diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-21 19:42:48 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-21 19:42:48 -0800 |
| commit | 953e4aeef04b2308f9e414c98c41c7f9a87f821e (patch) | |
| tree | 5734d61fe1da1265092fc89c176749d6523daa0b | |
| parent | 4eb8c663a8ce4a06bed0b3369a6bb40f151ec9cc (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68323-0.txt | 1620 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68323-0.zip | bin | 37187 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68323-h.zip | bin | 251768 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68323-h/68323-h.htm | 2412 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68323-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 232024 -> 0 bytes |
8 files changed, 17 insertions, 4032 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..23091a9 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #68323 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/68323) diff --git a/old/68323-0.txt b/old/68323-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 961dc75..0000000 --- a/old/68323-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,1620 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of Celtic mss. in relation to the -Macpherson fraud, by J. C. Roger - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: Celtic mss. in relation to the Macpherson fraud - With a review of Professor Freeman's criticism of "The Viking - Age," by the author of "Celticism a myth" - -Author: J. C. Roger - -Release Date: June 15, 2022 [eBook #68323] - -Language: English - -Produced by: Thomas Frost and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team - at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CELTIC MSS. IN RELATION TO -THE MACPHERSON FRAUD *** - - - - - - CELTIC MSS. - - IN RELATION TO - - THE MACPHERSON FRAUD; - - WITH A REVIEW OF - - PROFESSOR FREEMAN’S CRITICISM - - OF - - “The Viking Age,” - - BY - - THE AUTHOR OF - - “CELTICISM A MYTH.” - - “I thought your book an imposture. I think it an imposture - still.”--_Dr. Johnson._ - -“The purposeless tortuosities of Celtic falsehood, and its most subtile - manifestations.”--_Weekly Scotsman._ - - “The received accounts of the Saxon immigration, and subsequent - fortunes, and ultimate settlement, are devoid of historical truth in - every detail.”--_J. M. Kemble._ - - “And, armed in proof, the gauntlet cast at once - To Scotch marauder, and to Southern dunce.”--_Byron._ - - LONDON: - E. W. ALLEN, 4, AVE MARIA LANE. - - MDCCCXC. - - - - - LONDON - PRINTED AT THE COURTS OF JUSTICE PRINTING WORKS - BY DIPROSE, BATEMAN AND CO. - - - - -PREFACE. - - -That portion of this tractate which relates to Celtic manuscripts and -the doings of Macpherson, was transmitted to the _Scotsman_ newspaper, -in reply to an article by Professor Mackinnon which appeared in that -journal. My communication was however returned by the editor on the -plea that he could not find room for its insertion. It was perhaps -too much to expect that a journal owned by one of the secretaries of -a Society, which had engaged the services of the Celtic Professor at -Oxford, to uphold what I call the Celtic myth, should open its columns -to one inimical to Macpherson, and utterly sceptical in regard to his -pretended translation. Mr. Mackinnon’s enumeration seems a vindication -of the antiquity of Celtic MSS. in general, and was no doubt also -projected “as a basis for more extended collaboration.” - -It occurred to me that my remarks on the Ossian MSS. might with -advantage be incorporated with some notice of Professor Freeman’s -criticism of “The Viking Age,” both tending in the same direction. One -wipes out the Celts as the pioneers of civilization, the other explodes -the Saxons as a race distinct from the Scandinavians. With this in view -I have been aiming for some time past, to put my thoughts in train for -publication, but want of time has always stood in the way. - - J. C. ROGER. - - FRIARS WATCH, - WALTHAMSTOW. - _October, 1890._ - - - - -CELTIC MSS. - -IN RELATION TO - -THE MACPHERSON FRAUD, &c. - - -My attention was lately directed to a lengthy article that appeared in -_The Scotsman_ of the 12th of last November, bearing the initials of -Mr. Mackinnon, Professor of Celtic at the University of Edinburgh, to -whom I sent a copy of my book, _Celticism a Myth_, then just issued -from the press. The article begins with a tribute to the assiduity of -the Historiographer Royal in the cause of Celtic literature; but is -plainly intended as a refutation of my statement to the effect that -“It is no longer pretended that any Gaelic poetry has been preserved -in early manuscripts,” &c. In citing the remark of Dr. Irving it was -certainly not my intention to call down an exhibition of Professor -Mackinnon’s Celtic wares--of the authenticity and character of which I -am profoundly ignorant--but simply to express my conviction that the -alleged manuscript documents of which Macpherson professed to give a -translation did not exist. _De non existentibus et non apparentibus_ -Dr. Johnson says, _eadem est ratio_. There are unfortunately now no -Doctor Johnsons, or Pinkertons or John Hill Burtons to deal with these -possible inventions or forgeries of a later age, the perhaps “other -evidences” of what the great lexicographer characterised as “Scotch -conspiracy in national falsehood.” Ample time and opportunity has been -afforded since 1762--the date when Macpherson first gave to the world -his _Ossian the Son of Fingal_--to fabricate missing documents or -supply others of more startling character. A pungent criticism from the -pen of Mr. Hill Burton, or a crushing commentary by either of the other -named critics, would probably have relegated these so-called Celtic -MSS.--some of them at least--to the nothingness whence they came. It is -clear that what Professor Mackinnon brings forward is not _evidence_, -certainly not such as would be accepted in a Court of Law. There is -no substantiation of the Macpherson manuscripts save the statements, -and what I fear must be regarded as the fabrications, of a number of -interested individuals retailed at second-hand, none of all whom can -be accepted as unprejudiced witnesses. After the strictest search -for the originals of Ossian, Dr. Johnson came to the conclusion that -as regards Scotland and the pretensions of James Macpherson, there -was not in existence “an Erse manuscript a hundred years old.” Any -attempt therefore, in our day to bring into agreement this literary -imposture with the difficulties which stultify all conception of its -genuineness is foredoomed to failure. If, as Mr. Mackinnon alleges, -it be “perfectly established” that Macpherson carried away from the -North-West Highlands several Gaelic manuscripts it is equally certain -he never exhibited them to anyone capable of forming a judgment as to -their authenticity. “The collection proper,” it would appear, “consists -of sixty-three separate parcels.” How many of these are genuine we -shall probably never know. These are “Transcripts of several MSS. or -portions of MSS. by Mr. McLachlan, and the Rev. Donald Mackintosh,” and -collections of “Ossianic poetry made by a schoolmaster at Kilmelford,” -volumes of tales which belonged to Mr. Campbell of Islay, a collection -of Gaelic poetry made by a schoolmaster at Dunkeld, the MSS. whatever -these may be, written in “The old Gaelic hand!” the use of which, we -are told, was discontinued about the middle of the last century. -“Regarding the history of the great majority of these documents,” it -is said “we are ignorant”--certainly at least, I am, most profoundly. -It appears however, that “The Rev. Mr. Gallie saw in Macpherson’s -possession” ‘several volumes, small octavos, or rather large duodecimo -in the Gaelic language and characters’! Scarcely less authentic is the -fact that Lachlan Macviurich “remembers well that Clanranald made his -father give up the _Red book_ to James Macpherson,” and that Macpherson -himself deposited certain MSS. with his publishers Messrs. Beckett and -Dehondt which for a whole year remained in the custody of that firm. -These manuscripts mentioned by Mr. Mackinnon were probably the Gaelic -leases of Macleod of Rasay referred to by me in _Celticism a Myth_. -The fact that Macpherson so prostituted his talents, and character -for integrity was stated to me many years ago by an aged clergyman of -the Church of Scotland, who vouched for his statement on the faith -of his friend George Dempster of Dunichen, who was cognizant of the -circumstance. Father Farquharson, it is alleged, made a collection of -Gaelic MSS. before 1745, the last leaves of which were used to kindle a -stove fire in the Roman Catholic College at Douay, a circumstance, as -I think, not greatly to be deplored, while the “illiterate descendant” -of the _Seanachies_ attached to the family of Clanranald describes the -dispersion of the manuscript library accumulated by his ancestors, -and the fate of certain parchments [? old leases] which were cut down -for tailors’ measuring tapes. “He himself” (the descendant of the -_Seanachies_) “had possession of some parchments after his father’s -death,” but not being able to read, these disappeared from view. A -valuable witness truly in the identification of doubtful MSS. “Such -acts of vandalism,” we are told, “are not likely to occur again.” -Probably not. Like Joshua arresting the Sun and the Moon, they are -“things that have once been done but can be done no more.” The fact of -the dispersion, however, and the fate of the parchments, leases, title -deeds, literary treasures or by whatever name they may be called, rests -on the testimony of this Celtic ignoramus who, it is to be feared, -would not be too particular in any relation concerning the “glories and -greatness” of his country, his personal consequence, or the departed -grandeur of his clan. I well remember, many years ago, meeting with -an ignorant Highlander of some property, who offered to sell for ten -pounds an ancient claymore, with a pretentious, but unauthenticated -pedigree, for which he declared, with the voluntary accompaniment of -an oath, he had previously declined “_A Sousand pounds_.” It is my -experience that to persons of this class it comes more natural to state -a falsehood than to speak the truth. We all remember Charles Surface’s -exculpatory witness in _The School for Scandal_, “Oh yes, I swear.” Mr. -Mackinnon states that “The Gaelic text of Ossian which James Macpherson -handed over to Mr. Mackenzie, and which was given to the editor of the -edition of 1807, has disappeared.” How very odd that manuscripts on -which the human eye never rested should thus so strangely disappear! -Can that be said to disappear which was never visible? Of the poems of -Ossian, Dr. Irving says, “We are required to believe that these were -composed in the third century; and that by means of oral tradition, -they were delivered by one generation to another for the space of -nearly fifteen hundred years. If this account could be received as -authentic, if these poems could be regarded as genuine, they must be -classed among the most extraordinary effort of human genius. That a -nation so rude in other arts, and even unacquainted with the use of -letters, should yet have carried the most elegant of all arts to so -high a degree of perfection, would not only be sufficient to overturn -every established theory, but would exceed all the possibilities of -rational assent. But if we could suppose an untaught barbarian capable -of combining the rules of ancient poetry with the refinements of modern -sentiment one difficulty is indeed removed; but another difficulty -scarcely less formidable still remains--By what rare felicity were -many thousand verses, only written on the frail tablet of memory, -to be safely transmitted through fifty generations of mankind? If -Ossian could compose epic poems on the same model as Homer, how was -it possible for them to preserve their original texture through the -fearful vicissitudes of nearly fifteen centuries? * * * * It is utterly -incredible that such poems as Fingal and Temora, consisting each of -several thousand lines were thus transmitted from the supposed age -of Ossian to the age of Macpherson.” “It is” Dr. Irving continues -“no longer pretended that any Gaelic poetry has been preserved in -early manuscripts; and indeed the period when Gaelic can be traced -as a written language is comparatively modern.” “That many poems -and fragments of poems,” he goes on to say, “were preserved in the -Highlands of Scotland cannot however be doubted; and it is sufficiently -ascertained that Macpherson was assiduously employed in collecting such -popular reliques, some of which had perhaps existed for many ages. -_From the materials which he had thus procured he appears to have -fabricated the various works which he delivered to the public under -the name of Ossian, and afterwards to have adjusted the Gaelic by the -English text._” “The ground upon which Hume finally decided against the -authenticity of the _Poems of Ossian_, was the impossibility of any man -of sense imagining that they should have been orally preserved ‘during -fifty generations, by _the rudest, perhaps of all European nations; -the most necessitous_, the most turbulent, and the most unsettled.’” -Such is the historian Hume’s estimate of the Macpherson fraud as stated -by the _Edinburgh Review_, and such the beggarly array of evidence on -which, according to the abettors of Macpherson, the honour and glory -of Scotland, must rest in all time to come. The Scotch are a stubborn -race on which to operate, especially in matters that concern their -nationality. They have conceived the idea that in the dark ages--dark -to all but them--their countrymen, a Celtic race, were skilled in the -sciences and acquainted with art. This as an article of faith has -hardened into a conviction not to be shaken, and is that which, in -their view, distinguishes Scotland above all competitors. In it, in the -remote ages of the past, there existed culture and refinement rivalling -that of the most literary nations of antiquity whether Egyptian, -Etruscan, Greek or Roman. The roving Northmen, according to their -account, were but plundering pirates, and other nations barbarians. -No evidence, however overwhelming, will alter or modify this opinion. -Not on any terms will they be induced to give up their preconceptions. -Philologers and Ethnologists, Professors, and specialists, _et hoc -genus omne_, are called to the rescue, while they refuse to look at the -clearest facts. When their favourite idol begins to shake they rush -into the market-place crying “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” It is -impossible to doubt that Macpherson was an impudent impostor. When his -veracity was impugned no simpler method of clearing his reputation -from the aspersions cast upon it could have been devised than the very -reasonable plan suggested by Dr. Johnson, that he should place the -manuscripts in the hands of the professors at Aberdeen where there were -persons capable of judging of their authenticity. The