An introduction to the history of Great Britain and Ireland: By James Macpherson, ...

LANGUAGE OF THE ANCIENT BRITISH NATIONS.

General Observations.

* 1.1 NATIONS are not so tenacious of their customs and manners as they are of their aboriginal tongues. The first may gradually vanish in the growing improvements of civil life; the latter can only be buried in the same grave with the people themselves. Conquest may con|fine the bounds of a language; commerce may corrupt it; new inventions, by in|troducing new words, may throw the old into disuse; a change in the mode of thinking may alter the idiom: but the ex|tirpation of those who speak any ori|nal tongue is the only means, by which it can be entirely destroyed, even where letters have been altogether un|known. It retires from successful inva|sion

into rocks and desarts; it subsists with the remains of a people; even moun|tains and rivers in part retain it when the people are no more.

* 1.2 That the Romans established their own language, in the regions of the West and North which submitted to their arms, is a position which the learned scarce ever doubted, and which the rest of the world still implicitly believe. The Latin has been considered as the fountain from which the Italian, French, and Spanish, derive their origin; and it must be con|fessed, that, in a confined degree, the opinion is extremely just. It is however certain, that this mark of their own great|ness, which the Romans seem to have left in the conquered provinces, proceeded more from the reputation of their litera|ture than from the power of their arms. The illustrious nation had too much sense to endeavour to impose their own language upon the conquered; and, had they even departed from their usual political prudence on that head, it is scarcely credible, that they could have succeeded in the attempt. All other conquering nations, to whom history extends its information, failed in their endeavours of the same kind. The victors have often adopted the tongue of the vanquished; but the vassals have scarce ever been known to drop their own language for that of their lords.

* 1.3 The Arabs who conquered Persia, the Persians who subdued India, the Tartars who extended their empire over China, the Turks who reign in Greece and its Isles, have not been able to establish their own language in their conquests. The servants of the court, the attendants of the prince, the posterity of the victors, in general, may retain the tongue of their original country; but the bulk of the peo|ple will also retain that which descended to them from their fathers. The Ro|mans themselves could never extend the Latin to the Provinces of the East; on the contrary, the language of their Greek vassals prevailed, at last, over their own. The obstinate despotism of William the Conqueror, and the perseverance of those Norman and French princes who succeed|ed him in the throne of England, could not force the language of France on the English nation; and the Lombards and Franks lost their own Sarmatic dialect in the tongues of Italy and Gaul. The cause is as obvious as the fact is true. The number of the conquerors bore no proportion to the vanquished; and, in the article of language, the majority al|ways prevails.

* 1.4 The connection between the Latin and the languages of Spain, France, and mo|dern Italy, must be traced to another source than the government of Rome.

The nations who inhabited those exten|sive regions originally, and whose poste|rity still, in a great degree, possess them, were, in fact, the same people with the Romans. Those Gaël, who in Italy went under the name of Umbri, were partly the ancestors of the Banditti who settled with Romulus on the banks of the Tiber. The Romans, in their own a|version to commerce, vindicate, in part, their Celtic origin against their pretended descent from the Greeks of Magna Grae|cia, who were in some measure a commer|cial people. Some of their own wri|ters join issue with us in this opinion. Their language, though tinctured with Hellenisms, is radically different from the Greek; and we shall, in a subsequent section, have occasion to shew, that the primitives of the Latin tongue differ not materially from the language of a branch of the Celtae, to whom neither the litera|ture nor the government of Rome ever extended themselves.

