But a stronger argument than this can be urged against his theory, namely, that among all the pagan names of men which have been preserved by our authentic annalists, not one appears to be called after a pagan deity; and if it had been a general custom to call children after such deities, it might be expected that at least a few of them would have been transmitted. Since, then, they have not been transmitted, how, I would ask, did Mr Beauford discover that such a custom had ever existed? It is true that after the establishment of Christianity in the fifth century, the descendants of the pagan Irish who entered into holy orders, or into the monastic state, had their pagan names sometimes changed, as we learn from the lives of the saints of the primitive Irish church, but no documents now remain to prove, or even suggest, that such a change had been made previous to the introduction of Christianity. It is undeniable that cognomens, epithets, or sobriquets, were frequently added to the first name from some warlike exploit, or from some perfection or imperfection of body, colour of hair, or disposition of mind; but this continued to be the custom in Christian times, and still continues so, but no authority has been discovered even to suggest that any change of the original pagan name had occurred previous to the introduction of Christianity; and we find that even long after that period many distinguished Irish bishops, abbots, and other ecclesiastics, bore the names of their pagan ancestors. It is also a groundless assumption that the chief changed his name for that of the territory after his election to the government, or that the names of either the clan or district became surnames or family names in the tenth century. Can any one believe that Brian was the name of the territory of the O’Briens before the establishment of the name O’Brien? Was Donnell the name of the territory of the O’Donnells previous to the tenth century? Was Niall the name of the principality of the O’Neills? So much then for Mr Beauford’s general theory as put forward in the introduction to his work. I shall now proceed to show the equal fallacy of the etymological processes by which he attempts to sustain his theoretical assumptions in the work itself; namely, that the names of Irish tribes and families were derived from the situations and natural features of the territories they inhabited. 1. “CLANN CUILEAN, or the race or children of the corner of the water; called also _Hy na mor_, or the district of the sea; the chiefs of which were denominated _Mac na mor aois_, the sons of the elders of the sea, by contraction Macnamara,” &c. Now, what will be thought of all this etymological induction, when it can be proved from history that _clann Cuileain_ signifies the race of _Cullen_?