Camden's Britannia newly translated into English, with large additions and improvements ; publish'd by Edmund Gibson ...

SCOTS.

THE place among the British Nations next in order to the Picts, is in justice due to the Scots; but before I treat of them, lest some spiteful and ill-natur'd men should misconstrue those things for calumny, which with all sincerity and plain-dealing I have here collected out of antient Writers concerning the Scots; I must caution the Reader, that every word here is to be referred to the old, true, and genuine Scots only; whose poste∣rity are those that speak Irish, who possess for a long way together that now called the West part of Scot∣land, and the Islands thereabouts; and are commonly termed Highland-men. For those more civilized, who inhabit the East part of the country, though they are adopted into that name, yet are not really Scots, but of the same German original with us English. This they cannot but confess, nor we but acknow∣lege; being called, as well as we, by the aforesaid Highland-men, Sassones. Besides, they speak the same language that we do, namely the Saxon, with some variation in Dialect only; which is an infallible proof of the same original. In which regard, I am so far in this from casting any reflection upon them, that I have rather loved them the more, as men of the same blood and extraction, and have ever respected them, even when the Kingdoms were distinct, and now much more, since by the favour of God we are uni∣ted into one body, under one sovereign head of Eng∣land and Scotland; which may the Almighty sancti∣fie to the good, happy, prosperous, and peaceful state of both nations.

Thef beginning and etymology of the Scotch na∣tion, as well as its neighbours, is so wrapt up in mists and darkness, that even the sagacious Buchanan either did not discover it, or only discovered it to himself: for he has not answered the expectation of the world concerning him in this point. Upon this account, I have long forbore entring the lists, and playing the fool with others, in admiring fables. For, a man may as colourably refer the original of Scotland to the Gods, as to Scota, that sham-daughter of Pharaoh, King of Aegypt, who was married to Gaithelus, son of Cecrops, the founder of Athens. But, as this opi∣nion is rejected by those that are ingenuous among the Scots themselves, as sprung from a gross ignorance of Antiquity; so this other of a later date, absurdly ta∣ken from a Greek original, that the Scots are so called quasi 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is to say, obscure, ought likewise to be hissed out, and exposed, as spightfully contrived in dishonour to a most famous and warlike nation. Nor is that opinion of our Florilegus, namely, that the Scots are so called, as arising from a confused med∣dley of nations, universally current. Yet I cannot but admire, upon what grounds Isidorus could say, That the Scots in their own tongue have their name from their painted bodies, because they are marked by iron needles with ink, and the print of various figures. Which is al∣so cited in the same wordsg by Rabanus Maurus, in his Geography to the Emperor Lodovicus Pius, now ex∣tant in Trinity College Library at Oxford.

But seeing Scotland has nursed up those that can trace her Original from the highest steps of Antiquity,

and do it both to their own honour, and that of their Country, if they will but employ their whole care and thoughts for a while upon it; I will only give some short touches upon those things, which may afford them some light into the truth of it, and offer some others, which I would have them weigh a lit∣tle diligently: for I will not pretend to determine a∣ny thing in this controversie. First therefore of their original, and then of the place from whence they were transplanted into Ireland. For 'tis plain, that out of Ireland, (an Isle peopled formerly by the Britains, as shall be said in its proper place,) they were transpor∣ted into Britain; and that they were seated in Ire∣land when first known to any Writers by that name. So Claudian, speaking of their inroads into Britain;

—Totam cum Scotus Hibernem Movit, & infesto spumavit remige Thetis. When Scots came thundring from the Irish shores, And th'ocean trembled struck with hostile oars.