* 1.5 A similarity in the language of different nations is, of itself, sufficient to establish the certainty of their common origin, Were all the historical monuments of the English and Germans, by some accident, lost, the identity of the radical words common to the language of both, would convince mankind that one of those nati|ons must have originally migrated from

the other. When the Romans threw the first light on the immense track of coun|try which they distinguished by the name of Celtica, the same language as well as the same manners prevailed over the whole. The Aestiones, who inhabited Prussia and the banks of the Vistula, spoke nearly the same dialect with the ancient British nations* 1.6; and the Bastarnae and Scor|disci who lived on the Danube, differed not much in their language from the Aesti|ones† 1.7. The Britons, in the days of Tacitus, spoke a dialect of the Celtic little different from that of Gaul† 1.8; the Go|thini of Silesia retained the marks of their Gallic origin in their tongue§ 1.9. The in|habitants of Spain, if we except the Ibe|rians, were Gauls or Celtae, and must of course have spoken a dialect of the lan|guage of Gaul‖ 1.10; and the Gallo-Graeci of the lesser Asia, being in some measure the descendants of the Bastarnae and Scor|disci, must have retained a part, at least, of the tongue of their ancestors** 1.11. From

the pillars of Hercules to the mouth of the Danube, from the Hellespont almost to the Baltic, one language though in a great variety of dialects, prevailed; and, from that circumstance, should no other proof be produced, we may conclude, that all the nations who possessed that im|mense extent of country sprung originally from one and the same source.

* 1.12 It is more natural to suppose that the Latin owes, in part, its origin to one of the dialects of the great and general tongue which pervaded ancient Europe, than that it was formed by a few vaga|bonds who assembled together, for self|defence, on the shores of the Tiber. Some visionary pedants have been known to attempt the creation of a new language; illiterate men have always contented themselves with that which has been transmitted to them by their ancestors. In the progress of society, in the growth of inventions, a language is polished in its phrases, and enriched in the number of its words; but its first rude elements remain in its primitives, and serve to point out the fountain from which it originally flowed.

The Language of Ancient Britain.

* 1.13 Time, which effectuates a change in every thing, has a peculiar influence on language. In the less polished periods of society it grows gradually with advancing civilization; and, like those who speak it, it becomes corrupted through improve|ment. When literature and philosophy arrive at their height, for even these, like all human inventions, have their bounds, men of genius, as it were, arrest language in its progress, and secure, by their writ|ings, its permanency to future ages. They put their seals upon it, and send it down to posterity in a kind of independence on accident. Before the establishment of li|terature, or where it is imperfectly known, language, having no standard by which it can be fixed, fluctuates with the chang|ing manners of the society; and the longer it runs down through time, it departs the further from its primitive simplicity.

* 1.14 To this circumstance, and not to a difference of origin, we must ascribe that diversity of dialects which Julius Caesar found in Gaul. The Aquitani* 1.15 were

not understood by the Belgae, nor could the Celt, at the foot of the Alps, hold any conversation with the Gaul at the mouths of the Rhine; yet no writer has ever af|firmed that all Gaul was not possessed by one and the same people, though di|vided into separate states. The truth is, the identity of languages does not consist in their being mutually understood by the nations who speak them, but in the simi|larity discernible between the names of things which are common to all countries, and to every stage of society† 1.16. The Doric of Syracuse was not intelligible at Miletus; the Dutch can hold no discourse with the Silesians; yet the Sicilian and Ionian were Greeks; and one and the same nation possess the upper and lower Germany.

* 1.17 We have, in a preceding section, ob|served that Gaul and the lower Germany had sent colonies into Britain, at three different periods, before the arival of the Romans in the Island. The posterity of these must have differed considerably from one another in point of language. The Gaël, who still exist in North-Britain and Ireland, passed from the continent before

the arts of civil life had made any great progress in Gaul; and, in some measure, retain the unimproved language of their ancestors. The second colony were the posterity of those Gauls, who, being an|ciently settled beyond the Rhine, returned into the regions of the South, under the name of Cimbri. The Cumri of Wales are their descendants; and they preserve in their tongue, a tincture of the Sarma|tic of the East and North. The British Belgae spoke that dialect of the language of Gaul which still subsists among their posterity in lower Britanny. The three dialects which we have just mentioned, have been thought by many learned wri|ters to be the only genuine remains of the ancient Celtic; and others have added to these the language of the mountaineers of Asturias and Gallicia. Some have even gone so far as to affirm that these four languages are reciprocally understood by the Scots, Irish, and Welsh, the inhabi|tants of Britany, and the Spaniards who border on the Bay of Biscay.

