales, and of Ireland, it mostly occurs in the genitive, as mucoi after the word for son. That looks as t i shoul , sincbe d e Adamna r removes probablfa nwa o s n timt i d yno e or place from Pictish as the Ogam writers of the south of both islands. Onothee th . r hand Celta , s sucha , , wouls muca e hb d tempte mako dt e the noun following mocu end in the genitive as a Roman would be to say genus Adrasti, r genso Tarquinorum. o Adanman'S s tribal names beginning with moccu usually end in the genitive, regardless of the case of the leading name, as when he heads a chapter (i. 41) De Erco fure MocuDruidi. e cas th f Goidelie o n I c inscription n whici s e genitivth h f moco e o occurs, it is needless to say that the noun following is usually put in the genitive; but even in the single instance known for certain of the nominative, namely^ Catabor moco Viri-Oorb1 . . ., the noun Viri fol- lowing is in the genitive. This construction with moco followed by a name dependent on it in the genitive case, I have already treated as Goidelic, and the Pictish as that of two nouns in apposition. This inscription a y seemborne b stona b t n o t st Dunloneo ou a e Kerryn ei ,

• Unfortunatel inscriptioe yth imperfects ni , sinc t breakei s off afte Ogae th rr mfo 1 thao cannoe 6s , on twhethe y sa t r casa Cor d e bendinha Corbi,n i s ga which occurs elsewhere. In later Irish Viri-Corb- becomes Fir-Chorb, nominative Fer-Corb, " Corb's Man,'1 oftener than Fir-Chwirb and Fer-Cuirb respectively. INSCRIPTION NORTHERE TH 5 F 35 O S N PICTS.

which reads in Ogam Maqui-Ttal maqui Vorgos maqui Mucoi-Toicac, and means " (The Stono f Mac-Tailo ) f f VorgosMucoo o n n so ,-so , Toicac." Though it was meant to be Goidelic, the construction is that agglutinativn oa f e language gooa n i d s a man, y other instances. Thus tlie leading name is MaquiTtal, which should, in correct Goidelic, be MaquiTtali (later Meic Thail), but the i is only put on at the end of the agglutinate apposition group MaquiTtal-maqu-i: according to the same analogy, Vorgos-maqu-i probabl ye Goideli th stand r fo cs genitives Vorgossos maqui " Fergusii filii t whe ";e inscribebu th n re camth o t e end, wher e shoulh e d have written muco-Toicac-i, t feet no a l d di e h liberty to depart from the common formula maqui mucoi, so he wrote mucoi Toicac, where he might have produced correct Goidelic by making t i into Mucoi Toicaci, n anotheo s a r ston t Dunloeea e considereH . d that muco Toicacd an wer n appositioni e d entitlean , onlo cast e d yon e termination: thus, althoug e felh t boun attaco t dd muco,o t di t hi e h t thin stil s synta e no Toicaco lt th necessart kwa i t i s wellxs d a Hi ad . yo t of an agglutinative language, though his phonetics may be supposed to have becom ejudgy Goidelicma ee fro w e fac f mi th , t tha s Toicachi t s i modificatioa non-Goidelia f no c Toicap e genitiv th : e Toicapi occurn so another of the Dunloe stones. The name is probably that which was sounded f latewrittei s a r n Taoigheag Taeghag,r o though spelled for some unascertained reason Tadcc, Tade, Tadg, Tadhg : see O'Donovan's Irish Grammar, p. 9. Another instance of Irish changing p into c is Dinisp •— infragmentara y Ogam from Coolineagh . CorkCo ,n i , which occurs later in the name Cu-Dinisc; not to mention a whole group of Irish words like caisc, "Easter," from pasclia, and the like. Maccu r mocoo mutate e namsth e r instancfollowinfo s a than , ei it g t of the blind magician of Ossory given in the Book of Leinster, fo. 290a, as Dfl mac hii Chrecga, and in the Book of the Cow, fo. 546, as mo hui Creca for me hui Chreca. The case is the same with corcu, corco, or corca, regarde meanins da g offsprin r progenyo g n Coreai s a , Dliuibhne, Anglicised Corkaguiny, in Kerry. The oldest form is korku, in Adamnan's Korkureti, , whic47 . i h some would identify wit hlatea r Corca RaidJie, Anglicised Corkaree, e nama baronth f o en Westmeathi y . Possibly regardee mocob corcod y an involvinma s da e samgth e finat l I r u.oo 356 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

likelys i , however havo t , e been rathe rr u, uo wit strese hth s accenn o t it. At any rate this would help to explain the later analysis into mac hui and corca ui, with the accent on Jiui and ui followed by the muta- tion consonant. Lastly analoge th , f mocu yo corcud an appear havo st e been strong enoug influenco ht e syntath e mac,f xo ", grand son,6 d "-an Dhomhnaitt,c ma n i sons a , "Donnell's Fhearghail,son,6 d "an "Ferghail's grandson," where the general rule would require mac Domhnaill and 6 Fearghail, which in fact would be obligatory in Irish in the case of the words when used as a slonnud or family : see O'Donovan's Irish Grammar, p. 56, where he gives the latter as Mac Domhnaill and 0'Fearghail. In Manx Gaeli e mutatiocth stils ni l more widespreads a , in mac Yee, " son of God," and mac Ghavid, " David's son"; not to mention that most Manx surnames begin with c or k, as in CorJcish for Mac Fhorcais, "So f Fergus,no Kermode d Dhiarmota,c "an Ma r fo "Son of Dermot somewhad " an ; t similarl Scotcn yi hcase Gaelicf th e o n i s a , Mac Dhughaitt Shimic Ma d respectivelyan possibls i t I . e tha sucn i t h surnames, mac has, by confusion, more or less extensively taken the place of maccu, as, for instance, in the case of the ancient monastery of Clonmacnois, which is known to have been originally Cluain mac.cu Nois (written Cluain mcunois), called later Cluain mic Nois:

make unusuan a s l combination, meaning Dulinris e madw f i Core,e t bu it into Corcu Duibne it would seem probable that it might be a slonnud, and thae mighw t t rende t synonymousli r y Maceyb u Duibne,n "Ki of Dubinn, e fore-nam"th e being n thai , t case, unrecorded. Similarly in the case oi-Mae i Iferndin, A.D. 1150, for Maccu liherndin, more commonly known withou e mace th s tO'h-J/ernain: a e Fourth e se Masters, A.D. 1047 and 1150.

viii. THE GARDEN t STONELogia w eno , Elphinstone e Gariochth n i , , Aberdeenshire. I have been again studying this stone, chiefly in rubbings and photo- graphs submitted to me by Lord Southesk and Mr Nicholson. The supposed Ogam is drawn on a small circle made near the top of the stone, and the writing shows two empty spaces, the bigger of which occurs in the part of the circle which I may call the north-west, while the lesser space is situated diametrically opposite. These spaces seem to mark the reading off into two pieces, and if we begin from the north- west space and read towards the right round the top, we seem to have e followinth g Ogams :— 11II 1 J—H C a l_t Ha d b ho bat I should have no strong objection to its being read Hadbho Colt; but scoree e contrar th th reae l sar n al i df y direction e resulth , s Obhlabi t Vdas r Vdaso Obhlab, neithe f whico r h seem o t havs e anythino t g recommen e sequence scorth e soundth f th o en f o o et sd i concerned. casy eI an hav notioo n I n e n wha whole th t e means conceivabls i t i : e that it was not intended to be read as letters at all, but merely regarded rathe sora f magicas o ta r l figure thin I s. respece t th remindi t f o e son amber bead describe . Brash'Mr n di s boo . 321k(p , plate xli. havins )a g eight Ogam letters writte a lint roun n ecu no s circumference dit . This curious objec s sincha t e been trace y Lorb d d Southesk o sucwh -, ceeded, if I am not mistaken, in identifying it in the British Museum. I mentio possibles ni t thii s sa , tha circle suggestes th t eshapwa e th y edb of certain talismans like the amber bead: the inscribe! would have 8 35 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F .O SMA ,

found it considerable labour to cut an Ogam all round the Logie stone, an sparo dt e himself that havy troublma e e thougheh smala t l circln eo a smooth spot near the top of the stone would do equally well. But a line of writing round the stone can hardly have been the original idea: we have something more primitive than this suggested in the Irish story of Tain Bo Cuailnge, namely, a withy, a wooden ring or collar placed round the top or the narrow part of a pillar stone or menhir. In the Tain, Ciichulainn cuts dow brancna trea formd f ean h o t int i s orina g desireofthe d dimension singla sat e stroke writeand , Ogaan s itmon ; but what is said of his skill in accomplishing his object at one stroke is probably to be regarded as a partial inversion by the storyteller of some obligatory custom, thae collath t r y e elaborateshoulb an t n i no d r o d way highly finished e placTh e. d s thicallewherdi wa s e dh e Carn Cuilen therd an , e stoo dcoirthea menhir o r e spototh ne kneh : w that froe weste fo m th e ,th Ailil Maived an l , with their armies, would have to pass by on their way to surprise Ulster; so, to delay them whilst he gave notice Ultoniansth o et wrote h ,e ring Ogan th a e , n mwhico e h menhire collaa th purpore s e Ogaa n the Th o thath s rt .mnf se wa to t the invaders should not venture to pass by until they had found a mail to produce a ring in the same way as the Ultonian champion had done. It was explained to them, by an experienced leader and magician, tha f thei t y disregarde ringe dth , there woul e deat b dd bloodshe an h d among them befor nexe th e t morning thatd an , , thoug t werhi e heln i d one's han house a r locke o dn i e rin p th ,d u g woul t fai joio dt no m l nhi who wrot Ogae consequence eth it.n mTh o 1 thas ewa t Ailill toos khi army anothe a longe d an r way, which gave Ciichulain e timth ne eh wante waro dt friends ns cominghi it f o s . Carn Cuilen, wit s menhirhit , was probably a spot made sacred by the burial there of somebody, possibly.of the Cuilen from whom it was named; and it reminds one of buriae th l mound r cairn so s e expected cas th whico wa set e n i on hs a , caire oth f n formerly existin Gorffwysfan Pe t ga Pase th f Llanberis so n i , ,

1 Thu t woulsi d seem that misfortune resulted from meddling wit ringe d hth an , that the Ogam on the ring identified it with the writer of it, who wished to benefit e incidenTh . it t wil y foune b b l d relatefae-simile th n Booke n di th Du f e eo o th f Cow (p. 57), and in that of the Book of Leinster (p. 5SJ). • INSCRIPTION E NORTHERTH F 9 O S35 N PICTS.

Snowdoe inth n distric f Norto t hstona Walesd n passingi ead o t , f i , one wished to reach one's journey's end unmolested. Among other places these coirthi or menhirs stood near the homes of important familie n facti : s , their presenc ancienn i e t Irelano s s i d taken for granted in the stories that no account is given of them or e purposoth f e which they answered. The e simplyar y introducey b d e definitth e lef f o makthemear t o t e articlen s w ea ,ca whad e an , w t in the following incident, also given in the Tain:—Cdchulainn, on the takins hi f o g armsy da , wishe distinguiso dt h himsel slayiny b f g certain foes of his race, so he careers over the boundary and orders his charioteer to make for the fortress of the Throe Sons of Nechta Scene,1 for that was the name of their mother. Having arrived near it, he descends, takes e collath r ofcoirthee fth pillar-stonr o castd e an t int s i strea e oth m flowing pas carro t t y away, and thee coirthe reste th n fallh d y sb an s asleep while waitine Sonth f Nechtr o s gfo a Scen como t e e fort figho ht t with him. designedld Thuha e sh y insulted the removiny mb rine gth g mene ofth f - hirthar fo describe,s ti s collda ngisse themo t , which migh Englishee b t d a violatiosa f tabno u affecting them n otheI . r words t bodei , d evio t l them, which speedily came upon them at the hands of Cuchulainn, who carried their heads away to his friends at home.2 Lastly, I may say that on s i remindee e Ogam-inscribeth f o d d stone yearw founo fe ag sa d e e coursexcavation th th e Roma f th n e i o sit f th o e n n o stow f o n Calleva at Silchester, in Hampshire. It has a sort of neck or narrow part round which a wreath or torque may have been placed. Other asso-

1 It is more exactly speaking in the genitive throughout the text of the Book of the Dun, but once in a marginal gloss the nominative is given as Nechtan Scene, Booke whilth n ei o f Leinster throughous i t i t Nechtain Scene,nominative th s a e does not seem to occur. 2 The incident is related in the Book of the Dun (p. 62a), and in the Book of Leinster (p. 66). The latter version differs from the other in several important respects : (a) t explaini sgreee thatth n o ,befor dun,e th e coirthethera s ewa wit hrina irof go n t makeI ) roun(b s Cuchulain. dit arms hi t s rounnpu coirthee dth carrd an , rin yit g and all, as it was, and throw it into the river, (c) The ring had an Ogam on it, stating that it was tabu for any warrior to enter the green without openly offering fightl o thit Al s. sounds decidedly later tha briefee nth r descriptio Booke th f o n ni the Dun, and it comes nearer to certain passages with which one sometimes meets e Romancesth n i Booke th Eiinn e i : o Ogath fo n mmentiones i thin di s connection. 360 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