In another place also,

Scotorum cumulos flevit glacialis Hiberne. And frozen Ireland moan'd the crowding heaps Of murther'd Scots.—

Orosius likewise writes, that Ireland is peopled by nations of the Scots. Agreeable is also that of Isidore. Scot∣land and Ireland are the same: but it is called Scotland, because it is peopled by nations of the Scots. Gildas calls them Hib••rnos grassatores, Irish robbers. Bede also, The Scots who inhabit Ireland, an Island next to Britain. And so in other places. Eginhardus, who lived in the age of Charles the Great, expresly calls Ireland, the Island of the Scots. Thus also Giraldus Cambren∣sis, That the Scotch nation is the off-spring of Ireland, the resemblance of their language and dress, as well as of their weapons and customs, continued to this day, do sufficiently prove. But now for that I had to offer to be consi∣dered by the Scots.

Since they who are the true genuine Scots, own not the name of Scots, but call themselves Gaoithel, Gael, and Albin; and many people are called by their neighbours after another name than what they give themselves, by which the first rise of a nation is often traced; as for instance, the people of the lower Pan∣nonia, who call themselves Magier, are called by the Dutch Hungari, because they were originally Hunns; those bordering upon the forest Hercynia, go by the name of Czechi among themselves, whereas they are called by others Bohaemi, because they are the off-spring of the Bott in Gaul; the Inhabitants of Africa, who have also a name among themselves, are nevertheless called by the Spaniards Alarbes, because they are Ara∣bians; the Irish, who call themselves Erenach, are by our Britains called Gwidhill; and both the Irish and Britains give us English no other name than Sasson, be∣cause we are descended from the Saxons. Since these things are thus, I would desire it might be examined by the Scots, whether they were so called by their neighbours, quasi Scythae. For as the low Dutch call both the Scythians and Scots by this one word, Scutten; so it is observed from the British writers, that our Bri∣tains likewise called both of them Y-Scot. Ninnius also expresly calls the British inhabitants of Ireland Scythae, and Gildas names that Sea, over which they passed out of Ireland into Britain, Vallis Scythica. For so it is in the Paris Edition of him, whereas others absurd∣ly read it Styticha vallis. Again King Alfred (who 7 hundred years ago turned Orosius's History into Saxon) translates Scots by the word Scyttan; and our own borderers to Scotland do not call them Scots, but Scyttes and Scetts. For as the same people are called (so Walsingham has it) Getae, Getici, Gothi, Gothici; so from one and the same original come Scythae, Scitici, Scoti, Scotici.

But then, whether this name was given this nation by the neighbours, upon account of its Scythian, man∣ners, or because they came from Scythia, I would have them next to consider. For Diodorus Siculus and Strabo expresly compare the old people of Ireland, (which is the true and native country of the Scots) with the Scythians, in barbarity. Besides, they drink the blood out of the wounds of the slain, they ratifie their leagues with a draught of blood on both sides, and the wild Irish (as also those that are true Scots) think their honour less or greater, in propor∣tion to the numbers they have slain; as the Scythians heretofore did. Farther, 'tis observable, that the main weapons among the Scots, as well as among the Scy∣thians, were bows and arrows. For Orpheus calls the Scythians 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Aelian and Julius Pollux, Sagittarii, that is to say, Archers; whereupon the learned are of opinion that both nations took their name from their skill in arching. Nor is it strange, that several nations should take the same name from the same manners; since those that have travelled the West-Indies tell us, that all stout men, who with their bows and arrows infest the whole India, and the Islands about it, are called by this one name of Caribes, though they are of several nations.

But that they came from Scythia, the Irish Histo∣rians themselves relate; for they reckon Nemethus the Scythian, and long after that Dela, (descended from the posterity of Nemethus, that is to say, of Scythian extraction) among the first inhabitants of Ireland. Ninnius also, Eluodugus's Scholar, expresly writes thus: In the fourth age of the world (he means that space between the building of the Temple and the Babylonish Captivity) the Scythians possessed themselves of Ireland. Agreeable with this is the authority of mo∣dern writers; of Cisnerus in his Preface to Crantzius; and Reinerus Reineccius, who says, there remains descen∣ded from the Scythians a nation of Scots in Britain, &c. Yet I very much question, notwithstanding the Getes were a Scythick nation, whether Propertius means our Irish in this of his,

