Opening
Transcriber's note: A few typographical errors have been corrected: they are listed at the end of the text.
* * * * *
In this e-text a-breve is represented by [)a], a-macron by [=a], y-dotted-over by [.y], s-acute by ['s] etc. a-ring is [oa], a-circumflex is [^a] and a-grave [`a]. Aesc, eth and thorn have been expanded to ae, dh and th.
* * * * *
Page numbers enclosed by curly braces (example: {25}) have been incorporated to facilitate the use of the Table of Contents.
* * * * *
THE
ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
BY
ROBERT GORDON LATHAM, M.D., F.R.S.,
LATE FELLOW OF KING'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE; FELLOW OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS, LONDON; MEMBER OF THE ETHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY, NEW YORK; LATE PROFESSOR OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE, UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, LONDON.
THIRD EDITION,
REVISED AND GREATLY ENLARGED.
LONDON:
TAYLOR, WALTON, AND MABERLY,
UPPER GOWER STREET, AND IVY LANE, PATERNOSTER ROW.
1850.
* * * * *
LONDON: Printed by SAMUEL BENTLEY & Co., Bangor House, Shoe Lane.
* * * * *
TO
THE REV. WILLIAM BUTCHER, M.A.,
OF
ROPSLEY, LINCOLNSHIRE,
IN ADMIRATION OF HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS A LINGUIST,
AND AS A TESTIMONY OF PRIVATE REGARD,
THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE INSCRIBED,
BY HIS FRIEND,
THE AUTHOR.
LONDON, Nov. 4, 1841.
* * * * *
{v}
Preface
TO THE
SECOND EDITION.
* * * * *
The first edition of the present work was laid before the public, with the intention of representing in a form as systematic as the extent of the subject would allow, those views concerning the structure and relations of the English language, which amongst such scholars as had studied them with the proper means and opportunities, were then generally received; and which, so being received, might take their stand as established and recognized facts. With the results of modern criticism, as applied to his native tongue, it was conceived that an educated Englishman should be familiar. To this extent the special details of the language were exhibited; and to this extent the work was strictly a Grammar of the English Language.
But besides this, it was well known that the current grammarians, and the critical philologists, had long ceased to write alike upon the English, or {vi} indeed upon any other, language. For this reason the sphere of the work became enlarged; so that, on many occasions, general principles had to be enounced, fresh terms to be defined, and old classifications to be remodelled. This introduced extraneous elements of criticism, and points of discussion which, in a more advanced stage of English philology, would have been superfluous. It also introduced elements which had a tendency to displace the account of some of the more special and proper details of the language. There was not room for the exposition of general principles, for the introduction of the necessary amount of preliminary considerations, and for the minutiae of an extreme analysis. Nor is there room for all this at present. A work that should, at one and the same time, prove its principles, instead of assuming them, supply the full and necessary preliminaries in the way of logic, phonetics, and ethnology, and, besides this, give a history of every variety in the form of every word, although, perhaps, a work that one man might write, would be a full and perfect Thesaurus of the English Language, and, would probably extend to many volumes. For, in the English language, there are many first principles to be established, and much historical knowledge to be applied. Besides which, the particular points both of etymology and syntax are far more numerous than is imagined. Scanty as is the amount of declension and conjugation in current use, there are to be found in every department of our grammars, {vii} numerous isolated words which exhibit the fragments of a fuller inflection, and of a more highly developed etymology. This is well-known to every scholar who has not only viewed our language as a derivative of the Anglo-Saxon, and observed that there are similar relations between many other languages (e. g. the Italian and Latin, the German and Moeso-Gothic, &c.), but who has, also, generalized the phenomena of such forms of relationship and derivation, and enabled himself to see in the most uninflected languages of the nineteenth century, the fragments of a fuller and more systematic inflection, altered by time, but altered in a uniform and a general manner.
The point, however, upon which, in the prefaces both of the first edition of the present work and of his English Grammar, the writer has most urgently insisted is the disciplinal character of grammatical studies in general, combined with the fact, that the grammatical study of one's own language is almost exclusively disciplinal. It is undoubtedly true, that in schools something that is called English Grammar is taught: and it is taught pretty generally. It is taught so generally that, I believe, here are only two classes of English boys and girls who escape it--those who are taught nothing at all in any school whatever, and those who are sent so early to the great classical schools (where nothing is taught but Latin and Greek), as to escape altogether the English part of their scholastic education. But {viii} what is it that is thus generally taught? not the familiar practice of speaking English--that has been already attained by the simple fact of the pupil having been born on English soil, and of English parents. Not the scientific theory of the language--that is an impossibility with the existing text-books. Neither, then, of these matters is taught. Nevertheless labour is expended, and time is consumed. What is taught? Something undoubtedly. The facts, that language is more or less regular (i. e. capable of having its structure exhibited by rules); that there is such a thing as grammar; and that certain expressions should be avoided, are all matters worth knowing. And they are all taught even by the worst method of teaching. But are these the proper objects of systematic teaching? Is the importance of their acquisition equivalent to the time, the trouble, and the displacement of more valuable subjects, which are involved in their explanation? I think not. Gross vulgarity of language is a fault to be prevented; but the proper prevention is to be got from habit--not rules. The proprieties of the English language are to be learned, like the proprieties of English manners, by conversation and intercourse; and the proper school for both, is the best society in which the learner is placed. If this be good, systematic teaching is superfluous; if bad, insufficient. There are undoubted points where a young person may doubt as to the grammatical propriety of a certain expression. In this case let him ask some one older, and more instructed. Grammar, {ix} as an art, is, undoubtedly, the art of speaking and writing correctly--but then, as an art, it is only required for foreign languages. For our own we have the necessary practice and familiarity.
The claim of English grammar to form part and parcel of an English education stands or falls with the value of the philological and historical knowledge to which grammatical studies may serve as an introduction, and with the value of scientific grammar as a disciplinal study. I have no fear of being supposed to undervalue its importance in this respect. Indeed in assuming that it is very great, I also assume that wherever grammar is studied as grammar, the language which the grammar so studied should represent, must be the mother-tongue of the student; whatever that mother-tongue may be--English for Englishmen, Welsh for Welshmen, French for Frenchmen, German for Germans, &c. This study is the study of a theory; and for this reason it should be complicated as little as possible by points of practice. For this reason a man's mother-tongue is the best medium for the elements of scientific philology, simply because it is the one which he knows best in practice.
Now if, over and above the remarks upon the English language, and the languages allied to it, there occur in the present volume, episodical discussions of points connected with other languages, especially the Latin and Greek, it is because a greater portion of the current ideas on philological subjects {x} is taken from those languages than from our own. Besides which, a second question still stands over. There is still the question as to the relative disciplinal merits of the different non-vernacular languages of the world. What is the next best vehicle for philological philosophy to our mother-tongue, whatever that mother-tongue maybe? Each Athenian who fought at Salamis considered his own contributions to that great naval victory the greatest; and he considered them so because they were his own. So it is with the language which we speak, and use, and have learned as our own. Yet each same Athenian awarded the second place of honour to Themistocles. The great classical languages of Greece and Rome are in the position of Themistocles. They are the best when the question of ourselves and our possessions is excluded. They are the best in the eyes of an indifferent umpire. More than this; if we take into account the studies of the learned world, they are second only to the particular mother-tongue of the particular student, in the way of practical familiarity. Without either affirming or denying that, on the simple scores of etymological regularity, etymological variety, and syntactic logic, the Sanskrit may be their equal, it must still be admitted that this last-named language has no claims to a high value as a practical philological discipline upon the grounds of its universality as a point of education; nor will it have. Older than the Greek, it may (or may not) be; more multiform than the Latin, it may (or may not) be: but equally rich in the attractions {xi} of an unsurpassed literature, and equally influential as a standard of imitation, it neither has been nor can be. We may admit all that is stated by those who admire its epics, or elucidate its philosophy; we may admire all this and much more besides, but we shall still miss the great elements of oratory and history, that connect the ancient languages of Greece and Italy with the thoughts, and feelings, and admiration of recent Europe.
The same sort of reasoning applies to the Semitic languages. One element they have, in their grammatical representation, which gives them a value in philological philosophy, in the abstract, above all other languages--the generality of the expression of their structure. This is symbolic, and its advantage is that it exhibits the naturally universal phenomena of their construction in a universal language. Yet neither this nor their historical value raises them to the level of the classical languages.
Now, what has just been written has been written with a view towards a special inference, and as the preliminary to a practical deduction; and it would not have been written but for some such ulterior application. If these languages have so high a disciplinal value, how necessary it is that the expression of their philological phenomena should be accurate, scientific, and representative of their true growth and form? How essential that their grammars should exhibit nothing that may hereafter be unlearned? Pace grammaticorum dixerim, this is not the case. Bad {xii} as is Lindley Murray in English, Busby and Lilly are worse in Greek and Latin. This is the comparison of the men on the low rounds of the ladder. What do we find as we ascend? Is the grammatical science of even men like Mathiae and Zump much above that of Wallis? Does Buttmann's Greek give so little to be unlearned as Grimm's German? By any one who has gone far in comparative philology, the answer will be given in the negative.
This is not written in the spirit of a destructive criticism. If an opinion as to the fact is stated without reserve, it is accompanied by an explanation, and (partially, perhaps) by a justification. It is the business of a Greek and Latin grammarian to teach Greek and Latin cito, tute, ac jucunde,--cito, that is, between the years of twelve and twenty-four; tute, that is, in a way that quantities may be read truly, and hard passages translated accurately; jucunde, that is, as the taste and memory of the pupil may determine. With this view the grammar must be artificial. Granted. But then it should profess to be so. It should profess to address the memory only, not the understanding. Above all it should prefer to leave a point untaught, than to teach it in a way that must be unlearned.
In 1840, so little had been done by Englishmen for the English language, that in acknowledging my great obligations to foreign scholars, I was only able to speak to what might be done by my own countrymen. Since then, however, there has been a good {xiii} beginning of what is likely to be done well. My references to the works of Messrs. Kemble, Garnet, and Guest, show that my authorities are now as much English as German. And this is likely to be the case. The details of the syntax, the illustrations drawn from our provincial dialects, the minute history of individual words, and the whole system of articulate sounds can, for the English, only be done safely by an Englishman: or, to speak more generally, can, for any language, only be dealt with properly by the grammarian whose mother-tongue is that language. The Deutsche Grammatik of Grimm is the work not of an age nor of a century, but, like the great history of the Athenian, a [Greek: ktema eis aei]. It is the magazine from whence all draw their facts and illustrations. Yet it is only the proper German portion that pretends to be exhaustive. The Dutch and Scandinavians have each improved the exhibition of their own respective languages. Monument as is the Deutsche Grammatik of learning, industry, comprehensiveness, and arrangement, it is not a book that should be read to the exclusion of others: nor must it be considered to exhibit the grammar of the Gothic languages, in a form unsusceptible of improvement. Like all great works, it is more easily improved than imitated. One is almost unwilling to recur to the old comparison between Aristotle, who absorbed the labour of his predecessors, and the Eastern sultans, who kill-off their younger brothers. But such is the case with Grimm and his fore-runners in philology. Germany, that, in {xiv} respect to the Reformation, is content to be told that Erasmus laid the egg which Luther hatched, must also acknowledge that accurate and systematic scholars of other countries prepared the way for the Deutsche Grammatik,--Ten Kate in Holland; Dowbrowsky, a Slavonian; and Rask, a Dane.
Nor are there wanting older works in English that have a value in Gothic philology. I should be sorry to speak as if, beyond the writers of what may be called the modern school of philology, there was nothing for the English grammarian both to read and study. The fragments of Ben Jonson's English Grammar are worth the entireties of many later writers. The work of Wallis is eminently logical and precise. The voice of a mere ruler of rules is a sound to flee from; but the voice of a truly powerful understanding is a thing to be heard on all matters. It is this which gives to Cobbett and Priestley, to Horne Tooke as a subtle etymologist, and to Johnson as a practical lexicographer, a value in literary history, which they never can have in grammar. It converts unwholesome doctrines into a fertile discipline of thought.
The method of the present work is mixed. It is partly historical, and partly logical. The historical portions exhibit the way in which words and inflections have been used; the logical, the way in which they ought to be used. Now I cannot conceal from either my readers or myself the fact that philological criticism at the present moment is of an essentially {xv} historical character. It has been by working the historical method that all the great results both in general and special scholarship have been arrived at; and it is on historical investigation that the whole induction of modern philology rests. All beyond is [`a] priori argument; and, according to many, [`a] priori argument out of place. Now, this gives to the questions in philology, to questions concerning the phenomena of concord, government, &c. a subordinate character. It does so, however, improperly. Logic is in language what it is in reasoning,--a rule and standard. But in its application to reasoning and to language there is this difference. Whilst illogical reasoning, and illogical grammar are equally phenomena of the human mind, even as physical disease is a phenomenon of the human body, the illogical grammar can rectify itself by its mere continuance, propagation, and repetition. In this respect the phenomena of language stand apart from the other phenomena of either mind or organized matter. No amount of false argument can make a fallacy other than a fallacy. No amount of frequency can make physical disease other than a predisposing cause to physical disorganization. The argument that halts in its logic, is not on a par with the argument that is sound. Such also is the case with any bodily organ. No prevalence of sickness can ever evolve health. Language, however, as long as it preserves the same amount of intelligibility is always language. Provided it serve as a medium, it does its proper work; {xvi} and as long as it does this, it is, as far as its application is concerned, faultless. Now there is a limit in logical regularity which language is perpetually overstepping; just as there is a logical limit which the reasoning of common life is perpetually overstepping, and just as there is a physiological limit which the average health of men and women may depart from. This limit is investigated by the historical method; which shows the amount of latitude in which language may indulge and yet maintain its great essential of intelligibility. Nay, more, it can show that it sometimes transgresses the limit in so remarkable a manner, as to induce writers to talk about the corruption of a language, or the pathology of a language, with the application of many similar metaphors. Yet it is very doubtful whether all languages, in all their stages, are not equally intelligible, and, consequently, equally what they ought to be, viz., mediums of intercourse between man and man; whilst, in respect to their growth, it is almost certain that so far from exhibiting signs of dissolution, they are, on the contrary, like the Tithonus of mythology, the Strulbrugs of Laputa, or, lastly, such monsters as Frankenstein, very liable to the causes of death, but utterly unable to die. Hence, in language, whatever is, is right; a fact which, taken by itself, gives great value to the historical method of inquiry, and leaves little to the [`a] priori considerations of logic.
But, on the other hand, there is a limit in logical regularity, which language never oversteps: and as {xvii} long as this is the case, the study of the logical standard of what language is in its normal form must go hand in hand with the study of the processes that deflect it. The investigation of the irregularities of language--and be it remembered that almost all change implies original irregularity--is analogous to the investigation of fallacies in logic. It is the comparison between the rule and the practice, with this difference, that in language the practice can change the rule, which in logic is impossible. I am sure that these remarks are necessary in order to anticipate objections that may be raised against certain statements laid down in the syntax. I often write as if I took no account of the historical evidence, in respect to particular uses of particular words. I do so, not because I undervalue that department of philology, but because it is out of place. To show that one or more writers, generally correct, have used a particular expression is to show that they speak, in a few instances, as the vulgar speak in many. To show that the vulgar use one expression for another is to show that two ideas are sufficiently allied to be expressed in the same manner: in other words, the historical fact is accompanied by a logical explanation; and the historical deviation is measured by a logical standard.
I am not desirous of sacrificing a truth to an antithesis, but so certain is language to change from logical accuracy to logical licence, and, at the same time, so certain is language, when so changed, to be {xviii} just as intelligible as before, that I venture upon asserting that, not only whatever is, is right, but also, that in many cases, whatever was, was wrong. There is an antagonism, between logic and practice; and the phenomena on both sides must be studied.
* * * * *
{xix}
I. GERMANIC ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE--DATE
SECTION PAGE
1. English not originally British 1 2. Germanic in origin 2 3-10. Accredited details of the different immigrations from Germany into Britain 2-4 10-12. Accredited relations of the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons to each other as Germans 4 13. Criticism of evidence 5 Extract from Mr. Kemble 6 14. Inference 9
Chapter II
GERMANIC ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE--THE IMMIGRANT TRIBES AND THEIR RELATION TO EACH OTHER.
15-20. The Jute immigration doubtful 10-12 22. Difficulties in identifying the Saxons 13 23. Difficulties in identifying the Angles 13 25-29. Populations with the greatest [`a] priori likelihood of having immigrated 14, 15 26. Menapians 15 27. Batavians 15 28. Frisians 15 29. Chauci 15 30. Inference 16 {xx} 31-34. Saxons and Nordalbingians 16, 17 35-50. Populations, whereof the continental relation help us in fixing the original country of the Angles and Saxons 17-21 36. Germans of the Middle Rhine 17 Franks 18 Salians 18 Chamavi 18 37. Thuringians 18 38. Catti 18 39. Geographical conditions of the Saxon Area 18 40. Its Eastern limit 19 41-50. Slavonian frontier 20, 21 41. " Polabi 20 42. " Wagrians 20 43. " Obotriti 20 44. " Lini 20 45. " Warnabi 21 46. " Morizani 21 47. " Doxani 21 48. " Hevelli 21 49. " Slavonians of Altmark 21 50. " Sorabians 21 51. Saxon area 21
Chapter III
OF THE DIALECTS OF THE SAXON AREA AND OF THE SO-CALLED OLD SAXON.
52, 53. Extent and frontier 23 54-62. Anglo-Saxon and Old Saxon 23-25 63. Old-Saxon data 25 64. Specimen 26
Chapter IV
AFFINITIES OF THE ENGLISH WITH THE LANGUAGES OF GERMANY AND SCANDINAVIA.
65. General affinities of the English language 28 67. The term Gothic 28 69. Scandinavian branch 28 70. Teutonic branch 31 {xxi} 71. Moeso-Gothic 31 73. Origin of the Moeso-Goths 32 76. Name not Germanic 33 77. Old High German 35 78. Low Germanic division 36 79. Frisian 36 81. Old Frisian 37 82. Platt-Deutsch 38 83. Anglo-Saxon and Icelandic compound 38 84. Scandinavian article 40 88. Scandinavian verb 44 91. Declension in -n 45 92. Difference between languages of the same division 46 93. Weak and strong nouns 46 Moeso-Gothic inflections 47 94. Old Frisian and Anglo-Saxon 50 98. The term German 56 99. The term Dutch 57 100. The term Teutonic 58 101. The term Anglo-Saxon 59 102. Icelandic, Old Norse 59
V. ANALYSIS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE--GERMANIC ELEMENTS
106. The Angles 62 109. Extract from Tacitus 63 " Ptolemy 63 110. Extracts connecting them with the inhabitants of the Cimbric Chersonesus 64 111. The district called Angle 65 113. Inferences and remarks 65 114. What were the Langobardi with whom the Angles were connected by Tacitus? 66 115. What were the Suevi, &c. 66 116. What were the Werini, &c. 67 117. What were the Thuringians, &c. 67 121. Difficulties respecting the Angles 68 123-128. Patronymic forms, and the criticism based on them 68-72 129-131. Probably German immigrants not Anglo-Saxon 72, 73
{xxii} CHAPTER VI.
THE CELTIC STOCK OF LANGUAGES, AND THEIR RELATIONS TO THE ENGLISH.
132. Cambrian Celtic 74 133. Gaelic Celtic 77 136. Structure of Celtic tongues 79-83 138. The Celtic of Gaul 84 139. The Pictish 84
VII. THE ANGLO-NORMAN AND THE LANGUAGES OF THE CLASSICAL STOCK
140. The Classical languages 86 141. Extension of the Roman language 86 142. The divisions 87 Specimen of the Romanese 88 Specimen of the Wallachian 88 143. French dialects 89 Oath of Ludwig 90 144. Norman-French 91
VIII. THE POSITION OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AS INDO-EUROPEAN
147. The term Indo-European 94 148. Is the Celtic Indo-European? 95
I. HISTORICAL AND LOGICAL ELEMENTS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
149. Celtic elements 97 150. Latin of the First Period 98 151. Anglo-Saxon 98 152. Danish or Norse 98 153. Roman of the Second Period 100 {xxiii} 154. Anglo-Norman 101 155. Indirect Scandinavian 101 156. Latin of the Third Period 101 157. Greek elements 102 158. Classical elements 102 159. Latin words 103 160. Greek elements 104 161, 162. Miscellaneous elements 105 163, 164. Direct and ultimate origin of words 106, 107 165. Distinction 107 166-168. Words of foreign simulating a vernacular origin 107-109 169-171. Hybridism 109, 110 172. Incompletion of radical 110 173. Historical and logical analysis 111
Chapter II
THE RELATION OF THE ENGLISH TO THE ANGLO-SAXON AND THE STAGES OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
174. Ancient and modern languages 112 175. English and Anglo-Saxon compared 113 176. Semi-Saxon stage 117 177-179. Old English stage 119, 122 180. Middle English 122 181. Present tendencies of the English 123 182. Speculative question 123
III. THE LOWLAND SCOTCH
183-188. Lowland Scotch 124-127 189. Extracts 127 190. Points of difference with the English 130
Chapter IV
ON CERTAIN UNDETERMINED AND FICTITIOUS LANGUAGES OF GREAT BRITAIN.