manuscripts were -never produced, and in admitting this fact the defenders of Macpherson -resign the whole question. “To refuse,” Dr. Johnson says, “to gratify -a reasonable curiosity is the last refuge of impudent mendacity.” Dr. -Johnson’s letter to this vain-glorious boaster repelling a threat of -personal violence is a master-piece of contemptuous scorn and defiance. -“Mr. James Macpherson, I received your foolish and impudent letter. Any -violence offered me I shall do my best to repel, and what I cannot do -myself the law will do for me. I hope I shall never be deterred from -detecting what I think a cheat by the menaces of a ruffian. What would -you have me retract? I thought your book an imposture. I think it an -imposture still. For this opinion I have given my reasons to the public -which I here dare you to refute. Your rage I defy. Your abilities since -your _Homer_ are not so formidable, and what I hear of your morals -inclines me to pay regard, not to what you shall say, but to what you -shall prove. You may print this if you will.” - -We are told that the subject of the Pictish language has been -thoroughly discussed by Dr. W. F. Skene in his _Four Ancient Books -of Wales_, that, in addition to _Pean Fahel_, the sole Pictish word -formerly known he has discovered four other distinct words, besides a -number of syllables entering into proper names; and from all these he -deduces the opinion that Pictish “Is not Welsh, neither is it Gaelic; -but it is a Gaelic dialect partaking largely of Welsh forms” whatever -that may mean. “More especially,” we are told, “he holds that Pictish -as compared with Gaelic, was a _Low_ dialect, that it differed from -the Gaelic in much the same way that Low German differs from High.” It -is perhaps unnecessary to add that I regard this supposed solution of -the Pictish difficulty as so much figment. It is simply the arbitrary -conclusion of a man looking into a mill stone, and giving a deliverance -in regard to which he is in no more commanding position than the -most illiterate specimen of humanity to be found in the slums of the -Northern Metropolis. On the other side of the question it is open to -me to state that the Pictish words which Mr. Skene persuades himself -he has discovered, and which on his own shewing are neither Welsh nor -Gaelic but, belonging to a Low dialect of the latter may after all -be only the obsolete remains of an early Gothic speech. The ruler of -the Picts about the end of the sixth century, it is said, was _Brude_, -the son of _Mailcon_, who died in 586. The most active of all the -Pictish sovereigns, according to the received accounts, was _Hungus_ or -_Ængus_ who began to reign in 730. In so far then as these names may -not be absolute myth, they may be claimed as Scandinavian. With _Brude_ -compare the Norse personal names _Brodi_, _Breid-r_, and _Brodd-r_ (the -_r_ final separated by a hyphen being merely the sign of the nominative -case). _Mailcon_ is the united Scandinavian personal names of _Miöl_ -and _Kon-r_. With _Hungus_ or _Ængus_ compare the Scoto-Norwegian names -_Magnus Anguson_, and _Angus Magnuson_. - -The Norwegians in Man, in the Hebrides, and in the North, and -North-Western Highlands were confessedly the dominant and more numerous -race, and there for upwards of four centuries held uninterrupted sway. - -Did the Norwegian colonists eventually go off in vapour, leaving behind -them only a native residuum speaking a purely Celtic dialect freed -from all taint of the Northman’s language after the close contact of -so many centuries? If the Norwegian element was not so sublimated, but -as Pinkerton affirms, and which I believe, continues in the modern -population of those portions of the United Kingdom, what becomes of -the purity of the so-called “Primitive Celtic tongue”? Assuming that -it was Celts among whom the Norwegians settled, is it possible to -conceive that men of such force of character as the Northmen made no -lasting impression on the speech of the wretched Celtic inhabitants -whom they trampled under foot? Despite the researches of philologers -is it rational to conclude that what is now called Celtic can on any -intelligible hypothesis be the primeval speech of the unlettered -savages who before the advent of the Romans had been driven into the -western portion of the Island by the Belgae? “It is not in nature,” -the _Saturday Reviewer_ says, “that people should accept Mr. Roger’s -or Pinkerton’s opinion in preference to the universally held belief -that the Celtic speech is a language of the Indo-European family of -speech,” &c. But it is not alone Mr. Roger and Pinkerton with whom the -_Reviewer_ has to deal. The late Lord Neaves, an eminent Scotch judge -and antiquary, held an opinion very much akin to that of Pinkerton, -that the Erse, and Gaelic, and Manx dialects, if not entirely a form -of obsolete Gothic speech, contain at least a very large admixture of -the northern tongue. The editor of the _Athenæum_ too, in reviewing -Skene’s _Highlanders of Scotland_, draws attention to the fact of -the striking resemblance between the oldest Erse monuments and those -dialects confessedly Teutonic, holding this decisive of the question -that the _Scots_ were Germans. On the same side of the question is the -strongly expressed opinion of the late Dr. R. Angus Smith, F.R.S. “I -consider,” he says, “those who hold the nations called Celtic and those -called Teutonic, as one race, to be simply abolishing the knowledge we -get from history, and refusing to look at very clear facts.” I am not -however going to quarrel with the _Saturday Reviewer_, who virtually -concedes all for which I contend, that the Celts were entirely without -art or culture, of which more hereafter. On the question of civilizing -influences we have the testimony of Professor Kirkpatrick, of the -Scotch Bar, a gentleman of well-known scholarly accomplishments, who -occupies the Chair of Constitutional Law and History in the University -of Edinburgh. “I have long been of opinion,” he writes, “that we -owe the _whole_ of our civilization to Scandinavian and Teutonic -ancestors, and partly to Roman influence, and your very interesting -volume confirms that opinion.” There is still another phase of the -question with which the philological critic has to deal, and this is, -that only where the Northmen settled are found those remains of what -is called Celtic speech. “The Northmen formed colonies in Wales, in -Cornwall, in Brittany, in Ireland, in the Highlands and islands of -Scotland, and in the Isle of Man, and there only do we find those -dialects usually known as Celtic.” I do not pretend to explain this, -but I state it as an outside fact, which, in my view, it is incumbent -on the Celtic philologer to explain. It is, of course, impossible to -reach any confident conclusion as to what may have been the language -on which the Northman grafted his Teutonic speech, though it must be -obvious to every unprejudiced enquirer, that those dialects must now -be very much mixed and altered and corrupted from close contact for -many centuries with the language of a dominant race. Having regard to -this fact, the question arises whether “the universally held belief” -referred to by the _Saturday Review_, be not founded on the Gothic -accretions derived from the Northmen, rather than on the structural -peculiarities of the original language of the people among whom the -Northmen settled. It is evident from the remarks of Professor Max -Muller that too much importance is not to be attached to what is told -us by the Celtic philologer. “Celtic words,” he says, “may be found in -German, Slavonic, and even Latin, but only as foreign terms, and their -number is much smaller than commonly supposed. A far larger number -of Latin and German words have since found their way into the modern -Celtic dialects, and these have frequently been mistaken by Celtic -enthusiasts for original words from which German and Latin might in -their turn be derived.” - -Professor Kirkpatrick’s opinion suggests a natural connection between -the Celtic myth, and M. du Chaillu’s account of _The Viking Age_. The -_Scotsman_, in its review of this book, wonders what Professor Freeman -will say, and we are not long left in doubt. He looks down upon M. du -Chaillu from a lofty eminence, evidently regarding him with something -like pitying contempt. He is not sure he should have thought the -doctrine set forth by M. du Chaillu worthy of serious examination, -but for the singular relation in which it stands to Mr. Seebohm’s -“slightly older teaching,” in his book called _The English Village -Community_. Mr. Seebohm’s views, he says, are the evident result -of honest work at original materials, and eminently entitled to be -considered, and if need be, answered. But obviously both are eminently -objectionable. Though differing in method, they rival each other in -daring and absurdity. The only question is whether M. du Chaillu’s -theory need be discussed at all. Professor Freeman has decreed this, -and after so supreme a master in the art of criticism it is vain to -question it. - -It will thus be seen he lauds the one in order to disparage the other. -He compliments Mr. Seebohm and spits contemptuously in M. du Chaillu’s -face. I am Jupiter, and by contrast in the scale of intelligence, -you, M. du Chaillu, are only a black beetle. “The strife in its new -form,” he tells us, “has become more deadly.” M. du Chaillu threatens -to wipe out entirely Professor Freeman’s antiquated conception of a -Saxon invasion, and the latter is constrained to worship in secret the -divinity he pretends to despise. Professor Freeman’s views will be -found in _The Teutonic Conquest in Gaul and Britain_. He has had his -say, and “if anybody cares to know what that say is, he may read it -for himself.” Professor Freeman has written what he has written, and -woe to him who reads to controvert. It does not, however, follow that -what Professor Freeman has written is necessarily the gospel of English -history. Both theories alike, it would appear--Mr. Seebohm’s and M. -du Chaillu’s--throw aside the recorded facts of history! What are the -recorded facts of history in relation to the so-called Saxon invasion? -The Saxon invasion was doubted in the days of Bishop Nicolson, who -refers to the short and pithy despatch Sir William Temple makes of the -Saxon times, and the contempt with which he speaks of its historians. -The good Bishop himself is constrained to admit he does not know what -has become of the book written by King Alfred against corrupt judges, -nor of that gifted King’s collection of old Saxon sonnets.[1] The late -J. M. Kemble taught the learned world to believe that, “the received -accounts of the Saxon immigration, and subsequent fortunes, and -ultimate settlement are devoid of historical truth in every detail.” -Here is an eminent scholar who, having examined the subject with -perfect historical candour, regarded the Saxon invasion as fiction and -fabrication from beginning to end, and who surely may be accepted as -a valuable witness. To the same purpose we have the statement of Mr. -James Rankin, F.R.A.S., “Who the Saxons were, or when they arrived, or -where they settled, is a subject on which tradition is entirely silent, -for of written history there is none.” Professor Freeman says that M. -du Chaillu has put forth two very pretty volumes with abundance of -illustrations of Scandinavian objects. He contemns the pictures but -admires the frames. Most of them, however, he adds, will be found in -“various Scandinavian books,” but he does not suggest that the “various -Scandinavian books” are not readily accessible to the English reader. - -Professor Freeman indulges in that species of raillery to which men -usually resort when they are driven into a corner. “We are really not -ourselves,” he says, “but somebody else.” “The belief as to their own -origin which the English of Britain have held ever since there have -been Englishmen,” and such incoherent trifling. The ordinary average -Englishman has no independent belief on the subject. He is told in -his youth the story about Hengist and Horsa, and if he remembers it -at all it gives him no particular concern. The bulk of Englishmen and -Scotchmen too, are profoundly ignorant as to their history and origin. -The Englishman has some vague conception that he is an “Anglo-Saxon,” -while the Scot takes it for granted that all Scotchmen are Celts, and -that all art found in Scotland is Celtic. Sir Daniel Wilson could -discern in the rude rock scroll the “stately Cathedral.” There are -others “who can see a coffin in a flake of soot.” It is hardly by -such an adversary as M. du Chaillu, Professor Freeman says: “that -we shall be beaten out of the belief that there is such a thing as -English people in Britain. Perhaps too we shall not be more inclined -to give up our national being, when we see its earliest records tossed -aside with all the ignorant scorn of the eighteenth century.” This -is absolutely childish. It reads more like mental imbecility than -intellectual acumen. M. du Chaillu does not deny that there is an -English people in Britain. He only doubts that the English people are -Saxon, and affirms that they are Scandinavian, and in this view of the -matter he is sustained by many and strong presumptions. Neither does -he ask us “to give up our national being,” which he does not assail. -Macaulay says: “it is only in Britain that an age of fable separates -two ages of truth,” and the void, it would appear, is to be filled up -with “some hints” by Professor Freeman, who, to his own satisfaction, -at least, has bridged over the dreary gulf. Professor Freeman thinks it -odd that the so-called Saxons were led into such strange mistakes as -to their own name and origin. Is it an exceptional thing for a nation -to be mistaken as to its remote history? Can Professor Freeman tell us -who were the aborigines of Ancient Greece? Professor Freeman declines -to be brought from the North by M. du Chaillu even more strongly than -he declines to be brought from the South by Mr. Seebohm. Mr. Seebohm, -according to Professor Freeman, “does leave some scrap of separate -national being to the ‘Anglo-Saxon invaders’ * * * * M. du Chaillu -takes away our last shreds; we are mere impostors,” &c. Must a nation -be accounted impostor because it does not possess an accurate knowledge -of its remote history? We might, indeed, be justly termed impostors if -in the face of overwhelming evidence we should continue to adhere to -the foregone conclusions of dogmatic historians built on the fictions -and figment of monkish tradition. “As far as M. du Chaillu’s theory -can be made out,” Professor Freeman holds it to be this, “The Suiones -of Tacitus are the Swedes, and the Suiones had ships; so far no one -need cavil. But we do not hear of the Suiones or any other Scandinavian -people doing anything by sea for several centuries. But though we -do not hear of it they must have been doing something. What was it -they did? Now in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries we hear of the -Saxons doing