* 1.18 The opinion is not just: The Biscayan has not even the most distant connection with the Celtic; the other languages de|rive, it is certain, their origin from one source: they agree in many radical words, but their idioms are different. The Welshman is as ignorant of the Gaëlic as the Spaniard of Arragon is of the dia|lect

of Dauphiny; and the Scot knows no more of the language of Britany, than the inhabitant of Palermo does of the tongue of Portugal.—In vain have the learned had recourse to the rude dia|lects of the Celtic, which remain in Bri|tanny and Wales, to form upon them some idea of that language. What they sought after with so much eagerness a|broad, was every day in their hands at home. The language of the Romans sprung originally in part from the Celtic stock; and the French, Italians, and Spaniards speak, in some measure, to this day, the tongue of their Celtic ancestors. To render the first part of the position pro|bable, is to prove the latter beyond the power of reply.

The Latin and Gaëlic compared.

* 1.19 The Gallic Umbri* 1.20, and their poste|rity, the Tuscans and Sabins† 1.21, were in possession of a great part of the lower Italy before the foundation of Rome was

laid. These were the same with the A|borigines, whose peculiar and rude man|ner of life bore testimony of their Celtic origin. When the Greeks, from their possession of the arts which they had re|ceived from Phoenicia and Egypt, began to multiply their numbers in Peloponnesus and the Islands of the Archipelago, they sent abroad colonies who settled on the shore of the lower Italy, and carried on some commerce in its ports. Out of the vagabonds of these two very different sets of men Romulus collected the founders of Rome. The mixed manners, and the mixed language of the Romans, prove their double origin, and furnish a kind of demonstration that the illustrious nation derived their blood from the Celtae, as well as from the Greeks of Magna Grae|cia* 1.22.

* 1.23 The Latin derives many of its roots and primitive words from the Greek; it also draws some from the ancient Celtic. The Scots of Caledonia were never sub|dued by the Romans; and they had little connection with that illustrious people. The Roman language cannot be supposed

to have penetrated where neither the lite|rature nor the arms of Rome ever entered; yet there is a wonderful similarity, if not a perfect identity, between many primitives in the Gaëlic, and others that correspond with them exactly in the Latin tongue. This circustance seems to demonstrate, that the Gallic Umbri of Italy, who were partly the ancestors of the Romans, and the Gaël of Caledonia, who were the sole ancestors of the ancient Scots, swarm|ed originally from the same hive.

* 1.24 To prove the position by example a short catalogue of corresponding words is subjoined in alphabetical order:

Latin	Gaelic
Aër	Aër	Air
Aes Eris	Eris* 1.25	Brass
Aetas	Ette* 1.26	An Age
Agnus	Uan	A Lamb
Altus	Alt	High
Amnis	Amhon† 1.27	A River
Ancilla	Bancilla† 1.28	A Servant Maid

Anguilla	A Ghellac	An Eel
Anima	Anim	The Soul
Aqua	Oicha‖ 1.29	Water
Aquila	Acuil	Eagle
Arca	Arc	A Chest
Argentum	Arged	Silver
Arma	Arm	Arms
Aro	Ar	To plough
Aurum	Or	Gold
Betula	Bëth	A Birch Tree
Bos	Bo	A Cow
Bulga	Bolg	A Budget
Bufo	Buaf	A Toad
Caballus	Cabul	A Sorry Horse
Caecus	Caocha	Blind
Canis	Cana	A Whelp or Puppy
Cantor	Cainter	A Singer
Candela	Caindel	Candle
Cannabis	Cannab	Hemp
Carus	Cara	Dear
Caritas	Caritas	Friendship
Caseus	Caise	Cheese
Capra	Cabhar	A Goat
Cathedra	Cathoir	A Chair
Catus	Catta	Cat
Cella	Cealla	A Cell
Centum	Ced† 1.30	An Hundred
Cera	Cer	Wax