Hiberni{que} Getae, Picto{que} Britannia curru. And Irish Getes, and British foes that ride In painted Chariots—

But the honour of the Scots (forsooth) is not to be saved in this point, unless they be transplanted from Spain into Ireland. For this, both they and their Historians as zealously stickle for, as if their lives and liberties were at stake; and indeed not without rea∣son. And therefore all this is but lost labour, if there are no Scythians to be found in Spain. That the Scy∣thians then were there, (not to mention that Pro∣montory among the Cantabri, called Scythicum, next to Ireland; nor to heed what Strabo writes, that the Cantabri were like the Scythians in manners and bar∣barity,) is clearly shewn us by Silius Italicus, who was born in Spain. For that the Concani, a nation of Cantabria, were the off-spring of the Massagetae, that is, the Scythians, appears by this verse of his;

Et quae Massagetem monstrans feritate parentem Cornipedis fusa satiaris Concane venâ. Concans, that show themselves of Scythian strain, And horse's blood drink from the reeking vein.

Some few lines after, he informs us that the Sarmatae (who are granted by all to be Scythians) built Susana, a City of Spain, in this verse,

— Sarmaticos attollens Susana muros. Susan, that rears her proud Sarmatian walls.

From these Sarmatae, or Scythians, the Luceni, which Orosius places in Ireland, seem to be descended, see∣ing Susana is reckon'd by the Spaniards themselves a∣mong the Lucensii, as likewise the Gangani of Ireland from these Concani. For the Lucensii and Concani a∣mong the Cantabri were neighbours; as the Luceni and Gangani were in that coast of Ireland which lies towards Spain. If any one starts the question, Who these Scythians were that came into Spain? I can say nothing to it, unless you'll allow them to have been Germans. I wish the Scots themselves would consi∣der a little farther of it. That the Germans formerly enter'd into Spain, not to urge Pliny who calls the Oretani of Spain, Germans; Seneca, who was himself a Spaniard, will shew us. The Pyrenees (he says) did not stop the passage of the Germans; the freakishness of humane nature drew it self into these impassable and un∣known ways. And that the Germans were called Scy∣thians, may not only be gather'd from Ephorus and Strabo, who call all those nations towards the north Scythians; but also from Pliny, The name of the Scy∣thians

(says he) is every where used among the Sarmatae and Germans. Aventinus is a witness, that the Ger∣mans were nam'd Scythae and Scythulae by the Hunga∣rians. Now to derive their Original from the Scy∣thians can no ways be dishonourable, since they are not only a most antient people, but have conquer'd many other nations; and have ever been invincible themselves, and free from the yoke of any other em∣pire. I must not omit, that the Cauci and Menapii, (who were reckon'd among the most famous nations in Germany) are placed by the same names, and at the same distance by Ptolemy in Ireland; which makes it probable, that they took both their name and original from the said Germans.

If the Scots are not descended from these; I would have them consider, whether they are not the off-spring of those Barbarians, who were driven out of Gallaecia in Spain by Constantine the Great; accord∣ing to King Alphonsus's Chronicle. For it is from those parts that they would have themselves to have been transplanted into Ireland. If they examine what these Barbarians were, I do not doubt, but they'll agree with me, that they were Germans; For in the reign of Gallienus, Orosius says that the remoter Germans possess'd themselves of Spain then wasted; and who could these remoter Germans be but the Scythians? But that edition of Aurelius Victor, publish∣ed by Andreas Schottus, calls those Germans, Franks. Yet seeing these Franks and the remoter Germans sailing out of Germany, were carried a long way by stress of weather into the ocean; and, as Nazarius says to Constantine, infested the Spanish coasts all along our seas; who can ever believe that they left Ireland (a most fruitful Island, and rarely well situated for cruising upon Spain) for the dry barren soil of Biscay? Nay rather, as the Norwegians from Scandia in the time of Charlemain, and afterwards, often invaded Ireland and got possession there; so we may ima∣gine, and that very probably, that formerly the Franks did the same, and that they were transported from thence to Spain; and being driven out there by Constantine the Great, return'd to Ireland. 'Tis also like∣ly, that more of them afterwards went thither, as well when the Vandals and the Goths made those tragical outrages in Spain, and the barbarians fell to war among themselves, and so kill'd and plunder'd one another; as when the invasion of the Saracens gaul'd the Spaniards, and drove many of them into Gallitia and Cantabria. But let others examine these matters; it may suffice for me, that I was at least wil∣ling to remove this cloud.