«_^ ciations suggested by 'the menhi collard an r , K, ;^ and the peculiar shape of the Silchester stone, —--^ • need not he mentioned, and I have dwelt so a, ^5 long on this class of monuments only because a —;? ? the circle of Ogams oh the Logie stone may ^ perhaps be regarded as belonging to it. ' ' -^T I may, however, add that I. am inclined regaro t e pillar-stonedth , wit collas hit d _ _ an r K, *!~~ Ogam s continuea , modifiea n di de forth n mi _J— remarkable group of crosses in South Wales § — ,_ characterised by the formula that "A.B. pre» — pared this cros animao pr s dnimao pr sua r o „ ^ C.D.," or for both. It happens that most of ~^ the e wheemar l crosse r ino s somciry -ewa „, ~ cular, so that the collar or Ogam circle may e dul b e sai b yo t d represente Weste se d: - — \ wood's Lapidarium Wallix, plates , 3—710 , ^ ^ 14,16,18,22.

ix. THE SHEVACK STONE, at Newton, deenshire. n passinI g throug e Gariocth h I hcoul d not help breakin journey m g y at'Insch, in orde havo t r e another loo t thika s well-known stone, though I hardly expected to get any fres e hlettering th ligh n o I trea . d the Ogam much as before. Beginning at the end, I may say that I d beeha n influence a squeeze th y b df o e Oga rea mo last e dth t consonan anrs t a t bu ; ***' ^^ on examining it again I should have rather said that it made it possible to read r. On looking carefully, however, on the stone for thscoreh e5t I ,hav e faile fino dt d it ; there havy ma .e bee nlittla abovg e ta e fleaseth s ga INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 361"

it were the beginning of a 5th score; but I should rather regard, that aa ssor f stopo t , I takjus e obliqus a th et e .mark, whic s someha h - times been taken for an. h, at the- beginning of the fleasg to. have been mean indication a s a t n thareadine th t g is then continue differena n do t line from that preceding morm a eI .convince d than ever thae th t inscriber mean o havt t e ende e inscriptioth d e naturath n no l anglf eo the stone, and that he actually wrote there Iddaiqnnn Vorrenn Ipuai 0; but that, findin lettersuco lasn e i , th tw gthrouga o , si d irregula han r part of the edge, he resolved to turn back and continue the Ogam on . ano Anothe e artificiath d re-wrote r an h l conjecture i lino e s e: th e , which would come to the same thing, -would be, that the stone was or was groune ie nth b o t d rather deeper thanows i tha t d ni inscribere ,an th t , finding he could not finish on the edge, the i and the o were partly erased o neae groundto th e rwhols a Th m .e hi migh y b t accordingle b y represented thus: iddaiqnnnvorrennipua i&iosif. Or thus:— iddaiqnnnvorrennipua\_i o\iosif.1

One of the difficulties of this, as of some other Pictish inscriptions, is tha f distinguishino t g between vowel d consonantsan s: thu readinn si g iq rather than rq I must confess to being more or less influenced by e otheth r lettere stoneth n s,o namely. it face scripe f th th o e , n o t With regard to this more difficult kind of writing, I can hardly do more than pick from previous attempt othery b s d byan smysel f what seems to me the most probable reading, and attempt more especially to represent by the same letters the characters which appear to me to be identical:— supposee ar deriveLettere 5 b , 4 o dt , 1 sd fro e charactemth t JE.,bu r looks almose probablar . 1 t 2 F Nos lik , yn 3 a e, rounded .2 an s T' d e las th kindt y n line i an t D' , f , no s,o whil 44 whic. eNo h affects capitals more, is a capital T. Nos. 6, 19, 23 have been supposed to be C, though the gap in the circumference is in the upper part; but letter 19

1 It is tempting, I must confess, to read it iddaiqnnn vorrenn ipuai iosifa.\\&. to fancy we have here a form of the name Joseph; but ipuai Oiosifis also possible. 2 36 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH 9 Y , F 1898O SMA , .

has been . Nicholson, Mr rea y Ba db I hardl. y think, however, that the difference between it and No. 6 is sufficient to warrant that dis- tinction. Nosa rudimentar e , 3 see9b 7 3 ., o mt witN y s anglehit s e lasroundeth t d liman d b merelye indicatedar 1 4 , 15 . , Nos10 , 8 . supposed to.be a kind of v or u rather resembling a Y in appearance, and No 2 probabl1 . samee th s ,yi thoug t hi rathe r resemble, 32 . No s which seems to be a U with its sides produced divergently downwards, givin t somewhagi e appearancwitU th t a h s i n H a 3 , 4 f whil eo . No e closep otheto n i joine e de : Te ar Jrth p th linewords dto f o sinte th ,o

5 "f

37-

one continuous line. withouA Nos d e an crose ar r .th 6 t s2 1ba , 14 ,2 -with the angle at the top rounded; and I am inclined to think that t mor bu e als, ear A o elaborate5 4 , Nos42 p wide.to , wjte r th han d partly angular t I must. , howevere ar e admitted b ,5 4 d ,an tha2 4 t among the most difficult of all to identify : they may possibly be both E, but other values have also been assigned to them. No. 13 resembles s pretti a4 look n1 d . Irisyan s certainl, No somewhahp . r n ya t like a G of the reaping hook form, or- a sort of broken s. Nos. 16, ,18, INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 363

2 ther a 2 e cas s f th i eo e n i t bu , 0 l al appea0 e 4 b , o t r38 , 22 , 20 natura stone l th lin en e i whic h make e letteth s r look somewhat likea Greek 0. Nos. 17 and 37 are the same, and somewhat like a Greek A : they probably stand a variether s e a eswastikf Ji.th o y s i No 5 a2 . treatee b whic o t ds hi perhap crossa s sa , 7 perhap2 . doubla No s sa . es looks an E, but as there is a natural groove running horizontally at its witL possibl y s bacn it ha ma bask. s e i F yNo on e8 s treaa 2 . t i t curved backwards. Nos. 29, 31, 36 are I without any elaboration of the ends. No. 31 is nearly straight; 36 is less so and 29 is short and curved towards the L. No. 30 is a long, gently curved S. No. 34 looks like a Hebrew lamed, but it probably is a kind of 5, and No. 35 looks liks probabl a sore wa f recumbeno t ti yt bu intende , S t r fo d t quit no mors i es i t i like 9 ; , 3 e151 . 10 4 Nos, anothe, 8 No . . 5 r open rathed an , r resemble wit P e horizontaa sth h p l to portio s it f no wanting t it'wabu ; s possibly mean thar fo t t consonant. firsBeyono tw t e linesdth , these guesse f vero e y sar littl e valued an , I wish I could accept Mr. Nicholson's reading of the other four lines, whic considere h e Latinb o t s , meanin bonom cu g voto dn -\- Mvdisi, Unggi novofactum.1 In any case, the arrangement of the lines on the stone would see mo indicatt firso etw t thae lineth t s forme separata d e afterthoughn a o inscriptiont raty e ean du f t thao e s a rest th r twa t o , some kind. "We are helped by the parallel between the first two lines e Ogam th scripbeyone d d oth an f, an t dstil m thaa l I unablt. go o et Provisionally e mighon , t guess ^Ettce aicnvn Yarn o mean—t Here lies Vaur, whil e Ogaeth m Iddaiqnnn Vorrenn ipuai Osif migh renderee b t d —Here lies Vaur's nephew (or sister's son) Osif. But on duly con- sidering that we can point to no certain instance of the formula hie iacet or any variant of it on any other Pictish stone, and that no trace of that formula occurs in any Ogam whatsoever in Ireland, Wales, or England, it seems safer to suppose that what we have at most, in Pictish inscriptions e ainm, th consist r ) personao (a f o s l e namth f eo e ainma paren th a deceasedremotef ) o r o (6 t d r an , relative th n o e mother's side, together with (e) the slonnud or family surname added

1 The last word would look somewhat more possible as novovacta or nofovacta, for novofacta. Unggi looks like Norse ungi following a name, as in Hdkon Ungi. 364. PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

to either ainm or both. Accordingly, we should translate, provisionally, followss a :— jEttas JEanun Vavr. Kin Ecnun Vaur. Allowing for the order of the agglutinated words, this would be' approximately in Adamnan's usual formula, Vaur Moccu-Ecnun, " Vaur f Ecnun,o n ki " whil e Ogaeth m woule db Iddaiqnnn Vorenn ipuai Osif. Kin-Ecnun Vaur's nephew Osif. That is, analogously treated, Osif nephew of Vaur Moccu-Ecnun. Before leaving this Ogam, I wish to make some remarks on ipuai. s alreadha t I y been pointe t tha have dou w t e anothe rsame forth f emo word in the ipe in iv., and in my previous article I identified it with n Ogaa poi n mi from Ballintaggart, . Cork.Co , reading Broinienasi po NetaTtrenalugos " (The Stone) of Broiniu's Nephew, Champion of Tren- lug "; but there is room for hesitation as to how much of the legend wen e firsmako t th muct w tp e secondeu nameho th h thn d O ean ,. whole, however, as neta (more correctly nettd) seems to be the crude- stem form of a word which was in the genitive, nettas, with a nominative ne (for * netts), later Irish niaih, nia respectively, we have probably to construe thus:— Broinienas poi Neta-Ttrenalugos,1 Broiniu's nephew Netta-Ttrenalugos. 1 As to the Ogam for p, one may say, in the first ]>lace, that the Ogmie alphabet, being Goidelic, had no occasion for p, and that when Latin, Brythonic, or Pictish writtene wordb o t s d ,wit therha hp e appear havo t s e been some hesitatioa o t s na symbol. In South Wales it is found to have been x and /T\ (both written on e B th side representinn i ) n Ogagi m names derived from Turpilius Pompeius.d an The x so placed appears once in Ireland, in the Pictish genitive Erpenn, and I have found A\ lac'mipoi,n i both bein e e edge th £ sidTh g f .e place o e th n do ordinary Irish rule, however, was to use x placed on the edge, as in the case of e Pictisth h ipuai: more correctly speaking I shoul, d perhaps have said that this l eventsal rulee t th A I ,canno.e camb o et lonte -i n follonth gru wy tr thoso ewh to distinguish between the values of these symbols by making some of them into p othere th d s an intindebtem a o r I WhitlesomD . o t dc e r kinfa o cy f Stokedo r sfo a suggestion, that the Ttr of Neta Ttrenalugos, pronounced thr,i • comes from str: compar case ecathirf th eo 'a tow r e wholcity.o n Th e' name would thus analyse itself into Nettas-Trenalugos beginning with the genitive nettas. - INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 365

