[] AN INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF GREAT BRITAIN and IRELAND.

Preliminary Reflections.

The north⯑ern nations averſe to letters. THE northern nations, whoſe cha⯑racter was in many reſpects ſingu⯑lar, were remarkable for their averſion to the ſtudy of letters. Fierce and untrac⯑table by nature, and bred from their in⯑fancy to incurſion and depredation, they [2] thought every purſuit not immediately ſubſervient to the profeſſion of arms mean and diſhonourable. They little conſidered that this prejudice was a fatal enemy to the fame which they ſought after with ſo much eagerneſs in the field. In vain were exploits worthy of memory performed, when the only certain means of tranſmit⯑ting them to poſterity were diſcouraged and deſpiſed.

The middle ages In the cloud of ignorance which invol⯑ved them at home they advanced into the provinces of weſtern empire. Learning, which had long languiſhed among the Romans, expired with the power of that illuſtrious people; and Europe, in a great meaſure, returned to its original rudeneſs and barbarity. When the detached tribes who had ſubverted the government of the Romans formed themſelves into regular communities ſome knowledge of letters began to revive; but the Chriſtian cler⯑gy, following the policy of their predeceſ⯑ſors the Druids, confined that knowledge to themſelves.

unfavour⯑able to hiſtory. To record temporal events was not the firſt uſe made of letters by the religious of the middle ages. Miracles, viſions, and the lives of ſaints, were more impor⯑tant ſubjects, than the tranſactions of ſtates and kingdoms, in the eyes of a race of men whoſe influence depended upon keeping mankind in the ſhades of igno⯑rance [3] and ſuperſtition. We find, ac⯑cordingly, that monks and hermits be⯑came illuſtrious in cells and in deſerts, whilſt the monarchs of Europe ſat in ob⯑ſcurity upon their thrones.

The feudal eſtabliſh⯑ments intro⯑duce hiſtori⯑cal inquiry. The North, which, upon the decline of the Romans, had filled the provinces of the weſtern empire with its colonies, ſent abroad freſh armies of adventurers in the eighth and ninth ages. Theſe, ſet⯑tling in ſome of the regions of the South, gave a new turn to the genius of the Eu⯑ropean nations. The feudal eſtabliſh⯑ments, introduced, or at leaſt, revived and confirmed by them, gave ſtability to government, and were highly favourable to a ſpirit of national dignity and inde⯑pendence. Lands and honours becoming hereditary, gave birth to a pride of family among the great barons; and they en⯑deavoured to add luſtre to the diſtinctions which they had acquired by tracing their anceſtors through the ſame path of emi⯑nence to a remote antiquity. From in⯑dividuals this genealogical enthuſiaſm ſpread to whole communities. Men poſ⯑ſeſſed of the little literature of the times, and a talent for fable, either through ig⯑norance or vanity, indulged the romantic paſſions of an ignorant race of men, by deducing the origin of their reſpective na⯑tions from very diſtant aeras. The anti⯑quities of every country in Europe furniſh⯑ed [4] an ample field of fiction; and it was impoſſible to form tales too extravagant or improbable for the credulity of the age. It is therefore no matter of wonder that we poſſeſs ſuch a maſs of legends for the ancient hiſtory of thoſe nations, who, for many centuries, have made a figure in Europe.

The hiſtory of ancient Britain ne⯑glected. The revival of critical learning has en⯑abled foreigners to extricate, in a great meaſure, their antiquities from the fables of the middle ages: In Britain we con⯑tent ourſelves with looking back with contempt on the credulity of our anceſ⯑tors. From a pride incident to poliſhed times we are apt to think, and perhaps with ſome juſtice, that the tranſactions of the infancy of ſociety are as unworthy of remembrance as they are imperfectly known. But this obſervation has been made, not more to depreciate our anceſ⯑tors, than to cover a glaring defect in our⯑ſelves. The Britiſh nations, till of late years, were much more remarkable for the performance of great actions in the field, than for recording them with digni⯑ty and preciſion in the cloſet.

Deſign of the Author. Men of abilities have removed this re⯑proach from the nation. The latter pe⯑riods of our hiſtory are reduced into form and preciſion; but the early part of our annals ſtill remains in the poſſeſſion of fiction and romance. To diſpel the [5] ſhades which cover the antiquities of the Britiſh nations, to inveſtigate their origin, to carry down ſome account of their cha⯑racter, manners, and government, into the times of records and domeſtic writers, is the deſign of this introduction. The abilities of the Author are perhaps inade⯑quate to ſo arduous an undertaking; but as he travels back into antiquity with ſome advantages which others have not poſſeſſed, he flatters himſelf that he ſhall be able to throw a new, if not a ſatis⯑factory light, on a ſubject hitherto little underſtood. Though, for want of ſuffi⯑cient guides, he ſhould ſometimes loſe his way in a region of clouds and darkneſs, his hopes of the indulgence of the public are greater than his fears of their cenſure.

The Celtae.

Two na⯑tions, the celtae and Sarmatae, poſſeſſed Ancient Europe. The Greeks threw the firſt feeble light on the Barbarians of the North and Weſt: They roſe diſtinctly to view in the pro⯑greſs of the Roman arms. Two nations, in a great variety of tribes, poſſeſſed the vaſt continent of Europe. The Celtae extended themſelves from the pillars of Hercules^* to the banks of the Viſtula^† and Tanais^†, from the Helleſpont to the ſhores of the Baltic. The regions to the North-Eaſt of the Danube, from the Euxine Sea to the Frozen Ocean, were perambulated rather than inhabited by the European Sarmatae. Between the Baltic and the extremities of the North lay the ancient Scandinavians, whoſe poſterity, upon the decline of the Romans, carried into the South undoubted proofs of their Sarmatic extract.

The name of Celtae The Scythians of the weſtern Europe were, for the firſt time, mentioned un⯑der the name of Celtae, by Herodotus, in the eighty-ſeventh Olympiad. To in⯑veſtigate [7] the origin of that appellation we muſt return into a period of remote anti⯑quity. The Pelaſgi of Peloponneſus and the Iſlands of the Archipelago were the firſt of the European Nomades who quit⯑ted the ambulatory life of their anceſtors, and applied themſelves to the arts of civil life. Induced by the fine climate of Greece, they ſettled in fixed abodes; while yet their rude brethren to the North wandered after their cattle or game over the face of Europe. Improving their navigation by degrees, they ſailed to the Weſt, ſeized upon the neareſt coaſt of Italy^*, and moving into the heart of that country, met with the Umbri, and roſe into a mixed nation under the name of Latins. Extending their navigation ſtill further into the Mediterranean, the Phoceans made an eſtabliſhment on the coaſt of Gaul; Maſſilia was founded by thoſe adventurers about the forty-fifth Olympiad, when the elder Tarquin is ſaid to have held the reins of govern⯑ment at Rome^†.

[8] derives its origin from Gaël. The improvements introduced by the Phoceans had a great and ſudden effect upon the manners of the Gauls. Agri⯑culture, before imperfectly underſtood, was proſecuted with vigour and ſucceſs^*. The means of ſubſiſtence being augment⯑ed, population increaſed of courſe; mi⯑grating expeditions were formed to eaſe the country of its number of inhabitants, and the regions of Europe being traverſed rather than peopled by the Nomades, re⯑ceived ſucceſſive ſwarms of Galic emi⯑grants. Spain^†, Italy^†, Germany be⯑tween the Rhine and the Baltic^§, and the Britiſh Iſles^‖ were filled with colonies [9] from Gaul, in whom the old inhabitants, if they differed originally from the Gaël, were loſt. This revolution in the North of Europe extended to the greater part of its inhabitants the appellation of Celtae, which is an adjective derived from Gaël, the aboriginal name of the inhabitants of ancient Gaul.

Migrations of the Celtae, or Gaël. Though the expeditions of the Gauls, ſubſequent to the ſettlement of the Pho⯑ceans in their country, are the firſt men⯑tioned in hiſtory, we have reaſon to be⯑lieve that they pervaded Europe with their migrating armies^* in a more remote pe⯑riod of antiquity. They firſt entered Italy, according to Livy, in the reign of the elder Tarquin: but other writers of good credit affirm that they were, in part, the anceſtors of the vagabonds who ſettled with Romulus on the banks of the Tiber. The Umbri, the moſt ancient inhabitants of Italy^†, were Gauls^†; and from the Umbri the Tuſcans and Sabins^§, who were the founders of Rome, derive their origin. It is upon the whole, evident that the Gaël who inhabited the [10] vaſt country bounded by the ocean, the Rhine, the Alps, and Pyrenaean moun⯑tains, were the anceſtors of the Celtae, the extent of whoſe dominions we have already deſcribed^*.

The Cimbri.

The Cimbri derive their origin The domeſtic improvements which, in the beginning of their progreſs in Gaul, enabled the inhabitants of that country to overrun the regions of the Weſt and North, had arrived at ſome degree of maturity long before the Romans pene⯑trated beyond the Alps. Inſtead of wan⯑dering in ſearch of foreign ſettlements, the Gauls found it more convenient to cultivate thoſe which they already poſſeſ⯑ſed. The ſpirit of conqueſt retired fur⯑ther towards the North; and the tide of migration, which had for ages flowed from Gaul, returned upon itſelf with re⯑doubled violence. The German Celtae^† repaſſed the Rhine, committed terrible [11] devaſtations, and acquired a juſt title to the name of Cimbri, which ſignifies a band of robbers^*.

from the Celtae, or Gaël. The extenſive regions between the Rhine and the Baltic were poſſeſſed by Galic tribes when Germany became firſt known to the writers of Rome. An unavoidable mixture with the Sarmatae beyond the Viſtula and the Baltic had an effect on the genius of the Celtae of Ger⯑many; and they departed, in ſome de⯑gree, from the purity of the language and from ſome of the manners of their anceſtors. They however retained ſo many marks of their Galic origin, that ſome have thought that the name of Ger⯑mans proceeded from their ſimilarity in every reſpect to the inhabitants of Gaul^†.

Their mi⯑grations and conqueſts. More than three centuries prior to the Chriſtian aera, the German Celtae, under the name of Cimbri, ravaged all the re⯑gions lying between the Rhine and the Ionian ſea^†. They at the ſame time ex⯑tended their conqueſts to Spain and to [12] Great Britain. The Luſitanians, ac⯑cording to Diodorus Siculus, were the moſt warlike branch of the Cimbri^‖; and the Welſh retain, in their name, an undoubted mark of their Cimbric extracti⯑on. From theſe revolutions of the Cel⯑tae on the continent we ſhall, in a ſub⯑ſequent ſection, deduce the origin of the Britiſh nations.

The European Sarmatae.

Irruption of the Europe⯑an Sarmatae; The ſucceſſive migrations of the Bar⯑barians of the North may be compared to the tranſient ſtorms of a ſhowery day. The Sun ſcarce returns after one cloud is paſt, before another begins to gather in the ſame quarter of heaven. The ſhort ſpace between is filled with that pleaſing but melancholy ſerenity which attends joys whoſe period is approaching in view.—The firſt irruption of the nations of the northern Germany happened, as we have already obſerved, more than three cen⯑turies before the commencement of our preſent aera. About two ages after, the Celtae beyond the Rhine threw another fleece of adventurers, under the name of [13] Cimbri, into the regions of the South^*. A new people accompanied them in this expedition, who, in their deſignation of Teutoni^†, carried with them a proof of their Sarmatic origin.

their pro⯑greſs to the South. When the Celtae between the Elb and the Gulph of Bothnia evacuated their ter⯑ritories, and poured into the ſouthern Europe, about forty-five years after the death of Alexander, the Sarmatae of Scan⯑dinavia croſſed the Baltic, and ſettled be⯑tween the Viſtula and the Drave under the general name of Goths^† and Vandals^¶. The Celto-Germans who remained beyond the Elb on the ſhores of the ocean, and in the peninſula of Juteland, gave the name of TEUTIONI, or northern men, to [14] the Sarmatae; who, after having paſſed from Scandinavia, became their neigh⯑bours in Germany. Inſtead of contend⯑ing about the poſſeſſion of the bleak ſhores of the Baltic, the Cimbri and Teutoni, in cloſe alliance with one another, en⯑deavoured to procure for themſelves better ſettlements in a more favourable climate and ſoil.

The Scan⯑dinavian Sarmatae The Teutoni were the firſt of the Scan⯑dinavian Sarmatae who invaded the South. The calamities which over⯑whelmed thoſe adventurers in their ex⯑pedition, diſcouraged their countrymen for more than two complete centuries from ſimilar attempts. In the reign of Marcus Aurelius, forgetting the misfor⯑tunes of their fathers, the Sarmatic Germans advanced into the regions of the South and Eaſt^*. A new bulwark a⯑gainſt their invaſion had ſtarted up in the power of the Romans. The military diſcipline of the legions ſtationed on the frontiers of Pannonia fruſtrated all the efforts of the Barbarians, and obliged them to content themſelves with the cold and ſterile ſeats of their anceſtors. But though they were unſucceſsful in many ſucceeding attempts, they never loſt ſight of the object, till the growing imbecillity of the empire opened the South and Weſt to their arms.

[15] the anceſ⯑tors of the modern Germans. The Celtae beyond the Rhine were ei⯑ther diſſipated in the dominions of Rome before the fall of the empire, or after⯑wards loſt in the inundations of the Sarmatic Scandinavians; who, paſſing over Germany, overwhelmed the regions of the South and weſt at the decline of the Roman power. The Goths and Vandals who extended their conqueſts to Spain, Italy, and Africa, were, in ſome meaſure, loſt in the countries which they ſubdued. The northern nations, deſcended from the ſame ſtock who trod on their heels when they moved into the provinces of the Roman empire, are the anceſtors of the preſent Germans. The Franks, having confined their migrating expeditions to Gaul, have ſtill preſerved their Vandalic name in that country. The Saxons ſettled in Britain are the moſt unmixed of the poſterity of the Sar⯑matae who firſt ſettled on the ſouthern ſhore of the Baltic.

The Slavi.

Reflections. When fate had decreed the fall of the Romans ſhe ſeemed to create Barbarians for the ſingle purpoſe of executing her favourite deſign. Nations appeared ſud⯑denly on the frontiers of the empire un⯑heard of by others, and even unknown to themſelves. The memory of their former tranſactions was loſt in their own ignorance, and the name of their original ſeats was as it were forgot in the length of their march. They ſeemed to move forward under an impreſſion of the incon⯑veniences they had left at home, more than from the hopes of ſucceſs abroad; having philoſophy enough to prefer the uncertainty of future evils to preſent mi⯑ſery.

Origin and progreſs of the Slavi. The moſt obſcure of thoſe Barbarians who contributed to the deſtruction of the weſtern empire were the Slavi, whoſe poſterity now poſſeſs all the regions be⯑tween the Euxine and the Frozen Ocean. Under the name of Avari they advanced even as far as Peloponneſus in the fifth century, and under that of Bulgarians they continued their irruptions into the South till the end of the eighth age. Purſuing and flying from one another, in ſucceſſive mi⯑grations, they filled the weſtern Ruſſia, [17] Poland, and the regions near the mouths of the Danube, with their colonies; and, having at laſt ſettled in fixed abodes, ſtarted up into ſeveral powerful nations. Some of them extended themſelves as far as Dalmatia and Illyricum, and at this moment, ſpeak the language of their an⯑ceſtors on the Adriatic.

A different people from the Euro⯑pean Sar⯑matae. The Slavi ſeem, from their language as well as manners, to derive their origin from the Tartars of the North-Eaſt of Aſia. They were a very different race of men from the Scandinavian Sarmatae, the principals in the migrating expediti⯑ons which proved fatal to the Roman power. When the Goths, quitting their native ſeats to the Eaſt of the Viſtula, had advanced into Rhetia, Gaul, and Italy, the Slavi took poſſeſſion of their habitations^†. Growing numerous in Ruſſia and Poland they extended them⯑ſelves to the South-Weſt; and, if we regard their numbers and extent of do⯑minion, they form, at this day, one third of the weight in the ſcale of Europe.—This ſhort account of the origin of the Slavi, though foreign to our preſent ſubject, comes in, with ſome propriety, in the revolutions which happened of old in the North.

Reflections on the Origin of the European Nations.

The Celtae, the Sarma⯑tae, and Slavi, The ſuccinct account given of the ſtate of Ancient Europe lays open the ſecret ſprings from which its modern inhabitants derive their blood. The poliſhed nations who now excel antiquity itſelf in arts, and vie with it in arms, owe their origin to rude Barbarians, whoſe want of means of tranſ⯑mitting their hiſtory to poſterity has per⯑haps contributed to their fame. The Celtae, the Sarmarae, and Slavi, jumbled together by migration, conqueſt, and ac⯑cidents of various kinds, formed that great maſs which has ſtarted up, in the courſe of ages, into thoſe powerful and illuſtrious ſtates which figure, at this day, in Europe.

the anceſ⯑tors of the European nations, Though ſcarce any one people from the pillars of Hercules to the Tanais are free from a mixture of the three great original nations whom we have ſo often mentioned, there are regions in that vaſt extent of country where the blood of each peculiarly prevails. The Celtae, whom their connection with the Romans had abandoned to conqueſt in Gaul, Spain, Italy, and its iſles, are the anceſtors of the majority of the preſent inhabitants of thoſe extenſive countries. The Sarmatic [19] Vandals, who, under a great variety of national names, ſucceeded the Romans in the dominion of the South and Weſt, bore no proportion to the conquered. They introduced among their new ſub⯑jects their own form of government, their own regulations, the haughty ferocity of their character and manners, that want of neatneſs^* which all the improvements of civilized times have not hitherto been able to remove; but the language of the vaſſals, a certain evidence of their ſupe⯑riority in point of numbers, prevailed, at laſt, over that of their lords.

proved from In Germany, from the ſource of the Elb to the Baltic, from the Viſtula to the ocean; in England, in a great part of Scotland, the old Scandinavians, with little mixture, prevail. In the kingdoms of Norway and Sweden the blood of the ancient Sarmatae is tinctured with that of the Slavi, who ſtept into the vacant ha⯑bitations of thoſe tribes that ſucceſſively, for many ages, diſcharged themſelves into the regions of the South from both the ſhores of the Baltic. The dominions of the Slavi we have already deſcribed.

their lan⯑guage, &c. But to wander no further into diſſerta⯑tion: language, next to authentic re⯑cords, is the beſt evidence of the extract of a people. The modern Europeans, [20] deriving their blood from three very diffe⯑rent nations, ſtill preſerve among them the three original tongues of their anceſ⯑tors. Theſe are the Celtic, the Teuto⯑nic, and Sclavonic, all radically different from one another. Wherever any of theſe three languages is ſpoken with moſt purity, there the blood of the great na⯑tion, from which it takes its name, moſt prevails.

Preliminary Obſervations.

General SHOULD a traveller of ordinary curioſity land at the mouth of the Nile, he might perhaps content himſelf with viewing the fine effect, which that noble river has on the appearance of the lower Egypt: One more inquiſitive might chuſe to trace the ſtream to where it falls from the deſert into the plains of Thebes: But he, indeed, muſt be un⯑commonly curious, who would wander in ſearch of its ſource to the Mountains of the Moon^*. The novelty of the ro⯑mantic [22] ſcenes on the way might recom⯑penſe him for the fatigue of his journey, but mankind would ſcarce forget the folly of the undertaking in the pleaſure of hear⯑ing the detail of his diſcoveries.

obſerva⯑tions. A writer who penetrates into antiquity to inveſtigate the ſprings from which a nation has iſſued, may, in like manner, have his amuſement for his labour Par⯑tial to themſelves, the bulk of the people regard only thoſe periods of their hiſtory which deſcend neareſt to their own times. Satisfied with the renown of latter tranſ⯑actions, they are as indifferent concerning their remote annals and origin as they who profit by the inundations of the Nile are about the diſtant fountain from which it takes its riſe. The traveller, to con⯑tinue the compariſon, has, in ſome re⯑ſpects, the advantage of the writer; for the ſandy deſerts of Africa preſent not a more uncomfortable proſpect to the eye than the ſterile regions of national antiqui⯑ties. This conſideration, though it ſhall not prevent, will contribute to ſhorten the preſent inquiry.

Britain little known be⯑fore Julius Caeſar. Britain, before the arrival of Caeſar, was rather heard of than known. Foreign⯑ers had viſited its ports in purſuit of com⯑merce; but they took no pains to extend their inquiries to the internal ſtate of the country. The information of the Ro⯑mans accompanied the progreſs of their [23] new communities roſe gradually before them as they advanced into the heart of the iſland; till the whole body of its in⯑habitants came forward diſtinctly to view, when Agricola carried the Roman eagles to the mountains of Caledonia. But to inveſti⯑gate the origin of our anceſtors with pre⯑ciſion we muſt return to a period of more remote antiquity.

Affected by revolutions on the con⯑tinent. The Britiſh Iſles, from their vicinity to the continent, muſt, in the nature of things, have been affected by the revolu⯑tions which we have in the preceding ſections briefly deſcribed. The circles, ſpreading from commotions in the center, muſt have vibrated, though perhaps faintly, in the extremities of Europe; and the ſhock was certainly felt beyond the limits to which conqueſt and migra⯑tion actually extended themſelves. We can accordingly trace, in lively charac⯑ters, in Britain, the effect of every great movement made on the continent by the body of the Celtae before the power of the Romans confined them to fixed abodes.

The Gaël.

A conjec⯑ture con⯑cerning the aera Whether Britain was inhabited, or rather perambulated, by a race of Barbarians before the Gaël of the continent extended their name with their arms into all the regions of Europe^*, is a circumſtance which lies buried in impenetrable dark⯑neſs. The name of Gaël, ſtill retained by the poſterity of the moſt ancient in⯑habitants of the Britiſh Iſles, ſeems to look for its origin to the firſt great revo⯑lution of the Celtae on the continent. The wild tribes who originally poſſeſſed the vaſt regions bounded by the ocean, the Mediterranean, the Rhine, the Alps, and the Pyrenean mountains, were, as has been already obſerved, the firſt of the Euro⯑pean Scythians, if we except the Pelaſgi of Greece, who formed themſelves into diſtinct communities. Arriving at ſome degree of civilization, they became over⯑ſtocked with numbers at home, and they ſent armies of emigrants in queſt of foreign ſettlements^†. Britain could not fail to [25] attract the early attention of the Gaël. Its vicinity to their original^† country, the fertility of its ſoil^¶, the mildneſs of its air and climate^*, would have recom⯑mended it to that migrating nation in a degree ſuperior to thoſe regions of the Weſt and North, to which, it is well known, they extended themſelves in re⯑mote antiquity.

of their migration. It were idle to hope to aſcertain the aera in which the firſt migration of the Gauls into Britain ought to be placed. Its antiquity has left only room for con⯑jecture. We ſhould, in all probability, look for it beyond the eſtabliſhment of the Phoceans in the diſtrict of Maſſilia. Though it is affirmed, both by Livy and Plutarch^†, that the Gauls for the firſt time, entered Italy in a hoſtile manner in the reign of the elder Tarquin, we have reaſon to believe, that partial emigrations from that nation croſſed the Alps many ages before the foundation of Rome itſelf was laid^‖.

[26] into Britain. The Umbri, who were the moſt an⯑cient inhabitants of Italy, were the poſte⯑rity of Gauls who penetrated into that country long before the commencement of hiſtory^*. We may naturally ſuppoſe that the Gauls of Belgium would have found leſs difficulty in croſſing a very nar⯑row channel into Britain than their coun⯑trymen at the foot of the Alps in clam⯑bering, with their wives and children, over the vaſt ridge of mountains which ſeparated them from Italy. It may there⯑fore be concluded, that Britain received very conſiderable colonies from the Belgic diviſion of Gaul as early, at leaſt, as the Gaël of the Alpin regions ſeized upon Italy under the name of Umbri^†. But though it is impoſſible to fix with preci⯑ſion on the aera of the invaſion of Britain by the Gaël, no doubt can remain con⯑cerning the exiſtence of the fact itſelf. [27] The Gaël of Britain and Ireland retain a proof of their origin in their indigenous name. The writers of antiquity confirm it from every quarter^‖, though their in⯑formation extended not to the period in which that remarkable revolution happen⯑ed in the Iſland.

The Cimbri.

The Cim⯑bri. The Gaël were in poſſeſſion of Bri⯑tain for many ages before they were diſturbed by a ſecond migration from the continent. The ſpirit of conqueſt paſſing from the Gauls to the Celto-Germanic colonies beyond the Rhine, the latter pervaded Europe with their armies^*. We muſt judge of the aera in which this revolution happened from its effect on thoſe nations who had the means of tranſmitting their own hiſtory, as well as ſome account of their enemies, to after ages.

Aera of The German poſterity of the Gauls, under the name of Cimbri, traverſed, as has been in a preceding ſection ob⯑ſerved, the vaſt regions between their own country and the ſea of Ionia^†. A⯑bout half a century after the death of Alexander, they poured irreſiſtible armies into Greece, Thrace, and Macedonia; the latter of which, though recent from [29] the conqueſt of Aſia, they ſubdued and ruined^†. In their progreſs to the South and Eaſt they cut to pieces all the intermediate nations^§ between their original ſeats and the Helleſpont; and ſome of them, paſſing the Propontis, filled the leſſer Aſia with their colonies^‖; and ſpread the terror of their name far and wide by the fortune of their invincible arms^*.

their migra⯑tion. The irruption of the Cimbri was not merely depredatory. They left colonies in the conquered countries^†, and the manners which their ſucceſſors, in the ſame regions, brought down to after⯑times, was a kind of proof that they exterminated thoſe nations whom they ſubdued.—Whilſt a part of the Cimbri, or Celto-Germans, puſhed their con⯑queſts to the South and Eaſt, others di⯑rected their migration to the regions of the Weſt. We ſind traces of them as [30] far as the extremities of Europe^†; they were, in ſome meaſure, the anceſtors of the Luſitanians, and they roſe into a mixed nation with the Aborigines of the mountains of Gallicia. In Britain, their very name remains, with their blood, in the Cimbri of Wales.

into Britain. When ſome of the Cimbri appeared on the frontiers of Greece, others drove the ancient Gaël from the Belgic diviſion of Gaul. Caeſar obſerves, that the Belgae were the poſterity of German emigrants who ſettled in ancient times to the South of the Rhine, on account of the ferti⯑lity of the ſoil^§. Deſcrying, from their new ſettlements, the Iſland of Britain, they paſſed the narrow channel which di⯑vides it from the continent, and the Gaël, who had diffuſed themſelves over all the Iſland, contracted their limits to⯑wards the South to give room to thoſe new interlopers.

Etymon of Belgae. The Cimbri who remained in Gaul became afterwards to be diſtinguiſhed by the name of Belgae. As that appella⯑tion carries reproach in its meaning, it is likely that it was impoſed on that [31] warlike nation by the Gaël whom they had expelled from their Territories. BALGE or BALGEN, in the ancient Cel⯑tic ſignifies a ſpotted or party-coloured herd; and, in a metaphorical ſenſe, a mixed people, or an aggregate of many tribes. The name alludes either to Bel⯑gium's being peopled promiſcuouſly by the German tribes, or to the unavoidable mixture of the Celtic colonies beyond the Rhine with the Sarmatae of the Eaſt and North.

The Belgae.

The Belgae. When the Romans carried their arms into Britain, the whole Iſland was poſ⯑ſeſſed by three nations ſprung originally, thought at very different periods, from the Gaël of the continent. Two of theſe we have already deſcribed; the third falls now under conſideration.—The Celto-Germanic tribes, who had driven the old Gaël from Belgium, ſettling in that di⯑viſion of Gaul, roſe, in proceſs of time, into a variety of petty ſtates. Each of theſe, ſome time before the arrival of Caeſar, ſent colonies into Britain^§; which, according to the teſtimony of the illuſtrious writer, retained the names of the ſmall communities on the continent from which they reſpectively derived their origin^†. The Cimbri, who had paſſed into Britain about three centuries prior to our aera, retiring from the preſſure of theſe new invaders, poſſeſſed the country to the Weſt of the Severn, and that which extended from the Humber to the Twe [...]d. The Gaël, under the general name of Caledonians, inhabited the reſt of [33] the Iſland to the extremity of the North.

The aera of their arrival in Britain. It is difficult to aſcertain the aera of this third migration from the continent. We ought to place it perhaps half a century prior to the arrival of Caeſar. Divitia⯑cus, king of the Sueſſiones, who flou⯑riſhed before that great commander, may probably have tranſplanted from Gaul thoſe tribes in Britain over whom he reigned.—The Belgae, when they tranſ⯑migrated into Britain, brought with them thoſe arts of civil life which had made a conſiderable progreſs in Gaul before they left that country. The inhabitants of the maritime regions oppoſite to Gaul had almoſt attained to an equal pitch of cultivation with their brethren on the continent^*. They ſowed corn, they had fixed abodes, and ſome degree of commerce was carried on in their ports.

The Bri⯑gantes This ſuperior civilization rendered them objects of depredation to the Cimbri who had retired to the North and Weſt from the preſſure of the Belgae. The Cimbri, it is probable, had remained in the ſame rude barbarity which their anceſtors brought with them from Belgium. Re⯑cent injuries joined iſſue with their love [34] of depredation. They made frequent in⯑curſions into the Belgic dominions; and it was from that circumſtance that the Cimbri beyond the Humber derived their name of Brigantes, which ſignifies a race of freebooters and plunderers^†.

and Silures were Cim⯑bri. The Silures on the weſtern banks of the Severn were the moſt conſiderable tribe of the Britiſh Cimbri. They va⯑ried ſo much from the Belgae, that Ta⯑citus juſtly concluded that they were, in ſome meaſure, a different race of men. To deduce them from Spain was certainly an error. It is not in any degree proba⯑ble that, in ſo early a period, the Spa⯑niards, who were never a ſea-faring people, could tranſport themſelves over an immenſe ocean into Britain: Beſides, the poſterity of the Silures have come down to the preſent times; and, in their indigenous name of Cimbri, vindicate their origin^†.

Obſervations on the Three Britiſh Nations.

The Gaël, Cimbri, and Belgae, The three great Britiſh nations, whoſe origin we have endeavoured to inveſti⯑gate, muſt have differed conſiderably from one another in language, manners, and character. Though deſcended from the ſame ſource, their ſeparation into different channels was very remote. The Gaël who poſſeſſed the northern Britain, by the name of Caledonians, having paſ⯑ſed from the continent before the arts of civil life had made any conſiderable progreſs among them, retained the pure but unimproved language of their an⯑ceſtors, together with their rude ſimplicity of manners.

though de⯑ſcended from the Celtic ſtock, The Britiſh Cimbri derived their ori⯑gin from the Galic colonies, who, in remote antiquity, had ſettled beyond the Rhine. Theſe, with a ſmall mixture of the Sarmatae, returned, in all their ori⯑ginal barbariſm, into the regions of the South. During their ſeparation from their mother nation, their language and manners muſt have ſuffered ſuch a conſi⯑derable change, that it is extremely doubtful whether their dialect of the Celtic and that of the old Britiſh Gaël were, at the arrival of the former in this Iſland, reciprocally underſtood by [36] both nations.—The third colony differed in every thing from the Gaël and Cimbri. Their manners were more humanized; and their tongue, though perhaps corrupted, was more copious. They had left the continent at a period of advanced civility. Their character changed with the progreſs of the arts of civil life; and new inventions had intro⯑duced new words and new expreſſions into their language.

ſpoke three different dialects. But though the three nations who poſ⯑ſeſſed the Britiſh Iſles at the arrival of the Romans ſpoke three diſtinct dialects, and differed materially from one another in the formation of their phraſes, and conſtruction of their ſentences, the radi⯑cal words uſed by all were certainly the ſame. The names of places in the Ro⯑man Britain, however much diſguiſed they may have been by the orthography of the writers of the empire, may be, with great facility, traced to their origi⯑nal meaning in the language ſpoken to this day by the poſterity of the Gaël in the northern Britain^*.

[37] Obſerva⯑tions. To deſcend into a minute detail of the various petty tribes into which the three Britiſh nations were ſubdivided, would neither furniſh inſtruction nor amuſement. The Cimbri and Belgae, falling under the power of the Romans ſoon after they were mentioned by hiſto⯑rians, were loſt in the general name of Britons; and the internal ſtate of the Gaël of North Britain and Ireland, is covered with that impenetrable cloud which invariably involves illiterate na⯑tions who lie beyond the information of foreign writers.

Ancient Names of Britain.

Obſerva⯑tions. Having briefly inveſtigated the origin of the people, it may not be improper to inquire into the name of the country. Etymology is a ſcience frequently full of deception, and always unentertaining and dry. But as the Author of the In⯑troduction returns back into antiquity with ſome advantages which men of greater abilities have not poſſeſſed, he hopes to be, in ſome meaſure, ſatisfactory on this ſubject.

The etymon of Albion. Alba or Albin, the name of which the ancient Scots, in their native lan⯑guage, have, from all antiquity, diſtin⯑guiſhed their own diviſion of Britain, ſeems to be the fountain from which the Greeks deduced their Albion. It was natural for the Gaël, who tranſmigrated from the low plains of Belgium, to call the more elevated land of Britain by a name expreſſive of the face of the coun⯑tay. ALB or ALP, in the Celtic, ſig⯑nifies High, and IN invariably, a coun⯑try.—The name of Albion being im⯑poſed upon the Iſland by the Gaël, the firſt colony was known before the appel⯑lation which the Romans latinized into Britannia.

[39] and of The Cimbri, the ſecond Celtic colony who paſſed into Britain, arriving in Bel⯑gium, and deſcrying Albion, gave it a new name expreſſive of the ſame idea which firſt ſuggeſted the appellation of Albion to the Gaël. Comparing the elevated coaſt of Britain to the fenny plains of the lower Germany, they cal⯑led it BRAIT AN, a word compounded of BRAIT high, and AN or IN a country^*.

Britain. This new name never extended itſelf to the Gaël of North Britain; and the poſterity of the Cimbri have loſt it in the progreſs of time. The Scottiſh and Iriſh Gaël have brought down the name of Alba or Albin to the preſent age; the Welſh uſe no appellation. The aera of its impoſition ought to be fixed as far back as the arrival of the Cimbri in the Iſland. The Phoenicians of Gades and the Maſſilian Phoceans, who traded to the ports of Britain, learned the name of the natives, and communicated it to the writers of Greece and Rome.

Preliminary Reflections.

Origin of the Caledo⯑nians unin⯑veſtigated. IN proportion as we travel northward in ancient Britain, the darkneſs, which involves the antiquities of its in⯑habitants, thickens before us. The Cim⯑bri and Belgae, after they were compre⯑hended within the pale of the Roman dominions, were ſeen diſtinctly; but the more ancient inhabitants of the iſland, the Gaël, appeared only tranſiently, when, in an hoſtile manner, they advan⯑ced to the frontiers of the province. The arms of the empire penetrated, at differ⯑ent periods, into the heart of the coun⯑try beyond the Scottiſh friths; but as theſe expeditions were not attended with abſolute conqueſt, and a conſequent ſet⯑tlement of colonies, the Romans made little inquiry concerning the origin and hiſtory of the natives of the northern di⯑viſion of Britain.

By the Ro⯑mans. Julius Agricola, who, for the firſt time, diſplayed the Roman eagles beyond the frith, was not more ſucceſsful in the field than he was happy in an hiſtorian to tranſmit his actions with luſtre to poſte⯑rity. But even the diſtinct and intelli⯑gent [41] Tacitus gives but a very imperfect idea of thoſe enemies, by the defeat of whom his father-in-law acquired ſo much reputation. We learn from him indeed, that the Caledonians were the moſt an⯑cient inhabitants of Britain, that they were brave and numerous, that, though overcome in the field by the diſcipline of the Roman Legions, they were far from being reduced into any ſubjection which could deſerve the name of conqueſt.