191, 192. The Belgae 132-135 193. Caledonians, Iberians 135 194. Supposed affinities of the Irish 135 Extract from Plautus 136 195. Hypothesis of a Finnic race 139
{xxiv} PART III.
SOUNDS, LETTERS, PRONUNCIATION, AND SPELLING.
I. GENERAL NATURE OF ARTICULATE SOUNDS
196. Preliminary remarks 141 197. Vowels and consonants 143 198. Divisions of articulate sounds 143 199. Explanation of terms 143 Sharp and flat 143 Continuous and explosive 144 200. General statements 144 201. H no articulation 144
II. SYSTEM OF ARTICULATE SOUNDS
202. System of vowels 145 ['e] ferm['e], ['o] chiuso, ue German 145 203. System of mutes 145 Lenes and aspirates 146 204. Affinities of the liquids 147 205. Diphthongs 147 206. Compound sibilants 148 207. Ng 148 208-210. Further explanation of terms 148-150 211. System of vowels 150 212. System of mutes 150 213. Varieties 150 214. Connection in phonetics 151
III. ON CERTAIN COMBINATIONS OF ARTICULATE SOUNDS
215. Unpronounceable combinations 152 216. Unstable combinations 153 217. Effect of y 153 218, 219. Evolution of new sounds 153, 154 220. Value of a sufficient system of sounds 154 {xxv} 221. Double consonants rare 154 222. Reduplications of consonants rare 155 223. True aspirates rare 155
IV. EUPHONY; THE PERMUTATION AND TRANSITION OF LETTERS
224. Euphonic change exhibited 157 225. The rationale of it 157 226. The combinations -mt, -nt 158 227. The combination -pth 158 228. Accommodation of vowels 158 229. Permutation of letters 159 230. Transition of letters 160
V. ON THE FORMATION OF SYLLABLES
231. Distribution of consonants between two syllables 161
VI. ON QUANTITY
232. Long and short 164 233. How far coincident with independent and dependent 164 234. Length of vowels and length of syllables 165
VII. ON ACCENT
235. Accent 167 236. How far accent always on the root 168 237. Verbal accent and logical accent 168 238. Effect of accent on orthography 169 239. Accent and quantity not the same 170
VIII. THE PRINCIPLES OF ORTHOEPY
240. Meaning of the word orthoepy 172 241. Classification of errors in pronunciation 172 242-244. Causes of erroneous enunciation 172-175 {xxvi} 245. Appreciation of standards of orthoepy 175 246. Principles of critical orthoepy 176
IX. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ORTHOGRAPHY
247. Province of orthography 178 248. Imperfections of alphabets 178 249. Applications of alphabets 180 250. Changes of sound, and original false spelling 181 251. Theory of a perfect alphabet 181 252. Sounds and letters in English 182 253. Certain conventional modes of spelling 187 254. The inconvenience of them 189 255. Criticism upon the details of the English orthography 189-200
X. HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE ENGLISH ALPHABET
256. Bearings of the question 200 257. Phoenician Period 200 258, 259. Greek Period 201-203 260-262. Latin Period 203-205 263. The Moeso-Gothic alphabet 205 264. The Anglo-Saxon alphabet 205 265. The Anglo-Norman Period 207 266. Extract from the Ormulum 208 267. The Runes 209 268. The order of the alphabet 210 269. Parallel and equivalent orthographies 213
I. ON THE PROVINCE OF ETYMOLOGY
270. Meaning of the term etymology 214
{xxvii} CHAPTER II.
ON GENDER.
271. Latin genders 217 272. Words like he-goat 217 273. Words like genitrix 217 274. Words like domina 218 275. Sex 219 276. True Genders in English 219 277. Neuters in -t 220 278. Personification 220 279. True and apparent genders 221
III. THE NUMBERS
280, 281. Dual number 225 282-284. Plural in -s 226-230 285. The form in child-r-en 230 286. The form in -en 232 287. Men, feet, &c. 232 288. Brethren, &c. 232
IV. ON THE CASES
289, 290. Meaning of word case 234 291. Cases in English 237 292, 293. Determination of cases 239 294, 295. Analysis of cases 241 296. Case in -s 241
V. THE PERSONAL PRONOUNS
297. True personal pronoun 243 298. We and me 244
Chapter VI
ON THE TRUE REFLECTIVE PRONOUN IN THE GOTHIC LANGUAGES AND ON ITS ABSENCE IN THE ENGLISH.
299. The Latin se, sui 247
{xxviii} CHAPTER VII.
THE DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS, ETC.
300. He, she, it, this, that, the 249 301. These 251 302. Those 253
VIII. THE RELATIVE, INTERROGATIVE, AND CERTAIN OTHER PRONOUNS
303. Who, what, &c. 255 304. Indo-European forms 255 305. Miscellaneous observations 256
IX. ON CERTAIN FORMS IN -ER
306, 307. Eith-er, ov-er, und-er, bett-er 260, 261 308. Illustration from the Laplandic 261 309. Idea of alternative 262
X. THE COMPARATIVE DEGREE
310. Forms in -tara and -[^i]yas 263 311. Change from -s to -r 263 312. Moeso-Gothic comparative 264 313. Comparison of adverbs 264 314. Elder 265 315. Rather 265 316. Excess of expression 266 317. Better, &c. 266 318. Sequence in logic 266 319-325. Worse, &c. 267-270
XI. ON THE SUPERLATIVE DEGREE
326. Different modes of expression 271 327. The termination -st 272
{xxix} CHAPTER XII.
THE CARDINAL NUMBERS.
328, 329. Their ethnological value 273 Variations in form 274 10+2 and 10x2 275 330. Limits to the inflection of the numeral 276
XIII. ON THE ORDINAL NUMBERS
331. First 277 332. Second 277 333. Third, fourth, &c. 278 334, 335. Ordinal and superlative forms 278-280
XIV. THE ARTICLES
336. A, the, no 281
XV. DIMINUTIVES, AUGMENTATIVES, AND PATRONYMICS
337, 338. Diminutives 283 339. Augmentatives 285 340. Patronymics 286
XVI. GENTILE FORMS
341. Wales 288
Chapter XVII
ON THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE NOUN AND VERB, AND ON THE INFLECTION OF THE INFINITIVE MOOD.
342-344. Substantival character of verbs 289 345, 346. Declension of the infinitive 290
XVIII. ON DERIVED VERBS
347. Rise, raise, &c. 292
{xxx} CHAPTER XIX.
ON THE PERSONS.
348-351. Persons in English 294-298 352. Person in -t, -art, &c. 298 353. Forms like spakest, sungest, &c. 299 354. Plurals in -s 299
XX. ON THE NUMBERS OF VERBS
355. Personal signs of numbers 300 Run, ran 301
XXI. ON MOODS
356. The infinitive mood 302 357. The imperative mood 302 358. The subjunctive mood 302
XXII. OF TENSES IN GENERAL
359. General nature of tenses 303 360. Latin preterites 304 361. Moeso-Gothic perfects 304 Reduplication 305 362. Strong and weak verbs 305
XXIII. THE STRONG TENSES
363. Sang, sung 307 364-376. Classification of strong verbs 308-316
XXIV. THE WEAK TENSES
377. The weak inflection 317 378. First division 318 379. Second division 318 {xxxi} 380. Third division 319 381. Preterites in -ed and -t 319 382. Preterites like made, had 321-327 Would, should 322 Aught 322 Durst 322 Must 323 Wist 324 Do 325 Mind 325 Yode 327
XXV. ON CONJUGATIONS
383. So-called irregularities 328 384. Principles of criticism 329 Coincidence of form 329 Coincidence of distribution 329 Coincidence of order 329 385. Strong verbs once weak 332 386. Division of verbs into strong and weak natural 333 387. Obsolete forms 334 388. Double forms 334
XXVI. DEFECTIVENESS AND IRREGULARITY
389. Difference between defectiveness and irregularity 335 Vital and obsolete processes 336 Processes of necessity 337 Ordinary processes 338 Positive processes 338 Processes of confusion 339 390. Could 339 391. Quoth 340
XXVII. THE IMPERSONAL VERBS
392-394. Meseems, methinks, me listeth 342
{xxxii} CHAPTER XXVIII.
THE VERB SUBSTANTIVE.
395. The verb substantive defective 344 396. Was 344 397. Be 344 398, 399. Future power of be 345 400. Am 346 Worth 347
XXIX. THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE
401. The form in -ing 348 402. Substantival power of participle 349 403. Taylor's theory 349
XXX. THE PAST PARTICIPLE
404-406. Similarity to the preterite 351 407. Forlorn, frore 352 408. The form in -ed, -d, or -t 352 409. The y- in y-cleped, &c. 353
XXXI. ON COMPOSITION
410-414. Definition of composition 355-357 415-417. Parity of accent 358 418. Obscure compounds 361 419. Exceptions 362 420. Peacock, peahen, &c. 364 421. Third element in compound words 365 422. Improper compounds 365 423. Decomposites 365 424. Combinations 366
XXXII. ON DERIVATION AND INFLECTION
425. Derivation 367 426. Classification of derived words 368 427. Words like ['a]bsent and abs['e]nt, &c. 369 {xxxiii} 428. Words like churl, tail, &c. 370 429. Forms like tip and top, &c. 370 430. Obscure derivatives 370
XXXIII. ADVERBS
431. Classification of adverbs 371 432. Adverbs of deflection 372 433. Words like darkling 373 434. Words like brightly 374
XXXIV. ON CERTAIN ADVERBS OF PLACE
435-439. Here, hither, hence 374 440. Yonder 375 Anon 375
XXXV. ON WHEN, THEN, AND THAN
441. Origin of the words 377
XXXVI. ON PREPOSITIONS, ETC
442. Prepositions 378 443. Conjunctions 378 444. Yes and no 379 445. Particles 379
XXXVII. ON THE GRAMMATICAL POSITION OF THE WORDS MINE AND THINE
446. Peculiarities of inflection of pronouns 380 447. Powers of the genitive case 381 448. Ideas of possession and partition 382 449. Adjectival expressions 382 450. Evolution of cases 383 451. Idea of possession 383 452. Idea of partition 383 {xxxiv} 453. A posteriori argument 384 454-458. Analogy of mei and [Greek: emou] 384 459. Etymological evidence 386 460. Syntactic evidence 387 461. Value of the evidence of certain constructions 387 462, 463. Double adjectival form 388
XXXVIII. ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE WEAK PRAETERITE
464. Forms like salb-[^o]d[^e]dum 390 465, 466. The Slavonic praeterite 391
I. ON SYNTAX IN GENERAL
467. The term syntax 392 468. What is not syntax 392 469. What is syntax 394 470. Pure syntax 395 471, 472. Mixed syntax 395 473. Figures of speech 395 474. Personification 395 475. Ellipsis 395 476. Pleonasm 395 477. Zeugma 397 478. [Greek: Pros to semainomenon] 397 479. Apposition 398 480. Collective nouns 398 481, 482. Complex forms 399 483. Convertibility 399 484. Etymological convertibility 400 485. Syntactic convertibility 400 486. Adjectives used as substantives 400 {xxxv} 487. Uninflected parts of speech used as such 400 488. Convertibility common in English 401
II. SYNTAX OF SUBSTANTIVES
489. Convertibility 402 490. Ellipsis 403 491. Proper names 403
III. SYNTAX OF ADJECTIVES
492. Pleonasm 404 493. Collocation 404 494. Government 404 495. More fruitful, &c. 405 496. The better of the two 405 497. Syntax of adjectives simple 406
IV. SYNTAX OF PRONOUNS
498, 499. Syntax of pronouns important 407 500, 501. Pleonasm 407
V. THE TRUE PERSONAL PRONOUNS
502. Pronomen reverentiae 409 503. You and ye 409 504. Dativus ethicus 409 505. Reflected personal pronouns 410 506. Reflective neuter verbs 410 507. Equivocal reflectives 411
Chapter VI
ON THE SYNTAX OF THE DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS, AND ON THE PRONOUNS OF THE THIRD PERSON.
508. True demonstrative pronoun 412 509. His mother, her father 412 {xxxvi} 510, 511. Use of its 412 512. Take them things away 413 513, 514. Hic and ille, this and that 413
VII. ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WORD SELF
515. Government, apposition, composition 416 516. Her-self, itself 416 517. Self and one 417 518, 519. Inflection of self 418
VIII. ON THE POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS
520, 521. My and mine, &c. 419
IX. THE RELATIVE PRONOUNS
522-524. That, which, what 422 525. The man as rides to market 423 526, 527. Plural use of whose 423 528, 529. Concord of relative and antecedent 423 530. Ellipsis of the relative 424 531. Relative equivalent to demonstrative pronoun 425 Demonstrative equivalent to substantive 425 532. Omission of antecedent 426 533. [Greek: Chromai bibliois hois echo] 426 534. Relatives with complex antecedents 427
X. ON THE INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS
535. Direct and oblique interrogations 428 536-539. Whom do they say that it is? 428-430
XI. THE RECIPROCAL CONSTRUCTION
540, 541. Structure of reciprocal expressions 431
{xxxvii} CHAPTER XII.
THE INDETERMINATE PRONOUNS.
542. On dit=one says 433 543-546. It and there 433 Es sind 434
XIII. THE ARTICLES
547. Repetition of article 435
XIV. THE NUMERALS
548. The thousand-and-first 436 549. The first two and two first 436
XV. ON VERBS IN GENERAL
550. Transitive verbs 437 551. Auxiliary verbs 438 552. Verb substantive 438
XVI. THE CONCORD OF VERBS
553-556. Concord of person 439 557. Plural subjects with singular predicates 443 Singular subjects with plural predicates 443
XVII. ON THE GOVERNMENT OF VERBS
558, 559. Objective and modal government 444 560. Appositional construction 445 561. Verb and genitive case 448 562. Verb and accusative case 448 563. The partitive construction 448 564. I believe it to be him 448 565. [Greek: phemi einai despotes] 449 566. It is believed to be 449
{xxxviii} CHAPTER XVIII.
ON THE PARTICIPLES.
567. Dying-day 451 568. I am beaten 451
XIX. ON THE MOODS
569. The infinitive mood 452 570. Objective construction 452 570. Gerundial construction 453 571. Peculiarities of imperatives 454 572. Syntax of subjunctives 454
XX. ON THE TENSES
573. Present form habitual 455 574. Praeterite form aorist 455
XXI. SYNTAX OF THE PERSONS OF VERBS
575, 576. I, or he am (is) wrong 456
XXII. ON THE VOICES OF VERBS
577. The word hight 458
XXIII. ON THE AUXILIARY VERBS
578. Classification 459 579. Time and tense 461 Present 461 Aorist 461 Future 461 Imperfect 462 Perfect 462 {xxxix} Pluperfect 462 Future present 462 Future praeterite 462 Emphatic tenses 463 Predictive future 463 Promissive future 463 580. Historic present 463 581. Use of perfect for present 464 582, 583. Varieties of tense 465 Continuance 465 Habit 466 584. Inference of continuance 466 Inference of contrast 467 585. Have with a participle 467 586. I am to speak 469 587. I am to blame 469 588. Shall and will 469 589. Archdeacon Hare's theory 470 590. Mr. De Morgan's theory 472 591. I am beaten 474 592, 593. Present use of ought, &c. 475
XXIV. THE SYNTAX OF ADVERBS
594. The syntax of adverbs simple 477 595. Full for fully, &c. 477 596. The termination -ly 477 597. To sleep the sleep of the righteous 478 598. From whence, &c. 478
XXV. ON PREPOSITIONS
599. All prepositions govern cases 479 600, 601. None, in English, govern genitives 479 602. Dative case after prepositions 481 603. From to die 481 604. For to go 481 605. No prepositions in composition 481
{xl} CHAPTER XXVI.
ON CONJUNCTIONS.
606. Syntax of conjunctions 482 607. Convertibility of conjunctions 482 608. Connexion of prepositions 483 609, 610. Relatives and conjunctions 484 611. Government of mood 485 612. Conditional propositions 486 613. Variations of meaning 486 614. If and since 487 615. Use of that 487 616. Succession of tenses 488 Succession of moods 489 617. Greek constructions 489 618. Be for may be 491 619. Disjunctives 491 620-623. Either, neither 492
XXVII. THE SYNTAX OF THE NEGATIVE
624. Position of the negative 495 625. Distribution of the negative 495 626. Double negative 496 627. Questions of appeal 496 628. Extract from Sir Thomas More 496
XXVIII. OF THE CASE ABSOLUTE
629. He excepted, him excepted 498
. . . . . .
VI. PROSODY
630-632. Metre 499 633. Classical metres measured by quantities 500 634. English metre measured by accents 500 {xli} 635. Alliteration 500 636. Rhyme 501 637. Definition of Rhyme 503 638. Measures 503 639. Dissyllabic and trisyllabic 503 640. Dissyllabic measures 504 641. Trisyllabic measures 504 642. Measures different from feet 505 643. Couplets, stanzas, &c. 506 644, 645. Names of elementary metres 507, 508 646. Scansion 509 647. Symmetrical metres 509 648. Unsymmetrical metres 510 649. Measures of one and of four syllables 510 650. Contrast between English words and English metre 510 651-653. The classical metres as read by Englishmen 511, 512 654-657. Reasons against the classical nomenclature as applied to English metres 513-515 658-661. The classical metres metrical to English readers--why 515-517 662. Symmetrical metres 517 663. Unsymmetrical metres 517 664. Classical metres unsymmetrical 518 665-667. Conversion of English into classical metres 519, 520 668, 669. Caesura 520, 521 670-672. English hexameters, &c. 522-526 673. Convertible metres 526 674. Metrical and grammatical combinations 527 675. Rhythm 528 676, 677. Rhyme--its parts 529
. . . . . .
VII. THE DIALECTS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
678. Bearing of the investigation 531 679. Structural and ethnological views 531 680-682. Causes that effect change 532 683, 684. Preliminary notices 533 685. Philological preliminaries 533 686, 687. Present provincial dialects 534-540 688-691. Caution 540-544 {xlii} 692-696. Districts north of the Humber 545-552 697. South Lancashire 552 698. Shropshire, &c. 553 699. East Derbyshire, &c. 553 700. Norfolk and Suffolk 554 701. Leicestershire, &c. 555 702. Origin of the present written language 555 703. Dialects of the Lower Thames 556 704. Kent--Frisian theory 557 705. Sussex, &c. 559 706. Supposed East Anglian and Saxon frontier 560 707. Dialects of remaining counties 560 708. Objections 561 709. Dialect of Gower 561 710. ---- the Barony of Forth 563 711. Americanisms 565 712. Extract from a paper of Mr. Watts 566 713. Gypsy language, &c. 572 714. Talkee-talkee 573 715, 716. Varieties of the Anglo-Norman 574 717-719. Extracts from Mr. Kemble 575-580
PRAXIS 581
* * * * *
{1}
AN INTRODUCTION
TO THE STUDY OF
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
* * * * *
I. GENERAL ETHNOLOGICAL RELATIONS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
--------
I. GERMANIC ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.--DATE
s. 1. The first point to be remembered in the history of the English Language, is that it was not the original language of any of the British Islands altogether or of any portion of them. Indeed, of the whole of Great Britain it is not the language at the present moment. Welsh is spoken in Wales, Manks in the Isle of Man, Scotch Gaelic in the Highlands of Scotland, and Irish Gaelic in Ireland. Hence, the English that is now spoken was once as foreign to our country as it is at present to the East Indies; and it is no more our primitive vernacular tongue, than it is the primitive vernacular tongue for North America, Jamaica, or Australia. Like the English of Sydney, or the English of Pennsylvania, the English of Great Britain spread itself at the expense of some earlier and more aboriginal language, which it displaced and superseded. {2}
s. 2. The next point involves the real origin and the real affinities of the English Language. Its real origin is on the continent of Europe, and its real affinities are with certain languages there spoken. To speak more specifically, the native country of the English Language is Germany; and the Germanic languages are those that are the most closely connected with our own. In Germany, languages and dialects allied to each other and allied to the mother-tongue of the English have been spoken from times anterior to history; and these, for most purposes of philology, may be considered as the aboriginal languages and dialects of that country.
s. 3. Accredited details of the different immigrations from Germany into Britain.--Until lately the details of the different Germanic invasions of England, both in respect to the particular tribes by which they were made, and the order in which they succeeded each other, were received with but little doubt, and as little criticism.
Respecting the tribes by which they were made, the current opinion was, that they were chiefly, if not exclusively, those of the Jutes, the Saxons, and the Angles.