Of late, several instances mor f poio e liave been brough ligho t ty b t Fathe . Macalisterr Mr Barr e havstoned w w yan no ed s an ;readin s ga follows :— t DonardA Wicklo. Co , w :Ia inipoic maqui Mo[coi .... qu At Legan Castle, Co. Kilkenny : Labbipoi maqqui Muccoi Bria. 1 ~u ?~ e At Ballyboodan . do CorMpoi . do , maqui Labnatt. . . At Ballintaggart, Co. Kerry : Nettalminaccapoi maqqui Mucoi Do[v . . Mr. Macalister, in.' this last instance, reads at the end Dot), which e verh y naturally regarde beginninth e ancestress's th a s f o g s name in the genitive, Dovinia(s); and in the previous inscription I had formerly read Corbidai, re-examinat'ioa t bu e stonth f e o n with Father Barr Mrsd yan . Rhy 1896n si , convince Corbipois thae i dm t i t " Corb's- poi, let us say Corb's Boy or Nephew." For it will be seen that in all these instances poi is followed by maqui, whence it is to be concluded tha i form e po tpreviou th a pars f o t s namee comparisoTh .i po f o n with the original Pictish ipuai seems to show that the word was not a genitive, though it readily lent itself to that construction in Goideli a sor paralleof tas c mucoi,to l thatand ,not furtherwas it , accented on the first syllable, but ipudi or ipuai. Hence, partly, its decapitated form of poi in Goidelic, as in Broinienas poi; but this was also helpe frequentls it y db y following genitives endin vowela n gi , such as Corbi and Nettalminacca,1 whence Corbi'poi and Nettalminacca'poi. What the vowel omitted may have been, I do not feel very certain, but doubtless wa t i obscurn a s e I oneshoul d ,an e mor b d e inclineo t d I analyse this into N e-Ttalminacc[i]a[s], with the nominative »J, and I identify 1 e seconth d part wit e namhth e Talamnach r Tolamnach),(o genitive Talamnaigh (with its declension changed, as in the-case o'f DuUhach, DuUhaigh for. earlier Dutthaich, Dubthaige): see the Four Masters, A.B. 645, 717 ; Stokes's Annals of Tigernach in the Revue Celtique, xvii. • 189, 228 ; and Hennessy's Chronicuin Scotorum, A.D. 717, which shows this nam procesn ei s of' being oustebettee th y drb know e of non Tomaltach . • MacalisteMr . r wishe o reat s d NettalaminaccaI t bu , have examined the stone lately and found that his second a has no room left for it. 366 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

represent it as a than as 1 in tlie case of the Picts of South Britain and of Ireland, from whom one must suppose it to have survived into the Ogam inscriptions mentioned, thoug n Scotlani h t begini d s witn i i h ipe and ipuai. It is also worth noting that possibly we have it, or a nearly kindred word, occurring initially in such, names as Apevritti: on another Ballintaggart stone, and Apilogdo or Apiloggo .... on a stone from Minard, in the same county. But in this view I am also influenced considerabl groua y yf whab po I tcanno t help regardin purels ga y Pictish names survivin Welsh,n gi with apui, later dbwy, e suc th s thaa hf o t clerical witness variously called in the Book of Dav Guor-apui, Guor-abui, Guor-habui, Gur-al>ui, Gur-aboi, Gur-poid an (pp. 199, 200, 202, 205, 207, 209, 210), beside layman'sa s name, Guerabne . 210)(p , which is doubtless to be corrected into Guerabue or Guernabe. The latter would be a form of a name which occurs otherwise in the same manuscript as Guern-apui and Guern-abui (pp. 75, 77, 80, 164, 166), t to no mention Guen-opoui . 163)(p spellina , e samth f eg o namea r o , similarly formed one, such as Guin-abui (p. 122), and the later feminine Gwen-abwy (lolo. MSS., p. 117). To these maybe added Hun-apui 1 I am not certain whether this is. to be analysed Ape-Vritti or Apev-Bitti, but the latter has the advantage of equating naturally with Maqu-Eitti, later Macrith or Mac-rith: see Stokes's Lismore Lives of Saints (p. 171) and his 3 M. Irish Homilie . 98)(p s . Mac-nth seem o implt s y some suc ha Pictis h nams ea Rittm-Apev, -which had first its syntax made Goidelic by changing the place of the genitiv thed s declensioean n it n also. Thus arose Apev secone Jiitti,th d d an chang e was to translate Apev into Mac, which, however, need not necessarily be considered to have meant t son,meani s jusy a - mucs assumee a bo tb r moresame y o h Th ma e.d to have beehistore th nreadine Api-Logdf uncertaith o yo s t s gi bu . n . o thaI t dar t suggeseno Lugacla c e liketh Ma t r :o 31ac-Lugdech seems phonetically inad- missible. In the case of the CorbVpoi already instanced, we have the original Tictish, excepting that Corbi is Goidelic in its case ending, standing, as it does, for some suc hPictisa h genitiv s Corbena e rate y r Corbin.e exteno e an th , th t f A o t erro rbeneate whicli y hma h this guess canno considerablee b t havee w t seems i ,, a s exace th , t totranslatiome nam a t wit n ni me eh more than onc Irisn ei h Ogams: to wit, Macorbi, which is probably to be analysed into ftfaqua-Corbi or Maqu- Corbi : later MacCorb occurs as a man's name (Book of Leinster, fo. 55

and lun-abui, Latinised as Jun-apeius, Jun-apius (pp. 73, 164-5, 192, laten 275)i d r Welsan ; h Ekon-dbwy. f theseo l ,Al excep t Guor-apui or Gur-poi, hav e firseth t par ttha o e s seeendin , w t havn mo t n n i gi e Guin or Gwen, Guern, Hun, Inn, and Ehon, ancient Pictish genitives. But Gurapui is interesting as having the variant Gurpoi with the same shortenin e Earlth n yi Iriss ga h Corbi-poi, arid wha mors i t e unexpected still e samth , foune b kin Armorican o i f dfort d o s me i th wito n t ,i , e well-knownamth f o e n Breton e nintkingth f ho , century, Eiispoe. This analyses itself into poe = Goidelic poi, and Eris = the Goidelic Airis, genitiv man'a f o es name Aires, which occur GUIn i s Airisd an Domnach Airis (Book of Leinster, fo. 326cZ, 353cZ, 356a, 363c); Eres occurs also in the Book of Llan Dav (p. 188). Unless I am altogether mistaken, these instances of Pictish vocabulary, surviving, whether in ready-made Pictish names Brythonicised, or in an adapted Goidelic formula, place the question of the permanence of the Pictish people, whateve s origi it y havr ma ne been a ver n yi , striking light.

x. THE DYKE STONE, in Brodie Park, Morayshire. Septemben i Ony eda r 1897, opportunitn a d 1ha f re-examininyo e gth stone from Dyke, now in Brodie Park. My previous readings of this stone were largely guesswork guessemy sbut , this time diffe somto r e extent from them, and may be represented approximately as follows:— -m-Wrr--U--- r r n o n n t a h u m

• The first vowel is at the very base of the stone, as it now stands, and it may have had another score which has been broken off; and in the other directio I ncoul d gues o letterinn s y furtheran g , though there probabl bees yha n some.

/ / 1 O\J HI!_ I Mi Il/ I IiI! 111 J J \ ) uiT~~717II I I 1177! I 1" ~ • - o q h o t h h an m nag

The first consonant is at the base, and probably has lost one score, and '368 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

there seems to have been more writing above the q a: I jotted down •Ogams makin I plac las,t m relianc o ebu a n gl themn eo .

(3) o. a I i m u t t o

The'vowel score at the bottom is distinctly visible, though it escaped me othee th manw r ho timey t morbu , e ther havy ema bee nI canno t tell. principae Th l contributio f thino s monumen name th s ei t Eddarrnonn or Eddarrnon, whic hI regar anothes da r spellin name th ef go whic hI have represented as Ehtarrnonn on the Scoonie Stone. Of the rest I can make nothing.

xj. THE KILMALY STONE, in. the Duke of 's Museum at •Duurobin, Sutherlandshire. I hav t seeeno n this monument sinc eI wrot t beforei f t I.haveo bu , e before me a photograph of it and Mr. Nicholson's reading. The follow- ing are the guesses which I now. prefer to Allhhallorr edd Maqq Nuuvvarreirng, e lasth t reading suggeste formey m n di r paper :—

The gap occurs where an iron cramp is fixed to hold the stone in its present position in the museum, and the edge has been damaged at that point, how /ir.when J.do not know. Mr. Nicholson -reads Uvvarrecch as a spelling INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 369

e Gaelioth f c adjective uaibhreach, " prou dt eccJi "bu ; wilt e filth no ll space, and there is no reason to suppose that the gap is original; not to mention that the inclination of the scores is not that of c or li, judging from all the others on the h side: they distinctly slope like the r's. If the iron cramp were removed and the stone examined in a good light, possibl e spawyth l migh e founb t o havt d e left enough e traceth f o s score o shot s w their directio o decido enablt t e d eon ean n between r e abbreviatioTh . i d an n mqqr maqq s firsfo . wa t Mr pointey b t ou d Nicholson, t proveandi f i , s correct indication e seea w ,hav t mo i t n ei n of the comparatively late date of the inscription. The Irish manuscript Cown Du , e writteBooe th o th ff t klateo nno r tha e yeanth r 1106s ha , me for mac commonly enough; hut at what time the abbreviation first appears, I am unable to say. e legenTh d divides itself int owordo M'qqtw r so befor wite on h e e formeth an d I rwoul an afte , it dr analyse into Allhliallorr edd,a proper name. followeSt e identifiee b th edd,y b o n dt o t det wit e th h Vigeans Stone. As to the name, it is to me obscure, though at first sight it looks as if it ought to turn out to be Norse; but I have found n tenabloy cluan o et e theore pointth n y.o What follow Goidelie th s c m'qq should doubtlesgenitive th n i e regardee sb b case d an , intendes da d to be wholly or partly Goidelic itself. It is altogether so obscure, how- ever, thae cannoon t t feel certain whethe o reat r d Nuuvvarre r Irfo Nuuwarr Eirf, not to mention the alternative guesses as to doubtful letters. But with Nuuvvaire one might compare an obscure vocable Nufra in Firnufra, genitive of Fernufra, in a pedigree in the Book of Ballymote, fo. 122j, and conclude after the analogy of names like Fer Tlachtga, " Man of (the goddess or woman) Tlachtga," that Nufra was also a name. It is further possible that Irf is to be identified wit name hth e Hirp which occur n Cafhmoli s me e Bodle Hirpth n i y MS., Laud 610, fo. 95^. Compare Yrp in the Welsh Triads, i. 40 = ii f tha. o 5, n t1 namwherma e e eth appear strangea e b outwit o o st wh r s

1 This triad as given in the Red Book of Hergest (Oxford, Mabinozion, p. 298) is deservin noticf go e als accounn oo e followin th f o t g name it:—n i s A gcrennaynwyn- a gwanar- veibon "ftiaa uab ntryfre. Ac aryanrot verch veli eu mam. Ar gayr Tiynny o ercTi a Tided pann anhoedynt '' And Gwenwynwyn and Gwanar, sons of A 2 VOL. XXXII. 0 37 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F O .SMA ,

the Welsh e musH .t have bee nPicta Gael, a ,Norsema a r o n: Nors e literature mentions men of the name Erp more than once: see the Corpus Poeticum. 6 , , 2 5 8. 56 Boreale, ii ; , 51 . i The interpretation has difficulties of its own and of the same nature as those of the St. Vigeans inscription, turning on the particle edd. For among other things it may mean and or for. But the argument against t morpu e e formee b stronglth y . Vigeanma rSt ye th thas n casi n eo :n Ogam inscription whatsoever in Ireland, Wales, or England is known to have been intende commemorato dt e more individuals thano oneS . I take the edd to have meant for, and so I translate Allhhallorr for Mgq Nuuvvarre irf, that is, Allhhallorr put up the cross for McN.

xij. THB KEISS STONE, from Keiss, near Wick, in , now in the Edinburgh National Museum. When staying at Aberlour in September 1897, Mr. J. E. Findlay told e stonth mf eo ediscovere . BarrMr f Keisy o db s Castle gived an ,y nb him to Dr. Anderson for the National Museum in Edinburgh : a little later I went to the Museum to see it. Now that Dr. Anderson's account of the stone and a figure of it have appeared in the Society's Proceedings for 1896-7, p. 296, and that I am kindly permitted to have the latter reproduced here, I confine myself to a remark or two Ogae onth peculiarlmo s ystonee e Oga th placee facTh f th m. eo n do probabl s incompleteyi , having been originally continue anothen di r line t standabovi s fise a t ehth read: si s

N The « slopes forward, and the h and t slope backwards, while the vowels are perpendicular. The r is nearly so, too ; the only difference between it and the vowels being that the scores composing r are longer than vowelse thosth especialld f i immediateleo an ,e th f yo y following it. In fact, the scores of the i are somewhat irregular in their lengths ; f Nwyfre Arianrhodf Lliao o n d wso an , , Beli's daughter, their mother thosd An e. men it was of and (?) they were native." Here Nwyfre reminds one of Nun-cam, besides raising various other interesting questions which cannoe b t discussed here. INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 371 but they are probably imperfect, and immediately after them one seems to trace the beginning of a consonant on the same side as the n. I may say that I began by. reading the r as i, and I do not think that the other Scottish Ogams have bee e fac nalive th texamineon o et y an y db

. _ Fig. 3. Stone with symbols and Ogam inscription, from Links of Keiss Bay, Caithness, (f).

tha e »• mighth t e expecteb t e longe b r instance o fo t d r, i thae n i ,th n e Newto th case f th eo n Stone o guest s ,sd ha wherwhic an e r on es hi e readinth o t g s t Nelitetri,A kno•whicno . wi o d s hi wha I mako t t e of it, but it may contain the name which O'Curry modernizes as Neidhe, 2 37 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F . O SMA ,

quote y Cormab d s NedeI a ctak r Nedi.r o e Fo o havlitt e beena Pictish way of writing fh, and that it might stand for both the hard and the soft sound of English th (" thin," " then "). This seems to me proved by one of the fragments from Conningsburgh. On the whole inclinem a I , o thint d k that Nehtet mad completea e name, and that ri formed the beginning of another word. In that case, we might compare the termination et of Nehtet with that of such names as Uoret on the St. Vigeans Stone, Namet in Vipoig Namet in the Pictish List of Kings already mentioned, and Morbet in Neoton Morbet in the same Skene'e se : s Picts Scots,d . 6 an . p

xiij. .THE PAPA STRONSA STONE, Orkney. e Ostrengte th nrepresentatio th f o h f thio n s ston n Stuart'i e s Sculptured Stones of Scotland, plate xlii., I have guessed it to read dne icefv = Doinine Jesu. But I only repeat it here in the hope that a successful search has been made .for the, stone : Stuart 'mentions it as preserved in his time by Mr. Heddle of Milsetter.

