AN INTRODUCTION

TO THE STUDY OF

GENERAL ETHNOLOGICAL RELATIONS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

————

GERMANIC ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.—DATE.

§ 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 thewholeof 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of Great Britain spread itself at the expense of some earlier and more aboriginal language, which it displaced and superseded.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. The next point involves the real origin and the real affinities of the English Language. Itsrealorigin is on the continent of Europe, and itsrealaffinities are with certain languages there spoken. To speak more specifically, the native country of the English Language isGermany; and theGermaniclanguages 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.

§ 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:—

§ 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 ofJutes. 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.

§ 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 ofSaxons. Their leaderwas 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.

§ 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.

§ 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.

§ 8.Fifth settlement of invaders from Germany.—These wereAnglesin 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 theAngles.

§ 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. Thesouth-easternparts of Scotland constituted the sixth district where the original British was superseded by the mother-tongue of the present English, introduced from Northern Germany.

§ 10. It would be satisfactory if these details rested upon cotemporary evidence; in which case the next question wouldbe that of the relations of the immigrant tribes to each otheras 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.

§ 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.

§ 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 characteristicdifferentiæof 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.

3. For those of the Angles in Norfolk, Suffolk, Yorkshire, Durham, and Northumberland.

Or, changing the expression:—

1. Thedifferentiæof the people of Kent, part of Sussex, and the Isle of Wight (if any), are to be explained by thedifferentiæof 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.

§ 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, inA.D.449.

b.The nearest contemporary author is Gildas, andhelived 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 Ælli effecting a landing in Sussex with the same number, we are reminded of the Gothic tradition which carries a migration of Ostrogoths, Visigoths, and Gepidæ, also in three vessels, to the mouths of the Vistula."

b.The murder of the British chieftains by Hengist is toldtotidem 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 enclosedby 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 toA.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.TheNotitia utriusque imperii, of which the latest date is half a century earlierthanthe epoch of Hengist, mentions, as an officer of State, theComes littoris Saxonici per Britannias; his government extending along the coast from Portsmouth to the Wash.

I conclude with the following extract:—"We are ignorant whatfastior 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, andstones, or thebeech-wood, from which their name is derived, ofbooks. 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, Ælli, 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 Ælli among the Saxon chieftains. The events of Wessex are somewhat better detailed; we learn that in 495 two nobles, Cerdic and Cyneríc, came to England, and landed atCerdices-ora, where, on thesame day, they fought a battle: that in 501 they were followed by a noble named Port, who, with his two sons, Bieda and Mægla, 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 Wihtgár, 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 Wihtgár; and in 534, Cerdic died, and was succeeded by Cyneríc, who reigned twenty-six years. In 544, Wihtgár died. A victory of Cyneríc, 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 Ceól, 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 Ceólwulf 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 Ælli: that after a reign ofthirtyyears, he died in 588, and was succeeded by Æþelríc, who again, in 593, was succeeded by Æþelfriþ. 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 recordssupply 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.

§ 14.Inference.—As it is nearly certain, that the year 449 isnotthe 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.

GERMANIC ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.—THE IMMIGRANT TRIBES, AND THEIR RELATIONS TO EACH OTHER.

§ 15. By referring to§§ 3-12, it may be seen that out of the numerous tribes and nations of Germany,threein 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 theEnglishin general from theAngles, the particular inhabitants ofSussex,Essex,MiddlesexandWessex, from theSaxons, and theAnglo-Saxonlanguage from theAngleandSaxonwould 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. TheJuteelement, however, requires further notice.

§ 16. TheJutes.—Were any of the German immigrantsJutes? 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 thetraditionthat one of the three ships of Hengist and Horsa was manned by Jutes, but from the following extract from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle:—

Here the wordsgyt hæt Iútnacynnconstitute cotemporary evidence.