The next query I would offer to be consider'd by them, is, how it comes to pass that the Irish, who are the Ancestors of the Scots, and the Scots them∣selves, glory in the name Gael and Gaiothel; and in their languages are called Gaicthlac; and why they named that part of Britain where they first settled, Argathel: From what original can they derive these names? From the Gallaeci in Spain, many of whom doubtless shifted into Ireland; and whose first origi∣nal is to be fetch'd from the Gallati or Gauls? or from the Goths, as some moderns are of opinion, who would deduce the word Gaiothel, (as Cathalonia in Spain) from the Goths? Here they may seek proofs from the resemblance between the Gothick language and the Irish; which yet has no congruity with any other language of Europe that I can find, but only the British and the German. How true that of Huntington may be; The Scots came from Spain to Ireland in the fourth age of the world; a part of them still remaining speaks the same language, and are called Navarri; I say how true this passage is, let others judge. I here take no notice of David Chambres, a Scotchman, who has been informed by the Jesuites, that the Scotch language is spoke in the East-Indies. I am afraid the distance of that country might prompt the credulous man to take the liberty of telling a lye, which he never made.

If arguments may be drawn from the habits; we shall soon find the same dress and apparel among the Highl••nders of Scotland, that was formerly used by the Goths; as appears by Sidonius, who in his description of a Goth, has given you the fair draught of a Scotch Highlander. They shine (says he) with yellow; they cover their feet as high as the ancle with hairy untann'd leather; Their knees, legs, and calves are all bare. Their garment is high, close, and of sundry colours, hardly reaching down to their hams. Their sleeves only cover the upper part of their arms. Their inner coat is green, and edged with red fringe. Their belts hang down from the shoulder. The lappets of their ears are cover'd with locks of hair hanging over them (for so the manifold and distinct twists that there are in the hair of the Scotch and Irish, are properly called.) Their Arms are hooked Spears (which Gildas terms uncinata tela) and hatchets to fling. Th••y were also strait bodied coats (as Porphyrio says) without girdles. If this is not the very habit of the Irish-Scots, I appeal to their own judgments. I would also have them think upon this passage of Giraldus Cambrensis in his first Book De Institutione Principis: When Maximus was transported from Britain into Gaul (with the whole strength of men, arms and ammuniton, that the Island could raise) to possess himself of the Empire, Gratian and Valentinian brothers and partners in the Empire, shipped over the Goths (a nation hardy and valiant, being at that time either their allies, or subject and obliged to them by some Imperial favours) from the borders of Scythia, into the north parts of Bri∣tain, in order to annoy them, and make them call back the usurper with their youth. But they being too strong, both by reason of the natural valour of the Goths, and also because they found the Island destitute of men and strength, possest themselves of no small territories in the northern parts of the Island. But now, who these Goths were, others must find out, unless they may be al∣lowed to be Scots; and perhaps they may have some light into that search from Procopius, where Belisa∣rius answers the Goths, expostulating why they had granted Sicily to the Romans, in these words. We permit the Goths likewise to have Britain, which is much more excellent than Sicily; being heretofore conquer'd by the Romans. For 'tis reason that they who bestow favours, should receive either equal thanks, or an equal return of kindness. To this also may seem to be referr'd what the Scots write of Fergusius the Scot's being a com∣panion of Alarick the Goth at the sacking of Rome; what Irenicus tells us of Gensricus King of the Vandals going over to Scotland and Britain; and what Cambren∣sis (I know not upon how good authority) relates of the Gaideli or Scots, taking not only their name, but their original from the Vandals; who (as P. Diaconus in∣forms us) were the same with the Goths. Nor is it to be thought a diminution of the glory of the Scots, if they own themselves the progeny of the Goths, when the most potent Kings of Spain value themselves upon that extraction; and the greatest of the Nobility a∣mong the Italians either derive their pedigree from the Goths, or at least pretend to do it. And the Emperor Charles the fifth was wont to say in good earnest, that all the Nobility of Europe were derived from Scandia and the Goths. However, all this is not so weighty, as that I dare persuade my self, that the Scots are the real off spring of the Goths.