The particular chieftains that headed each descent were also known, as well as the different localities upon which they descended. These were as follows:--
s. 4. First settlement of invaders from Germany.--The account of this gives us the year 449 for the first permanent Germanic tribes settled in Britain. Ebbsfleet, in the Isle of Thanet, was the spot where they landed; and the particular name that these tribes gave themselves was that of Jutes. Their leaders were Hengist and Horsa. Six years after their landing they had established the kingdom of Kent; so that the county of Kent was the first district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English, introduced from Germany.
s. 5. Second settlement of invaders from Germany.--In the year 477 invaders from Northern Germany made the second permanent settlement in Britain. The coast of Sussex was the spot whereon they landed. The particular name that these tribes gave themselves was that of Saxons. Their leader {3} was Ella. They established the kingdom of the South Saxons (Sussex); so that the county of Sussex was the second district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English, introduced from Northern Germany.
s. 6. Third settlement of invaders from Germany.--In the year 495 invaders from Northern Germany made the third permanent settlement in Britain. The coast of Hampshire was the spot whereon they landed. Like the invaders last mentioned, these tribes were Saxons. Their leader was Cerdic. They established the kingdom of the West Saxons (Wessex); so that the county of Hants was the third district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English, introduced from Northern Germany.
s. 7. Fourth settlement of invaders from Germany.--A.D. 530, certain Saxons landed in Essex, so that the county of Essex was the fourth district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English, introduced from Northern Germany.
s. 8. Fifth settlement of invaders from Germany.--These were Angles in Norfolk and Suffolk. This settlement, of which the precise date is not known, took place during the reign of Cerdic in Wessex. The fifth district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English was the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk; the particular dialect introduced being that of the Angles.
s. 9. Sixth settlement of invaders from Germany.--In the year 547 invaders from Northern Germany made the sixth permanent settlement in Britain. The south-eastern counties of Scotland, between the rivers Tweed and Forth, were the districts where they landed. They were of the tribe of the Angles, and their leader was Ida. The south-eastern parts of Scotland constituted the sixth district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English, introduced from Northern Germany.
s. 10. It would be satisfactory if these details rested upon cotemporary evidence; in which case the next question would {4} be that of the relations of the immigrant tribes to each other as Germans, i.e. the extent to which the Jute differed from (or agreed with) the Angle, or the Saxon, and the relations of the Angle and the Saxon to each other. Did they speak different languages?--different dialects of a common tongue!--or dialects absolutely identical? Did they belong to the same or to different confederations? Was one polity common to all? Were the civilizations similar?
Questions like these being answered, and a certain amount of mutual difference being ascertained, it would then stand over to inquire whether any traces of this original difference were still to be found in the modern English. Have any provincial dialects characteristics which are Jute rather than Angle? or Angle rather than Saxon?
It is clear that the second of these questions is involved in the answer given to the first.
s. 11. The accredited relations of the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons to each other as Germans.--These are as follows:--
1. That the geographical locality of the Jutes was the Peninsula of Jutland.
2. That that of Angles, was the present Dutchy of Sleswick; so that they were the southern neighbours of the Jutes.
3. That that of the Saxons was a small tract north of the Elbe, and some distinct point--more or less extensive--between the Elbe and Rhine.
4. That, although there were, probably, dialectal differences between the languages, the speech of all the three tribes was mutually intelligible.
s. 12. Assuming, then, the accuracy of our historical facts, the inference is, that, without expecting to find any very prominent and characteristic differences between the different inhabitants of England arising out of the original differences between the Germanic immigrants, we are to look for what few there are in the following quarters--
1. For the characteristic differentiae of the Jutes, in Kent, part of Sussex, and the Isle of Wight.
2. For those of the Saxons in Sussex, Essex, Hants (Wessex), and Middlesex. {5}
3. For those of the Angles in Norfolk, Suffolk, Yorkshire, Durham, and Northumberland.
Or, changing the expression:--
1. The differentiae of the people of Kent, part of Sussex, and the Isle of Wight (if any), are to be explained by the differentiae of the original Jute immigrants--
2. Those of the rest of Sussex, Wessex, Essex, and Middlesex, by those of the Saxons--
3. Those of the people of Norfolk, &c., by those of the Angles.
Such is our reasoning, and such a sketch of our philological researches--assuming that the opinions just exhibited, concerning the dates, conductors, localities, and order, are absolute and unimpeachable historical facts.
s. 13. Criticism of the aforesaid details.--As a preliminary to this part of the subject, the present writer takes occasion to state once for all, that nearly the whole of the following criticism is not his own (except, of course, so far as he adopts it--which he does), but Mr. Kemble's, and that it forms the introduction to his valuable work on the Saxons in England.
1. The evidence to the details just given, is not historical, but traditional.--a. Bede, from whom it is chiefly taken, wrote more than 300 years after the supposed event, i.e., the landing of Hengist and Horsa, in A.D. 449.
b. The nearest contemporary author is Gildas, and he lived at least 100 years after it.
2. The account of Hengist's and Horsa's landing, has elements which are fictional rather than historical--a. Thus "when we find Hengist and Horsa approaching the coasts of Kent in three keels, and Aelli effecting a landing in Sussex with the same number, we are reminded of the Gothic tradition which carries a migration of Ostrogoths, Visigoths, and Gepidae, also in three vessels, to the mouths of the Vistula."
b. The murder of the British chieftains by Hengist is told totidem verbis, by Widukind, and others of the Old Saxons in Thuringia.
c. Geoffry of Monmouth relates also, how "Hengist obtained from the Britons as much land as could be enclosed {6} by an ox-hide; then, cutting the hide into thongs, enclosed a much larger space than the granters intended, on which he erected Thong Castle--a tale too familiar to need illustration, and which runs throughout the mythus of many nations. Among the Old Saxons, the tradition is in reality the same, though recorded with a slight variety of detail. In their story, a lap-full of earth is purchased at a dear rate from a Thuringian; the companions of the Saxon jeer him for his imprudent bargain; but he sows the purchased earth upon a large space of ground, which he claims, and, by the aid of his comrades, ultimately wrests it from the Thuringians."
3. There is direct evidence in favour of there having been German tribes in England anterior to A.D. 447.--a. At the close of the Marcomannic war, Marcus Antoninus transplanted a number of Germans into Britain.--Dio Cassius, lxxi. lxiii.
b. Alemannic auxiliaries served along with Roman legions under Valentinian.
c. The Notitia utriusque imperii, of which the latest date is half a century earlier than the epoch of Hengist, mentions, as an officer of State, the Comes littoris Saxonici per Britannias; his government extending along the coast from Portsmouth to the Wash.
I conclude with the following extract:--"We are ignorant what fasti or even mode of reckoning the revolutions of seasons prevailed in England, previous to the introduction of Christianity. We know not how any event before the year 600 was recorded, or to what period the memory of man extended. There may have been rare annals: there may have been poems: if such there were they have perished, and have left no trace behind, unless we are to attribute to them such scanty notices as the Saxon Chronicle adds to Beda's account. From such sources, however, little could have been gained of accurate information either as to the real internal state, the domestic progress, or development of a people. The dry bare entries of the Chronicles in historical periods may supply the means of judging what sort of annals were likely to exist before the general introduction of the Roman alphabet and parchment, while, in all probability, runes supplied the place of letters, and {7} stones, or the beech-wood, from which their name is derived, of books. Again, the traditions embodied in the epic, are pre-eminently those of kings and princes; they are heroical, devoted to celebrate the divine or half-divine founders of a race, the fortunes of their warlike descendants, the manners and mode of life of military adventurers, not the obscure progress, household peace, and orderly habits of the humble husband-man. They are full of feasts and fighting, shining arms and golden goblets: the gods mingle among men almost their equals, share in the same pursuits, are animated by the same passions of love, and jealousy, and hatred; or, blending the divine with the mortal nature, become the founders of races, kingly, because derived from divinity itself. But one race knows little of another, or its traditions, and cares as little for them. Alliances or wars alone bring them in contact with one another, and the terms of intercourse between the races will, for the most part, determine the character under which foreign heroes shall be admitted into the national epos, or whether they shall be admitted at all. All history, then, which is founded in any degree upon epical tradition (and national history is usually more or less so founded) must be to that extent imperfect, if not inaccurate; only when corrected by the written references of contemporaneous authors, can we assign any certainty to its records.
"Let us apply these observations to the early events of Saxon history: of Kent, indeed, we have the vague and uncertain notices which I have mentioned; even more vague and uncertain are those of Sussex and Wessex. Of the former, we learn that in the year 477, Aelli, with three sons, Cymen, Wlencing, and Cissa, landed in Sussex; that in the year 485 they defeated the Welsh, and that in 491 they destroyed the population of Anderida. Not another word is there about Sussex before the arrival of Augustine, except a late assertion of the military pre-eminence of Aelli among the Saxon chieftains. The events of Wessex are somewhat better detailed; we learn that in 495 two nobles, Cerdic and Cyner['i]c, came to England, and landed at Cerdices-ora, where, on the {8} same day, they fought a battle: that in 501 they were followed by a noble named Port, who, with his two sons, Bieda and Maegla, made a forcible landing at Portsmouth: and that in 508, they gained a great battle over a British king, whom they slew, together with five thousand of his people. In 514 Stuff and Wihtg['a]r, their nephews, brought them a reinforcement of three ships; in 519, they again defeated the Britons, and established the kingdom of Wessex. In 527, a new victory is recorded; in 530, the Isle of Wight was subdued and given to Wihtg['a]r; and in 534, Cerdic died, and was succeeded by Cyner['i]c, who reigned twenty-six years. In 544, Wihtg['a]r died. A victory of Cyner['i]c, in 552 and 556, and Ceawlin's accession to the throne of Wessex are next recorded. Wars of the West-Saxon kings are noted in 568, 571, 577, 584. From 590 to 595, a king of that race, named Ce['o]l, is mentioned: in 591, we learn the expulsion of Ceawlin from power; in 593, the deaths of Ceawlin, Cwichelm, and Crida, are mentioned, and in 597, the year of Augustine's arrival, we learn that Ce['o]lwulf ascended the throne of Wessex.
"Meagre as these details are, they far exceed what is related of Northumberland, Essex, or East-Anglia. In 547, we are told that Ida began to reign in the first of these kingdoms, and that he was succeeded in 560, by Aelli: that after a reign of thirty years, he died in 588, and was succeeded by Aethelr['i]c, who again, in 593, was succeeded by Aethelfrith. This is all we learn of Northumbria; of Mercia, Essex, East-Anglia, and the innumerable kingdoms that must have been comprised under these general appellations, we hear not a single word.
"If this be all that we can now recover of events, a great number of which must have fallen within the lives of those to whom Augustine preached, what credit shall we give to the inconsistent accounts of earlier actions? How shall we supply the almost total want of information respecting the first settlements? What explanation have we to give of the alliance between Jutes, Angles, and Saxon, which preceded the invasions of England? What knowledge will these records {9} supply of the real number and quality of the chieftains, the language and blood of the populations who gradually spread themselves from the Atlantic to the Frith of Forth; of the remains of Roman cultivation, or the amount of British power with which they had to contend? of the vicissitudes of good and evil fortune which visited the independent principalities before they were swallowed up in the kingdoms of the heptarchy, or the extent of the influence which they retained after the event! On all these several points we are left entirely in the dark; and yet these are facts which it most imports us to know, if we would comprehend the growth of a society which endured for at least 700 years in England, and formed the foundation of that in which we live."--The Saxons in England. Vol. I, pp. 28-32.
s. 14. Inference.--As it is nearly certain, that the year 449 is not the date of the first introduction of German tribes into Britain, we must consider that the displacement of the original British began at an earlier period than the one usually admitted, and, consequently, that it was more gradual than is usually supposed.
Perhaps, if we substitute the middle of the fourth, instead of the middle of the fifth century, as the epoch of the Germanic immigrations into Britain, we shall not be far from the truth.
* * * * *
{10}
Chapter II
GERMANIC ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.--THE IMMIGRANT TRIBES, AND THEIR RELATIONS TO EACH OTHER.
s. 15. By referring to ss. 3-12, it may be seen that out of the numerous tribes and nations of Germany, three in particular have been considered as the chief, if not the exclusive, sources of the present English, viz.: the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes.
To criticise the evidence which derives the English in general from the Angles, the particular inhabitants of Sussex, Essex, Middlesex and Wessex, from the Saxons, and the Anglo-Saxon language from the Angle and Saxon would be superfluous; whilst to doubt the truth of the main facts which it attests would exhibit an unnecessary and unhealthy scepticism. That the Angles and Saxons formed at least seven-tenths of the Germanic invaders may be safely admitted. The Jute element, however, requires further notice.
s. 16. The Jutes.--Were any of the German immigrants Jutes? If so, what were their relations to the other German tribes?
a. Were there Jutes in England? That there was a Jute element in England is to be maintained, not upon the tradition that one of the three ships of Hengist and Horsa was manned by Jutes, but from the following extract from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle:--
"Of Jotum comon Cantware and Wihtware, thaet is seo maeiadh, the n['u] eardath on Wiht, and thaet cynn on West-Sexum dhe man gyt haet I['u]tnacynn. Of Eald-Seaxum comon E['a]st-Seaxan, and Sudh-Seaxan, and West-Seaxan. Of Angle comon {11} (se ['a] sidhdhan st['o]d westig betwix I['u]tum and Seaxum) E['a]st-Engle, Middel-Angle, Mearce, and ealle Nordhymbra."
From the Jutes came the inhabitants of Kent and of Wight, that is, the race that now dwells in Wight, and that tribe amongst the West-Saxons which is yet called the Jute tribe. From the Old-Saxons came the East-Saxons, and South-Saxons, and West-Saxons. From the Angles Land (which has since always stood waste betwixt the Jutes and Saxons) came the East-Angles, Middle-Angles, Mercians, and all the Northumbrians.
Here the words gyt haet I['u]tnacynn constitute cotemporary evidence.
Still there is a flaw in it; since it is quite possible that the term I['u]tnacynn may have been no true denomination of a section of the Germans of England, but only the synonym of a different word, Wiht-saetan. Alfred writes--comon hi of thrym folcum tham strangestan Germaniae; thaet of Seaxum, and of Angle, and of Geatum. Of Geatum fruman sindon Cantware and Wiht-saetan, thaet is seo the['o]d se Wiht thaet ealond on eardadh--they came of three folk, the strongest of Germany; that of Saxons and of Angles, and of Geats. Of Geats originally are the Kent people and Wiht-set; that is the people which Wiht the Island live on.
This changes the reasoning, and leads us to the following facts.
a. The word in question is a compound=Wight=the name of the isle, + saetan=people; as Somer-set, and Dor-set.
b. The peninsula Jut-land was also called Vit-land, or With-land.
c. The wiht- in Wiht-saetan is, undoubtedly, no such element as the vit- in Vit-land=Jut-land; since it represents the older Celtic term, known to us in the Romanized form Vectis.
Putting all this together, it becomes possible (nay probable) that the whole doctrine of a Jute element in the Anglo-Saxon migration may have arisen out of the fact of there being a portion of the people of Southern England neighbours of the Saxons, and bearing the name Wiht-saetan; a fact which, taken along with the juxtaposition of the Vit-landers (Jut-landers) and Saxons on the Continent, suggested to the writers of a long later age the doctrine of a Jute migration.
s. 17. As this last objection impugns the evidence rather than the fact, the following question finds place:-- {12}
What were the Jutes of Germany? At present they are the natives of Jutland, and their language is Danish rather than German.
Neither is there reason to suppose that during the third and fourth centuries it was otherwise.
s. 18. This last circumstance detracts from the likelihood of the fact; since in no part of Kent, Sussex, Hants, nor even in the Isle of Wight--a likely place for a language to remain unchanged--have any traces of the old Jute been found.
s. 19. On the other hand the fact of Jutes, even though Danes, being members of a Germanic confederation is not only probable, but such was actually the case; at least for continental wars--subactis, cum Saxonibus, Euciis (Eutiis), qui se nobis (i.e., the Franks), propri[^a] voluntate tradiderunt ... usque in Oceani littoribus dominio nostro porrigitur.--Theodebert to the Emperor Justinian.--
"Quem Geta, Vasco tremunt, Danus, Eutheo,[1] Saxo, Britannus, Cum patre quos acie te domitasse patet."
Venantius Fortunatus ad Chilpericum regem.[2]
s. 20. Inference.--Of the three following views--(1.) that the Jutes of Jutland in the fourth and fifth centuries spoke Saxon; (2.) that they spoke Danish at home, but lost their language after three or four centuries' residence in England; and (3.) that a later historian was induced by the similarity between the term Wiht-saetan, as applied to the people of the Isle of Wight, and Wit-land, as applied to Jutland, combined with the real probability of the fact supposed, to assume a Jute origin for the Saxons of the parts in question, the third is, in the mind of the present writer, the most probable.
s. 21. It has already been stated that concerning the Angles and Saxons, no reasonable man will put the question which was put in respect to the Jutes, viz., had they any real place among the Germanic invaders of England? Respecting, however, their relations to each other, and their respective geographical localities whilst occupants of Germany, anterior to {13} their immigration into Britain, there is much that requires investigation. What were the Saxons of Germany--what the Angles?
s. 22. Difficulties respecting the identification of the Saxons.--There are two senses of the word Saxon, one of which causes difficulty by being too limited; the other by being too wide.
a. The limited sense of the word Saxon.--This is what we get from Ptolemy, the first author who names the Saxons, and who gives them a limited locality at the mouth of the Elbe, bounded by the Sigulones, the Sabalingi, the Kobandi, the Chali, the Phundusii, the Harudes, and other tribes of the Cimbric Peninsula, of which the Saxons just occupied the neck, and three small islands opposite--probably Fohr, Sylt, and Nordstand.
Now a sense of the word Saxon thus limited, would restrict the joint conquerors of Britain to the small area comprized between the Elbe and Eyder, of which they do not seem even to have held the whole.
b. The wide sense of the word Saxon.--The reader need scarcely be reminded that the present kingdom of Saxony is as far inland as the northern frontier of Bohemia. Laying this, however, out of the question, as the effect of an extension subsequent to the invasion of Britain, we still find Saxons in ancient Hanover, ancient Oldenburg, ancient Westphalia, and (speaking roughly) over the greater part of the country drained by the Weser, and of the area inclosed by the eastern feeders of the Lower Rhine, the Elbe, and the range of the Hartz.
Now as it is not likely that the limited Saxon area of Ptolemy should have supplied the whole of our Saxon population, so on the other hand, it is certain, that of a considerable portion of the Saxon area in its wider extent tribes other than the Saxons of England, were occupants.
s. 23. Difficulties respecting the word Angle.--The reader is referred to an extract from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in s. 16, where it is stated, that "from the Angles' land (which has since always stood waste betwixt the Jutes and the {14} Saxons) came the East-Angles, Middle-Angles, Mercians, and all the Northumbrians."
Thus to bring the great Angle population from an area no larger than the county of Rutland, is an objection--but it is not the chief one.
The chief objection to the Angles of England being derived from the little district of Anglen, in Sleswick, lies in the fact of there being mention of Angli in another part of Germany.
s. 24. This exposition of the elements of uncertainty will be followed by an enumeration of--
1. Those portions of the Germanic populations, which from their geographical position, are the likeliest, [`a] priori, to have helped to people England.
2. Those portions of the Germanic population, which although not supposed to have contributed in any notable degree to the population of Britain, had such continental relations to the Angles and Saxons, as to help in fixing their localities.
These two scenes of facts, give us what may be called our preliminary apparatus criticus.
s. 25. Between the northern limits of the Celtic populations of Gaul and the southern boundary of the Scandinavians of Jutland, we find the area which is most likely to have given origin to the Germans of England. This is best considered under two heads.
a. That of the proper seaboard, or the coast from the Rhine to the Eyder.
b. That of the rivers, i.e., the communications between the ocean and the inland country.
This double division is sufficient, since it is not likely that Britain was peopled by any tribes which were not either maritime, or the occupants of a river.
On the other hand, it is necessary, since although the [`a] priori view is in favour of the coast having supplied the British immigration, the chances of its having proceeded from the interior by the way of the large rivers Rhine, Weser, and Elbe, must also be taken into consideration. {15}
The importance of this latter alternative, will soon be seen.
s. 26. The Menapians.--Locality, from the country of the Morini on the French side of the Straits of Dover, to the Scheldt. It is generally considered that these were not Germans but Celts. The fact, however, is by no means ascertained. If Germans, the Menapians were the tribes nearest to Britain. Again, supposing that the present Flemings of Belgium are the oldest inhabitants of the country, their origin is either wholly, or in part, Menapian. Mentioned by Caesar.
s. 27. The Batavians.--Mentioned by Caesar; locality, from the Maas to the Zuyder Zee. Conterminous with the Menapians on the south, and with the Frisians on the north. If the present Dutch of Holland be the inhabitants of the country from the time of Caesar downwards, their origin is Batavian.
s. 28. The Frisians.--First known to the Romans during the campaign of Drusus--"tributum Frisiis transrhenano populo--Drusus jusserat modicum;"[3] Tacitus, Ann. iv. 72. Extended, according to Ptolemy, as far north as the Ems--[Greek: ten de parokeanitin katechousin ... hoi Phrissioi, mechri tou Amisiou potamou].