a good deal by sea; therefore the name _Saxones_ must be a -mistake of the Latin writer’s for _Suiones_.” The assumption that goes -through all this, Professor Freeman continues, is that “because the -Suiones had ships in the days of Tacitus, as they could not have left -off using ships it must have been they who did the acts attributed to -the Saxons.” He condescends to admit that “a good deal is involved in -this last assumption; it is at least conceivable,” he says, “and not -at all unlike the later history of Sweden, that the Suiones went on -using their ships, but used them somewhere else, and not on the coasts -of Gaul and Britain.” But this begs the question in dispute. Setting -aside M. du Chaillu’s conjecture as to the possible confounding of -names,[2] the question still remains who were the Saxons? Whether is it -more reasonable to believe that the Suiones or Swedes referred to by -Tacitus, not to mention the Danes and Norwegians, did not continue to -make their descent on the shores of Britain so readily accessible to -their fleets, or that the so-named Saxon invader was one and the same -with the Scandinavian? “There is nothing very strange,” the _Quarterly_ -thinks, “in supposing that some of the ‘Angles’ or ‘Saxons’ may have -descended from the Suiones of Tacitus.” M. du Chaillu, it says, “rests -his case mainly on the fact that, while the so-called Anglo-Saxon -remains found in England correspond minutely with those discovered -in enormous quantities in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, there are no -traces of such objects in the basins of the Elbe, the Weser, and the -Rhine, nor anywhere else, save in places which Scandinavians are known -to have visited.” “Every tumulus,” M. du Chaillu says, “described -by antiquaries as a Saxon or Frankish grave, is the counterpart of a -northern grave, thus showing conclusively the common origin of the -people.” Professor Freeman considers M. du Chaillu’s theory “several -degrees more amazing than that of Mr. Seebohm,” though why the two -should be connected I hardly know. “No one denies,” Mr. Freeman -says, that the Scandinavian infusion in England is “real, great, and -valuable,” only the date of the Scandinavian descent on the shores of -Britain, and the degree and manner of the northern immigration must -be taken on the faith of Professor Freeman. According to his account -the Scandinavian invasion was an _infusion_ that dates from the ninth -century. This is exactly the pivot on which the whole question turns. -There are strong grounds for believing that the Northman incursions and -settlements in Britain were not limited to the Danish invasions of the -ninth century. Did the fleets of the Northmen fully equipped start into -existence in the middle or end of the ninth century? If not, how were -they engaged during the centuries that immediately preceded? Professor -Freeman affirms that they were employed “somewhere else.” If they were -not used in the subjugation of Britain, perhaps Professor Freeman -will state circumstantially what portions of Europe are comprehended -under the vague generality of “Somewhere else.” We want something more -convincing than his _ipse dixit_. Danish writers, we are told, have -often greatly exaggerated the amount of Scandinavian influence in -England, a remark that applies with equal force to the advocates of the -Saxon and Celtic theories. Things, it is said, have been set down as -signs of direct Scandinavian influence, which “are part of the common -heritage of the Teutonic race.” Admitting this “common heritage,” and -having regard to the fact, that the language of the Scandinavian, and -that of the so-called Anglo-Saxon are almost identical, who shall -decide between their conflicting claims? The _Quarterly_, citing from -the _Corpus Poeticum Boreale_ of Vigfússon and Powell in reference -to the poetry of the Norsemen, says, “The men from whom these poems -sprung took no small share in the making of England; their blood is -in our veins, and their speech in our mouths.”[3] The preponderance -of the direct Scandinavian element in the English language has been -shown by Archbishop Trench, who states “That of a hundred English -words, sixty come from the Scandinavian, thirty from the Latin, five -from the Greek, and five from other sources.” “Dane and Angle, Dane -and Saxon,” according to Professor Freeman’s own shewing “were near -enough each other to learn from one another, and to profit by one -another.” Their dialectic difference was never such as to prevent them -from understanding each other. “There is,” the _Quarterly_ affirms, -“very high authority for saying that there was as little difference -in those early times between a Dane and an Englishman, as there was -between two Englishmen in different parts of the country.” The Saxons -were in fact only an earlier swarm of northern adventurers of the same -race who were afterwards known in history as Danes and Northmen. Still -Professor Freeman thinks the Scandinavian element was but an _infusion_ -into the already existing English mass. Hardly I should think if the -existing English mass, and the invading Northmen had a common origin! -The name of England’s principal city, it may be remarked, the great -metropolis of the Empire is Scandinavian. Neither are there wanting -persons who believe that such also is the name England itself. In -a communication to _Notes and Queries_ by Mr. Henry Rowan in 1868, -he suggests a derivation of this name from the Danish _Eng_. “While -travelling in Denmark,” he says, “I met with a word which seems to me -to afford a derivation of our name of England, as probable, at least -as the ordinary one of _Angle land_. The word I mean is _Eng_, an -old Danish name applied even yet to the level marshy pasture lands -adjoining rivers. I believe the Saxons and Angles, from the time of -whose invasion the name is supposed to date, first landed and possessed -the Isle of Thanet, which in parts, especially those about Minster, and -the river _Stour_, would answer very well to the description of Danish -_Eng lands_. It is from this word I think the name may have sprung, -instead of from the Angles, whom we have no reason for supposing to -have been so superior to the Saxons as to leave the remembrance of -their name to the entire exclusion of the latter.” M. Worsaae, in -the first words of his history unwittingly confirms what Mr. Rowan -here points out. “The greater part of England,” he says, “consists -of flat and fertile lowland, particularly towards the southern and -eastern coasts, where large open plains extend themselves.” There is a -low-lying district of Aberdeenshire called the _Enzie_, a name of the -same character, evidently imposed by the Northmen. This is pronounced -by the natives _aingie_, the sound of the first portion of the name -being as the _aing_ in the Scotch surname of _Laing_. The derivation -just cited, coupled with my conjecture that the name Scotland is the -ancient gothic _Skot-land_, land laid under tribute, Icelandic _Skat_, -a tax (Skat-land) goes to confirm M. du Chaillu’s contention that the -British people, and tongue (by tongue, I mean the present speech of the -British nation) are of northern origin. - -The contention that the Danish influx into England was in any sense a -mere infusion must in the nature of things be pure fiction. It was a -full rolling tide of conquest and colonization swelling a population -already essentially Scandinavian. - -The first authentic particulars relating to the ancient Britons are -derived from Cæsar who made his descent in the year 55 before Christ. -The original inhabitants appear to have been Celts from France and -Spain. We learn from the Roman historian that they had been driven -into the interior and western portion of the island by the Belgae who -settled on the east and south-eastern shores of England, and were now -known as Britons. He tells us in language, about which there can be no -misconception, that the Belgae were descended from the Germans. These -were the Britons with whom Cæsar had to do, and these the Romanized -Britons who, in their dire extremity, sent forth their despairing cry -to the gates of Imperial Rome, “The barbarians drive us to the sea, -and the sea to the barbarians.” Prichard demonstrated, at least to his -own satisfaction, that “the ancient Belgae were of Celtic, and not -of Teutonic race, as had previously been supposed,” and ethnologists -are agreed in setting aside the testimony of Cæsar! What amount of -hypothetical evidence is sufficient to overturn an historic fact? It -might be difficult to say who is an authority on language, but anyone -reasonably endowed with judgment may be an authority on matters of -fact and practical sense. The science of language is not an exact -science, and leaves a good deal of room for the imagination to play. -I would rather doubt the conclusions of philologers than believe -that the Roman historian wrote without knowledge of his subject, or -deliberately stated what he had no means of knowing to be true. The -weight of evidence is certainly on the side of Cæsar. Not all the -ingenuity of all the Bopps and Grimms and Potts and Zeusses who ever -applied themselves to the elucidation of this most obscure of all -unintelligible subjects can ever be sufficient to overturn an outside -historical fact. “In the history of all nations,” Pinkerton says, -“it is indispensable to admit the most ancient authorities as the -sole foundation of any knowledge we can acquire. If we reject them -or pretend to refute them no science can remain, and any dreamer may -build up an infinite series of romances from his own imagination. When, -therefore, a modern pretends to refute Cæsar and Tacitus in their -accounts of the inhabitants of ancient Britain, any man of science -would disdain to enter the field.” It does not by any means follow -that every scholar who is familiar with the structural peculiarities -of language has necessarily any aptitude for perceiving the exact -relations of things. Many distinguished men eminent in literature have -been singularly deficient in ordinary reasoning power. The late Charles -Kingsley, it is well known, “could not discern truth from falsehood.” -Though occupying “an historical chair, he lacked every qualification of -an historian.” - -M. Worsaae, the Danish antiquary, after a good deal of hesitation -and circumlocution in regard to several matters of disputed origin, -in particular the Ruthwell cross which he casts out of the category -of Scandinavian remains, and contradicts himself in the following -sentences: “Ornaments with similar so-called Anglo-Saxon runic -inscriptions are not altogether uncommon in England, particularly -in the North. But as not a few ornaments, as well as runic stones -with inscriptions in the self-same character, are also found in the -countries of Scandinavia both in Denmark and Norway, and particularly -the latter, and the west and south-west of Sweden (and there mostly -in Bleking), it may be a question whether this runic writing was not -originally brought over to England by Scandinavian emigrants. It -would otherwise be inexplicable that they should have used entirely -foreign runic characters in Scandinavia, whilst they possessed a -peculiar runic writing of their own.” I do not think there can be -any question in the matter. No stronger evidence could be given in -proof of the fact that the so-called Anglo-Saxons and Scandinavians -were radically one and the same people. M. Worsaae has done much to -illustrate the Scandinavian antiquities of the British islands, and I -am unwilling to cast reflection on the memory of one so eminent and so -well-intentioned, but it is evident throughout his book, that he has -accepted at second-hand, on a variety of subjects, the conclusions of -English and Scotch antiquaries, which as a foreigner he was incapable -of dealing with by independent investigation. The Hunterston brooch, -which in every lineament is distinctively Scandinavian, he has been -told to call _Celtic_. He deals with this most interesting monument -of art in the ambiguous manner for which he is always remarkable -where his judgment seems to contradict his conclusion. “An excellent -silver gilt brooch,” he says, “found near Hunterston, about three -miles from Largs, was once said to have been lost by some Norwegian -who fled from the field of battle [nothing more probable]. There is -a short Scandinavian runic inscription scratched on the back of it, -but from what has hitherto been deciphered, it would rather seem to -denote the name of a Scotchman than of a Norwegian. Professor Munch -reads ‘Malbritha a dalk thana--Melbridg owns this brooch.’” M. Worsaae -here obviously means _Celt_, as opposed to Scandinavian, but uses -the term Scotchman to allow himself, if need be, a door of escape. -“Scotchman” would apply equally to anyone born in Scotland, whether -Celt by extraction, Scandinavian, Fleming or Norman. This seems to me -an undignified way of getting out of a difficult position. The runic -writing of the Hunterston brooch, which is in the Norse tongue, has -been accurately explained by Professor George Stephens, of Copenhagen. -M. Worsaae, we know, accepted the attentions of eminent British -antiquaries, and could not gracefully seem to doubt their conclusions -on special subjects submitted to his decision. He is first told what to -say, and then cited by his instructors, as an authority for statements -which they themselves have put into his mouth. Perhaps, under the -circumstances, this may not be an exceptional manner of dealing with -matters of disputed history, but it is certainly not the way to reach -the truth that reveals itself to intelligence. “In workmanship,” M. -Worsaae says, “the Hunterston brooch resembles the contemporary Irish -and Scotch more than Scandinavian ornaments.” Now, it certainly does no -such thing. It does not appear to me that as regards the Scandinavian -remains of Great Britain, one like M. Worsaae groping his way darkly -with the help of such lights as he can find is at all competent to -pronounce dogmatic judgments. Ireland and Scotland were invaded, and -subdued, and peopled by the Northmen, and brooches of the self-same -character are found in the Viking interments of Scandinavia. The -contemporary Irish and Scotch brooches may reasonably be presumed to -be Scandinavian. The resemblance of the Hunterston brooch to that -found at Tara, and to others of like character found in Scotland is -certainly not greater than to the brooch in the Bergen Museum exhumed -from a Viking mound at Vambheim, or to that dug up at North Trondheim -in another grave of the Viking period. The inscription contained on the -Hunterston brooch proves to demonstration, not only that its art, and -that of all others of kindred type is Scandinavian, but that the name -“Melbridg” is Norwegian. Whatever be the _origin_ of the art exhibited -on the brooches, it is plain that this cannot be Celtic, inasmuch as -that no one has ever shewn that the Celts possessed any knowledge of -art. It is all very well to talk in an off-handed way about Celtic -art, but