Their hiſ⯑tory After Agricola was removed from the government of Britain, the writers of the empire for ſome years loſt ſight of the Caledonians. The incurſions of thoſe barbarians into the province, forced both Adrian^* and Antoninus Pius^† to con⯑ſtruct walls, at an immenſe labor and ex⯑pence, to exclude their ravages. In the reign of Commodus neither walls or the military abilities and conduct of Ulpius Marcellus^† could prevent them from [42] laying waſte the northern diviſion of the Roman Britain, till Severus, about the beginning of the third century, carried the war into their country with a nume⯑rous army. This is the ſum of what the Romans have related concerning the Cale⯑donians for near two centuries after they were firſt mentioned: To their origin and internal hiſtory the writers of Rome were equally ſtrangers.

peculiarly obſcure. This defect in foreign writers, with regard to the ancient inhabitants of North Britain, is not ſupplied by any authen⯑tic monuments of their own. The Ca⯑ledonians were not more deſtitute of the means of preſerving their hiſtory in the intermediate century between Agricola and Severus, than their poſterity were for a conſiderable time after the Romans had relinquiſhed the dominion of Britain. The climate and ſoil of Caledonia were far from being favourable to internal civi⯑lization; and a ferocity of manners, a⯑riſing from an uninterrupted ſeries of hoſtilities, effectually prevented the in⯑troduction of the arts of civil life from abroad.

A reflec⯑tion. But when the Scots look back with re⯑gret upon that want of letters which has involved in obſcurity and fable the origin and hiſtory of their anceſtors, they ought to conſider that it was, perhaps, from this circumſtance aroſe that national inde⯑pendence [43] which they tranſmitted to their poſterity. Had the Romans eſtabliſhed themſelves in Caledonia, we might in⯑deed have known more of the ancient inhabitants of that country; but it is much to be doubted whether the Scots of this age would have been more con⯑cerned in their hiſtory, than the Engliſh of Middleſex and Eſſex are in the tran⯑ſactions of the Trinobantes, who poſſeſ⯑ſed thoſe counties in the time of Julius Caeſar. The Romans, it is true, intro⯑duced the arts of civil life into the coun⯑tries which they ſubdued; but with thoſe arts came in ſlavery, and a conſequent imbecillity of mind, which, in the end, abandoned the vaſſals, as well as their lords, to conqueſt, and even to extirpa⯑tion.

Scots deſti⯑tute of an⯑cientdomeſ⯑tic writers. The firſt domeſtic writers of the hiſtory of North Britain were too ignorant, as well as too modern, to form any proba⯑ble ſyſtem concerning the origin of their nation. Deſtitute of records at home, they found themſelves obliged to fill up the void in their antiquities with tales which had been growing in Ireland, for ſome ages before, in the hands of a ſuc⯑ceſſion of ignorant Bards and Fileas. After the ſtudy of critical learning was proſecuted with ſucceſs among other na⯑tions, what part of it extended to Scot⯑land was only employed to remove ſome [44] of the abſurdities of the old fables, and not levelled in a manly manner againſt the whole of that fabric of fiction which had ſo long diſhonoured the antiquities of that country.

Inaccuracy and indo⯑lence of their mo⯑dern hiſto⯑rians. The ingenious father Innes was the firſt of the Scots who had the courage to attack the puerile ſyſtem of their origin, which his countrymen had for many ages adopted. He wreſted the ſceptre of Scot⯑land from the firſt Fergus, and thirty-nine of the ideal ſucceſſors of that pretended monarch, and paſſing over into Ireland diſcomfited that motley army of Bards, Fileas, and Senachies, which had been ſo long fortifying itſelf in rhimes, tra⯑ditions, and fabulous records. But Innes was more ſucceſsful in deſtroying the in⯑digeſted accounts of others, than in eſta⯑bliſhing a more rational ſyſtem of his own. Setting out upon wrong princi⯑ples, and being an utter ſtranger to the Galic language, he fell into unavoidable miſtakes; and endeavoured to obtrude upon the world opinions, concerning the origin of the Scots, no leſs improbable than thoſe tales which he had exploded with ſo much ſucceſs. Though Scotland has of late years produced men diſtin⯑guiſhed for their talent in hiſtorical diſ⯑quiſition, none of them has thought pro⯑per to ſearch for the genuine origin and hiſtory of his anceſtors among thoſe [45] fables which obſcure the antiquities of the nation. Poſſeſſed of parts, perhaps, too valuable to be employed in inveſtigations of that kind, they haſtened to important periods of hiſtory where their abilities might with luſtre be diſplayed.

A learned Clergyman^*, in one of the Scottiſh iſles, reduced lately into form and preciſion the antiquities which Innes had left in confuſion and diſorder. Had the ingenious writer extended his remarks as far as he might have been enabled to do by his erudition and great knowledge of all the branches of the Celtic language, there would, perhaps, be very little occa⯑ſion for this Eſſay. His obſervations are ſo judicious, and his arguments ſo conclu⯑ſive, on ſeveral points of this ſubject, that to give him the merit of being the beſt antiquary that has treated of the origin of the Scots, is too ſmall a tribute to his memory.

Origin of the Scots.

General re⯑flections on the origin of the Scots. It is unneceſſary to controvert the opinion of Cornelius Tacitus concerning the origin of the ancient inhabitants of North Britain^*. The name by which the celebrated writer himſelf diſtinguiſhes their country, is ſufficient to demonſtrate that they came from a very different quarter of the continent than what he ſuppoſed. When the arms of the empire under Julius Agricola laid open all the nations of Britain to the enquiry of the Romans, it has been already obſerved that the whole iſland was poſſeſſed by three nations, whom Tacitus endeavours to deduce from communities on the con⯑tinent very diſtant from one another. The poſterity of two of thoſe nations preſerve, to this day, in their names, proofs that altogether ſubvert this opinion. The Silures or Cumri of the ſouth, it has already appeared, had a much better title to a Germanic extraction than the Gael of Caledonia.

A colony of Gauls The Gaël, or ancient Gauls, having tranſmigrated from the continent at a period when the arts of civil life had [47] made but very little progreſs among them, muſt have maintained them⯑ſelves chiefly by hunting; and we may ſuppoſe, that in purſuit of their game they ſoon extended themſelves to the northern extremity of the iſland. A people whoſe ſubſiſtence ariſes chiefly from the chace are never numerous; it is conſequently natural to believe that the Cimbri met with little oppoſition from the Gaël, when the former paſſed from the continent and ſeized upon the ſouth⯑ern diviſion of Britain.

gradually advance in⯑to North Britain, and tranſmi⯑grate into Ireland. In proportion as the Cimbri advanced towards the north, the Gaël, being cir⯑cumſcribed within narrower limits, were forced to tranſmigrate into the iſlands which crowd the northern and weſtern coaſts of Scotland. It is in this period, perhaps, we ought to place the firſt great migration of the Britiſh Gaël into Ire⯑land; that kingdom being much nearer to the promontory of Galloway and Cantyre, than many of the Scottiſh iſles are to the continent of North Britain. This vicinity of Ireland had probably drawn partial emigrations from Caledonia before the arrival of the Cimbri in Bri⯑tain; but when theſe interlopers preſſed upon the Gaël from the ſouth, it is rea⯑ſonable to conclude the numerous colo⯑nies paſſed over into an iſland ſo near, [48] and ſo much ſuperior to their original country in climate and fertility.

Forced northward by the Belgae. The inhabitants of the maritime re⯑gions of Gaul croſſing, in an after age, the Britiſh Channel^*, eſtabliſhed them⯑ſelves on that part of our iſland which lies neareſt to the continent; and, mov⯑ing gradually towards the north, drove the Cimbri beyond the Severn and Hum⯑ber. The Gaël of the north, reduced within limits ſtill more circumſcribed by the preſſure of the Cimbri, ſent freſh colonies into Ireland, while the Scottiſh friths became a natural and ſtrong boun⯑dary towards the ſouth to thoſe Gaël who remained in Britain.

Formed in⯑to a nation. It was, perhaps, after the Belgic inva⯑ſion of the ſouthern Britain, that the Gaël of the northern diviſion formed themſelves into a regular community, to repel the incroachment of the Cimbri upon their territories. To the country which they themſelves poſſeſſed they gave the name of CAEL-DOCH, which is the only appellation the Scots, who ſpeak the Galic language, know for their own di⯑viſion of Britain. CAEL-DOCH is a compound made up of GAEL or CAEL, [49] the firſt colony of the ancient Gauls who tranſmigrated into Britain, and DOCH, a diſtrict or diviſion of a country. The Romans, by tranſpoſing the letter L in CAEL, and by ſoftening into a Latin termination the CH of DOCH, formed the well-known name of Caledonia. Obvious as this etymon of Caledonia appears, it was but very lately diſco⯑vered^*. Thoſe who treated of the an⯑tiquities of North Britain, were utter ſtrangers to that only name by which the Scots diſtinguiſhed the corner of Britain which their anceſtors poſſeſſed from the remoteſt antiquity. From an ignorance, ſo unpardonable in antiqua⯑ries, proceeded that erroneous ſyſtem of the origin of the Scots, which, for many ages, has been, with ſo much confidence, obtruded on the world.

Internal hiſtory un⯑known. Concerning the internal ſtate of Cale⯑donia, and the diviſion of its inhabitants into various tribes in a very early period, we can find nothing certain. The ac⯑count given by Ptolemy of the Epidii, Carini, Cantae, Logae, and other na⯑tions, is little to be regarded. Tacitus paſſed over thoſe petty communities in ſilence; and in the period between the [50] expedition of Julius Agricola, and the reign of Marcus Aurelius, under whom the Egyptian geographer flouriſhed, the Romans had no opportunity of being ac⯑quainted with the domeſtic arrangements of the Caledonions.

Their boun⯑daries. Though the Scottiſh friths are gene⯑rally allowed to have been the bounda⯑ries of Caledonia towards the South, it is more than probable that thoſe tribes who poſſeſſed the country between the walls were principally deſcended from the antient Gaël. The names of the Sel⯑govae and Gadeni, two petty communi⯑ties on the northern banks of the Solway and Tweed, ſeem to ſtrengthen this ſup⯑poſition. They carry in their ſignifica⯑tion a proof that the tribes who bore them were in a ſtate of hoſtility with their neighbours the Ottadini and Brigan⯑tes, which furniſhes a preſumption, that they derived their origin from a different quarter^*.

The Maea⯑tae. But as that tract of country which is comprehended between the Tweed and Solway, and the Scottiſh friths, was more [51] expoſed to invaſion than Caledonia, we may conclude that the Gaël who poſſeſ⯑ſed it, were, in ſome degree, mixed with the Cimbric Ottadini and Brigantes, even before the invaſions of the Romans preſ⯑ſed thoſe tribes towards the North. It was from this unavoidable mixture that the Selgovae, Gadeni, Damnii, and No⯑vantes, were, in an after age, diſtin⯑guiſhed by the name of Maeatae, which ſignifies a people deſcended from a double origin, as well as the inhabitants of a controverted country^*.

Origin of the Iriſh.

Ireland firſt peopled from Bri⯑tain. THE origin of the ancient Britiſh nations being inveſtigated, little difficulty can remain in tracing the old Iriſh to their genuine ſource. The vi⯑cinity of Ireland to two promontories in the northern Britain, furniſhes a ſtrong preſumption that the inhabitants of the former tranſmigrated, in an early period, from the latter^*. Beſides, there is not a fact concerning any nation, beyond the pale of the Roman empire, better eſta⯑bliſhed by the teſtimony of writers of unqueſtionable authority, than the Britiſh extraction of the old Iriſh.

proved from foreign wri⯑ters; The ancients with one voice agreed to give to Ireland the appellation of a Britiſh Iſland^†. Ptolemy calls it the leſſer Britain, and Strabo in his Epitome gives the name of Britons to its inhabi⯑tants. Diodorus Siculus^† mentions it as [53] a fact well known in his time, that the Iriſh were of Britiſh extract, as well as that the Britons themſelves derived their blood from the Gauls. Cornelius Taci⯑tus affirms that the nature and manners of the Iriſh did not, in the days of Do⯑mitian, differ much from the Britons^*; and many foreign writers of great autho⯑rity give their teſtimony to the Britiſh deſcent of the old inhabitants of Ire⯑land^†.

acknow⯑ledged by domeſtic antiquaries. The moſt romantic abettors of the fa⯑bulous ſyſtem of Iriſh antiquities durſt not deny a fact ſo well aſcertained from every quarter. They acknowledged, on the authority of the Hibernian Senachies, that Britiſh colonies, a ſhort time after the univerſal deluge, tranſmigrated into Ireland from North-Britain. But theſe ill-fated Britons, like many other inter⯑lopers from various parts of the world, who ſucceeded them in Ireland, had the misfortune to fall under the diſpleaſure of the Senachies, and were inhumanly ex⯑terminated, [54] to make room for the Mile⯑ſian Scots, ſo famous in the fictions and rhimes of the Bards.

The Britiſh Gaël the anceſtors of the Iriſh. It is little to the purpoſe to enquire whether the Scythian Nomades, who, prior to the migrations of the Gauls, wandered over the vaſt regions of Eu⯑rope, found their way into Ireland from the neareſt promontories of Britain. The name of GAEL, ſtill retained by the old Iriſh, ſufficiently demonſtrates, that they derive their blood from thoſe Gaël or Gauls, who, in an after period, were diſtinguiſhed in Britain by the name of Caledonians. The wildeſt en⯑thuſiaſts in Hibernian antiquities never once aſſerted that the Caledonians, or their poſterity the Picts, were of Iriſh extract; yet nothing is better aſcertained than that the ancient Britons of the South gave to the Scots, the Picts, and the Iriſh, the common name of Gaël^*; and conſequently that they very juſtly concluded that the three nations derived their origin from the ſame ſource, the ancient GAEL of the continent.

[55] Conjecture concerning the time of their tranſ⯑migration. The Britiſh Gaël, in an early age, extending themſelves to the very extre⯑mities of the Iſland, deſcried Ireland from the Mulls of Galloway and Cantire, and croſſing the narrow channel which ſepa⯑rates the two countries, became the pro⯑genitors of the Iriſh nation. In propor⯑tion as freſh emigrants from the conti⯑nent of Europe forced the ancient Gaël towards the North of Britain, more co⯑lonies tranſmigrated into Ireland from the promontories which we have ſo often mentioned. It is probable that it was after the arrival of the Cimbri in Bri⯑tain, a Number of the GAEL, ſufficient to deſerve the name of a nation, ſettled themſelves in Ireland. But they became ſo numerous in that country before the arrival of the Belgae in Britain, that the colonies which tranſmigrated from that nation into Ireland were, together with their language, manners, and cuſtoms, loſt in the Gaël; ſo that in one ſenſe the Caledonians may be reckoned the ſole progenitors of the old Iriſh^*.

[56] Etymon of the name of Erin; When the Gaël arrived firſt in Ireland they naturally gave it the name of IAR-IN^†, or the weſtern country, in contra⯑diſtinction to their original ſettlements in Britain. From IAR-IN is not only to be deduced the EIRIN of the Iriſh themſelves, but thoſe various names by which the Greeks and Romans diſtin⯑guiſhed their Iſland^*. The appellation of IAR-IN was not altogether confined to Ireland by the Gaël of North Britain. They gave it alſo to thoſe numerous Iſlands which crowd the weſtern coaſts of Caledonia; but when by degrees they became acquainted with the vaſt extent of Ireland, when compared to the other Scottiſh Iſles, they called it by an em⯑phaſis H'IARIN or H'EIRIN, the weſtern country or Iſland^§.

and of Hi⯑bernia. Hibernia, the moſt common name by which the Romans diſtinguiſhed Ireland, may appear to ſome too remote in the [57] pronunciation and Orthography from IAR-IN, or H'EIRIN, to be derived from either. This difficulty is eaſily removed. Julius Caeſar mentions, for the firſt time, Ireland under the name of Hibernia. One of two reaſons induced the illuſtri⯑ous writer to uſe that appellation. He either latinized the HYVERDHON of the ſouthern Britains, or, what is more probable, he annexed to Ireland a name which ſuited his own ideas of its air and climate. The Romans, long after the expedition of Caeſar, entertained a very unfavourable opinion of the climate of Ireland: Strabo thought that the ſeverity of the weather rendered that Iſland ex⯑tremely uncomfortable^*, and Pomponius Mela was told that corn never ripened there on account of the inclemency of the ſeaſons^†. The attention of Caeſar was engaged by much more important objects than in informing himſelf minutely concerning the climate of a country to which he never intended to carry his arms. If Strabo and Mela, whoſe ſub⯑ject led to enquiries of that kind, ſup⯑poſed that the air of Ireland was ex⯑tremely intemperate, it is no wonder that Caeſar ſhould have fallen into a ſimilar [58] miſtake; and we may from this circum⯑ſtance conclude that he formed the name of Hibernia from the adjective Hibernus. He thought that a perpetual winter reigned in Ireland; and he was informed that, in the leſſer iſlands in the neighbourhood, one winter night was equal to thirty in Italy^†.

Letters unknown in Ancient Ireland.

Obſervati⯑ons. A deduction of the etymon of Hiber⯑nia from another fountain gave birth, per⯑haps, to a ſyſtem concerning the origin of the Iriſh, diametrically oppoſite to that which we mean to eſtabliſh. The world are well acquainted with the pretenſions which the Iriſh have made, for many ages, to very high antiquities, as well as to an original very different from the other inhabitants of the Britiſh Iſles. In⯑ſtead of tranſmigrating from the neareſt continent, in the natural progreſs of migra⯑tion, it ſeems that the firſt colonies came to Ireland, acroſs an immenſe ocean, at a period when the rude navigation of the other nations of Europe ſcarcely en⯑abled them to waft themſelves over rivers and narrow arms of the ſea.

Pretenſions of the old Iriſh to let⯑ters. To ſupport this improbable tale, ano⯑ther was formed no leſs incredible in itſelf than the fact it was meant to aſcertain. The fabricators of the Iriſh antiquities found than an early knowledge of letters in their country was abſolutely neceſſary to gain credit to the ſyſtem which they ſo much wiſhed to eſtabliſh. Ireland therefore was made the ſeat of polite lite⯑rature many ages before Greece itſelf roſe [60] out of ignorance and barbarity. To re⯑move this ſupport from the antiquities of the Iriſh, is to deſtroy at once that whole fabric of fiction, which they poſſeſs for their ancient hiſtory.

Reflections. The art of perpetuating ideas, and of tranſmitting the wiſdom of one age to another, is the firſt means of civilizing mankind out of their natural ferocity and barbarity. When ſome certain marks are found to ſend down the memory of inventions and tranſactions through a ſe⯑ries of generations, a nation becomes poliſhed in proportion to the length of time it has been in poſſeſſion of that art. Before the Phoenicians taught the uſe of the alphabet to the Ionians^*, Pelopon⯑neſus and the Iſlands of Greece were poſ⯑ſeſſed by tribes as obſcure and contempti⯑ble as thoſe wild Indians, who wander through the foreſts of America. The progreſs of the Greeks towards the figure which they make in hiſtory, accompanied the gradual cultivation of polite learning in their country; and we find, that from a poſſeſſion of letters for a few centuries, they arrived at ſuch a pitch of civilization, that it was not without reaſon they diſtin⯑guiſhed other nations by the name of Bar⯑barians.

[61] Pretended civility of the old Iriſh, As the Iriſh pretend to have been even before the Greeks^†, in point of time, with regard to the reception of letters, we ought naturally to expect that they be⯑came civilized in a very early period. The annals of Ireland are accordingly full of the progreſs of civility, and the encouragement given to polite learning in that country, many ages before any other nation in Europe extricated itſelf from the ſhades of ignorance and barbarity. But theſe annals deſerve little credit on a matter of ſuch high antiquity. The Pſalter Caſhel, the oldeſt record of the Iriſh tranſactions, was written in the latter end of the tenth age, more than two thouſand years after the pretended importation of letters into Ireland.

confuted from the teſtimony of The only credible accounts of the man⯑ners of the old Iriſh, as well as of the other barbarous nations of Europe, muſt be derived from the writers of Rome; and theſe do not go beyond the com⯑mencement of the Chriſtian aera, which is, at leaſt a thouſand years poſterior to the period aſſigned by the Iriſh for the introduction of learning among their an⯑ceſtors. Unfortunately for the Hiber⯑nian ſyſtem of antiquities, by the teſti⯑mony of foreign writers who extended [62] their enquiries to Ireland, the character of its ancient inhabitants is utterly in⯑compatible with that civilization which invariably accompanies any knowledge of letters^*.

Strabo, Strabo is the firſt writer who mentions any particulars concerning the manners of the old Iriſh. His account differs in no reſpect from the relations we have of the moſt unpoliſhed ſavages of Africa and America. In one place^† he affirms, that Ireland, which lies near Britain, is poſ⯑ſeſſed by a race of men altogether wild and unpoliſhed; and in another he not only ſays that the Iriſh were much more barbarous than the Britons, but he even mentions ſeveral inſtances of their brutal ferocity of manners which decency ob⯑liges us to leave under the veil of a dead language^†.

[63] Diodorus Siculus, The teſtimony of Diodorus Siculus is not more favourable, than that of Strabo, to the national character of the Iriſh. They were in the days of that writer ſo far from being civilized by a long poſſeſſion of let⯑ters, that they were thought to feed upon human bodies. The authority of Dio⯑dorus not only deſtroys the fiction of the early knowledge of letters in Ireland, but alſo ruins that ſyſtem of antiquities, to ſupport which, the fiction itſelf was firſt framed. He ſhews that the Iriſh, ſo far from coming from a diſtant country, were a branch of thoſe Gauls who had poſſeſſed themſelves of Britain in the pe⯑riod we have already aſſigned^†.

Pomponius Mela, The account given of the Iriſh by Pomponius Mela is extremely unfavour⯑able to their pretended civilization by a long poſſeſſion of letters. He calls them a race of men unpoliſhed, barbarous, and ignorant of every virtue^*. Cornelius Tacitus, Cornelius Tacitus, after having deſcribed thoſe rude tribes in Britain whom the Romans had [64] not humanized, obſerves, that the inha⯑bitants of Ireland did not differ much in their manners from the Britons^†. Nei⯑ther was the national character of the old Hibernians mended at all in the ſe⯑cond or third century^†, Julius Soli⯑nus. when Julius So⯑linus ſtigmatized them with epithets of rude, inhuman, and inhoſpitable, a race of men who were in ſuch a ſtate of rude⯑neſs that they made no diſtinction between right and wrong^‖.

Objections anſwered. In vain has it been ſaid that the writers, whoſe authority we have cited, were ill⯑formed concerning the manners of the Iriſh, and that barbarity in which their country was anciently involved. The Britons, who, according to Strabo^¶, reſorted to Rome, could not have been ignorant of the ſtate of Ireland. From thoſe Britons, we may conclude that both Strabo and Mela derived their informati⯑ons concerning the Hibernians; and in the days of Tacitus the ports of Ireland were ſo well known, that the celebrated writer could not poſſibly have been ig⯑norant [65] of the real character of its inha⯑bitants^*. Solinus had even a better op⯑portunity than Strabo, Mela, and Ta⯑citus, to become acquainted with the manners of the Iriſh. Britain had been a province of the empire two centuries at leaſt, before Solinus wrote. Some com⯑munication muſt have been maintained between the two Iſlands during that pe⯑riod, and of courſe the Romans could not have been ſtrangers to the real man⯑ners of the inhabitants of Ireland.

The man⯑ners of the old Iriſh in⯑conſiſtent with a knowledge of letters. The genuine national character of the Iriſh, at a time when their Senachies ſay they had been in poſſeſſion of letters for more than a thouſand years, being thus aſcertained, we find it abſolutely incon⯑ſiſtent with learning, and that civility which is the invariable companion of lite⯑rature. It was from this conſideration that the moſt learned and unbiaſſed among the moderns rejected, as mere fable and romance, what is related concerning letters in Ireland, prior to the miſſion of Patrick, and the reign of Leogaire. The celebrated Camden looked upon the bar⯑barity and ignorance of the ancient Iriſh as facts ſo well aſcertained, that he pro⯑duces them as proofs that the Romans, who poliſhed thoſe nations whom they [66] ſubdued, never extended their empire to Ireland^*. Sir James Ware, though very zealous for the honour of his coun⯑try, gave no credit to the pretenſions of the Iriſh to any knowledge of an alpha⯑bet, before they were introduced with Chriſtianity^‖; and the learned Uſher, by his ſilence concerning the affairs of Ireland beyond the fifth age, ſeems to join iſſue upon that head with Ware^†.

The old Iriſh illite⯑rate, proved Bolandus and the induſtrious Innes have entered into a ſerious refutation of the pretenſions of Ireland to letters in the times of Paganiſm. Both theſe writers, as well as Ware, prove from Nennius^†, that the firſt alphabet was taught in that Iſland by St. Patrick. To ſtrengthen the aſſertion of Nennius, Ware produced the authority of Tirochan, who, in the ſeventh age, wrote the life of the apoſtle [67] of Ireland^¶. To theſe authorities Innes ſubjoins ſome critical obſervations of his own, which in themſelves are enough to deſtroy the credit of the whole legend concerning the literature of the Pagan Iriſh.

from their uſing fo⯑reign terms in their let⯑ters, &c. The ingenious father very ſhrewdly ob⯑ſerves, that the bare terms which the Romans uſed in their letters, arts, and ſciences, ſufficiently demonſtrate, with⯑out having recourſe to hiſtory, that they derived their polite learning from Greece^*. In the ſame manner the proper terms by which the Iriſh in their vulgar language, expreſs every thing concerning letters and ſcience, being Latin words hibernized^†, leave no room to doubt that they were taught firſt to read and write by perſons who ſpoke the Roman language. But as the Romans never entered Ireland, it is [68] certain that the Iriſh did not receive thoſe terms immediately from that nation. The firſt preachers of the goſpel in Ireland, who had their education at Rome, were conſequently thoſe who introduced into that country the knowledge of letters, and the Roman terms by which their dif⯑ferent uſes were expreſſed.

from their want of written mo⯑numents; In vain, continues Innes, has O'Fla⯑herty^†, and the ingenious father might have added many other Iriſh writers, af⯑firmed that Ireland is, or was poſſeſſed of any books, whether of poetry or hiſtory, written before the introduction of Chri⯑ſtianity into that Iſland^*. This is mani⯑feſtly begging the queſtion, till theſe books are given to the public with literal tranſlations and documents to prove their authority, their age, and where they have been preſerved through ſo long a ſeries of ages. The learned Ware, after all his enquiries, could not find one wri⯑ter of Iriſh hiſtory or antiquities prior to the author of the Pſalter-Caſhel, whom he places in the tenth century; though from what Ware himſelf cites from the Pſalter in another place^†, it muſt have been written after the commencement of the eleventh age.

[69] from the form of their alpha⯑bet; The arbitrary order in which the Iriſh of the middle ages placed their alphabet, and the fanciful appellations they gave them, prove only that the Hibernian Se⯑nachies formed a very early deſign to de⯑ceive the world on the article of their an⯑tiquities. But arguments ariſing from thoſe two circumſtances can only deceive thoſe who have not compared old Iriſh manuſcripts with the records of any other nation in Europe, prior to the invention of printing. The perfect indentity ob⯑ſervable in the forms of the letters in both ſufficiently confutes this idle tale, unleſs we are to ſuppoſe that the Iriſh, and not the Romans, humanized and taught let⯑ters to all the European nations.

from the improbabi⯑lity of their aſſertions. It is unneceſſary, with Bolandus and Innes, to purſue the abettors of the pre⯑tended literature of Ireland, before the miſſion of St. Patrick, through all the maze of a conteſt, in which poſitive aſ⯑ſertions, on the ſide of the latter, ſupply the place of argument. To a brief detail of ſome other unanſwerable objections advanced by the two learned writers, we ſhall annex ſome additional obſervations, to put an end for ever to the diſpute. Keating, O'Flaherty, and Toland, up⯑on the authority of the book of Lecan, a manuſcript ſcarcely three hundred and fifty years old, affirm that one Phenius Farſa invented the Hebrew, Greek, [70] Latin, and Iriſh alphabets, together with the Ogum of Ireland, little more than a century after the univerſal deluge. A legend which ſays that the Greek al⯑phabet was invented many ages before Cecrops and Cadmus, and the Latin characters ſeventeen centuries before the Romans were a people, is too ridiculous to deſerve any ſerious conſideration. But this idle ſtory is not more pregnant with abſurdity than the mention that is made of Adam, Cain, Noah, the deluge, Moſes, Pharaoh, and many other names and tranſactions in the old teſtament, in annals ſaid to have been written many ages before Chriſtianity introduced into Europe any knowledge of the Jewiſh hiſtory and antiquities.

The Ogum a ſpecies of ſtenogra⯑phy. The Iriſh being in ſome meaſure ob⯑liged to acknowledge that the Bethluiſ⯑nion, notwithſtanding the arbitrary tranſ⯑portation of the letters, and the puerile fancy of impoſing upon them the names of trees, by the Bards and Senachies of the middle ages, was borrowed from the Latin, ſtill continue to inſiſt that their anceſtors in remote antiquity, made uſe of characters diſtinguiſhed by the name of Ogum. Ogum is a word which has no affinity with any other in the Iriſh language, and ſeems therefore to have been a cant-name impoſed upon a ſpecies of ſtenography or cypher, in which the [71] old Iriſh, like many other nations, wrote their ſecrets. Sir James Ware, whoſe authority is often cited to prove the ex⯑iſtence of the Ogum, ſhews plainly that it was a kind of ſhort hand, varied ac⯑cording to the fancy of thoſe that uſed it, and conſequently that it did not merit the title of an alphabet^*.

Contradic⯑tions be⯑tween the ancient and modern Iriſh anna⯑liſts. There is no circumſtance more con⯑cluſive againſt the learning of the Pagan Iriſh, than the contradictions between the ancient writers, and thoſe of the modern annaliſts of Ireland. The anti⯑quaries of that country, in proportion as the general hiſtory of the world became more and more known to them, reformed, new-modelled, and retrenched the ex⯑travagancies of the firſt rude draught of Hibernian antiquities formed by the Bards and Fileas. Had letters been cul⯑tivated in Ireland in ſo early a period as is pretended, ſyſtems of the hiſtory of that country would have been ſo anciently formed, and ſo well eſtabliſhed by the ſanction of their antiquity, that neither Keating or O'Flaherty durſt, in the ſe⯑venteenth age, give a compleat turn to the Iriſh antiquities. But that no ſuch ſyſtem was formed, is demonſtrable from [72] the ſilence concerning the times of Hea⯑theniſm, in the moſt ancient annals of Ireland, of the exiſtence of which we have any ſatisfactory proof^*.

Deciſive proof a⯑gainſt the pretended literature of the old Iriſh. To cloſe with one deciſive argument this controverſy: It is to be obſerved that the ſettlement of the Mileſians, un⯑der the name of Scots, in Ireland, about a thouſand years before the Chriſtian aera, is the capital point eſtabliſhed by the pretended literature of the Heathen Iriſh. Should this early ſettlement be once aſ⯑certained, it naturally ought to follow that the Britiſh Scots derived their blood from thoſe of Ireland; if they did, they muſt have carried with them to Caledo⯑nia that learning, ſcience, and civility, which had made ſo great a progreſs in their mother-country before they tranſmigrated from it. But nothing is more certain than that the Britiſh Scots were an illi⯑terate people, and involved in barbariſm, even after St. Patrick's miſſion to the Scots of Ireland. The abettors of the Iriſh antiquities are then reduced into this dilemma; either the Scots of North Britain did not derive their origin from Ireland, or elſe the Iriſh had not any [73] knowledge of letters when the Britiſh Scots tranſmigrated from their country. If the firſt poſition is true, the whole credit of the Mileſian ſtory is at an end; if the latter, on the other hand, is the fact, no memory remains in Ireland of tranſactions prior to the miſſion of St. Pa⯑trick, and the reign of Leogaire.

General concluſions. From the general reſult of our enquiry upon this ſubject, we may conclude with Sir James Ware, that nothing certain is known concerning the affairs of Ireland before the middle of the fifth age^*. We may alſo, with the ſame learned writer^†, take it for granted that the account of their Heathen anceſtors, retailed by the annaliſts, antiquaries, and hiſtorians of Ireland, are the impoſtures of later ages^†. It were to be wiſhed that the writers of that country, who underſtood the ancient Galic, had not given room to ſuſpect that they themſelves were conſcious of thoſe impoſtures, by their concealing from the [74] public thoſe monuments of their ancient hiſtory from which they pretend to derive their information. But had they given them to the world, it is highly probable that external argument would be very unneceſſary to prove that the literature of Ireland commenced with the miſſion of St. Patrick.

Iriſh writers reprehend⯑ed It is a matter of ſome wonder that the Iriſh remain ſo long wedded to a ridicu⯑lous ſyſtem of antiquities, which throws the reproach of credulity upon their na⯑tion. Every other poliſhed people, who, in the times of ignorance, had ſet up high ſchemes of antiquity, have now ex⯑tricated their hiſtory from the fables of their dark ages. Had there been a ſcar⯑city of men of abilities and learning in Ireland, ſome excuſe might be framed for this blind attachment to the legends of the bards. But as that country hath pro⯑duced very able men, and qualified to form a ſolid foundation for a true hiſtory of their anceſtors, they deſerve to be ſe⯑verely animadverted upon, for not reſcu⯑ing their antiquities, from that obſcurity and fiction in which they have been in⯑volved, by ſome modern, prejudiced, and injudicious writers.

Preliminary Obſervations.

General ob⯑ſervation. THE dark regions of Iriſh antiquity oppoſe more than their barrenneſs to inquiry. To the common gloom, which covers the origin of other nations, the Bards of Ireland have added clouds of their own. The deſart of their ancient hiſtory, to uſe a metaphor, is haunted by goblins and ſtrange forms, which diſtract the attention and offend the eye. To encounter the abſurdities which the more ancient Iriſh poſſes for the annals of their remote ages, is not an arduous, but a diſagreeable and tedious taſk. The field is ample, but it produces no laurels; the combat is not dangerous, but the victory will be attended by no ſame. But the profeſſed deſign of this work gives propriety to a minute inquiry into the pretenſions of Ireland to high anti⯑quities, and the public, it is hoped, will [76] forgive the prolixity of the diſquiſition, on account of the neceſſity which has impoſed ſo dry a ſubject upon the Author.

Concluſions againſt the domeſtic accounts of the Iriſh. From the principles already eſtabliſhed we may draw the following juſt conclu⯑ſions: That the hiſtory of the Mileſian colony, which, it is pretended, tranſmi⯑grated from Spain into Ireland under the conduct of Heremon and Heber, is ab⯑ſolutely unworthy of any credit: That the long liſt of kings, who are ſaid to have held the ſcepter of Ireland, for thirteen centuries before the Chriſtian aera, had their exiſtence only in the diſ⯑tempered fancies of the Bards of latter ages; and, in ſhort, that every thing re⯑lated in their domeſtic annals concerning the Iriſh, prior to the miſſion of St. Pa⯑trick, ought to be baniſhed to the region of fiction and romance. Whatever drea⯑mers in remote antiquities may be pleaſed to ſay, it is an indiſputable fact, that the tranſactions of a nation, illiterate in itſelf, and too diſtant or obſcure to be diſtinctly ſeen by foreign writers, muſt for ever lie buried in oblivion. The Iriſh, we have already ſeen, were ſo far from having the advantage of the Greeks and Romans in an earlier knowledge of let⯑ters^*, that, on the contrary, they re⯑mained [77] much longer in ignorance than the inhabitants of the regions of the Weſt and North, whom the latter of thoſe il⯑luſtrious nations ſubdued and humanized.