Still there is a flaw in it; since it is quite possible that the termIútnacynnmay have been no true denomination of a section of the Germans of England, but only the synonym of a different word,Wiht-sætan. Alfred writes—comon hi of þrym folcum þam strangestan Germaniæ; þæt ofSeaxum, and ofAngle, and ofGeatum. Of Geatum fruman sindon Cantware andWiht-sætan, þæt is seo þeód se Wiht þæt ealond on eardað—they came of three folk, the strongest of Germany; that ofSaxonsand ofAngles,and ofGeats.OfGeatsoriginally arethe Kent peopleandWiht-set;that is the people whichWihtthe 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, +sætan=people; as Somer-set, and Dor-set.

b.The peninsulaJut-land was also calledVit-land, orWith-land.

c.Thewiht- inWiht-sætan is, undoubtedly, no such element as thevit- inVit-land=Jut-land; since it represents the older Celtic term, known to us in the Romanized formVectis.

Putting all this together, it becomes possible (nay probable) that the whole doctrine of aJuteelement 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 nameWiht-sætan; a fact which, taken along with the juxtaposition of theVit-landers (Jut-landers) and Saxons on the Continent, suggested to the writers of a long later age the doctrine of a Jute migration.

§ 17. As this last objection impugns the evidence rather than the fact, the following question finds place:—

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.

§ 18. This last circumstance detracts from the likelihood of thefact; 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.

§ 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),propriâ voluntate tradiderunt ... usque in Oceani littoribus dominio nostro porrigitur.—Theodebert to the Emperor Justinian.—

"QuemGeta, Vasco tremunt, Danus, Eutheo,[1]Saxo, Britannus,Cum patre quos acie te domitasse patet."

"QuemGeta, Vasco tremunt, Danus, Eutheo,[1]Saxo, Britannus,

Cum patre quos acie te domitasse patet."

Venantius Fortunatus ad Chilpericum regem.[2]

§ 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 termWiht-sætan, as applied to thepeople of the Isle of Wight, andWit-land, as applied toJutland, 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.

§ 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 totheir immigration into Britain, there is much that requires investigation. What were the Saxons of Germany—what the Angles?

§ 22.Difficulties respecting the identification of the Saxons.—There are two senses of the wordSaxon, 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 wordSaxonthus 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 itswiderextent tribes other than the Saxons of England, were occupants.

§ 23.Difficulties respecting the word Angle.—The reader is referred to an extract from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in§ 16, where it is stated, that "from the Angles' land (which has since always stood waste betwixt the Jutes and theSaxons) 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 ofAngliin another part of Germany.

§ 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,à 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 preliminaryapparatus criticus.

§ 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 properseaboard, or thecoastfrom the Rhine to the Eyder.

b.That of therivers,i.e., the communications between the ocean and the inland country.

This double division issufficient, 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 isnecessary, since although theà prioriview is in favour of thecoasthaving 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.

The importance of this latter alternative, will soon be seen.

§ 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 Cæsar.

§ 27.The Batavians.—Mentioned by Cæsar; 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 Cæsar downwards, their origin is Batavian.

§ 28.The Frisians.—First known to the Romans during the campaign of Drusus—"tributumFrisiistransrhenano populo—Drusus jusserat modicum;"[3]Tacitus, Ann. iv. 72. Extended, according to Ptolemy, as far north as the Ems—τὴν δὲ παρωκεανῖτιν κατέχουσιν ... οἱ Φρίσσιοι, μέχρι τοῦ Αμισίου ποταμοῦ.

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.

§ 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—μετὰ δὲ τούτους(the Frisians),Καῦχοι οἱ μικροὶ μέχρι τοῦ Οὐισούργιος ποταμοῦ, εἶτα Καῦχοι οἱ μειζοῦς, μέχρι τοῦ Ἄλβιος ποταμοῦ.

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 theseNorthFrisians 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.

§ 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.