BU.BRIAE xivTH . N STONE, from North Eonaldsha Orkneyn i ,n i w no , Nationae th l Museum, Edinburgh. My guesses of the peculiar Ogam on this stone are very uncertain, but they have been much facilitated by the two excellent photographs of the stone in- plate xlvi., in the fifth volume of the Arclieeologia Scotica. What I printed before came to this—u 'or. ran. n uurract pevvcerroccs inclinew no o represenm t da s I followsa t t i bu t; , omittin pointse gth , which see havmo t meaningo en , uorrann vurr act pew cerroccs. •• • e » I have made several attempts to read the previous scores, and at one time I thought I read them Cabma, but I am convinced that the long oblique stroke which I regarded as m is no part of the writing. Lord Southesk read inclinedm sa Naall,I o calot t r call o bu makine th g first name into Calouorran or Calluorrann; but even then we have probably not got at the beginning, for, at the point in question, the INSCRIPTION NORTHERE TH 3 F 37 O S N PICTS.

surface of the stone is hopelessly gone. Such a guess as Calluorrann suggests Talluorrann or even Maqqo-Talluorrann, approximating the slonnud f Frobbaccennevvo e Aboynth n o e - Stoneun t wite bu ;th h certainty prevailing heruseless i t ei sucy insiso an st h n o comparisonst . The next word seem begio st n wit Ogae hth r v m;fo the e surfacth n e become e word tha Th ba t i leaved tp sufficien o . s sga e a s r r uo fo t vurract I should treat as another spelling of vurraolvt or rather vurrahht, analysd an t intei o vwr-aliM with vurr, e v&r n fora i Vergameboth f mo Roundee onth l Stone, which become e lisf Pictisth so t urn i h kings bearin e namgth r titlr eo o f Brudeet o ac e pago 2 abovet se , s e34 A . ahht, I should treat that as ehlit, modified in obedience to some unascer- f tainevoweo w la dl harmon r accentuationyo . Compare Connachtd an Eoganacht, partly derived by Cormac from icht, " descendants or pro- geny," and meaning the race of Conn and Eogan respectively (p. 350). If the foregoing surmises should prove correct, we may assume that e remaindeth r form personaa s l name Pevvcerroccs e formulth d f o an a; e inscriptioth n would see mfal o t witn i l d e Aboynh th an tha f e o t on e others. So one may provisionally render it thus :— ..... uorrann vurr-act Pevvcerroccs. .'.... uorr's descendant Pevvcerrocs. t insteaBu f descendando havy ma e t i beet n eldest son, youngest son, o meann f s decidino sha e e e likexacoon th th gr e: t meanine th f go syllable vurr, even had one felt sure as to that of act; but the inter- pretation suggested of Drusti filii Wrthrosst, at page 343, would seem to countenance some suc renderinha I hav s ga e suggested.

. THxv E LUNASTING STONE, froe Mainlanmth f Shetlando d n i w no , Nationae th l Museum, Edinburgh. I have again examined this stone, and I read as before :— X ttocuhetts : ahehhttmnnn : hccvvevv : nehhtonn. u remarkw fe t thera e sI Bu shoul ear d lik mako et e concernin , sucgit h as the, following :—The x at the beginning has the fleasg or artificial line produced right through it, so that it is possible that it is to be read as 374 PBOCKED1NGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

a letter, and in that case we should have to read it as p. We know too little about Pictish phonetics to say that jpW or pth was impossible. I mention pth, as tt seems to be here distinguished from a single t, as in Nehhtonn, and it may have represented th as in Irish Ogams. What is here transcribed o or u is on the stone a semicircle attached by the ends of its arc to the fleasg on the B side of it. The Ogam for 8 after s rathei t t r carelessly e formedoutsidth d e joininti ean , e endth gf o s scoree th s togethe s veri r y indistinct e lasTh te .scor th f o e e buon t final Ogam of Nehhtonn is imperfect, and the last one altogether gone. Lastly pointe ,th ) besids(: e being know Runin ni c inscriptions, occun i r e Ogasomth f meo alphabets e Boogiveth f Ballymotekn o ni . 313fo , . ; Though Nehhtonn forms a complete name in itself, it is possible that •hccvvevv name w prefixes o fori t ne t m,a i jus o dub,s dt a t " black,s i " frequently prefixed to ready-made names in Irish, such as Dub- Daboireann, Dub-Indreachtach, and that of a Pictish king Dubh-Tolargg. Or else one may suppose hccvvevv to have had some such a signification as tha f kingo t , prince, warrior n eithei r priestt y o , Bu rma .case on e perhaps treat Ttocuhetts-Ahehhtmnnn as if it had been Mocu or . Corcu- Ahehhtmnnn, provisionalld an y translate thus:—

Ttocuhetts-Ahehhtmnnn : hccvvev v: Nehhtonn . Kin- Ahehhtmnnn king Nechtan.

Thasayo t s ,i t Kin f Ahehhtmnnno gn Nechtaki e alternae th f Th no . - tive to this is to treat hccvvevv as expressing relationship, such as that of sor nephew o no construt d an , e Ttocuhetts-Ahehhtmnnn a genitiv s a e depending on it. But that seems to me less probable, especially if nnn is to be treated, as I have done in the case of Iddaiqnnn, as having nothing to do with the genitive case.

xvj. CONNINGSBUEOH STON . 1,No E frome th Shetland n i w no , Museu t mEdinburgha . This has been read and published by me as Ehteconmor (with the r queried) t lasbu t; yea rI looke t agaii t da n wit . AndersonhDr found ,an d as pointed out by Mr. Nicholson, that the reading was continued with- INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 375

out interruption over the edge on the thin end of the stone. This is what I make of it now : — ) —0 —5 —————————— r/ 1 1///// n — E h t e c o n M o r s a f 11 i letterso e lastw Th t e r seconparto th , f lettersn o so d e planear , d an , they come so close to the edge that the first score of the s may be called in doubt, but, in any case, it does not extend above the line serving as e fleasge fina th stonee e edgTh th l th .f vowe eo n , o whos s i l e thickness must once have been greater than it is now : so the letter may have been any vowel from « to i. What this second vocable, Mors or Mofv, may have been, I. have no idea ; the spelling Morv would suggest the begin- a ninwor f o gd like e Morbet,Pictise namth th f o n ei h king called Necton e PictisMorbetth n i h Chronicle e previouTh . e sth 'par f o t legen e nam th I drecognis s ea Aithican,w no e e genitivth f whico e h occurs as Aithicain in the Annals of Tigheruach : see Skene's Fids and Scots, p. 72, where he has Tolair aithicain, and p. 351, where he has, from the Annals of Ulster, Talorgg mac Acithaen; also Stokes's edition of the fragments of Tighernach in the Revue Celtique, xvii. 209, where he prints Tolar [g] [mac] Aithicain. In the pedigrees in the Book of Leinster name th , e is^Educan, 318al, genitive jEducain, 340e th ad 'b an ; Four Masters have it as Aedhacan, more commonly Aedliagan, which is reduce Englisn di h spellin Egan.o gt I take Ehtecon nominativa e b o t e like Nehhtonn and Ehtarrnonn or Eddarrnonn on other stones. (2) The same stone has on one of its edges a bit of an Ogam, which I formerly guessed to be devoddr-e; but, .owing to a mistake whic I hcanno t account for e las,th t letter should havs i e t I bee . ns casy vowelo inan en , nor, indeed I fin n vowea d ca , l there t alleth a s ,a angl e vowel th s worni e d san , were probably only notches originally. This is what I have copied : — ii \\ 1 1 ///// 777 ///// 1 1 1 1 vi r

have been any Ogam from d to qu. The v slopes perceptibly, which seem indicato st directioe th e rea eb n i dthae o letter t nth te herar s e suggested, and not in the contrary one : the other way, the consonants sequencI,. a . woul. t erll . e ed. b which seems less probable, especially if we may suppose the s of the other reading to begin a second word.

xvij. CONNINGSBUBGH STONE No. 2, also in the Museum in Edinburgh. This is a still smaller fragment, with Ogam letters reading ir or ri, with a portion of an angulated group of scores. The scores making ir or ri interestine ar beins ga g specimen f bundlso e Ogams.

xviij. ST. NINIANS ISLE STONE, now in the National Museum in Edinburgh. Thi sI hav e reas da 111 , ^1 / II || 11111 11 n i ,,,, I ,,,,, I / /1, 1 ... ,,, 1111 //// 1 r^n | ITI / rmTTTTT I I I I I I r/7 " rn TTT rrtl //// be s m e q q nan a mm o v i> e f - «• 3 Here the first score is at the very edge of the stone, and it may have been one of a group of scores, making any consonant from b to n. So one is at liberty to suppose that meqq was here preceded by the same word which, on the Stone, I have ventured to read bennises, and to interpret as meaning a married woman : thus we should have an in- scription meanin lawfue gth l wif Maqf eo wit. qGoidelie N hth c collocation

of the genitive ineqqti corresponding to magq in the nominative. But the Ogams following meqq contain probably more than Maqq N.'s name : to wit, that of the other person, here assumed to be his wife. How, then, are we to break up the legend 1 If one treats it as Meqq-Ndn Ammovvef, one may compare an , O'Naan, recorded by the Four Masters shoule w undet kno t e yearno dth bu rwd 1336 s an wha, 130o 6t t maka nam f o ee othee th Ammovvef. n r o hand , e reaIf w ,d Meqq Nanam Movvef, we seem to have a Movvef consisting of the affix ef, whic probably hma identifiee yb f Frobbaccennew,o v d ev wit e th h d an of a stem Mom, which suggests kinship with the masculine genitive INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 377

Medvvi t Rathcroghaa Eoscommon. Co n e well-knowi th d an , n namf eo Medb (pronounced Mev r Maive),o quee f Connaughto n , who, in Irish story, had her court at Rathcroghan. The same name occurs, hitherto unidentified, in the legendary history of Irelan s Medu,a d 1 born womaa y eb n who Foue mth r Masters brin Irelano gt d Anno Mundi 2850. Meanwhile, Meqq Nanam looks more obscure f possiblei , , than Meqq I coul Nan,d dan only suggest that, coming before Movvef, Nanam mighe b t regarde havins da g assimilate followine th do finaa t n lg m,o s that, standing alone, it may have been Nanan, which would have more the appearance of a genitive. The interpretation may provisionally be given as follows :— Benni]ses Meqq-Nanam Movvef. Wife of Mac-N. Movvef. 6 •8 = The construction, with the woman's name at the end, is like 13 tha f otheo t r Pictish inscriptions e positioe th th t f bu o ,n genitives meqq d Nanaman t s GoideliPictishi no d an c.

xix. THE BRESSAY CROSS, Shetland, now in the National Museum at Edinburgh. This was read by me formerly as follows in the margin :— The first line I read still nearly the same, but I notice that the short scores on each side of the -j-(- (o) cast a shadow differin t fro gotherse cu mdifferen a th frof i l s mal a , t sidet I . s possibli e that they were edge markth en so befor Ogae th e m was cut, and that we should not reckon them as a part of the writing at all. The second line presents much greater difficulties. The moulding on which the Ogams are cut is divided by a line along the middle of it, which answers the a har t e dstonno purposth one s s e i efleasga a th , f d eo an ; inscriber seems to have used some sort of a ruler to guide his hand;

1 This is remarkable as deriving undoubtedly from an Ogmic spelling Medv- or Medvo-, and seems to point back to a very ancient tradition as its origin. 378 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

' but he occasionally allowed the tool with which he scored to slip too far . e thir th e casThus df th o eOgamn inclinei , m a I , thino dt k that he meant to make an -nrrT n > but he allowed his chisel to slip beyond

T the fleasg in making the second and the third scores, and possibly also e drawh e end d n , -j-f-fj-fe o reasotherth a firstnr n th Ha s. y s i e. n wh of the other scores should not still be visible, as the stone shows no weathering or wearing away in the part in question. Nearly the same remark applies to the next Ogam, which may have also been n, except thae thir fourtth d t dan h score guesse e onle b groue sar o yt w th d: pno looks like -p—f- (Ib). i Aftecome e th r s roo r -p-p-mfo t , onlsbu , , -yya b , visiblew no s i . , i The e closth no et come followee n a s -p-p-y t b d bu , e scoresomth f o se see o crosmt e fleasgth s ; this perhap- in swa t sno tende mory dan e case thath e n's.e n i oth f t surLastlyf no o e m a I , the points (:) before meqq, as I could only be certain of one, namely, on represente e fleasge whole righe b th th y Th f o t.e ma d approximatels ya . follows :— Crroscc : Nahhtvvdda$0s: dattrr : ann Ben ^i i jj e s : Meqqddrroann ri b bf :