Hiſtory of Ireland commences with St. Patrick. The only means the old Iriſh had to preſerve the memory of their actions were the rhimes of the Bards, a race of men retained by the illiterate nations de⯑ſcended from the great Celtic ſtock. Without inſiſting on the known uncer⯑tainty of hiſtory in rhime, we may affirm that a dull narrative of facts in verſe could never take hold of the human mind in a degree ſufficient to tranſmit a knowledge of events, by oral tradition, through any conſiderable length of time. Granting then every poſſible indulgence to the tra⯑ditionary hiſtory of Ireland, we cannot admit that it extends much beyond the middle of the fifth age, if even to record the rhimes of the Heathen Bards had been the firſt uſe made of the alphabet intro⯑duced by St. Patrick. But as it is not, in any degree, probable that the firſt con⯑verts in Ireland would employ their time in collecting and recording hiſtorical poems, which were tinctured, perhaps, with the ancient ſuperſtition, we may naturally place the commencement of the fabulous, as well as of the true hiſtory of that Iſland, poſterior to the introduction of Chriſtianity.

Spaniſh Extraction of the Iriſh examined and confuted.

Spaniſh ex⯑traction of the Iriſh before the Chriſtian aera The Iriſh annaliſts have, for many ages, adhered invariably to the pretended deſcent of their nation from the old Spa⯑niards. The confidence with which they have always ſpoken on this ſubject, in⯑duced ſome learned men, who gave no credit to an early knowledge of letters in Ireland, to ſuppoſe that there was ſome foundation in fact for a ſtory, concerning which, tradition had brought intimations from every quarter. But to thoſe who have well conſidered the ſtate of ancient Europe, it will appear juſt as improbable that the Spaniards could tranſport them⯑ſelves into Ireland before the Chriſtian aera, as it is impoſſible to believe that any memory of that event, had it actually happened, could have been preſerved by tradition to the introduction of letters by St. Patrick.

highly im⯑probable. It does not appear that much of the knowledge of the arts of civil life was extended to the inhabitants of the moun⯑tains of Aſturia and Gallicia, from the ſettlement eſtabliſhed by the Phoenicians in the Iſland of Gades. So far were the [79] old Spaniards, who poſſeſſed the ſhore of the Atlantic, from improving themſelves in navigation by their vicinity to the ocean, that Strabo affirms^*, that from their ſituation they were cut off from all commerce with the reſt of mankind. Of all the inhabitants of the Celtiberian di⯑viſion of Spain, Diodorus Siculus re⯑marks^†, that the Vaccaei were the moſt humanized, for they had ſome knowledge in agriculture. But if a ſmall ſkill in one of the earlieſt and rudeſt arts entitled the Vaccaei to the character of a civilized people, when compared to the neighbouring tribes, we may, with juſ⯑tice, conclude that thoſe tribes had not made a progreſs in navigation ſufficient to make them venture into the ocean, and tranſport a colony into Ireland.

Dropt as in⯑defenſible. The ſcheme of deducing the Iriſh Scotch from the Spaniards prior to the Chriſtian aera, was dropt as indefenſible by thoſe of the moſt learning and judg⯑ment, who examined the ſubject. After Innes had deſtroyed the credit of the [80] Mileſian tale, he found it neceſſary to in⯑veſtigate the origin of the Scots in ſome other way. He propoſed to himſelf as a queſtion, from whence, and at what period, came the Scots into Ireland? ‘"They came,"’ fays the ingenious father, ‘"either from Scandia or Cantabria, a⯑bout the time of the incarnation, or rather a little time after it^*".’

Vague con⯑cluſions of Engliſh an⯑tiquaries. The antiquaries of England either did not examine with attention the origin of the Scots, or, averſe to enter into a con⯑teſt with the Iriſh about a matter in which their own nation was not material⯑ly concerned, ſpoke very undeciſively on this ſubject. Stillingfleet thought that the Scots were Scythians from Scandi⯑navia; but the time of their tranſmigra⯑tion he does not attempt to aſſign^‖. Cam⯑den, contrary to his uſual preciſion, is full of uncertainty on this head. They were, ſays the celebrated writer, Scythi⯑ans from Spain, Scandia, or Germany. At one time he makes them the poſterity of thoſe Goths whom Conſtantine expel⯑led from Spain; at another time, they are a motley aggregate of many nations; and laſt of all they are deſcendants of thoſe Britons who firſt poſſeſſed themſelves of Ireland^†.

[81] Innes' ſcheme. It is idle, on this ſubject to liſten to the tales of the Bards, annaliſts, and an⯑tiquariers of Ireland; they have been heard out and confuted. Innes is the only writer who has reduced the origin of the Scots into a regular ſyſtem; and he endeavours to defend it. Should the in⯑genious father's ſcheme be deſtroyed, the Caledonian extraction of the Iriſh muſt of courſe riſe upon its ruins. The Scots, ſays Innes, were foreigners who invaded or conquered Ireland in the firſt age of Chriſtianity. Two kinds of proofs, ob⯑ſerves the ingenious father, are neceſſary to eſtabliſh this propoſition; the teſtimony of cotemporary writers, and the effects ariſing from ſuch an invaſion and con⯑queſt.

Proofs from the ancients againſt it. In vain did Innes ſearch for the teſti⯑mony of writers to ſupport the credit of this Hibernian revolution^*. Diodorus Siculus, Diodorus Siculus, who mentions the Iriſh a little time before the Chriſtian aera, ſays ex⯑preſsly that they were Britons, who had derived their blood from the Gauls^†; Strabo, and Strabo, in the unfavourable account he gives of his cotemporaries of Ireland, gives no hint of the ſettlement of the Spaniards in that Iſland^†.

[82] Pomponius Mela, The acrimony of Mela's^¶ obſervations on the national character of the Iriſh is a ſtrong argument againſt the Cantabric deſcent of that nation. Mela himſelf was a Spaniard, he had ſome intereſt in the Gallaeci, and could not have been igno⯑rant of the Cantabric war. Had he learned, and had any ſuch event happened it muſt have come to his knowledge, that, after all the efforts of Auguſtus in perſon, or by his lieutenants, Antiſtius, Furnius, Cariſius, and Agrippa, the Cantabri col⯑lected a body of men, committed them⯑ſelves to the ocean, and ſeized upon Ire⯑land, from a natural partiality for his countrymen he would have treated the Iriſh with more decency and reſpect.

Tacitus, Cornelius Tacitus wrote the life of Agricola before the concluſion of the firſt age. Agricola had formed a plan to re⯑duce Ireland under the Roman yoke. The low idea that great commander en⯑tertained of the number and valor of the Iriſh is an unanſwerable proof that the Cantabric deſcent of that nation is a mere fiction. Had any conſiderable body of thoſe brave Spaniards, who fought againſt Auguſtus and his lieutenants, tranſmigrated into Ireland, Agricola could not ſuppoſe that a ſingle legion was ſuf⯑ficient [83] to ſubjugate and maintain the conqueſt of that Iſland. It is idle, in ſhort, to expect from Tacitus any ſupport to Innes' Spaniſh ſyſtem. The celebrated writer, from the beſt information,^*, affirms, that the Britiſh and Hibernians were men of much the ſame genius and manners, and from that circumſtance we may infer that the two nations derived their origin from one common ſource.

Solinus. From the only favourable epithet be⯑ſtowed by Solinus^† on the Iriſh of the ſecond or third age, Innes concludes that the Scots, a valiant body of foreigners, were ſettled among them before the time of that writer. It is difficult to com⯑prehend why a mixture of foreign blood ſhould be neceſſary to make the Iriſh a warlike people. If the ſituation of their country ſecured them from invaſion, the civil diſſentions ariſing from their being divided into a number of petty ſepts would have undoubtedly kindled and preſerved a martial ſpirit among them. But if a [84] colony from abroad was requiſite to enti⯑tle the inhabitants of Ireland to the cha⯑racter of a brave race of men, it is more natural to ſuppoſe that ſome of the Bri⯑tons of the South, or of the Caledonians of the North, ſettled among them, than emigrants from Cantabria. Tacitus ſays, and indeed it is common ſenſe, that many Britons fled into Ireland from the tyranny of the Romans.

Ptolomy. Ptolemy, who wrote under the Anto⯑nines, has not once mentioned the Scots, though he is very minute with regard to inferior tribes ſettled in Ireland. The geographer found in the leſſer Britain the Brigantes, Vellabori, Cauci, and Me⯑napii, but the redoubtable Scots of Can⯑tabria totally eſcaped his notice. Camden, willing to humour the Iriſh in their pre⯑tenſions to a Spaniſh extract, has ob⯑ſerved that the Lucenſii and Concani were neighbours in Spain, as the Luceni and Gongani were in Hibernia. If this is an argument, others of the ſame kind and of equal force may be produced to oppoſe it. The Cauci and Menapii were neighbours in Germany, and ſo were tribes of the ſame name, according to Ptolemy, in Ireland. Shall we then bring ſome Iriſh tribes from Cantabria, others from Germany, tranſport the Brigantes from South Britain, and totally exclude all emigrants from Caledonia, which is with⯑in [85] a few leagues of the Iriſh ſhore? Camden's obſervation might have been extended further; the Iberians and Alba⯑nians were contiguous to one another in Aſia; the Hibernians and Albanians poſ⯑ſeſſed the Britiſh Iſles, divided from one another by a very narrow channel; and ought we from that circumſtance to infer, that the Caledonians and Iriſh came from the ſhores of the Caſpian?

Oroſius, In the days of Oroſius the Iriſh were diſtinguiſhed by the name of Scottiſh clans. Oroſius does not ſay from whence theſe Scottiſh tribes tranſmigrated into Ireland. Though a Spaniard himſelf, he has not mentioned, in treating of the Cantabric war, a circumſtance that would have done honour to his country; that a great body of the Cantabri, rather than ſubmit to Auguſtus, or to ſkulk in moun⯑tains and deſarts, or throw in deſpair their lives away like many of their countrymen, committed themſelves to the Ocean, and acquired in Ireland better ſettlements than thoſe for which they contended, with ſo much unavailing bravery againſt the Ro⯑mans.

Florus Florus is another writer of Spaniſh ex⯑traction. He was evidently partial to the Cantabri, but he does not even furniſh an obſcure hint that either of the two warlike nations who were engaged in [86] the laſt Spaniſh war againſt the Romans, had, after their unſucceſsful efforts to de⯑fend their liberty, found new ſettlements in the neighbouring ocean. The greateſt part of the Cantabri, according to Florus, after being hard preſſed both by ſea and land, driven out of their faſtneſſes, hunted down like wild beaſts, and, at laſt, in⯑cloſed within lines of circumvallation, reſcued themſelves from ſlavery by a vo⯑luntary death. A ſeries of ſimilar miſ⯑fortunes purſued the Aſturians; after having incloſed themſelves within walls, they were taken by the armies of Rome, the whole nation were tranſplanted from their native mountains to the plain coun⯑try, and an end for ever put to Spaniſh inſurrections.

The Iriſh not a Spa⯑niſh colony proved from their lan⯑guage. In the whole hiſtory of the Cantabric war it is impoſſible to find a Spaniſh na⯑tion, hoſtile to the Romans, that were able to equip tranſports for a colony, eſcape the vigilance of the Roman navy, and numerous enough to conquer or peo⯑ple Ireland. In vain has Innes availed himſelf of a pretended analogy between the Biſcayan dialect and the language of Ireland, to ſupport his ſcheme of the Spaniſh extract of the Scots. That the moſt ancient inhabitants of Galicia were mixed with Celtes is a point ſufficiently eſtabliſhed by the authority of many of [87] the ancients^*; and therefore that they originally ſpoke in part the ſame language with the Gaël who firſt tranſmigrated into Britain, may, from the circumſtance of the deſcent common to both nations, be inferred. The ſterility of the moun⯑tains of Galicia would never invite new ſettlers whom the bravery of the old in⯑habitants could not repel. They conſe⯑quently remained an unmixed people, and the ſimplicity of their manners preſerved their language from corruption. A ſimi⯑lar ſituation had a ſimilar effect on the Scots of the Britiſh Iſles. The north of Scotland received no colonies in any pe⯑riod that can be aſſigned; and the Iriſh remained, in a great meaſure, unmixed until the Engliſh conqueſt of their coun⯑try. But notwithſtanding circumſtances common to the Cantabri and the Scots of both our Iſles, the language of the latter has leſs affinity with the modern Biſ⯑cayan, than the Engliſh tongue has with [88] that of the Moguls of the eaſtern Tar⯑tary^*.

Scandinavian Extraction of the Iriſh confuted.

Pretended Scandina⯑vian deſcent of the Iriſh confuted. If Innes had little reaſon to deduce the Scots from Spain, he had ſtill leſs to de⯑rive them from any of the nations of Scandinavia. Neither he or Stillingfleet were able, with all their erudition, to ſup⯑port a Scandinavian migration into Ireland, in the firſt age, by the authority of any cotemporary writer. One argument will be perhaps ſufficient to deſtroy the credit of this part of the ingenious father's ſcheme. The language of the Scandina⯑vians, being a branch of the Sarmatic, is radically different from the Hibernian and Britiſh Galic. It muſt be acknowledged that the ancients ſometimes diſtinguiſhed the Germans, as well as thoſe nations who inhabited beyond the Baltic, by the name of Scythians. But it is extremely puerile to infer, from the remote analogy between the name of Scythians and Scots, that the latter nation derived their blood either from the Germans or old Scandi⯑navians. The Danes, for a ſimilar rea⯑ſon, might deduce themſelves from the Danai of Greece; and the Caledonians of North Britain trace themſelves to thoſe of the ſame name in Aetolia.

[90] Innes' viſio⯑onary argu⯑ment Innes endeavours to ſupport this branch of his ſyſtem with other arguments. ‘"The Romans, ſays the ingenious wri⯑ter, after the conqueſt of Gaul found means to confine the Germans within their own territories. Being overſtocked with numbers at home, they were obliged to put to ſea, and try their fortune beyond the pale of the empire. The Germans, touching on the oppoſite ſhore of North Britain, were probably repulſed by the bravery of the Caledonians, upon which they ſteered their courſe to Ireland, and made a conqueſt of that country."’

from the population of Germany The legions of Rome it is certain fruſ⯑trated, for ſome time, the attempts which the Germans made to extend themſelves towards the South. In the reign of Auguſtus they croſſed the Rhine without ſucceſs, and in that of Veſpaſian they aided, to no purpoſe, the rebellion of Claudius Civilis. When Domitian held the reins of government at Rome, the Germans attempted the conqueſt of Gaul, and they gave much trouble to many of his ſucceſſors in the imperial dignity. The Romans, ſays Cornelius Tacitus^*, rather triumphed over, than ſubdued, the Germans; the victories which the impe⯑rial armies gained in their country being [91] attended with more glory than any ſolid advantage. To prevent the incurſions of enemies ſo formidable, the Romans had recourſe to political expedients to weaken their power at home. Both Auguſtus and Tiberius concluded treaties with the Suevi and Sicambri, and tranſplanted them into the fertile provinces of Gaul.

confuted. It does not appear that Germany was o⯑verſtocked with numbers, after the Roman legions had excluded their migrating ar⯑mies from Gaul. In the attempts of the Germans upon that country, in the reign of Auguſtus, they loſt a great number of their braveſt ſoldiers; and the expeditions of Druſus depopulated whole diſtricts of their country. Tiberius was not leſs ſucceſsful in Germany than his brother Druſus, nor his many victories leſs de⯑ſtructive to the inhabitants of that coun⯑try^*. After his acceſſion to the imperial dignity, his nephew Germanicus, with eight legions ſupported by auxiliaries, ra⯑vaged all that tract of country, which lies between the Rhine and the Elbe, and made a general maſſacre of the whole nation of the Marſi. Germany, during that fatal period, was involved in civil wars. The ill-timed animoſities between Arminius and Segeſtes, the ravages of Maroboduus, [92] and the invaſion of the Romans, made it a ſcene of unparalleled miſeries. It is therefore certain that Germany, in the firſt century, was more depopulated, than it was in any former or after period, if we except the time in which the Franks, Allemans, and Lombards, evacuated their territories to ſettle themſelves in more fertile countries^*.

The Iriſh deſcended of the Bri⯑tiſh Gaël. It appears, upon the whole, that no colonies came to Ireland either from Spain or the North of Europe, between the commencement of the Chriſtian aera, and the cloſe of the third century, when the Scots are mentioned by Porphyrius for the firſt time. That the Scots came from either of thoſe countries by a long voyage [93] to Ireland, prior to the firſt century, is ſufficiently contradicted by the known barbariſm of the old Hibernians, as well as of all other nations whom an inter⯑courſe with the Romans had not huma⯑nized. We muſt have recourſe, in the laſt reſort, to the Caledonian Britons for the genuine origin of the Iriſh. Their name of Gaël, their lan⯑guage, the conformity of their manners and cuſtoms with thoſe of the old Britons, all concur in proving, beyond any poſſi⯑bility of reply, that the Iriſh are the poſterity of the Gauls or Gaël, who. after having traverſed the Iſland of Great Britain, paſſed over, in a very early pe⯑riod, into Ireland from the promontories of Galloway and Cantire.

General Reflections.

General obſervation. NATIONS find it difficult to diveſt themſelves of a partiality for ſyſ⯑tems of antiquity, which, to the ſanction of ages, have added the authority of learned men. The Scots of both the Britiſh Iſles were former peculiarly at⯑tached to the abſurd tales, with which their bards had covered their origin. Many ſtill retain the unmanly credulity, which has been the reproach of their anceſtors, and think it a kind of ſacri⯑lege to diſperſe the gloom, which involves the commencements of their hiſtory. The Author of the Introduction writes not for theſe; he has taken up arms againſt fiction and romance, and he will not lay them down till the whole are ſubdued. In deſtroying the fantaſtic fables, which deform the obſcurity of our ancient hiſ⯑tory, he may perhaps bury whole ages in darkneſs; but oblivion itſelf is better than inauthentic fame. The credit of the Mileſian tale is already deſtroyed, and it is perhaps ſuperfluous to refute the pre⯑tended Hibernian extraction of the Scots [95] Both ſtories depend upon the ſame autho⯑rity, and they muſt both fall by the ſame argument. But to cloſe for ever a conteſt, which, though not material in itſelf, has employed the pens of many learned men, and attracted the attention of nations, we muſt diſcuſs the point at more length than its importance deſerves.

Nothing known of the Iriſh be⯑fore St. Pa⯑trick. It has already appeared that nothing certain is known concerning the affairs of Ireland prior to the miſſion of St. Patrick^*. The hiſtory of Caledonia, before the Roman eagles were diſplayed beyond the friths, muſt for ever remain in impenetrable darkneſs. Both countries were peopled many ages before the reign of Domitian, but how they were governed, or by what petty chieftains or kings, a Scottiſh or Iriſh Beroſus can only tell. Had a hundred Hibernian colonies, with a royal Mileſian at the head of each, tranſmigrated into North Britain, before the Roman arms penetrated into Caledo⯑nia, they muſt, without a revelation from heaven, remain involved in eternal ob⯑livion. [96] It is as ridiculous to aſſert, as it would be downright anility to believe, that Caledonia received an Iriſh colony before Tacitus wrote the life of Agricola. To prove that no Iriſh colony tranſmi⯑grated into Britain in or after the reign of Domitian, it is proper to review what the Romans have communicated concern⯑ing the ſtate of Caledonia from that period to the appearance of the Scots on the frontiers of the province.

The Scots not of Iriſh Extract.

No Iriſh migration happened in the firſt cen⯑tury. Julius Agricola employed his fourth campaign in ſecuring the acquiſitions which he had made to the ſouth of the Forth and Clyde; and could the bravery of his troops, and the glory of the Ro⯑man name, permit it, that able comman⯑der, ſays Tacitus, might find in thoſe friths a proper boundary for his conqueſts in Britain^*. Agricola, in the fifth year of his expeditions, ſhipping his army in the Clyde, attacked nations till then un⯑known, in that part of Caledonia which lies over againſt Ireland. After ſeveral ſucceſsful engagements he ſtationed ſome [97] of his troops there to be in readineſs for an Iriſh expedition^†.

Firſt argu⯑ment. The counties of Dumbarton and Argyle were the theatre of war in Agricola's fifth campaign. The inhabitants were ſo nu⯑merous, that, for a whole ſummer, they gave ample employment to the Roman army; and that, at a time, when, by the teſtimony of Agricola himſelf^†, a ſingle legion was ſufficient not only to ſubdue, but alſo to ſecure the conqueſt of Ireland.

Second ar⯑gument. In vain will it be objected that the Ro⯑man commander might have been miſta⯑ken in his calculation of the internal ſtrength of Ireland. He had in his camp an Iriſh prince who was no ſtranger to the ſtate of his own country. Should it be ſuppoſed that this exile, from a deſire of inducing Agricola to undertake an expedition, which might re-eſtabliſh him⯑ſelf in his dominions, gave a falſe account of Ireland, the Roman was too prudent to rely altogether on the intelligence of the Hibernian fugitive. The ports of Ireland were, in thoſe times, better known than thoſe of Britain; and Agricola muſt [98] have conſulted thoſe who traded into that country concerning the force of an Iſland which he intended to invade^*.

Third argu⯑ment. We may therefore conclude that Agri⯑cola formed, upon good intelligence, a juſt idea of the ſtate of Ireland, and con⯑ſequently that it was very thinly peopled, or that the military character of its inha⯑bitants, on account of their extreme bar⯑bariſm, was very low. In either of theſe ſituations it is not in any degree probable, that the Iriſh, in the days of Domitian, would have made any attempts to ſettle in Caledonia; or that thoſe whom one legion was ſufficient to ſubdue at home, could make conqueſts abroad, among a people who employed the whole force of the Roman army.

Fourth ar⯑gument. It is difficult to aſcertain with exactneſs the number of the troops of Agricola in his Caledonian expedition. Joſephus ſays that there were four legions ſtationed in Britain in the days of Domitian. We learn from Tacitus, that Agricola, at one period of the Caledonion war, divided his army into three bodies. The enemy at⯑tacked one of thoſe diviſions conſiſting of the ninth legion, which, according to the eſtabliſhed maxim of the Romans, muſt have been ſupported by a proportionable [99] number of auxiliaries. Upon the whole we may conclude, that the two counties of Argyle and Dumbarton oppoſed, for a campaign, thrice the number of troops, that, according to Agricola's opinion, was ſufficient to conquer the whole kingdom of Ireland.

Fifth argu⯑ment. Had there been in the time of Agricola an Hibernian colony ſettled in the weſtern Caledonia, who had reſolution and num⯑bers ſufficient to oppoſe that great man, it is impoſſible that their mother coun⯑try could have been repreſented by him in ſo deſpicable a light. Neither is it probable that Tacitus, in his ſhort account of the Iriſh nation, where he obſerves that their genius and manners did not differ materially from the Britons^*, would have omitted to ſay that the weſtern Cale⯑donians derived their blood from Ireland, had that actually been the caſe. The celebrated writer, on the contrary, gave it as his opinion, that the Caledonians, in the moſt extenſive ſenſe of that name, and conſequently the inhabitants of Argyle and Dumbarton, were of German ex⯑tract^†.

[100] Iriſh fables on the ſub⯑ject. The Iriſh, upon the authority of thoſe annals whoſe credit has been already de⯑ſtroyed, affirm that their anceſtors, in the days of Agricola, as well as in ſubſequent periods, were the life and ſtrength of the Caledonian armies^†. It will, perhaps, be thought unneceſſary to confute theſe unauthorized aſſertions, after what has been already ſaid concerning the faith due to Iriſh hiſtory before the time of St. Patrick. But to give every advantage to the zealous abetters of the old ſyſtem, we ſhall examine this tale without inſiſt⯑ing on the impoſſibility that even tradition could extend to Ireland in the firſt cen⯑tury.

Improba⯑ble. Crimothan the firſt, it would appear, held the reins of government in Ireland, when Agricola carried the Roman arms into Caledonia. This monarch tranſported an army into North Britain, aided the Cale⯑donians againſt the Romans, and after the departure of Agricola returned to Ire⯑land laden with ſpoils and foreign tro⯑phies. Tacitus was extremely unjuſt to the happy valour of Crimothan againſt the Romans. The illuſtrious Crimothan, the ſupreme king of Ireland, was, it ſeems, inferior in command, in birth and valour, to the chieftain who was at the [101] head of the Caledonian confederacy. Tacitus expreſsly affirms, that Galgacus was ſuperior, in thoſe reſpects, to all the leaders of that army which fought Agri⯑cola near the Grampian mountains^†.

Impoſſible, Is it not ſomewhat ſtrange, that Gal⯑gacus has totally neglected to mention his ally Crimothan, and his Hibernian forces, in that excellent ſpeech with which he animated the Caledonian army^*? And why did not Tacitus place the pro⯑vocation given by Crimothan among thoſe reaſons which Agricola aſſigned for his intended expedition into Ireland? The celebrated writer, the truth is, knew no⯑thing of Crimothan or his troops; and therefore we may conclude, that the re⯑doubtable monarch, if he ever exiſted, never croſſed the Iriſh channel. It is upon the whole demonſtrable, that no part of Caledonia was poſſeſſed by an Hibernian colony in the days of Agricola; and that the ſtory of the pretended auxili⯑aries from Ireland is abſolute fiction.

The Cale⯑donians ſuf⯑fered little from Agri⯑cola. The loſſes ſuſtained by the Caledonians during the expedition of Agricola were, perhaps, much exaggerated by Tacitus. But had they ſuffered even more than the hiſtorian affirms, they had time to re⯑cover [102] their former ſtrength during the long tranquility which ſucceeded the de⯑parture of Agricola, and continued to the reign of Hadrian. The incurſions of the Caledonians rendered it neceſſary for that emperor to come in perſon into Britain; but that the Barbarians ſuffered very little loſs by his arms we may naturally infer, from his relinquiſhing to them all that tract of country which extends from the Tine and Solway to the Scottiſh friths^†.

Formidable in the reign of Pius. Lollius Urbicus, in the reign of Anto⯑ninus Pius, defeated the Caledonians; and, driving them beyond the Forth and Clyde, excluded them by an earthen wall from the Roman Britain^*. Though repelled by Urbicus, and afterwards by Ulpius Marcellus, in the time of Com⯑modus, they were far from being reduced ſo low as to yield a part of their terri⯑tories to the Romans, much leſs to a band of Hibernian adventurers. Before they were chaſtiſed by Marcellus, they had committed^† dreadful devaſtations in the province, and cut off a Roman general [103] with the greateſt part of his army. When Severus aſſumed the purple, they haraſſed the northern provincials with ſuch cruelty, and ſo little intermiſſion, that Virus Lupus was driven to the ſhameful neceſſity of purchaſing a peace from them with money^†.

Expedition of Severus. Some years after this ignominious treaty was patched up, the Roman lieu⯑tenant in Britain acquainted Severus that the northern Barbarians were every where in motion; that they overran, plundered, and laid waſte the province, and that therefore a powerful reinforcement, or the preſence of the emperor himſelf, was indiſpenſibly neceſſary^*. Severus, de⯑ſirous of adding to the laurels he had acquired in the Eaſt and North, embraced with pleaſure, an opportunity ſo favour⯑able to his ambition. Though oppreſſed with the gout and the weight of years, he undertook immediately an expedition into Britain; and, arriving with a great [104] army, made preparations for a vigorous and deciſive campaign. The Barbarians were alarmed, ſent an embaſſy to excuſe their conduct, and to offer overtures of peace. Severus for ſome time amuſed the ambaſſadors, and when every thing was prepared, marched northward, with a fixed reſolution to exterminate the whole nation of the Caledonians.

attended with no ſucceſs. But the flattering hopes of Severus vaniſhed into air, after the moſt vigorous exertions of courage, conduct, and force; after ſuſtaining incredible fatigues with amazing patience, and the loſs of fifty thouſand men, he was at laſt reduced to the old and inglorious expedient of build⯑ing a wall to exclude from the province thoſe Barbarians whom he could neither extirpate or ſubdue^†. We may there⯑fore infer, from this circumſtance, that the Caledonians, after all the toil and military efforts of Severus, ſo far from being annihilated, or even much weakened or humbled, continued a very formidable enemy.

Mileſian fictions. Some Iriſh annaliſts affirm, that the Picts, from the commencement of their [105] hiſtory, through a long ſeries of ages, were tributary to the Mileſian Scots of Ireland. It is obſervable, that the pre⯑tended records from which the incredible tale is extracted, make no mention of the Caledonian name, which circumſtance is very unfavourable to the credit of the annals of Ireland. The inhabitants of North Britain ceaſed to be diſtinguiſhed by the name of Caledonians about the cloſe of the fourth age; ſo that the Mi⯑leſian ſyſtem muſt have been fabricated in a period ſo modern as to place the fourth century beyond the reach of tradition. But, by whatever name the northern Britons were diſtinguiſhed, it is reaſon⯑able to ſuppoſe that the monarch of Ire⯑land would have ſent auxiliaries to his diſtreſſed vaſſals when Severus threatened the whole nation with extirpation. He⯑rodian and Dion Caſſius then were very unjuſt to his Hibernian majeſty, for nei⯑ther he or his forces are once mentioned in the minute account given by thoſe hiſtorians of the Caledonian war. The Roman writers with one conſent ſeem to have entered into a conſpiracy againſt the military fame of the royal line of Heremon. In vain did Crimothan diſcomfit legions in Britain; in vain did the redoubtable Nial carry his victorious arms to the banks of the Loire; it was to no purpoſe that [106] Dathy^*, whom heaven alone could ſub⯑due, penetrated to the foot of the Alps; foreign writers, with a ſcandalous partia⯑lity, not only concealed the exploits, but even the very names of thoſe heroes.

State of Caledonia from Seve⯑rus to the appearance of the Scots. In the long period which intervened between the acceſſion of the ſons of Se⯑verus to the imperial dignity, and the middle of the fourth age, the Caledonians were not once attacked within their own territories by the Roman armies. The exploits of Carauſius are mere fiction, and the feats of Conſtantine and his father Chlorus in Caledonia exiſted only in the rants of eccleſiaſtical panegyriſts. The frequent conteſts for the purple, between men ſometimes called emperors and ſome⯑times tyrants and uſurpers, in proportion as they were near or far diſtant from the capital; the public diſtractions which aroſe naturally from theſe diſputes, the growing imbecillity of the empire, and the invaſions of the Barbarians of the northern Europe, diverted the attention of the Romans from Caledonia. In a [107] period ſo long, and of ſuch tranquillity, the inhabitants of North Britain, inſtead of declining, muſt have greatly multiplied their numbers. In the tenth conſulſhip of Conſtantius, the ſon of Conſtantine, we meet with the Scots, a formidable nation in Britain. Ammianus Marcellinus, who found them firſt in the iſland, does not furniſh one obſcure hint that they derived their blood from a foreign country. The hiſtorian, on the contrary, gives to them and the Picts the character of wild nations, plainly in oppoſition to thoſe Britons whom the Romans had ſubdued and humanized^*.

Proved from various Arguments.

Firſt argu⯑ment. Bede is the firſt writer who poſitively affirms that the Scots of Britain derived their origin from thoſe of Ireland. Whe⯑ther they originally obtained from the Picts the principality of Iar-gaël or Ar⯑gyle by force or treaty, was a point which all his hiſtorical and traditional knowledge did not enable the venerable Anglo-Saxon to determine. The incapacity of Bede, who lived ſo near the pretended tranſmi⯑gration of the Iriſh, to ſolve this difficulty, is a kind of demonſtration that the whole ſtory is a fiction, impoſed upon that credulous, though pious writer.

Second argument. If the Picts were ſo ſeeble that a band of Iriſh adventurers could tear from them one third of their dominions, how came they ſo frequently to provoke the Roman legions, and haraſs the provincials from the time of Chlorus to the total dere⯑liction of Britain by Honorius? To invade the territories of a warlike and diſciplined people when they ſuffered a great part of their own to be wreſted from them by a deſpicable enemy, is a folly too abſurd to gain any credit. But perhaps the Picts [109] gave the diſtrict of Argyle to their allies of Ireland, in conſideration of ſervices againſt the Romans. Theſe ſervices were extremely unneceſſary; for the Romans, till provoked by incurſions, were very in⯑offenſive towards the Barbarians beyond the walls. Nations, in ſhort, have been known to receive foreigners into the boſom of their country to repel invaſions, but it is ridiculous to think that any people would have recourſe to ſo dangerous an expedient for the pleaſure of harraſſing neighbours who did not in any degree offend them.

Third argu⯑ment. It is difficult for the unprejudiced part of mankind to believe, that a colony, ſufficient to occupy the weſtern Highlands and Iſles, could have wafted themſelves, their wives, and children, at once, from Ireland into the northern Britain, in Cur⯑raghs or miſerable ſkiffs, whoſe hulls of wicker were wrapped up in a cow's hide. In theſe wretched veſſels, it is true, an irregular communication was kept up be⯑tween both the Iſlands; but the naviga⯑tion was dangerous, and performed only in the faireſt days of ſummer^*. The [110] fertility of the ſoil of Iar-ghaël could never be an inducement to an Iriſh mi⯑gration into that diviſion of Caledonia. If poverty, or their being overſtocked with numbers, compelled the inhabitants of the pretended Dalrietta, or the Route in the county of Antrim, to go in queſt of foreign ſettlements, they ought in common prudence to have tried their fortune in the ſouthern diviſion of their own country, and not in the ſterile moun⯑tains of the weſtern Caledonia.

Fourth ar⯑gument. The Iriſh muſt have been wonderfully improved in military knowledge from the days of Agricola, if it was more difficult in the fourth century to extort part of their dominions from them, than from the Caledonians, who had better oppor⯑tunies to be enured to arms. Turgeſius and his Norwegians did not find, in an after age, that the Iriſh were ſo obſtinately tenacious of their fertile lands, as the poſterity of the Picts were of their own barren country, when repeatedly attacked by all the efforts of Scandinavia.

Fifth argu⯑ment. Should it be ſuppoſed that a band of adventurers were expelled from Ulſter by the preſſure of the ſouthern Iriſh, it is difficult to account how the Picts of Bri⯑tain ſhould receive the fugitives. Either generoſity or ſelfiſhneſs would have prompted them, like the Earl of Pem⯑broke, [111] to aſſiſt the exiles in recovering their territories; and, by that means, to endeavour to conquer a part of a fine country for themſelves. But the Picts were, it ſeems, ſtrangers to the moſt common maxims of policy; for, accord⯑ing to the ſyſtem under conſideration, they muſt have been of all nations the moſt tame, prodigal, and imprudent. In ſhort, if the Iriſh Scots voluntarily abandoned one of the beſt diſtricts of Ireland to ſet⯑tle in one of the moſt ſterile diviſions of North Britain, they muſt have been more abſurd than the Hibernians of latter ages have been, perhaps very unjuſtly, repre⯑ſented; if by violence they were driven from home, the Picts deſerve the ſame character for permitting a band of vaga⯑bonds to ſeize upon one third of their dominions.

Sixth argu⯑ment. The Saxon auxiliaries of Vortigern were not ſo modeſt as the Iriſh Scots; or elſe the Picts were a people of much leſs ſpirit than the ſouthern Britons. When the Saxons raiſed their demands to an unreaſonable height, the Britons diſputed with them every inch of ground. They were at laſt overpowered; but it was after ſuch an expence of time and blood, that glory covered them in the midſt of ruin. Had the Hibernian mer⯑cenaries encroached upon the Picts, as the [112] Saxons did on the Britons, we might naturally ſuppoſe that the latter, inſtead of carrying war and deſolation into a foreign country, in conjunction with the Scots, would have found employment for their arms at home. The unanimity in expedition which ſubſiſted for ages be⯑tween the Caledonian nations, is proof ſufficient that they derived their origin from one and the ſame ſource.