something more than this is necessary to carry conviction. -To my perceptions a Celtic statement is much improved by some form of -_evidence_. Dr. Soderberg of Lund doubts if I will find many adherents -among Scandinavian scholars. “We are all of us,” he says, “more or -less imbued with Celticism.” So much the worse for Scandinavia, -that her sons deny her legitimate claims to her own historic and -archaic remains. It is not however, as I think, so much a question of -scholarship as of practical sense, the capacity to deal with facts -which may be weighed by anyone possessed of ordinary reasoning power -or capable of speech and thought in their simplest forms. One can -understand a Scotch antiquary of the Celtic type placing himself in -an attitude of antagonism, just as we might imagine Professor Freeman -gliding like a shark along the Saxon line ready to do battle on behalf -of his cherished delusion, because that to both of these the Northman -theory is total extinction. But that the Scandinavian antiquary, who -as regards his national remains has no reason to falsify the facts of -history, should in the interest of an exotic fable, waste his ingenuity -in disclaiming the art that especially belongs to his country surpasses -my comprehension. Let us hear what the _Saturday Review_ has to say on -the subject of Celtic art. Taking exception to many of my positions, -it says: “He [Mr. Roger] is on much firmer ground when he declines -to believe in any art or culture that can fairly be called Celtic. -The very patterns which are usually spoken of as Celtic are common to -all the gold work of the Mycenæan graves, which few people, we think, -will now place much later than 1500 B.C.” “Dr. Schliemann’s Mycenæan -discoveries deprive the Celts of any credit for originality in their -system of spiral ornament.” Again “‘_Celtic_’ patterns certainly -existed on the shores of the Ægean fifteen hundred years before our -era.” “Mr. Roger is probably right when he claims a Scandinavian -origin for the ancient claymores (two handed), for the Tara brooch and -other brooches, for stone crosses, dirk handles, and what so else is -too commonly attributed to Celtic art.” “‘What is Celtic art?’ cries -Mr. Roger, triumphantly. What, indeed? ‘The Celts, Pinkerton tells -us, had no monuments, any more than the Finns or savage Africans, or -Americans.’ As to Americans, Mr. Roger can see their bas-reliefs at -the South Kensington Museum;[4] _but for Celtic art not derived from -the Scandinavians or Romans, we know not where to bid him look_.” -I am content to rest the matter here. There is no art known as -distinctively Celtic, and in this aspect of the question I am confirmed -by the _Saturday Review_. But to return to Professor Freeman. In a -number of the publication called _The Antiquary_, issued on November -16th, 1872, the writer of a paper on _The Landing of the Saxons in -Kent_, tells us that “after pillaging for ‘a hundred and fifty years’ -the British shores,” the Jutes, or Saxons, landed under Hengist and -Horsa, “and here,” the writer says, “we must halt for a few moments -till we have disposed of Mr. E. A. Freeman’s astounding statement that -Horsa meant _mare_. Hors, our misspelt _horse_,” the writer says, “is -like its German equivalent Ross, a neuter word. The Saxon hero is -sometimes called simply Hors, but more frequently by the addition of a -masculine termination--a, as in ‘Ida Ælla,’ and some thousands more, -he becomes Horsa, masculine and male. _Mare_ is Myre, feminine. -* * * * If Mr. Freeman will be good enough to tell us how he came to -fall into this preposterous error, we may possibly clear up the cause of -his mistake; for the most part, when he makes a bad blunder, we can -form a notion what better authority has misled him; but in this case -no English dictionary, grammar, or history can have been consulted -by him. Can it have been a Latin grammar? Mr. Freeman is extensively -known as blowing weekly a shrill trumpet, ‘_asper, acerba, sonans_,’ -in reviews of literary and illiterate performances, but then he is -in hiding; we hear the obstreperous whirr, but the midge is behind -the screen; when he appears in human body, he makes lapses, trips and -stumbles, and lays himself bare to stings,” &c. This is in Professor -Freeman’s early days, but men carry their idiosyncrasies into their -riper years. It gives us an insight into this critic’s mind according -to the estimation in which he was then held by his fellow-scribblers. -To the article in question, which occupies nearly two columns of -_The Antiquary_, the editor appends the following note:--“The story -of Hengist and Horsa (including the so-called Anglo-Saxon invasion) -is an exploded fable. The Anglo-Saxons of England, like the Picts -or Caledonians of Scotland, were only the earlier Northmen or -Scandinavians.” - -This is pre-eminently an age of platitudes and Professor Freeman is -great in such. “There is,” he says, “an English folk, and there is a -British Crown.” There is also, it might be affirmed, a Scotch folk, -and a British Crown, and until Mr. Gladstone shall accomplish his -visionary project of Irish Home Rule, there is, and will be an Irish -folk and a British Crown. “But the homes of the English folk,” we are -to note, “and the dominions of the British Crown do not always mean -the same thing.” Does any one suppose they do? “Here by the border -stream of the Angle and the Saxon” we are in “the dominions of the -British Crown,” &c. If by the “border stream” be meant the Tweed, it -is more than doubtful if the Angles and Saxons ever saw that stream. -In Professor Freeman’s “youth,” the “Anglo-Saxon race was unheard of,” -and by some strange delusion, for which it is difficult to account, the -“British race” dates, he believes, from some speech delivered a week -before the time at which he writes. It is evident Professor Freeman -has not been a reader of _Good Words_, at least of its early numbers -published more than thirty years ago. In one of these he will find “The -British race has been called Anglo-Saxon,” &c., and a good deal more -which it might be inconvenient for him to learn. - -Professor Freeman “shows how some writers, sometimes more famous -writers, now and then get at their facts.” “One received way,” he -tells us, “is to glance at a page of an original writer, to have the -eye caught by a word, to write down another word, that looks a little -like it, and to invent facts that suit the words written down. To roll -two independent words into a compound word with a hyphen is perhaps a -little stronger; but only a little.” Are we to suppose that Professor -Freeman is recounting his individual experience in dealing with the -facts of English history? - -The gifted Edmund Spenser, who charmed the world with his _Faery Queen_ -died forsaken and in want. Milton sold his copyright of Paradise Lost -for fifteen pounds, and Goldsmith’s Vicar of Wakefield was disposed of -for a trifle to save him from the grip of the law. _Tempora mutantur!_ -Third rate contributions by high class writers command their market -value. If men can obtain payment for writing such articles as that of -Professor Freeman’s criticism of _The Viking Age_ that appeared in the -January number of the _Contemporary Review_ it shows that there is -something in a name, that the conductors of such periodicals pay more -regard to the reputation of the writer, than to the quality of the -writing. Professor Freeman is no doubt a very able writer, but this is -not the conclusion that would be reached in reading his captious and -illogical criticism of M. du Chaillu’s book. - -I have evidently wounded the susceptibilities of some extreme churchman -or irascible Celt, in the person of a reviewer in the _Literary -World_, whose hostility is hardly explainable on the ground of mere -difference of opinion. According to this disposer of events, I fall -wofully short in the qualifications of one who is entitled to speak -on the subject of archæology. I might, however, plead in extenuation, -and in mitigation of punishment the reason given by Mr. Gladstone for -upholding the verity of Old Testament Scripture, that “there is a -very large portion of the community whose opportunities of judgment -have been materially smaller than my own,” and that, “in all studies -light may be thrown inwards from without.” I profess not to unravel -the hidden mysteries of prehistoric antiquity, but simply to deal with -the historical aspect of outside facts, though, as the _Saturday_ -reviewer justly remarks, I must get into prehistory somewhere. Among -the numerous disqualifications manifested in my treatise, I show “a -very indifferent acquaintance” with “Language;” and its “twin sister, -Ethnology,” of which, however, I may reasonably be presumed to -know as much as my censor. Most persons who write on any subject do -something to keep in touch with current facts and common knowledge. -If the critic of the _Literary World_ had taken the trouble to read -my book attentively, he would have found many references to what has -been done by philologers and Ethnologists on whose labours he sets so -much store. “As the book is in a second edition,” he condescends to -inform us, he has “occupied more space than he should otherwise have -done in estimating its claims to authority.” The conclusion he has -reached is that I go as far astray in one direction as the Celticists -do in another, an opinion which is quite within the limit of legitimate -criticism. When, however, from his lofty tribune he looks down and -imputes to me ignorance of what has been done by the great masters of -“Language,” the Joneses, and Colebrookeses, and Bopps, and Potts, and -Grimms, and Steinthals, and suggests that I do not know what has been -said by such writers as Camper, Jacquart, Blumenbach, Cuvier, Prichard, -Latham and Morton, not to mention the pernicious nonsense of Darwin, -and the vagaries of Professor Huxley, I must be permitted to take -exception. It is one thing to know what they have written, and quite -another to accept their conclusions as absolute and final, considering -how often we hear the most arrant nonsense solemnly propounded as the -deductions of scientific investigation. It has been pointed out by a -late minister of the Crown that “Newton’s projectile theory of Light” -which had apparently been firmly established has given place to “the -theory of undulation,” which, citing from the Virginian philosopher Dr. -Smith, he says, “has now for fifty years reigned in its stead.” On this -he grounds the suggestion that we should not “receive with impatience -the assertion of contradictions.” On the subject of specialists we have -the opinion of the same eminent individual, notable among the great -intellects of the age, one who like Brougham, “has the languages of -Greece and Rome strung like a bunch of keys at his girdle.” No less -a personage in fact, than the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, with whom, -while admiring the versatility of his genius, I differ politically, -_toto cœlo_. To none of the sciences, rightly or wrongly so named, do -his remarks more aptly apply than to the “Science of Language,” and -its twin sister, “Ethnology.” “I have had the opportunity,” he says, -“of perceiving how, among specialists as with other men, there may -be fashions of the time and school, which Lord Bacon called idols -of the market-place, and currents of prejudice below the surface, -which may detract somewhat from the authority which each enquirer may -justly claim in his own field, and from their title to impose their -conclusions upon mankind.” In proof of the fluctuating and uncertain -character of this so-called science Dr. Morton in regard to “certain -points of primary importance found himself compelled to differ in -opinion from the majority of scholars.” I believe with Bishop Percy, -Dr. R. Angus Smith, and others, that the Celts and Teutons even -remotely had not a common origin, but were _ab origine_ distinct races -of mankind. As to _authority_ I hold that “no man is an authority for -any statement which he cannot prove,” and although according to the -critic of the _Literary World_, I deliver my opinions in a manner “more -forcible than elegant”[5] my pretensions are exceedingly humble. “I -venture to draw attention to the subject, in the hope that the matter -may be taken up by some one with more time and better appliances at -his disposal than I can command.” Without pretending to be “exhaustive -or specially erudite” I have done the best I can to extinguish a -national delusion, and I hope cannot finally, and altogether fail. If -I be deficient in language, in whatever acceptation, I am in no worse -position than the statesman already referred to, who maintains the -truth of ancient Scripture avowedly without any knowledge of the Hebrew -tongue. Language, as Lord Southesk most accurately, and pertinently -points out, “is a thing that seems like a boomerang, so queer are -the twists it takes, and so uncertain its returns.” Ethnology, or -Anthropology--whichever its votaries choose to call it--is not, as -I think, a science. It consists of the conceits and assumptions of -men learned and unlearned who have reached certain conclusions, and -who profess to bring back from the depths of prehistoric antiquity -facts which may not be facts, or which at least we have no means of -knowing to be true. The whole subject is “feeble, perplexed, and to all -appearance, confused.” Many years since Mr. Hyde Clarke, at a meeting -of the Ethnological Society, remarking on the utterances of Professor -Huxley, suggested that, although the latter “had laid down his -statements as established by men of science, there was little capable -of proof.” What then is the value of a study, the results of which are -as unstable as the passing vapour? It was a conception of the late Sir -David Brewster, that _science_ is the only earthly treasure we can -carry with us to a better state. Let us hope that if _Language_, and -its _twin sister_ be among the number destined thither, they will be -freed from their mundane misconceptions and uncertainties. - -The Reviewer of the _Literary World_ thinks I “make a sorry jumble -of races and languages. All sorts of people, and tribes, dialects, -and remains, related and unrelated, are said to be Goths or Gothic,” -though in dealing with my shortcomings, real or supposed, he does -not always keep faith with facts. The ancient Scythians, he makes me -to say, were Goths, for which the only foundation is that I cite Dr. -Macculloch and Mr. Planché from each a paragraph in which the name -Scythian is mentioned. “The occupiers of prehistoric lake dwellings -Goths.” Precisely what I do not say. I mention the facts that “a -species of combat called _holmgang_, peculiar to the old Northmen, was -usually fought in a small island or holm in a lake,” and that islands -in lakes were places resorted to by the Scandinavian “foude,” or -magistrate, with his law officers, &c. In Iceland, the men on whom -sentence of death had been passed, were beheaded upon an islet in a -lake or river. I submit these facts to the candid consideration of -those who are capable of judging, because if my conjecture be correct, -palisaded islands were neither inhabited nor are they prehistoric. -“The Caledonians, Goths; the Picts, Goths.” I was taught to believe -that Pict and Caledonian are convertible terms. “The Icelanders and -others were Goths.” I do not, of course, know which “others” the -reviewer may have had in his mind, but the Icelanders are certainly -Goths. “Sometimes,” the critic says, “Gothic appears as the equivalent -of Scandinavian.” Certainly as opposed to Celtic. “And the sum of the -whole matter is that ‘the Scandinavians are our true progenitors,’” -which, he points out, is “the same blunder that M. du Chaillu has been -dashing his head against.” All wise beyond conception! By a figure of -speech a writer might be said to dash his head against a rock, but -hardly I should think, against a _blunder_! It is rather odd that this -captious censor should be ignorant of the fact that the quotation which -he cites from my preface contains the _ipsissima verba_ of the writer -of an article that appeared in _Good Words_ nearly forty years ago, -by whom M. du Chaillu was anticipated, and that the same views and -opinions were advocated by myself nineteen years since in the pages of -_Notes and Queries._ - -The languages or dialects to be dealt with as regards the British -islands, are few in number, and we can judge of them in an outside -fashion, without the aid of Bopp, or Grimm, or Zeuss, or Steinthal. -These are the Welsh of the Principality, which, roughly speaking, -includes the extinct dialect of Cornwall. The Erse or Gaelic of -Scotland, Ireland, and the Isle of Man. The Teutonic of the Belgae, -which Prichard calls Celtic, but which we gather from Cæsar was German. -At least it is a fair inference from his statement, _Belgas esse ortos -a Germanis_, that they spoke some dialect of Teutonic speech.