Here Crroscc s probabli e Latiyth n crux, through Gaelic whicn i , h traces e wore founth ar s nrosgf a d crasg.o d an NalihtvvddaQQse th s ha genitive ending from Norse, whence alswore oth d dattrr, corresponding to English daughter and its congeners, and the whole, treated as the woman' se Pictisth name s hha , genitive ending appendedt Bu . NahhtvvddaOO, though it takes the Norse declension, cannot be a Norse word t wouli s a ,than di t case have become NattvvddaQQ, afte same th r e rul dattrr.s ea e nam Th e seem o fort s ma rhythmica l parallelo t o s , say o pevvCerrocct , d hccvvevvNehhton,an s wher knoe w e w Nehhton to be a complete name in itself. So if one translate the former by Bed-Cerroccs e latteth y Kingb d r an Nechtan,y perhapsma r e fo w , formula's sake, suggest that the name here in question be regarded as provisionally Great-VuddaQQ, where VuddaQQ reminds one of the Irish INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NOETHERN PICTS. 379

personal name Fothad,. We now come to the second line, where we doubla y b t e difficultyme e ar f readinf interpretationo ,o d gan e on f I . tak e readineth g bennises,s probablha e o on regart s yinvolvin a t i d g Goidelie th c ben, " woman, wife," combined with some elemen conveyo t t , perhaps, the idea of married 'woman or matron, or, better still, Goidelic banais, "wedding,a d "ha wit o affin ha wh x e givine senson th f t o gi e gone through some kind of wedding ceremony or marriage. At all events, therreasoo n s ei o suppos nt e this inscriptio o earl r to nth yfo e institution of marriage to have become familiar to the Picts of Shetland, whhav o t provee t oar i e y comdb contacn ei t mor r leso e s direct with Goidel d Norsemenan s . Next comes megq, whic s i alsh o Goidelic, bein genitive gth maqq,f eo " son," and, lastly, ddrroann, mutatioa f no drroann, which is regular after the genitive meqq : the word seems to b Pictisea h genitiv r whaefo t d Irisoccur Ol s genitiva h n i s e druad, nominative drui, a magicia" r draid.o n " Thisa , howevere b y ma , proper firse namth te samn instanceei th f eo origid an ,s Truiana n n i a Eunic inscription at Kirkbride in the Isle of Man. The Manx inscription s writtei ' a spellin n ni g which employ d, d botr an fo h t t s so transcribe be thanam the t may e d Druicm, nominathe whicin -is h tive, whil e nominativth e e correspondin o Droannt g would probably have been Dro or Droa.e othe nameo Th tw r thin i s s inscriptioe ar n Celtic, and it is possible that the Norse Druian is but the Pictish genitive slightly modifie e leadin th used s an da d g e name th for f mo . Lastly, the case of Bennises is more likely to be nominative than genitive, for beginning the second line, as it here does, it is hardly probable tha constructioe th t continues nwa genitivee th n di , whichever inscribee th language e th b y r considereema usings wa e .dh On this point one may venture to say that it was not Norse, though he borrowed a Norse word and a Norse inflection. The question is more difficult as between Pictish and Goidelic : the two most important genitives hav Pictisea h ending, whil e Goidelieth c genitive meqq only occurs, like Norsth e e e a onebodprope th f o yn ,i e r th name n O . other hand, the relative position of the two genitives in question and noune th whicn so h they depen s Goidelit di Pictish no o herd S can e. the claims of the two languages are, as in xvij, pretty evenly balanced, 380 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

and one may regard this cross as illustrating one of the last stages in the history of Pictish, and showing the manner in which it was Goideled out of existence. The foregoing guesses may be represented by the following attemp translatioa t a t n :— Crrosc c: Nahht-Vvdda$0 s: dattr r : ami Gross Great-of VuddaQQ's Daughter, Bennise s: Meqqddrroan n Wife Mac-Drroann.of

II. It will facilitate comparison if I submit at this point a list of the most probabl ee inscriptions readingth l al f so , together with their pro- venance followss a , , wit Ogame hth s transliterate italicn di s : —

£ATTLDONAT. i1 . . .Th . e . IKoundel , Townhead Farm, near Greenloaning, Perthshire. 2. V5RGAMSBO NOTIVO u u ij. Ehtarrnonn ..... Scoonie, East Fife. . : . Abernethyiij .imn,...... , Perthshire .. . Vigeans. St . , nea . r Arbroath . . iv, .For . droften:- . . ipe Iloret farshire. ett For cuf v. pidaRNOiN ...... Fordoun, Kincardineshire. vj. Vinon Itedov ..... Easter Aquhollie, near Stonehaven. vij. MaqqoTalluorrrn-ehht Frobbaecennevv . Aboyne, Deeside, Aberdeenshire. viij. Gait Hadbho ..... Garden, Garioch, Aberdeenshire. ix. Iddaiqnnn1 . Vorrenn ipuai . ShevackOsif , near Newton, Garioch, . JETtJE2 Aberdeenshire. .&CNVN VAVR 3. svohocoto CA*AELISI

hOPOVADTA x.I.eddarrnonn....tahumo.... . Dyke . , near Brodie, Morayshire. 2. ramnnag . . . hhtohqo .... 3. alonimutto . . . INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 381

xj. Allhhallorr edd M'qq Nwuvvam . Kilmaly f ir , Sutherlandshire. xij. Nehtet Ri...... Keiss, near Wick, Caithness. xiij. due ice/v ...... Papa Stronsa, Orkney. xiv.... uorrann vurract pevv-Cerroccs . Broo f Burrianho , N. Ronaldsha, Orkney, xv. x ttoeuhetts : aheJihtmnnn : hccvvevv : Nehhtonn, ..... 1/unasting, Mainland of Shetland. xvj. 1. Ehtecon . Conningsburgh Mors ...... , Shetland. 2. ... duveddr s .. . Conningsburgh . xvij...... , Shetland. ir...... xviij. .... ses Meqq Nanam Movvef . . St Ninians Isle, „ xix . Crroscc:1 . nahMVvdda98s: dattrr: ann ...... Bressay, „ . Bennises:2 MeqqDdrroann, This list, besides indicating the distribution and showing a variety of language and lettering, is instructive in point of spelling, and it enables o makt s u e certain orthographic equations which shoul e bornb d n i e firss u mindt takLe e .eth VOWELS.—Ther s nothini e g peculia o mentiot r n with , regarA o t d except that, in a few instances, it assumes in Ogam the form of j_, namely, in Frobbaeennew in vij., in -ann and -act in xiv., and in aliehhtmnnn in xv. Possibly it may have meant a particular modification of a, but evidence thao t t effec s wantingi t . B.—Thi partls si y writte partld e cettcean th ne , yn 2 i cecnvnce,. s a ix n i have Icesvn i w xiij. t n expresseed i i d an an ; aiiddaiqnnnn y di b , 1 . ix n i which seems to equate with cettoe cecnvn in ix. 2, and also in ipuai in ix. 1 for ipue, to be equated probably with the ipe in iv. Similarly, as already indicate e cas th f elitecon eo n di s xvjn comparei a , .1 d wite hth Irish spelling Aithican; but here we should probably set out from some suc a hspellin s ^Educan,a g which also occurs. Lastly n Ogai , e mw sometimes have besides ||{j- the form ^, which I have indicated as e. It occurs in vij. twice, in xj. once, in xiv. once, and in xv. twice. It has been suggested that it represents a special modification of e, namelv, one whic s representei h n moderi d n than i Iris t ea;ty b hbu cas e ew Nehhtonnn oughi t i hav o t td xv.n eha modere i th : n for Neaehtan.ms i So, on the whole, I am inclined to think that no more distinction of sound was intended tha betwees na ae.d an ne Nevertheless e Pictisth , h 382 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1898.

language may have distinguished in pronunciation between a close e and havy instancn ma ea e forme ae th n W f opeeo r . e npassin g intn i oi the Osif of ix. 1, as compared with the -ef of Movvef in xviij. and iddaiqnnn of ix. 1 for the cettoe cecnun of the script ix. 2. Similarly, one might regard the open e becoming a in vurract in xiv., if that word is to be analysed int olattee vurr-ad,th f ri sam e syllabld th an f e o origi s ei n eKhte th vijn i s .a i.—The inscriptions suggest nothing special in the case of this vowel. In icesv in xiij. the letter possibly represents the semi-vowel i, that is, wha s writtei t Englise th n n yi h word yes. o.—The languag havy ma e given this vowe n opea a closlnd an e indicatioo soundn t bu , n occurs beyon face dth probabls t thawa t i te yth latter wher t eseemi tako t splace e th f whao e s representei t n Irisi d h Nelihtonnn i s a b, ya Neclitan,r fo Elitecon jEducan,r fo Ehtarrnonnd an Eddarrnonn Etliarnanr fo r Itliarnan.o IT.—The data are too scanty to suggest any exact conclusion as to the quality of this vowel; but, besides u, we have uu in xj., but whether uu meant u or «, we have probably to attach the value of uu or vu to the vv of NalihtvvddaQQ in xix., while hccwew in xv. may have been hceuevv or hccuevv, or else hccinievv. All this probably points to the influenc f Engliso e h double r w.o u Lastly e possiblw , y have some sort of u in the cecnvn of ix. 2, as compared with the iddaiqnnn of ix. 1: we have the latter spelling also in ahehhtmnnn in xv., and perhaps the sound indicated by nvn and nnn was that of n sonans, or a sort of pro- longed n. This is, on the whole, the more probable view. DIPHTHONGS.—We havdiphthona 2 VAVn i e . ix whic, En i gaw s hi reduced to o in the Vorrenn of the Ogam on the same stone, ix. 1, and possibly another in the last line of the script ix. 3 (d). A diphthong ae in a previous line of the same script stands alone, and so does ei in xj. e rea ion fe df uo Talluorrn o eirf.Th vij n i uorrannd .an xivn i y .ma have been a diphthong uo or uo, but it is more likely to have been up • and the ipuai of ix. 1 was probably ipue, simplified into ipe in iv., and occurrin namen gi e namsth likf eo e o Apevrittiu e th . 366)o t (p s A . lase Uoretth t n mentionei d inscription syllable th , e uor thers i e possibly to be associated with the vorr of Vorrenn in ix. 1. INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 383

SEMI-VOWELS.—These have already been noticed, as i and u, in con- nectiod an n O wit I B vowelsshoule , t hth 2 . thaBu i d .n liki ad t o et VO stand probably s suggestea , d abovrespecp u . 341)d (p ewr an -fo , representeV e th tively s a , a dsoun,vo rathe d d an elidero b tha r dnfo latee th rn i Goidelic pronunciation f Notioo , s Naflii.a THE ASPIRATE.—This appears n ttocuhetti , ahehhtmnnnd an s xv.n i , lesn i sd certaian n readings t alwaybu , hiatusn si , wit e possiblth h - eex ception of the doubtful Hopovauta in ix. 3 (d). The predominant use of the letter, however, is to form Ogmic digraphs, such as liti and Tit, and we once have o mentiolice,t n xv.t i no , n that possibl e oughon yo t t read hrr instead of arr in xj. „ CONSONANTS.—We may deal first with those which may be regarded as presenting the least difficulty, namely, the NASALS.—Her e havw e ed n, m an alse gutturath o l nasal, which seems to occur as ng in ix. 3 (c) and possibly in xj. N is freely doubled, but, so far as one can see, with no intention of conveying any distinction of sound. LIQUIDS, ETC.—L and r occur both single and double, and the fre- quency with which the Ogam for r is doubled seems to indicate that Pictis fel s diffeo t t wa som n hi r r e important respect from Goidelio N . cr instance occurs of ss, and the most remarkable combinations into which enterss , without regardin e borroweth g d wor de Norscrroscth d e an c genitive Nahhtvvdda$6>s, both in xix. 1, are ccs in xiv., its in xv., and thiremaro y t s ma A laste kDrostenn si t . on tha, , whiciv st tn i s hi little known as a Goidelic combination at all, and never in auslaut, occurs in the following names in the Pictish Chronicle, Drust1 and Drest, Gest, Vist or Uist, and Co/worst, which in part reminds one of the name of the Boresti, seemo wh , from 's allusio Ayricola,e th n ni havo t e lived somewhere betwee Firthse nth f Forto Tayd han . With regare th o dt

1 The spelling Druxst also occurs, namely, in Tigernach's entry A.D. 723 : see the Rev. Celtique, xvii . proof e antiquit231e th th f t formf I o .sdocument e o e th f son y o s whic Irise hth s disposal h hi Latis annalis i t a t I nd . spellingha t , dating froma time when x, had come to be sounded s ; and we have it in inscriptions of the fifth and sixth century in "Wales, as, for instance, in VXSOR for Uxor, and CdSLEXTI for Ctetestis. Hiibner'e Se s Inscrip. Brit. Christianas, Nos. 101, 128. 384 PEOCEEDING E SOCIETY , 18989 TH Y F O .SMA ,

Us of ttocuhetis, we seem to have it as ts in the Pictish king's name Usconbuts, which, howevere varianth s ha t, Uscoribest, also shortened into Goribust and Cumbust. See Skene's Chronicles, pp. 6, 27, 172, 285, 398. MUTES, ETC.—The following table of mutes and spirants will show what sound e havw s e under this the w headinge repreho ar y d - an , sented :—

Mutes. Spirants. Classification according to Organs of Speech. Voiceless. Voiced. Voiceless. Voiced.