General Reflections.

Firſt ap⯑pearance of the Scots. ABOUT the middle of the fourth age, the unconquered barbarians of Caledonia became known to the Ro⯑mans under the name of Picts and Scots. Marcellinus, who is the firſt hiſtorian who met them in Britain, was an abſo⯑lute ſtranger to their being a new people, who then made their appearance in the iſland^*. In the period of time between the expedition of Julius Agricola and the reign of Conſtantius we have already ſeen, that the improbability of the tranſmigra⯑tion of a foreign colony into North Bri⯑tain is ſo great that, without poſitive evi⯑dence, the ſtory can never be believed. The abettors of the Hibernian antiquities, [114] finding that the credit of the domeſtic annals of Ireland could never eſtabliſh this fact, had recourſe to ſome paſſages of foreign writers, which they wreſted to their purpoſe.

The impoſſibility of an Iriſh migration into North Britain between the reign of Conſtantius and the dereliction of Britain by Honorius, is ſupported by arguments equally ſtrong with thoſe we have pro⯑duced for the period before the firſt of thoſe emperors. Thoſe who after Con⯑ſtantius ſucceeded to the imperial purple, till the days of Valentinian, were rather inſulted than feared by the wild nations of Caledonia. The latter, therefore, were under no neceſſity to implore the aſſiſtance of foreign auxiliaries; neither can we ſuppoſe that they would cede to a pitiful band of Iriſh barbarians any part of thoſe territories, which they defended, with ſo much ſpirit, againſt the diſciplined armies of the lords of the world.

Claudian.

Claudian's pretended authority The ſupporters of the Hibernian ex⯑traction of the Britiſh Scots pretend to have found in Claudian a direct proof of their ſyſtem. That Poet, in his pane⯑gyric on Theodoſius, has the following lines.

But we may venture to affirm, that there is nothing in this paſſage concluſive in fa⯑vour of the old Mileſian tale. Claudian indulged all the wantonneſs of a poetical fancy in this panegyric on Theodoſius. It was the poet's imagination only that ‘"warmed Thule with Pictiſh blood, moiſtened the ſands of Orkney with Saxon gore, and thawed the frozen Ierne into tears for the ſlaughter of the Scots."’ [116] It is idle, in ſhort, to ſearch for fact in the hyperboles of poetry; Marcellinus, though particularly fond of Theodoſius, has not recorded theſe prodigies of valour: Even Latinus Pacatius, though a pane⯑gyriſt, ſays no more, than that the Scot was driven back to his native fens^*, and the Saxons deſtroyed in conflicts by ſea.

examined, Without inſiſting upon what ſhall here⯑after appear at leaſt probable, that Ireland is not meant by the Ierne of Claudian, we may aver, that there is nothing in theſe verſes deciſive concerning the origin of the Scots. If the Hibernians were of Ca⯑ledonian extract; if, from the ancient ties of conſanguinity, a friendly inter⯑courſe was maintained between the Iriſh and the inhabitants of Albany; a perſon of a leſs warm imagination than Claudian might ſuppoſe that the former ſincerely lamented the misfortunes of their mother nation^†.

and confut⯑ed. In Claudian's panegyric on Stilicho, there is a paſſage which has been often tranſcribed with triumph in oppoſition to the antiquity of the Britiſh Scots.

Britain is here perſonified; ſhe makes her acknowledgments to Stilicho for his ſer⯑vices to her at a very perilous conjunc⯑ture. ‘"She owed her ſafety to that able commander when the Scot had put all IERNA in motion; when the ocean was agitated into a foam by hoſtile oars. He delivered her from the terrors of a Scot⯑tiſh war, from Pictiſh incurſions, and from beholding piratical ſquadrons of Saxons coming to her coaſts with the veering winds."’

It will be hereafter ſhewn that the name of Ierna may, without any violence, [118] be applied to the weſtern diviſion of Scot⯑land, including the iſles: But ſhould the Ierna of Claudian be the ſame with Ire⯑land, it would little avail the abettors of that ſyſtem which we now oppoſe. There is no neceſſity to believe that the poet adhered to hiſtorical fact. Virgil, with⯑out any authority, extended the victories of Auguſtus to nations, whom neither he nor his lieutenants ever looked in the face^*; and why ſhould not the ſame privilege of invention, exaggeration, and flattery be allowed to the laureat of Honorius?

A critical remark. Not to inſiſt upon the improbability that the Iriſh in that ſtate of barbariſm in which they were certainly involved to⯑wards the cloſe of the fourth age, could annually tranſport armies into Britain, we may ſafely affirm, that the Tethys of Claudian was rather agitated into a foam by Saxon than by Hibernian oars. The Saxons, in the days of Honorius, were [119] in ſome meaſure a maritime people; Tethys ſignifies the ocean: the ſea be⯑tween Germany and England has ſome right to that title, but the channel be⯑tween Ireland and Caledonia was never dignified with ſo high a name. This cri⯑ticiſm is ſufficient to deſtroy the whole force of the argument drawn from Clau⯑dian. It appears not from hiſtory that the Scots ever infeſted the Roman divi⯑ſion of Britain by ſea: Conſtantine ap⯑pointed an officer called Comes littoris Sax⯑onici, to take the charge of part of the coaſt of the province, which was moſt expoſed to the piratical depredations of the Saxons; but of a Comes littoris Scottici Hibernici we have never heard.

Concluſive arguments. If the province of Valentia comprehend⯑ed the country between the walls, why did not the Hibernian Scots land every other ſeaſon in Galloway? How came not the Iriſh rovers to attempt a deſcent in either of the diviſions of Wales or in Cumber⯑land? Was not the coaſt of Lancaſhire almoſt as near to the Iſle of Man, which, according to Oroſius, was poſſeſſed by Scottiſh tribes, as any part of the conti⯑nent of Caledonia was to Ireland? Why, in the name of wonder, was a bulwark of turf or ſtone a better ſecurity againſt the Iriſh Scots than againſt the Saxons of Friezeland or Holland, as both were tranſmarine nations with reſpect to the [120] Province? Why did the Iriſh, with a peculiar abſurdity, land always on the wrong ſide of the Roman walls, which they muſt have ſcaled or deſtroyed before they could penetrate into the province? It is impoſſible to believe that all their ex⯑peditions could have been ſo ill-concerted; and this conſideration alone is ſufficient to demonſtrate that the Scots, whom the Roman writers ſo often mention, were inhabitants of Caledonia. Walls were conſtructed and legions employed to de⯑fend the province from their incurſions, but fleets were never fitted out to intercept or deſtroy them at ſea.

Oroſius.—Iſidorus.

The Hibernian ſyſtem being deprived of every ſupport from Claudian, let us next examine ſome paſſages of other an⯑cient authors whom our adverſaries have raiſed to their aid. Oroſius. If Oroſius, a Spaniſh prieſt, found the Scots in Ireland about the beginning of the fifth age, Marcelli⯑nus met with them in Britain about the middle of the third^*. Iſidorus. Iſidore of Seville, who flouriſhed in the ſeventh age, ſays, that in his time, Ireland was indiſcrimi⯑nately [121] called Scottia and Hibernia; and that the latter name proceeded from its lying over againſt Iberia and the Canta⯑bric ocean^¶.

examined, On this etymon of Hibernia great weight is laid by the abettors of the Can⯑tabric deſcent of the Iriſh. Should the name of Hibernia ariſe from the poſition of Ireland with reſpect to Iberia, Mauri⯑tania, and a part of Gaul ought to have obtained the ſame appellation, from a ſimilar ſituation with regard to Spain. Ireland itſelf, from a parity of reaſon, ought to have a name reſembling that of Britain, which lies ſo near it, rather than from Iberia, divided from it by an immenſe ocean. The biſhop of Seville, the truth is, knew very little about Ire⯑land or its inhabitants; and his ridiculous derivation of the name of Scots, is a laſting monument of his talent in etymo⯑logy^†.

and con⯑futed. Iſidore is not the firſt learned prelate who gave to Ireland the name of Scottia; a biſhop of Canterbury, about the year [122] 605, beſtowed upon that iſland the ſame appellation. We ſhall not diſpute with the Iriſh that their country received the name of Scottia ſome centuries before it was appropriated to Caledonia. But no argument can ariſe in favour of their ſu⯑perior antiquity from that priority. A colony of the ancient Grecians poſſeſſed themſelves of a diſtrict of the leſſer Aſia, which afterwards obtained the name of Ionia. That colony, and their anceſtors in Greece for a ſeries of ages, were called Ionians, but their territories in Europe never poſſeſſed the appellation of Ionia; and, from that circumſtance, will any man conclude, that the Ionians of Ephe⯑ſus and Miletus were more ancient than thoſe of Attica?

Gildas.

Gildas ex⯑amined, The teſtimony of Gildas ſeems, at firſt ſight, more favourable to the Hibernian ſyſtem than that of Iſidore. This writer, with an iraſcible diſpoſition, ſoured by the misfortunes of the times, was queru⯑lous, wrathful, ſcurrilous, and at no leſs enmity with the whole world than with the enemies of his country, the Scots, [123] Picts, and Saxons^*. It is almoſt need⯑leſs to obſerve that Gildas calls the Scots and Picts tranſmarine nations, as Bede has explained away that appellation in a man⯑ner that is not unfavourable to the ſyſtem which we endeavour to eſtabliſh^†. The ſtrength of the argument againſt us ariſes from the epithet of Hibernian robbers, with which the paſſionate Gildas has dig⯑nified the anceſtors of the Scots^†. Not to inſiſt upon the more proper reading of the paſſage, as it is reſtored by Dr. Gale^¶, which deſtroys at once the au⯑thority in favour of the Hibernian deſcent of the Scots, we may, upon another foun⯑dation, [124] fairly deny the conſequences ge⯑nerally drawn from the vague expreſſion of Gildas. Propertius in one of his ele⯑gies gives the epithet of Hiberni to the Getes of Thrace. Gildas was remarkably fond of expreſſing himſelf in the language of poetry. His diction from ſo puerile an affectation partakes more of the turgid declamation of tragedy, than of the pre⯑ciſion and ſimplicity of a grave hiſtorian. Had he, by way of ſarcaſm on the ſeverity of the climate of Caledonia, beſtowed the epithet of Hiberni on its inhabitants, he ſhould not have written improperly, un⯑poetically, or unlike his own manner.

and con⯑futed. The Britiſh and Iriſh Scots ſpoke the ſame language, wore the ſame kind of dreſs, and were diſtinguiſhed by every characteriſtical mark neceſſary to make a foreigner believe that both nations were originally the ſame people. Whether the Scots of Hibernia, or thoſe of Albania, were the moſt ancient, every one was at freedom to reſolve in his own way. Had Gildas poſitively decided in favour of the former, his authority can go no further than his confeſſed knowledge in antiqui⯑ties. But it appears from other circum⯑ſtances, that the Britiſh writer was a very bad antiquary. The Scots, accord⯑ing to him, infeſted for the firſt time, the Roman province, when Maximus with⯑drew the legions from Britain. There is [125] not perhaps any piece of ancient hiſtory better aſcertained, than that a tribe of the Caledonians, under the name of Scots, made incurſions into the province near ſeventy years before the rebellion of Maximus. The account which Gildas gives of the Roman walls betrays his ig⯑norance in the tradition, as well as hiſto⯑ry, of his own country; and therefore it is difficult to ſay why the teſtimony of ſuch a writer, had it even been leſs equi⯑vocal, ſhould be thought deciſive concern⯑ing the antiquities of a people to whoſe tradition and hiſtory he muſt, in the na⯑ture of things, have been an abſolute ſtranger.

Bede.

Bede's Bede, a Saxon monk, flouriſhed in the monaſtery of Girwy upon the Tyne about the commencement of the ſeventh century, and diſplayed uncommon talents and learning for the age in which he liv⯑ed. In his hiſtory of the Saxon churches the venerable writer diſtinguiſhes, with preciſion, the Britiſh Scots from thoſe of Ireland, and poſitively affirms that the former derived their blood and origin from the latter. Bede did not confine his ge⯑nealogical enquiries to the Scots. He en⯑deavoured to trace all the Britiſh nations to their reſpective origins.

[126] genealogi⯑cal account of the Bri⯑tiſh nations The Britons, properly ſo called, ſays he, were the firſt inhabitants of this Iſland, and they originally tranſmigrated from the Armorican diviſion of Gaul. The Picts, in an after age, ſeized upon North Britain; for to the name of Cale⯑donia the Anglo-Saxon was an abſolute ſtranger. After the Britons and Picts had poſſeſſed the Iſland for ſome ages, Britain, in its northern diviſion, received a third nation from Ireland under the conduct of Reuda. Whether the Iriſh Scots ob⯑tained ſettlements of the Picts by force or favour was a point which Bede could not determine. He was however inform⯑ed that they were called Dalreudini, from their illuſtrious leader Reuda, and from the Galic word deal, which, according to the venerable writer, ſignified a por⯑tion or diviſion of a country^*.

never impli⯑citly adpted. It is remarkable, that not one Engliſh or Scottiſh antiquary ever implicitly adopt⯑ed every part of the Anglo-Saxon's ſyſ⯑tem. The Picts and Scots, according to him, as ſeparate nations, and from very different origins, poſſeſſed North Britain before the commencement of the Chriſ⯑tian aera. Camden, Uſher, the two [127] Lloyds, Stillingfleet, Innes, and many more, rejected, ſome one part or other, and ſome the whole of Bede's account of the ſouthern Britons; but all theſe learn⯑ed men received without examination his ſyſtem of the Hibernian extraction of the Britiſh Scots.

His miſ⯑takes Where we have an opportunity to ex⯑amine Bede's account by the criterion of collateral hiſtory, we find that he has committed a very eſſential miſtake. The ſouthern Britons were ſo far from deriv⯑ing their blood from the inhabitants of Armorica, that, on the contrary, the Armoricans had tranſmigrated from Bri⯑tain not many ages before Bede's own time. If Bede therefore was in an error with reſpect to the origin of a people, whoſe hiſtory, on account of their con⯑nection with the Romans, was known, it is much more probable that he knew no⯑thing certain concerning the antiquities of a nation, who had not among them the means of preſerving, with any certainty, the memory of events.

ariſe from various cauſes. From the political and religious preju⯑dices which prevailed, in the days of Bede, between the Britiſh Scots and the Saxons, we may conclude that the venerable writer had very little converſa⯑tion with the antiquaries or ſenachies of the former nation. Had he even conſult⯑ed them, very little light could be derived [128] from them in an age of ignorance, cre⯑dulity, and barbariſm. Bede, on the other hand, entertained a friendly partiali⯑ty for the Scots of Ireland. That people were, in his time, remarkable for mon⯑kiſh learning and aſcetic auſterities; which, together with their benevolence and hoſpitality to the Saxon ſtudents, who flocked into their country, recom⯑mended them, in a very high degree, to the venerable Anglo-Saxon^*. The good man, we may take it for granted, em⯑braced every opportunity of converſing with thoſe Hibernian miſſionaries and pilgrims who came over in ſwarms into Britain, in thoſe days of converſion and religious pilgrimage. From them he bor⯑rowed all that genealogical erudition which he diſplays in the beginning of his eccleſiaſtical hiſtory.

He received his accounts of the Scots from Ire⯑land. The ſudden tranſition which Bede makes from the tale of Reuda to a pane⯑gyric on Ireland, furniſhes a ſtrong pre⯑ſumption that he derived his information from that quarter. Having obſerved, in the courſe of a very favourable deſcription of Ireland, that no reptile is ſeen in that country, that the air deſtroys ſerpents, that the leaves of Hibernian trees and the ſhavings of timber are efficacious anti⯑dotes [129] againſt poiſon; after having remark⯑ed, that the happy iſland flowed with milk and honey, and was not deſtitute of vines; he concludes with a new declara⯑tion, as if that doctrine had been ſtrongly inculcated upon him by his Iriſh friends, that the Britiſh Scots derived their origin from that fortunate country.

confuted. It is apparent from another circum⯑ſtance, that Bede borrowed his account of the Scots from the Iriſh. He calls the inhabitants of Iar-gaël by the name of Dalreudini, an appellation utterly un⯑known to the hiſtorians, writers of chro⯑nicles, bards, and ſenachies of Scotland, though common in the annals of Ireland. Bede's account of the Picts being almoſt word for word what has been handed down in the hiſtorical rhimes of Ireland^*, fur⯑niſhes a ſtriking proof of the Hibernian origin of the whole of the Anglo-Saxon's genealogical tale: Both the Iriſh and he ſuppoſed that the Picts were diſtinguiſhed by that name, which, according to them, is derived from a Latin epithet, near five compleat centuries before the foundation of Rome was laid by Romulus. The ſyſtem of Bede being thus traced to its ſource, the tales of the Iriſh bards, and thoſe tales having been already thrown in⯑to [130] diſcredit, we may infer, that the vene⯑rable writer's authority concludes nothing for the Hibernian deſcent of the Britiſh Scots.

Uſher's ar⯑guments in ſupport of Bede To deſtroy from another principle, the tale of Bede and the ſtory of Reuda, it may not be improper to obſerve, that the learned Uſher found out that a diſtrict in the county of Antrim, which has for ma⯑ny ages been diſtinguiſhed by the name of Route, is the Dalriada of the old Iriſh^*. Dalriada, ſays the ingenious prelate, de⯑rives its name from Cairbre-Riada, the ſon of Conaire, who held the ſcepter of Ireland in the third century. But we may venture to affirm that Uſher, in this ſuppoſition, was very much miſled. Rute or Reaidh in the old Scotch language ſignifies a ram. From the firſt of theſe ſynonimous words, the territory in the county of Antrim, from which it is pre⯑tended, that the Britiſh Scots originally tranſmigrated, received the appellation of the Route, and from the ſecond is to be deduced the name of Dalriada, literally the valley of the Ram.

examined; Uſher quotes a patent which is preſerv⯑ed in the Tower of London, wherein it appears, that John king of England granted to Allen lord of Galloway the territory of [131] Dalreth and the Iſland of Rachrin, which is ſituated over againſt that diſtrict^†. From the ſyllabication of the two local names in the patent, we may conclude that the etymon we have given of Dalriada is per⯑fectly juſt. Rachrin, which may, with great propriety, be reckoned an appen⯑dage to the ROUTE, ſignifies the ram's promontory, in the Iriſh tongue; and Dalriada itſelf being expreſsly called the land of Rams, in the Iriſh patent mention⯑ed by the primate himſelf, is a circum⯑ſtance that is deciſive in our favour.

confuted. Dalreath or Dalreadh, which was af⯑terwards latinized into Dalriada, could not poſſibly, according to the genius of the Iriſh language, be derived from Cairbre-Riada, were it even certain that ſuch a monarch ever exiſted. Riada ſignifies a long-hand, an appellation joined to the name of Cairbre, on account of the ſingu⯑lar length of his hands. The Route, therefore, in propriety of language, ought to have been called Dal-Cairbre, if it muſt at any rate receive its name from that pretended monarch.

Authority of Jocelyn and Tiger⯑nach The primate, with all his erudition, could only produce the authority of Joce⯑lyn and Tigernach^†, writers of the ele⯑venth [132] and twelfth ages, in ſupport of the Iriſh origin of the Scots in Britain. Had theſe writers even been leſs notoriouſly fabulous than they appear to be, it is cer⯑tain that they flouriſhed in too modern a period to know any thing of the tranſ⯑actions of the Iriſh in the dark ages, prior to the introduction of Chriſtianity and letters by Patrick. The two writers, it is true, place the tranſmigration of the Scots into Britain on this ſide of that aera, but the teſtimony of the Roman writers ſufficiently deſtroys that abſurd poſition^*.

exploded. Tigernach and Jocelyn contradicted one another materially, and Bede, who lived more than three centuries before the firſt of thoſe writers, differs toto coelo from both; but had all the three concur⯑red in tranſporting the Scots into Britain under the ſame leader, and in the ſame year, we might, with reaſon, preſume that they were all miſtaken. Uſher has aſcertained the bounds of Dalriada, or the Route in Antrim, and found its whole extent about thirty miles^†. Were it even certain that Dalriada produced more men th n any diſtrict of the ſame ex [...]ent [133] in ancient Ireland, ſtill it is incredible, that an army could be muſtered there ſufficient to ſubdue the principality of Iar-ghaël. Should the dominion of Ar⯑gyle only comprehend Braidalbin, Can⯑tyre, Knapdale, and Lorn, the natives muſt have been an overmatch for the in⯑habitants of the ſmall country pent up within the river Boiſy and Glenfinneacht. Should it be admitted that the Dalriadans were ſupported in their expedition into Caledonia by ſome other Iriſh tribes, it is reaſonable to ſuppoſe that the eaſtern Picts would have aided their friends of the Weſt, at a time, when they confeſ⯑ſedly had nothing to fear from any other foreign enemy.

Nennius.—General Obſervations.

Nennius. The teſtimony of Nennius deſerves little attention; he derived his intelligence concerning the origin of the Scots from the Hibernian ſenachies^*, and their tales have been already examined and exploded. The ſyſtem of Iriſh antiquity which Nen⯑nius has preſerved is, in many inſtances, diametrically oppoſite to thoſe genealogi⯑cal [134] ſchemes, which the modern writers of Ireland have new modelled and adorned; and hence an internal proof ariſes con⯑cerning the uncertainty of Hibernian annals.

Concluſive arguments As a concluding argument againſt the Hibernian extraction of the Scots, it may not be improper to obſerve, that the Ca⯑ledonians might be called Hibernians, their country in general Hibernia, and the weſtern diviſion of it Ierna or Yverdon, without deriving their blood from the Iriſh. The Saxons of England, it is well known, had their Norfolk and Suf⯑folk, and the appellation of Southerons and Norlands are not hitherto totally ex⯑tinguiſhed among the Scots: The ancient Picts, in like manner, were divided into two great tribes, the Vecturiones and Deucaledones, the inhabitants of the northern and ſouthern diviſions, according to the teſtimony of Marcellinus^*.

againſt the Hibernian extraction After the Caledonians, upon the decline of the Roman power in the ſouthern Bri⯑tain, began to infeſt the province in ſe⯑perate bodies, the two principal tribes in thoſe incurſions were diſtinguiſhed by the [135] names of Picts and Scots, by the hiſto⯑rians of the empire. If the Picts ſpoke the Gaëlic or Caledonian language, they muſt certainly have called the territories of the Scots, Iar, Eire, Erin, or Ard-Iar^†, words, all of them, expreſſive of the ſituation of the country of the Scottiſh tribes, in oppoſition to the Pictiſh diviſion of Caledonia; if they ſpoke the ancient Britiſh, they would have diſtinguiſhed the country of the Scots by the name Yverdhon, or, as it is pronounced, Yberon or Yveron. Theſe names being communicated to the Ro⯑mans by the Britons, or by Pictiſh pri⯑ſoners, it was natural for them to latinize them into Ierna, Jouverna, or Hibernia. In common converſation, the weſtern Highlands are called by thoſe who ſpeak the Galic language IAR, or the Weſt; and when the Hebrides are comprehended in that diviſion of Scotland, the Galic appellation of Iar-in has been always given to the whole. The diſtrict of Atregathel, or rather Iar-ghaël, ſo often mentioned in the annals of Ireland and Scotland, as the firſt poſſeſſions of the Hibernian colonies in Britain, carries in its name a demonſtration of this poſition, [136] as well as a deciſive argument againſt the ancient ſyſtem of the origin of the Scots. Iar-ghaël literally ſignifies the Weſtern-Ghael, or the Scots, in oppoſition to the Eaſtern-Ghael, or the Picts, who poſſeſ⯑ſed the ſhore of the German ocean.

of the Bri⯑tiſh Scots. In the neighbourhood of Drumalbin, a ridge of hills which divided the Scottiſh from the Pictiſh dominions, there is a lake, which, to this day, is called Erin. The river Erin or Ern riſes from that lake, and gives its name to a very conſi⯑derable diviſion of the county of Perth. In this diſtrict there are to be ſeen ſeveral Roman camps to this day. The Romans could not be ſtrangers to the name of a country where their armies remained long enough to leave ſuch laſting memorials of themſelves behind. Juvenal, from the ſoldiers of Agricola, might have heard of the diſtrict of Erin, which he ſoftened into Juverna; and the troops of Theodo⯑ſius might have carried the ſame intelli⯑gence to Claudian.

Stillingfleet and Uſher examined.

Stillingfleet confuted, IN vain has Stillingfleet obſerved, that there muſt have been a ſea between Britain and the Ierna of Claudian.

Tethys, or the ocean, it has been already ſhewn, was rather agitated into a foam by Saxon, than by Scottiſh rowers. But not to inſiſt upon that criticiſm, if by Ierna we are to underſtand IAR, the weſtern diviſion of Caledonia, from Glotta to Tarviſium, the many extenſive arms of the ſea, which indent that coaſt, will, at once, remove the learned prelate's [138] objection. Should we ſuppoſe that IAR-IN, or the weſtern Iſlands of Scotland, were the Ierna of Claudian, the objection will altogether vaniſh, as many of thoſe Iſlands are at a much greater diſtance than Ireland itſelf from the continent of Cale⯑donia^*.

The argu⯑ment col⯑lected into one point. To collect the whole argument on this head into one point of view: The Scots of Britain lived in a cold climate; their country was ſituated to the Weſt of ſuch of their neighbours as had an immediate communication with the Romans. The Iriſh lay under the ſame diſadvantage of un⯑friendly ſeaſons; and their Iſland was ſimu⯑larly ſituated. The hiſtorians and poets of the empire, and the geographers of Greece and Rome exaggerated, from ignorance or prejudice, the ſeverity of the climate un⯑der which both the Scottiſh nations lived. From an exact conformity of genius, language, manners, dreſs, ſituation, and climate, the Scots of both the Iſles had a much better title to the common appel⯑lation of Hiberni, than Italy, Spain, and [139] a conſiderable part of Africa, had to the name of Heſperia. But whether the Hibernians of the Britiſh ſoil^*, the Hi⯑bernian robbers of a much later age^†, and the Scots vanquiſhed by Theodoſius^‡, derived their origin from Ireland, or were of Caledonian extraction, is a point which Eumenius, Claudian, and Gildas, have left undetermined.

Uſher exa⯑mined, It is obſerved by Uſher^‖, that Albania was not diſtinguiſhed by the name of Scotia, prior to the eleventh age. The antiquaries of Scotland have quoted ſeve⯑ral paſſages from Bede to refute the ob⯑ſervation of the learned prelate. But had the remark been perfectly juſt, it is by no means concluſive in favour of the ſuperior antiquity of the Hibernian Scots. Were there no Scots in Ireland prior to the ſeventh century? for then, for the firſt time, that country received the name of Scotia from Iſidore and Lawrence of Canterbury. We may turn the primate's argument againſt his own ſyſtem. Mar⯑cellinus found the Scots in Britain a whole century before Oroſius diſcovered them in Ireland; and, from a parity of reaſon, we might conclude that the Britiſh Scots [140] are more ancient than the Iriſh friends of the ingenious prelate.

and an⯑ſwered. The learned Uſher is not more happy in the argument which he deduces from the appellation of Scotia Major given to Ireland in oppoſition to the Scotia Minor of Britain. Donald O'Neil^*, a petty king or chieftain of Ulſter in the four⯑teenth century, and a charter granted by the emperor Sigiſmund to a convent of Scots and Iriſh at Ratiſbon, have made that diſtinction. But to a concluſion drawn in favour of the old ſyſtem, from theſe circumſtances, it may, from a parity of reaſon, be oppoſed, that the Hiber⯑nians of the age of Ptolemy were origi⯑nally Britons, and not Spaniards, becauſe that geographer gave the name of the leſſer Britain to Ireland. The inhabitants of Hellas, by a ſimilar argument, ought to have derived their origin from the Italian Magna Grecia; that is, to ſpeak the language of ſome of thoſe who are moſt likely to oppoſe our ſyſtem, that the Greeks who poſſeſſed themſelves of a part of Italy were older than their anceſtors in Greece.

Similarity of local names It may be here, with great propriety, obſerved, that nothing is more deceitful, in traducing nations to their origin, than arguments deduced from a ſimilarity of [141] local names in different countries. Strabo thought it an extravagant fancy to derive the Spaniards from the Iberians of Aſia; yet the Aſiatic Iberia, as well as Spain, had its Iberus and Arragon^*. But a conformity in a few particulars is not ſuf⯑ficient to perſuade us, that the neigh⯑bours of the Caſpian could, in an early period, tranſport themſelves either by ſea or land into the European Iberia, no more than the Albanians of the ſame diviſion of Aſia could ſend colonies to Caledonia.

furniſhes no proof of a common origin. Italy, Macedonia, Aſia near Caucaſus, and North Britain, countries very diſtant from one another, produced four nations promiſcuouſly called Albanians. Nothing can be inferred from this identity, but that they all derived their names from the mountainous face of the regions which they reſpectively poſſeſſed^†. In the ſame manner, nothing can be concluded from the name of Hiberni, given, by ſome writers, indiſcriminately to the weſtern Caledonians, and the Iriſh, but that both nations lived under the ſame unfavourable climate, and that both were peculiarly diſtinguiſhed by the ſame characteriſtical qualities, which naturally aroſe from their common origin.

Riſe and Progreſs of the Fiction.

General ob⯑ſervations. In vain have the Iriſh, and the abettors of their high antiquities, called in the aid of foreign writers to ſupport the pretended Hibernian origin of the Britiſh Scots. That part of their hiſtory, like the ex⯑ploded Mileſian tale, muſt reſt entirely on the credit of their own domeſtic annals; but that no degree of faith ought to be given to thoſe annals beyond the intro⯑duction of letters, is a point which we have already very amply diſcuſſed. The authority of hiſtory having failed, it is natural to ſuppoſe that the adverſaries of our ſyſtem will have recourſe to objections ariſing from reaſon. To do all the juſtice in our power to the old and popular error concerning the origin of the Scots, we ſhall examine with attention thoſe objec⯑tions, before we ſhall conclude for ever the controverſy by arguments, which, though obvious, are new and deciſive.

On the riſe and progreſs Could ancient tradition, the belief of ages, the poſitive aſſertions of Engliſh antiquaries and Iriſh annaliſts, and the univerſal acquieſcence of the hiſtorians of the Britiſh Scots be ſufficient to eſtabliſh the credit of the Hibernian deſcent of that nation, it muſt be confeſſed that it were idle to hope to reconcile the public [143] judgment to a new ſyſtem ſo diametrically oppoſite to the old. But we have ſeen that tradition could not have extended to that period in which the tranſmigration of the Scots is placed, and therefore the belief of ages, which was founded upon that pretended tradition, was no more than a popular error. This error ren⯑dered venerable by its antiquity, miſled, to ſay no worſe, the writers of the annals of Ireland, and deceived the hiſtorians of North Britain. The antiquaries of Eng⯑land, it muſt be confeſſed, could not be influenced by the prejudices which led aſtray the writers of both the Scottiſh nations; but the former were under no temptation to contradict or expoſe a tra⯑dition which was not diſagreeable to them⯑ſelves, though from a very different cauſe than that which rendered it ſo highly favoured in Scotland and Ireland.

of the Hi⯑berno-Scot⯑tiſh fictions. It may not be improper, in this place, to inquire into the riſe and progreſs of thoſe traditionary fictions which have ſo much obſcured the antiquities of the Scots of both the Iſles. When the firſt dawn of learning roſe among thoſe barbarous tribes who had ſubverted the empire of the Romans, ſome ſcholars more profound than the reſt, traced the antiquity of their reſpective nations to illuſtrious names recorded in ancient hiſtory. The Ro⯑mans, Greeks, Spaniards, and other na⯑tions [144] who figured in old times were placed at the head of the pedigree of bar⯑barians, who, but juſt emerging from illiterate obſcurity, had loſt all memory of their own origin. The impoſtures of the half-learned writers of the middle ages were received with avidity and great cre⯑dulity by the Engliſh, French, Spaniards, Germans, Danes, and Swedes: a part of an infatuation ſo univerſal muſt have ex⯑tended itſelf to the Scots of Ireland.

Cauſe of the obſcurity which in⯑volves the ancient Iriſh. The letters which St. Patrick intro⯑duced into that Iſland in the fifth age, were not employed in recording hiſtorical tranſactions for ſome centuries poſterior to that period. The enthuſiaſm of the times turned all the little literature of the religious of Ireland to holier purpoſes than to regiſter temporal events; which, from the ſecluded ſituation of that coun⯑try, muſt have been very unimportant. Miracles, viſions, and thoſe ſacred perſons who diſtinguiſhed themſelves in the work of converſion, employed the whole atten⯑tion of the monks, at a time that the royal line of Heremon ſat in the midſt of obſcurity and anarchy on the Iriſh throne. The antiquities of the nation being thus left in the hands of illiterate bards and ſenachies, aſſumed ſo monſtrous a form, that the poliſhing they have received from ſucceeding writers has ſcarcely hitherto rendered them fit for the public eye.

[145] Aera of the Spaniſh fic⯑tion. The fable of the Hibernian extraction of the Britiſh Scots ſeems to have been fabricated in Ireland long before the bards thought of bringing a colony from Spain into that country. Bede, in the ſeventh age, had received intelligence of the firſt of thoſe ſtories from the Iriſh ſenachies, but his placing it in a period beyond the reach of tradition has thrown abſolute diſcredit upon the whole. In the period between Bede and Nennius, who, for the firſt time, mentioned the Cantabric deſcent of the Scots of Ireland, ſome learned bard or monk diſcovered that Spain was called Iberia, and, upon the ſimilarity between that name and Hibernia, built the whole fabric of the Mileſian tale. To obviate all ſcepticiſm concerning a ſtory which wore the face of improba⯑bility, it became neceſſary for ſucceeding writers to give aſſurances to the world, that letters and polite arts were cultivated in Ireland no leſs than ſeventeen hundred years before its converſion to the chriſtian faith by St. Patrick.

Cauſe of the darkneſs which co⯑vers the Bri⯑tiſh Scots. When monkiſh learning flouriſhed in Ireland, the Scots of Britain, by an un⯑interrupted ſeries of hoſtilities with the Britons, Picts, and Saxons, were diverted from cultivating letters, which alone could enable them to look back into their anti⯑quities, or to tranſmit any memory of their actions to poſterity. Their exploits [146] in the field died away for want of the means of perpetuating them in the cloſet. The monks of Ireland, as it was manifeſt to the whole world that both the Scottiſh nations were originally the ſame people, made an eaſy acquiſition of an illiterate, though brave people, and obtruded upon the world that ſyſtem of the origin of the Caledonian Scots, which has been, for many ages, almoſt univerſally received.

Negative Arguments.

Firſt argu⯑ment. Had the more ancient genealogiſts of the little principality of Argadia^* diſco⯑vered that there was a conſiderable diſtrict in Peloponneſus, the name of which ſo nearly reſembled the latinized appellation of their own country, it is probable they would have traced their anceſtors to an Arcadian origin. The Arcadians were brave, and a reſpectable people in Greece^†, and their being older than Jupiter and the moon would have highly recommended them to the Scottiſh ſenachies.