Now, as the dialect of the modern province of Friesland differs in many important points from the Dutch of Holland and Flanders; and as there is every reason to believe that the same, or greater difference, existed between the old Frisians and the old Batavians, assuming each to have been the mother-tongues of the present Frisian and Dutch respectively, we may consider that in reaching the parts to the north of the Zuyder-Zee, we have come to a second sub-division of the Germanic dialects; nevertheless, it is not the division to which either the Angles or the Saxons belong, as may be ascertained by the difference of dialect, or rather language.
s. 29. The Chauci.--Connected with the Frisii.--Falling into two divisions--the lesser (?) Chauci, from the Ems to the Weser; the greater (?) Chauci from the Weser to the Elbe--[Greek: meta de toutous] (the Frisians), {16} [Greek: Kauchoi hoi mikroi mechri tou Ouisourgios potamou, eita Kauchoi hoi meizous, mechri tou Albios potamou.]
Tacitus describes the Chauci thus:--"Tam immensum terrarum spatium non tenent tantum Chauci, sed et implent; populus inter Germanos nobilissimus."
The Frisians, as has been stated, represent a separate subdivision of the German dialects, as opposed to the ancient Batavian, and the modern Dutch and Flemish. Did the Chauci represent a third, or were they part of the Frisian division?
The latter is the more likely, and that for the following reasons--Vestiges of Frisian dialects are to be found on the Continent, in Oldenburgh, and also in the island of Heligoland.
More important still is the North-Frisian dialect. North of the Elbe, in the Dutchy of Sleswick, and from the Eyder to Tondern, we find a tract of land called, by Saxo Grammaticus, Frisia Minor, and by other writers, Frisia Eydorensis.
Now, as there are no grounds for considering these North Frisians as other than indigenous to the tract in question, we get an additional reason for looking upon the intermediate line of coast as Frisian rather than either Angle or Saxon--or, at least, such parts of it as are not expressly stated to be otherwise.
s. 30. Inference.--As the whole coast south of the Elbe seems to have been occupied by tribes speaking either Frisian or Batavian dialects, and as neither of these sub-divisions represents the language of the Angles and Saxons, the original localities of those invaders must be sought for either north of the Elbe, or inland, along the course of the rivers, i.e.--inland.
s. 31. The Saxons and Nordalbingians.--North of the Elbe, and south of the Eyder (as stated in s. 22), we meet the Saxons of Ptolemy; but that in a very circumscribed locality.
In the ninth century, the tribes of these parts are divided into three divisions:--
a. The Holtsati=the people of Holstein. Here holt=wood, whilst sat is the -set in Somer-set and Dor-set. {17}
b. The Thiedmarsi=the people of Ditmarsh.
c. The Stormarii=the people of Stormar.
Besides the names of these three particular divisions the tribes between the Elbe and Eyder were called by the general name of Nordalbingii=i.e. people to the north of the Elbe.
s. 32. The people of Anglen--North of the Nordalbingii; Anglen being the name of a district between the Schlie and Flensburg.
s. 33. The Jutes.--In Jut-land, north of the Angles and the Northfrisians.
s. 34. The Saxons of Holstein, how large their area?--There is no reason for considering the Nordalbingian Holtsati, Thiedmarsi and Stormarii as other than Saxons; although the fact of the Northfrisians to the north, and of the Frisians of Hanover to the south of them, is a slight complication of the prim[^a] facie view.
Neither is it necessary to identify the two divisions, and to consider the Saxons as Frisians, or the Frisians as Saxons, as is done by some authors.
It is only necessary to perceive the complication which the existence of the Northfrisians introduces, and to recognise the improbability of parts of the present dutchies of Holstein and Sleswick having constituted the whole of the Anglo-Saxon area.
In other words, we have to ascertain in what direction the Germanic population represented by the Saxons at the mouth of the Elbe extended itself--for some further extension there undoubtedly must have been.
s. 35. This brings us to the other series of preliminary facts, viz.: the consideration of the more important tribes of the middle and lower courses of the three great rivers, the Rhine, the Weser, and the Elbe.
s. 36. The Germans of the Middle Rhine.--Of the Germans of the Lower and Middle Rhine, it is only necessary to mention one--
The Franks.--We shall see that, taking the two terms in their widest sense, the Franks and the Saxons were in contact, a fact which makes it necessary to notice at least some portion of the Frank area. {18}
a. Salian Franks.--If the element Sal- represent the -sel, in the name of the Dutch river Y-ssel, the locality of the Salian Franks was Overyssel and Guelderland, whilst their ethnological relations were most probably with the Batavians.
b. Chamavi.--In the Tabula Peutingeriana we find--Chamavi qui Elpranci (leg. et Franci). They were conterminous with the Salii--[Greek: Hupedexamen men moiran tou Salion ethnous, Chamabous de exelasa].--Julian, Op. p. 280.--D.N.
The following extract is more important, as it shows that a Roman communication at least took place between the Rhine and Britain: [Greek: Chamabon gar me bouleuomenon, adunaton estin ten tes Bretannikes nesou sitopompian epi ta Rhomaika phrouria diapempesthai].--Eunap. in Except. leg. ed., Bonn, p. 42.--D.N.
The name Chamavi is still preserved in that of the district of Hameland, near Deventer.--D.N. and G.D.S.
The Bructeri, Sigambri, and Ripuarian Franks bring us to the Franks of the Middle Rhine, a portion of the division which it is not necessary to follow.
s. 37. The Thuringians.--First mentioned in the beginning of the fourth century. Locality, between the Hartz, the Werra a feeder of the Weser, and the Sala a feeder of the Elbe. As early as the sixth century the Thuringians and Saxons are conterminous, and members of the same confederation against the Franks.--D.N.
s. 38. The Catti.--Locality, the valley of the Fulda, forming part of the Upper Weser. Conterminous with the Thuringi (from whom they were separated by the river Werra) on the east, and the Franks on the west. The modern form of the word Catti is Hesse, and the principality of Hesse is their old locality.--G.D.S.
s. 39. Geographical conditions of the Saxon area.--Southern and northern limits.--The Saxons were in league with the Thuringians and Jutes against the Franks.
By the Jutes they were limited on the north, by the Thuringians on the south-east, and by the Franks on the south-west; the middle portion of the southern frontier being formed by the Catti between the Franks and Thuringians. {19}
This gives us a southern and a northern limit.
Western limit.--This is formed by the Batavians and Frisians of the sea-coast, i.e., by the Batavians of Holland, Guelderland, and Overyssel, and, afterwards, by the Frisians of West and East Friesland, and of Oldenburg.
Here, however, the breadth of the non-Saxon area is uncertain. Generally speaking, it is broadest in the southern, and narrowest in the northern portion. The Frisian line is narrower than the Batavian, whilst when we reach the Elbe the Saxons appear on the sea-coast. Perhaps they do so on the Weser as well.
s. 40. Eastern limit.--Preliminary remark.--Before the eastern limit of the Saxons is investigated, it will be well to indicate the extent to which it differs from the southern.
a. The Thuringians, Catti (or Hessians), and Franks, on the southern boundary of the Saxon area were Germans. Hence the line of demarcation between their language was no broad and definite line, like that between the English and the Welsh, but rather one representing a difference of dialect, like that between the Yorkshire and the Lowland Scotch. Hence, too, we ought not only not to be surprised, if we find dialects intermediate to the Frank and Saxon, the Saxon and Thuringian, &c., but we must expect to find them.
b. The same is the case with the Batavian and Frisian frontier.--We really find specimens of language which some writers call Saxon, and others Dutch (Batavian).
The eastern frontier, however, will be like the frontier between England and Wales, where the line of demarcation is broad and definite, where there are no intermediate and transitional dialects, and where the two contiguous languages belong to different philological classes.--The languages to the east of the Saxon area will be allied to the languages of Russia, Poland, and Bohemia; i.e., they will be not Germanic but Slavonic.
Note.--The northern frontier of the Saxon area is intermediate in character to the western and southern on one hand, and to the eastern on the other; the Danish of the Cimbric Peninsula being--though not German--Gothic. {20}
We begin at the northern portion of the Saxon area, i.e., the south-eastern corner of the Cimbric Peninsula, and the parts about the Town of Lubeck; where the Dutchies of Mecklenburg Schwerin and Holstein join. The attention of the reader is particularly directed to the dates.
s. 41. Slavonians of Holstein, Mecklenburg, and Lauenburg.--The Polabi--From po=on, and Labe=the Elbe. Name Slavonic. Germanized by the addition of the termination--ing, and so become Po-lab-ing-i; just as in Kent we find the Kent-ing-s. Conterminous with the Nordalbingian Stormarii, from whom they are divided by the river Bille, a small confluent of the Elbe. Capital Ratzeburg. First mentioned by writers subsequent to the time of Charlemagne.--D.N.
s. 42. The Wagrians.--North of the Polabi, and within the Cimbric Peninsula, divided from the Danes by the Eyder, from the Non-Danish Nordalbingians by the Trave. Capital Oldenburg. The Isle of Femern was Wagrian. Authorities--chiefly writers of and subsequent to the time of Charlemagne. In one of these we learn that the town of Hadhum (Sleswick) lies between the Angles, the Saxons, and the Wends.
Now, Wend is the German designation of the Slavonians; so that there must have been Slavonians in the Cimbric Peninsula at least as early as the ninth century.--D.N.
s. 43. Obotriti, written also Obotritae, Abotriti, Abotridi; Apodritae, Abatareni, Apdrede, Afdrege, and for the sake of distinction from a people of the same name, Nort-Obtrezi, occupants of the western part of Mecklenburg, and extended as far east as the Warnow, as far south as Schwerin. Called by Adam of Bremen, Reregi. The Obotrites were allies of the Franks against the Saxons, and after the defeat and partial removal of the latter, were transplanted to some of their localities.--"Saxones transtulit" (i.e., Charlemagne), "in Franciam et pagos transalbianos Abodritis dedit."--Eginhart Ann. A.D. 804.--D.N.
s. 44. The Lini--Slavonians on the left bank of the Elbe, and the first met with on that side of the river. Occupants of Danneburg, Luchow and Wustrow, in Luneburg. By the {21} writers subsequent to the time of Charlemagne the Smeldengi (a German designation), and the Bethenici are mentioned along with the Lini (or Linones). Of this Slavonic a Paternoster may be seen in the Mithridates representing the dialect of the neighbourhood in Luchow in A.D. 1691. It is much mixed with the German. About the middle of the last century this (Cis-Albian Slavonic) dialect became extinct.--D.N.
s. 45. The Warnabi or Warnavi.--Locality. Parts about Grabow, Valley of the Elbe. This is the locality of the Varini of Tacitus, the [Greek: Ouirounoi] of Ptolemy, and the Werini of later writers, a tribe connected with the Angli, and generally considered as Germanic.--D.N.
s. 46. Morizani.--The district round the Moritz Lake.--D.N.
s. 47. Doxani.--Locality; the valley of the Dosse.--D.N.
s. 48. Hevelli.--Locality; the valley of the Hevel. These are the Slavonians of Brandenburg and Mittelmark.--D.N.
s. 49. Slavonians of Altmark.--In Altmark, as in Lunenburg, though on the German side of the Elbe we find the names of the places Slavonic, e.g., Klotze, Wrepke, Solpke, Blatz, Regatz, Colbitz, &c.; so that Altmark, like Lunenburg, was originally a Cis-Albian Slavonic locality.
s. 50. South of the Hevel we meet with the Sorabian, or Sorb Slavonians, the descendants of whom form at the present time part of the population of Lusatia and Silesia. It is not, however, necessary to follow these further, since the German frontier now begins to be Thuringian rather than Saxon.
s. 51. Saxon area.--From the preceding investigations we determine the area occupied by the Saxons of Germany to be nearly as follows:
a.--Ethnologically considered.--Tract bounded on the north by the North Frisian Germans and Jute Danes of Sleswick; on the north and north-east by the Slavonians of the Elbe, sometimes Trans-Albian like the Wagrians and Obotrites; sometimes Cis-Albian, like the Linones and the Slaves of Altmark; on the south by the Thuringians, Catti, and Franks; on the west by the Franks, Batavians, and Frisians.
b. Considered in relation to the ancient population that it {22} comprised.--The country of the Saxons of Ptolemy; the Angli of Tacitus; the Langobardi of Tacitus; the Angrivarii; the Dulgubini; the Ampsivarii (?); the Bructeri Minores (?); the Fosi, and Cherusci; and probably part of the Cauci. Of populations mentioned by the later writers (i.e. of those between the seventh and eleventh centuries), the following belong to this area--the Stormarii, Thietmarsi, Hotsati (=the Nordalbingii, or Nordleudi), the Ostfali, (Osterluidi), Westfali, Angarii, and Eald-Seaxan (Old Saxons).
c. Considered in relation to its modern population.--Here it coincides most closely with the kingdom of Hanover, plus parts of the Dutchies of Holstein and Oldenburg, and parts of Altmark? Brunswick? and Westphalia, and minus the Frisian portion of East Friesland, and the Slavonic part of Luneburg.
d. River system.--By extending the Saxons of Westphalia as far as Cleves (which has been done by competent judges) we carry the western limit to the neighbourhood of the Rhine. This, however, is as far as it can safely be carried. In the respect to the Upper Ems, it was probably Saxon, the lower part being Frisian. The Weser is pre-eminently the river of the Saxons, with the water-system of which their area coincides more closely than with any other physical division. The Elbe was much in the same relation to the Germans and Slavonians, as the Rhine was to the Germans and the Gauls. Roughly speaking, it is the frontier--the Cis-Albian Slaves (the Linones and the Slavonians of Altmark) being quite as numerous as the Trans-Albian Germans, (the people of Stormar, Ditmarsh, and Holstein). The Eyder was perhaps equally Danish, Frisian, and Saxon.
e. Mountains.--The watershed of the Weser on the one side, and of the Ruhr and Lippe on the other, is the chief high land contained within the Saxon area, and is noticed as being the line most likely to form a subdivision of the Saxon population, either in the way of dialect or political relations--in case such a subdivision exists, a point which will be considered in the next chapter.
* * * * *
{23}
Chapter III
OF THE DIALECTS OF THE SAXON AREA, AND OF THE SO-CALLED, OLD SAXON.
s. 52. The area occupied by the Saxons of Germany has been investigated; and it now remains to ask, how far the language of the occupants was absolutely identical throughout, or how far it fell into dialects or sub-dialects. In doing this, it may as well be asked, First, what we expect, [`a] priori; Second, what we really find.
s. 53. To the Saxon area in Germany, there are five philological frontiers, the Slavonic, the Frisian, the Batavian, the Frank, and the Thuringian, to which may probably be added the Hessian; in each of which, except the Slavonic, we may expect that the philological phenomenon of intermixture and transition will occur. Thus--
a. The Saxon of Holstein may be expected to approach the Jute and Frisian.
b. That of South Oldenburg and East Friesland, the Frisian and Batavian.
c. That of Westphalia, the Batavian and Frank.
d, e. That of the Hessian and Thuringian frontiers, the Hessian and Thuringian.
Finally, the Saxon of the centre of the area is expected to be the Saxon of the most typical character.
s. 54. Such is what we expect. How far it was the fact is not known for want of data. What is known, however, is as follows.--There were at least two divisions of the Saxon; (1st) the Saxon of which the extant specimens are of English origin, and (2nd), the Saxon of which the extant specimens are of continental origin. We will call these at present the Saxon of England, and the Saxon of the Continent. {24}
s. 55. Respecting the Saxon of England and the Saxon of the Continent, there is good reason for believing that the first was spoken in the northern, the second in the southern portion of the Saxon area, i.e., the one in Hanover and the other in Westphalia, the probable boundaries between them being the line of highlands between Osnaburg and Paderborn.
s. 56. Respecting the Saxon of England and the Saxon of the Continent, there is good reason for believing that, whilst the former was the mother-tongue of the Angles and the conquerors of England, the latter was that of the Cherusci of Arminius, the conquerors and the annihilators of the legions of Varus.
s. 57. Respecting the Saxon of England and the Saxon of the Continent, it is a fact that whilst we have a full literature in the former, we have but fragmentary specimens of the latter--these being chiefly the following: (1) the Heliand, (2) Hildubrand and Hathubrant, (3) the Carolinian Psalms.
s. 58. The preceding points have been predicated respecting the difference between the two ascertained Saxon dialects, for the sake of preparing the reader for the names by which they are known. Supposing the nomenclature to be based upon any of the preceding facts, we might have the following nomenclature:--
FOR THE SAXON OF THE CONTINENT. FOR THE SAXON OF ENGLAND.
1. Continental Saxon. Insular Saxon. 2. German Saxon. English Saxon. 3. Westphalian Saxon. Hanoverian Saxon. 4. South-Saxon. North Saxon. 5. Cheruscan Saxon. Angle Saxon. 6. Saxon of the Heliand.[4] Saxon of Beowulf.[4]
Of these names the last would be the best for strictly scientific purposes, or for the purposes of investigation; since the fact upon which it is based is the most undeniable.
Such is what the nomenclature might be, or, perhaps, ought to be. What it is is another question.
{25}
s. 59. The Saxon of England is called Anglo-Saxon; a term against which no exception can be raised.
s. 60. The Saxon of the Continental used to be called Dano-Saxon, and is called Old Saxon.
s. 61. _Why called Dano-Saxon._--When the poem called Heliand was first discovered (and that in an English library), the difference in language between it and the common Anglo-Saxon composition was accounted for by the assumption of a Danish intermixture.
s. 62. _Why called Old Saxon._--When the Continental origin of the Heliand was recognised, the language was called Old Saxon, because it represented the Saxon of the mother-country, the natives of which were called Old Saxons by the Anglo-Saxons themselves. Still the term is exceptionable; the Saxon of the Heliand is most probably a sister-dialect of the Anglo-Saxon, rather the Anglo-Saxon itself is a continental locality. Exceptionable, however, as it is, it will be employed.
s. 63. The data for the study of the Old Saxon are as follows:--
1. Abrenuntiatio Diaboli, e Codice Vaticano.--Graff, Diutisca, ii. 191.
2. Confessionis Formulae, e Codice Essensi.--Lacomblet, Archiv, fuer Geschichte des Niederrhins, 1, 4-9.
3. Fragmentum de Festo omnium Sanctorum, e Codice Essensi.--Ibid.
4. Rotulus redituum Essensis.--Ibid.
5. The Frekkenhorst Roll.--Denkmaeler von Dorow, 1, 2, 1.
6. Glossae Saxonicae, e Codice Argentorat.--Diutisca, 192.
7. T. Lipsii; Epist. cent. III. ad Belgas pertinentium, Ep. 44.
8. Hildebrand.--Heroic fragment, in alliterative metre.
9. The Carolinian Psalms.--A translation of the Psalms, referred to the time of Charlemagne; sometimes considered to be old Batavian.
10. Heliand, a Gospel Harmony in alliterative metre, and the chief Old Saxon composition extant. {26}
SPECIMEN.
s. 64. Heliand, pp. 12, 13. (Schmeller's Edition.)
LUC. II. 8-13.