Labials, .... p, bb b f v, vv Dentals, .... t, tt d ht, ee, tt d, dd

Gutturals, C, 00 g hh,hcc,cc?,c g? q, qq = ? mixed or compound guttural.

The consonant p does not occur doubled in our inscriptions, but it seems to be represented by bb in the name Frobbaccennevv (p. 349), e doublinth d r thian fo gs purpose was probably accepted from Irish Ogmic spelling, where bb represents the sound of p, or at least of a labial mute so nearly approaching p as not to be liable to be mutated to e havpli. W instancn e a spellin e th n ei g Corbbi, which occurs twicn ei the south of Ireland, for what is otherwise found written Oorbi, "Corb's" Maqqm n i wito s s r t', ha o d t ddan ; = Decceddas, genitive oa namf e which appears late s Mac,a r Decliet. vijn i s i .p r Thafo b b t not quite exceptional is proved by spellings such as abb for ap from apas, " abbot," Abberdeon and Abbordoboir for Aperdeon and Aperdo- boir in the charters in the (see Stokes's Ooidelica, pp. 108, 111), and also the more ancient spelling with p in Apurnethige, "Abernethy, d Apurfeirte Pictisan "th n i h Chronicle (Skene. 6) . p , The oldest Welsh spelling of aper, aber is oper in Opergelei, now Abergele (Cymmrodor, ix. 165), as the word seems to be made up of nd-ber, the out-bear, so to say, or output of a river. INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS.' 385

"We hav dentae eth l mutr certaifo et Drostenn ni iv.n i Nehhtonnn ,i in xv., ehht d n vij.possibli an , n n DonatiI i y d Notivo . i an n i dattrr in xix. the tt probably represents the sound of t, after the example of the Norse dottir, but most of the other instances of it may be supposed to represent the spirant fh or d". 0 represents the guttural mute c or lc in crroscc in xix. and in Ehtecon in xvj. 1, and the same sound is probably to be understood by the cc in crroscc, in Frobbaccennew in vij., and in Pev-Cerroccs in xiv. • As to b, d, g one can hardly assume that they represent the mutes so written in any of these inscriptions, except when they happen to be initial, as in bennises in xix. 2 and in Drosten in iv.; and we have an e pronounceb o instanct n Unggii s i g ixn t i f i (c),3 d .o e f i Ung-gi, •with ngg pronounced lik e Engliseth ngn i h vrojdi finger. SPIRANTS.—Thes wholee th are, n o , more difficul understano t t d than the mutes, as we have here to do to a still greater extent with two kinds of spelling, a Latin and an Ogmic.one. Thus, after the 'analogy of lit for voiceles mighe on , t sth hav e expected lip forph or/an t ch,r evefo bu a ndh lie found littl ethee d Pict favou eyee th t occuran i n th f s: so w n i r no s aGruohc,n si Registrume th n i Prioratus . AndreeS . 114p . hed Htan were probably derived from the Latin use of Ih, ch : one finds both some- times in old Welsh names for th and ch respectively. But the history of quits i h t er differentfo t t t comet s a , s from Ogmic spelling, wher t eseemi s havo t e arisen somewha followss a t Brythonin i : e speec pronunciae hth - earl n wasc a c t y, a , tt date , tiopp , f modifieno d int oe spirant thath f o t s ph, , whilill, ch writine eth g continued long afterward : "bepp,o t scc , tt traces of it are to be detected in Old Welsh. Goidelic does not reduce froh c cc—r m, o t th anothet it d neveha t ri r t hadpp—bu , ch r intoo h t t i borrowesourc d an e d from Brythoni e expedienth e f expressino t g the sounds of th, ch by tt, cc in Ogam writing. This applies to Early Goidelic of the sixth and fifth centuries; for, in the earliest manu- scripts of Goidelic,—that is to say, Old Irish manuscripts containing glosses reachin ge nintbacth o hkt century n somi , e instances also t o the eighth, the Latin digraphs th, ch are alone found used, except where scribe th e forget distinguiso st hn Scotland I them . c d fro,an mhowt - ever have w , e the Book f Deer,o containing Gaelic entriee timth ef so VOL. xxxii. 2 B 386 PKOCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1838.

of King David I., which show some peculiaritie n respece i sth f o t spelling adopted, and bear on this question : the scribe does not always use digrapth e e frequentlh r ch,fo y write e spirant th c alons r fo e, cch,e on whicn i instanceo whild s tw cc,h an ha n remind i ef e so h e son e Pictisth e Jieon th i h wor e Stokes'dSe hccvvevv . s xv Goidelica, n i . 108-111pp d comparan , e Gattheli (for Gadheli) e Colbertinth n i e manuscript, printed by Skene in his Fids and Scots, p. 137. So hccvvevv looks like a survival of Ogam, spelling modified by a touch of Latie th n system. Labiale th Ao st particularn si Irise littld th , hha e occasio ph,r s nfo a Latin provided them with/an Ogmie dth c alphabet wit equivalenn ha t in the Ogam //^/; not to mention that when the sound of initial -ppp had changed into that o f/ the alsd yoha -pj-j- (th Ogad eol m for t theiv)a r dis- posal: The Pictish inscriptions could, therefore, scarcely be expected to .show lip,but they supply instances of the other three symbols,/in Foreus iv.n i , /// certair ^fo Movvefmn i xviij, yj-j d Frobbaccennevvn i -an , vijn i . One comes now to the voiced spirant, which it is convenient to dis- cus t thia s s point ;e firs andobservth y t n ma i place, e e on tha, t Latin 7; fro e fourtmth h thacenturo d v, s soundo an t tw 6 f ye so th dow d nha .the Brythons borrowe t di wit e doublth h e eth soundn i useo d s t an ,di Old Welsh glosses, and, in fact, until Norman influence prevailed in the twelfth century. From Britain the Latin alphabet had reached Ireland, Irise th hd employean botr fo hdb sound s dow comparativelo nt y modern times. Lastly, from Ireland, Irish missionaries brought their alphabet Northumbriao t t becami d e alphabean , th e r Anglo-Saxofo t n froe mth .time when runic writing was given up till the Normans came and con- .quered. Early specimens, therefore, of English show the letter b having the two sounds of 6 and v, though the English seem to have set them- selves to confine b to what one may term its own sound ; but this was .not wholly achieved till the ninth century, as anyone will see who will tak trouble eth reao et d throug . Sweet'hDr s Oldest English Texts..o T ,com inscriptionser bac ou probable e souno kar t tha v th e f s i w o dt t yi , .to ascribe to the letter b in Vergamebo in i., especially if we have in that .vocable the same element as in the final syllable of Frobbaccennevv .in t wit vii f Movvefe Bu o fh. th xviijn i . compare such form Morebs sa INSCRIPTION NORTHERE TH 7 F 38 O S N PICTS.

and Muref, both meaning the province of Moray : 'see Skene's Picts and Scots, pp. 10, 136, also 154, 170, 214, 368, 370, 371. The two spell- ings Moreb and Muref would seem to indicate that there were two pro- nunciations othee th d r wite witan v on ,h he ef; somes tha , thwa is t-ev times provected to /, as in Movvef.1 It may accordingly appear to be an inconsistency to transcribe the name

TTT-////H———T-H———Lm-M-m^~T7TTT-m-l———TT as Frolbaccennevv, with the initial jjj made into /, while the double -pp- borne b o minn t erepresentes i i s i d d t i en tha t e e th -w.tth y Bu db t a doublin consonana f go e Pictisth n i t h inscription favourita s si e expe- dient for indicating a modification of the sound represented by the single letter. To be consistent in the present case one should have || ffnr if it was intended to pronounce ef, and accordingly the final jjjj—| ; actuall e stonth n eyo woul e perhapb d s more accurately transcribe, dev e t otheanevv.Th no dr most instructive instances occu n ix.i r , namely n Vavr i ,Vorrenn, d an where -pp- equatescripte th f o ,s v wit e hth whereas in Frotbaccennevv the -p-p had become /, a distinct proof that inscription vij. is later than ix. A somewhat similar remark is appli- cabl o inscriptiot e n iv.a scrip n ,i t whic n s Uoret,ui ha h possibly representing the sound of v, and standing in sharp contrast to the / of Forcus, e nam th fora f emo Fergus , genitive Fergossa, n Irisi h Ogam s alsVergoso:i . o iv lateo s I r ough tha . havo t nix t e said thae th t Ogam alphabe t onlno t y supplie t thabu t alsi , typ—p-jd v oha r y-p fo - - for the same or a similar sound, as, for instance, in Dovvinias, in later Irish Duibne, Duibhne, the genitive of Dubinn, DuiVhinn. Next come the dental spirants, as to which it is to be noticed that both occur in Nahhtvvdda$0s in xix.: in fact, that inscription dis- tinguishes between four dentals, t or U, d, and dd of two kinds, in which one naturally recognises (1 and 6; but which is which ? In answed combinin d onl n tha y e ca y thissa o th e t r on ,g wit houghs o t t e voicelesth e b s spiran f Engliso (th0 h t r e o p h thorn), which would leave the other dd to represent the voiced spirant & (the th of English -this); d thian s fits ddrroann a mutatio s a f drroann,o n aftee th r L .The converse is not out of the question, to wit, the sounding of final/as v. S88 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 3898.

Goidelic genitive meqq. It is right, however, to say that in this inscrip- tion Norse influenc s conspicuousi e d thaan ,t e otherith n equallo sn y exact distinction between the dental spirants is to be found. Prom .the equatio f edd f Eddarrnonnno xjn o i . d n iv.i witwit 1 an t , . et hhx n i Elitarrnonn in ij., I gather that dd, tt, and Jit, all three represent e dentath l spirants t withoubu , y greatean t r concer o distinguisht n ' e cas betweethath o n Englishi es tw i n e nth , where bot e writtear h n indifferently th. • In Irish, d represented both d and (dh or) d, and in e Oldestth English s Textsaccordingli t i e founb o t yd doing thid san even more, namely, . standinp Som d , d~,d an r e gfo ancien t Irish Ogams even show dd doing duty for the spirant, as, for instance, in Maqui. Ddumileas, e prob a -stono t n t Dunloeo a d e ha t n t Kerryi , f I . t naturabu s emplonounceo t lwa t i d fof(dh, yd ) cT, dth or thoug h there is no denying that dd was also sometimes used for t or t' in Irish Ogam (p. 384) ; and we know too little about the dates of the inscriptions to be able to say that these contradictory spellings were not in use at the same time.1 As for Pictish, then, the use of dd for it may have been imported with the rest of the Ogmic system. But in any case dd should, in the first instance, have represented the voiced spirant: so Eddarrnonn in x. 1 would, if I have guessed the history of the word rightly, be a less correct spelling tha e otheth n n Ehtarrnonnr O hand e . ij th , n i Goidelic sEducan would lead one to suppose that Ehtecon in xvj. 1 is less correct than Eddecon would have been. The tt of ttocuhetts in xv. seems to harmonise with the 60s of NahhtvvddaOQs in xix.; but in the case of edd in xj. and ett in iv., as also of idd- and cett in ix. 1 and ix. 2, it is impossible to say which spelling is the more correct, that with dd or that with tt, as one is in the dark as to the origin and history of the vocables concerned e havW e. another instancth= t t possibl f o e n yi , unlesCattii. e prefen i on s r Gatti, d considean t i connecter d wita h genitive oiIrisn la h stone reading either Gatigni Gattagni,r o with which might be compared respectively Gaithini (Stokes's Patrick, p. 194, Four Masters, A.D. 865) or GotMn (O'Grady's Diarmuid and Grainne, i. 22). digrape th f o he Instance litus e havth f eso already been give Ehtarr-n ni nonn and Ehtecon, also in Nehtet. in xij., to which one may add that it 1 The same name occurs written Lugudi and Luyutti in Irish inscriptions. INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NOETHEKN PICTS. 389