Second ar⯑gument. Had the firſt fabricators of the fabulous hiſtory of Scotland found out that there [147] were Albanians in the North of Aſia. Albanians in the army of Alexander the Great, and Alban ſenates and kings in Italy, it is at leaſt doubtful whether they would have condeſcended to deduce their nation from Ireland. This conjecture is neither fanciful or extravagant: The author of an old Scottiſh chronicle pre⯑ſerved by Innes^†, having, it ſeems, read Solinus^*, derives the Picts and Scots from the Albanian Scythians. But the monks of Ireland found out Iberia before the ſenachies of Caledonia had the good fortune to meet either with the Scythians, or any Albanian beyond the limits of their own country.

Objections anſwered. The Iriſh, it may be objected, were too obſcure and inconſiderable a people in Europe to tempt the Scots to deduce their origin from them, if the ſtory had not actually any foundation in fact; eſpecially as their neighbours and enemies to the South traced themſelves to an illuſtrious anceſtry of Romans and Trojans. The Scots of Albany entertained a very diffe⯑rent idea of the Iriſh nation. Hibernian miſſionaries had converted the greateſt part of the Scots from the errors of the Pagan [148] ſuperſtition; Columba was the great apoſtle of the Picts, and became after⯑wards the tutelar ſaint of the united Ca⯑ledonian kingdoms. Legions of monks and ſaints ſwarmed from Ireland into North Britain in thoſe days of converſion and religious peregrination. It was na⯑tural for an illiterate people, like the Bri⯑tiſh Scots, to believe that a nation who produced theſe holy and very extraordi⯑nary men was one of the moſt illuſtrious in the world. Whether the zealous miſſionaries, among other pious frauds, endeavoured to inculcate on their converts a belief of the ſtupendous antiquity of the Iriſh nation, and the Hibernian ex⯑traction of the Scots, to promote the good cauſe of Chriſtianity, by procuring to themſelves a favourable reception in Albany, is very difficult to determine. That thoſe apoſtles ſerved in the double capacity of bards and teachers of the faith is apparent from the appellation of CHLERI^*, given, in the old poems and traditions of the Scots, indiſcriminately to the Iriſh emigrants of both profeſ⯑ſions.

The Hiber⯑nian tales inculcated by Iriſh miſſionaries and bards. But be that as it will, it is certain that ſwarms of Iriſh bards accompanied into Caledonia thoſe Hibernian miſſionaries [149] who firſt converted the majority of the Picts and Scots to Chriſtianity. It was convenient for the divine, that the bard ſhould propagate a belief of the con⯑nexion between the Scots of both the Iſles; and the authority of the former could eſtabliſh any doctrine in the minds of an ignorant, credulous, and ſuperſtitious people. The ſenachies were impudent, the bards formidable, and both were elo⯑quent. If any ſcepticiſm remained a⯑gainſt their well-told tales, the miſſionaries deſtroyed it altogether by the weight of their ſanctified character. This ſyſtem, once eſtabliſhed, was propagated, and became the traditional belief of after ages. The little progreſs that learning made in Scotland when its firſt hiſtories were writ⯑ten, could not enable the zealous abettors of its antiquities to overturn that ſyſtem of the origin of the nation, which had been ſo long obtruded upon the world; and the Scottiſh writers who, in a much later period, diſtinguiſhed themſelves in critical inquiries into the hiſtory of their anceſtors, were at more pains to adorn the fictions of their predeceſſors, than to expoſe their abſurdities.

Objections anſwered Some learned men have drawn an argu⯑ment againſt our ſyſtem from the ſilence of the Romans concerning the Scots till after the commencement of the fourth age. Their not being mentioned before [150] that century, ſay they, argues ſtrongly that they muſt have been a new people in Britain. That this is an unjuſt conclu⯑ſion will appear from collateral examples. Tacitus has not mentioned any national names in North Britain but thoſe of Caledonii and Horeſtii; yet it is certain that the Vecturiones and Deucaledones of Marcellinus, the Maeatae of Dion Caſſius, the Gadeni, Cantae, and Epidii of Pto⯑lemy, poſſeſſed that country. Ptolemy, it muſt be confeſſed, knew nothing of the inhabitants of the northern Britain, under the name of Scots; he was equally a ſtranger to the Picts, Maeatae, and Atta⯑cotti. But, if he has neglected to men⯑tion the Scots of Britain, he has been equally unjuſt to thoſe of Ireland; a circumſtance very ſtrange, if that country was, as Bede ſays, overſtocked with tribes of that name before Caledonia received any colony from abroad.

by collateral examples. Tacitus in his deſcription of Germany has omitted the Saxons. Ptolemy, ſoon after that celebrated hiſtorian, found that warlike nation on the confines of the Cherſoneſus Cimbrica. Germany is for the firſt time mentioned by Julius Caeſar; and are we to ſuppoſe, from that circum⯑ſtance, that the inhabitants of that ex⯑tenſive diviſion of Europe came, in the days of the illuſtrious writer, like a cloud of locuſts from an unknown country? [151] The Franks and Allemans were not heard of before the third century; yet thoſe nations, in whom the Catti, Chauci, Cheruſci, Agravarii, the Teutones, and the Cimbri, in a confined ſenſe, were loſt, were never once thought to have been a new people, who had enſlaved, deſtroyed, or expelled, the old inhabitants of thoſe territories which they poſſeſſed in Germany. Theſe collateral examples form a complete anſwer to the objection againſt our ſyſtem, which ariſes from the ſilence of the Romans concerning the Picts and Scots till the beginning of the fourth age.

Poſitive Proofs.

Proofs of the Caledonian extraction of the Scots. To dwell no longer on negative ar⯑guments againſt the Hibernian ſyſtem, we ſhall proceed to poſitive proofs of the Caledonian extraction of the Britiſh Scots. The very ingenious author of ſome diſſer⯑tations lately publiſhed, has diſcuſſed this ſubject with ſo much ability and exact⯑neſs, that little is left to be done but to collect into one point of view the moſt ſtriking of his arguments. To theſe ar⯑guments we ſhall annex ſome obſervations, to quaſh for ever a ſyſtem which had been ſo long impoſed for truth upon the world.

[152] Firſt proof. Alba or Albin, it has been already ob⯑ſerved, was the firſt name given to this iſland, by the Gaël, who tranſmigrated from Belgium into the more elevated country of Britain. Hence proceeded the Albion of the Greeks, and the Albium of the Roman language. The inhabitants of mountainous countries, who, from their ſituation, have very little intercourſe with other nations, and who were never ſubject to a foreign yoke, are remarkably tenacious of the local names, and their aboriginal cuſtoms, manners, and language. We accordingly find, that the ancient Scots, in all the ages to which our information extends, agreed in calling Scotland Alba or Albania. The High⯑landers and the inhabitants of the He⯑brides have, to this day, no other name but Alba for Scotland, and they invaria⯑bly call themſelves Albanich, or genuine Britons. The uninterrupted uſe of this national appellation, from the earlieſt ac⯑count we have of their hiſtory, furniſhes a moral demonſtration that they are the true deſcendants of the firſt inhabitants of Britain. Had they been of Iriſh extrac⯑tion, they and their anceſtors would have undoubtedly aſſumed a name more ſuitable to their origin.

Second proof. The Belgic nations, who tranſmigrated into South Britain before the deſcent of Julius Caeſar, retained the name of thoſe [153] communities on the continent from which they reſpectively derived their blood^*. The auxiliaries of Vortigern preſerved long their original name of Saxons, and the Scots who ſpeak the Galic language have no other name for England or its inhabitants than Saſſon and Saſſonich. But if the ancient Scots have preſerved among them the true name of the Engliſh, for ſo many ages after it has been diſuſed by that nation itſelf, it is much more likely that they muſt have retained their own in⯑digenous name.

Third proof. Had the Scots been originally Iriſh, Erinich and not Albanich would have been their proper name. So far were they from adopting the name of their neigh⯑bours of Hibernia, that it is well known that both the old Iriſh and the inhabitants of the north of Scotland promiſcuouſly call themſelves Gaël, or the poſterity of the Gauls, who firſt tranſmigrated into Britain from the continent. The Welſh, in ancient times, diſtinguiſhed the Scots of both the Britiſh Iſles by the appellation of Gaidhel, which, as the DH are inva⯑riably quieſcent in Celtic words, is much the ſame with Gaël, in the pronuncia⯑tion. Should then the Scots be of Iriſh extract, it muſt naturally follow that the [154] Picts ſprung from the ſame ſource, a doc⯑trine no leſs abſurd than it is new.

Fourth proof. From the name of the diſtrict of Iar-ghael, which, it has been always ſaid, was the firſt territory poſſeſſed by the Hiberno-Scottiſh colony, there ariſes a very deciſive argument in favour of our ſyſtem. Iar-ghaël is not the name of the country, but of thoſe who inhabited it from the earlieſt times. It ſignifies the Weſtern-Gael in oppoſition to the Eaſtern-Gael, or the Picts, who poſſeſſed the ſhore of the German ocean. But what is con⯑cluſive againſt the Iriſh ſyſtem is, that Caeldoch, or the country of the Gaël, which the Romans ſoftened into Caledo⯑nia, is the only name by which the Highlanders diſtinguiſhed that diviſion of Scotland which they themſelves poſſeſs.

The Gaël of the conti⯑nent We ſhall now leave it to the candour of the unprejudiced, and the con mon ſenſe of mankind, whether there does not, upon the whole, ariſe a demonſtration, that the firſt colony of Gael or Gauls who tranſmigated into Britai [...] from the continent, and were afterwards driven northward by the preſſure of other inter⯑lopers, are the progenitors of the Scots of North Britain and Ireland. The true cauſe why the name of Scotti was not heard of till the days of Marcellinus, or rather of Porphyrius is, that it was a con⯑tumelious [155] name^*. It was for the ſame reaſon that the genuine offspring of the old Caledonians, the Highlanders, have never adopted a name which carried re⯑proach in its meaning.

the immedi⯑ate anceſ⯑tors of the Scots. Why the Iriſh obtained, in the days of Oroſius, the name of Scots, when their tranſmigration from Caledonia was ſo re⯑mote, requires to be explained. The name of Scotti was communicated to the Romans by the Picts and Britons. The Britons and Romans diſcovering a perfect reſemblance in the manners, cuſtoms, dreſs, arms, and language of the Iar-ghaël, or weſtern Caledonians, and the Iriſh, agreed to call both nations by one common name. The Iriſh being no ſtrangers to the military reputation that their friends of Caledonia had acquired againſt the Romans and their provincials, either adopted their name, or acquieſced afterwards in an appellation which ſome writers had impoſed upon them. The illiterate, and conſequently the bulk of the Iriſh nation, were never reconciled to this innovation. They preſerved the Ca⯑ledonian deſignation of Gaël, or the name of Erinich, which they had aſſumed after their tranſmigration into Ireland, and the adventitious names of Scotti and Scottia fell at laſt into total deſuetude,.

[156] In the courſe of the preceding diſcuſſi⯑on, the Author of the Introduction has laid no ſtreſs upon the teſtimony of the Poems of Oſſian. Having rejected the Hibernian bards, there might be an ap⯑pearance of partiality in drawing autho⯑rities from the ancient poet of Caledonia. In the preſent ſtate of the argument, there is no need of his aſſiſtance. The fabric we have raiſed demands no collate⯑ral prop; it even can beſtow the aid it does not require. The perfect agreement between Oſſian and the genealogical ſyſ⯑tem we have eſtabliſhed, has placed his aera beyond the commencement of the po⯑pular opinion of the Hibernian deſcent of the Scots; which was old enough to be placed in a period of remote antiquity by Bede, who flouriſhed in the beginning of the ſeventh age.

Preliminary Reflections.

Obſervati⯑ons. NO weary traveller ever iſſued forth with more joy from a barren de⯑ſart into the skirts of a pleaſant and well cultivated country, than the Author of the Introduction quits the ſterile ſubject of Scottiſh and Iriſh Antiquities. But to decide finally a point ſo long agitated was a part of the province which he had cho⯑ſen for himſelf. The origin of nations, like a river near its ſource, preſents no⯑thing that is either beautiful or great. It is only when hiſtory deſcends into the cul⯑tivated periods of a well formed commu⯑nity, that it becomes an object of plea⯑ſure, and the means of improvement. We have ſtill a long journey to make; but the way is ſtrewed with ſome flowers.

[158] Modern hiſtorians blamed. To an inveſtigation of their origin, it may be proper to add a brief inquiry into the Religion of the Ancient Britiſh Na⯑tions. This ſubject has not ſuffered leſs from the negligence, than the former did from the vanity and prejudice of hiſto⯑rians. Some complain that the ancients have not thrown any conſiderable light upon the northern nations; others affirm that the opinions and actions of Barba⯑rians are unworthy of any memory. The firſt obſervation is unjuſt; the latter is the reſult of a pride incident to poliſhed times.

Author's double ſource of in⯑formation Though few of the Romans, like the firſt Caeſar, carried a talent for writing into the field, the inquiries of their hiſ⯑torians extended to the characteriſtical manners of the nations whom that illuſ⯑trious people ſubdued. We find, ac⯑cordingly, that there are facts preſerved ſufficient to prove that the beſt qualities of the modern Europeans are but the vir⯑tues of their anceſtors ſeparated from fero⯑city and barbariſm. Nor is it from the ancients only we are to derive our infor⯑mation. The opinions of our forefathers ought to be traced among thoſe of their poſterity, whom their ſituation excluded from any conſiderable commerce with ſtrangers; ſuch, till of late years, were the inhabitants of a part of Wales, and [159] ſuch ſtill are ſome Iriſh tribes, and the natives of the mountains of Scotland.

enables him to advance ſomething new. Poſſeſſed of this channel to a know⯑ledge of the character of the ancient Cel⯑tae, we may, perhaps, be able to advance ſomething new upon the ſubject; and by applying the accounts of the ancients to the criterion of the living manners and in⯑digenous opinions of an unmixed race of men, reſcue ſome facts from the ſhades of doubt and uncertainty. The character of a people muſt be gathered from an in⯑quiry into thoſe prejudices and principles of the human mind which are the motives of their actions. To take a curſory re⯑view of the religious opinions of our re⯑mote anceſtors, is the moſt direct path to a knowledge of thoſe manners, which ſo remarkably diſtinguiſhed them from the poliſhed nations of antiquity. An ample field for diſquiſition preſents itſelf; but it is more the purpoſe of the Author to give a clear and conciſe idea of the ſub⯑ject, than to deviate into diſſertations, which, without being ſatisfactory, might aſſume an appearance of ingenuity and learning.

Their Idea of the Unity of God.

General re⯑mark on re⯑ligion. Religion is one of thoſe few things which ſeldom receive any improvement from time. Being an univerſal concern, it naturally becomes a ſubject of general in⯑quiry; and every time it is turned in the mind it ſuffers additional corruption, from thoſe vain ſuperſtitions and fears, which are inherent in human nature. The original opinions of mankind con⯑cerning GOD were the moſt ſimple, noble, and juſt. We find that an ade⯑quate n tion of the Divinity was ſo far from growing with the progreſs of the art of thinking, that the Celt, in the midſt of his foreſt, owned but one Lord of the Univerſe^*, when the Academic on the banks of Ilyſſus, animated into Gods his own abſtracted ideas.

Religion of the Celtae. The information of the ancients did not extend to the Celtae when they con⯑tinued in a ſtate of nature, and conſe⯑quently we can form no judgment con⯑cerning [161] their aboriginal ideas on the ſub⯑ject of religion. When they became firſt known to the writers of Greece and Rome, they were formed into communi⯑ties, ſubject to ſome kind of government, and they had an order of men eſtabliſhed among them who were not only the ſu⯑perintendants, but perhaps the inventors of their religious ceremonies and opinions. It is, however, probable that, like other ſavage nations^†, they had ſome imperfect notion of a Supreme Being, before the Druids formed that philoſophical ſyſtem of religion which had ſuch a wonderful effect on their national character and manners.

Characte⯑riſtical n ame of God. The name, or rather title, by which the divinity is diſtinguiſhed in all the languages of the ancient, as well as moſt of thoſe of modern Europe, is ſufficient to demonſtrate that polytheiſm was not known to the old Celtae. The ΔΙΣ of the Greeks, their ΘΕΟΣ, and the ob⯑lique caſes of their ΖΕΥΣ, the Dis, Ditis pater, and Deus of the Romans, are ma⯑nifeſtly derived from DE, DI, TI or [162] DIA, the only appellation by which God is known to thoſe who ſpeak the Galic of Britain and Ireland^*. DE, DI or DIA literally ſignifies the PERSON, by way of eminence, or rather The HE, if we can, with any propriety, uſe that expreſ⯑ſion.

Idea of his Unity. That the unity of the Supreme Being was one of the fundamental tenets of the religion inculcated by the Druids^† on their followers, we have reaſon to be⯑lieve, notwithſtanding the poſitive aſſer⯑tions of many ancient writers to the con⯑trary. The old Gauls were ſaid to wor⯑ſhip three divinities under the appellations of TEUTATES, HESUS, and TARA⯑NIS^†; but theſe three names are mani⯑feſtly titles of one Supreme Being, and not three ſeparate intelligences to whom divine honours were paid. TEUTATES, or DE-TAT-UAS ſignifies the God that is above: HESUS is derived from the ſame ſimple idea with DE; from ES, or, with [163] an emphaſis, HES, which means HE, or the Being; and TARANIS is the epithet of THUNDERER, given by all nations to the Supreme Divinity^*.

Their pretended Polytheiſm.

Religion ſubject to corruption. The moſt rational ſyſtems of religion have been always found to deviate into abſurdity and ſuperſtition among the ig⯑norant multitude. The human mind, naturally timid, is apt to clothe with ter⯑rors every thing which it does not ſuffi⯑ciently comprehend. The bulk of the Celtae, therefore, almoſt corrupted into polytheiſm the philoſophical opinion of the Druids concerning God.

[164] Philoſophi⯑cal opinion of the Druids on that ſubject. The doctrine concerning the Divinity, which Pythagoras and his diſciples firſt broached in the South of Europe, was the ſame with that of the Druids, and perhaps borrowed by the philoſo⯑pher^* from that order of men. They looked upon the Divinity as the ſoul of the world; a ſpirit, which diffuſing itſelf through all nature, gave, in a particular manner, life to men and all other ani⯑mals^†. From this ſyſtem of the univer⯑ſality of God, the Celtic nations natural⯑ly deduced an idea, that his preſence was moſt conſpicuous in thoſe parts of the univerſe which were endued with moſt beauty and action. The heavenly bodies, on account of their ſplendor, magnitude, and motion; the elements of fire, air and [165] water, on account of their rapidity and invincible force; were thought to poſ⯑ſeſs an extraordinary proportion of that active ſpirit which prevaded the whole body of nature.

Reverence for great na⯑tural ob⯑jects. According to this ſyſtem of theology, it was natural for the Celtae to direct their attention to thoſe objects in which the ac⯑tive principle which diffuſed itſelf through the univerſe ſeemed moſt apparently to exert itſelf. The heavenly bodies, and what philoſophers call the elements, were proper emblems of a Divinity, whoſe chief properties were immenſity, activity, and force. It is likely, therefore, that the veneration which the Celtae ſhewed, upon every occaſion, for the Sun, Moon, Stars, Fire, great collections of water, and for Foreſts and Mountains, proceed⯑ed originally from an opinion that theſe great objects were the beſt ſymbols of the Supreme Being^*.

Belief in a Providence. The belief of a providence, without which no religion can exiſt, muſt, in a peculiar manner, have been the reſult of [166] that which the Celtae profeſſed. God was not only the ſole agent of the opera⯑tions of nature, but even the principal part of which nature itſelf conſiſted; not ſo much the giver and preſerver of life, as he was that life itſelf which animated every living thing. From this philoſo⯑phical ſyſtem opinions aroſe among the bulk of the Celtae, which almoſt deviat⯑ed into polytheiſm. As it was the buſi⯑neſs of God to do every thing, ſo they thought that the chief wiſdom of man ſhould conſiſt in penetrating into his de⯑ſigns, and in endeavouring to avert ſuch of his deciſions as might be detrimental to themſelves. They, for this purpoſe, not only addreſſed their prayers and ſacri⯑fices to the Divinity through thoſe ſym⯑bols we have already mentioned, but alſo uſed divinations to diſcover his intentions, and practiſed charms to turn the natural courſe of events.

Their pretended Worſhip of the Heavenly Bodies.

Subaltern intelligen⯑ces. From their attention to the principal objects of nature there gradually aroſe a belief among the Celtae that the heavenly bodies and elements, inſtead of being [167] ſymbols of the Supreme Divinity, were the reſidences of ſubaltern intelligences^*. Theſe inferior ſpirits, being immediately ſubordinate to God, had acceſs to know his intentions, and it was in their power to forewarn mankind of them by certain ſigns and tokens. But that divine ho⯑nours were paid to thoſe beings who re⯑ſided in different natural objects was cer⯑tainly the miſtake of the writers of Greece and Rome. To prove this ſeeming para⯑dox we need only have recourſe to the true Celtic names of thoſe heavenly bodies which are univerſally ſaid to have been objects of the worſhip to the old northern nations.

Pretended worſhip of the ſun ex⯑amined. CRI-AN, or GRIAN, from which ought to be deduced the Apollo Gran⯑nius and Grynaeus of the ancients, is the appellative by which, in all ages, the Celtae diſtinguiſhed the Sun^†. The [168] words are manifeſtly derived from CRI|'EIN, ſignifying the trembling fire, which, in the Galic language, carries an idea too mean to be applied to a God. RE, Eaſga, but moſt commonly GELLACH^*, are the Celtic names of the moon; RE⯑UL, or rather RINNAC, ſignifies a ſtar. Theſe appellations carry in their meaning a demonſtration that the heavenly bodies were not worſhipped by our anceſtors. GELLACH is litterally a pale or wan complexion by an emphaſis; and RINNAC, a point of light; titles utterly inconſiſtent with the ſuppoſed divinity of the objects which bore them.

[169] The hea⯑venly bodies animated by inferior in⯑telligences. It is certain that the Celtic nations thought that the heavenly bodies were the reſidences of intelligences ſubordinate to God. Theſe ſpirits were diſtinguiſhed by the name of AISE^†, a word expreſſive of their feebleneſs and imbecillity in compariſon of DE, the Supreme Divinity. But we have reaſon to believe, from the following circumſtance, that GRIAN⯑AIS, or the Spirit of the Sun, was an⯑ciently peculiarly honoured in Caledonia. In the confines between Badenoch and Strathſpey, two diſtricts of the county of Inverneſs, there is a very extenſive heath which goes by the name of SLIA GRIAN⯑AIS, or the Plain of the Spirit of the Sun. The river Spey, which is there deep and rapid, borders this heath on the South; and a chain of craggy mountains, in the form of a half moon, interſperſed with precipices and a few naked trees, confines it on the North. It is entered towards the Weſt by a narrow paſs formed [170] by the near approach of the Spey and the mountains; and deep woods anciently ſkirted it on the eaſtern ſide.

A place of worſhip. This ſequeſtered heath ſwells towards the center into ſeveral eminences, upon the moſt of which there are ſtill to be ſeen ſeveral circles of ſtone, reſembling, though in miniature, the famous Stone Henge on the plain of Saliſbury. Theſe monuments of antiquity, ſtanding in a place altogether unfit for culture, have received no injury but from time, and are conſequently more entire than any o⯑ther of the ſame kind in the Highlands and Scottiſh Iſles. The diameter of the area of the largeſt is not quite two hun⯑dred feet, and in the center of each ariſes a conical pile of looſe ſtones. Concern⯑ing the uſe to which theſe rude fabrics were anciently converted there remains not the veſtige of a tradition in that coun⯑try; but the name which the place bears, demonſtrates that they were erected in honour of the Sun.

Their ſuperſtitious Ceremonies.

Reverence for inferior intelli⯑gences; Among an unmixed race of men, like the inhabitants of the mountains of Scot⯑land, the ſuperſtitions and prejudices of their anceſtors are handed down without [171] much alteration through a long ſeries of ages. A ſtranger, in hearing the ancient Scots talking with great reſpect of the Spi⯑rit of the Sun, the Spirit of the Moun⯑tain, the Spirit of the Storm, and the Genius of the ſea, might be tempted to think, that, like what is reported of their Celtic anceſtors, they ſtill paid divine ho⯑nours to the intelligences who were thought to reſide in the elements If he ſaw them avoiding to bathe themſelves in a ſpring, and never mentioning the water of rivers without prefixing to it the epithet of ex⯑cellent^*; if, above all, they ſhould be ſeen, according to an annual cuſtom, not hitherto altogether diſuſed, kindling a fire on a rock on the firſt of May in ho⯑nour of the Sun, and giving to that lu⯑minary the titles of DAY^†, and the light of heaven ^†, and avoiding to call him by his proper, though derogatory name, of GRIAN, any man might conclude that they ſtill remained in the ſhades of hea⯑theniſh ignorance and ſuperſtition.

[172] for natural objects. But ſhould the ancient Scots themſelves be aſked why they ſhew ſuch a ſuperſtiti⯑ous regard for natural objects, they would reply, That it is by no means proper to bathe themſelves in a fountain, leſt the elegant ^† Genius that reſides in it ſhould be offended and remove to another place; and that the epithet of excellent ought in propriety to be prefixed to the water of rivers on account of its beauty, activity, and force. ‘"We kindle,"’ ſay they, ‘"the BEL-TEIN^¶, or the Fire of the Rock, on the firſt of May, to welcome the Sun after his travels behind the clouds and tempeſts of the dark months^‖; and it would be highly indecent not to ho⯑nour him with the titles of dignity, when we meet him with joy on our hills."’

Ceremony of It is however certain that the Caledo⯑nians kindled the BEL-TEIN more for the purpoſes of divination and inchant⯑ment than as a mark of their reſpect for the Sun. The ceremonies ſtill uſed by the lower ſort of people, for ſuch only light up the BEL-TEIN in our days, are [173] evident remains of the ſuperſtitions of the Druidical ſyſtem of religion. It was a cuſtom, till of late years, among the in⯑habitants of whole diſtricts in the North of Scotland, to extinguiſh all their fires on the evening of the laſt day of April. Early on the firſt day of May ſome ſelect perſons met in a private place, and, by turning with great rapidity an augre in a dry piece of wood, extracted what they called the forced or elementary fire^*. Some active young men, one from each hamlet in the diſtrict, attended at a diſtance, and, as ſoon as the forced fire was kindled, carried part of it with great expedition and joy to their reſpective villages. The people immediately aſſembled upon ſome rock or eminencee, lighted the BEL-TEIN, and ſpent the day in mirth and feſtivity.

the Beltien. The ceremonies uſed upon this occaſion were founded upon opinions of which there is now no trace remaining in tra⯑dition. It is in vain to inquire why thoſe ignorant perſons, who are addicted to this ſuperſtition, throw into the BEL-TEIN a portion of thoſe things upon which they regale themſelves on the firſt of May. Neither is there any reaſon aſſigned by [174] them for decking branches of mountain⯑aſh^* with wreaths of flowers and heath, which they carry, with ſhouts and geſ⯑tures of joy, in proceſſion three times round the fire. Theſe branches they afterwards depoſite above the doors of their reſpective dwellings, where they remain till they give place to others in the ſucceed⯑ing year.

Theſe and many other extraordinary and ſuperſtitious ceremonies, uſed upon this occaſion, have, it is certain, much of the appearance of religious worſhip paid by the ancient Caledonians to the Sun. The rude monuments which, as we have already obſerved, bear ſtill the name of GRIAN-AIS, ſeem, at firſt ſight, to put the certainty of the exiſtence of polytheiſm among the Celtae beyond any diſpute; but we may venture to affirm, that neither of thoſe circumſtances furniſhes a concluſive argument upon that head.

Their Divinations.

Divinations, ſacrifices, and in⯑chantments. Though it was a fundamental maxim in the opinions of the Celtae concerning God, that he was the ſole agent in all operations of nature, they were far from ſuppoſing that his decrees were predeter⯑mined and unalterable. The firſt buſi⯑neſs, therefore, as has been already ob⯑ſerved, was to penetrate into his deſigns by means of divination, and afterwards to endeavour to avert from themſelves ſuch of thoſe deſigns as might be detrimental, by the aſſiſtance of ſacrifice, prayers, and inchantment. The element of fire, and above all, the Sun, which is the ſource of it, were objects in which the ſoul of the world ſeemed moſt manifeſtly to ex⯑ert itſelf; and conſequently they, more than any other part of nature, employed the attention of a ſuperſtitious people: and this attention ſoon degenerated into thoſe ridiculous ceremonies which we have juſt deſcribed. As ſuch circular piles of ſtones as we have already men⯑tioned are only to be met with on plains, we may conclude that they were only arti⯑ficial eminences raiſed for the BEL-TEIN, in places where rocks, from which it ori⯑ginally derived its name, could not be found.

Reflections.

The Sun not wor⯑ſhipped by our anceſ⯑tors; We have in our hands a poſitive proof that the Sun was not an object of worſhip among the ancient Caledonians. A poem, the compoſition of which is placed beyond the introduction of Chriſtianity into the north Britain, has preſerved the real opi⯑nion of our anceſtors concerning the Spi⯑rit of the Sun. The ſubject of the piece is a war between two Scandinavian chiefs, in which one of them, having the misfor⯑tune to fall into the hands of his enemy, gives occaſion to the following ſimile:

‘"Seized amidſt the ſhock of armies—Clugar ſtruggled in all his thongs, and rolled in wrath his red eyes.—Thus ho⯑vering over the bleak waves of the North,—when GRIAN-AIS ſleeps, wrapt in his cloud, a ſudden froſt comes on all his wings.—He ſtruggles, he loudly roars.—Wide over the broad regions of ſnow is heard a voice!—His large red eyes flame through the duſky evening: The Cruglians ſhrink to their caves^*."’

[177] nor objects of nature. Had GRIAN-AIS been a God in Cale⯑donia, it is not probable that a bard of that country would have treated him with ſo little reſpect. The terrors which the poet has placed around him, ſerve only to highten the ridicule of his diſtreſs. The whole, in ſhort, is abſolutely in⯑conſiſtent with that preſcience and power, which are attributes neceſſary to conſtitute a Divinity. But if the intelligence who reſided in the Sun, and who was pecu⯑liarly honoured by an unmixed branch of the Celtae, could not, in their opinion, extricate his wings from the effects of a froſty evening, we may juſtly conclude, that the ſpirits placed in leſs dignified objects of nature, were actually what they were called, AISE, or feeble ſha⯑dows^*.

[178] General re⯑flections. To collect into one point of view the opinion of the Celtic nations upon the ſubject of religion, they originally believ⯑ed that the Supreme Divinity DE, as the ſoul of the world, pervaded the whole body of nature. This philoſophical idea degenerated, among the bulk of the peo⯑ple, into a ſuppoſition that ſome objects of nature, inſtead of being animated by God himſelf, became the reſidences of ſpirits, who, in ſubordination to him, di⯑rected the operations of their reſpective portions of matter. To theſe intelligen⯑ces they gave the name of AISE, or ſha⯑dowy ghoſts, expreſſive of the vaſt diſpro⯑portion between them and that Being who was the ſource from which theſe ſpi⯑rits themſelves, as well as every thing poſſeſſed of life and motion, derived their exiſtence. It is, upon the whole, highly probable, that the rites which ſome of the ancients took for ſacrifices to ſubordinate Divinities among the Celtae, were no o⯑ther than ceremonies uſed by thoſe Bar⯑barians for the purpoſe of their pretended divinations and inchantments.

General Reflections.

The doc⯑trine not coeval with man. THE doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul is not coeval with man. Whole nations have come down into the region of true hiſtory without having pla⯑ced a tenet ſo eſſential to religion in their faith. The infancy of ſociety is not favour⯑able to ſpeculative inquiry. Mankind, in their rudeſt ſtate, ſcarce ever extend their ideas beyond objects of ſenſe. They per⯑ceive, when death ſuſpends the functions of the body, that the man ceaſes to act and to feel; and the ſubſequent diſſolution of his whole frame eſtabliſhes the ſuppoſi⯑tion, that his being is at an end. Nature herſelf confirms the opinion from every quarter by ſymptoms of decay. The oak [180] that has fallen by accident or age reſumes not its place on the mountain; and the flower that withers in autumn revives not with the returning year.

Unknown in the firſt ſtage of ſociety. Philoſophy only begins where the firſt ſtage of ſociety ends. As long as bodily labour is the only means of acquiring the neceſſaries of life, man has neither time or inclination to cultivate the mind. Spe⯑culative inquiry is the firſt fruits of the leiſure which civil life procures for indi⯑viduals; but it is extremely doubtful whether the Immortality of the Soul is among the firſt truths which philoſophers have reſcued from ignorance and barba⯑rity.

Aera of its being firſt broached in Greece. The moſt poliſhed nation of antiquity was late in its reception of the doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul. The Greeks, till the days of Thales^*, had formed no idea at all concerning a future ſtate. It is even likely that Thales him⯑ſelf, who was the firſt dignified with the title of Wiſe^†, came too early into the world for the commencement of that opinion. Pherecydes of Scyros^†, accord⯑ing to the beſt authority, firſt introduced the doctine about the fifty-fifth olympiad; [181] and his diſciple Pythagoras greatly con⯑tributed to confirm the belief of another ſtate by the reputation of his philoſophy^‖. It is however certain, that few of the Greeks gave into the opinion of Pytha⯑goras and his maſter; for Pauſanias^§ inſinuates, that even in the days of Plato only ſome of the Greeks believed that the Soul of Man was immortal.

Merely ſpe⯑culative The Immortality of the Soul was, upon the whole, a doctrine merely ſpecu⯑lative among the ancient Greeks. Their Poets held it forth in their compoſitions; their philoſophers inculcated it upon their diſciples; it was a theme of diſputation in the ſchools; but the bulk of the peo⯑ple did not look upon it as a truth neceſ⯑ſary to religion: and it is even a matter of doubt whether thoſe philoſophers who affirm that virtue muſt be loved on its own account, did not, in that inſtance, forget what they had advanced in other places concerning the rewards which await the good in another life.

[182] among the ancient Greeks. This ſcepticiſm of the Greeks in ſo eſſential a point of religion may appear ſtrange, to men who have not examined into the origin of that illuſtrious nation. The new people who chaſed the Pelaſgi^† from Peloponneſus and the Iſlands of the Archipelago, came from the coaſt of Phoenicia and the mouths of the Nile. They carried into Greece the Gods of Syria and of Egypt, but they could not carry along with them a doctrine which was not received in thoſe countries at the time of their migration. It is a matter of great doubt with many, whether the Jews themſelves admitted, in an early period, the Immortality of the Soul a⯑mong the articles of their faith. This much is certain, that their lawgiver and prophets, if they ſpeak at all, ſpeak very obſcurely, as well as undeciſively, upon the ſubject^‡.

Opinions of the Celtae on that Subject.

Philoſophy The Greeks and Romans affected to degrade, with the name of Barbarians, all the nations beyond the pale of their own reſpective dominions. The luxuri⯑ous Perſian, in the midſt of the pomp and grandeur of the Eaſt, was not free from the ignominy of this injurious appel⯑lation, no more than the Scythian in the wild foreſts of the Weſt. We have how⯑ever ſome reaſon to conclude, that, in an early aera, there was little foundation in fact for the diſtinction which Greece and Rome made between themſelves and the reſt of the world. The ſuperiority of the Perſians in the arts of civil life was ma⯑nifeſt and acknowledged; and philoſophy itſelf took its riſe among thoſe whom the poliſhed nations of antiquity diſtinguiſhed by the name of Barbarians^‖.

roſe firſt among the northern nations. We diſcover by the firſt dawn of hiſ⯑rory which roſe on the northern nations, that, though they had not made any con⯑ſiderable progreſs in the arts of civil life, they had turned their attention to philo⯑ſophical [184] inquiry^*. An order of men ſeparated from the body of the people by the ſacredneſs of their character, had ex⯑tended their ſpeculations to the Being and Attributes of a God. We have, in a preceding ſection, ſeen that the primary ideas of the Druids concerning the Di⯑vinity were the ſame with thoſe of the ancient Brahmins of the Eaſt; ‘"that God is the GREAT SOUL, who ani⯑mates the whole body of nature^†."’