[6] The -language of the Picts or Caledonians, which Skene affirms is neither -Welsh nor Gaelic, but a Gaelic dialect partaking largely of Welsh -forms. This, however, on the faith of Tacitus, I believe to have -been Scandinavian, _rutilæ Caledoniam habitantium comæ magni artus -Germanicam asseverant_. The Saxon, or earlier Scandinavian of South -Britain, and the confessedly Scandinavian dialects of Yorkshire, -Derbyshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Northumberland and North Britain. In -point of fact only two languages, the Gothic or Teutonic, and the -Celtic, or whatever else may be the structure, foundation or admixture -of the dialects so named. I have elsewhere stated that “The several -dialects of what has been called Celtic might be compared to so many -dust heaps to which has been swept the refuse of all other languages -from time immemorial,” and I see no reason to change my opinion. It -will thus be seen that there is not much room to jumble either races -or language. The jumble, if such there be, arises out of the confusion -and obscurity of the critic’s own mind. He ridicules the idea of -identifying the “Gothic _Magus_” with what he calls the “Celtic _Mac_ -or _Maqui_.” I deny that _Mac_ is Celtic, and I identify it with the -_Maqui_ of the Ogham inscriptions, because I think there are good -grounds for believing that Oghams and runes were equally the work -of the Northmen, although Lord Southesk, who has made these remains -a special study, differs from me in opinion. There is certainly an -uncommon outside resemblance between the two words. It is however, -satisfactory to know that his Lordship is in substantial agreement -with me on the main subject of my contention, the preponderance of the -Scandinavian element in the British Isles. Coming to the essence of -the controversy, he says, “Where I agree with you thoroughly is in the -belief that the prevalence and influence of the Scandinavian races in -Britain and Ireland have been largely underrated, and that much due -to them has been ascribed to the various peoples commonly classed as -Celts.” “One has only to look at the people inhabiting Aberdeenshire, -Angus, &c., to convince one’s-self that Norse blood predominates.” -I regard the questions of races, art, and culture entirely from an -outside or historic view. In the face of such facts as I have adduced -to continue to call _Mac_ Celtic is simply persistent dogmatism--a -perverse determination to adhere _per fas et nefas_ to a foregone -conclusion. The prefix _Mac_ though found in Scotch Gaelic and other -dialects of the Erse, has obviously been imported thither only as a -foreign term, in the same manner that the Norse word _jarl_, an earl, -found its way into the Welsh. _Mac_, as I have elsewhere pointed out, -occurs in the Anglo-Norse dialect of Craven, West Riding of York. It -was used in the sense of _son_ by the Danes and Northmen. It occurs -as a prefix to an interminable number of personal names distinctively -Scandinavian, and in one form or other is found in every dialect of -the Teutonic. We must “deal with the evidence before us according to a -rational appreciation of its force.” “_Plaid_,” the critic, affirms, -“does not exist in Moeso-Gothic.” Thomson in _Observations_ prefixed to -his Lexicon, says, “Plaid, a cloke in Moeso-Gothic, was the Icelandic -_palt_.” I would rather believe that the critic of the _Literary World_ -does not know where to look for the word, than that the erudite private -secretary to the Marquis of Hastings in India, presuming on their -ignorance, sought to impose on his readers a word which he knew did not -exist. Again this critic says, “Denying to another (Anglo-Saxon) a word -that does (foster).” The expression is confused, but he evidently means -that “foster” _is_ found in Anglo-Saxon. In the text of my treatise -I say, “Neither can there be any doubt as to the Northern derivation -of the word _foster_.” To this I append a footnote taken from the -_Quarterly Review_, vol. 139 (1875), p. 449. “The word _foster_ is -not found in Anglo-Saxon, Moeso-Gothic, or German,” and at the same -time indicate the source whence my information is derived. I accepted -the statement on the faith of the writer. If it does occur, it only -shows how little dependence can be placed on facts adduced by literary -critics even in connection with such responsible publications as the -_Quarterly Review_. Another evidence of disqualification as “a writer -on Archæological matters,” is that the word _Celte_ cited from the -Vulgate was shown long ago by Mr. Knight Watson to be a misprint for -_Certe_. The critic must indeed have been much at a loss for a peg on -which to hang his hypercriticism. I hardly know why it is incumbent on -me before delivering my views on the Celtic myth to know all that has -been explained on collateral subjects by Mr. Knight Watson. I found -neither note nor marginal reference declaratory of this gentleman’s -critical acumen, or of the great service he had rendered to archæology -in resolving this enigma, nor if I had should I have introduced it -into my treatise. My remark in regard to the Vulgate is an incidental -reference of the vaguest description on which nothing depends. To -borrow the expression of an eminent individual, Would the critic of -the _Literary World_ “be surprised to learn” that by a defect of -information, quite as glaring as that which he imputes to me, he has -entirely missed the point of my stricture which is directed against -the executive of the _Society of Antiquaries of Scotland_. At page 11 -of its _Catalogue of Antiquities_, printed in 1876, it is stated as -the heading of a section, “STONE CELTS OR AXE HEADS.” Behind the word -“Celts,” an asterisk, and underneath, a footnote corresponding thereto -the explanation “Celtis, a chisel,” of all which the critic shows -himself to be entirely ignorant. He mentions the Gothic word _afar_. -Thomson calls it _hafar_. I can only conjecture that the critic may -have first seen the light within the vibrations of certain well-known -sounds, and that he habitually drops the letter _h_. In the course of -my “polemic,” he thinks, I “undoubtedly score a point here and there -in matters of detail.” “Thus,” he says, “he maintains what ought to -be obvious enough [but which to the Celtic expositor it never is] -that remains inscribed in Northern runes must be attributed to the -Scandinavians.” I give, he says, “and this appears to be my _chef -d’œuvre_, a very probable reading (GRIMKITIL THANE RAIST, Grimkitil -engraved this) to a fragmentary inscription ( ... KITIL TH ...) on -what is known as the bronze plate of Laws. And inasmuch as” that this -critic “formed a similar opinion many years ago, he is bound to approve -my suggestion that the old Greek and runic alphabets were derived from -some common source, and not either from the other.” He is “bound to -approve.” How very condescending! It is evident he does not perceive -the effect of his own conclusion. If my reading of the inscription -on the Laws plate be correct it involves something more than a mere -matter of detail. It is the solution of a problem which has perplexed -and bewildered most antiquaries of the present century, because it -demonstrates the symbols of the Laws crescent plate, and those of the -Scotch sculptured stones to be the work of the Scandinavians. This has -long been my individual opinion, though I doubt if the critic of the -_Literary World_ will make many converts among antiquaries on the other -side of the Tweed. When I attempt to establish “my own peculiar views,” -he says, I seem to “break down.” Are not the points on which--to borrow -his elegant diction--I “score” as much my “peculiar views” as those on -which he alleges I fail? “Of the Teutonic tribes, whose settlements -grew into our old Heptarchy, or Octarchy, none, and no discoverable -part of any, were Scandinavian proper. [This is mere arbitrary -statement.] There was subsequently, of course, in certain districts, -a large infusion of Scandinavian forms, proper names, &c. [What does -he mean by _forms_? The Scandinavians brought their _names_ when they -brought their bodies] in consequence of the invasions and settlements -of the ‘Danes,’ but in spite of this, and of much more serious -disturbance afterwards, our language from the Channel to the Forth, -owing to its power of absorption, and assimilation, remained, and -remains substantially ‘English.’” “Remained and remains substantially -English.” These remarks are unanswerable, which it is said, is the -happy property of all remarks sufficiently wide of the purpose. Is the -language of the British nation less “English” because derived from the -_Scandinavian_ rather than from the _Saxon_, two dialects of the same -speech in their essential elements hardly distinguishable? If this be -true--as beyond all question it is true--it demolishes utterly the -bugbear which the suggestion he advocates sets up. - -While accepting with becoming humility the disparaging estimate of -my performance, it is not desirable that a reviewer of this character -should have his say uncontradicted, though in setting myself right -with those whom his strictures might have influenced, I have perhaps -honoured him with too much notice. It is not a very formidable matter -to cope with such an adversary. - - “While these are censors, ’twould be sin to spare; - While such are critics, why should I forbear?”--BYRON. - - - THE END. - - - - -FOOTNOTES: - - -[1] The sonnets were originally discovered in the Monastery of the -“Monks of Therfuse,” which stood on the site now occupied by the -terminus of the “Glenmutchkin Railway.” They were afterwards placed for -safe custody with the MSS. of Ossian. - -[2] “Well-known scholars,” the _Quarterly_ says, “have shown before -him, and he is justified in adopting the conclusion, that the name of -‘Saxon’ must have been loosely applied to all the pirates that scoured -the Narrow Seas. We may conjecture that many crews from Scania and the -Danish Isles, or from the great bay by the Naze of Norway, which gave -its name to the Vikings, must have been found among the roving fleets -of the fourth and fifth centuries, when the Empire was crumbling into -ruins.” - -[3] “The red-bearded Thor was called ‘The Englishmen’s -God.’”--_Quarterly Review._ - -[4] I suspect these were not the savage Americans Pinkerton had in his -mind. - -[5] A writer who, to denote that which is without foundation, makes -use of the expression “mere fudge” cannot be a very competent judge of -elegance. - -[6] That cannot be regarded as _science_ which based only on the -uncertain hypothesis of _language_ contradicts the ascertained facts of -history. - - - - -OPINIONS OF THE PRESS, AND OTHERS IN REGARD TO THE SECOND EDITION OF -“CELTICISM A MYTH.” - - -“This issue of the work, resumes in an able statement the arguments of -those antiquaries who hold that the early civilization of these islands -was the work, not of Celts, but of Scandinavians.”--_Scotsman._ - - * * * * * - -“He [Mr. Roger] is on much firmer ground when he declines to believe in -any art or culture that can fairly be called Celtic. The very patterns -which are usually spoken of as Celtic are common on the gold work of -the Mycenæan graves, which few people, we think, will now place much -later than 1500 B.C. ... Mr. Roger is probably right when he claims a -Scandinavian origin for the ancient claymores (two handed), for the -Tara brooch, and other brooches, for stone crosses, dirk handles, and -what so else is too commonly attributed to Celtic art.”--_Saturday -Review._ - - * * * * * - -“The book throughout in its many pages bears evidence to an exceeding -amount of careful research, clever reasoning, and close intimacy with -the subject.... Until contradicted and disproved the facts in the pages -of ‘Celticism a Myth’ must carry conviction.”--_Montrose Standard._ - - * * * * * - -“A further issue of this learned work is evidence that the arguments -advanced against the pet theories of such recognised authorities as Dr. -Joseph Anderson, and Dr. Daniel Wilson have aroused some commotion in -the camp of archæologists.”--_Publishers’ Circular._ - - * * * * * - -“A second edition of Mr. Roger’s argument against the prehistoric -existence of a Celtic civilization, and his ‘demonstration beyond -reasonable doubt,’ that the only civilization in Scotland, of which -we have any knowledge, was brought there by the Scandinavians.”--_The -Bookseller._ - - * * * * * - -“It is a vigorous piece of controversy in favour of the argument that -Celtic literature, and Celtic art never existed.”--_Evening News and -Post._ - - * * * * * - -“It is a book that has interested me much.”--_The Most Hon. The Marquis -of Lorne, K.T., &c._ - - * * * * * - -“Where I agree with you thoroughly is in the belief that the -prevalence, and influence of the Scandinavian races in Britain and -Ireland have been largely underrated, and that much due to them has -been ascribed to the various peoples commonly classed as Celts.”--_The -Right Hon. The Earl of Southesk, K.T., F.S.A. Scot., &c._ - - * * * * * - -“I have long been of opinion that we owe the _whole_ of our -civilization to Scandinavian, and Teutonic ancestors, and partly -to Roman influence, and your very interesting volume confirms that -opinion.”