Tho uuard managun cud, Then it was to many known, Obar thesa uuidon uuerold. Over this wide world. Uuardos antfundun, The words they discovered, Thea thar ehuscalcos Those that there, as horse-grooms, Uta uuarun, Were without, Uueros an uuahtu, Men at watch, Uuiggeo gomean, Horses to tend, Fehas aftar felda: Cattle on the field-- Gisahun finistri an tuue They saw the darkness in two Telatan an lufte; Dissipated in the atmosphere, Endi quam lioht Godes, And came a light of God Uuanum thurh thui uuolcan; --through the welkin; Endi thea uuardos thar And the words there Bifeng an them felda. Caught on the field. Sie uurdun an forhtun tho, They were in fright then Thea man an ira moda; The men in their mood-- Gisahun thar mahtigna They saw there mighty Godes Engil cuman; Angel of God come; The im tegegnes sprac. That to them face to face spake. Het that im thea uuardos-- It bade them these words-- "Uuiht ne antdredin "Dread not a whit Ledes fon them liohta. Of mischief from the light. Ic scal eu quad he liobora thing, I shall to you speak glad things, Suido uuarlico Very true; Uuilleon seggean, Say commands; Cudean craft mikil. Show great strength. Nu is Krist geboran, Now is Christ born, An thesero selbun naht, In this self-same night; Salig barn Godes, The blessed child of God, An thera Davides burg, In David's city, Drohtin the godo. The Lord the good. That is mendislo That is exultation Manno cunneas, To the races of men, Allaro firiho fruma. Of all men the advancement. Thar gi ina fidan mugun, There ye may find him An Bethlema burg, In the city of Bethlehem, Barno rikiost. The noblest of children-- Hebbiath that te tecna, Ye have as a token {27} That ic eu gitellean mag, That I tell ye Uuarun uuordun, True words, That he thar biuundan ligid, That he there swathed lieth, That kind an enera cribbiun, The child in a crib, Tho he si cuning obar al Though he be King over all Erdun endi himiles, Earth and Heaven, Endi obar eldeo barn, And over the sons of men, Uueroldes uualdand." Of the world the Ruler." Reht so he tho that uuord gespracenun Right as he that word spake, So uuard thar engilo te them So was there of Angels to them, Unrim cuman, In a multitude, come Helag heriskepi, A holy host, Fon hebanuuanga, From the Heaven-plains, Fagar folc Godes, The fair folk of God, Endi filu sprakun, And much they spake Lofuuord manag, Praise-words many, Liudeo herron; To the Lord of Hosts (people). Athobun tho helagna sang, They raised the holy song, Tho sie eft te hebanuuanga As they back to the Heaven-plains Uundun thurh thin uuolcan. Wound through the welkin. Thea uuardos hordun, The words they heard, Huo thin engilo craft How the strength of the Angels Alomahtigna God, The Almighty God, Suido uuerdlico, Very worthily, Uuordun louodun. With words praised. "Diurida si nu," quadun sie, "Love be there now," quoth they, "Drohtine selbun, "To the Lord himself An them hohoston On the highest Himilo rikea; Kingdom of Heaven, Endi fridu an erdu, And peace on earth Firiho barnum, To the children of men, Goduuilligun gumun, Goodwilled men Them the God antkennead, Who know God, Thurh hluttran hugi." Through a pure mind."
* * * * *
{28}
Chapter IV
AFFINITIES OF THE ENGLISH WITH THE LANGUAGES OF GERMANY AND SCANDINAVIA.
s. 65. The last chapter has limited the Anglo-Saxon area to the northern part of the Saxon area in general. Further details, however, upon this point, may stand over until the general affinities of the English language have been considered.
s. 66. Over and above those languages of Germany and Holland which were akin to the dialects of the Angles and the Saxons, cognate languages were spoken in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, and the Feroe isles, i.e., in Scandinavia.
s. 67. The general collective designation for the Germanic tongues of Germany and Holland, and for the Scandinavian languages of Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, and the Feroe Isles, is taken from the name of those German tribes who, during the decline of the Roman Empire, were best known to the Romans as the Goths; the term Gothic for the Scandinavian and Germanic languages, collectively, being both current and convenient.
s. 68. Of this great stock of languages the Scandinavian is one branch; the Germanic, called also Teutonic, another.
s. 69. The Scandinavian branch of the Gothic stock comprehends, 1. The dialects of Scandinavia Proper, i.e., of Norway and Sweden; 2. of the Danish isles and Jutland; 3. of Iceland; 4. of the Feroe Isles. On the side of Lapland the languages of this branch come in contact with the Laplandic and Finlandic; whilst in Sleswick they are bounded by the Low German. {29}
SPECIMENS.
Icelandic (Fareyinga-Saga--Ed. Mohnike).
Ok n['u] er that eitthvert sinn um sumarit, at Sigmundr maelti til th['o]ris: "Hvat mun verdha, tho at vidh farim ['i] sk['o]g thenna, er h[`e]r er nordhr fr['a] gardhi?" th['o]rir svarar: "['a] thv['i] er m[`e]r eingi forvitni," segir hann. "Ekki er m[`e]r sv[^a] gefit," segir Sigmundr, "ok th['a]ngat skal ek fara." "th['u] munt r['a]dha hlj['o]ta," segir th[^u]rir, "en brj['o]tum vidh tha bodhordh f['o]stra m['i]ns." Nu f['o]ru their, ok hafdhi Sigmundr vidharoexi eina i hendi s[`e]r; koma i sk['o]ginn, ok ['i] rj[^o]dhr eitt fagurt; ok er their hafa thar eigi leingi verit, th['a] heyra their bjoern mikinn hardhla ok grimligan. that var vidhbjoern mikill, ['u]lfgr['a]r at lit. their hlaupa nu aptra ['a] stiginn than, er their hoeldhu th['a]ngat farit; stigrinn var mj['o]r ok thraurigr, ok hleypr th['o]rir fyrir, en Sigmundr s['i]dhar. D['y]rit bleypr n['u] eptir theim ['a] stiginn, ok verdhr thv['i] thraungr stigrinn, ok brotna eikrnar fyrir thvi. Sigmundr snyr th['a] skj['o]tt ['u]t af stignum millum trj['a]nna, ok bidhr thar til er dyrit kemr jafn-fram honum. tha hoeggr hann jafnt medhal hlusta ['a] d[^y]rinu medh tveim hoendum, sv[^a] at exin soekkr. En d[^y]rit fellr ['a]fram, ok er dautt.
Feroic.
N['u] vaer so til ajna Ferina um Summari, at Sigmundur snakkaji so vi Towra: "Kvat man bagga, towat v[`i]d faerin uj henda Skowin, uj [`e]r h[`e]r noran-firi Gaerin?" Towrur svaerar, "Ikkji haevi e Hu at forvitnast ettir tuj," s[`i]ir han. "Ikkji eri e so sintur," s[`i]ir Sigmundur, "og haear skael e fara." "T[`u] fert t[oa] at r[oa]a," s[`i]ir Towrur, "men t[oa] browtum vid Forbo Fostirfaejir mujns." N[`u] fowru tajr, og Sigmundur heji ajna oeksi til Brennuv[`i] uj Hondini; tajr koma in uj Skowin, og [oa] ajt vaekurt rudda Plos men ikkji haeva tajr veri haer l['a]jngji, firin tajr hojra kvoedtt Brak uj Skownun, og br[oa]t ettir sujgja tajr ajna egvulia stowra Bjoedn og gruiska. Tae vae ajn stowr Skowbjoedn gr[oa]gulmut [oa] Litinun. Tair lejpa n[`u] attir [oa] R[oa]sina, sum tajr hoeddu gingji ettir; R[oa]sin vaer mj[oa]v og trong; Towrur lejpur undan, og Sigmundur attan[oa]. Djowri leipur n[`u] ettir tajmum [oa] R[oa]sini; og n[`u] verur R[oa]sin trong kj[oa] tuj, so at Ajkjinar brotnavu fr[oa] tuj. Sigmundur snujur t[oa] kvikliani ['u]taef R[oa]sini inimidlum Trjini, og bujar haer til Djowri kjemur abajnt han. T[oa] hoeggur han bajnt uj Ojrnalystri [oa] Djowrinum vi b[oa]vun Hondun, so at oexin soekkur in, og Djowri dettir bajnt framettir, og er standejt.
Swedish.
Och nu var det eng[oa]ng on sommaren, som Sigmund sade till Thorer: "Hvad m[oa]nde vael deraf warda, om vi [oa]ter g[oa] ut i skogen, som ligger der norr on g[oa]rden?" "Det aer jag alldeles icke nyfiken att veta," svarade Thor. "Icke g[oa]r det s[oa] med mig," sade Sigmund, "och ditret maeste jag." "Du kommer d[oa] att r[oa]da," sade Thor, "men dermed oefvertraeda vi v[oa]r {30} Fosterfaders bud." De gingo nu [oa]stad, och Sigmund bade en vedyxa i handen; de kommo in i skogen, och strat derp[oa] fingo de se en ganska stor och vildsinnt bjoern, en dr[oa]pelig skogsbjoern, varg-gr[oa] till faergen. De sprungo d[oa] tillbaka p[oa] samma stig som de hade kommit dit. Stigen var smal och tr[oa]ng; och Thorer sprang fr[oa]mst, men Sigmund efterst. Djuret lopp nu efter dem p[oa] stigen, och stigen blef tr[oa]ng foer detsamma, s[oa] att traeden soenderbroetos i dess lopp. Sigmund vaende d[oa] kurtigt retaf fr[oa]n stigen, och staellde sig mellan traeden, samt stod der, tills djuret kom fram midt foer honom. D[oa] fattade han yxan med begge haenderna, och hoegg midt emellan oeronen p[oa] djuret, s[oa] att yxan gick in, och djuret stoertade fram[oa]t, och dog p[oa] staellet.
Danish.
Og nu var det engang om Sommeren, at Sigmund sagde til Thorer: "Hvad mon der vel kan flyde af, om vi end gaae hen i den Skov, som ligger her nordenfor Gaarden?" "Det er jeg ikken nysgjerrig efter at vide," svarede Thorer. "Ei gaar det mig saa," sagde Sigmund, "og derud maa jeg." "Du kommer da til at raade," sagde Thorer, "men da overtraede, vi vor Fosterfaders Bud." De gik nu, og Sigmund havde en Vedoexe i Haanden; de kom ind i Skoven, og strax derpaa saae de en meget stor og grum Bjoern, en drabelig Skovejoern, ulvegraa af Farve. De loeb da tilbage ad den samme Sti, ad hvilken de vare komne derhen. Stien var smal og trang; og Thorer loeb forrest, men Sigmund bagerst. Dyret loeb nu efter dem paa Stien, og Stien blev trang for det, og Traeerne broedes i dets. Loeb Sigmund dreiede da nu hurtig ud af Stien, og stillede sig imellem Traeerne, og stod der indtil Dyret kom frem lige for ham. Da fattede han oexen med begge Haender, og hug lige imellem oererne paa Dyret, saa at oexen sank i, og Dyret styrtede fremad, og var doedt paa Stedet.
English.
And now is it a time about the summer, that Sigmund spake to Thorir: "What would become, even if we two go into the wood (shaw), which here is north from the house?" Thorir answers, "Thereto there is to me no curiosity," says he. "So is it not with me," says Sigmund, "and thither shall I go." "Thou mayst counsel," says Thorir, "but we two break the bidding-word of foster-father mine." Now go they, and Sigmund had a wood-axe in his hands; they come into the wood, and into a fair place; and as they had not been there long, they hear a bear, big, fierce, and grim. It was a wood-bear, big, wolf-grey in hue. They run (leap) now back (after) to the path, by which they had gone thither. The path was narrow and strait; and Thorir runs first, and Sigmund after. The beast runs now after them on the path, and the path becomes strait, and broken oaks before it. Sigmund turns then short out of the path among the trees, and bides there till the beast comes even with him. Then cuts he even in between {31} the ears of the beast with his two hands, so that the axe sinks, and the beast falls forward, and is dead.
s. 70. The Teutonic branch falls into three divisions:--
1. The Moeso-Gothic.
2. The High Germanic.
3. The Low Germanic.
s. 71. It is in the Moeso-Gothic that the most ancient specimen of any Gothic tongue has been preserved. It is also the Moeso-Gothic that was spoken by the conquerors of ancient Rome; by the subjects of Hermanic, Alaric, Theodoric, Genseric (?), Euric, Athanaric, and Totila.
This history of this language, and the meaning of the term by which it is designated, is best explained by the following passages:--
a. A.D. 482. "Trocondo et Severino consulibus--Theodoricus cognomento Valamer utramque Macedoniam, Thessaliamque depopulatus est, Larissam quoque metropolim depredatus, Fausto solo consule (A.D. 485)--Idem Theodoricus rex Gothorum Zenonis Augusti munificentia pene pacatus, magisterque praesentis militiae factus, consul quoque designatus, creditam sibi Ripensis Daciae partem Moesiaeque inferioris, cum suis satellitibus pro tempore tenuit."--Marcellini Comitis Chronicon, D.N.
b. "Frederichus ad Theodoricum regem, qui tunc apud Novam Civitatem provinciae Moesiae morabatur, profectus est."--Vita S. Severini, D.N.
c. "Zeno misit ad Civitatem Novam, in qu[^a] erat Theodoricus dux Gothorum, filius Valameris, et eum invitavit in solatium sibi adversus Basiliscum."--Anon. Valesii, p. 663, D.N.
d. Civitas Nova is Nicopolis on the Danube; and the nation thus spoken of is the Gothic nation in the time of Zeno. At this time they are settled in the Lower Moesia, or Bulgaria.
How they got here from the northern side of the Danube we find in the history of the reign of Valens. When pressed by intestine wars, and by the movements of the Huns, they were assisted by that emperor, and settled in the parts in question. {32}
Furthermore, they were converted to Christianity; and the Bible was translated into their language by their Bishop Ulphilas.
Fragments of this translation, chiefly from the Gospels, have come down to the present time; and the Bible translation of the Arian Bishop Ulphilas, in the language of the Goths of Moesia, during the reign of Valens, exhibits the earliest sample of any Gothic tongue.
s. 72. How Gothic tribes reached the Lower Danube is a point upon which there is a variety of opinion. The following facts, however, may serve as the basis of our reasoning.
A.D. 249-251--The Goths are found about equidistant from the Euxine Sea, and the eastern portion of the range of Mount Haemus, in the Lower Moesia, and at Marcianopolis. Here they gain a great battle against the Romans, in which the Emperor Decius is killed.
His successor, Gallus, purchases a peace.
Valerian defends himself against them.
During the reign of Gallienus they appear as maritime warriors, and ravage Asia Minor, Greece, and Illyria.
A.D. 269--Are conquered at Naissus, on the western boundary of Moesia Superior by Claudius.
A.D. 282--Are defeated by Carus.
A.D. 321--Ravage Moesia (Inferior?) and Thrace.
A.D. 336--Attacked by Constantine in Dacia--north of the Danube.
A.D. 373--In the reign of Valens (as already stated), they were admitted to settle within the limits of the empire.
s. 73. Now, although all this explains, how a Gothic language was spoken in Bulgaria, and how remnants of it have been preserved until the nineteenth century, the manner in which the tribe who spoke it reached Marcianopolis, so as to conquer the Emperor Decius, in A.D. 249, is unexplained.
Concerning this there are three opinions--
A. The Baltic doctrine. According to this the Goths migrated from the Baltic to the Maeotis, from the Maeotis to the Euxine, and from the Euxine to the Danube, along which river they moved from east to west. {33}
B. The Getic doctrine.--Here the Goths are made out to be the aborigines of the Lower Danube, of Dacia, Moesia, and even Thrace; in which case their movement was, also, from east to west.
C. The German doctrine.--Here the migration is from west to east, along the course of the Danube, from some part of south-eastern Germany, as its starting-point, to Asia Minor as its extreme point, and to Bulgaria (Moesia Inferior) as its point of settlement.
s. 74. Respecting the first of these views the most that can be said in its favour is, that it is laid down by Jornandes, who wrote in the fifth century, and founded his history upon the earlier writings of Ablavius and Dexippus, Gothic historians, who, in their turn took their account from the old legends of the Goths themselves--in priscis eorum carminibus, paene historico ritu. On the other hand, the evidence is, at best, traditional, the fact improbable, and the likelihood of some such genealogy being concocted after the relationship between the Goths of the Euxine, and Germans of the Baltic had been ascertained exceedingly great.
s. 75. The second is supported by no less an authority than Grimm, in his latest work, the History of the German Language;--and the fact of so learned and comprehensive an investigator having admitted it, is, in the mind of the present writer, the only circumstance in its favour. Over and above the arguments that may be founded on a fact which will soon be noticed, the chief reasons are deduced from a list of Dacian or Getic plants in Dioscorides, which are considered to bear names significant in the German. Whether or not, the details of this line of criticism will satisfy the reader who refers to them, it is certain that they are not likely to take a more cogent form than they take in the hands of the Deutsche Grammatik.
s. 76. The third opinion is the likeliest; and if it were not for a single difficulty would, probably, never have been demurred to. The fact in question is the similarity between the words Getae and Gothi.
The fact that a tribe called G-O-T-H-I should, when they first peopled the Moesogothic country, have hit upon the {34} country of a people with a name so like their own as G-E-T-AE, by mere accident, is strange. English or American colonies might be sent to some thousand places before one would be found with a name so like that of the mother-country as Get is to Got. The chances, therefore, are that the similarity of name is not accidental, but that there is some historical, ethnological, or geographical grounds to account for it. Grimm's view has been noticed. He recognises the difficulty, and accounts for it by making the Goths indigenous to the land of Getae.
To a writer who (at one and the same time) finds difficulty in believing that this similarity is accidental and is dissatisfied with Grimm's reasoning, there seems to be no other alternative but to consider that the Goths of the Lower Danube had no existence at all in Germany under that name, that they left their country under a different[5] one, and that they took the one by which they were known to the Romans (and through them to us), on reaching the land of the Getae--as, in England, the Saxons of Essex and Wessex did not (since they brought their name with them), but as the East and West Kent-ings[6] did.
This doctrine, of course, falls to the ground directly it can be shown that the Goths of Moesia were either called Goths in Germany, or any where else, anterior to their settlement in the Geta-land.
Be this, however, as it may, the first division of the Teutonic branch of languages is the Moeso-Gothic of the Goths of the Lower Danube, in the fourth century, as preserved in the translation of Ulphilas, and in other less important fragments.
SPECIMEN.
LUKE i. 46-56.
Jah quath Mariam. Mikileid saivala meina Fan, jah svegneid ahma meins du Gotha nasjand meinamma. Unte insahu du hnaivenai thiujos seinaizos: {35} sai allis fram himma nu audagjand mik alla kunja. Unte gatavida mis mikilein sa mahteiga, jah veih namo is. Jah armahairtei is in aldins ald[^e] thaim ogandam ina. Gatavida svinthein in arma seinamma; distahida mikilthuhtans gahugdai hairtins seinis; gadrausida mahteigans af stolam, jah ushauhida gahnaividans; gredigans gas[^o]thida thiuthe, jah gabignandans insandida lausans; hleibida Israela thiumagu seinamma, gamundans armahairteins, sva sve rodida du attam unsaraim Abrahaima jah fraiv is und aiv.
s. 77. The Old High German, called also Francic and Alemannic, was spoken in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries, in Suabia, Bavaria, and Franconia. It is in the Old High German that the Krist of Otfrid, the Psalms of Notker, the Canticle of Willeram, the Glosses of Kero, the Vita Annonis, &c., are composed.
SPECIMEN.
KRIST, i. 12. (Edit. Graff.)
Tho uuarun thar in lante hirta haltente; Thes fehes datun uuarta uuidar fianta. Zi ['i]n quam boto sconi, engil scinenti; Joh uuurtun sie inliuhte fon himilisgen liohte. Forahtun sie in tho gahun so sinan anasahun; Joh hintarquamun harto thes Gotes boten uuorto. Sprah ther Gotes boto sar. "Ih scal ['i]['u] sagen uuuntar. Ju scal sin fon Gote heil; nales forahta nihein. Ih scal iu sagen imbot, gibot ther himilisgo Got; Ouh nist ther er gihorti so fronisg arunti. Thes uuirdit uuorolt sinu zi euuidon blidu, Joh al giscaft thiu in uuorolti thesa erdun ist ouh dretenti Niuuui boran habet thiz lant then himilisgon Heilant; The ist Druhtin Krist guater fon iungeru muater. In Bethleem thiue kuninga thie uuarun alle thanana, Fon in uuard ouh giboran iu sin muater magad sconu. Sagen ih ['i]['u], guate man, uuio ir nan sculut findan, Zeichen ouh gizami thuruh thaz seltsani. Zi theru burgi faret hinana, ir findet, so ih ['i]['u] sageta, Kind niuuui boranaz in kripphun gilegitaz. Tho quam unz er zin tho sprah engilo heriscaf, Himilisgu menigi, sus alle singenti-- In himilriches hohi si Gote guallichi; Si in erdu fridu ouh allen thie fol sin guates uuillen
{36}
The Same, in English.
Then there was in the land herdsmen feeding: Of their cattle they made watch against foes. To them came a messenger fair, an angel shining, And they became lit with heavenly light. They feared, suddenly as on him they looked; And followed much the words of God's messenger: Spake there God's messenger strait, "I shall to you say wonders. To you shall there be from God health; fear nothing at all. I shall to you say a message, the bidding of the heavenly God: Also there is none who has heard so glad an errand. Therefore becomes his world for ever blythe, And all creatures that in the world are treading this earth. Newly borne has this land the heavenly Savior, Who is the Lord Christ, good, from a young mother. In Bethleem, of the kings they were all thence-- From them was also born his mother, a maid fair. I say to you, good men, how ye him shall find, A sign and token, through this wonder. To your burgh fare hence, ye find, so as I to you said, A child, new born, in a crib lying." Then came, while he to them spake, of angels an host, A heavenly retinue, thus all singing: "In the heavenly kingdom's highth be to God glory; Be on earth peace also to all who are full of God's will."
The Middle High German ranges from the thirteenth Century to the Reformation.
s. 78. The Low Germanic Division, to which the Anglo-Saxon belongs, is currently said to comprise six languages, or rather four languages in different stages.