The Druids taught the Immorta⯑lity of the Soul. The Druids, from the elevated inquiry into the exiſtence of the GREAT SOUL, deſcended into an examination of the na⯑ture and permanency of that active prin⯑ciple which animates the human body. In their reſearches upon this ſubject they departed from the opinion of the ancient Brahmins, who ſuppoſed that the ſoul of man was a portion of that irreſiſtible prin⯑ciple [185] which pervades and moves the im⯑menſe body of the Univerſe^†. The ideas of the Druids concerning God were certainly the ſame with thoſe of the eaſtern philoſophers; but they placed in the human frame a diſtinct intelligence capable of happineſs, and ſubject to mi⯑ſery. The Immortality of the Soul was the firſt principle of their faith^†, and the [186] great hinge upon which the religion of the ancient Britiſh, as well as of the other branches of the Celtic ſtock, ori⯑ginally turned. Upon this doctrine, which was with eagerneſs inculcated by the Druids, were founded thoſe character⯑iſtical manners which diſtinguiſhed the northern Celtae from the poliſhed nations of antiquity.

Their opi⯑nions con⯑cerning a future ſtate, In the infancy of philoſophy it is dif⯑ficult for the human mind to form any diſtinct idea of the exiſtence of an im⯑material Being. We are not, therefore, to wonder that the northern nations car⯑ried the buſineſs and paſtimes, though not the miſeries, of this life into their future ſtate. Without being acquainted with the PALINGENESIA of Pythagoras^* and his followers, they clothed departed ſpirits with bodies not ſubject to decay; and they were ſingular in the opinion, that the ſoul left all unhappineſs behind it when it took its flight from this world.

which was free from miſery, But though the future ſtate of the an⯑cient Britons was diſtinguiſhed by a total abſence of miſery, its pleaſures were of different degrees. The hero and ſoldier [187] who died in war enjoyed a more elevated felicity; but the peaceable and unwarlike were not, as among the Scandinavians, pre⯑cipitated into a ſtate of abſolute miſery. Such was the ignorance of the Celtae of what we call Hell, that they had no name for any ſuch place in their language. This circumſtance diveſted Death of all his terrors; and to it we ought to aſcribe the unparalleled valour of the Celtic na⯑tions^†.

and full of felicity. The pleaſing proſpect which a future ſtate preſented to our anceſtors, rendered, by its contraſt, the preſent life very mi⯑ſerable in their eyes. They wept over the birth of their children^* as entering [188] into a ſcene of misfortunes, and they ac⯑companied their dead with joy to the grave, as having changed a ſtate of un⯑happineſs for one of perfect felicity. Peculiarly fortunate in their error, if the opinion deſerves ſo harſh a name, they con⯑verted into means of joy what other ſyſ⯑tems of religion have rendered gloomy and melancholy. Death, with them, was the dark point which ſeparated a life ſhort and miſerable, from a long and happy immortality in another world^†.

The Paradiſe of the ancient Britiſh Nations.

The Para⯑diſe of the Celtae The ancient inhabitants of Britain, to enjoy the felicity of a future ſtate, aſ⯑cended not into heaven with the Chriſ⯑tians, nor dived under the ocean with the poets of Greece and Rome. Their [189] FLATH-INNIS, or NOBLE ISLAND^*, lay ſurrounded with tempeſt, in the Weſtern ocean^†. Their brethren on the continent, in an early period, placed the ſeats of the Bleſſed in Britain; but the Britons themſelves, as we ſhall have occaſion to ſhew, removed their Fortu⯑nate Iſland very far to the weſt of their own country.

different from that of the North. The ancients are extremely imperfect in their accounts of the pleaſures which the Celtae enjoyed in their future ſtate; neither does the Iſlandic Edda, now in the hands of the learned, ſupply that de⯑fect. The nations to the North and Eaſt of the Baltic were a very different race of men from the more ancient inhabitants of the reſt of Europe. It was after the tyranny and civilization of the Romans had broken the ſpirit, and deſtroyed the virtues of the Celtae, that the Sarmatic Tartars of the Eaſt and North advanced into the South, and eſtabliſhed their opinions in the regions which they ſub⯑dued. It is therefore in vain to trace the ſpeculative ideas of the ancient Bri⯑tons, concerning their NOBLE ISLAND, in the legends of Odin's Hall.

[190] A Galic tale. On this ſubject we muſt derive our in⯑telligence from a domeſtic ſource. The Scottiſh bards, with their compoſitions in verſe, conveyed to poſterity ſome poetical romances in proſe. One of thoſe tales, which tradition has brought down to our times, relates to the Paradiſe of the Celtic nations. The following extract will con⯑tribute to illuſtrate the detached infor⯑mations which the writers of Greece and Rome have tranſmitted from antiquity, concerning the Fortunate Iſlands.

General re⯑marks. Thus far is the Tale worthy of tranſla⯑tion. Incoherent fables ſucceed the de⯑ſcription; and the employments of the Bleſſed in their Fortunate Iſland differ, in no reſpect, from the amuſements of the moſt uncultivated inhabitants of a moun⯑tainous country. The bodies with which the bard clothes his departed heroes have more grace, and are more active, than [194] thoſe they left behind them in this world; and he deſcribes with peculiar elegance the beauty of the women. After a very tranſient viſion of the NOBLE ISLE, the magician of Skerr returned home in the ſame miraculous manner in which he had been carried acroſs the ocean. But though in his own mind he comprehended his abſence in ſixteen days, he found every thing changed at his return. No trace of his habitation remained; he knew not the face of any man. He was even forced, ſays the Tale, to make inquiry concern⯑ing himſelf; and tradition had ſcarcely carried down his name to the generation who then poſſeſſed the Iſland of SKERR. Two complete centuries had paſſed away ſince his departure; ſo imperceptible was the flight of time in the felicity of the Celtic Paradiſe.

The ſouls of the departed viſited at times this world. The departed, according to the Tale, retained in the midſt of their happineſs a warm affection for their country and liv⯑ing friends. They ſometimes viſited the firſt; and by the latter, as the bard ex⯑preſſes it, they were tranſiently ſeen in the hour of peril, and eſpecially on the near approach of death. It was then that at midnight the death-devoted, to uſe the words of the Tale, were ſud⯑denly awakened by a ſtrange knocking at their gates; it was then that they heard [195] the undiſtinct voice of their departed friends calling them away to the Noble Iſle^*.—‘"A ſudden joy,"’ continues the Author of the Tale, ‘"ruſhed in upon their minds: and that pleaſing melancholy, which looks forward to happineſs in a diſtant land."’ It is worthy of being re⯑marked, that though thoſe who died a natural death were not excluded from the Celtic Paradiſe, the more pleaſant divi⯑ſions of the FLATH-INNIS, or NOBLE ISLE, were aſſigned to men who fell in war.

Cauſe of the con⯑tempt of death a⯑mong our anceſtors. The animated deſcriptions which the Druids and Bards gave of FLATH-INNIS, or the NOBLE ISLE, rendered the Celtic nations careleſs about a tranſitory life which muſt terminate in happineſs^†. They threw away with indifference the burden when it galled them, and became in ſome meaſure independent of fortune in her worſt extreme. They met death in the field with elevation and joy of mind^†; they ſought after him with [196] eagerneſs when oppreſſed with diſeaſe, or worn out with age^†. To the ſame cauſe, and not to a want of docility of diſpo⯑ſition and temper, we ought to aſcribe their ſmall progreſs in the arts of civil life before the Phoenicians and Greeks, with their commerce, and the Romans, with their arms, introduced a taſte for luxury into the regions of the Weſt and North.

Their Character.

Cauſe of variety in the charac⯑ters of na⯑tions. THE principles of reaſon are ſo unchangeable in themſelves, that were men to form their actions upon them there would be little diverſity in the cha⯑racter of nations. The ſpeculative opi⯑nions of the Brahmin on the banks of the Ganges differed not materially from thoſe of the Druid on the Rhine; but there was no ſimilarity between the igno⯑rant Indian and the illiterate German. The bulk of mankind deliver themſelves over to the direction of their paſſions; climate, conſtitution of body, mode of education, manner of life, and a thou⯑ſand circumſtances of leſs importance than theſe, give riſe to thoſe peculiari⯑ties which diſtinguiſh individuals from one another, and diverſify the characters of [198] nations. Without this variety, hiſtory would languiſh in the ſameneſs of events; for the motives which produce human actions furniſh more amuſement in narra⯑tion than the actions themſelves.

The An⯑cient Britiſh paſſionate and impe⯑tuous, The Ancient Britiſh Nations, like their Celtic brethren on the continent, were fierce, paſſionate, and impetuous; ſudden in reſolution, ſanguine in expectation, impatient under diſappointment. This warmth and vehemence of temper pro⯑ceeded, according to the ancients, from the full habit of their bodies, and the abundance of their blood^*; and theſe circumſtances naturally led to a careleſs boldneſs, which threw diſgrace on their conduct, when it diſplayed their courage. warlike, War, which was their chief buſineſs, was their great amuſement. They were in love^† with ſlaughter, and, as Caeſar obſerves, born as it were in the midſt of battle and depredation^†. Public tran⯑quility by no means ſuited their diſpo⯑ſition; they ſeemed to be of the ſame opinion with the king of Thrace, who ſaid, that he appeared to himſelf no bet⯑ter [199] than his groom when he was not en⯑gaged in war.

plain, good⯑hearted, upright, With all this violence and fierceneſs of diſpoſition, they were in private life plain and upright in their dealings, and far removed from the deceit and duplicity of modern times^§. They were always open, ſincere, and undiſguiſed; ſimple, good-natured, and void of malignity^*; and though cruel, and ſometimes barba⯑rous, to their enemies, they were kind and compaſſionate to the ſupplicant and unfortunate^†. fickle, Fickleneſs and levity were the natural conſequences of their warmth of diſpoſition. Men of vivacity, and ſubject to paſſion, are, for the moſt part, inconſtant, changeable, raſh, curi⯑ous, credulous, and proud. precipitate, All the branches of the Celtic nation determined ſuddenly upon affairs of the greateſt mo⯑ment, and placed the foundation of reſo⯑lutions of the laſt importance upon un⯑certain rumours, and vague reports^†. [200] Their violence in ruſhing into new pro⯑jects could be only equalled by their want of perſeverance in any plan. The tide ſeldom ran long in one direction; it was always with them a precipitate ebb, or a tempeſtuous flow.

curious, The curioſity which ſo remarkably di⯑ſtinguiſhed the ancient Gauls has come down with their poſterity to the preſent times. The Highlanders of North Bri⯑tain are ſo fond of news, that even the pooreſt labourers, upon ſeeing at a great diſtance a traveller on the road, often quit their work, run to meet him, and, with great earneſtneſs, intreat him to tell them ſomething concerning the ſtate of public affairs. If he is communicative they ac⯑company him perhaps for many miles, and they ſeem to think themſelves well recom⯑penſed for the time they have loſt by the intelligence which they have received^*.

hoſpitable, Our anceſtors were hoſpitable beyond example. To receive the ſtranger with cheerfulneſs, to lodge him in their beſt apartments, to treat him with their greateſt delicacies, was a law which cuſtom had rendered inviolable and univerſal^†. It [201] was not till after he ſignified his deſire of purſuing his journey that they inquired about his country and his name^†; and they excuſed this piece of curioſity in themſelves by ſaying, that they were anxious to know ſome few particulars concerning a perſon who had ſo much honoured their habitation with his pre⯑ſence. When they ſaw a traveller upon the road they ran to meet him, and, with an earneſtneſs that bordered on compul⯑ſion, invited him to their houſes; and there was often a kind of jealouſy and contention between the neighbours about the honour of being the firſt who ſhould entertain the ſtranger. The deciſion in theſe diſputes was left to the traveller; and the diſappointed perſon uſed to ſay, that God was favourable to him who had the good fortune to be preferred^*. At night they never ſhut their gates^†, ‘"leſt [202] the traveller, ſay they, ſhould come and be diſappointed, when we are aſleep, and not ready to invite or receive him^†."’

proud, and haughty. The haughtineſs, ſelf-conceit, and na⯑tional pride which the ancients found a⯑mong the Celtae^‖, was not peculiar to that race of men. The vulgar of every country have a high opinion of their own nation. National pride is, at the worſt, an uſeful weakneſs; for men who think meanly of themſelves are ſeldom capable of great actions.—Theſe are the moſt ſtriking outlines of the character of the ancient inhabitants of Britain. To any man acquainted with the nature and ge⯑nius of the unmixed part of the poſterity of the Celtae, in the northern diviſion of the Iſland, the authorities at the bottom of the page are ſuperfluous. He will be convinced of the juſtneſs of the deſcrip⯑tion, by the obſervations he himſelf has made; and he will be, at the ſame time, ſurpriſed to ſee the accurate exactneſs, with which the writers of Rome have drawn the portrait of our anceſtors.

Their Amuſements and Diverſions.

Amuſe⯑ments of the ancient Britons The Britiſh branch of the Celtae, like the great ſtock from which they ſprung, were, almoſt in every thing, on the ex⯑treme. They placed their chief happi⯑neſs in the moſt perfect inactivity, or in the moſt violent exertions of the body. Wedded to the ſtrange opinion, that all labour, whether of body or mind, was mean and diſgraceful, they dedicated the whole time that remained to them from war and the chace, to ſleep, and a very few domeſtic diverſions^*.

conſiſted in feaſts To feaſt together, and to regale them⯑ſelves, held the firſt place in their amuſe⯑ments. Every ſlight occurrence was ſeized upon with eagerneſs, as an excuſe for conviviality and public entertainment. Without the banquet nothing important was ever done. The feaſt was, as it were, the ſeal which gave validity to pub⯑lic conventions, the ſanction which ren⯑dered inviolable private friendſhips. The name-day of every perſon in a family was kept, marriages were celebrated with un⯑common feſtivity, and funerals ſolemnized with laviſh hoſpitality. The love of a [204] reputation for hoſpitality was carried ſo far, that the great men in the community often pitched tents and built huts on the public road, for the pleaſure of enter⯑taining indiſcriminately all thoſe who paſ⯑ſed that way^†. Theſe entertainments have been known to laſt a whole year; and the hoſpitable chief, not content with giving a general invitation to all the members of the ſtate, placed parties of men on the by-roads of the country, to bring paſſengers, by a kind of compul⯑ſion, to his table.

and public The diſhes at thoſe feaſts were not nu⯑merous, and there was little variety in the cookery. Fiſh of various kinds, the fleſh of tame animals, wild fowl, and ve⯑niſon, were ſerved up, as at preſent, in the three modes of boiled, broiled, and roaſted^†. They abſtained from tame fowl: Geeſe, ducks, and hens they only reared for pleaſure^*. The utenſils uſed upon theſe occaſions were few in number and ſimple in their faſhion. Spits and large earthen pots were the whole furni⯑ture [205] of the kitchen; wooden, and ſome⯑times earthen and pewter platters^*, that of the table. The gueſts, as to this day in France, brought along with them their own knives and forks, which hung from the girdle in the ſame ſheath^† with the dagger, which is called the BIDOC by the ancient Scots.

entertain⯑ments. The ſide-tables of the old Britons were not decorated with all the ſplendour of modern times. On them were only to be ſeen drinking cups of various ſizes, in number equal to thoſe who ſat at table. One of the cups was generally of ſilver, the reſt of wood, horn^‖, earth, and ſometimes of ſhell. The better ſort ſat at a table in the center of the great hall. Their dependents, compleatly armed, as if on guard, formed a wider circle, and regaled themſelves, at the ſame time^†, [206] on long benches very little raiſed from the ground. They were waited upon at table by girls and boys not arived at the years of puberty^§. When they had done eating, the moſt honourable man at the feaſt called for a cup of ale, the com⯑mon drink of the Celtae, or of wine, after commerce had introduced it among them. He drank, as we do at preſent, to the next on his right hand; and the ſame cup being filled to the brim to each per⯑ſon, went round the whole circle. The women were^* not only admitted but highly honoured at their entainments; they retired, as with us, before the men proceeded to downright ebriety.

Of ſinging, The bards held a conſpicuous place at public entertainments; and a great part of the amuſement of our anceſtors was derived from their ſongs. They repeat⯑ed their compoſitions in every branch of poetry; the heroic, the elegiac, the ludi⯑crous, the ſevere. The words were ſet to muſic; the bard recited nothing where the voice was not ſuſtained by ſome in⯑ſtrument. The harp was appropriated [207] to the ſerious; a flute or pipe accompa⯑nied the comic and lively.

dancing, That ſpecies of dancing which the Greeks diſtinguiſhed by the name of Pyr⯑rhic, was an univerſal amuſement a⯑mong the Celtic nations. A number of young men in complete armour ruſhed in ſuddenly before the gueſts, at a certain pe⯑riod of the warlike muſic, danced with great agility, and kept time by ſtriking their ſwords againſt their ſhields^†. When the ſpectators were, for a ſhort time, a⯑muſed with this ſhew, the muſic ſuddenly changed, the armed dancers diſappeared with a ſhout of war, and a band of young women entered, tripping hand in hand to a merry air^†. They too, at a certain period of the muſic, vaniſhed at once; the young men entered again as if engaged in action, and to the ſound of the accom⯑panying inſtrument exhibited all the in⯑cidents of a real battle^*.

duelling, Neither were the gueſts at Celtic en⯑tertainments gratified with fictitious bat⯑tles only; the young warriors frequently challenged one another to ſingle combat to ſhew their bravery. The gladiatorial ſpectacles at Rome proceeded from this [208] characteriſtical cuſtom of the Barbarians of the North of Europe; who, contrary to the opinions of all other nations, plac⯑ed death itſelf in the number of their amuſements^*. This peculiarity they carried to ſuch an extravagant pitch, that a ſtranger, if renowned for his va⯑lour, thought himſelf diſhonoured ſhould his hoſt neglect to give him an opportu⯑nity of breaking a ſpear with ſome brave man among his friends.

games of chance. The eagerneſs for games of chance, which Tacitus found among the Ger⯑mans, was not entirely confined to the continent. The ancient Bards have tranſmitted to us, in their ſongs, many proofs that dice were not unknown among the Caledonians. The Bards, however, do not inform us that the northern Bri⯑tons carried their paſſion for gaming ſo far as to place their liberty, which was more valuable than life itſelf in the eyes of the Celtae, upon a ſingle throw of the dye^†.

Their Morality and Poetry.

General reflections. Vice is not natural to man; he derives it from thoſe fictitious wants which grow with the progreſs of ſociety. Before proper⯑ty becomes the means of procuring ſenſual pleaſure, civil reſtraints are ſuperfluous, and morality itſelf an unneceſſary ſtudy. The contempt which the Celtic nations ſhewed for death, is a proof that they were not anxious about the poſſeſſion of the conveniencies of life; and that circum⯑ſtance ſhut up the great channel of cor⯑ruption which pollutes the human mind in an advanced ſtage of civility. We may here without impropriety obſerve, that the vices of Barbarians proceed from prejudice, and their virtues from na⯑ture.

Morality taught by the Druids, The Druids, with their ſpeculative opinions on religion, inculcated upon their followers ſome general maxims of mora⯑lity. The reſult of their inquiries in other branches of philoſophy, their diſ⯑coveries in the nature and properties of matter, they confined to themſelves, to aſtoniſh into a veneration for their order a race of men whom they wiſhed to govern through the channel of prejudice and igno⯑rance. [210] Darkneſs was favourable to the continuance of their power; and they encouraged into a ſettled contempt that diſlike to ſcience and the arts of civil life which the northern nations derived from their natural averſion to mental, as well as to bodily labour.

and Bards, The moral character of our anceſtors owed more to the compoſitions of the Bard^* than to the precepts of the Druid. That elevation of ſoul which the firſt inſpired was more favourable to virtue than the cold dictates of the latter; for the mind which entertains a conſcious and dignified pride ſeldom harbours vice. The influence which the Bards derived from the inſtruction and amuſement with which their poems furniſhed their countrymen, raiſed them to equal honours with the Druids themſelves. The reſpect for their order was ſo great and univerſal, that armies engaged in action have been known to deſiſt from battle when the Bards threw themſelves between the lines^†. They [211] were held in as much veneration by the enemies of their nation as by their coun⯑trymen and friends; "for" as an ancient Bard expreſſes himſelf, ‘"the world is the country, and mankind the relations of every genuine Poet."’

who were divided into three claſſes. The compoſitions of the Bards, ac⯑cording to the ancients, comprehended the religion, the laws, and hiſtory of the Celtic nations. To commit thoſe poems to memory, to repeat them on ſolemn occaſions, was the great amuſement and ſtudy of their vacant hours. It is highly probable, though the obſervation is not made by the writers of Greece and Rome, that the order of the Bards were divided into three different claſſes. The Britiſh and Iriſh Scots had their FER-LAOI, or Hymniſts^†, who reduced the tenets of re⯑ligion into verſe; their SENACHIES, who comprehended the fabulous hiſtory of their anceſtors^* in a kind of unpoetical ſtanza; and their FER-DAN, who ſung the praiſes of men who had made a great [212] figure in war^†. Each of theſe claſſes kept its own province entire. They in⯑terfered not in the leaſt with one another; the FER-LAOI deſcended not into the re⯑gion of the SENACHY, nor did the SE⯑NACHY riſe to the ſublimity of the FER-DAN, who derived from his poetical ge⯑nius his only title to the name of Bard. The hymns of the FER-LAOI were loſt by the introduction of a new religion; and the works of the SENACHY expired in their natural dulneſs. A few of the compoſitions of the FER-DAN have tri⯑umphed over the ravages of time; and prove that the Bards inculcated the pureſt morals on their countrymen, and compre⯑hended in their ſongs all thoſe virtues which render a man truly great, and de⯑ſervedly renowned.

Character of the ancient Britons formed on the poems of the Bards. The ancient Britiſh nations heard their poems with ſuch rapture and enthuſiaſm, that they formed their character and man⯑ners upon the model of the virtues which the Bards recommended in their ſongs. In an age unacquainted with ſcience men became diſintereſted, gene⯑rous, [213] and noble, as individuals; as a nation they were inconſiderable and ob⯑ſcure in the abſence of thoſe civil improve⯑ments which alone can render a commu⯑nity reſpectable and great. A publication which the Author of the Introduction has already given to the world eſtabliſhes the juſtneſs of the above obſervation. It at the ſame time ſhews, that the perſonal virtues of individuals avail little to perpe⯑tuate the fame of an uncultivated nation; and it alſo proves, that no dignity of character, no greatneſs of ſoul, can reſ⯑cue the prince from the oblivion which muſt involve his unpoliſhed and illiterate people. Fingal paſſed away unnoticed in Caledonia, at the time that Helioga⯑balus employed the page of the hiſtorian at Rome.

Subject of their poems. To recommend valour in war by the example of ancient times^*, to encourage the generous feelings of the mind with penegyric, to animate the living to noble deeds by celebrating the great actions of the dead^†, were not the only ſubjects which employed the genius of the Celtic Bards. They travelled to the various [214] regions of poetry, to the ſentimental, the ludicrous, the ſevere. Of the two latter nothing of any antiquity remains. The ludicrous is local and temporary; and ſatire ceaſes to pleaſe when the follies it reprehends are loſt in length of time. The ſentimental is peculiar to no age; it ſuits the inherent feelings of the human mind; and when clothed with glowing imagery, and expreſſed in ſmooth verſifi⯑cation, it pleaſes the fancy, and adheres to the memory. It is to an union of all theſe circumſtances we owe the preſerva⯑tion of the greateſt part of the poems of Oſſian, which contribute to finiſh the picture of our anceſtors, of which the outlines have been drawn by the writers of Greece and Rome.

The poets, in ſhort, were the great, the favourite inſtructors of the ancient Briton. He attended to the precept of the Druid with awe; he heard the ſenti⯑ment of the Bard with rapture. Reſerv⯑ed, ſevere, and imperious, the firſt, when he enlightened, endeavoured to enſlave the mind; the latter elevated the ſoul with pleaſure, when he improved it with inſtruction.

Their Perſons and Women.

Perſons of the Celtae The inhabitants of modern Europe dif⯑fer not more in their manners, than in the ſize of their perſons, from thoſe nations who poſſeſſed of old the regions of the North and Weſt. The Sarmatic Tar⯑tars, who moved into the provinces of the Roman empire upon its decline, were low of ſtature, a ſquat and ſwarthy race of men. The Celtic nations, under whatever climate they were placed, were tall, robuſt^*, and luſty^†; of a ruddy complexion^†, with yellow hair^‖, and [216] large blue eyes^*. The Spaniard^†, ex⯑poſed to the burning ſuns of Gallicia, was as fair and florid as the German of the northern Europe.

of an enor⯑mous ſize. The ancients, aſtoniſhed at the enor⯑mous ſize of the Celtae, endeavoured to account for that phaenomenon in a phyſi⯑cal way. Caeſar, in ſpeaking of the Germans, attributes their great ſtature to the groſs food with which they were nouriſhed, and to the continual exerciſe which was the natural attendant on the two occupations of hunting and depreda⯑tory war. The illuſtrious writer aſcribes it in part to the uninterrupted freedom of action they enjoyed in their youth; to the want of all application to ſtudy; and to the conſequent abſence of correction when boys^†. To all theſe cauſes com⯑bined the Celtae, according to Caeſar, owed that immenſe height of body which roſe ſo remarkably over the ſtandard of other nations.

[217] Cauſe of that phaeno⯑menon. Theſe circumſtances may have contri⯑buted to the great ſize of the Celtic na⯑tions, but they were far from being the only cauſe. The Tartars, who migrated in the fourth and fifth ages into the pro⯑vinces of the weſtern empire, differed not materially in their manner of life from the Celtae, yet they fell much ſhort of them in ſtature. Among mankind, as in other animals, there ſeem to be a vari⯑ety of ſpecies; ſome are by nature mere pigmies, others of gigantic proportions. No climate, no change of food can raiſe the Laplander to the height of the Ger⯑man: and ſubject the latter for ages to the intenſe cold and ſcarcity of food in the arctic circle, and he will not dwindle into the mean ſtature of the preſent inha⯑bitant of Lapland.

The Britiſh talleſt of all the Celtae. Of all the branches of the Celtae, the ancient Britons, the Germans not even excepted, were the greateſt in the height of their bodies^*. They generally ex⯑ceeded by half a foot the talleſt Romans in the days of Strabo; and they roſe be⯑yond [218] the ſtandard of the Gauls, whoſe perſons, according to an exaggerating writer, were of more than human ſize^†. their wo⯑men; The women did not yield to the men in ſtature, and they almoſt equalled them in ſtrength of body and in vigour of mind^†. They were fair, blooming, and ſtately; juſt and full in the proportions of their limbs; active, high-ſpirited, and bold. Their long yellow hair flowed careleſsly down their ſhoulders, and their large blue eyes animated their looks into a kind of ferocity leſs apt to kindle love than to command reſpect and awe.

their cha⯑racter; In modern Europe a fictitious reſpect is paid to women, in the ancient they poſ⯑ſeſſed real conſequence and power. They were not then chained to the diſtaff, or confined to the trivial cares of domeſtic life. They entered into the active ſcenes of public affairs, and, with a maſculine ſpirit, ſhared the dangers and fatigues of the field with their huſbands and friends. They unmanned not their countrymen in the hour of peril with vain terrors and complaints; they animated them to action [219] with exhortation, and confirmed their va⯑lour with examples of perſonal courage^‖. Routed armies have been known to return to the charge at their intreaty, battles have been gained by their timely interpoſition^*. Strangers to the acquieſcing diſpoſition of other women, they ſcorned to ſurvive the defeat of their friends; they ſnatched the triumphs of victory from the hand of the enemy, and reſcued themſelves from ſlavery by a voluntary death^†. Inſtead of ſoothing the untractable minds of their huſbands into conceſſions that might pro⯑cure ſafety, they encouraged them to loſe their lives rather than their liberty and in⯑dependence.

their amaz⯑ing influ⯑ence, The picture we have drawn will not probably pleaſe the refined ideas of the preſent times. But the high ſpirit of the Celtic women gave them more influence over our anceſtors than our modern beau⯑ties derive from all their elegant timidity and delicacy of manners. The moſt un⯑poliſhed [220] Germans, according to Tacitus, thought that ſomething divine dwelt in female minds: Women were admitted to their public deliberations, and they did not deſpiſe their opinions or neglect to follow their advice^†. To ſuch a pitch had ſome branches of the Celtae carried their veneration for the fair ſex, that, even in their life-time, a kind of divine honours was paid to ſome diſtinguiſhed women^§. The ancient Britons were peculiarly fond of the government of wo⯑men. Succeſſion, where it was eſtabliſh⯑ed at all, went in the female as well as in the male line^‖; and they convened with no leſs ardour round the ſtandard of a princeſs, than they followed with eager⯑neſs their petty kings and chiefs to the field^*.

obſervations on the ſize of the Celtae. Some late writers have aſcribed the enormous ſize and corpulence of the Bar⯑barians of ancient Europe to their uſe of beer, the univerſal beverage of all the [221] branches of the Celtic nations. Had the obſervation been juſt, the preſent Engliſh ſhould exceed their fathers in ſtature; but this is ſo far from being the caſe, that they fall ſhort of the modern Germans, and are ſcarce ſuperior, in that reſpect, to the French, who, from poſſeſſing the grape, have for ages diſcontinued the drinking of beer. To ſtrengthen the argument it may be here obſerved, that the inhabitants of London, who uſe beer the moſt, are of a ſmaller ſize than thoſe who live leſs luxuriouſly in other parts of the kingdom. To ſolve the difficulty we muſt have recourſe to a remark already made; that the Sarmatae, who, upon the decline of the Romans, advanced into the regions of the Weſt, were a very different race of men from the Celtae, and that they ſent down their low ſize, with their blood, to the preſent inhabitants of Eu⯑rope, who are, in a great meaſure, their poſterity^*.

[222] Effects of climate on the ſize of men, The great ſtature of the ancient Bri⯑tons may, in ſome degree, be aſcribed to the humidity of the climate under which they lived. The ſame temperature of air which favours the extraordinary growth of vegetables, may contribute to increaſe the ſize of the human body, where it is not checked by that mode of life and hard labour which civil improvements have introduced into modern Europe. The inhabitants of cloudy regions and ſwampy countries, even at this day, ex⯑ceed in ſtature thoſe who live under a ſerene ſky and on a dry and light ſoil. The Germans who poſſeſs the fens be⯑tween the Scheld and the Elbe riſe beyond the ſtandard of the inhabitants of the up⯑per Germany, and the Engliſh of the moraſſes of Lincoln exceed in ſize the inhabitants of the downs of Hamp⯑ſhire.

and beauty of their wo⯑men. But whatever effect the humidity of the air had on the ſtature of the northern Celtae, it certainly contributed to that whiteneſs of ſkin by which they were ſo remarkably diſtinguiſhed. The beauty of their women^*, thoſe ruddy and florid complexions which glow in the deſcripti⯑ons of the ancients^†, may, in ſome mea⯑ſure, [223] be aſcribed to the moiſt atmoſphere which ſtill clothes our fields with a kind of perpetual green. But the ſuperior beauty of the Celtic women, as it was common to all the nations of ancient Europe deſ⯑cended from the ſame ſtock, muſt, like the ſtature of the men, have proceeded from their being a different race from the Sarmatae, who carried their homely looks with their ſmall ſize into the regions of the Weſt.

The uncorrupted chaſtity, the abſolute abſtinence from early venery, which a virtuous kind of prejudice eſtabliſhed into an inviolable law among the Celtic nati⯑ons, muſt have conduced to the immenſe ſize of their bodies. To have any com⯑merce with women before the age of twenty was one of the moſt diſgraceful and unpardonable of all crimes^†. Vir⯑gins were never given in matrimony till their twentieth year; and thus the young couple, coming together in full maturity and vigour, tranſmitted their own ſtrength and ſize to their children^‖.

Their Manner of Life.

Obſerva⯑tions. Our anceſtors had the misfortune, if there is any misfortune in the want of importance with poſterity, to be ſeen diſtinctly by foreigners before either time or accident had poliſhed them out of their natural rudeneſs and barbarity. Nations who have the advantage of be⯑ing the recorders of their own actions cover the beginnings of their hiſtory with ſplendid fictions, or place them in the ſhade to heighten the features of their more authentic ſame. The light which the Romans threw upon the northern nations, in their uncultivated ſtate, by reſcuing their manners from oblivion, has taken away from their renown. Men accuſtomed to the luxuries of advanced ſociety look with a kind of c ontempton the inconveniencies of rude life. This conſideration has induced the Author of the introduction to confine, within nar⯑row bounds, his obſervations on the man⯑ners of the ancient Britiſh nations; for where the road lies through a barren coun⯑try the journey ought to be ſhort.

[225] Agricul⯑ture, &c. When the Scythian Nomades firſt be⯑came known to the Greeks they neither ſowed nor reaped^†; they derived their ſubſiſtence from the fruits which the earth naturally produced, from the chace, and the milk and fleſh of their flocks and herds^§. The Gauls were the firſt branch of the Celtae who applied them⯑ſelves to agriculture; and that earlieſt and rudeſt of all arts had ſcarce paſſed the Rhine, when Caeſar diſplayed in Germany the Roman Eagle^‖. The Britons were probably before the Ger⯑mans, in point of time, in the cultivation of their lands. Their vicinity to Gaul enabled them to import its arts; and their ſoil and climate were more favour⯑able to agriculture than the cold regi⯑ons beyond the Rhine; yet, in the days of Strabo, many of the inhabi⯑tants of Britain were ſtrangers to the uſe of the plough^*. In the infancy of agriculture, oats and barley were the only grains known in the north of [226] Europe^†. The firſt they parched be⯑fore the fire^† and ground in hand-mills, as ſome of the Scots and Iriſh did till of late years; and of the latter they made their favourite beverage, beer.

intoxicating liquors. The art of extracting an inebriating liquor from corn^§ was known among all the branches of the Celtae, before the Greeks and Romans extended their infor⯑mation to the regions of the Weſt. As the method of brewing this intoxicating liquid was not the peculiar invention of any particular country, it went under va⯑rious name. The German appellation is ſtill retained in the Engliſh word Beer; and the LEAN, or LEUAN of the Scots and Iriſh is ſtill famous in the rhimes of their ancient bards. Beer however was not the ſole beverage of the ancient Bri⯑tons; their Zythus, or water diluted with [227] honey^‖, was in much requeſt; and they ſeem, with other northern nations, to have known a method of extracting a kind of cyder from wild apples^*. When the Romans extended their arms to this ſide of the Alps the uſe of wine was in⯑troduced among the Celtic nations. The Germans, rude as they were in the days of Tacitus, were well acquainted with the juice of the grape; and we may con⯑clude, from a parity of reaſon, that the Britons were not ſtrangers to wine at the firſt ſettlement of the Romans in their country.

Houſhold furniture. The houſehold furniture of the Britons was neither ſplendid nor convenient. The beſt accommodated lay on flock beds or on the ſkins of wild beaſts ſpread on ſtraw, ruſhes, or heath; and their chairs and tables were faſhioned with the axe. The ancient Germans were not peculiar in having a ſeparate table, when they eat in private, for each perſon in the family^†; at their public entertainments, they uſed but one table for each rank of the people invited. The old bards have tranſmitted [228] the memory of this, as a Britiſh cuſtom, to modern times. The veſſels uſed by our anceſtors were carved out of wood or made of earth^†. Their drinking-cups were, as has been already obſerved, ori⯑ginally either of ſhell or of horn^§ though ſome more magnificent than others were poſſeſſed of goblets of ſilver^‖.