--_John Kirkpatrick, Esq., Advocate, M.A., Ph.D. LL.B., LL.D., -Professor of History, University of Edinburgh._ - - * * * * * - -“Bertrand gives maps shewing the course followed by the megalithic -monument builders in entering Europe, and this, I think, dispels the -idea of their being due to the Celts.”--_Rev. S. Baring-Gould, M.A. -&c., &c._ - - * * * * * - -“Your case is so well put, your rebutting evidence so cogent, and your -reasoning so clear, that you must by this time have convinced many of -your readers that ‘Celticism’ _is_ ‘A Myth.’”--_John C. H. Flood, of -the Middle Temple, Esq._ - - * * * * * - -“You have certainly dispelled my illusion as to Celtic art, and I -consider you have proved your case certainly in the main, if not -altogether.”--_Walter L. Spofforth of the Inner Temple, Esq._ - - * * * * * - -“I have seldom perused a more interesting work. The whole argument -is clearly stated, and most convincing.”--_Rev. George Brown, F.S.A. -Scot., Bendochy Manse._ - - -DIPROSE, BATEMAN & CO., PRINTERS, SHEFFIELD STREET, LINCOLN’S INN -FIELDS. - - - - -Transcriber’s Note - - -In this file, text in _italics_ is indicated by underscores. - -Printer’s errors were corrected where they could be clearly identified. -Otherwise, as far as possible, original spelling and punctuation have -been retained. - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CELTIC MSS. IN RELATION TO THE -MACPHERSON FRAUD *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/68323-0.zip b/old/68323-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b19f5b7..0000000 --- a/old/68323-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/68323-h.zip b/old/68323-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ba40276..0000000 --- a/old/68323-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/68323-h/68323-h.htm b/old/68323-h/68323-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 2e416b2..0000000 --- a/old/68323-h/68323-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,2412 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> -<head> - <meta charset="UTF-8" /> - <title> - Celtic mss. in relation to the Macpherson fraud; with a review of Professor Freeman's criticism of "The viking age," by James Cruikshank Roger—A Project Gutenberg eBook - </title> - <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover" /> - <style> - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2 { - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; -} - -.p130 {font-size:1.30em;} -.p110 {font-size:1.10em;} -.p80 {font-size:0.8em;} -.p50 {font-size:0.5em;} - -.p0 {margin-top: 0em;} -.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} - -.mr5 {margin-right: 5%;} - -.ml5 {margin-left: 5%;} -.ml10 {margin-left: 10%;} - -.mb1 {margin-bottom: 1em;} -.mb3 {margin-bottom: 3em;} - -.break {page-break-before: always;} - -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: 33.5%; - margin-right: 33.5%; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;} -hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} -@media print { hr.chap {display: none; visibility: hidden;} } -hr.full {width: 95%; margin-left: 2.5%; margin-right: 2.5%;} - -hr.r5 {width: 5%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 47.5%; margin-right: 47.5%;} -hr.r10 {width: 10%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 45%; margin-right: 45%;} -hr.r20 {width: 20%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 40%; margin-right: 40%;} - -div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} -h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; - font-style: normal; - font-weight: normal; - font-variant: normal; -} /* page numbers */ - - - -.center {text-align: center;} - -.right {text-align: right;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;} - - - - - -/* Footnotes */ - -.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} - -.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - -/* Poetry */ -.poetry-container {text-align: center;} -.poetry {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%;} -/* uncomment the next line for centered poetry in browsers */ - .poetry {display: inline-block;} -.poetry .stanza {margin: 1em auto;} -.poetry .verse {text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em;} -/* large inline blocks don't split well on paged devices */ -@media print { .poetry {display: block;} } -.x-ebookmaker .poetry {display: block;} - -/* Transcriber's notes */ -.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - font-size:smaller; - padding:0.5em; - margin-bottom:5em; - font-family:sans-serif, serif; } - -/* Poetry indents */ -.poetry .indent0 {text-indent: -3em;} - -.poetry .outdent {text-indent: -3.4em; padding-left: 3em;} - -em, cite, .italic {font-style: italic;} - -</style> -</head> -<body> -<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Celtic mss. in relation to the Macpherson fraud, by J. C. Roger</p> -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online -at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you -are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this eBook. -</div> - -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: Celtic mss. in relation to the Macpherson fraud</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em;'>With a review of Professor Freeman's criticism of "The Viking Age," by the author of "Celticism a myth"</p> -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: J. C. Roger</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: June 15, 2022 [eBook #68323]</p> -<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p> - <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: Thomas Frost and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)</p> -<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CELTIC MSS. IN RELATION TO THE MACPHERSON FRAUD ***</div> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_i">[Pg i]</span></p> - - - - -<h1>CELTIC MSS.<br /> - -<span class="p50">IN RELATION TO</span><br /> - -THE MACPHERSON FRAUD;<br /> - -<span class="p50">WITH A REVIEW OF</span><br /> - -<span class="p80">PROFESSOR FREEMAN’S CRITICISM</span><br /> - -<span class="p50">OF</span><br /> - -<span class="p80">“The Viking Age,”</span></h1> - -<p class="center"><b>BY<br /> - -THE AUTHOR OF</b></p> - -<p class="p130 center"><b>“CELTICISM A MYTH.”</b></p> - -<hr class="r20" /> - - -<p class="center"> -“I thought your book an imposture. I think it an imposture still.” -—<span class="italic">Dr. Johnson.</span></p> - -<hr class="r10" /> - -<p class="center">“The purposeless tortuosities of Celtic falsehood, and its most subtile -manifestations.”—<cite>Weekly Scotsman.</cite></p> - -<hr class="r10" /> - -<p class="center">“The received accounts of the Saxon immigration, and subsequent -fortunes, and ultimate settlement, are devoid of historical truth in -every detail.”—<span class="italic">J. M. Kemble.</span> -</p> - -<hr class="r10" /> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0 outdent">“And, armed in proof, the gauntlet cast at once</div> - <div class="verse indent0">To Scotch marauder, and to Southern dunce.”—<span class="italic">Byron.</span></div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<hr class="r20" /> - -<p class="center p110"> -LONDON:<br /> -E. W. ALLEN, 4, AVE MARIA LANE.</p> - -<hr class="r5" /> - -<p class="center"> -MDCCCXC. -</p> - - -<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop mb1" /> - - - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_ii">[Pg ii]</span></p> - - -<p class="center break p80 p0"> -LONDON<br /> -PRINTED AT THE COURTS OF JUSTICE PRINTING WORKS<br /> -BY DIPROSE, BATEMAN AND CO.<br /> -</p> - - -<hr class="full x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_iii">[Pg iii]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PREFACE">PREFACE.</h2> -</div> - - -<p>That portion of this tractate which relates to -Celtic manuscripts and the doings of Macpherson, -was transmitted to the <cite>Scotsman</cite> newspaper, in -reply to an article by Professor Mackinnon which -appeared in that journal. My communication -was however returned by the editor on the plea -that he could not find room for its insertion. -It was perhaps too much to expect that a journal -owned by one of the secretaries of a Society, which -had engaged the services of the Celtic Professor -at Oxford, to uphold what I call the Celtic -myth, should open its columns to one inimical to -Macpherson, and utterly sceptical in regard to -his pretended translation. Mr. Mackinnon’s -enumeration seems a vindication of the antiquity -of Celtic MSS. in general, and was no doubt also -projected “as a basis for more extended collaboration.”</p> - -<p>It occurred to me that my remarks on the -Ossian MSS. might with advantage be incorporated -with some notice of Professor Freeman’s<span class="pagenum" id="Page_iv">[Pg iv]</span> -criticism of “The Viking Age,” both tending -in the same direction. One wipes out the Celts -as the pioneers of civilization, the other explodes -the Saxons as a race distinct from the Scandinavians. -With this in view I have been aiming -for some time past, to put my thoughts in train -for publication, but want of time has always -stood in the way.</p> - -<p class="right mr5"> -J. C. ROGER. -</p> - -<p> -<span class="smcap"><span class="ml5">Friars Watch,</span><br /> -<span class="ml10">Walthamstow.</span></span><br /> -<span class="ml5"><span class="italic">October, 1890.</span></span> -</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CELTIC_MSS">CELTIC MSS.<br /> -<span class="p50">IN RELATION TO</span><br /> -THE MACPHERSON FRAUD, &c.</h2></div> - -<hr class="r10" /> - -<p>My attention was lately directed to a lengthy -article that appeared in <cite>The Scotsman</cite> of the -12th of last November, bearing the initials of -Mr. Mackinnon, Professor of Celtic at the -University of Edinburgh, to whom I sent a copy -of my book, <cite>Celticism a Myth</cite>, then just issued -from the press. The article begins with a -tribute to the assiduity of the Historiographer -Royal in the cause of Celtic literature; but is -plainly intended as a refutation of my statement -to the effect that “It is no longer pretended -that any Gaelic poetry has been preserved in -early manuscripts,” &c. In citing the remark of -Dr. Irving it was certainly not my intention to -call down an exhibition of Professor Mackinnon’s -Celtic wares—of the authenticity and character -of which I am profoundly ignorant—but simply -to express my conviction that the alleged manuscript -documents of which Macpherson professed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</span> -to give a translation did not exist. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">De non -existentibus et non apparentibus</i> Dr. Johnson -says, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">eadem est ratio</i>. There are unfortunately -now no Doctor Johnsons, or Pinkertons or -John Hill Burtons to deal with these possible -inventions or forgeries of a later age, the -perhaps “other evidences” of what the great lexicographer -characterised as “Scotch conspiracy -in national falsehood.” Ample time and opportunity -has been afforded since 1762—the date -when Macpherson first gave to the world his -<cite>Ossian the Son of Fingal</cite>—to fabricate missing -documents or supply others of more startling -character. A pungent criticism from the pen -of Mr. Hill Burton, or a crushing commentary -by either of the other named critics, would -probably have relegated these so-called Celtic -MSS.—some of them at least—to the nothingness -whence they came. It is clear that what Professor -Mackinnon brings forward is not <em>evidence</em>, -certainly not such as would be accepted in a -Court of Law. There is no substantiation of -the Macpherson manuscripts save the statements, -and what I fear must be regarded as the fabrications, -of a number of interested individuals -retailed at second-hand, none of all whom can -be accepted as unprejudiced witnesses. After<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</span> -the strictest search for the originals of Ossian, -Dr. Johnson came to the conclusion that as -regards Scotland and the pretensions of James -Macpherson, there was not in existence “an -Erse manuscript a hundred years old.” Any -attempt therefore, in our day to bring into -agreement this literary imposture with the -difficulties which stultify all conception of its -genuineness is foredoomed to failure. If, as -Mr. Mackinnon alleges, it be “perfectly established” -that Macpherson carried away from the -North-West Highlands several Gaelic manuscripts -it is equally certain he never exhibited -them to anyone capable of forming a judgment as -to their authenticity. “The collection proper,” -it would appear, “consists of sixty-three -separate parcels.” How many of these are -genuine we shall probably never know. These -are “Transcripts of several MSS. or portions of -MSS. by Mr. McLachlan, and the Rev. Donald -Mackintosh,” and collections of “Ossianic poetry -made by a schoolmaster at Kilmelford,” volumes -of tales which belonged to Mr. Campbell of -Islay, a collection of Gaelic poetry made by a -schoolmaster at Dunkeld, the MSS. whatever -these may be, written in “The old Gaelic hand!” -the use of which, we are told, was discontinued<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</span> -about the middle of the last century. “Regarding -the history of the great majority of these documents,” -it is said “we are ignorant”—certainly -at least, I am, most profoundly. It appears -however, that “The Rev. Mr. Gallie saw in -Macpherson’s possession” ‘several volumes, -small octavos, or rather large duodecimo in the -Gaelic language and characters’! Scarcely less -authentic is the fact that Lachlan Macviurich -“remembers well that Clanranald made his -father give up the <cite>Red book</cite> to James Macpherson,” -and that Macpherson himself deposited certain -MSS. with his publishers Messrs. Beckett and -Dehondt which for a whole year remained in the -custody of that firm. These manuscripts mentioned -by Mr. Mackinnon were probably the -Gaelic leases of Macleod of Rasay referred to -by me in <cite>Celticism a Myth</cite>. The fact that -Macpherson so prostituted his talents, and -character for integrity was stated to me many -years ago by an aged clergyman of the Church -of Scotland, who vouched for his statement on -the faith of his friend George Dempster of -Dunichen, who was cognizant of the circumstance. -Father Farquharson, it is alleged, made a -collection of Gaelic MSS. before 1745, the last -leaves of which were used to kindle a stove fire<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</span> -in the Roman Catholic College at Douay, a -circumstance, as I think, not greatly to be -deplored, while the “illiterate descendant” of -the <span class="italic">Seanachies</span> attached to the family of -Clanranald describes the dispersion of the manuscript -library accumulated by his ancestors, and -the fate of certain parchments [? old leases] -which were cut down for