§ 31.The Saxons and Nordalbingians.—North of the Elbe, and south of the Eyder (as stated in§ 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.TheHoltsati=the people of Holstein. Hereholt=wood, whilstsatis the-setin Somer-setand Dor-set.

b.TheThiedmarsi=the people of Ditmarsh.

c.TheStormarii=the people of Stormar.

Besides the names of these three particular divisions the tribes between the Elbe and Eyder were called by thegeneralname ofNordalbingii=i.e. people to the north of the Elbe.

§ 32.The people of Anglen—North of the Nordalbingii; Anglen being the name of adistrictbetween the Schlie and Flensburg.

§ 33.The Jutes.—InJut-land, north of the Angles and the Northfrisians.

§ 34.The Saxons of Holstein, how large their area?—There is no reason for considering the NordalbingianHoltsati,ThiedmarsiandStormariias 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 theprimâ facieview.

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 ofpartsof the present dutchies of Holstein and Sleswick having constituted thewholeof 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.

§ 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.

§ 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, theFranksand theSaxonswere in contact, a fact which makes it necessary to notice at least some portion of the Frank area.

a.Salian Franks.—If the elementSal-represent the-sel, in the name of the Dutch riverY-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 quiElpranci(leg. et Franci). They were conterminous with the Salii—Ὑπεδεξάμην μὲν μοῖραν τοῦ Σαλίων ἔθνους, Χαμάβους δὲ ἐξήλασα.—Julian, Op. p. 280.—D.N.

The following extract is more important, as it shows that a Roman communicationat leasttook place between the Rhine and Britain:Χαμάβων γὰρ μὴ βουλευομένων, ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν τὴν τῆς Βρεταννίκης νήσου σιτοπομπίαν ἐπὶ τὰ Ῥωμάϊκα φρούρία διαπέμπεσθαι.—Eunap. in Except. leg. ed., Bonn, p. 42.—D.N.

The name Chamavi is still preserved in that of the district ofHameland, 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.

§ 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.

§ 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 wordCattiisHesse, and the principality of Hesse is their old locality.—G.D.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.

This gives us asouthernand anorthernlimit.

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.

§ 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 wereGermans. 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.

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.

§ 41.Slavonians of Holstein, Mecklenburg, and Lauenburg.—ThePolabi—Frompo=on, andLabe=the Elbe. Name Slavonic. Germanized by the addition of the termination—ing, and so becomePo-lab-ing-i; just as inKentwe find theKent-ing-s. Conterminous with the NordalbingianStormarii, from whom they are divided by the riverBille, a small confluent of the Elbe. Capital Ratzeburg. First mentioned by writers subsequent to the time of Charlemagne.—D.N.

§ 42. TheWagrians.—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 ofHaðum(Sleswick) lies between the Angles, the Saxons, and theWends.

Now,Wendis the German designation of theSlavonians; so that there must have been Slavonians in the Cimbric Peninsula at least as early as the ninth century.—D.N.

§ 43.Obotriti, written alsoObotritæ,Abotriti,Abotridi;Apodritæ,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.

§ 44. TheLini—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 thewriters subsequent to the time of Charlemagne theSmeldengi(a German designation), and theBetheniciare 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 inA.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.

§ 45. TheWarnabiorWarnavi.—Locality. Parts about Grabow, Valley of the Elbe. This is the locality of theVariniof Tacitus, theΟὐΐρούνοιof Ptolemy, and theWeriniof later writers, a tribe connected with the Angli, and generally considered as Germanic.—D.N.

§ 46.Morizani.—The district round the Moritz Lake.—D.N.

§ 47.Doxani.—Locality; the valley of the Dosse.—D.N.

§ 48.Hevelli.—Locality; the valley of the Hevel. These are the Slavonians of Brandenburg and Mittelmark.—D.N.

§ 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 aCis-Albian Slavonic locality.

§ 50. South of the Hevel we meet with theSorabian, orSorbSlavonians, 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.