Clothing The Celtae were better clothed than ſome learned men have ſuppoſed, from the teſtimony of the ancients. Their peculiar cuſtom of throwing away their looſe garments in action gave riſe to the opinion, that ſome of them went always naked. When the nations of antiquity firſt appeared in hiſtory they were but very ſlightly covered: the greateſt part of the body was left bare; and the Perſians were the firſt who adopted the womaniſh long ſtole of the Eaſt. In the various regions of Europe they uſed for clothing the materials in which the country moſt excelled; but the faſhion of their gar⯑ments was univerſally the ſame.

of the va⯑rious bran⯑ches of the Celtae. In the northern regions, where game abounded, their upper coverings were made of the ſkins of beaſts^*: In Ger⯑many [229] they uſed linen, eſpecially the wo⯑men, who ſometimes wore printed gar⯑ments^†, and often long robes of white. The Gauls, like the modern French, de⯑lighted in gawdineſs and ſhew^†. Their wool was coarſe^§; but they rendered their garments leſs homely with gold and ſilver lace^‖. In Spain, as at preſent, the wool was extremely fine^**; the clothing of the Spaniards, therefore, was of ſlighter texture, and more elegant than that of the Gauls. The inhabitants of Britain uſed woollen clothing; neither were they ſtrangers to the manufacturing of linen.

Their make and faſhion. The party-coloured garments^† which the natives of the mountains of Scotland have brought down to the preſent times, were the univerſal taſte among all the [230] branches of the Celtic nation. The Sa⯑gum of the old Gauls and Spaniards was no other than the Scottiſh PLAID of various colours; the Braccae, from which a part of Gaul took its name, were the Highland Trouſe, and the ſame with that worn by the Germans; which being ſtrait and cloſe to the ſkin, exhibited the ſhape of the limbs^†. The ancient Bri⯑tons, like the Germans, wore a cloſe jacket of party-coloured cloth, which ge⯑nerally reached no further than the waiſt⯑band of the Trouſe. This jacket had a half ſleeve, which came down to the el⯑bow^*. The vulgar wore a kind of half-boot and ſhoe in one, made of raw hides, and laced faſt before with ſmall thongs^*: the ſhoes of the better ſort of people were of tanned leather^§.

Dreſs of the women. The dreſs of the women was ſtill more ſimple than that of the men. It conſiſted of a jacket without any ſleeves, and a petticoat which reached down a little be⯑low the knee. Their boſoms were ex⯑poſed [231] to view, and their arms were bare^†. Upon public occaſions they uſed likewiſe a party-coloured Sagum or PLAID of finer texture than that worn by the men; and women of condition and rank hung a chain of gold, by way of ornament, a⯑bout the neck^†. In ſummer their jack⯑ets and petticoats were of linen ſtained with purple: In winter they were of wool, ſtriped with different colours. Printed linens ſeem to be of Celtic in⯑vention. The Spaniſh ladies, in the days of Strabo, wore linen robes ſtained with the figures of various flowers^§.

Dreſs of the Celtae very ſumptuous. Though the Celtic nations had a par⯑ticular averſion to the changing of the faſhion of their clothes, they became early luxurious and expenſive in the article of dreſs. The apparel of the Gauls and Spaniards eſpecially was extremely mag⯑nificent. When they wore linen it was [232] ſtamped or painted^* with a variety of figures in different colours; and their woollen clothes were variegated, accord⯑ing to Strabo, with gold^†. The Ger⯑mans themſelves as early as the beginning of the third century ſtreaked their gar⯑ments with ſilver; and we may conclude that the ancient Britons were not behind the Germans in their love of finery and ſhow^†.

Their neat⯑neſs and cleanlineſs. The Celtae were not only neat in their dreſs, they were alſo cleanly in their per⯑ſons. The character of dirtineſs, which we annex to the Barbarians of ancient Europe, came from the Eaſt with thoſe wild na⯑tions who overturned the empire of the Weſt. The Sarmatae, who were the an⯑ceſtors of the greater part of the preſent inhabitants of Europe, were dirty to a proverb^§. The Celtic nations were pe⯑culiarly fond of cleanlineſs: They bathed regularly every day^‖ in the months of winter, as well as in the heat of ſummer; [233] and they carried their love of neatneſs ſo far, that, according to Ammianus Mar⯑cellinus, in all the provinces of ancient Gaul, not one man or woman, even the pooreſt, was to be ſeen with patched or mended clothes^*. The ſame writer gives a ſtriking contraſt to the Celtic neatneſs in the naſtineſs of the Sarmatae^†, whoſe dirty and ragged poſterity croud, at this day, the ſtreets of the moſt opulent cities in Europe. The cleanlineſs of modern nations proceeds from luxury, and is not general; it was the reſult of nature a⯑mong the Celtae, and was univerſal. Beggary and rags are of the improvements of advanced ſociety.

Their Houſes, Navigation, and Commerce.

Form of their houſes. Caeſar obſerves, that in Britain, which at his arrival ſwarmed with an infinite number of inhabitants, the houſes differed little in the architecture from thoſe of the Gauls^*. The walls were conſtructed of boards or of hurdles^†; the latter of which were plaſtered over with different ſorts of clay of various colours, red, blue, yellow, and white, which made a ſplendid appearance where diſtance prevented the meanneſs of the materials from offending the eye^†. They were of a circular form, the roof roſe in a kind of cone to a great height, and was covered with ſtraw^§. In the center of theſe halls, which were of great ſize, there was ſupported on four pillars of wood a kind of wattled funnel, which, being plaſtered with clay, ſerved [235] the purpoſe of a chimney, and carried the ſmoke through the conical point of the roof. This tube, which was very wide below, ſerved in part to light the hall. The ſleeping apartments, which were divided from the great hall by par⯑titions of planks, or of hurdles plaſtered with mortar, were lighted with ſmall widows.

Stone and brick known, but little uſed. Stone buildings were very rare, and though brick and tile were not abſolutely unknown^*, they were little uſed. It is probable after the Britons began to drop the old Celtic cuſtom of an annual divi⯑ſion of their lands, that ſome of their chiefs and petty kings had more conve⯑nient habitations than thoſe we have above deſcribed. The political motives which the Germans advanced for a frequent change of habitation either exiſted not at all, or were not ſo powerful in Britain as they were upon the continent. When men ſettle in fixed abodes for any conſi⯑derable period of time, the conveniencies of life gradually grow up among them, and they become objects of depredation to their leſs cultivated neighbours. Mo⯑tives of ſafety from ſudden incurſions would certainly have ſuggeſted to the more [236] poliſhed Britons of the South the idea of building with brick and ſtone even before the Romans introduced both among them with their government and arts.

The vulgar lived in huts. The inferior ſort of people, as they do to this day in the mountains of Scotland, lived in mean huts^§: the walls of theſe huts were of ſod, and their roofs covered with a light kind of turf, which frequently ſtood out for twenty years together againſt the injuries of the weather. This ruſtic kind of architecture remained in Italy in the days of Virgil^‖; for the clowns of Mantua and Cremona lived in the turf cabins of their Celtic anceſtors, at a time when Auguſtus boaſted of having con⯑verted the brick edifices of Rome into marble.

Situation of their houſes. In Britain, as in Gaul and Germany, the inhabitants built their houſes in copſes of wood^*, to ſhade them from the heat of the ſummer, and to cover them from the violence of the winter winds. Na⯑turally fond of cleanlineſs, they always fixed their reſidence on the banks of ſome brook or river into which they plunged [237] every morning as ſoon as they roſe from ſleep^†.

They had no towns. The Britons had ſcarcely any group of houſes built in one place, which could deſerve the name of a town^†, when Caeſar firſt arrived in Britain. Like the ancient Germans, they avoided to build in con⯑tinued rows to ſhun the accidents of fire. Thick woods fenced round with a foſs and wall obtained, among the Bri⯑tons, the name of a town^§. This peculiar cuſtom gave its origin to the word BALL, by which a town is inva⯑riably diſtinguiſhed in the Gaëlic lan⯑guage; it being derived from BUAL, literally a fence or fold. It is not im⯑probable but, even in the days of Caeſar, there might be ſome inconſiderable num⯑ber of contiguous houſes on the banks of navigable rivers, and on the ſhores of convenient harbours. The commerce, which, even in thoſe days, was carried on in the ports of Britain, preſuppoſes, in ſome meaſure, the exiſtence of villages.

Their navi⯑gation, The navigation of the ancient Britiſh nations was deſpicable, if compared with the improvements of modern times. They, however, ventured, into the ocean [238] in ſmall craft of rude conſtruction, which they managed with great dexterity^‖. The keels and kelſons of their long⯑boats, for their veſſels deſerved not the name of ſhips, were formed of ſlight ma⯑terials. The hull was made of wicker covered with raw hides^*. Each end of the veſſel terminated in a ſharp beak, and it was rowed indiſcriminately either way^†. They uſed oars^† for the moſt part, though they were not unacquainted with the ſail; and they ſkimmed along the water with amazing facility and expedition. The ſize of thoſe veſſels muſt have been greater than is generally ſuppoſed, for the Saxon auxiliaries of Vortigern tranſported them⯑ſelves in three of them from Germany to Britain. As, to uſe a naval phraſe, they could live in any ſea, it is probable that ſome of thoſe boats were accommodated with ſlight decks.

[239] The inhabitants of the north of Eu⯑rope, it is highly probable, ſailed, in a very early period, in veſſels of a larger ſize and better conſtruction than thoſe we have already deſcribed. The Suiones or ancient Scandinavians had their fleets in the days of Tacitus^§; and before the time of the elder Pliny, the northern nations not only ventured into the tem⯑peſtuous ſeas of Norway, but even paſſed over into Thule, which the learned ſup⯑poſe to be the ſame with the modern Ice⯑land^‖. Theſe voyages could not have been performed in open boats nor in hulls of wicker covered with raw hides. The art of ſhip-building, though perhaps in its rudeſt ſtate, was known in the North when the firſt feeble light of hiſtory roſe on its nations. Men who ſailed to Thule could ſcarcely be unacquainted with Bri⯑tain; and had the inhabitants of the latter neglected an art which their maritime ſituation muſt have naturally ſuggeſted to them, they muſt have certainly adopted it from the Scandinavians. Rivers, narrow arms of the ſea, even the Britiſh and Iriſh channels might be navigated in open [240] ſkiffs by the inhabitants of the weſtern ſhores of Britain, but thoſe on the Ger⯑man ocean may be ſuppoſed to have known as much of navigation as the na⯑tives of the oppoſite continent.

Their fo⯑reign and domeſtic trade; The ancient Britiſh nations carried on ſome degree of foreign commerce, and exported commodities and manufactures^*. The Iſle of Wight ſeems to have been their chief mart. The tin, which Corn⯑wall produced in great abundance, after being ſmelted into bars or cubes was car⯑ried thither, and exported afterwards to the neareſt coaſt of Gaul; from which it was ſent by land-carriage to the mouth of the Rhone, and from thence conveyed by the Liguſtic ſea into Italy^†. Their next great commodity was raw hides; and, after the Romans had ſettled in the Iſland, corn. Their manufactures for foreign markets conſiſted, in the reign of Auguſtus, of bridles, glaſs, and earthen ware, veſſels made of a kind of a mixed metal, and other coarſe articles, upon which the Romans raiſed conſiderable du⯑ties in the ports of Gaul^†. The exiſtence [241] of a mercantile intercourſe with foreign⯑ers implies a degree of internal commerce. The ancient Britons, who ventured their ſmall craft on the ocean, may be reaſon⯑ably ſuppoſed to have converted the con⯑venience, which their rivers afforded for water-carriage, to the purpoſes of do⯑meſtic trade.

land carri⯑age and chariots. Their land-carriage was performed, as at preſent, by the means of carts and waggons, long before the Romans intro⯑duced the conveniencies^§ of life with their government. That they went in chariots to war is univerſally known^*: that they uſed them for the convenience of travel⯑ling, as we do our poſt-chaiſes, is equally certain^‖. Some of thoſe vehicles were more expenſive than the tawdry equipages of modern times; for the chariots in which their petty kings fought in battle were frequently of ſolid ſilver^†.

Reflections on the Origin of Go⯑vernment.

Riſe and progreſs of ſociety. SOCIETY is of greater antiquity than government. Civil regulations confeſs, in their own origin, the pre⯑exiſtence of public crimes. Mankind, like other animals, herded originally toge⯑ther through mere inſtinct; and they de⯑ceive themſelves who think that commu⯑ties were formed under a preconcerted ſyſtem of policy. Man, in his rudeſt ſtate, being deſtitute of property, neither fears nor meets with injuſtice: He poſ⯑ſeſſes nothing which his own arm cannot defend, before the love of the convenien⯑cies of life has overcome his neighbour's natural propenſity to juſtice. In the progreſs of ſociety individuals poliſh one another, as it were, by colliſion. The fruit of the ingenuity of one is adopted and improved by another: New inven⯑tions ſtart up in every quarter, and are [243] loſt in none: Luxury grows with the in⯑creaſe of the arts of civil life, rapacity treads cloſe on its heels; and then, for the firſt time, the check of law and re⯑gulation becomes neceſſary to the welfare, if not to the very being of the community.

Origin of monarchy. The popular form of government is more ancient than monarchy. The patri⯑archal authority from which ſome writers deduce the latter, is too much circum⯑ſcribed in degree and time to be the foun⯑tain from which monarchy flows. The power which a parent has over his chil⯑dren cannot be tranſmitted to his ſon. He derives it from nature. and it dies with himſelf. Regal government is a civil inſtitution, which in various coun⯑tries owes its commencement to various cauſes. It generally takes its riſe from a kind of uſurpation; and, whatever theoriſts in politics may ſay, there were originally no ſtipulations made between the tyrant and the people. Length of time eſtabliſhes into a kind of right what, at the beginning, was an act of injuſtice; and the acquieſcence of the people con⯑ſtitutes into a moral duty that obedience which was at firſt the effect of fear.

Popular go⯑vernment older than monarchy. The ſimplicity of monarchical govern⯑ment has eſtabliſhed with many an opi⯑nion of its ſuperior antiquity. The in⯑fancy of ſociety, like that of man, muſt be awed, ſay they, into good behaviour by [244] the fear of obvious puniſhment. The ſlow movements of popular governments command no reſpect, and impreſs no fears; and therefore men naturally place the power of the ſtate where it can be exerted with moſt expedition and preciſion. They who argue in this manner are little ac⯑quainted with the character of barbarous times. In the firſt ſtage of ſociety there is no inequality between individuals: a man's mind muſt be opened with civili⯑zation before he will acquieſce in an opi⯑nion of his own inferiority. The Bar⯑barian knows no perſon better than him⯑ſelf, and he ſubmits to the dictates of none; deriving, in fact, from the vigour and independence of his own mind, that liberty which we owe to an accidental conſtitution of government.

Monarchy begins in force, and is ſupported by influ⯑ence. Though monarchy, for the moſt part, begins in the midſt of tumult and war, the very exiſtence of regal power preſup⯑poſes a conſiderable degree of civility in the community. The authority which the leader of a nation may acquire from perſonal merit in battle will die away in peace, unleſs the machine is kept in mo⯑tion by the continued impulſe of influ⯑ence; and this influence, which is the foundation, if not the origin, of kingly government, is only to be obtained by having ſomething to beſtow upon abettors and dependents. A few being gained. [245] through the channel of intereſt, the many are over-awed into ſubmiſſion; and that lenity and impartial juſtice, which pru⯑dence dictates in the firſt periods of mo⯑narchy, contributes to reconcile the minds of the people to the government of one.

Origin and nature of the popular form of go⯑vernment. In the early infancy of a ſtate, the only laws that ſubſiſt in the community are the opinions and prejudices of the people. Before property is well eſtabliſhed, the catalogue of crimes is very ſuccinct; and the puniſhments annexed to each are nei⯑ther ſevere nor inflicted with preciſion. The people have not yet delegated their authority to a few; and the power that remains in the hands of the many ſeldom exerts itſelf with vigour. The ſociety is kept together more by habit, and the ab⯑ſence of vice, than by any thing which deſerves the name of government. The people, who have the whole power in their hands, convene only when they are to carry war into an enemy's country, or to defend their own. They conſult together but on the external affairs of the community; its internal concerns are left to the opinions of individuals. This ab⯑ſence of all regulation may be called the moſt ancient form of government; and it may be diſtinguiſhed by the title of a popular government, as the opinions of the people in general are the only checks upon the crimes and irregularities of in⯑dividuals.

Form of the Ancient Britiſh Government.

The Ancient Britiſh nations, like the reſt of the inhabitants of the North of Europe, were extremely fond and very tenacious of their political freedom. Though, from a conviction that civil ſociety cannot maintain itſelf without ſubordination, they had their judges, their princes, and kings, the power of thoſe dignified perſons was very much circum⯑ſcribed^§. In the midſt of barbarity they formed as juſt notions of liberty as other free nations have done in the moſt culti⯑vated times. They were convinced, that they not only had a right to elect their magiſtrates^‖, but alſo to preſcribe thoſe laws by which they choſe to be governed. The actions of the individual were cogni⯑zable by the BREHON or judge; the judge was accountable for his conduct to the general aſſembly of the people^*.

[247] love of li⯑berty. The Celtae in general were ſuch enthu⯑ſiaſts on the article of public freedom, that they affirmed it was the natural pro⯑perty of animals as well as of men^†. Their love of liberty was one of the rea⯑ſons they gave for their averſion to induſ⯑try and the accumulation of property; ‘"for he that wiſhes to be free,"’ ſaid the Scy⯑thians, ‘"ought to have nothing that he is afraid to loſe^†."’ Poverty is certainly the beſt bulwark againſt tyranny; nor were our anceſtors much miſtaken when they believed that the man who loves riches is capable of ſelling his liberty for money. The Celtae through all their branches preferred their freedom to life it⯑ſelf. The firſt maxim in war was to maintain their independance, or to prevent ſlavery by a voluntary death^§.

Their kings The department of the prince was to lead in war; in peace he ſunk into an equality with others. Inſtead of con⯑ſidering his will and pleaſure as a living law, they paid him no obedience but what he derived from their opinion of his merit^*. They ſeemed to conſider the [248] chief magiſtrate, even after his authority had extended itſelf to times of tranquility, to be only the guardian of thoſe cuſtoms which occupied the place of laws. Their kings had no public revenue, and they ſtood in need of none when the ſubject attended them in war at his own expence; if indeed the equipping of an ancient Bri⯑ton for depredatory expeditions required any expence at all.

Their gene⯑ral aſſem⯑blies. It is certain that the ancient Britons, like their brethren on the continent, had their general aſſemblies of the people, in which all affairs of public concern were decided by the plurality of voices^*. In the ſmall ſtates into which they were ſub⯑divided, it was not impoſſible for the majority of thoſe of perfect age to convene upon important occaſions. Their reſolu⯑tions muſt, in the nature of things, have been tumultuary and precipitate. They met principally for the purpoſe of making war, and they ruſhed with little delibera⯑tion into a ſtate which they naturally loved. Domeſtic affairs were ſeldom the ſubject of debate; for a people before the eſta⯑bliſhment [249] of landed property and a con⯑ſiderable degree of commerce can ſcarcely be ſaid to have any domeſtic affairs.

Origin of repreſenta⯑tion. The greateſt improvements in politics riſe from very ſimple and rude beginnings. When the ſtate became extenſive and po⯑pulous, it was impoſſible for all its mem⯑bers to convene in general aſſemly. The expedient of delegation was obvious, and was naturally adopted; and length of time poliſhed into what is called a con⯑vention of the ſtates the democratical meetings of the Celtic nations. The de⯑legates being freed of the interruptions and confuſions incident to the aſſemblies of the populace, found leiſure to deter⯑mine upon domeſtic as well as foreign matters; and this was the ſource of theſe civil regulations we diſtinguiſh by the name of laws.—In the darkneſs which involves our remoteſt anceſtors it is im⯑poſſible to trace their government through all its departments with preciſion. The abſence of thoſe vices which exiſt only in poliſhed ſociety was probably the chief cauſe of the domeſtic tranquility^† which they enjoyed. Crimes, to uſe at once a paradox and a metaphor, are the parents of civil regulations; and neceſſity, which is ſaid to have no law, is the ſource of all law.

Their Juſtice.

Man by na⯑ture juſt. Man is by nature juſt. The love of pleaſure, and the conveniences of civil life, warp his ſoul in advanced ſociety from the principles of rectitude and im⯑partiality. The Celto-Scythians are re⯑preſented by the ancients as the moſt juſt and equitable of men. The unbiaſſed feelings of a mind uncorrupted by ſelfiſh paſſions ſupply the place of civil regulati⯑on, and are even better than the coercive power of laws. The ſecurity derived from the innate integrity of men is more pleaſing than that which ariſes from their fears^†. The nation that boaſts of the multiplicity and ſalutarineſs of its regu⯑lations conveys ſatire in ſelf-applauſe; and, though the paradox is not in all caſes juſt, we may venture to affirm, that thoſe who have the beſt laws often need them the moſt^‡.

[251] Simplicity and integri⯑ty of the Britons The open ſimplicity and integrity of the ancient Britons met with the approba⯑tion of thoſe who were moſt their foes; and they yielded not to the Celtae on the continent in their ideas and practice of juſtice between man and man. The ſtranger, the traveller, and the merchant, were ſecure in their perſons and property, not by the ſeverity of legal puniſhments, but from the natural propenſity of the people to juſtice. Theft and robbery within the territory of the community were reckoned unpardonable crimes; be⯑beyond the limits of the ſtate they took the name of depredatory war, and were covered with honour and renown^*.

confined to their domeſ⯑tic conduct. In commending the juſtice and integrity of our anceſtors we muſt confine our ap⯑plauſe to their conduct at home. To take every advantage of an enemy was one of their invariable maxims; and to carry devaſtation and death into the territory of their neighbours upon every ſlight occa⯑ſion was, inſtead of being thought diſ⯑honourable, attended with fame. Though they did not, like the American Indians, excuſe their cruelties by an averſion to war, for, on the contrary, it was the amuſe⯑ment and buſineſs of their lives, they fre⯑quently [252] committed barbarities which can admit of little apology. To alleviate the weight of this reflection it ought to be obſerved, that the oppreſſions of the Ro⯑mans, in the firſt period of their govern⯑ment in Britain, were ſufficient to raiſe a ſpirit of implacable revenge in minds leſs iraſcible and haughty than thoſe of the ancient Britiſh nations. Neither were the Celtae, in any one of their branches, very tenacious of the faith of treaties; their fickle diſpoſition, and ardent love of liberty, rendered them careleſs in their obſervation of conditions impoſed upon them in their misfortunes^†.

Faithful in the ſervice of foreign⯑ers. Notwithſtanding this defect in their public faith, they boaſted frequently, and with juſtice, of the inviolable ſincerity of their profeſſions^§. Their fidelity and at⯑tachment to the foreign princes whom they ſerved in war were without bounds, and beyond example. It muſt however be confeſſed, that gratitude for favours received had a greater influence upon their conduct in this reſpect, than a regard for the virtues of the perſon whoſe arms they bore. A Nero^†, a Vitellius, a Cara⯑calla, were equally loved, and ſerved with [253] as much attachment as an Antonine, by the Celtic Germans; and the Britons, when they obeyed the Romans, made no diſtinction between a lawful prince and an uſurper.—The ancient Britiſh na⯑tions were equitable, juſt, open, and ſin⯑cere, in private life; in their public tranſ⯑actions, like their Celtic neighbours on the continent, they were ſometimes trea⯑cherous and cruel. The pale of their own dominions comprehended almoſt all their good qualities; they carried no vir⯑tue, except valour, into the territory of their enemies.

Their ap⯑peal to the ſword. There was a ſpecies of theocracy a⯑mong the Celtae, as well as among the old Jews. Though they had magiſtrates and courts of juſtice, there was an autho⯑rity ſuperior to both, to which, in doubt⯑ful caſes, they appealed. When either the queſtion of right or matter of fact, was not perfectly clear, the parties de⯑cided the ſuit by the ſword^*. Even wit⯑neſſes, when they did not agree in their teſtimonies, were often obliged to ſettle the difference in their evidence by ſingle combat. The deciſion of arms was rec⯑koned [254] more unerring than that of the ma⯑giſtrate: The appeal was to providence, and the judgment was that of God. To ſuch a pitch of extravagance was this pe⯑culiar cuſtom carried, that the candidates for public offices in the community, when their merit appeared to be equal, truſt⯑ed their reſpective pretenſions to the deci⯑ſion of the ſword^†. Eccleſiaſtical digni⯑ties have been acquired in the ſame bar⯑barous way; and the chief Druid himſelf ſometimes owed his elevation more to his dexterity in ſingle combat with his rivals, than to the ſuperior ſanctity of his own character^†.

General Obſervations.

Nations te⯑nacious of original tongues. NATIONS are not ſo tenacious of their cuſtoms and manners as they are of their aboriginal tongues. The firſt may gradually vaniſh in the growing improvements of civil life; the latter can only be buried in the ſame grave with the people themſelves. Conqueſt may con⯑fine the bounds of a language; commerce may corrupt it; new inventions, by in⯑troducing new words, may throw the old into diſuſe; a change in the mode of thinking may alter the idiom: but the ex⯑tirpation of thoſe who ſpeak any ori⯑nal tongue is the only means, by which it can be entirely deſtroyed, even where letters have been altogether un⯑known. It retires from ſucceſsful inva⯑ſion [256] into rocks and deſarts; it ſubſiſts with the remains of a people; even moun⯑tains and rivers in part retain it when the people are no more.

The Latin not the mo⯑ther of the language of France, &c. That the Romans eſtabliſhed their own language, in the regions of the Weſt and North which ſubmitted to their arms, is a poſition which the learned ſcarce ever doubted, and which the reſt of the world ſtill implicitly believe. The Latin has been conſidered as the fountain from which the Italian, French, and Spaniſh, derive their origin; and it muſt be con⯑feſſed, that, in a confined degree, the opinion is extremely juſt. It is however certain, that this mark of their own great⯑neſs, which the Romans ſeem to have left in the conquered provinces, proceeded more from the reputation of their litera⯑ture than from the power of their arms. The illuſtrious nation had too much ſenſe to endeavour to impoſe their own language upon the conquered; and, had they even departed from their uſual political prudence on that head, it is ſcarcely credible, that they could have ſucceeded in the attempt. All other conquering nations, to whom hiſtory extends its information, failed in their endeavours of the ſame kind. The victors have often adopted the tongue of the vanquiſhed; but the vaſſals have ſcarce ever been known to drop their own language for that of their lords.

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

Cauſe of the connection of the French, &c. with the Latin. The connection between the Latin and the languages of Spain, France, and mo⯑dern Italy, muſt be traced to another ſource than the government of Rome. [258] The nations who inhabited thoſe exten⯑ſive regions originally, and whoſe poſte⯑rity ſtill, in a great degree, poſſeſs them, were, in fact, the ſame people with the Romans. Thoſe Gaël, who in Italy went under the name of Umbri, were partly the anceſtors of the Banditti who ſettled with Romulus on the banks of the Tiber. The Romans, in their own a⯑verſion to commerce, vindicate, in part, their Celtic origin againſt their pretended deſcent from the Greeks of Magna Grae⯑cia, who were in ſome meaſure a commer⯑cial people. Some of their own wri⯑ters join iſſue with us in this opinion. Their language, though tinctured with Helleniſms, is radically different from the Greek; and we ſhall, in a ſubſequent ſection, have occaſion to ſhew, that the primitives of the Latin tongue differ not materially from the language of a branch of the Celtae, to whom neither the litera⯑ture nor the government of Rome ever extended themſelves.

The Celtic once the univerſal language in Europe. A ſimilarity in the language of different nations is, of itſelf, ſufficient to eſtabliſh the certainty of their common origin, Were all the hiſtorical monuments of the Engliſh and Germans, by ſome accident, loſt, the identity of the radical words common to the language of both, would convince mankind that one of thoſe nati⯑ons muſt have originally migrated from [259] the other. When the Romans threw the firſt light on the immenſe track of coun⯑try which they diſtinguiſhed by the name of Celtica, the ſame language as well as the ſame manners prevailed over the whole. The Aeſtiones, who inhabited Pruſſia and the banks of the Viſtula, ſpoke nearly the ſame dialect with the ancient Britiſh nations^*; and the Baſtarnae and Scor⯑diſci who lived on the Danube, differed not much in their language from the Aeſti⯑ones^†. The Britons, in the days of Tacitus, ſpoke a dialect of the Celtic little different from that of Gaul^†; the Go⯑thini of Sileſia retained the marks of their Gallic origin in their tongue^§. The in⯑habitants of Spain, if we except the Ibe⯑rians, were Gauls or Celtae, and muſt of courſe have ſpoken a dialect of the lan⯑guage of Gaul^‖; and the Gallo-Graeci of the leſſer Aſia, being in ſome meaſure the deſcendants of the Baſtarnae and Scor⯑diſci, muſt have retained a part, at leaſt, of the tongue of their anceſtors^**. From [260] the pillars of Hercules to the mouth of the Danube, from the Helleſpont almoſt to the Baltic, one language though in a great variety of dialects, prevailed; and, from that circumſtance, ſhould no other proof be produced, we may conclude, that all the nations who poſſeſſed that im⯑menſe extent of country ſprung originally from one and the ſame ſource.

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

The Language of Ancient Britain.

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

Cauſe of di⯑verſity of dialects. To this circumſtance, and not to a difference of origin, we muſt aſcribe that diverſity of dialects which Julius Caeſar found in Gaul. The Aquitani^* were [262] not underſtood by the Belgae, nor could the Celt, at the foot of the Alps, hold any converſation with the Gaul at the mouths of the Rhine; yet no writer has ever af⯑firmed that all Gaul was not poſſeſſed by one and the ſame people, though di⯑vided into ſeparate ſtates. The truth is, the identity of languages does not conſiſt in their being mutually underſtood by the nations who ſpeak them, but in the ſimi⯑larity diſcernible between the names of things which are common to all countries, and to every ſtage of ſociety^†. The Doric of Syracuſe was not intelligible at Miletus; the Dutch can hold no diſcourſe with the Sileſians; yet the Sicilian and Ionian were Greeks; and one and the ſame nation poſſeſs the upper and lower Germany.

Three in Britain at the arrival of the Ro⯑mans. We have, in a preceding ſection, ob⯑ſerved that Gaul and the lower Germany had ſent colonies into Britain, at three different periods, before the arival of the Romans in the Iſland. The poſterity of theſe muſt have differed conſiderably from one another in point of language. The Gaël, who ſtill exiſt in North-Britain and Ireland, paſſed from the continent before [263] the arts of civil life had made any great progreſs in Gaul; and, in ſome meaſure, retain the unimproved language of their anceſtors. The ſecond colony were the poſterity of thoſe Gauls, who, being an⯑ciently ſettled beyond the Rhine, returned into the regions of the South, under the name of Cimbri. The Cumri of Wales are their deſcendants; and they preſerve in their tongue, a tincture of the Sarma⯑tic of the Eaſt and North. The Britiſh Belgae ſpoke that dialect of the language of Gaul which ſtill ſubſiſts among their poſterity in lower Britanny. The three dialects which we have juſt mentioned, have been thought by many learned wri⯑ters to be the only genuine remains of the ancient Celtic; and others have added to theſe the language of the mountaineers of Aſturias and Gallicia. Some have even gone ſo far as to affirm that theſe four languages are reciprocally underſtood by the Scots, Iriſh, and Welſh, the inhabi⯑tants of Britany, and the Spaniards who border on the Bay of Biſcay.

Obſervati⯑ons on the Biſcayan, Armorican, Welſh, &c. The opinion is not juſt: The Biſcayan has not even the moſt diſtant connection with the Celtic; the other languages de⯑rive, it is certain, their origin from one ſource: they agree in many radical words, but their idioms are different. The Welſhman is as ignorant of the Gaëlic as the Spaniard of Arragon is of the dia⯑lect [264] of Dauphiny; and the Scot knows no more of the language of Britany, than the inhabitant of Palermo does of the tongue of Portugal.—In vain have the learned had recourſe to the rude dia⯑lects of the Celtic, which remain in Bri⯑tanny and Wales, to form upon them ſome idea of that language. What they ſought after with ſo much eagerneſs a⯑broad, was every day in their hands at home. The language of the Romans ſprung originally in part from the Celtic ſtock; and the French, Italians, and Spaniards ſpeak, in ſome meaſure, to this day, the tongue of their Celtic anceſtors. To render the firſt part of the poſition pro⯑bable, is to prove the latter beyond the power of reply.

The Latin and Gaëlic compared.

Origin of the Ro⯑mans. The Gallic Umbri^*, and their poſte⯑rity, the Tuſcans and Sabins^†, were in poſſeſſion of a great part of the lower Italy before the foundation of Rome was [265] laid. Theſe were the ſame with the A⯑borigines, whoſe peculiar and rude man⯑ner of life bore teſtimony of their Celtic origin. When the Greeks, from their poſſeſſion of the arts which they had re⯑ceived from Phoenicia and Egypt, began to multiply their numbers in Peloponneſus and the Iſlands of the Archipelago, they ſent abroad colonies who ſettled on the ſhore of the lower Italy, and carried on ſome commerce in its ports. Out of the vagabonds of theſe two very different ſets of men Romulus collected the founders of Rome. The mixed manners, and the mixed language of the Romans, prove their double origin, and furniſh a kind of demonſtration that the illuſtrious nation derived their blood from the Celtae, as well as from the Greeks of Magna Grae⯑cia^*.

They de⯑rived in part their lan⯑guage from the Celtae. The Latin derives many of its roots and primitive words from the Greek; it alſo draws ſome from the ancient Celtic. The Scots of Caledonia were never ſub⯑dued by the Romans; and they had little connection with that illuſtrious people. The Roman language cannot be ſuppoſed [266] to have penetrated where neither the lite⯑rature nor the arms of Rome ever entered; yet there is a wonderful ſimilarity, if not a perfect identity, between many primitives in the Gaëlic, and others that correſpond with them exactly in the Latin tongue. This circuſtance ſeems to demonſtrate, that the Gallic Umbri of Italy, who were partly the anceſtors of the Romans, and the Gaël of Caledonia, who were the ſole anceſtors of the ancient Scots, ſwarm⯑ed originally from the ſame hive.

Latin com⯑pared with the Gaëlic or Caledo⯑nian tongue. To prove the poſition by example a ſhort catalogue of correſponding words is ſubjoined in alphabetical order:

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

Reflections To draw, in this place, a parallel be⯑tween the Gaëlic, the Welch, and the language of Britanny, would not even have novelty to recommend it. The ingenious Mr. Lhud's comparative vocabulary is already in the hands of the curious; and to ſuch as are not fond of philological diſ⯑quiſition it is ſufficient to obſerve, that the three languages, though not recipro⯑cally underſtood by the Scots, Welch, and the inhabitants of Britanny, are evi⯑dently deſcended from that tongue which [272] the nations of Gaul carried in their mi⯑grations to every quarter of Europe. It is even demonſtrable, were not the ſub⯑ject foreign to this Introduction, that the Italian, Spaniſh, and eſpecially the mo⯑dern French, owe their origin, to ſpeak in a confined ſenſe, more to the ancient Celtic than to the Latin, which was itſelf, in part, a dialect of that language.

Preliminary Obſervations.