Cingulum	Cingul* 1.31	A Belt
Chorda	Corda	A String
Cicur	Ciocair	Tame
Circulus	Circul	A Circle
Columba	Colum	A Dove
Cortex	Cort	Bark
Creta	Creadh	Chalk
Cruor	Cru	Blood
Culex	Culac	A Fly
Culter	Cultair	Coulter of a Plough
Cuneus	Ceuna	A Wedge
Currus	Carru† 1.32	A Chariot
Cura	Curam	Care
Decem	Dec	Ten
Dexter	Deas	Right
Dies	Di† 1.33	Day
Deus	Dia	God
Domus	Dom	A House
Duo	Do	Two
Durus	Dur	Hard
Equus	Each	A Horse
Fagus	Faiga	A Beech Tree
Febris	Feabras§ 1.34	A Fever

Floccus	Floccas	A Lock of Wool
Frater	Vrather	Brother
Fulmen	Folmhein‖ 1.35	A Thunder Bolt
Fundus	Fon	Ground
Gallus	Caollach	A Cock
Gladius	Claidhea	A Sword
Hora	Urh	Hour
Hasta	Astas	A Spear
Hordeum	Ordna	Barley
Lacus	Loch	Lake
Latro	Ladran* 1.36	Robber
Ligo	Leige	A Mattock
Linum	Lin	Lint
Lorica	Lurich	A Coat of Mail
Luna	Luan† 1.37	The Moon
Mala	Meil	The Jaw Bone
Manus	Main	The Hand
Mare	Moir† 1.38	Sea
Mater	Mather	Mother
Matutinus	Mattin§ 1.39	Early
Mille	Mile	A Thousand
Mons	Monna	A Mountain

Nox	Noich	Night
Novem	Noif	Nine
Oceanus	Oicean‖ 1.40	Ocean
Olor	Eola	Swan
Octo	Ochto	Eight
Ovum	Ouff	Egg
Quater	Ceather	Four
Quinque	Cuinc	Five
Rex	Ri	King
Sericum	Seric	Silk
Sex	Se	Six
Septem	Secht	Seven
Sol	Solus	Light or the Sun
Sonus	Suain	A Sound
Tellus	Tallu or Tellur	Earth
Taurus	Taru	A Bull
Terra	Tir	Earth
Tres	Tri	Three
Tu	Tu	Thou
Tumulus	Tum	A Hillock
Turba	Turba	A Multitude
Undecim	Hunc-dec	Eleven

Viginti	Fighint	Twenty
Unus	Hun	One

* 1.41 This catalogue might be extended to a much greater length, but nothing can be more tedious and unentertaining than a dry list of words. To remove every ground of supposition that the Scots of either of the British Isles borrowed any part of their language from the Latin it is necessary to observe, that almost every one word in the Gaëlic column is either a compound or derivative from some well known primitive in that language. The Gaëlic primitives are all monosyllables. Wherever a word of more syllables than one presents itself it is a compound; and all the adjectives are formed, by the ad|dition of some termination or other, to a substantive noun.

* 1.42 To draw, in this place, a parallel be|tween the Gaëlic, the Welch, and the language of Britanny, would not even have novelty to recommend it. The ingenious Mr. Lhud's comparative vocabulary is already in the hands of the curious; and to such as are not fond of philological dis|quisition it is sufficient to observe, that the three languages, though not recipro|cally understood by the Scots, Welch, and the inhabitants of Britanny, are evi|dently descended from that tongue which

the nations of Gaul carried in their mi|grations to every quarter of Europe. It is even demonstrable, were not the sub|ject foreign to this Introduction, that the Italian, Spanish, and especially the mo|dern French, owe their origin, to speak in a confined sense, more to the ancient Celtic than to the Latin, which was itself, in part, a dialect of that language.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Nations te|nacious of original tongues.
• * 1.2