I. II.--The Anglo-Saxon and Modern English.
III.--The Old Saxon.
IV. V.--The Old Frisian and Modern Dutch.
VI.--The Platt-Deutsch, or Low German.
s. 79. The Frisian and Dutch.--It is a current statement that the Old Frisian bears the same relation to the Modern Dutch of Holland that the Anglo-Saxon does to the English.
The truer view of the question is as follows:-- {37}
1. That a single language, spoken in two dialects, was originally common to both Holland and Friesland.
2. That from the northern of these dialects we have the Modern Frisian of Friesland.
3. From the southern, the Modern Dutch of Holland.
The reason for this refinement is as follows:--
The Modern Dutch has certain grammatical forms older than those of the Old Frisian; e.g., the Dutch infinitives and the Dutch weak substantives, in their oblique cases, end in -en; those of the Old Frisian in -a: the form in -en being the older.
s. 80. The true Frisian is spoken in few and isolated localities. There is--
1. The Frisian of the Dutch state called Friesland.
2. The Frisian of the parish of Saterland, in Westphalia.
3. The Frisian of Heligoland.
4. The North Frisian, spoken in a few villages of Sleswick. One of the characters of the North Frisian is the possession of a Dual Number.
s. 81. In respect to its stages, we have the Old Frisian of the Asega-bog, the Middle Frisian of Gysbert Japicx, and the Modern Frisian of the present Frieslanders, Westphalians, and Heligolanders.
Asega-bog, i. 3. p. 13, 14. (Ed. Wiarda.)
Thet is thiu thredde liodkest and thes Kynig Kerles ieft, theter allera monna ek ana sina eyna gode besitte umberavat. Hit ne se thet ma hine urwinne mith tele and mith rethe and mith riuchta thingate, sa hebbere alsam sin Asega dema and dele to lioda londriuchte. Ther ne hach nen Asega nenne dom to delande hit ne se thet hi to fara tha Keysere fon Rume esweren hebbe and thet hi fon da liodon ekeren se. Sa hoch hi thenne to demande and to delande tha fiande alsare friounde, thruch des ethes willa, ther hi to fara tha Keysere fon Rume esweren heth, tho demande and to delande widuon and weson, waluberon and alle werlosa liodon, like to helpande and sine threa knilinge. Alsa thi Asega nimth tha unriuchta mida and tha urlouada panninga, and ma hini urtinga mi mith twam sine juenethon an thes Kyninges bonne, sa ne hoch hi nenne dom mar to delande, truch thet thi Asega thi biteknath thene prestere, hwande hia send siande and hia skilun wesa agon there heliga Kerstenede, hia skilun helpa alle tham ther hiam seluon nauwet helpa ne muge.
{38}
The Same, in English.
That is the third determination and concession of King Charles, that of all men each one possess his own goods (house?) unrobbed. It may not be that any man overcome him with charge (tales), and with summons (rede), and with legal action. So let him hold as his Asega (judge) dooms and deals according to the land-right of the people. There shall no Asega deal a doom unless it be that before the Caesar of Rome he shall have sworn, and that he shall have been by the people chosen. He has then to doom and deal to foes as to friends, through the force (will) of the oath which he before the Caesar of Rome has sworn, to doom and to deal to widows and orphans, to wayfarers and all defenceless people, to help them as his own kind in the third degree. If the Asega take an illegal reward, or pledged money, and a man convict him before two of his colleagues in the King's Court, he has no more to doom, since it is the Asega that betokens the priest, and they are seeing, and they should be the eyes of the Holy Christendom, they should help all those who may nought help themselves.
s. 82. The Low German and Platt-Deutsch.--The words Low German are not only lax in their application, but they are equivocal; since the term has two meanings, a general meaning when it signifies a division of the Germanic languages, comprising English, Dutch, Anglo-Saxon, Old Saxon, and Frisian, and a limited one when it means the particular dialects of the Ems, the Weser, and the Elbe. To avoid this the dialects in question will be henceforth called by their continental name of Platt-Deutsch; which although foreign, is convenient.
s. 83. The points of likeness and difference between two languages belonging to different branches of the same Gothic stock may be partially collected from the following comparison between certain Icelandic, Norse or Scandinavian, and certain Anglo-Saxon or Germanic inflections.
Declension of substantives ending with a vowel.
Saxon. Icelandic.
Neuter. Neuter.
Sing. Nom. E['a]ge (an eye). Auga (an eye). Acc. E['a]ge Auga. Dat. E['a]gan Auga. Gen. E['a]gan Auga. {39} Plur. Nom. E['a]gan Augu. Acc. E['a]gan Augu. Dat. E['a]gan Augum. Gen. E['a]gan Augna.
Masculine. Masculine.
Sing. Nom. Nama (a name). Bogi (a bow). Acc. Naman Boga. Dat. Naman Boga. Gen. Naman Boga. Plur. Nom. Naman Bogar. Acc. Naman Boga. Dat. Namum Bogum. Gen. Namena Boga.
Feminine. Feminine.
Sing. Nom. Tunge (a tongue). T['u]nga (a tongue). Acc. Tungan T['u]ngu. Dat. Tungan T['u]ngu. Gen. Tungan T['u]ngu. Plur. Nom. Tungan T['u]ngur. Acc. Tungan T['u]ngur. Dat. Tungum T['u]ngum. Gen. Tungena T['u]ngna.
Declension of Substantives ending with a Consonant.
Saxon. Icelandic.
Neuter. Neuter.
Sing. Nom. Le['a]f (a leaf). Skip (a ship). Acc. Le['a]f Skip. Dat. Le['a]fe Skipi. Gen. Le['a]fes Skips. Plur. Nom. Le['a]f Skip. Acc. Le['a]f Skip. Dat. Le['a]fum Skipum. Gen. Le['a]fa Skipa.
Masculine. Masculine.
Sing. Nom. Smidh (a smith). Konungr (a king). Acc. Smidh Konung. Dat. Smidhe Konungi. Gen. Smidhes Konungs. {40} Plur. Nom. Smidhas Konungar. Acc. Smidhas Konunga. Dat. Smidhum Konungum. Gen. Smidha Konunga.
Feminine. Feminine. Sing. Nom. Spr['ae]c (a speech). Br['u]dhr (a bride). Acc. Spr['ae]ce Br['u]i. Dat. Spr['ae]ce Br['u]dhi. Gen. Spr['ae]ce Br['u]dhar. Plur. Nom. Spr['ae]ca Br['u]dhir. Acc. Spr['ae]ca Br['u]dhir. Dat. Spr['ae]cum Br['u]dhum. Gen. Spr['ae]ca Br['u]dha.
s. 84. The most characteristic difference between the Saxon and Icelandic lies in the peculiar position of the definite article in the latter language. In Saxon, the article corresponding with the modern word the, is thaet, se, se['o], for the neuter, masculine, and feminine genders respectively; and these words, regularly declined, are prefixed to the words with which they agree, just as is the case with the English and with the majority of languages. In Icelandic, however, the article, instead of preceding, follows its noun, with which it coalesces, having previously suffered a change in form. The Icelandic article corresponding to thaet, se, se['o], is hitt (N.), hinn (M.), hin (F.): from this the h is ejected, so that, instead of the regular inflection (a), we have the forms (b).
a. Neut. Masc. Fem.
Sing. Nom. Hitt Hinn Hin. Acc. Hitt Hinn Hina. Dat. Hinu Hinum Hinni. Gen. Hins Hins Hinnar. Plur. Nom. Hin Hinir Hinar. Acc. Hin Hina Hinar. Dat. Hinum Hinum Hinum. Gen. Hinna Hinna Hinna.
b.
Sing. Nom. --it --inn --in. Acc. --it --inn --ina (-na). {41} Dat. --nu --num --inni (-nni). Gen. --ins --ins --innar (-nnar). Plur. Nom. --in --nir --nar. Acc. --in --na --nar. Dat. --num --num --num. Gen. --nna --nna --nna.
whence, as an affix, in composition,
Neut. Masc. Fem.
Sing. Nom. Augat Boginn T['u]ngan. Acc. Augat Boginn T['u]nguna. Dat. Auganu Boganum T['u]ngunni. Gen. Augans Bogans T['u]ngunnar. Plur. Nom. Augun Bogarnir T['u]ngurnar. Acc. Augun Bogana T['u]ngurnar. Dat. Augunum Bogunum T['u]ngunum. Gen. Augnanna Boganna T['u]ngnanna.
s. 85. In the Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish this peculiarity in the position of the definite article is preserved. Its origin, however, is concealed; and an accidental identity with the indefinite article has led to false notions respecting its nature. In the languages in point the i is changed into e, so that what in Icelandic is it and in, is in Danish et and en. En, however, as a separate word, is the numeral one, and also the indefinite article a; whilst in the neuter gender it is et--en Sol, a sun; et Bord, a table: Solen, the sun; Bordet, the table. From modern forms like those just quoted, it has been imagined that the definite is merely the indefinite article transposed. This it is not.
Reference will be made to this passage on more occasions than one, to show how words originally distinct may, in the process of time, take the appearance of being identical. To apply an expression of Mr. Cobbett's, en=a, and -en=the, are the same combination of letters, but not the same word. {42}
DECLENSION OF ADJECTIVES.
Saxon. Icelandic. Definite.[7] Definite.[7] Singular. Singular.
Neut. Masc. Fem. Neut. Masc. Fem.
Nom. G['o]de G['o]da G['o]de. Nom. Haga Hagi Haga. Acc. G['o]de G['o]dan G['o]dan. Acc. Haga Haga Hoegu. Abl. G['o]dan G['o]dan G['o]dan. Abl. Haga Haga Hoegu. Dat. G['o]dan G['o]dan G['o]dan. Dat. Haga Haga Hoegu. Gen. G['o]dan G['o]dan G['o]dan. Gen. Haga Haga Hoegu.
Plural. Hoegu is the Plural form for all Nom. G['o]dan G['o]dan G['o]dan. the Cases and all the Genders. Acc. G['o]dan G['o]dan G['o]dan. Abl. G['o]dum G['o]dum G['o]dum. Dat. G['o]dum G['o]dum G['o]dum. Gen. G['o]dena G['o]dena G['o]dena.
Indefinite. Indefinite. Singular. Singular.
Neut. Masc. Fem. Neut. Masc. Fem.
Nom. G['o]d G['o]d G['o]d. Nom. Hagt Hagr Hoeg. Acc. G['o]d G['o]dne G['o]de. Acc. Hagt Hagan Hoeg. Abl. G['o]de G['o]de G['o]dre. Abl. Hoegu Hoegum Hagri. Dat. G['o]dum G['o]dum G['o]dre. Dat. Hoegu Hoegum Hagri. Gen. G['o]des G['o]des G['o]dre. Gen. Hags Hags Hagrar.
Plural. Plural.
Nom. G['o]de G['o]de G['o]de. Nom. Hoeg Hagir Hagar. Acc. G['o]de G['o]de G['o]de. Acc. Hoeg Haga Hagar. Abl. G['o]dum G['o]dum G['o]dum. Abl. Hoegum Hoegum Hoegum. Dat. G['o]dum G['o]dum G['o]dum. Dat. Hoegum Hoegum Hoegum. Gen. G['o]dra G['o]dra G['o]dra. Gen. Hagra Hagra Hagra.
s. 86. Observe in the Icelandic forms the absence of the termination -an. Observe also the neuter termination -t, as hagr, hagt. Throughout the modern forms of the Icelandic (viz. the Swedish, Danish, and Norwegian languages) this termination is still preserved: e.g., en god Hest, a good horse; et godt Hjaert, a good heart; en skoen Pige, a beautiful damsel; et skarpt Svoerd, a sharp sword.
{43}
s. 87. Amongst the pronouns the following differences present themselves. The Saxon forms are, for the pronoun of the second person, thu (thou), git (ye two), ge (ye); whilst in Icelandic they are thu, thidh, per, respectively. Again, in Saxon there is no reflective pronoun corresponding with the Latin se. In Icelandic we have sik, s['e]r, sin, corresponding to the Latin se, sibi, suus. Besides this, the word sin is declined, so that like the Latin suus it becomes adjectival.
Sing. Nom. Sitt Sinn S['i]n. Acc. Sitt Sinn S['i]na. Dat. S['i]nu S['i]num Sinni. Gen. Sins Sins Sinnar. Plur. Nom. S['i]n S['i]nir S['i]nar. Acc. S['i]n S['i]na S['i]nar. Dat. S['i]num S['i]num S['i]num. Gen. Sinna Sinna Sinna.
In Saxon there is of course no such an adjectival form. There the Possessives of the Third Person correspond not with the Latin suus, sua, suum; but with the Latin ejus and eorum. The English words his and her are genitive cases, not adjectives.
Further remarks upon the presence of the Reflective Pronoun sik in Icelandic, and its absence in Saxon, will appear in the sequel.
THE NUMERALS.
Saxon. Icelandic. 1. ['A]n Eitt, einn, ein. 2. Tw['a] Tvoe, tveir. 3. Thre['o] Thrju, thrir. 4. Feower Fjoegur, fj['o]rir. 5. F['i]f Fimm. 6. Six Sex. 7. Seofon Sjoe. 8. Eahta ['A]tta. 9. Nigon Niu. 10. Tyn Tiu.
Of the Icelandic verbs the infinitives end in -a; as kalla, to call; elska, to love; whereas the Saxon termination is -an; as lufian, to love; wyrcan, to work. {44}
s. 88. The persons are as follows:--
Saxon. Icelandic.
Pres. Sing. 1. Baerne Brenni. 2. Baernst Brennir. 3. Baerndh Brennir. Plur. 1. Baernadh Brennum. 2. Baernadh Brennidh. 3. Baernadh Brenna.
s. 89. The characteristic, however, of the Icelandic (indeed, of all the Scandinavian languages) is the possession of a passive form, or a passive voice, ending in -st:--Ek, thu, hann brennist=I, thou, he is burnt; Ver brennumst=We are burnt; th['e]r brennizt=ye are burnt; their brennast=they are burnt. Past tense, Ek, thu, hann brendist; ver brendumst, th['e]r brenduzt, their brendust. Imperat.: brenstu=be thou burnt. Infinit.: brennast=to be burnt.
In the modern Danish and Swedish, the passive is still preserved, but without the final t. In the older stages of Icelandic, on the other hand, the termination was not -st but -sc; which -sc grew out of the reflective pronoun sik. With these phenomena the Scandinavian languages give us the evolution and development of a passive voice; wherein we have the following series of changes:--1st. the reflective pronoun coalesces with the verb, whilst the sense changes from that of a reflective to that of a middle verb; 2nd. the c changes to t, whilst the middle sense passes into a passive one; 3rd. t is dropped from the end of the word, and the expression that was once reflective then becomes strictly passive.
Now the Saxons have no passive voice at all. That they should have one originating like that of the Scandinavians was impossible. Having no reflective pronoun, they had nothing to evolve it from.
The Auxiliary Verb.
Saxon. Icelandic.
Indicative. Present.
Sing. 1. Eom (I am) Em. 2. Eart. Ert. 3. Is. Er. {45} Plur. 1. Synd (Syndon) Erum. 2. Synd (Syndon) Erudh. 3. Synd (Syndon) Eru.
Indicative. Past. Sing. 1. W['ae]s Var. 2. W['ae]re Vart. 3. W['ae]s Var. Plur. 1. W['ae]ron Vorum. 2. W['ae]ron Voru. 3. W['ae]ron Voru.
Subjunctive. Present. Sing. 1. S['y] S['e]. 2. S['y] S['e]r. 3. S['y] S['e]. Plur. 1. S['y]n S['e]um. 2. S['y]n Seudh. 3. S['y]n S['e]u.
Subjunctive. Past. Sing. 1. W['ae]re Vaeri. 2. W['ae]re Vaerir. 3. W['ae]re Vaeri. Plur. 1. W['ae]ron Vaerum. 2. W['ae]ron Vaeru. 3. W['ae]ron Vaerudh.
Infinitive. Wesan Vera.
Participle. Wesende Verandi.
s. 90. Recapitulating, we find that the characteristic differences of the greatest importance between the Icelandic and Saxon are three in number:--
1st. The peculiar nature of the definite article.
2nd. The neuter form of the adjectives in -t.
3rd. The existence of a passive voice in -sc, -st, or -s.
s. 91. In the previous comparison the substantives were divided as follows:--1st. into those ending with a vowel; 2ndly, into those ending with a consonant. In respect to the substantives ending with a vowel (e['a]ge, nama, tunge), it may have been observed that their cases were in A. S. almost {46} exclusively formed in -n, as e['a]gan, tungan, &c.; whilst words like skip and smidh had, throughout their whole declension, no case formed in -n; no case indeed wherein the sound of -n entered. This enables us (at least with the A. S.) to make a general assertion concerning the substantives ending in a vowel in contrast to those ending in a consonant, viz. that they take an inflection in -n.
In Icelandic this inflection in -n is concealed by the fact of -an having been changed into -a. However, as this -a represents -an, and as fragments or rudiments of -n are found in the genitive plurals of the neuter and feminine genders (augna, tungna), we may make the same general assertion in Icelandic that we make in A. S., viz. that substantives ending in a vowel take an inflection in -n.
s. 92. The points of likeness and difference between two languages, belonging to different divisions of the same Germanic branch, may be partially collected from the following comparison between certain Moeso-Gothic and certain Anglo-Saxon inflections.
s. 93. It must, however, be premised, that, although the distinction between nouns taking an inflection in -n, and nouns not so inflected, exists equally in the Moeso-Gothic and the Icelandic, the form in which the difference shows itself is different; and along with the indication of this difference may be introduced the important terms weak and strong, as applied to the declension of nouns.
Weak nouns end in a vowel; or, if in a consonant, in a consonant that has become final from the loss of the vowel that originally followed it. They also form a certain proportion of their oblique cases in -n, or an equivalent to -n--Nom. aug[^o], gen. aug-in-s.
Strong nouns end in a consonant; or, if in a vowel, in one of the vowels allied to the semivowels y or w, and through them to the consonants. They also form their oblique cases by the addition of a simple inflection, without the insertion of n.
Furthermore, be it observed that nouns in general are weak and strong, in other words, that adjectives are weak or {47} strong, as well as substantives. Between substantives and adjectives, however, there is this difference:--
1. A substantive is either weak or strong, i.e., it has one of the two inflections, but not both. Aug[^o]=an eye, is weak under all circumstances; waurd=a word, is strong under all circumstances.
2. An adjective is both weak and strong. The Anglo-Saxon for good is sometimes god (strong), sometimes gode (weak). Which of the two forms is used depends not on the word itself, but on the state of its construction.
In this respect the following two rules are important:--
1. The definite sense is generally expressed by the weak form, as se blinde man=the blind man.
2. The indefinite sense is generally expressed by the strong form, as sum blind man=a blind man.
Hence, as far as adjectives are concerned, the words definite and indefinite coincide with the words weak and strong respectively, except that the former are terms based on the syntax, the latter terms based on the etymology of the word to which they apply.
Declension of Weak Substantives in Moeso-Gothic.
Neuter.
Singular. Plural.
Nom. ['A]ug[^o] (an eye) ['A]ug[^o]na. Acc. ['A]ug[^o] ['A]ug[^o]na. Dat. ['A]ugin ['A]ugam. Gen. ['A]ugins ['A]ug[^o]n[^e].
Masculine.
Nom. Manna (a man) Mannans. Acc. Mannan Mannans. Dat. Mannin Mannam. Gen. Mannins Mannan[^e].
Feminine.
Nom. Tugg[^o] (a tongue) Tugg[^o]ns. Acc. Tugg[^o]n Tugg[^o]ns. Dat. Tugg[^o]n Tugg[^o]m. Gen. Tugg[^o]ns Tugg[^o]n[^o].
{48}
Declension of Strong Substantives in Moeso-Gothic.
Neuter.
Singular. Plural.
Nom. Va['u]rd (a word) Va['u]rda. Acc. Va['u]rd Va['u]rda. Dat. Va['u]rda Va['u]rdam. Gen. Va['u]rdis Va['u]rd[^e].
Masculine.
Nom. Fisks (a fish) Fisk[^o]s. Acc. Fisk Fiskans. Dat. Fiska Fiskam. Gen. Fiskis Fisk[^e].
Feminine.
Nom. Br[^u]ths (a bride) Br[^u]theis. Acc. Br[^u]th Br[^u]thins. Dat. Br[^u]thai Br[^u]thim. Gen. Br[^u]thais Br[^u]th[^e].
These may be compared with the Saxon declensions; viz. a['u]g[^o] with e['a]ge, manna with nama, tugg[^o] with tunge, va['u]rd with le['a]f, fisks with smidh, and br[^u]ths with spraec.
Declension of Weak (or Definite) Adjectives in Moeso-Gothic.[8]
Singular.
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine.