Obſcurity of the remote antiquities of the Sax⯑ons. THE remote antiquities of the Saxons lie buried in the darkneſs which involved, in ancient times, the inhabitants of the northern Europe. Without the means of tranſmitting any account of themſelves to poſterity; at a diſtance from thoſe nations who poſſeſſed the uſe of letters, their tranſactions were either loſt in obſcurity or disfigured with fable. In their progreſs towards the South, they gradually roſe, as it were, from night; the light of hiſtory broke in upon them; and we ſee them, for the firſt time, in that rude form which a fierce combination of Barbarians wear in migra⯑tion and depredatory war. After the ſoil and climate of Britain had attached them to fixed abodes, their natural ferocity was [274] mellowed down by degrees; the arts of civil life began to appear; and they were among the firſt of the European nations who committed their hiſtory to writing, and even whoſe tranſactions were worthy of being recorded.

Apology and deſign The character, private life, and govern⯑ment of the Anglo-Saxons, after their ſettlement in this iſland, furniſh an am⯑ple field for diſquiſition; the monuments which remain of their hiſtory on the continent are few in number; and the ſubject itſelf is, in ſome meaſure, barren, from its high antiquity. But as nothing that concerns a people who have made ſo great and ſplendid a figure can be unin⯑tereſting, either to themſelves or the world, the Author of the Introduction hopes to ſcreen his own want of abilities behind the importance of his ſubject. He even preſumes to think that he has thrown ſome additional light on thoſe an⯑tiquities which he has endeavoured to re⯑preſent in their leaſt forbidding form. Should his confining himſelf to the hiſ⯑tory and manners of the Saxons in their rudeſt ſtate be the chief objection to his work, he may perhaps remove it by de⯑ſcending hereafter into a more fruitful period: ſhould the objection, on the other hand, ariſe from any defect in himſelf, he will derive ſome happineſs from the [275] thoughts of having ſpent but little time, in a province where he failed to pleaſe.

of the Author, To inveſtigate the origin of the Anglo-Saxons, to purſue their progreſs from Scandinavia with preciſion, it may not be improper to throw together ſome reflec⯑tions on the fall of the Romans; the de⯑cline of whoſe power opened the regions of the Weſt to the migrations of the Barbarians of the northern Europe.

Reflections on the Fall of the Romans.

Cauſe of the ſtability of the Ro⯑man empire, The Romans differed not more from other nations in the riſe and progreſs, than in the extent and permanence of their power. The fall of the republic, by melting down into one maſs all diſtinc⯑tions of party, gave ſtability and weight to the ſtate, when it deſtroyed the im⯑portance of the members of which it was compoſed. Feeble and corrupted in the center, the empire threw all its vigour and ſtrength into its frontier, and became formidable abroad in the midſt of domeſtic decay. The diſputes about the purple, though frequent and bloody, were but partial ſhocks; they agitated and diſturb⯑ed, but did neither break nor ruin the great fabric of the ſtate. The ſtorms were violent, but they did not laſt long; [276] and things were ſoon reſtored to their original balance by the tranquility of ab⯑ſolute government.

In what dif⯑ferent from other mo⯑narchies. The deſpotic empires of Aſia raiſed by the abilities of one prince fall through the weakneſs of another: the fate of the ſtate is involved with the life of the mo⯑narch, and when he dies in battle, or by the hands of the aſſaſſin, the great body, of which he was the head, ſubmits to a foreign conqueror, or ſeparates into petty principalities under domeſtic tyrants. The imperial authority at Rome ſtood upon a more ſolid foundation. When the Julian family reduced the Roman re⯑public into an empire for themſelves, they did not change in appearance the ancient form of government. Though a new power ſtarted up in the ſtate, all the old offices remained. Deſpotiſm had the de⯑cency to cover oppreſſion with a maſk, and to execute its moſt rigorous plans through channels neither unknown nor formidable in the days of freedom. The power of the firſt Caeſars conſiſted in influence; and an overawed and venal ſenate were the obvious inſtruments of their tyranny.

Why the permanency of the em⯑pire The interference of the imperial au⯑thority was confined to matters of ſtate. The detail of inferior government, the courſe of juſtice between individuals re⯑mained in the poſſeſſion of ancient forms. The oppreſſions of the worſt of the Caeſars [277] ſcarce ever extended beyond the walls of Rome; and the provinces which had lan⯑guiſhed under the exactions of republican praefects flouriſhed under the lieutenants of a Caligula and a Nero. Though, veſted with the ſacredneſs of his tri [...]uni⯑tian authority, no laws could bind the emperor, the empire itſelf was governed, in fact, by a regular ſyſtem of laws; and therefore, when the tyrant fell, the ſtate was not involved in his ruin.

did not de⯑pend on the fate of the prince. There was one other cauſe which pre⯑vented the permanence of the Empire from depending on the fate of the prince. The hereditary ſucceſſion, which the Julian family endeavoured to eſtabliſh, expired with Nero; and the ſuffrage of the army, confirmed by the approbation of a timid and complying ſenate, became the only neceſſary title to the throne. Men raiſed by accidental influence to the imperial dignity, though they inforced obedience, could command neither reſpect nor attachment from a people among whom they themſelves had been ſo lately numbered as private perſons. The mul⯑titude, who are, in every age and nation, the great ſupporters of hereditary mo⯑narchy, found no reſting-place for their loyalty in the fluctuations of imperial ſucceſſion; and they acquieſced, without reluctance, in the government of any ambitious leader, who had paved his way [278] to the purple by private treachery or by open force.

The exten⯑ſion of the freedom of the city the firſt cauſe of decline. One of the beſt of thoſe, who held the reins of government at Rome, haſ⯑tened the diſſolution of the empire more than the very worſt of his predeceſſors. The firſt Antonine, by extending the freedom of the city to^* all the provinces, broke down the fence of diſtinction which, even in the midſt of degeneracy, protected ſome ſmall remains of the old Roman ſpi⯑rit. When the excluſive privilege of ci⯑tizens was no longer confined to Italy, the awe which the conquered nations had for the original ſeat of greatneſs gradually decayed. When, to be born within the walls of Rome no longer conferred any peculiar immunities, that myſterious tie, which bound the attachment of the citi⯑zen himſelf to the reſidence of his an⯑ceſtors, was broken; and the veneration once annexed to the Roman name became naturally feeble, when the name itſelf was diffuſed over half the world.

The abſence of all ſpirit in the pro⯑vinces. But this cauſe of diſſolution was neither obvious in its commencement nor rapid in its progreſs. The total abſence of all [279] ſpirit in the provinces balanced, for ſome time, its decline in Italy. The debility which tyranny and luxury carried from Rome through all its dominions, even contributed, though the opinion is ſingu⯑lar, to the permanency and ſtability of the empire. The conquered nations, by be⯑ing deprived of their arms, applied them⯑ſelves to thoſe enervating arts, which, by adminiſtering to luxury, deprave when they poliſh the human mind. Timid and habituated to ſubmiſſion, they fell in love with the tranquillity of deſpotiſm; and in a kind of determination to conti⯑nue ſlaves, they became indifferent about the title and virtues of their tyrant. The news of his acceſſion was enough to e⯑ſtabliſh the authority of any prince in the moſt diſtant regions of the empire; and many provinces were ſo diſpirited and paſſive, that a military force was found altogether unneceſſary to ſecure their obe⯑dience. No attempt at independence could be made by ſuch an inactive body. Men were either ignorant of the natural rights of their ſpecies, or meanly reſigned them for the abject ſecurity of ſervitude.

The general debility ſpreading to the army. The infectious debility which had ſeized the other ſubjects of Rome, did not, for ſome centuries after the extinction of liberty, overwhelm its armies. Born in the more diſtant parts of the empire, and ſtationed on its frontier, the ſoldier [280] was a ſtranger to thoſe enervating vices which extinguiſh the martial ſpirit. When the legions followed an ambitious leader to Rome, a diſmiſſion from ſervice was the common reward of their fidelity; and if they were depraved by licence, they were ſoon diſſipated and loſt in the ge⯑neral imbecillity of the body of the peo⯑ple. They were ſucceeded in the preſi⯑dial provinces by new levies of hardy and uncorrupted barbarians, who preſerved an appearance of vigour in the extremi⯑ties of the empire, after the center had exhibited every ſymptom of political de⯑cay.

The remo⯑val of the ſeat of go⯑vernment. The impolitic vanity of Conſtantine, in removing the ſeat of empire to a new capital, gave a mortal blow to the Ro⯑man ſtate. The ſenate, whoſe conſe⯑quence and authority had declined with their virtue, were, in ſome meaſure, an⯑nihilated by being tranſplanted to another place. The name, even the very walls of Rome, contained ſomething within them which commanded obedience from the provinces. The opinion which ſup⯑ports all government was deſtroyed, by turning the attention of the people to a quarter to which they were not accuſ⯑tomed to look. They were habituated to obey implicitly the mandates of Ro⯑man emperors and Roman ſenates; but to Bizantine princes and aſſemblies they [281] paid only that cold and unwilling obe⯑dience which force extorts from ſlaves. To complete at once the ruin of that mighty fabric which the policy and vir⯑tue of ancient Rome had raiſed, Conſtan⯑tine, by creating new offices and by changing the names of many of the old, altered the conſtitution of the Roman government This prince, in ſhort, who covered with ſplendid exploits, in public life, the meanneſs and even wickedneſs of his private character, was more fatal to the permanancy of the Roman power, eſpecially in the Weſt, than the moſt wretched and impolitic of his predeceſſors in the imperial dignity.

gives a mor⯑tal blow to the empire. Julian, though endued with all the ſpi⯑rit, abilities, and even virtues of the old Romans, came too late into the world to ſtop the rapid progreſs of the ſtate to its decline. His untimely death extinguiſh⯑ed the laſt hopes of Rome. The vigour and prudence with which he conducted his meaſures in his early youth ſerve only to ſhew what he might have been in his riper years. Had he lived, there was a chance for the future permanency of the empire, a certainty of its temporary greatneſs. He fell, and the whole fabric of Roman power nodded to its fall when he died. The circumſcribed abilities of ſome of his ſucceſſors ſupported, for a few years, a part of the venerable ruin; but [282] with every rude blaſt that ruſhed from the North and Eaſt ſome ſhattered frag⯑ment fell. Province was cut off after province, till the mutilated body at laſt expired, when Rome itſelf was taken and ſacked by the Goths.

General Reflections on the Sarmatae.

Of the Bar⯑barians who were the ſecondary cauſe of the fall of Rome. The bad policy of Conſtantine and the imbecillity which gradually aroſe from advanced civility and ſlavery, though they were the great, were not the only, cauſe of the ruin of Rome. The Barbarians of the North and Eaſt, who have even pervaded the regions of Aſia itſelf with their migrations, gave the finiſhing blow to a ſtate already tottering to its fall. Wandering like beaſts of prey on the ſkirts of their own deſerts, they ſaw the luxuries which prevailed within the Ro⯑man pale, and they made many attempts to break into the fold. Whilſt vigour and diſcipline remained among the legions on the frontiers, they repelled with eaſe the irregular incurſions of the naked Tar⯑tars of the North and Eaſt. But after the general effeminacy had extended itſelf to the army, enemies who, in the better days of Rome, were deſpiſed, became formidable and victorious. The fence being once broken down, the deluge ſoon [283] ſpread over the provinces of the Weſt; and that great fabric which was the work of many centuries, fell in leſs than the ſpace of one.

The obſcu⯑rity in which they were invol⯑ved. It were in vain to attempt to penetrate the darkneſs which involved, at home, the Sarmatae, who ſucceeded the Romans in the regions of the Weſt. Deſtitute of means of conveying their own annals to poſterity, the firſt feeble light of hiſtory was thrown upon them when they ſhewed themſelves, in a hoſtile manner, on the frontiers of the empire. The writers who have ſent down the earlieſt ac⯑count of their invaſions, aſtoniſhed at their appearance, and alarmed at their cru⯑elties, ſeem to have been more anxious to deſcribe what they then were, than what they had formerly been. They puſhed not their inquiry into the origin of Bar⯑barians whoſe ravages conveyed the firſt news of their name; and they were little ſolicitous about examining into the previous hiſtory of a rude race of men, whoſe in⯑curſions into the Roman territories were perhaps their firſt public tranſaction. To ſupply, in ſome meaſure, this defect in the latter writers of Rome, we muſt return to antiquity, and recapitulate ſome part of what has been already advanced concern⯑ing the ſtate of Ancient Europe.

Europe poſ⯑ſeſſed origi⯑nally by the Celtae and Sarmatae: When the Greeks and Romans had ex⯑tended their inquiries beyond the Danube and the Alps, they found, in the vaſt [284] track of country which they diſtinguiſhed by the name of Scythia, two nations dif⯑ferent from one another in manners, cuſtoms, and language. To the inhabi⯑tants of the regions of the Eaſt and North-Eaſt of the Danube they gave the name of Sarmatae; the Celtae extended them⯑ſelves to the Weſt and the ocean. The character of the Sarmatae, and their man⯑ner of life, was as oppoſite to thoſe of the Celtae as the barbariſm common to both could permit.

the contraſt between their cha⯑racters. The Sarmatae, like the Celtae, made war the buſineſs of their lives; but their troops conſiſted altogether of cavalry. They were ſo much addicted to riding^* that they, in ſome meaſure, loſt the uſe of their limbs^†. They held their aſſemblies, tranſacted their af⯑fairs, they eat, they even ſlept on horſe⯑back^† The fleſh of their favourite ani⯑mal, the horſe, was numbered among their greateſt delicacies; his blood mixed with milk was their moſt delicious beve⯑rage^§. [285] Before their migration to the South they wore the loſe ſtole of the Eaſt, which deſcended down to their heels; their arms conſiſted chiefly of the bow and the arrow^‖. They were given to poly⯑gamy^**. Their wives accompanied them to battle as well as to war^*; and their daughters, a ſingular mark of the ferocity of their manners, were debarred from marriage until they had ſlain an enemy in the field^†. The character of the Celtae was, in ſome reſpects, in the other extreme. Though they were not unacquainted with the uſe of cavalry, their chief ſtrength conſiſted in foot. They drew their ſubſiſtence from their flocks and herds, from the chace, and the produce of their lands. Their dreſs was faſhioned to the ſhape of their bodies and limbs; and, in place of the bow [286] and arrow, they carried the buckler and ſpear to war. Polygamy was unknown among them; and though their wives and daughters accompanied them in their ex⯑peditions, women never engaged in bat⯑tle but in the worſt extreme of fortune^†.

Boundaries of their re⯑ſpective do⯑minions. The European branch of the Sarmatae, whoſe manners and character betray their Tartar origin, extended themſelves over Poland^§, the weſtern Ruſſia, and the regions between the Baltic and the extre⯑mities of the North. The Celtae poſ⯑ſeſſed the weſtern Europe, Spain, Gaul, Italy, the Britiſh Iſles, and a great part of Germany. Theſe two great nations meeting one another on their frontiers, formed a third race of men, whoſe cha⯑racter, manners, and language, bore the ſtrongeſt mark of their mixed origin. Such were the Peucini, the Venedi, and Fenni, of Tacitus, who, though claſſed among the old Germans, were tinctured with the looſe manners and characteriſtical dirt and lazineſs of the Sarmatae^†.

[287] Progreſs of theSarmatae to the South. In the period of time between the days of Tacitus and the reign of Marcus Au⯑relius, the mixed breed of the Celto-Sarmatic Germans of the North be⯑came ſo numerous on the ſhores of the Baltic, that, under the name of Vandals and Marcomanni^† they ad⯑vanced into Pannonia, croſſed the Da⯑nube, and ravaged the Roman territories^§. The emperor oppoſed them in perſon, and after, in his ſecond expedition, he died at Sirmium, the Barbarians were driven back by the valour and conduct of Pertinax, who commanded in Dacia and the two Maeſias^‖. Recruited by new migrations from the Sarmatae beyond the Viſtula and the Baltic, they attempted to break into the Roman dominions in the reign of Commodus, but with not ſucceſs: Maxi⯑min and Diocleſian obtained ſignal victo⯑ries over them^*; and, in ſhort, as long as the empire retained any vigour on its frontier, the legions found means to repel the depredatory armies of the northern Sarmatae.

[288] The anceſ⯑tors of the Barbarians who over⯑turned the empire. The enemies with whom the Romans contended in the decline of their empire were far from being the ſame race of men who oppoſed them when they firſt pene⯑trated with their arms beyond the Alps. The whole dominions of the Celtae, ex⯑cepting a part of Germany, the northern Britain, and Ireland, fell under the power of Rome during its political vigour. The Sarmatae of Scandinavia, with that fondneſs for migration which they exhi⯑bited in all ages, advanced gradually into Germany, and, being ſtopt in their pro⯑greſs by the legions ſtationed on the Rhine and Danube, ſettled between the Baltic, the ocean, and the two great rivers juſt mentioned, and roſe into various petty nations, whoſe manners bore evident marks of their mixed origin. The blood of the Sarmatae ſeems however to have moſt prevailed; for the language and character which the Barbarians who overturned the empire carried with them into the South of Europe were much more nearly allied to the Sarmatic Tar⯑tars of the Eaſt than to the Celtic nations who poſſeſſed the Weſt. The writers therefore who affirm, that the preſent lan⯑guage of Germany is the remains of the old Celtic, deceive themſelves and the public. The truth is, the modern Ger⯑mans are almoſt as little concerned in thoſe barbarous tribes, whom Tacitus ſo [289] elegantly deſcribes, as the Turks of Pe⯑loponneſus are in the hiſtory and manners of the ancient Spartans.

Origin of the Anglo-Saxons.

Goths and Vandals. The Goths and Vandals, who made ſuch a great figure in Europe, originally poſſeſſed a part of that immenſe tract of country which lies between the Baltic and the northern ocean^†. In a period of remote antiquity they quitted their ancient ſeats in Scandinavia, and ſeized on the ſouthern ſhore of the Baltic from the mouth of the Viſtula to the Elb and the German ocean. The Vandals were the principals in this great migration, which muſt have happened a conſiderable time before their firſt appearance on the con⯑fines of the Roman dominions in the reign of Marcus Aurelius. Their ſituation in Germany was to the Weſt of the Goths; and they were ſubdivided into a variety of ſmall communities^‡, each of which made [290] a diſtinguiſhed figure in the inundation of Barbarians which overwhelmed the weſtern empire after the death of the firſt Theodoſius.

Origin of the Angli. The Angli, from whom the majority of the Engliſh nation derive their blood, and the whole their name, were one of the ſmall ſtates which the Romans comprehended under the general name of Vandals. Ta⯑citus has had the good fortune to have dignified his account of the Germans with the firſt mention of a nation who have ſince made ſuch an illuſtrious figure in the world^§. They, however, promiſed but little of their future greatneſs in the days of the elegant writer. He paſſes ſlightly over them in a catalogue of obſcure tribes, who were remarkable for nothing but the peculiar worſhip they paid to Hertha, or the earth, well known to be the great goddeſs of the Scandinavian Sarmatae, who were the anceſtors of the Angli. They ſeem to have been in poſſeſſion of that part of the ſhore of the Baltic which extends from the Vekel to the Drave. The Elb bounded their territories to the South; the tribe of Vandals, diſtinguiſhed by the name of Varini, bordered with them on the Eaſt, and their friends and allies the Saxons lay between them and the German ocean.

[291] Of the Sax⯑ons. The Saxons derived their origin from the ſame ſource with the Angli. The perfect identity in point of cuſtoms, man⯑ners, and religion, which ſubſiſted be⯑tween theſe two tribes, their unanimity in expedition and war, the facility with which they were loſt in one another in their Britiſh conqueſts, prove, beyond diſ⯑pute, that the names of Angli and Saxons were but two appellations for one and the ſame people. The weſtern Vandals are, for the firſt time, mentioned under the name of Saxons by Ptolemy^*, who flou⯑riſhed in the reign of Marcus Aurelius. The ſignification of their name is involved in that impenetrable darkneſs which co⯑vered their original country, the ancient Scandinavia; and the learned men who have attempted to inveſtigate its etymon have expoſed their own ignorance without having thrown any light on the ſubject.

Their pro⯑greſs to the South. When the Roman empire began to de⯑cline, the Saxons, like the reſt of the Sarmatic Germans, availed themſelves of its debility, and indulged their natural love of depredation by deſcents on the coaſts of the maritime provinces^†. The [292] ſituation of the Angli on the ſhore of the Baltic, that of the Saxons on the Ger⯑man ocean, and the knowledge of naval affairs which both derived from the Suiones, who were their anceſtors in Scan⯑dinavia, rendered them a troubleſome enemy to the empire^† a whole century before its fall^†. During that period they gradually poſſeſſed themſelves of the whole ſhore of the German ocean from the Elb to the Rhine; and after the Franks had forced their way into Gaul, the Saxons ſucceeded them in their ancient ſeats in Germany, and formed an ample dominion in that country, before they found means to eſtabliſh themſelves in a better ſoil and climate.

Their hiſ⯑tory on the continent little known The hiſtory of the Saxons before their arrival in Britain is comprehended in the tranſient notice taken of their piracies by the writers of Rome. Like the other nations whoſe expeditions proved fatal to the power of the Romans they advanced in a cloud of darkneſs into the regions of the South. Ignorant of letters, they had not the means of tranſmitting any account of themſelves to after ages, and thoſe who could record their actions were the [293] natural enemies of their fame. Neither is the loſs which their poſterity have ſuf⯑fered from this circumſtance either conſi⯑derable or to be much regretted. The Barbarians of the northern Europe car⯑ried ſcarce any virtue, except valour, into the conquered provinces. Their object was to get ſettlements for themſelves, and not to procure ſubjects; and to obtain the former, they exerciſed every ſpecies of in⯑humanity againſt the latter. Time, however, has, in its progreſs, worn off their ferocity; and the nations of modern Europe have been rendered independent of the abſence of hiſtory among their anceſ⯑tors by their own proper fame.

Their Religion.

General obſervations. MEN not favoured with revelation give their own paſſions and preju⯑dices to the divinities whom they adore. Brought up in battle, and habituated to blood, the northern nations made their Gods as fierce and untractable as them⯑ſelves. The character which they give of Odin differs, in no reſpect, from the pic⯑tures we have of thoſe bold and intrepid warriors who led them into the regions of the South. His hall was not better fur⯑niſhed than the rude manſion of a Saxon chief, nor was his table provided with any other fare than the fat of an inexhau⯑ſtible wild boar^*, which, though regu⯑larly boiled every morning for dinner, re⯑mained at night entire. Ale, the favour⯑ite [295] beverage of the North, went round in the ſkulls of the enemies of his follow⯑ers and friends^†; and arms, which were the delight of the Saxon in this life, con⯑tinued to be his amuſement in another world^†. Battle was the daily paſtime, and ſlaughter itſelf the recreation, of the bleſſed. The deaths which were the con⯑ſequences of theſe conflicts, were, how⯑ever, temporary; for the ſlain, upon the approach of the time of dinner, ſtarted up as if nothing had happened, rode^* into the Valhalla, and ſat down to ſerious drinking.

Their mode of worſhip. The mode of worſhip among the Sax⯑ons was as ſimple as their ideas of the di⯑vinity were unrefined. A great log of unfaſhioned wood perpendicularly raiſed in the open air was the common repre⯑ſentative of Odin. This idol they diſtin⯑guiſhed by the name of IRMINSUL, a word which, in their language, ſignified the univerſal pillar which ſuſtains the [296] world^†. There is a kind of philoſophy in this meaning which agreed but little with the general character of the ſangui⯑nary God. The Sarmatae, who worſhip⯑ped him under the figure of a ſword, formed more ſuitable ideas of a Power who delighted in human blood^‡.

Their three divinities, Some writers, who have unneceſſarily raked up the antiquities of the North for arguments in favour of our preſent reli⯑gion, have hugged themſelves in the thoughts of having found a Trinity in the mythology of the old Scandinavians. Odin, Thor, and Frea^* are ſaid to have been the only powers dignified with places of worſhip and ſtatues, though a number of inferior intelligences were reſpected and venerated. But Thor is only the title of Thunderer, annexed, by all na⯑tions, to the Supreme Divinity^†. Odin was worſhipped under that name as pre⯑ſiding over the regions of the air, as the ruler of tempeſts, the director of thunder, the lord of the weather, and protector [297] and nouriſher of the fruits of the earth^†.

Frea, Odin's wife. The Saxons and their Scandinavian an⯑ceſtors having given human paſſions to Odin, accommodated him alſo with a wife^‖. Contrary to the practice of the Celtae, they admitted a female divinity into the catalogue of their Gods; which furniſhes another argument of their Sar⯑matic origin. The Angli, in the days of Tacitus, worſhipped the Earth under the name of Hertha; and it was the ſame divinity who afterwards obtained the title of Frea, the ſpouſe of the great Odin. Men who deduce every ſyſtem of religion from rational principles, may reſt the origin of that of the Saxons on philo⯑ſophy. Odin was the irreſiſtible princi⯑ple which gives motion to every thing that breathes; and Hertha, Frea, or the Earth, furniſhed that portion of matter which is animated into living creatures, by the active and pervading ſpirit, which is diſtinguiſhed under the name of God.

Worſhip of Frea, under the name of Hertha, or the Earth. Tacitus, with his uſual preciſion and elegance, deſcribes the veneration which the Angli and their neighbours on the Baltic paid to the ſpouſe of Odin. Her worſhip filled the minds of her devotees [298] with ſentiments very oppoſite to thoſe which the bloody altars of Odin inſpired. During the feaſt which was held in ho⯑nour of Hertha, an univerſal joy ſpread over the country. Benevolence and hoſ⯑pitality prevailed in every quarter; war and diſcord ceaſed; and it was then only that peace and quiet were either known or loved. The univerſal parent of man⯑kind did not, they thought, delight in the deſtruction of her race; and therefore every inſtrument of death was ſhut up during her ſuppoſed reſidence in the land. When ſhe retired to her ſacred grove, her warlike worſhippers, whoſe bent to humanity was only temporary, recoiled with violence into the favourite occupa⯑tion of ſlaughter and war^*.

Human ſa⯑crifices. Though no apology can waſh away the ſtain which the blood of human victims has left on the hands of our anceſtors, there are circumſtances which may leſſen the horror which naturally ariſes in the mind againſt a practice ſo oppoſite to every idea of humanity. An uninterrupted ac⯑quaintance [299] with danger created, among the northern nations, a contempt for death, which, in the firm belief of an immediate entrance into a life of joy and feſtivity in Odin's hall, they looked upon as a bleſſing ra⯑ther than a misfortune. A demiſe through violence, in battle, through ſuicide, or by the hands of the prieſt, procured an imme⯑diate admiſſion into the northern paradiſe. It was only the unfortunate perſons who died of diſeaſe or age that were precipi⯑tated into the dark dominions of Hela.^† Self-preſervation, that firſt principle of the human mind, ſeems to have vaniſhed be⯑fore the ſtrength of this extraordinary prejudice. When danger roſe to its height it became a ſource of elevation and joy, as it brought within view a certainty of perpetual felicity in another world^†.

The Scan⯑dianvian and Celtic para⯑diſes com⯑pared. The paradiſe of the Sarmatae differed in many reſpects from that of Celtae. The Valhalla, or hall of Odin, was placed on the top of the high mountains of Sevo; the Celtic nations ſurrounded their Fortu⯑nate Iſland with tempeſt in the Atlantic ocean. Among the Sarmatae, only thoſe [300] who fell by the ſword were admitted to the table of Odin: Such as died of diſ⯑eaſe or age went to the regions of Hela under the earth. Men ſlain in battle were, among the Celtae, entitled to a more elevated degree of happineſs in their paradiſe; but the peaceable and unwar⯑like had alſo a beautiful Iſland of their own. Fighting, drinking, and the mini⯑ſtration of young virgins comprehended the joys of the Valhalla: the Celtic he⯑roes wandered after a variety of rural pleaſures over the face of a beautiful and extenſive country. The heroes of the former were always in the preſence of Odin: There is no mention made of the Divinity in the Celtic Paradiſe^*. The Sarmatae remained for ever in the Val⯑halla; the ſouls of the departed retain⯑ing, among the Celtae, a warm affection for their country and living friends, often returned to viſit them. The Sarmatae admitted a good and a bad principle in their mythology; they had their Hell as well as their Heaven: the Celtae placed nothing but endleſs felicity beyond the li⯑mits of the preſent life.

Their Government.

General ob⯑ſervations. The want of information, which in⯑duced the writers of Rome to remove the northern limits of ancient Germany to the pole, was a ſource of error to the learned of modern times. The latter have ex⯑tended the general character of the Cel⯑tic nations between the Rhine and the Elb, to the inhabitants of Scandinavia and the ſhores of the Baltic. In vain have the wild nations of the north advan⯑ced into the ſouthern Europe with poſi⯑tive proofs of their own Sarmatic origin; men of letters have choſen to make them Celtae; and Celtae, in ſpite of all evi⯑dence to the contrary, they muſt remain. To differ from the learned in this point is neither precipitate nor preſumptuous. The ancients give no countenance to their opinion, and the unmixed poſterity of thoſe nations, who overwhelmed the empire of the Weſt, argue againſt them with all the force of language, manners, and government. To the origin of the latter we ſhall, at preſent, confine our in⯑quiries.

Monarchs abſolute a⯑mong the Scandinavi⯑ans; The Scandinavians, in the days of Ta⯑citus, were ſubject to abſolute monarchy. [302] They were a commercial people^*; eſta⯑bliſhed property had attached them to fixed abodes. Wealth was honoured among them, and they acquieſced under the un⯑limited deſpotiſm of one^†. Secured by their ſituation from foreign enemies, their domeſtic ſpirit declined^†. They ſuffered themſelves to be diſarmed by their prin⯑ces; and thus the tyranny of Aſia, in the abſence of its luxury, prevailed under the pole. The Sitones of Norway were even more abject than their brethren to the Eaſt of the mountains of Sevo. They not only degenerated from liberty but even from ſlavery itſelf: they ſubmitted to the government of women, and added diſgrace to ſervitude^§. This attachment to hereditary ſucceſſion continued among the colonies which Scandinavia eſtabliſhed to the South of the Baltic. The Rugii, the Lemovii^‖, all the Vandals from the Iſle of Rugen to the German ocean, as well as their brethren the Sarmatic Go⯑thones [303] on the Viſtula, were diſtinguiſhed by their obedience to kings^*.

very limited among the anceſtors of the Saxons, It is however certain, that the monarchs of the Scandinavian Sarmatae loſt their in⯑fluence in the progreſſive migrations of their ſubjects towards the South. The Goths and Vandals, the undoubted anceſ⯑tors of the modern Engliſh, were remark⯑able for their attachment to civil liberty. Though the crown was hereditary in cer⯑tain families^†, though their princes vaun⯑ted their deſcent from Odin the firſt of the Gods, their power^†, and even the poſ⯑ſeſſion of their dignity, depended upon the general aſſembly of the people, whoſe re⯑ſolutions they were always obliged to carry into executions^§. In expedition and war the king was reſpected^‖; but deſtitute of the power of inflicting any puniſhment upon the diſobedient, his authority was nugatory^**. With war the reverence for his perſon was at an end. Indignity was added to his want of conſequence and [304] power; the meaneſt of his ſubjects ſat with him at table, joined in his conver⯑ſation, uſed him with contempt, and diſ⯑graced him with ſcurrility^*. The kings of the Goths, a nation deſcended from the ſame ſtock with the Saxons, enjoyed no honour and met with no reſpect^†. The rabble being, by the ſtrength of eſta⯑bliſhed cuſtom, admitted to the entertain⯑ments of the prince, the unhappy man, inſtead of being treated with the reve⯑rence due to his rank, was often obliged to purchaſe with preſents a decency of be⯑haviour from his barbarous gueſts^†.

who fre⯑quently de⯑throned and puniſhed with death their kings. This ſpecies of rude liberty degenerated ſometimes into licence in the extreme. Barbarians who uſed ſuch freedoms with their Prince, muſt naturally have a con⯑tempt for his character and authority. They ſometimes perſecuted him to death itſelf, for no other cauſe but that they were determined to ſubmit to the com⯑mands [305] of none^¶. He was expelled from his throne upon every frivolous and unjuſt pretence.—Should they happen to be unſucceſsful in war, ſhould the fruits of the earth, through the inclemency of the ſeaſon, fail^‖, the unhappy monarch was degraded from his dignity, and be⯑came the victim of diſappointment and injuſtice. He was anſwerable for the fate of battles in which he was not obey⯑ed; and, though deſtitute of authority among men, he was puniſhed for not hav⯑ing the power of a God over the weather.

Their greater aſ⯑ſembly: The northern Germans had two aſſem⯑blies for the management of their foreign and domeſtic affairs. The greater aſſem⯑bly conſiſting of the body of the people for matters of ſtate^*: the leſſer com⯑poſed of the prince and his aſſeſſors for the adminiſtration of juſtice. Every man of perfect age^††, and without any diſtincti⯑on of degree, had a voice at this general [306] convention. The multitude came com⯑pleatly armed^*, and all had a right to deliver their ſentiments with the utmoſt freedom. Alliances were made, wars re⯑ſolved upon, treaties of peace concluded, in the great aſſembly^‖; whoſe power ex⯑tended alſo to capital puniſhments for of⯑fences againſt the ſtate^¶.

The leſſer. The general aſſembly of the people elected annually one hundred out of their own number to attend the perſon of the prince, and to ſerve as his aſſeſſors when he ſat in judgment^†. Theſe gave weight to his deciſions, and inforced his decrees. They ſat at his table, accompanied him in his progreſs, they were his guard in peace, his protection in war^†. To ſup⯑port the expence of entertaining theſe conſtant attendants of his preſence he re⯑ceived from the people a voluntary and free gift of cattle and corn^§, and he alſo derived a kind of revenue from the fines impoſed upon petty offenders^‖. The [307] prince and his aſſeſſors formed the leſſer aſſembly; and differences between indi⯑viduals were heard and determined before them.

Their legal puniſh⯑ments. Traitors againſt the ſtate, and deſerters to an enemy, were tried among the old Germans before the general aſſembly of the people, and, upon conviction, hang⯑ed^*. Cowards and men of infamous lives were drowned under hurls in ſtag⯑nant and muddy pools^†. The laws of the ancient Saxons on the continent were particularly ſevere againſt incontinency and adultery. Should a virgin in her fa⯑ther's houſe, or a married woman in that of her huſband, be guilty of incontinence, ſhe was either ſtrangled by her relations in private, and her body burnt, or ſhe was delivered over to a ſpecies of public puniſhment the moſt ignominous and cruel. Cut ſhort of her clothing by the waiſt, ſhe was whipped from village to village by ancient matrons, who, at the ſame time, pricked her body with knives till ſhe expired under their hands^†. Vir⯑tue, [308] in this caſe, degenerated into un⯑pardonable barbarity.—They animad⯑verted upon petty offenders with ſlighter puniſhments. A fine in cattle, propor⯑tioned to the degree of the offence, was levied by authority of the king and his aſ⯑ſeſſors upon the delinquent; even homi⯑cide itſelf was expiated by a certain [...]ulct payable to the prince and the relations of the perſon ſlain^§. Such were the rude elements which time has improved into the preſent conſtitution of Engliſh govern⯑ment.

Concluding reflection. To enter into the character and man⯑ners of the Saxons, in this place, would pre-occupy a province which we have re⯑ſerved for another occaſion. Before their arrival in Britain we have only tranſient and interrupted glimpſes of their hiſtory through the obſcurity in which their pro⯑greſs towards the South was involved. Their chief virtue was a ferocious bravery; their ſole occupation was war. They certainly performed great actions, but they themſelves were unacquainted with the means of tranſmitting them to poſteri⯑ty; and their fame being left in the hands of their enemies, came down through time mutilated and incomplete.