In short, I would have the learned part of the Scotchmen consider, whether they are not descended from the old British Inhabitants of Ireland, (for it is certain that the British formerly inhabited Ireland,) and whether they were called Scythae or Scoti, be∣cause they were like the Scythians in manners; or be∣cause they were the real Scythians that came out of Scandia or Scythia, (to whom the Gallaeci, Franks, or Germans driven out of Spain, and also the Goths or Vandals, joined themselves, when Spain was im∣broil'd with a bloody war) or else that medley of people that flocked into Ireland, and thereupon got that name among the nations thereabouts. The lan∣guage (says Giraldus) of the Irish is called Gaidelach, be∣ing as it were a compound of all other languages. And Florilegus, whencesoever he takes it; The Scots have their Original from the Picts and Irish, as being made up out of several nations. For that is called Scot which is amassed together out of several things. Thus the Al∣mans (according to Asinius Quadratus) went by that name, because they arose from a medley of different men. Neither can it seem strange to any one, that so many nations should formerly crowd into Ireland, seeing that Island lies in the center between Britain and Spain, and very advantageous for the French-Sea;

and that in these eight hundred years last past, it is most certain from History, that the Norw••gians, and the Oustmans from Germany; and that the Eng∣lish, the Welsh, and the Scots out of Britain, have planted and settled themselves there. This is the sum of what I would desire to be considered by the Scots in this matter. In the mean time let them remember, I have asserted nothing, but only hinted some things, which may seem pertinent to this enquiry. If all this gives no light into the original of the Scots, they must apply themselves for it elsewhere, for I am per∣fectly in the dark in this point; and have followed the truth, (which has still fled from me) with much labour to no purpose; yet I hope nothing is said in this search that can reasonably disgust any one.

Concerning the time when the name of Scots was first broached in the world, there is some dispute; and upon this very point Humfrey Lhuid (the best of Antiquaries by the best of Poets) is quarrelied by Buchanan; For Lhuid having said that the name of Scoti was not to be found in Authors before Con∣stantine the Great, Buchanan flies upon him, catches him fast, and with two petty arguments thinks to dispatch him; the one drawn from the Panegyrist, and the other from his own conjecture. Because the old Panegyrist says, that Britain in Caesar's time was infested by the Irish enemies; By consequence (for∣sooth,) the Scots at that time were planted in Britain; whereas no one before ever said so much, as that those Irish had then any settlement, much less that they were Scots. The Panegyrist without question, after the common way of writers, had his eye upon his own times in it, and not upon those of Caesar. As for the conjecture, it is not his own, but that of the most learned Joseph Scaliger. For in his notes to Propertius, while by the by he restores that verse of Seneca's to the true Reading,

• ...Ille Britannos
• ...Et caerulos
• ...Colla Cathenis,
• ...Ultra noti
• ...Scuta Brigantes
• ...Jussit, &c.
• ...Littora ponti,
• ...Dare Romuleis.