Nom. Blind[^o] Blinda Blind[^o]. Acc. Blind[^o] Blindan Blind[^o]n. Dat. Blindin Blindin Blind[^o]n. Gen. Blindins Blindins Blind[^o]ns.
Plural.
Nom. Blind[^o]na Blindans Blind[^o]ns. Acc. Blind[^o]na Blindans Blind[^o]ns. Dat. Blindam Blindam Blind[^o]m. Gen. Blind[^o]n[^e] Blindan[^e] Blind[^o]n[^o].
{49}
Declension of strong (or indefinite) adjectives in Moeso-Gothic.[9]
Singular.
Nom. Blindata Blinds Blinda. Acc. Blindata Blindana Blinda. Dat. Blindamma Blindamma Blind['a]i. Gen. Blindis Blindis Blind['a]iz[^o]s.
Plural.
Nom. Blinda Blind['a]i Blind[^o]s. Acc. Blinda Blindans Blind[^o]s. Dat. Blind['a]im Blind['a]im Blind['a]im. Gen. Blind['a]iz[^e] Blind['a]iz[^e] Blind['a]iz[^o].
Observe--In the neuter form blindata M. G. we have the sound of t, as in Icelandic. This becomes z (ts) in Old High German, and s in modern German.
The conjugation of the M. G. is as follows. From the Anglo-Saxon it differs most in its plural persons.
Indicative.
M.G. A.S.
Present.
Sing. 1. S[^o]k-ja Lufie. 2. S[^o]k-eis Lufast. 3. S[^o]k-eith Lufadh. Plur. 1. S[^o]k-jam Lufiadh. 2. S[^o]k-eith Lufiadh. 3. S[^o]k-jand Lufiadh.
Praet.
Sing. 1. S[^o]kida Lufode. 2. S[^o]kides Lufodest. 3. S[^o]kida Lufode. Plur. 1. S[^o]kid[^e]dum Lufodon. 2. S[^o]kid[^e]duth Lufodon. 3. S[^o]kid[^e]dun Lufodon.
Subjunctive.
M.G. A.S.
Present.
Sing. 1. S[^o]kj['a]u } 2. S[^o]kj['a]is } Lufige. 3. S[^o]kj['a]i } Plur. 1. S[^o]kj['a]ima } 2. S[^o]kj['a]ith } Lufion. 3. S[^o]kj['a]ina }
Praet.
Sing. 1. S[^o]kid[^e]dj['a]u } 2. S[^o]kid[^e]deis } Lufode. 3. S[^o]kid[^e]di } Plur. 1. S[^o]kid[^e]deima } 2. S[^o]kid[^e]deith } Lufodon 3. S[^o]kid[^e]deina }
The conjugation of the auxiliary verb in Moeso-Gothic is as follows. It may be compared with the A. S. s. 89.
{50}
Indicative. Pres. Subjunctive. Pres.
Sing. Plur. Sing. Plur. 1. Im (I am) Sijum. 1. Sij['a]u Sij['a]ima. 2. Is Sijuth. 2. Sij['a]is Sij['a]ith. 3. Ist Sind. 3. Sij['a]i Sij['a]ina.
Praet. Praet.
1. Vas V[^e]sum. 1. V[^e]sj['a]u V[^e]seima. 2. Vast V[^e]suth. 2. V[^e]seis V[^e]seith. 3. Vas V[^e]sun. 3. V[^e]sei V[^e]seina.
Inf. Visan and Sijan--(to be).
Part. Visands--(being).
s. 94. The points of likeness or difference between two languages, each of the Low Germanic division, may be partially collected from the following comparison between certain Old Frisian and certain Anglo-Saxon inflections.
In the comparison the first point to be noticed is the Transition of Letters.
['a] in Frisian corresponds to e['a] in A. S.; as d['a]d, r['a]d, l['a]s, str['a]m, b['a]m, c['a]p, ['a]re, h['a]p, Frisian; de['a]d, re['a]d, le['a]s, stre['a]m, be['a]m, ce['a]p, e['a]re, he['a]p, Saxon; dead, red, loose, stream, tree (boom), bargain (cheap, chapman), ear, heap, English.
['e] Frisian corresponds to ^a), the A. S. ['a]; as Eth, t['e]ken, h['e]l, br['e]d, Fris.; ['a]th, t['a]cen, h['a]l, br['a]d, Saxon; oath, token, hale, broad, English;--^b), to A. S. ae; h['e]r, d['e]de, br['e]da, Frisian; haer, daed, braedan, A. S.; hair, deed, roast, English.
e to ea and ae A. S.--Frisian thet, A. S. thaet, Engl. that, Fris. gers, A. S. gaers, Engl. grass.--Also to eo; prestere, Fr.; preost A. S., priest Engl.; berch Fr., beorh A. S.; hill (berg, as in iceberg) Engl.; melok Fr., meoloc A. S., milk Engl.
i to eo A. S.--Fr. irthe, A. S. eordhe; Fris. hirte; A. S. heorte; Fris. fir A. S. feor=in English earth, heart, far.
j['a]=eo A. S.; as bjada, be['o]dan, bid--thet fjarde, feordhe, the fourth--sj['a]k, se['o]c, sick.
ju=y or eo A. S.; rjucht, ryth, right--frjund, freond, friend. {51}
Dsz=A. S. cg; Fr. sedza, lidzja; A. S. secgan, licgan; Engl. to say, to lie.
Tz, ts, sz, sth=A. S. c or ce; as szereke, or sthereke, Frisian; cyrice A. S., church Engl.; czetel Fr., cytel A. S., kettle English.
ch Fr.=h A. S., as thjach Fr., the['o]h A. S., thigh Engl.--berch, be['o]rh, hill (berg)--dochter, dohtor, daughter, &c.
As a general statement we may say, that in the transition letters the Frisian corresponds with the A. S. more closely than it does with any other language. It must, moreover, be remarked, that, in such pairs of words as frjund and freond, the difference (as far at least as the e and j are concerned) is a mere difference of orthography. Such also is probably the case with the words d['e]d and daed, and many others.
The Anglo-Saxon inflection of ^a) Substantives ending in a vowel, ^b) Substantives ending in a consonant, ^c) Adjectives with an indefinite ^d) Adjectives with a definite sense, ^e) Verbs Active ^f) and verbs auxiliar, may be seen in the comparison between the A. S. and the Icelandic. The corresponding inflections in Frisian are as follows:--
(a).
Substantives ending in a vowel.
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine.
Sing. Nom. ['A]re (an ear) Campa (a champion) Tunge (a tongue). Acc. ['A]re Campa Tunga. Dat. ['A]ra Campa Tunga. Gen. ['A]ra Campa Tunga. Plur. Nom. ['A]ra Campa Tunga. Acc. ['A]ra Campa Tunga. Dat. ['A]ron Campon Tungon. Gen. ['A]rona Campona Tungona.
(b).
Substantives ending in a consonant.
Neuter. Feminine.
Sing. Nom. Skip (a ship) Hond (a hand). Acc. Skip Hond. {52} Dat. Skipe Hond. Gen. Skipis Honde. Plur. Nom. Skipu Honda. Acc. Skipu Honda. Dat. Skipum Hondum (-on). Gen. Skipa Honda.
With respect to the masculine substantives terminating in a consonant, it must be observed that in A. S. there are two modes of declension; in one, the plural ends in -s; in the other, in -a. The specimen in s. 83 represents the first of these modes only. From this the Frisian is essentially different. With the second it has a close alliance; e.g.:--
Saxon. Frisian.
Sing. Nom. Sunu (a son) Sunu. Acc. Sunu Sunu. Dat. Suna Suna. Gen. Suna Suna. Plur. Nom. Suna Suna. Acc. Suna Suna. Dat. Sunum Sunum. Gen. Sunena (Sunena).
(c).
Indefinite Declension of Adjectives.
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine. Sing. Nom. G['o]d G['o]d G['o]d. Acc. G['o]d G['o]dene G['o]de. Dat. G['o]da (-um) G['o]da (-um). G['o]dere. Gen. G['o]des G['o]des G['o]dere. Plur. Nom. G['o]de G['o]de G['o]de. Acc. G['o]de G['o]de G['o]de. Dat. G['o]dum (-a) G['o]dum (-a) G['o]dum (-a). Gen. G['o]dera G['o]dera G['o]dera.
(d).
Definite.
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine. Sing. Nom. G['o]de G['o]da G['o]de. Acc. G['o]de G['o]da G['o]da. {53} Dat. G['o]da G['o]da G['o]da. Gen. G['o]da G['o]da G['o]da. Plur. Nom. G['o]da G['o]da G['o]da. Acc. G['o]da G['o]da G['o]da. Dat. G['o]da (-on) G['o]da (-on) G['o]da (-on). Gen. G['o]da (-ona) G['o]da (-ona) G['o]da (-ona).
(e).
The Persons of the Present Tense.
Indicative Mood.
Sing. 1. Berne I burn. 2. Bernst Thou burnest. 3. Bernth He burns. Plur. 1. Bernath We burn. 2. Bernath Ye burn. 3. Bernath They burn.
In the inflection of the verbs there is between the Frisian and A. S. this important difference. In A. S. the infinite ends in -an macian, to make, laeran, to learn, baernan, to burn; whilst in Frisian it ends in -a, as maka, l['e]ra, berna.
(f).
The Auxiliar Verb Wesa, To Be.
Indicative.
Present. Past.
Sing. 1. Ik ben 1. Ik } 2. ? 2. Th['u] } Was. 3. Hi is 3. Hi } Plur. 1. Wi } 1. Wi } 2. I } Send 2. I } Weron. 3. Hja } 3. Hja }
Subjunctive.
Present. Past.
Sing. 1. 2. 3. Se 1. 2. 3. W['e]re. Plur. 1. 2. 3. Se 1. 2. 3. W['e]re. Infin. Wesa. Pr. Part. Wesande. Past Part. E-wesen.
The Frisian numerals (to be compared with those of the Anglo-Saxons, p. 43), are as follows:--['E]n, tw['a], thrj['u], {54} fj['u]wer, f['i]f, sex, sj['u]gun, achta, njugun, tian, &c. Of these the first three take an inflection, e.g., En, like Gode and the adjectives, has both a definite and an indefinite form, en, and thet ene; whilst twa and thrj['u] run as follows:--Nom. and Acc. Neut. twa; Masc. twene; Fem. twa; Dat. twam; Gen. twira.--Nom. and Acc. Neut. thrju; Masc. thre; Fem. thrja; Dat. thrim; Gen. thrira.
In respect to the Pronouns, there is in the Old Frisian of Friesland no dual number, as there is in Anglo-Saxon. On the other hand, however, the Frisians (whilst they have no such form as his) possess, like the Icelandic, the inflected adjectival pronoun sin, corresponding to the Latin suus: whilst, like the Anglo-Saxons, and unlike the Icelanders, they have nothing to correspond with the Latin se.
s. 95. In Frisian there is between the demonstrative pronoun used as an article, and the same word used as a demonstrative in the limited sense of the term, the following difference of declension:--
THE ARTICLE.
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine.
Sing. Nom. Thet Thi Thj['u]. Acc. Thet Thene Th['a]. \----------\/--------/ Dat. Th['a] There. Gen. Thes There. \--------------\/-------------/ Plur. Nom. Th['a]. Acc. Th['a]. _Dat. _ Th['a]. Gen. Th['e]ra.
PRONOUN.
The Demonstrative in the limited sense of the word.
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine.
Sing. Nom. Thet Thi Se. Acc. Thet Thene Se. \---------\/--------/ Dat. Tham There. Gen. Thes There. \-------------\/---------------/ {55} Plur. Nom. Se. Acc. Se. Dat. Th['a]m. Gen. Th['e]ra.
The Saxons draw no such a distinction. With them the article and demonstrative is declined as follows:--
Neuter. Masculine. Feminine.
Sing. Nom. Thaet Se Seo. Acc. Thaet Thone Th['a]. \-----\/----/ Dat. Tham Th['ae]re. Gen. Thaes Th['ae]re. \--------\/-------/ Plur. Nom. Th['a]. Acc. Th['a]. Dat. Th['a]m. Gen. Th['a]ra.
s. 96. Specimen of Glossarial affinity.--Taken from Rask's Preface to his Frisian Grammar:--
Frisian. Anglo Saxon. English.
['A]ge E['a]ge Eye. H['a]ved He['a]fod Head. Kind Cild Child. Erva Eafora Heir. Drochten Drihten Lord. Nacht Niht Night. R['e]d R['ae]d Council (Rede). D['e]de D['ae]d Deed. Nose Nasu Nose. ['E]in ['A]gen Own. K['a]pie Ceapige I buy (Chapman). Dua Don To do. Sl['a] Sle['a]n Slay. Gunga Gangan Go (Gang).
* * * * *
s. 97. In this Chapter there has been, thus far, an attempt to do two things at once. Firstly, to exhibit the general likeness between stocks, branches, &c.; and secondly, to show the special affinities between certain languages allied to our {56} own, and of the Gothic Stock. What follows, consists of certain observations upon two or three points of nomenclature.
s. 98. German.--The points to remember concerning this term are--
1. That it is no national name, but a name given by the Latins to the natives of the country called Germania. The word German is foreign to all the Gothic languages.
2. That it was first applied to proper Germanic tribes in the time of Julius Caesar, and that it served to distinguish the Gothic Germans from the Celtic Gauls.
3. That, anterior to the time of Caesar, there is no proof of it being applied as a distinctive designation to any of the tribes to whom it was afterwards limited. The first tribe to whom it was applied, was (in the opinion of the present writer) a Gallic tribe.
4. That since the time of Julius Caesar, its application has been constant, i.e., it has always meant Gothic tribes, or Gothic languages.
5. That sometimes it has been general to the whole nation--Unde fit ut tantae populorum multitudines arctoo sub axe oriantur, ut non immerito universa illa regio Tanai tenus usque ad occiduum, licet et propriis loca ea singula nuncupentur nominibus, generali tamen vocabulo Germania vocitetur ... Gothi, siquidem, Vandalique, Rugi, Heruli, atque Turcilingi, necnon etiam aliae feroces ac barbarae nationes e Germania prodierunt.--Paulus Diaconus.
6. That sometimes it has been peculiar and distinctive to certain prominent portions of the nation--equi fraenis Germanicis, sellis Saxonicis falerati.
7. That the general power of the word has been, with few exceptions, limited to the Germans of Germany. We do not find either English or Scandinavian writers calling their countrymen Germani.
8. That the two German tribes most generally meant, when the word German is used in a limited sense, are the Franks and the Alemanni.
9. That by a similar latitude the words Francic and {57} Alemannic have been occasionally used as synonymous with Germanic.
10. That the origin of the word Germani, in the Latin language, is a point upon which there are two hypotheses.
a. That it is connected with the Latin word Germani=brothers, meaning either tribes akin to one another, or tribes in a degree of brotherly alliance with Rome.
b. That it grew out of some such German word as Herman, Irmin, Wehrmann, or the Herm- in Hermunduri, Hermiones, &c.
Neither of these views satisfies the present writer.
For all the facts concerning the word Germani, see the Introduction to the third edition of the Deutsche Grammar.
s. 99. Dutch.--For the purposes of Philology the meaning given to this word is inconvenient. In England, it means the language of the people of Holland.
In Germany, Holland, and Scandinavia, it means the language of the people of Germany in general; and this general power of the word is retained even with us in the expression High-Dutch, and Low-Dutch. In the present work the term is avoided as much as possible. Nevertheless, wherever it occurs it means the Dutch of Holland.
The origin of the word has been a subject of much investigation; the question, however, may be considered to be settled by the remarks of Grimm, D. G.--Introduction to the third edition.
1. It was originally no national name at all.
2. In the earliest passage where it occurs, the derivative form thiudisk[^o] corresponds with the Greek word [Greek: ethnikos]--The Moeso-Gothic Translation of the New Testament--Galatians, ii. 14.
3. The derivation of the word from the substantive thiudu=a people, a nation, is undoubted.
4. So also is the derivation of the modern word Dutch, in all its varied forms:--Old High-German, Diutisc; Anglo-Saxon, The['o]disc; Latin, Theodisca, Theudisca, Teutisca; Italian, Tedesco; Danish, Tyske; English, Dutch; the latter part of the word being the adjectival ending -isc=ish. {58}
5. The original meaning being of, or belonging to, the people, or of, or belonging to, the nation, secondary meanings grew out of it.
6. Of these the most remarkable are a) the power given to the word in Ulphilas (heathen), illustrated by the similarly secondary power of the Greek [Greek: ethnikos]; b) the meaning vernacular, provincial or vulgar given to it as applied to language.
7. This latter power was probably given to it about the ninth century.
8. That it was not given much before, is inferred from negative evidence. The word theotisca is not found in the Latin writers of the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries, although there are plenty of passages where it might well have been used had it existed. The terms really used are either patrius sermo, sermo barbaricus, sermo vulgaricus, lingua rustica; or else the names of particular tribes, as lingua Anglorum, Alamannorum.
9. That it was current in the ninth century is evident from a variety of quotations:--_Ut quilibet episcopus homilias aperte transferre studeat in rusticam Romanam linguam, aut theotiscam, quo tandem cuncti possint intelligere quae dicantur._--Synodus Turonensis. _Quod in lingua Thiudisca scaftlegi, id est armorum depositio, vocatur._--Capit. Wormatiense. _De collectis quas Theudisca lingua heriszuph appellat._--Conventus Silvacensis. _Si barbara, quam Teutiscam dicunt, lingua loqueretur._--Vita Adalhardi, &c.--D.G., i. p. 14, Introduction.
10. That its present national sense is wholly secondary and derivative, and that originally it was no more the name of a people or a language than the word vulgate in the expression the vulgate translation of the Scriptures is the name of a people or a language.
s. 100. Teutonic.--About the tenth century the Latin writers upon German affairs began to use not only the words Theotiscus and Theotisc['e], but also the words Teutonicus and Teutonic['e]. Upon this, Grimm remarks that the latter term sounded more learned; since Teutonicus was a classical word, an adjective derived from the Gentile name of the Teutones conquered by Manus. Be it so. It then follows that the connexion between Teutonicus and Theotiscus is a mere accident, the origin {59} of the two words being different. The worthlessness of all evidence concerning the Germanic origin of the Teutonic tribes conquered by Marius, based upon the connexion between the word Teuton and Dutch, has been pointed out by the present writer in the 17th number of the Philological Transactions.[10] All that is proved is this, viz., that out of the confusion between the two words arose a confusion between the two nations. These last may or may not have been of the same race.
s. 101. Anglo-Saxon--In the ninth century the language of England was Angle, or English. The lingua Anglorum of Bede is translated by Alfred on englisce. The term Saxon was in use also at an early (perhaps an equally early) date--fures quos Saxonice dicimus vergeld the['o]vas. The compound term Anglo-Saxon is later.--Grimm, Introduction to the third edition of D.G., p. 2.
s. 102. Icelandic, Old Norse.--Although Icelandic is the usual name for the mother-tongue of the Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian, the Norwegian philologists generally prefer the term Old Norse.
In favour of this view is the fact that Norway was the mother-country, Iceland the colony, and that much of what is called Old Icelandic was composed in Norway.
Still the reason is insufficient; since the present term Icelandic is given to the language not because Iceland was the country that produced, but because it is the country that has preserved it.
This leads to the argument in its most general form--should a language be named from the colony, or from the mother-country? The Norwegians say from the mother-country. Let us consider this.
Suppose that whilst the Latin of Virgil and Cicero in Italy had been changing into the modern Italian, in some old Roman colony (say Sardinia) it had remained either wholly {60} unaltered, or else, altered so little as for the modern Sardinian--provided he could read at all--to be able to read the authors of the Augustan age, just like those of the era of Charles Albert; no other portion of the old Roman territory--not even Rome itself--having any tongue more like to that of the Classical writers, than the most antiquated dialect of the present Italian. Suppose, too, that the term Latin had become obsolete, would it be imperative upon us to call the language of the Classics Old Italian, Old Roman, or at least Old Latin, when no modern native of Rome, Latium, or Italy could read them? Would it be wrong to call it Sardinian when every Sarde could read them? I think not. Mutatis mutandis, this is the case with Iceland and Norway.
* * * * *
{61}
V. ANALYSIS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE--GERMANIC ELEMENTS
s. 103. The population and, to a certain extent, the language of England, have been formed of three elements, which in the most general way may be expressed as follows:--
a. Elements referable to the original British population, and derived from times anterior to the Anglo-Saxon invasion.
b. Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, or imported elements.
c. Elements introduced since the Anglo-Saxon conquest.
s. 104. Each of these requires a special analysis, but that of the second will be taken first, and will form the contents of the present chapter.