sporadically occur n manuscriptsi s r instanceFo . e Registeth e , th f o r Priory of St. Andrews (edited by Bruce, 1841) has Kinninmuneht and Kil- rimuneht(p. 189), and the Chronicle of Melrose, A.D. 1215, has Mae AM for what is otherwise written Mac Eih (see Skene's Celtic Scotland, i. 484). Similarly, Simeon of Durham calls a certain king of the Picts Cijnofh and Cynoht (cited by Skene in his Celtic Scotland, i. 301); it was the same king, in fact, whose death is recorded in the Annals of Ulster, A.D. 774, thus—Mors Cinadhon regis Pictorum, which, together wit n entrha y A.D. 777, EitJmi ingen (filia) Cinadhon mortua s i esf, valuable as giving us the Pictish genitive of the name now Anglicised Kenneth pronounced an n Scotci d h Gaelic Coinneach. e principaTh l spelling f thio s s nam n Skene'i e s Picts d : ScotsCinioch e an ; ar 7 . p , ; KinadiusCinade 0 1 , 8 . i (Lati,pp n genitive), 22 ; , Cinaet,9 21 . . p , pp 36 5; Ciniath,-p. ; Ciniod,pp. 8 2 ; Cinaed,pp. 9 2 , 7 365-, 29 6(Goideli; c genitive Cinaeda, , 362-329 Cinaedo,. d pp an ; . 361)p ; Cinaeth,, 44 . pp 36 1; Cionaoth (Goidelic genitive ; KinethOionaoith), 3 6 , 171. 62 ,p . ;pp Kinat, pp. 173, 176; Kinath, pp. 174-5; Kinet, pp. 173-4. In the tenth century manuscript of the Annales Cambrice the name is Cenioith or Cenioyth (see the Cymmrodor, ix. 162, 165), in the former of which one finds Mors Cinadhon recorded in the words Cenioyd rex Pictorum oliiit. Ciniath seems a thoroughly Pictish name, and it is probably to be compared with Gairtniath, Gartnait r Gartnaifh,o witd Stariathe an hth bornn ei legendare th y histor mentionen f Irelanyma o a y db d in Nennius (§ 14) as Istorith Istorini filius,t weri s a e Stariath c Stairnma (Booe th f ko Dun Cow, fo. 166; Book of Leinster, fo. 5a, 66, 7c), but it is right to say thnt Prof. Kuno Meyer is inclined to see in' these two names Norse importations (see Meye d Suit'e an r se st Voyagebu ; f 5 Bran,o 29 . ii alsFoure oth Masters, A.M. 2850, where Starn, written Sdarn, s madi e the name of the husband of Medii). To me this sort of name looks far more ancient than any Norse importations could be, but the subject requires investigation. In the case of the gutturals, the Picts having the Ogam -1- for the aspirate took to doubling it for the voiceless spirant ch, as in Nehhtonn in xv., which is written in the Pictish Chronicle Necton and Nectonius, othen i r Chronicles Nectan Neehtan,d an Anglicised Naghte Naughtonr no 390 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9, 1893.

e familth n i y nam f MacXaughtono e e instanceTh . f hho s have been already mentioned, ehht in'vij., Allhhallorr n xj.i , aheJMmnnnd an Nehhtonn in xv., and NahhtvvddaQQs in xix. In Vwract in xiv. e gutturath l spiran s alwayi s writtei ts a , sc ne don th n cliti n ei Gaelic entries in the Book of Deer, and had the inscriber of xiv. been asked to represent the sound with more precision, it is hard to say whether he would have used Tie or cc. It is remarkable, however, that e combinatioth n wit e dentath h representes i l Ogamn di t c als n s i soa Ireland, while Ogams in Wales make it into gt: so it is possible that histore e combinatioth th f yo n conceals some phonological fact which t beeye nt ha t detected.scertaino no s i n t I tha ;hav e gutturae w t eth l spirant occurring as cc in these inscriptions : it is hardly probable that we have it in Pevv-cerroccs, but it is pretty .certain that we do in the , furtheris t I hcc f hccvvevv- o , . impossiblxv n i one'y la o set fingea n o r probable instance of the corresponding voiced spirant gh in them. Lastly, q occurs in Iddaiqnnn in Ogam = ^Kte JEcnvn in the script in ix., and.qq inMaqqo M'qqn i vij.n i xj.,n i , an Meqqn di xviijn i d an . 2iom a t surI exix . tha I shoult justifiee b d n disposini d f thesgo y eb treating the merels ma , thougy cc equivalent migh e d hon y an sa tc r fo s that the word mac, genitive mec or me, was etymologically entitled to q, and that it is to be found used in it long after the ancient Ogmic 'maqui had bee ncannoI t forgotte fifte value Bu th th ht f d e. o Oga nan qu s ma help suspecting that ther anothes ewa r reasoPictise th usinr n ni fo h t gi inscriptions e soughe pronunciatio,b th an o t n i dt s i tha t i tf tho n e word Gaelie n mosI th f . o tc are f Scotlandao , mac, micpronouncee ar d e presenth t y macTie,a da t mikhlc with d Tehchan like chGerman i n dock and. ich respectively. We have traces of some such a pronuncia- tion in mediaeval Ireland, as proved.by the fact that mace sometimes rhymes with words like tlaclit, meicc wit hwito s seirc, hd soman e other monosyllables ending in cc. In the district around Dingle in Kerry almoss i Ogae u q th r tm alwayfo s double maqui,n di sometimed an s else-, where. This doublin contrars gi what-Welso yt h map, mab, son,r o " y "bo would .tleae o dexpecon n Modi t . Goidelic, namely, mack. t lookI s as- thoug s vowe it wore d hnasath e l dha th nasalise d l m,e vowean th y db l resolved itself into ang, which was then partly assimilated to the qu;. INSCRIPTION E NOETHEETH 1 F O S39 N PICTS • .

compare wha happenes ha t d late n Mani r x words like crorik, "hill,a " for older enocc, Irish cnoc, Welsh cnwch, r whicfo a hborrowe d cnwo is sometimes used : see Khys's Manx Phonology, p. 33. Taking a comprehensive view of the slender materials at our disposal in the matter of the Pictish inscriptions, one is struck by the frequent1 use of digraphs, mostly doubled consonants, to indicate a modification of the sounds represented by those consonants when used without the doubling or the prefixing of an h. The more important examples are the following:— . p' r o p = hb t b ).,/.»-. ,, > = th (or a). L ? tt J v ' vv = v. r th)(o 1 .( = eld lili lii f chc. , > =hcc = ch. qq = -j . , . cc ?j I khk. improbablt no s i t I e tha shoule w t d treat II, rr, nn similarly regard an , d them as representing sounds felt to be somewhat different from those of I, r, n, though the inscribers were by no means careful to bear difference th mindn e recoursi e Th . e whic digraph. h to thed d yha sha in most cases been suggeste e spellin th o thet d y mb g usua Irisn i l h Ogmic writing, of which they preserved features which appear to have been forgotte n Irelani n a comparativel t a d y early datee , th suc s ha use of //// for /. This leaves Tit and hh, but the former was probably suggested e calles alreadb a f ,wha y o d h ma t yLati hintede nth y b , spelling. As to hh for the guttural spirant ch or Jfh, the origin of that digrap s hmori e obscure s trui t eI tha. t student Higd Ol h f so German are familiar with hh, and that two or three Anglo-Saxon words were sometimes written with hh; but there is no evidence to prove that this had any influence on the spelling used by the authors of the Pictish inscriptions. It is natural, however, to look in the direction of countre th finde ye Forthon soutlth s d f somo an i, e encouragemenn i t the Ghartulary of the Cathedral of Glasgow. I refer more particu-. larly to a document concerning the Marches of Stobo in Upper Tweed- dale : it was written about the year 1200, and contains some two dozen witnesses' names, man f whico y e curiouar h d soman sn poinei t 392 PEOCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 9; 3898.

" 0 here. Take for example those of Gylinilthel fil. Bridoc, andof-Gille- mihhel queschutb.rit, i.e., servant of S.t. Cuthbert; also that of Milihyn, leso bornn s y thab e n three witnesses. e digrapth o S h1 lili doet no s appea havo t r e been wholly unknow n thai n t countr ye openin °ath t g e thirteentth of h century d probablan ; n archivisa y t familiar with ancient Scottish documents migh -ane ablw b t o shodt eho whes wu t ni was introduced among the Picts. As to the other digraphs it is seen that they likewise wer t merno e ee inscribersfreakth f o s , since1 most e peculiaritieth of f Pictiso s h spelling appea n thai rf names'io t n the chronicles, as has been pointed out from time to time in the course of this paper. It would probably have been much more evident e carelessnesth d e scribeha th t f alloweo sno s d r t itlito thele o mt ( = tli) becom , viceor t becom, t eversa,t le o et)t = illr ;( ito similarly, also, to a-less extent in the case of the gutturals, and perhaps even of the labials. The impression which the whole group of inscriptions minmakey , m tha is dn o s t a Pictis thers wa eh schoo f writino l d gan spelling, and that it was striving after a regular and consistent system of Orthography. . It seems to have been not wholly without initiative, backed, perhaps survivina y b , g sens f distinco e t nationalit inded yan - pendence. We can now stay a moment to take stock of the identifications which have been suggeste r elso d e indirectly made eon probable e th d an ; which challenges the first e terminatioplacth s i e n e n havNelilitonni W t i e . n xv.i ON ,r Nwhico n Irisi h s hi Neclitan, latee th r spellin whicf go Neachtans hi ; als o in Ehtarrnonnn i ij. and Eddarrnonn in x. 1. This name, as already mentioned, appears in Trish document s Etliarnan,a s Itharnan, d Ifernan. e havan e W th e same termination also in EMecon, though it is there written with a single n : the Irish forms are ^Educan, Aedhacan, and the like. In these instances, the names ending in onn or on are probably to be regarded as being in the nominative case, and the Scoonie Cross is deserving of notice, as it has no lettering on it but Ehtarrnonn. There

e Registrumth e Se 1 Episcopalus Glasguensis, publishe Bannatyne th y db e Club vol. i. p. 89. For directing my attention to remarkable spellings in that valuable compilation I have to thank the Eev. John Wilson, II.A. INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 393

appears also to have been a Pictish genitive ending in on, but that may a differen havd ha e t sound, though n s Irisi usualli t t i hwit me yh written likewise an. Instances of it occur in such forma as the Ginadhon, already mentioned . 389p , Culeon,d ,an e genitivth man'a f eo s namn ei the Book of Deer; possibly it should be associated with a nominative Culii, which occurs in the same charter: see Stokes's Goidelica, p. 109. In Goidelic the vowel a has been gaining ground at the expense of o, as, for example, in the designation of St. Cainnech, who had a cell near St. Andrews, and is said to have been brother to Natlii: he is called in Adamnan's Colwiiba, iii. 17, Cainnechus mocu Dalon, which afterwards became Cainnech maccu Ddlann, s peoplhi otherwise d ear an e knows na Corca Dallann: e Reevesse ' Adamnan's Columba, . 220pp , 221e th ; Irish Nennius, p. 264 ; Stokes's Calendar of Oengus, Oct. 11 ; and the Glossarial Index, p. cclxxxviij. Other instances of a for an earlier o in Goidelic documents migh e mentionedb t have w ed probablan , f o e yon them in Beccan Ruimean, "Beccan of the Island of Bum," whose deat recordeds hi , unde e yeath r r e Annal676th n i f Tigernae, so h (Rev. Celt., xvii. 204) : thi Pictisa s suggestm hSu genitivr fo s e Ruimeonr o Rwmeon, which occur n German'i s s Martyrolog s Ruiminna y n i d an , tha Donegaf o t Ruim.s a l f I thi s should prove well foundedy ma e w , have here the key also to Adamnan's Geonee primarius eohortis, with Geonae Latinisina s a a Pictis f go h genitive Geon, whic s possibli h o yt referree , fableb Ce e havsono dt o th dt f Cruithn o sf e o beee r non eo the eponymou , however is e Pictss th t here noticeI b f .o o t , d that in the inscriptions we have a genitive ending ANN, which appears, so far as they are concerned, to have been kept distinct from onn or on. The instances are dattrrann and Ddrroann, also . . uorrann. In the case of Ddrroann, the ann seems simply substituted by the Picts for the ad or adh of druadh, the Goidelic genitive of drui, " a magician or druid." Adamuan mentions a family called Mocu Druidi, or " the Druid's Kin " (Reeves's Adamnan, i. 41): see also a Mo Druad in the Book of Ballymote, fo. 195^. . AnotheEN r o rN genitivEN e endin n Vorrenns i enn, s wa ga , e probablw d genitivAn y hav . e f samVavrix eo th e n i e genitivn i e e herb Drosten y e addema iv.n t i I .d that there seem o havt s e been 4 39 PKOCEEDING SOCIETYE , 18989 TH Y F O .SMA ,