He puts it Scotobrigantes; and forthwith cries out, that the Scots are indebted to him for the discovery of their original; for my part, I am sorry I cannot se∣cond this opinion, having ever honour'd him upon many accounts, and much admir'd his learning. For this conjecture is not the product of Copies, but of his own ingenuity and parts▪ and the sense will bear either Reading, caerule••s scuta Brigantes as all the Books have it, or Caeruleos cute Brigantes, as the most learned Hadr. Junius reads it. Yet Buchanan, (chusing ra∣ther to play the fool with his own Wit and that of another, than to close with the common and true Reading) cries up this conjecture to the skies. First because Authors do not inform us, that the Britains painted their shie••ds. Secondly, that he said Scoto-Brigantes, for difference sake, that he might distin∣guish them from the Brigantes of Spain and Ireland Lastly, that in this verse he might distinguish be∣tween the Britains and the Brigantes, as different na∣tions. But if one may dispute this point, what should hinder them from painting their shields, who painted themselves and their chariots? To what end should he coin the new word Scoto-Brigantes for di∣stinction sake? When he calls them Caeruleos, and says they were subdued by Claudius, does not this suffici∣ently distinguish them from the other Brigantes? That observation of the Britains and Brigantes, as being different nations, does not look like a Poet, who could never be ignorant of the poetical way of expressing the whole by a part. Wherefore, seeing these pleas will not carry it, I will reinforce Bucha∣nan with a supply from Egesippus, who is commonly thought very antient. For where he treats of the greatness of the Romans, he says; Scotlandf which owes nothing to other Countreys, dreads them, and so does Saxony, inaccessible by reason of its bogs. But hold, this argument will not come up to the point; for he liv'd since Constantine, as appears by his own Writings; nor does this make any more for the Scots living in Britain, than that verse of Sidonius. but now cited. Yet a more weighty reason than all this, is that which the most famous and learned J. Cragius has started after a nice enquiry out of J••sephus Ben G••ri••n con∣cerning the destruction of Jerusalem, that the Scots in a Hebrew copy are expresly so named, where Munster in his latin translation falsly puts the Britains for the Scots. But I have not sufficiently discovered in what age this Ben-Gorion lived. 'Tis plain he lived since Flavius Josephus, seeing he has made men∣tion of the Franks.

Yet if I may engage against so many great men in this controversy: As far as I have observed, the first mention of the Scotch nation we meet with in Authors, is in the reign of Aurelian. For Porphyry, who then writ against the Christians, takes notice of them in these words, as S. Hierom tells us. Nor has Britain, a fruitful province in the hands of Tyrants, nor the Scotch nations, nor any of those barbarous nations all round to the very Ocean, heard of Moses and the Pro∣phets. At which time also, or a little before, Anti∣quaries observe that the names of those mighty na∣tions the Franks and Almans, were first heard of in the reign of Gallienus. That of some Authors there∣fore is not grounded upon sure authority; that the Name and Kingdom of the Scots flourish'd in Britain many ages before the birth of Christ. Rather take the time of it from Giraldus. When Nellus the great reigned in Ireland, the six sons of Muredus King of Ulster possess'd the north parts of Britain. So from these a nation was propagated, and call'd by a peculiar name Scotland, which inhabits that corner even to this day. But that this happen'd about the time when the Ro∣man Empire began to decay, is thus inferr'd. In the reign of Lagerius, son of this Nellus, in Ireland, Pa∣trick, the Irish Apostle, came thither; it being then much about the year 430 after Christ's nativity. So that this seems to have fallen about the time of Hono∣rius Augustus. For, whereas before they lived after a rambling manner, without any fixed abode, as Am∣mianus says, and had long infested Britain and the marches thereof; then they seem to have settled in Britain. But they would have it. that they then first return'd from Ireland, whither they had withdrawn themselves, when they were routed by the Romans and the Britains; and they take this passage of Gil∣das to be meant of that time. The Irish robbers return home, with design to come back again shortly. About this time Reuda mention'd by Bede, is thought by some to have settled himself in this Island, upon a winding of the River Cluid northward, either by force or love. From this Captain (says he) the Dal∣reudini are so called to this day: for in their tongue dal signifies a part; and from this Reuda it is (as others think) that we call them R••dshanks. 'Tis thought also that this Simon Brech (whom the Scots affirm to have been the founder of their nation) flourish'd in these times. The true name of him was Sinbrech, that is to say, freckled Sin, as we read it in Fordon; perhaps the very same Brichus, who about the age of S. Patrick with Thuibaius, Macleius and Auspacus, Scotchmen, infested Britain; as we find it in the life o•• S. Car••ntocus.