§ 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, sometimesTrans-Albian like the Wagrians and Obotrites; sometimesCis-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 itcomprised.—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,plusparts of the Dutchies of Holstein and Oldenburg, and parts of Altmark? Brunswick? and Westphalia, andminusthe 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—theCis-Albian Slaves (the Linones and the Slavonians of Altmark) being quite as numerous as theTrans-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 landcontainedwithin 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.

OF THE DIALECTS OF THE SAXON AREA, AND OF THE SO-CALLED, OLD SAXON.

§ 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,à priori; Second, what we really find.

§ 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.

§ 54. Such is what we expect. How far it was the fact is not known for want ofdata. What is known, however, is as follows.—There were at leasttwodivisions 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.

§ 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.

§ 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.

§ 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.

§ 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:—

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 isisanother question.

§ 59. The Saxon of England is called Anglo-Saxon; a term against which no exception can be raised.

§ 60. The Saxon of the Continentalused tobe calledDano-Saxon, andiscalledOldSaxon.

§ 61.Why calledDano-Saxon.—When the poem calledHeliandwas 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 aDanishintermixture.

§ 62.Why calledOldSaxon.—When the Continental origin of theHeliandwas recognised, the language was calledOld Saxon, because it represented the Saxon of the mother-country, the natives of which were calledOldSaxons by theAnglo-Saxons themselves. Still the term is exceptionable; the Saxon of the Heliand is most probably asister-dialect of theAnglo-Saxon, rather theAnglo-Saxon itself is a continental locality. Exceptionable, however, as it is, it will be employed.

§ 63. Thedatafor the study of the Old Saxon are as follows:—

1.Abrenuntiatio Diaboli, e Codice Vaticano.—Graff, Diutisca, ii. 191.

2.Confessionis Formulæ, e Codice Essensi.—Lacomblet, Archiv, für 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.—Denkmäler von Dorow, 1, 2, 1.

6.Glossæ Saxonicæ, 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 chiefOldSaxon composition extant.

SPECIMEN.

§ 64.Heliand, pp. 12, 13. (Schmeller's Edition.)

Luc. II.8-13.

AFFINITIES OF THE ENGLISH WITH THE LANGUAGES OF GERMANY AND SCANDINAVIA.

§ 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 thegeneralaffinities of the English language have been considered.

§ 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.

§ 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 theGoths; the termGothicfor the Scandinavian and Germanic languages, collectively, being both current and convenient.

§ 68. Of this greatstockof languages the Scandinavian is onebranch; the Germanic, called also Teutonic, another.

§ 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.

SPECIMENS.

Icelandic(Fareyïnga-Saga—Ed. Mohnike).

Ok nú er þat eitthvert sinn um sumarit, at Sigmundr mælti til þóris: "Hvat mun verða, þo at við farim í skóg þenna, er hèr er norðr frá garði?" þórir svarar: "á því er mèr eingi forvitni," segir hann. "Ekki er mèr svâ gefit," segir Sigmundr, "ok þángat skal ek fara." "þú munt ráða hljóta," segir þûrir, "en brjótum við þa boðorð fóstra míns." Nu fóru þeir, ok hafði Sigmundr viðaröxi eina i hendi sèr; koma i skóginn, ok í rjôðr eitt fagurt; ok er þeir hafa þar eigi leingi verit, þá heyra þeir björn mikinn harðla ok grimligan. þat var viðbjörn mikill, úlfgrár at lit. þeir hlaupa nu aptra á stiginn þan, er þeir hölðu þángat farit; stigrinn var mjór ok þraurigr, ok hleypr þórir fyrir, en Sigmundr síðar. Dýrit bleypr nú eptir þeim á stiginn, ok verðr því þraungr stigrinn, ok brotna eikrnar fyrir þvi. Sigmundr snyr þá skjótt út af stignum millum trjánna, ok biðr þar til er dyrit kemr jafn-fram honum. þa höggr hann jafnt meðal hlusta á dŷrinu með tveim höndum, svâ at exin sökkr. En dŷrit fellr áfram, ok er dautt.