tailors’ measuring tapes. -“He himself” (the descendant of the <span class="italic">Seanachies</span>) -“had possession of some parchments after his -father’s death,” but not being able to read, these -disappeared from view. A valuable witness -truly in the identification of doubtful MSS. -“Such acts of vandalism,” we are told, “are -not likely to occur again.” Probably not. Like -Joshua arresting the Sun and the Moon, they -are “things that have once been done but can -be done no more.” The fact of the dispersion, -however, and the fate of the parchments, leases, -title deeds, literary treasures or by whatever name -they may be called, rests on the testimony -of this Celtic ignoramus who, it is to be feared, -would not be too particular in any relation -concerning the “glories and greatness” of -his country, his personal consequence, or the -departed grandeur of his clan. I well remember, -many years ago, meeting with an ignorant Highlander<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</span> -of some property, who offered to sell for -ten pounds an ancient claymore, with a pretentious, -but unauthenticated pedigree, for which -he declared, with the voluntary accompaniment -of an oath, he had previously declined “<em>A -Sousand pounds</em>.” It is my experience that to -persons of this class it comes more natural to -state a falsehood than to speak the truth. We -all remember Charles Surface’s exculpatory -witness in <cite>The School for Scandal</cite>, “Oh yes, I -swear.” Mr. Mackinnon states that “The -Gaelic text of Ossian which James Macpherson -handed over to Mr. Mackenzie, and which was -given to the editor of the edition of 1807, has -disappeared.” How very odd that manuscripts -on which the human eye never rested should -thus so strangely disappear! Can that be said -to disappear which was never visible? Of the -poems of Ossian, Dr. Irving says, “We are -required to believe that these were composed in -the third century; and that by means of oral -tradition, they were delivered by one generation -to another for the space of nearly fifteen hundred -years. If this account could be received as -authentic, if these poems could be regarded as -genuine, they must be classed among the most -extraordinary effort of human genius. That a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</span> -nation so rude in other arts, and even unacquainted -with the use of letters, should yet have -carried the most elegant of all arts to so high a -degree of perfection, would not only be sufficient -to overturn every established theory, but would -exceed all the possibilities of rational assent. -But if we could suppose an untaught barbarian -capable of combining the rules of ancient poetry -with the refinements of modern sentiment one -difficulty is indeed removed; but another difficulty -scarcely less formidable still remains—By -what rare felicity were many thousand -verses, only written on the frail tablet of memory, -to be safely transmitted through fifty generations -of mankind? If Ossian could compose epic -poems on the same model as Homer, how was it -possible for them to preserve their original -texture through the fearful vicissitudes of nearly -fifteen centuries? * * * * It is utterly -incredible that such poems as Fingal and Temora, -consisting each of several thousand lines were -thus transmitted from the supposed age of Ossian -to the age of Macpherson.” “It is” Dr. Irving -continues “no longer pretended that any Gaelic -poetry has been preserved in early manuscripts; -and indeed the period when Gaelic can be traced -as a written language is comparatively modern.”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</span> -“That many poems and fragments of poems,” -he goes on to say, “were preserved in the Highlands -of Scotland cannot however be doubted; -and it is sufficiently ascertained that Macpherson -was assiduously employed in collecting such -popular reliques, some of which had perhaps -existed for many ages. <em>From the materials -which he had thus procured he appears to have -fabricated the various works which he delivered -to the public under the name of Ossian, and -afterwards to have adjusted the Gaelic by the -English text.</em>” “The ground upon which Hume -finally decided against the authenticity of the -<cite>Poems of Ossian</cite>, was the impossibility of any man -of sense imagining that they should have been -orally preserved ‘during fifty generations, by -<em>the rudest, perhaps of all European nations; -the most necessitous</em>, the most turbulent, and the -most unsettled.’” Such is the historian Hume’s -estimate of the Macpherson fraud as stated by -the <cite>Edinburgh Review</cite>, and such the beggarly -array of evidence on which, according to the -abettors of Macpherson, the honour and glory of -Scotland, must rest in all time to come. The -Scotch are a stubborn race on which to operate, -especially in matters that concern their nationality. -They have conceived the idea that in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</span> -the dark ages—dark to all but them—their -countrymen, a Celtic race, were skilled in the -sciences and acquainted with art. This as an -article of faith has hardened into a conviction -not to be shaken, and is that which, in their -view, distinguishes Scotland above all competitors. -In it, in the remote ages of the past, -there existed culture and refinement rivalling -that of the most literary nations of antiquity -whether Egyptian, Etruscan, Greek or Roman. -The roving Northmen, according to their -account, were but plundering pirates, and other -nations barbarians. No evidence, however -overwhelming, will alter or modify this opinion. -Not on any terms will they be induced to give -up their preconceptions. Philologers and Ethnologists, -Professors, and specialists, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">et hoc genus -omne</i>, are called to the rescue, while they refuse -to look at the clearest facts. When their -favourite idol begins to shake they rush into the -market-place crying “Great is Diana of the -Ephesians.” It is impossible to doubt that -Macpherson was an impudent impostor. When -his veracity was impugned no simpler method of -clearing his reputation from the aspersions cast -upon it could have been devised than the very -reasonable plan suggested by Dr. Johnson, that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</span> -he should place the manuscripts in the hands of -the professors at Aberdeen where there were -persons capable of judging of their authenticity. -The manuscripts were never produced, and in -admitting this fact the defenders of Macpherson -resign the whole question. “To refuse,” Dr. -Johnson says, “to gratify a reasonable curiosity -is the last refuge of impudent mendacity.” Dr. -Johnson’s letter to this vain-glorious boaster -repelling a threat of personal violence is a -master-piece of contemptuous scorn and defiance. -“Mr. James Macpherson, I received your -foolish and impudent letter. Any violence -offered me I shall do my best to repel, and what -I cannot do myself the law will do for me. I -hope I shall never be deterred from detecting -what I think a cheat by the menaces of a -ruffian. What would you have me retract? I -thought your book an imposture. I think it an -imposture still. For this opinion I have given -my reasons to the public which I here dare you -to refute. Your rage I defy. Your abilities -since your <em>Homer</em> are not so formidable, and -what I hear of your morals inclines me to pay -regard, not to what you shall say, but to what -you shall prove. You may print this if you -will.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</span></p> - -<p>We are told that the subject of the Pictish -language has been thoroughly discussed by Dr. -W. F. Skene in his <cite>Four Ancient Books of -Wales</cite>, that, in addition to <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Pean Fahel</i>, the sole -Pictish word formerly known he has discovered -four other distinct words, besides a number of -syllables entering into proper names; and from -all these he deduces the opinion that Pictish -“Is not Welsh, neither is it Gaelic; but it is a -Gaelic dialect partaking largely of Welsh forms” -whatever that may mean. “More especially,” -we are told, “he holds that Pictish as compared -with Gaelic, was a <em>Low</em> dialect, that it differed -from the Gaelic in much the same way that Low -German differs from High.” It is perhaps unnecessary -to add that I regard this supposed -solution of the Pictish difficulty as so much -figment. It is simply the arbitrary conclusion -of a man looking into a mill stone, and giving a -deliverance in regard to which he is in no more -commanding position than the most illiterate -specimen of humanity to be found in the slums -of the Northern Metropolis. On the other side -of the question it is open to me to state that the -Pictish words which Mr. Skene persuades himself -he has discovered, and which on his own -shewing are neither Welsh nor Gaelic but,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</span> -belonging to a Low dialect of the latter may -after all be only the obsolete remains of an early -Gothic speech. The ruler of the Picts about -the end of the sixth century, it is said, was -<i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Brude</i>, the son of <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Mailcon</i>, who died in 586. -The most active of all the Pictish sovereigns, -according to the received accounts, was <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Hungus</i> -or <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Ængus</i> who began to reign in 730. In so -far then as these names may not be absolute -myth, they may be claimed as Scandinavian. -With <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Brude</i> compare the Norse personal names -<i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Brodi</i>, <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Breid-r</i>, and <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Brodd-r</i> (the <em>r</em> final -separated by a hyphen being merely the sign of -the nominative case). <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Mailcon</i> is the united -Scandinavian personal names of <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Miöl</i> and <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Kon-r</i>. -With <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Hungus</i> or <i lang="xpi" xml:lang="xpi">Ængus</i> compare the Scoto-Norwegian -names <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Magnus Anguson</i>, and <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">Angus -Magnuson</i>.</p> - -<p>The Norwegians in Man, in the Hebrides, and -in the North, and North-Western Highlands -were confessedly the dominant and more -numerous race, and there for upwards of four -centuries held uninterrupted sway.</p> - -<p>Did the Norwegian colonists eventually go off -in vapour, leaving behind them only a native -residuum speaking a purely Celtic dialect freed -from all taint of the Northman’s language after<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</span> -the close contact of so many centuries? If the -Norwegian element was not so sublimated, but -as Pinkerton affirms, and which I believe, continues -in the modern population of those portions -of the United Kingdom, what becomes of the -purity of the so-called “Primitive Celtic tongue”? -Assuming that it was Celts among whom the -Norwegians settled, is it possible to conceive -that men of such force of character as the Northmen -made no lasting impression on the speech -of the wretched Celtic inhabitants whom they -trampled under foot? Despite the researches -of philologers is it rational to conclude that what -is now called Celtic can on any intelligible -hypothesis be the primeval speech of the unlettered -savages who before the advent of the -Romans had been driven into the western portion -of the Island by the Belgae? “It is not in nature,” -the <cite>Saturday Reviewer</cite> says, “that people should -accept Mr. Roger’s or Pinkerton’s opinion in -preference to the universally held belief that the -Celtic speech is a language of the Indo-European -family of speech,” &c. But it is not alone Mr. -Roger and Pinkerton with whom the <cite>Reviewer</cite> -has to deal. The late Lord Neaves, an eminent -Scotch judge and antiquary, held an opinion -very much akin to that of Pinkerton, that the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</span> -Erse, and Gaelic, and Manx dialects, if not -entirely a form of obsolete Gothic speech, contain -at least a very large admixture of the northern -tongue. The editor of the <cite>Athenæum</cite> too, in -reviewing Skene’s <cite>Highlanders of Scotland</cite>, -draws attention to the fact of the striking resemblance -between the oldest Erse monuments -and those dialects confessedly Teutonic, holding -this decisive of the question that the <em>Scots</em> were -Germans. On the same side of the question is -the strongly expressed opinion of the late Dr. -R. Angus Smith, F.R.S. “I consider,” he says, -“those who hold the nations called Celtic and -those called Teutonic, as one race, to be simply -abolishing the knowledge we get from history, -and refusing to look at very clear facts.” I am -not however going to quarrel with the <cite>Saturday -Reviewer</cite>, who virtually concedes all for which I -contend, that the Celts were entirely without -art or culture, of which more hereafter. On the -question of civilizing influences we have the -testimony of Professor Kirkpatrick, of the -Scotch Bar, a gentleman of well-known scholarly -accomplishments, who occupies the Chair of -Constitutional Law and History in the University -of Edinburgh. “I have long been of opinion,” -he writes, “that we owe the <em>whole</em> of our civilization<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</span> -to Scandinavian and Teutonic ancestors, -and partly to Roman influence, and your very -interesting volume confirms that opinion.” -There is still another phase of the question -with which the philological critic has to deal, -and this is, that only where the Northmen -settled are found those remains of what is -called Celtic speech. “The Northmen formed -colonies in Wales, in Cornwall, in Brittany, -in Ireland, in the Highlands and islands of -Scotland, and in the Isle of Man, and there -only do we find those dialects usually known as -Celtic.” I do not pretend to explain this, but I -state it as an outside fact, which, in my view, it -is incumbent on the Celtic philologer to explain. It -is, of course, impossible to reach any confident conclusion -as to what may have been the language on -which the Northman grafted his Teutonic speech, -though it must be obvious to every unprejudiced -enquirer, that those dialects must now be very -much mixed and altered and corrupted from -close contact for many centuries with the language -of a dominant race. Having regard to this fact, -the question arises whether “the universally -held belief” referred to by the <cite>Saturday Review</cite>, -be not founded on the Gothic accretions derived -from the Northmen, rather than on the structural<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</span> -peculiarities of the original language of the -people among whom the Northmen settled. It -is evident from the remarks of Professor Max -Muller that too much importance is not to be -attached to what is told us by the Celtic philologer. -“Celtic words,” he says, “may be -found in German, Slavonic, and even Latin, -but only as foreign terms, and their number is -much smaller than commonly supposed. A -far larger number of Latin and German words -have since found their way into the modern -Celtic dialects, and these have frequently been -mistaken by Celtic enthusiasts for original words -from which German and Latin might in their -turn be derived.”