But since the Scots, who live in Britain, call the Country which they inhabit Alban and Albin, and the Irish themselves Allabany; it will be no disingenuous inquiry, whether this Allabany may not have some re∣mains of the old name Albion; or whether it may not come from Albedo, whiteness, (for that they call Ban) so that Ellanban may be as much in Scotch as a white Island; or whether it might not come out of Ireland, which is call'd by their Poets Banno, and so Allabany be as much either as another Ireland, or a se∣cond Ireland. For Historians call Ireland ••cotia Major, and the kingdom of the Scots in Britain Scotiae Minor. Moreover, seeing the Scots call themse••ves in their own language Alvin, (whence Blondus has named them Scoti Albienses, or Albinenses, and Buchanan Al∣bini) let the Criticks consider, whether that in S. Je∣rom, where he inveighs against a certain Pelagian, a Scotchman, should not be read Albinum for Alpinum; when he calls him, An Alpine D••g, huge and corpulent, who can do more mischief with his h••••ls than with his

[illustration]

[illustration]

[illustration] Saxon Britain

BRITANNIA Saxonica.

teeth, for he's the off-spring of the Scotch nation bordering upon Britain: And he says in another place, he was overgrown with Scotch browis. I do not remember that ever I read of Alpine Dogs in any Author, but that theg Scotch Dogs were then famous at Rome, as appears from Symmachus. Seven Scotch Dogs (says he) were so admired at Rome the day before the Plays, that they thought them brought over in iron-cages.

But when the Scotsh came into Britain to the Picts, though they provoked the Britains with continual skirmishes and ravages, yet the Scotch-state came not immediately to a full growth, but continu'd a long time in that corner where they first arriv'd: nor did they (as Bede says) for the space of one hundred and twenty seven years, take the field against the petty kings of Northumberland, till at one and the same time they had almost quite routed the Picts, and the kingdom of Northumberland was utterly destroyed by Civil wars, and the invasions of the Danes. For then all the north part of Britain fell under the name of Scotland, together with that inner country on this side the Cluid and Edinburgh Frith. For that this was a part of the kingdom of Northumberland, and in the possession of the Saxons, is universally agreed up∣on. By which means it comes to pass, that all the inhabitants of the East part of Scotland (called Low∣land-men, as living Low) are originally Saxons, and speak English. But that such as live towards the West (called Highland-men from their high situation) are re∣al Scots and speak Irish, as we observ'd before; being mortal enemies to those Lowlanders that speak English.

That the Attacotti, a warlike nation, did infest Britain along with the Scots, we have the authority of Ammianus Marcellinus: and that these were a part of the Scotch nation, is the opinion of H. Lhuid; but how true I know not. St. Jerom expressly calls them a British People. Who tells us, that when he was young, (probably in the Emperor Julian's time) He saw in France the Attacotti a British People, feeding upon man's flesh; and when they found in the woods, droves of hogs, herds of beasts or sheep, that they us'd to cut off the buttocks of the herdsmen, and the paps of the women, and look upon these as the richest dainties. For here we are to read Attacotti upon the authority of Manuscripts, and not Scoti with Erasmus, who at the same time owns the place to be faulty. Though I must confess in one Manuscript it is Attigotti, in another Catacotti, and in a third Cattiti. But of the Scots it cannot, as 'tis commonly, be understood; for Jerom in that place speak∣ing of the Customs of several nations, begins the sen∣tence immediately following, thus: The Scotch nation has no wives peculiar to single men, &c. And in ano∣ther place, where Jerom mentions the Attacotti, Eras∣mus puts in the room of it Azoti. These (as we learn from the Notitia) were Stipendiaries in the decline of the Roman Empire. For they are reckon'd amongst the Palatine-Aids in Gaul, Attecotti juniores Gallicani, and Attecotti Honoriani Seniores; and in Italy, Attecotti Honoriani juniores. By this addition of Honoriani, they seem to have been some of those Barbarians that Honorius the Emperor receiv'd into league, and listed them in his army not without great damage to the Empire.