  The Latin not the mo|ther of the language of France, &c.
• * 1.3

  proved from collateral examples.
• * 1.4

  Cause of the connection of the French, &c. with the Latin.
• * 1.5

  The Celtic once the universal language in Europe.
• * 1.6

  Dextero Suevici maris litore Aestiorum gentes alu|untur: quibus ritus habitus Suevorum, lingua Britan|nicae proprior. Tacit. Germ. xlv.
• † 1.7

  Scordisci Galli. Strabo, lib. vii.

  Bastarnae Scor|discis lingua et moribus aequales. Livius, lib. xl.
• † 1.8

  Sermo haud multum diversus. Tacit. Agric. xi.
• § 1.9

  Gothinos Gallica lingua coarguit. Tacit. Germ. xliii.
• ‖ 1.10

  Galli occidua Europae usque ad Gades incolunt. Strabo, lib. ii.
• ** 1.11

  Justin. xxxii.
• * 1.12

  The Latin descended from it in part.
• * 1.13

  General re|flections.
• * 1.14

  Cause of di|versity of dialects.
• * 1.15

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Strabo, lib. iv.
• † 1.16

  Strabo says, that the nations of Gaul differed very little from one another in point of language

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Strabo, lib. iv.
• * 1.17

  Three in Britain at the arrival of the Ro|mans.
• * 1.18

  Observati|ons on the Biscayan, Armorican, Welsh, &c.
• * 1.19

  Origin of the Ro|mans.
• * 1.20

  Bocchus absolvit Gallorum veterum propaginem Umbros esse. Solin. viii.

  Umbros veterum Gallorum propaginem esse Marcus Antonius refert. Servius in Aeneid. xii.
• † 1.21

  Zenodotus Traezenius qui Umbrorum historiam conscripsit narrat Sabinos pro Umbris appellatos. Dionys. Halic. lib. ii.
• * 1.22

  Veresimile barbarici etiam generis reliquias nonnullas e vicinis et priscis incolis cum Graecis se conjunxisse. Dionys. Halic. lib. ii.

  Be that as it will, the Sabins were received into the city of Rome under Titus Tatius; and the Sabins were Umbri, and the Umbri Gaël.
• * 1.23

  They de|rived in part their lan|guage from the Celtae.
• * 1.24

  Latin com|pared with the Gaëlic or Caledo|nian tongue.
• * 1.25

  Lhud's Archae. Britan.
• * 1.26

  Lhud's Archae. Britan.
• † 1.27

  Pronounced Avon.
• † 1.28

  From Ban, or Bean, woman; and Cilla, pro|nounced Killa, servant. It is observable that the C of the Latin is pronounced invariably like K in the Gaëlic language; which is a kind of proof that the Romans pronounced it in the same way; for instance, the Latin Cera, (wax) is pronounced KER in the Galic, though it is always written Ger.
• ‖ 1.29

  Lhud's Archae. Britan.
• † 1.30

  Or Cent, pronounced Kent.
• * 1.31

  Cingal, pronounced Kingul, signifies literally any thing that is wrapped round the waist.
• † 1.32

  From Car, turning round; in allusion to the wheels.
• † 1.33

  As in Di-Luar, Monday.
• § 1.34

  From Fea, a vein; and Bras, quick; literally a quick pulse.
• ‖ 1.35

  Literally rushing fire.
• * 1.36

  From Lader, strong; in allusion to the force used by robbers.
• † 1.37

  Luan is literally the full moon, from Lan, sull.
• † 1.38

  Mor, greatness emphatically.
• § 1.39

  Mattin literally good or precious light.
• ‖ 1.40

  Pronounced Aikean, or Aigen.
• * 1.41

  A remark.
• * 1.42

  Reflections