Feroic.

Nú vär so til ajna Ferina um Summari, at Sigmundur snakkaji so vi Towra: "Kvat man bagga, towat vìd färin uj henda Skowin, uj èr hèr noran-firi Gärin?" Towrur svärar, "Ikkji hävi e Hu at forvitnast ettir tuj," sìir han. "Ikkji eri e so sintur," sìir Sigmundur, "og häar skäl e fara." "Tù fert tå at råa," sìir Towrur, "men tå browtum vid Forbo Fostirfäjir mujns." Nù fowru tajr, og Sigmundur heji ajna öksi til Brennuvì uj Hondini; tajr koma in uj Skowin, og å ajt väkurt rudda Plos men ikkji häva tajr veri här lájngji, firin tajr hojra kvödtt Brak uj Skownun, og bråt ettir sujgja tajr ajna egvulia stowra Bjödn og gruiska. Tä vä ajn stowr Skowbjödn grågulmut å Litinun. Tair lejpa nù attir å Råsina, sum tajr höddu gingji ettir; Råsin vär mjåv og trong; Towrur lejpur undan, og Sigmundur attanå. Djowri leipur nù ettir tajmum å Råsini; og nù verur Råsin trong kjå tuj, so at Ajkjinar brotnavu frå tuj. Sigmundur snujur tå kvikliani útäf Råsini inimidlum Trjini, og bujar här til Djowri kjemur abajnt han. Tå höggur han bajnt uj Ojrnalystri å Djowrinum vi båvun Hondun, so at öxin sökkur in, og Djowri dettir bajnt framettir, og er standejt.

Swedish.

Och nu var det engång on sommaren, som Sigmund sade till Thorer: "Hvad månde väl deraf warda, om vi åter gå ut i skogen, som ligger der norr on gården?" "Det är jag alldeles icke nyfiken att veta," svarade Thor. "Icke går det så med mig," sade Sigmund, "och ditret mäste jag." "Du kommer då att råda," sade Thor, "men dermed öfverträda vi vårFosterfaders bud." De gingo nu åstad, och Sigmund bade en vedyxa i handen; de kommo in i skogen, och strat derpå fingo de se en ganska stor och vildsinnt björn, en dråpelig skogsbjörn, varg-grå till färgen. De sprungo då tillbaka på samma stig som de hade kommit dit. Stigen var smal och trång; och Thorer sprang fråmst, men Sigmund efterst. Djuret lopp nu efter dem på stigen, och stigen blef trång för detsamma, så att träden sönderbrötos i dess lopp. Sigmund vände då kurtigt retaf från stigen, och ställde sig mellan träden, samt stod der, tills djuret kom fram midt för honom. Då fattade han yxan med begge händerna, och högg midt emellan öronen på djuret, så att yxan gick in, och djuret störtade framåt, och dog på stället.

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 overtræde, vi vor Fosterfaders Bud." De gik nu, og Sigmund havde en Vedöxe i Haanden; de kom ind i Skoven, og strax derpaa saae de en meget stor og grum Björn, en drabelig Skovejörn, ulvegraa af Farve. De löb da tilbage ad den samme Sti, ad hvilken de vare komne derhen. Stien var smal og trang; og Thorer löb forrest, men Sigmund bagerst. Dyret löb nu efter dem paa Stien, og Stien blev trang for det, og Træerne brödes i dets. Löb Sigmund dreiede da nu hurtig ud af Stien, og stillede sig imellem Træerne, og stod der indtil Dyret kom frem lige for ham. Da fattede han öxen med begge Hænder, og hug lige imellem örerne paa Dyret, saa at öxen sank i, og Dyret styrtede fremad, og var dödt 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 betweenthe ears of the beast with his two hands, so that the axe sinks, and the beast falls forward, and is dead.

§ 70. The Teutonic branch falls into three divisions:—

Back to Index Next