All that we have at present learned concerning the Germanic invaders of England, is the geographical area which they wholly or partially occupied, and the tribes and nations with which they were conterminous whilst in Germany. How far, however, it was simple Saxons who conquered England single-handed, or how far the particular Saxon Germans were portions of a complex population, requires further investigation. Were the Saxons one division of the German population, whilst the Angles were another? or were the Angles a section of the Saxons, so that the latter was a generic term, including the former? Again, although the Saxon invasion may be the one which has had the greatest influence, and drawn the most attention, why may there not have been separate and independent migrations, the effects and record of which, have in the lapse of time, become fused with those of the more important divisions?
Questions like these require notice, and in a more advanced state of what may be called minute ethnographical {62} philology will obtain more of it than has hitherto been their share. At present our facts are few, and our methods of investigation imperfect.
s. 105. In respect to this last, it is necessary to distinguish between the opinions based on external, and the opinions based on internal evidence. To the former class belong the testimonies of cotemporary records, or (wanting these) of records based upon transmitted, but cotemporary, evidence. To the latter belong the inferences drawn from similarity of language, name, and other ethnological data. Of such, a portion only will be considered in the present chapter; not that they have no proper place in it, but because the minuter investigation of an important section of these (i.e., the subject of the English dialects) will be treated as a separate subject elsewhere.
s. 106. The Angles; who were they, and what was their relation to the Saxons?--The first answer to this question embodies a great fact in the way of internal evidence, viz., that they were the people from whom England derives the name it bears=the Angle-land, i.e., land of the Angles. Our language too is English, i.e., Angle. Whatever, then, they may have been on the Continent, they were a leading section of the invaders here. Why then has their position in our inquiries been hitherto so subordinate to that of the Saxons? It is because their definitude and preponderance are not so manifest in Germany as we infer (from the terms England and English) it to have been in Britain. Nay more, their historical place amongst the nations of Germany, and within the German area, is both insignificant and doubtful; indeed, it will be seen from the sequel, that in and of themselves we know next to nothing about them, knowing them only in their relations, i.e., to ourselves and to the Saxons. The following, however, are the chief facts that form the foundation for our inferences.
s. 107. Although they are the section of the immigration which gave the name to England, and as such, the preponderating element in the eyes of the present English, they were not so in the eyes of the original British; who neither knew at the time of the Conquest, nor know now, of any other name for their German enemies but Saxon. And Saxon is the {63} name by which the present English are known to the Welsh, Armorican, and Gaelic Celts.
Welsh Saxon. Armorican Soson. Gaelic Sassenach.
s. 108. Although they are the section of the immigration which gave the name to England, &c., they were quite as little Angles as Saxons, in the eyes of foreign cotemporary writers; since the expression Saxoniae trans-marinae, occurs as applied to England.
s. 109. Although they are the section of the immigration which gave the name to England, &c., the material notice of them as Germans of Germany, are limited to the following facts.
Extract from Tacitus.--This merely connects them with certain other tribes, and affirms the existence of certain religious ordinances common to them--
"Contra Langobardos paucitas nobilitat: plurimis ac valentissimis nationibus cincti, non per obsequium, sed proeliis et periclitando tuti sunt. Reudigni deinde, et Aviones, et Angli, et Varini, et Eudoses, et Suardones, et Nuithones, fluminibus aut silvis muniuntur: nec quidquam notabile in singulis, nisi quod in commune Herthum, id est, Terram matrem colunt, eamque intervenire rebus hominum, invehi populis, arbitrantur. Est in insula Oceani castum nemus, dicatumque in eo vehiculum, veste contectum, attingere uni sacerdoti concessum. Is adesse penetrali deam intelligit, vectamque bobus feminis mult[^a] cum veneratione prosequitur. Laeti tunc dies, festa loca, quaecumque adventu hospitioque dignatur. Non bella ineunt, non arma sumunt, clausum omne ferrum; pax et quies tunc tant[`u]m nota, tunc tant[`u]m amata, donec idem sacerdos satiatam conversatione mortalium deam templo reddat: mox vehiculum et vestes, et, si credere velis, numen ipsum secreto lacu abluitur. Servi ministrant, quos statim idem lacus haurit. Arcanus hinc terror, sanctaque ignorantia, quid sit id, quod tant[`u]m perituri vident."[11]
Extract from Ptolemy.--This connects the Angles with {64} the Suevi, and Langobardi, and places them on the Middle Elbe.
[Greek: Entos kai mesogeion ethnon megista men esti to, te ton Souebon ton Angeilon, hoi eisin anatolikoteroi ton Langobardon, anateinontes pros tas arktous mechri ton meson tou Albios potamou.]
Extract from Procopius.--For this see s. 129.
Heading of a law referred to the age of Charlemagne.--This connects them with the Werini (Varni), and the Thuringians--"Incipit lex Angliorum et Verinorum (Varni); hoc est Thuringorum."--Zeuss, 495, and Grimm. G.D.S.
s. 110. These notices agree in giving the Angles a German locality, and in connecting them ethnologically, and philologically with the Germans of Germany. The notices that follow, traverse this view of the question, by indicating a slightly different area, and Danish rather than German affinities.
Extracts connecting them with the inhabitants of the Cimbric Peninsula.--a. The quotation from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle of s. 16.
b. From Bede; "Porro de Anglis, hoc est illa patria, quae Angulus dicitur, et ab eo tempore usque hodie, manere desertus inter provincias Jutarum et Saxonum perhibetur."--Angl. i. 15.
c. From Alfred, "And be waestan eald Seaxum is Albe mudha thaere ea and Frisland. And thanon west nordh is thaet land, the man Angle, haet and Sillende, and summe dael Dena."[12]--Oros. p. 20.
Also, speaking of Other's voyage,[13] "He seglode to thaem porte the man haet Haethum; se stent betwuhs Winedum and Seaxum, and Angle, and hyrdh in on Dene ... and tha {65} twegen dagas aer he to Haedhum come, him waes on thaet steorbord Gothland and Sillende and iglanda fela. On thaem landum eardodon Engle, aer hi hidher on land comon."[14]--Oros. p. 23.
d. From Etherwerd, writing in the eleventh century--"Anglia vetus sita est inter Saxones et Giotos, habens oppidum capitale, quod sermone Saxonico Sleswic nuncupatur, secundum vero Danos Hathaby."[14]
s. 111. The district called Angle.--The district of Anglen, so called (where it is mentioned at all) at the present moment, is a part of the Dutchy of Sleswick, which is literally an Angle; i.e., a triangle of irregular shape, formed by the Schlie, the Flensborger Fiord, and a line drawn from Flensborg to Sleswick; every geographical name in it being, at present, Danish, whatever it may have been previously. Thus some villages end in bye (Danish=town) as Hus-bye, Herreds-bye, Ulse-bye, &c.; some in gaard (=house), as Oegaard; whilst the other Danish forms are skov=wood (shaw), hofved=head, lund=grove, &c. In short it has nothing to distinguish it from the other parts of the peninsula.
s. 112. Add to these the Danish expression, that Dan and Angul were brothers, as the exponent of a recognised relationship between the two populations, and we have a view of the evidence in favour of the Danish affinity.
s. 113. Inferences and remarks.--a. That whilst the root Angl- in Tacitus, Ptolemy, Procopius, and the Leges Anglorum, &c., is the name of a people, the root Angl- in the Anglen of Sleswick, is the name of a district; a fact which is further confirmed by the circumstance of there being in at least one other part of Scandinavia, a district with a similar name--"Hann ['a]tti bu a Halogolandi i Aungli."[14]--Heimskringla, iii. 454.
b. That the derivation of the Angles of England from the Anglen of Sleswick is an inference of the same kind with the one respecting the Jutes (see s. 20), made by the same writers, probably on the same principle, and most likely incorrectly.
c. That the Angles of England were the Angli of Tacitus, {66} Ptolemy, Procopius, and the Leges Anglorum et Werinorum, whatever these were.
s. 114. What were the Langobardi, with whom the Angles were connected by Tacitus? The most important facts to be known concerning them are, (1) that the general opinion is in favour of their having belonged to the High-German, or Moeso-Gothic division, rather than to the Low; (2) that their original locality either reached or lay beyond the Elbe; a locality, which, in the tenth century, was Slavonic, and which, in the opinion of the present writer, we have no reason to consider to have been other than Slavonic during the nine preceding ones.--That they were partially, at least, on this side of the Elbe, we learn from the following:--"Receptae Cauchorum nationes, fracti Langobardi, gens etiam Germanis feritate ferocior; denique usque ad flumen Albim ... Romanus cum signis perductus exercitus."[15]--Velleius Paterc. ii. 106.
s. 115. What were the Suevi, with whom the Angles were connected by Tacitus? The most important facts to be known concerning them are, (1) that the general opinion is in favour of their having belonged to the High-German or Moeso-Gothic, division, rather than to the Low; (2) that their original locality either reached or lay beyond the Elbe; a locality, which, in the tenth century, was Slavonic, and which, in the opinion of the present writer, we have no reason to consider to have been other than Slavonic during the nine preceding ones. In other words, what applies to the Langobardi applies to the Suevi also.
What the Suevi were, the Semnones were also, "Vetustissimos se nobilissimosque Suevorum Semnones memorant." Tac. Germ., 39. Speaking, too, of their great extension, he says, centum pagi ab iis habitantur.[15]
Velleius states that there were Suevi on the west of the Middle Elbe, Ptolemy, that there were Suevi to the east of it, i.e., as far as the River Suebus (Oder?).--[Greek: Kai to ton Souebon ton Semnonon, hoitines diekousi meta ton Albin apo tou eiremenou merous] {67} (the middle Elbe) [Greek: pros anatolas mechri tou Souebou potamou].[16]
In the letter of Theodeberht to the Emperor Justinian, we find the North-Suevians mentioned along with the Thuringians, as having been conquered by the Franks; "Subactis Thuringis ... Norsavorum gentis nobis placata majestas colla subdidit."[16]
s. 116. What were the Werini, with whom the Angles were connected in the Leges Anglorum et Werinorum? Without having any particular data for connecting the Werini (Varni, [Greek: Ouarnoi]) with either the High-German, or the Moeso-Gothic divisions, there are in favour of their being Slavonic in locality, the same facts as applied to the Suevi and Langobardi, with the additional one, that the name probably exists at present in the River Warnow, of Mecklenburg Schwerin, at the mouth of which (Warnemunde) the town of Rostock stands.
s. 117. What were the Thuringians, with whom the Angles are connected in the Leges Anglorum, &c.; Germanic in locality, and most probably allied to the Goths of Moesia in language.
s. 118. Of the Reudigni, Eudoses, Nuithones, Suardones, and Aviones, too little is known in detail to make the details an inquiry of importance. Respecting them all, it may be said at once, that whatever may be the Germanic affinities involved in their connection with the Suevi, Langobardi, Angli, &c., they are traversed by the fact of their locality being in the tenth century Slavonic.
s. 119. The last tribe which will be mentioned, is that of the Angrarii, most probably another form of the Angrivarii of Tacitus, the name of the occupants of the valley of the Aller, the northern confluent of the Weser.
As this word is compound (-varii=ware=inhabitants), the root remains Angr-, a word which only requires the r to become l in order to make Angl-. As both the locality and the relation to the Saxons, make the Angrivarian locality one of the best we could assume for the Angles, the only {68} difficulty lies in the change from r to l. Unfortunately, this, in the Saxon-German, is an unlikely one.
s. 120. The last fact connected with the Angles, will be found in a more expanded form in the Chapter on the Dialects of the English Language. It relates to the distribution over the conquered parts of Britain. Their chief area was the Midland and Eastern counties, Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire, Leicestershire, &c., rather than the parts south of the Thames, which were Saxon, and those north of the Wash, where Danish influences have been considerable.
s. 121. The reader has now got a general view of the extent to which the position of the Angles, as a German tribe, is complicated by conflicting statements; statements which connect them with (probably) High-German Thuringians, Suevi, and Langobardi, and with (probably) Slavonic Varni, Eudoses, Suardones, &c.; whereas in England, they are scarcely distinguishable from the Low-German Saxons. In the present state of our knowledge, the only safe fact seems to be, that of the common relation of both Angle and Saxon, to the present English of England.
This brings the two sections within a very close degree of affinity, and makes it probable, that just, as at present, descendants of the Saxons are English (Angle) in Britain, so, in the third and fourth centuries, ancestors of the Angles were Saxons in Germany. Why, however, the one name preponderated on the Continent, and the other in England is difficult to ascertain.
s. 122. By considering the Angles as Saxons under another name (or vice vers[^a]), and by treating the statement as to the existence of Jutes in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight as wholly unhistorical, we get, as a general expression for the Anglo-Germanic immigration, that it consisted of the closely allied tribes of the North-Saxon area, an expression that implies a general uniformity of population. Is there reason to think that the uniformity was absolute?
s. 123. The following series of facts, when put together, will prepare us for a fresh train of reasoning concerning the different geographical and ethnological relations of the {69} immigrants into England, during their previous habitation in Germany.
1. The termination -as is, like the -s in the modern English, the sign of the plural number in Anglo-Saxon.
2. The termination -ing denotes, in the first instance, a certain number of individuals collected together, and united with each other as a clan, tribe, family, household.
3. In doing this, it generally indicates a relationship of a personal or political character. Thus two Baningas might be connected with each other, and (as such) indicated by the same term from any of the following causes--relationship, subordination to the same chief, origin from the same locality, &c.
4. Of these personal connections, the one which is considered to be the commonest is that of descent from a common ancestor, so that the termination -ing in this case, is a real patronymic.
5. Such an ancestor need not be real; indeed, he rarely if ever is so. Like the eponymus of the classical writers, he is the hypothetical, or mythological, progenitor of the clan, sept, or tribe, as the case may be; i.e., as Aeolus, Dorus, and Ion to the Aeolians, Dorians, and Ionians.
Now, by admitting these facts without limitation, and by applying them freely and boldly to the Germanic population of England, we arrive at the following inferences.
1. That where we meet two (or more) households, families, tribes, clans, or septs of the same name (that name ending in -ing), in different parts of England, we may connect them with each other, either directly or indirectly; directly when we look on the second as an offset from the first; indirectly, when we derive both from some third source.
2. That when we find families, tribes, &c., of the same name, both in Britain and in Germany, we may derive the English ones from the continental.
Now neither of these views is hypothetical. On the contrary each is a real fact. Thus in respect to divisions of the population, designated by names ending in -ing, we have
1. In Essex, Somerset, and Sussex,--Aestingas.
2. In Kent, Dorset, Devonshire, and Lincoln,--Alingas. {70}
3. In Sussex, Berks, and Northamptonshire,--Ardingas.
4. In Devonshire, Gloucestershire, and Sussex,--Arlingas.
5. In Herts, Kent, Lincolnshire, and Salop,--Baningas.
6. In Norfolk, Suffolk, Surrey, Sussex, and the Isle of Wight,--Beadingas.
7. In Kent, Devonshire, Lincolnshire, Herefordshire, Salop, and Somerset,--Beringas.
8. In Bedford, Durham, Kent, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Northamptonshire, Northumberland, Salop, Sussex, and the Isle of Wight,--Billingas, &c.--the list being taken from Mr. Kemble, vol. i. p. 64.
s. 124. On the other hand, the following Anglo-Saxon names in -ing, reappear in different parts of Germany, sometimes in definite geographical localities, as the occupants of particular districts, sometimes as mentioned in poems without further notice.
1. Waelsingas,--as the Volsungar of the Iceland, and the Waelsingen of the German heroic legends.
2. Herelingas,--mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon poem known by the name of the Traveller's Song, containing a long list of the Gothic tribes, families, nations, &c.
3. Brentingas.--Ibid.
4. Scyldingas.--Ibid.
5. Scylfingas.--Ibid.
6. Ardingas.
7. Baningas, Traveller's Song, mentioned as the subjects of Becca.
8. Helsingas.--Ibid.
9. Myrgingas.--Ibid.
10. Hundingas.--Ibid.
11. Hocingas.--Ibid.
12. Seringas.--Ibid.
13. Dhyringas=Thuringians. (?)
14. Bleccingas.
15. Gytingas.
16. Scydingas.
17. Dylingas.
s. 125. We will still, for argument's sake, and for the sake {71} of the illustration of an ethnological method, take these names along with the observations by which they were preceded, as if they were wholly unexceptionable; and, having done this, ask how far each is known as German. So doing, we must make two divisions:
a. Those which we have no reason to think other than Angle or Saxon.
b. Those which indicate elements of the migration other than Angle or Saxon.
s. 126. Patronymics which do not necessarily denote a non-Saxon element.--Of these, the following are so little known, that they may pass as Saxons, simply because we have no grounds for thinking them aught else; the Brentings, Banings, Helsings, Serings, Ardings, Hundings, Blekings, Herelings, Gytings, Scydings, Dylings. The Scyldings and Scefings, belong, in a more positive way, to the Anglo-Saxon division; since their eponymi, Scyld and Sceaf, form a portion of the Anglo-Saxon mythology.
s. 127. Patronymics indicating a non-Saxon, rather than a Saxon element.--a. The Waelsings--In the way of tradition and mythology, this is a Frank gentile name.
b. The Myrgings.--Ditto. This is the German form of the Merovingians.
c. The Hocings.--This is the German form of the Chauci, and, as such, a Frisian gentile name.
d. The Dhyrings.--Perhaps Thuringians of Thuringia.
Thus, then, if we still assume that the method in question is unexceptionable, we have, from the evidence of what may be called either the gentile forms, or the patronymics in -ing, reasons for believing that Frank Myrgings, Frisian Hocings, and Thuringian Dhyrings, formed part of the invasion--these, at least; possibly others besides.
And why should the reason be other than unexceptionable? Do we not in North America, believe, that, as a general rule, the families with particular names, coincide with the families so-called in England; that the names of certain places, sometimes, at least, indicate a population originating in places similarly designated here? that the Smiths and Johnstons {72} are English in origin, and that O'Connors and O'Neils are Irish? We certainly believe all this, and, in many cases, we believe it, on the ground of the identity of name only.
s. 128. Exceptions.--Still there are exceptions. Of these the most important are as follows:--
1. The termination -ing is sometimes added to an undoubtedly British root, so as to have originated within the island, rather than to have been brought from the continent, e.g., the Kent-ings=the people of Kent. In such a case, the similarity to a German name, if it exist at all, exists as an accident.
2. The same, or nearly the same, name may not only occur in different parts of one and the same division of the Germanic areas, but in different ones, e.g., the Dhyrings may denote the Thuringians of Thuringia; but they may also denote the people of a district, or town, in Belgium, designated as Dorringen.[17]
Still as a method, the one in question should be understood; although it has been too short a time before the learned world to have borne fruit.
N.B.--What applies to the coincidence of gentile or patronymic names on the two sides of the water, applies also to dialects; e.g., if (say) the Kentish differed from the other dialects of England, just in the same way, and with the same peculiar words and forms, as (say) the Verden dialect differed from the ones of Germany, we might fairly argue, that it was from the district of Verden that the county of Kent is peopled. At present we are writing simply for the sake of illustrating certain philological methods. The question of dialect will be treated in Part VII.
s. 129. _German tribes where there is no direct evidence as to their having made part of the population of England, but where the [`a] priori probabilities are strongly in their favour._ This applies to--a. The Batavians. No direct evidence, but great [`a] priori probability.
b. The Frisians.--Great [`a] priori probability, and {73} something more; [Greek: Brittian de ten neson ethne tria poluanthropotata echousi, basileus te heis auton hekastoi ephesteken, onomata de keitai tois ethnesi toutois Angiloi te kai Phrissones kai hoi tei nesoi homonumoi Brittones. Tosaute de he tonde ton ethnon poluanthropia phainetai ousa hoste ana pan etos kata pollous enthende metanistamenoi xun gunaixi kai paisin es Phrangous chorousin].[18]--Procop. B. G. iv. 20.
s. 130. I believe, for my own part, there were portions in the early Germanic population of Britain, which were not strictly either Angle or Saxon (Anglo-Saxon); but I do this without thinking that it bore any great ratio to the remainder, and without even guessing at what that ratio was, or whereabouts its different component elements were located--the Frisians and Batavians being the most probable. With this view, there may have been Jutes as well; notwithstanding what has been said in ss. 16-20; since the reasoning there is not so against a Jute element in toto, as against that particular Jute element, in which Beda, Alfred, and the later writers believed and believe.
s. 131. No exception against the existence of Batavian, Frisian, Frank, and other elements not strictly Anglo-Saxon, is to be taken from the absence of traces of such in the present language, and that for the following reason. Languages which differ in an older form may so far change according to a common principle, as to become identical in a newer one. E.g., the Frisian infinitive in verbs ends in -a, (as baerna=to burn), the Saxon in -an (as baernan=to burn). Here is a difference. Let, however, the same change affect both languages; that change being the abandonment, on both sides, of the infinitive termination altogether. What follows? even that the two originally different forms baern-a, and baern-an, both come out baern (burn); so that the result is the same, though the original forms were different.
* * * * *
{74}