Among the nations that made incursions into Bri∣tain, the Ambrones are reckon'd up by John Caius, (one who has employ'd his time upon the best Stu∣dies, and to whom the Commonwealth of Learning is extreamly indebted) upon reading these words in that part of Gildas, where he treats of the Pic••s and Scots. Those former enemies, like so many ravenous wolves, enrag'd with extremity of hunger and thirst, leap∣ing over the sheep-folds, and the shepherd not appearing; carried with the wings of oars, the arms of rowers, and sails driven forward by the winds, break through, and butcher all they come near. Here the good o••d man remembred that he had read in Festus, how the Am∣brones pour'd into Italy along with the Cimbrians; but then he had forgot that Ambro (as Isidore observes) signi∣fies a Devourer. And neither Gildas nor Ge••ffrey of Monmouth (who calls the Saxons Ambrones) use the word in any other sense. Nor have I ever found in any ancient Author that there were other Ambrones that invaded Britain.

Notes

• f

  See Bishop Usher's Antiquitat. Eccl••s. Britan. cap. 15.
• Scota, Phara••h's daughter.
• l. 9. c. 2
• g

  D•••••••••• out o•• ••••m. Hoi.
• Ireland the C••un∣try of the Scots.
• Ga••o••••••l, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 G••••thel, and Gael.
• V••llis Scy∣thica.
• In his H••∣podigma.
• Lib. 6.
• S••rabo, l. 4.
• Caribe•• Benz••••
• Tom. 1. p. 37
• From whence the Sco•• cam•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Irelan••.
• Scyth•••••• in Sp••••••
• Conca••.
• Lib. ••.
• Luceni.
• Germa••s in Spain
• De C•••••• ad Al•••••• L. 4. c. 1.
• ••••••a••s.
• ••••sius, ••. 7.
• G ths and Hig••lan∣••ers have ••he same ••pparel.
• Flagellis
• In Horat. de Arte Poet.
• Lib. 2. de Bello Go∣thorum.
• Lib. 6. cap. 25.
• Levinus Lemnius.
• Diodorus Siculus,
• Under the year 77.
• Scot.
• Almans. Agathias, l. 1.
• W••en the S••••ts 〈◊〉〈◊〉 into B••it••in. G. Bu ha∣••••••. H. Lhui∣dus.
• i.e. Ire∣land. l••b. 5. c. 15.
• f

  See Bishop Usher's Antiquitat. Britannicarum Eccles. p. 329. fol.
• Against the P••••∣gian••, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Cresip••er.
• The Lib. •• P s••••ten∣sis purs hi•• retur•• unde•• the year 424.
• Bede, l. 1. c. 1.
• Alban a••d Albin.
• Albin and Alvinus.
• An Alpi••e Dog. S. A••••••n a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Ma••••yro∣logie, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. S••p••. is call'd A••∣pinus.
• g

  Of what great value the British Dogs were our Author has shown at large in Hamshire.
• ••cotch ••ogs, l. 2. ••pist. ••76. Prae••••∣••nis die.
• h

  Of the first coming of the Scots into Bri∣tain, see Stillingfleet's Orig. Britann. p. 280.
• ••b. 1. cap. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• ••de.
• ••ttacotti.
• 2. con∣•• Jovia∣••n.
• Vincentius in his Spe∣culum read•• it Attigotti. I Aethi∣cus's Geo¦graphy they are read Cat¦tiganci.
• Am∣brones.
• Ambro∣nes lupi.