likewise a genitive ending-inn or 'in': take, for . instance, Malechi,- genitive Maloechin '(Stokes's Goidelica, . 110pp , 111) d Forthin,an , ' Forth V (Skene's Fids and Scots, p. 10). Pausanias's Tevowla also in f/ Tevovvia /j.oipa may have been based on a genitive Genun or Genunn : there was,"a l eventsal t man'a , s name Gen, genitive uGe.no,e th de- f o ' delusion, which would fit as the base of a Pictish genitive Genun : see Anrf. of Ulster, where one reads, A.D. 578, Occisio Aedha mac Geno, and. A.D. 587, Mors Nepotum Geno: e dat r th locatin afo g these evente ar s wanting, but I should expect them to have been connected with Galloway t woulI . d thus appear more'correct perhap supposo st e that the Pictish genitive was indicated by the ending nn or n appended to the stein vowel, whichever it may have been, a, o, u, e, or i • and to r withou e cas th f Talluorr-n.vowea eo t n i s a l ET. This termination we have in Uoret in iv., and we may have it also in Nchtetri in xij., that is, supposing the first vocable to have consisted of a name Nelitet followed by a word beginning with ri. Compare No/met possibld an y Morbet, also 'Mac Lochit, Locket,"f o n "so wh s callei o d fathe f Cmithneachao r e Skene'se n: s PidsScots,d an . 45 Her y als . mentione, 6 be oma e . pp e worth d d cartit, given -by Cormac as a Pictish word for a pin or brooch, which has been some- times supposed borrowed fro mWelsa h source. Thi , however,sis ' very doubtful, as the word garfhon, given in Welsh dictionaries as meaning a t otherwisgoadno s i , e known, being probably somebody's careless copy- e Cornisth inf go h gartlion, "a goa d " : compar Cornisd Ol e h gertlii, "virgce." The Welsh is ierthi, "the rod used in driving oxen," and it. s derivei d from som ee Anglo-Saxo forth f mo n worrepresented.iw dno n ; . Englis yard,y hb "rod.a " IF, EB, EVV, EF. The instances of this termination are Osif, VERGAMEB-0,'Frobbaccennevv d Movvef;an Ticcvvevv, possibly also, ianw n dPevv-cerroccs.pe Her vowee th e l oscillates betwee:.e d an ni which is the original one 1 I am inclined to give the preference to the: i, as we have it in two inscriptions in South Wales, one yielding in Oga ma Goideli c genitive Cunacenniv-i n Latii d nan CVNOCENNI F1LIVS CVNOOENI HIC IACIT, and the other in Ogam Ogtene and in Latin HOGTIVIS FILI DEMETI. Nay, we might perhaps go. • INSCRIPTION E NORTHERTH 5 F O S39 N PICTS - .

much furthe y thae rforenamsa th tbac d an kf Lossi o e o Veda would hav laten ei r times made LOSSI Lossif,d Van which will serv introo et - duce an instance of probable coincidence between Pictish and Celtic. , ef) e terminatio ev seemr Th (o havf o i st , eniv belonge e nominath o dt - tive case, as when the name Frobbaccenn (Irish Srobcin) is made into Frobbaccennevv vij.n i , whil e correspondinth e g genitive probabld yha a nasal, making some such a syllable as en or enn. The declension that comes near it in Irish is that of such words as toimtiu, " opinion," genitive toimten, declinee relateth f i ds d a Lati n word mentio made some such a genitive as mentin-is or menten-is: as a matter of fact, the nearest Latin declension would be that of turbo, twbinis, or virgo, virginis. Compare also such word Eriu,s sa " Ireland," genitive Erenn, for Early Irish Iverio or Iveriu, genitive iverenn-as, while the Brythonic forms are Iicerytt' and Iioerifon, representing earlier forms like Iveriiu an dthay Iverion-os.f sa Lossio i Pictista y s herd ma wa h eAn I name , a borrowe t an no de fro on md Brythonic I suspec, t tha s forit ts mi du parn e i Brythonio t t c declension d tha an t ,woul i t d otherwise have been LOSSI Lossiur naturaVs fo wa r Lossiv; o t i l t thabu t in Brythonic mouths it should sound Lossio or Lossiu, genitive Lossion-os, and the stem of this latter survives in South Wales as the proper name Lleision. A few instances also .occur of the survival of the Pictish termination -•iv, if in Wales, in such names as Oureinniv or Gurcinnif and Enim (pronounced Eniv) r Heinif o d Henip[Ji\, an e Boo th f Llan ko i n Dav. otheOe nth r hande form t th onl no ,o syd wit prevaihe lPictis e inth h inscriptions e havw t e bu possibl, e nominativth y f 'poio en i apev, already notice Apev-Ritti,n di whic s followei h ipuaiy , b d1 . ix Osif n i exceptin e agglutinatioth f go thad ts en appende i n'th e f i eth t a d ipuai-Os, accordin whao gt t seem havo t s e bee Pictise nth h rule.n A 1 interesting name which deserves mention here was derived from that of the ancient Verturiones, and was, in the dative and accusative, Fortrinn-, and, in the genitive, Fortrenn, also Forthrenn: see St. Berchan's Pro- phec n Skene'i y , 102 e nominativ95 s , Th .Fids d Scots,88 . an pp e should be , but it is not known to occur in that form. It is, t possibl1Bu woul e e contrar yon righth e db n o ttreatinn yi g Drosten-ipe Uoret ett Forms, mean s reaa e b do t Drosten-ipe v Kore t Forcuset t . 6 39 PROCEEDING SOCIETYE , 18939 TH Y F .O SMA ,

however, to be identified with the more Pictish form Fothrif (Latin ablative Fotlireve), meaning the country between Fife and Stirling (Ibid., . 136)p r perhapo , e ancienth s t deaner. St f e Fothro yth n i i Andrews Register (p. 32), unless 'the dropping of one .of its rs in the later pronunciation should be considered to make this equation impos- t inclineno m siblethino a t d I .k tha t doei t s: compar e Tarbetd an Tarbat instead of Tarbert. e chronologth o t saie e Pictis b s th da w f yo hno y ma o worA tw r do inscriptions d subjecan ; t entirel o correctiot y . AndersoDr y d b n an n others, who have studied the Pictish symbol stones, I would venture the following conjectures:—The Picts were more given to representing men and animals on their monuments, or to ornamenting them with drawing a symboli f o s c nature, tha o writint n s this a suchga s d an ; kind of art shows itself more and more developed on the stones, the writing takes a secondary place : it becomes minute and relegated to a mouldin e edge f th I tha n somo .s gt so o i t ,y eperhap extenma e on st reason conversel thaty sa , d wheryan e writinth e g stands alone unac- e companiesupposeb y drawingy an ma y d b dt i ,mor e ancient than where it plays the part of an accompaniment to attempts at art, and that it dates back nearer to the time when the Picts learnt from their Goidelic teachers how to use the Ogam alphabet. It has already been urged thae Eoundeth t l Inscriptio n Latii n n letter s probabli s e th y oldest, and, accordin whao gt I thav e just suggested e e oldesth th , f o t Ogam probable sar Aquhollie yth e one, vj., near Stonehaven ix.d t an a , Newton. A phonological reason has been mentioned (p. 387) why the latter should be considered older than vij., and also than iv. on the St. Vigeans Stone, the script of which, containing the Goidelic name Forcus, may be said to date between the seventh and the ninth century. Probably the Island Inscriptions may, as a group, be regarded as later tha n formee e Mainlandthosth th l latese f n al o eth o r f d o t an , may be the Bressay Ogam, xix. Whilst considering the Scoonie Ogam, ij.I stumble, d acros name sth e Ehtarrnonn fore th m n i Ifharnan e th n i fragments of Tigernach recently published by Stokes in the Revue Geltique xvij see : . 201, wher readeone s A.D. 668—Itharna Oorindunet apud Pidores defuindi sunt. But I have great pleasure in acknow- INSCRIPTIONS OF THE NORTHERN PICTS. 397

ledging that I find I have heen anticipated by Lord Southesk, who suggested identifying the name with Eddarrnonn on the Dyke Stone as far back as 1886 : see the Proceedings, Dec. 14, 1885. I must have read his Lordship's remarks then and forgotten them since, so that e sensatioth w f makinno no d ha littla g I e discovery. But leavo ,t e this personal explanation mentioy ma I ,e nGhronicum th tha n i t Scot- torum entre th y occurs under 665 readd ,an sHuman: t Corindae apud Pictones defuncti sunt. In the Annals of Ulster it is nearly the same— Itarnan et Corindu apud Pictures defuncti sunt. The name occurs also in Ireland in the family designation of Ua Iferndin or 0' h-Iffernain, now Heffernan barone th n f i Owneyyo Countn i , y Limeric k: trace f so the old form also occur—Maccu Iferndin: see the Four Masters, A.D. 1047, 1150 O'Donovan'd ,an s note. Lord Southesk, wit hele hth p of Bishop Forbes's Kalendars f Scottisho Saints, trace e e namth th s n ei north finde h : t i bornsa sain y b et called Ethernanus, sais i o do t wh have belonge nobla o dt e famil n Scotlandi y havo t , e been educated in Ireland, and to have become bishop of Eathin, in . But the Bishop also believed (p. 334) that Eihernanns had a religious house on the Isle of May, on the coast of Fife. That may, however, have been another Ethernanus whosn ma eI infee t th f the rbu ,o s thae mwa on t obit has been cited as given by Tigernach under the year 668. Now crosses inscribed wit e namehth f thoso s whoo et m they belonged were, I take it, put up by or for persons of distinction and importance, and only one Itharnan occurs mentioned in the chronicles and annals where one would expect it. So the odds are, if I may say so, heavily in favour e identitoth f f Itharnayo n wit e Eddarrnonhth e Dykth f eno Crossd ,an assigninr lattee oou fth sevente o rt th halt gi f o f h century spelle Th -. ing 'Ehtarrnonn belongs probably to a later date. However, I wish to say that I offer these somewhat loose conjectures with the greatest diffi- hope able b th reviso et y edence n i tha ma ed ligh e I tthean ,th f o tmn i inferences drawn by others from the specimens of art accompanying the inscriptions on the two stones respectively and on the other Pictish monuments. As regards the Northern Picts and their contact with the Celts, it would appear from the foregoing remarks, that the first Celts to exercise 8 39 PROCEEDING SSOCIETYE , O13989 TH F. Y MA ,

influence on the Picts were Brythons, and several instances pointing in that direction have been mentioned. The foremost place among them s claimei e namth y e b d Vepogenos, which n Pictislii , , yielded Vipoig . 329)(p herr e borrowinfo ;eth g goe srattima y baco ean t e t kwhea n thematie th Vepo-gen-n i co s stilwa l retaine Brythonin di earle th yn ci portio e thirth f dno century. Another instanc a somewha f eo t earlier date occurs in the name of the Pict Argeritocoxos, which seems to have meant " Him of the Silver Leg": it is given the. husband of the lady whose remarkable conversation with Julia Domna, wife of the Emperor Severus, respecting Pictish morals summarises ,i Dioy db n Cassius ' The. n there is the word pett, genitive pette, which occurs in the charters in the Book of Deer, meaning a parcel or plot of land (see Stokes's Goideliea, pp. t stili 109 ,d l an entert intt 120)orpi pe , o s sa suc h names Pittens a - weem, Pitgaveny, and the like, in the Pictish country north of the Forth, though it seems to have been largely expelled by bal. However that wore th ma , d ybe petts bee ha n identifie y somb d e scholars wite th h Welsh wordpeth, "a'portio parr n o anythingf o t thina , casn i ged ";an they-are right wore th , d would see o mhavt e been borrowed some time or other before the Brythons had made their tt into the spirant th: that may be supposed to go back to the fifth century, perhaps still further. This pape alreads ri lono discussin y to alloo g t m f wo g later instances, and I will only say that I cannot think of any similarly early ones showin e Pictth g s under Goidelic influence. Wit e victorth h f o y Kennet e nintc Alpith ma hn i n century, Goidelic speech probably became dominant d previouslan , d doubtlesha t i y s been growing ever since Columba's missio PictisCourthe the nto of th beforkingBut .e Columba's time it would seem that the dominant Celtic influence among e Pictth s must- have been Brythonic teste. as ,saysuc o y t thad,b hs i t precarious dat languagf ao s disposal inquiree hi th t a s ea s .rha