</p> - -<p>Professor Kirkpatrick’s opinion suggests a -natural connection between the Celtic myth, and -M. du Chaillu’s account of <cite>The Viking Age</cite>. -The <cite>Scotsman</cite>, in its review of this book, -wonders what Professor Freeman will say, and -we are not long left in doubt. He looks down -upon M. du Chaillu from a lofty eminence, evidently -regarding him with something like pitying -contempt. He is not sure he should have -thought the doctrine set forth by M. du Chaillu -worthy of serious examination, but for the -singular relation in which it stands to Mr.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</span> -Seebohm’s “slightly older teaching,” in his -book called <cite>The English Village Community</cite>. -Mr. Seebohm’s views, he says, are the evident -result of honest work at original materials, and -eminently entitled to be considered, and if need -be, answered. But obviously both are eminently -objectionable. Though differing in method, they -rival each other in daring and absurdity. The -only question is whether M. du Chaillu’s theory -need be discussed at all. Professor Freeman has -decreed this, and after so supreme a master in -the art of criticism it is vain to question it.</p> - -<p>It will thus be seen he lauds the one in order -to disparage the other. He compliments Mr. -Seebohm and spits contemptuously in M. du -Chaillu’s face. I am Jupiter, and by contrast -in the scale of intelligence, you, M. du Chaillu, -are only a black beetle. “The strife in its new -form,” he tells us, “has become more deadly.” -M. du Chaillu threatens to wipe out entirely -Professor Freeman’s antiquated conception of -a Saxon invasion, and the latter is constrained -to worship in secret the divinity he pretends to -despise. Professor Freeman’s views will be -found in <cite>The Teutonic Conquest in Gaul and -Britain</cite>. He has had his say, and “if anybody -cares to know what that say is, he may read it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</span> -for himself.” Professor Freeman has written -what he has written, and woe to him who reads -to controvert. It does not, however, follow that -what Professor Freeman has written is necessarily -the gospel of English history. Both -theories alike, it would appear—Mr. Seebohm’s -and M. du Chaillu’s—throw aside the recorded -facts of history! What are the recorded facts -of history in relation to the so-called Saxon -invasion? The Saxon invasion was doubted -in the days of Bishop Nicolson, who refers to -the short and pithy despatch Sir William Temple -makes of the Saxon times, and the contempt -with which he speaks of its historians. The -good Bishop himself is constrained to admit he -does not know what has become of the book -written by King Alfred against corrupt judges, -nor of that gifted King’s collection of old Saxon -sonnets.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> The late J. M. Kemble taught the -learned world to believe that, “the received -accounts of the Saxon immigration, and subsequent -fortunes, and ultimate settlement are -devoid of historical truth in every detail.”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</span> -Here is an eminent scholar who, having -examined the subject with perfect historical -candour, regarded the Saxon invasion as fiction -and fabrication from beginning to end, and who -surely may be accepted as a valuable witness. -To the same purpose we have the statement of -Mr. James Rankin, F.R.A.S., “Who the Saxons -were, or when they arrived, or where they -settled, is a subject on which tradition is entirely -silent, for of written history there is none.” -Professor Freeman says that M. du Chaillu has -put forth two very pretty volumes with abundance -of illustrations of Scandinavian objects. -He contemns the pictures but admires the frames. -Most of them, however, he adds, will be found -in “various Scandinavian books,” but he does -not suggest that the “various Scandinavian -books” are not readily accessible to the English -reader.</p> - -<p>Professor Freeman indulges in that species of -raillery to which men usually resort when they -are driven into a corner. “We are really not -ourselves,” he says, “but somebody else.” “The -belief as to their own origin which the English -of Britain have held ever since there have been -Englishmen,” and such incoherent trifling. The -ordinary average Englishman has no independent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</span> -belief on the subject. He is told in his youth -the story about Hengist and Horsa, and if he -remembers it at all it gives him no particular -concern. The bulk of Englishmen and Scotchmen -too, are profoundly ignorant as to their -history and origin. The Englishman has some -vague conception that he is an “Anglo-Saxon,” -while the Scot takes it for granted that all -Scotchmen are Celts, and that all art found in -Scotland is Celtic. Sir Daniel Wilson could -discern in the rude rock scroll the “stately -Cathedral.” There are others “who can see a -coffin in a flake of soot.” It is hardly by such -an adversary as M. du Chaillu, Professor Freeman -says: “that we shall be beaten out of the belief -that there is such a thing as English people in -Britain. Perhaps too we shall not be more -inclined to give up our national being, when we -see its earliest records tossed aside with all the -ignorant scorn of the eighteenth century.” This -is absolutely childish. It reads more like mental -imbecility than intellectual acumen. M. du -Chaillu does not deny that there is an English -people in Britain. He only doubts that the -English people are Saxon, and affirms that they -are Scandinavian, and in this view of the matter -he is sustained by many and strong presumptions.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</span> -Neither does he ask us “to give up our national -being,” which he does not assail. Macaulay -says: “it is only in Britain that an age of fable -separates two ages of truth,” and the void, it -would appear, is to be filled up with “some -hints” by Professor Freeman, who, to his own -satisfaction, at least, has bridged over the dreary -gulf. Professor Freeman thinks it odd that the -so-called Saxons were led into such strange -mistakes as to their own name and origin. Is it -an exceptional thing for a nation to be mistaken -as to its remote history? Can Professor Freeman -tell us who were the aborigines of Ancient -Greece? Professor Freeman declines to be -brought from the North by M. du Chaillu even -more strongly than he declines to be brought -from the South by Mr. Seebohm. Mr. Seebohm, -according to Professor Freeman, “does leave -some scrap of separate national being to the -‘Anglo-Saxon invaders’ * * * * M. du -Chaillu takes away our last shreds; we are -mere impostors,” &c. Must a nation be accounted -impostor because it does not possess -an accurate knowledge of its remote history? -We might, indeed, be justly termed impostors if -in the face of overwhelming evidence we should -continue to adhere to the foregone conclusions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</span> -of dogmatic historians built on the fictions and -figment of monkish tradition. “As far as M. du -Chaillu’s theory can be made out,” Professor -Freeman holds it to be this, “The Suiones of -Tacitus are the Swedes, and the Suiones had -ships; so far no one need cavil. But we do not -hear of the Suiones or any other Scandinavian -people doing anything by sea for several centuries. -But though we do not hear of it they -must have been doing something. What was it -they did? Now in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries -we hear of the Saxons doing a good deal -by sea; therefore the name <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Saxones</i> must be a -mistake of the Latin writer’s for <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Suiones</i>.” The -assumption that goes through all this, Professor -Freeman continues, is that “because the Suiones -had ships in the days of Tacitus, as they could -not have left off using ships it must have been -they who did the acts attributed to the Saxons.” -He condescends to admit that “a good deal is -involved in this last assumption; it is at least -conceivable,” he says, “and not at all unlike the -later history of Sweden, that the Suiones went -on using their ships, but used them somewhere -else, and not on the coasts of Gaul and Britain.” -But this begs the question in dispute. Setting -aside M. du Chaillu’s conjecture as to the possible<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</span> -confounding of names,<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> the question still -remains who were the Saxons? Whether is it -more reasonable to believe that the Suiones or -Swedes referred to by Tacitus, not to mention -the Danes and Norwegians, did not continue to -make their descent on the shores of Britain so -readily accessible to their fleets, or that the -so-named Saxon invader was one and the same -with the Scandinavian? “There is nothing -very strange,” the <cite>Quarterly</cite> thinks, “in supposing -that some of the ‘Angles’ or ‘Saxons’ -may have descended from the Suiones of -Tacitus.” M. du Chaillu, it says, “rests his -case mainly on the fact that, while the so-called -Anglo-Saxon remains found in England correspond -minutely with those discovered in enormous -quantities in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, -there are no traces of such objects in the -basins of the Elbe, the Weser, and the Rhine, -nor anywhere else, save in places which Scandinavians -are known to have visited.” “Every<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</span> -tumulus,” M. du Chaillu says, “described by -antiquaries as a Saxon or Frankish grave, is -the counterpart of a northern grave, thus -showing conclusively the common origin of the -people.” Professor Freeman considers M. du -Chaillu’s theory “several degrees more amazing -than that of Mr. Seebohm,” though why the two -should be connected I hardly know. “No one denies,” -Mr. Freeman says, that the Scandinavian -infusion in England is “real, great, and valuable,” -only the date of the Scandinavian descent on the -shores of Britain, and the degree and manner -of the northern immigration must be taken on -the faith of Professor Freeman. According to -his account the Scandinavian invasion was an -<em>infusion</em> that dates from the ninth century. -This is exactly the pivot on which the whole -question turns. There are strong grounds for -believing that the Northman incursions and -settlements in Britain were not limited to the -Danish invasions of the ninth century. Did -the fleets of the Northmen fully equipped start -into existence in the middle or end of the ninth -century? If not, how were they engaged -during the centuries that immediately preceded? -Professor Freeman affirms that they were employed -“somewhere else.” If they were not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</span> -used in the subjugation of Britain, perhaps -Professor Freeman will state circumstantially -what portions of Europe are comprehended -under the vague generality of “Somewhere else.” -We want something more convincing than his -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ipse dixit</i>. Danish writers, we are told, have -often greatly exaggerated the amount of Scandinavian -influence in England, a remark that -applies with equal force to the advocates of the -Saxon and Celtic theories. Things, it is said, -have been set down as signs of direct Scandinavian -influence, which “are part of the -common heritage of the Teutonic race.” Admitting -this “common heritage,” and having -regard to the fact, that the language of the -Scandinavian, and that of the so-called Anglo-Saxon -are almost identical, who shall decide -between their conflicting claims? The <cite>Quarterly</cite>, -citing from the <cite>Corpus Poeticum Boreale</cite> of -Vigfússon and Powell in reference to the -poetry of the Norsemen, says, “The men from -whom these poems sprung took no small share -in the making of England; their blood is in our -veins, and their speech in our mouths.”<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> The -preponderance of the direct Scandinavian element<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</span> -in the English language has been shown -by Archbishop Trench, who states “That of a -hundred English words, sixty come from the -Scandinavian, thirty from the Latin, five from -the Greek, and five from other sources.” “Dane -and Angle, Dane and Saxon,” according to -Professor Freeman’s own shewing “were near -enough each other to learn from one another, -and to profit by one another.” Their dialectic -difference was never such as to prevent them -from understanding each other. “There is,” -the <cite>Quarterly</cite> affirms, “very high authority for -saying that there was as little difference in -those early times between a Dane and an Englishman, -as there was between two Englishmen in -different parts of the country.” The Saxons -were in fact only an earlier swarm of northern -adventurers of the same race who were afterwards -known in history as Danes and Northmen. -Still Professor Freeman thinks the Scandinavian -element was but an <em>infusion</em> into the already -existing English mass. Hardly I should think if -the existing English mass, and the invading -Northmen had a common origin! The name of -England’s principal city, it may be remarked, -the great metropolis of the Empire is Scandinavian. -Neither are there wanting persons<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</span> -who believe that such also is the name England -itself. In a communication to <cite>Notes and -Queries</cite> by Mr. Henry Rowan in 1868, he -suggests a derivation of this name from the -Danish <i lang="da" xml:lang="da">Eng</i>. “While travelling in Denmark,” -he says, “I met with a word which seems to me -to afford a derivation of our name of England, -as probable, at least as the ordinary one of -<em>Angle land</em>. The word I mean is <i lang="da" xml:lang="da">Eng</i>, an old -Danish name applied even yet to the level -marshy pasture lands adjoining rivers. I believe -the Saxons and Angles, from the time of whose -invasion the name is supposed to date, first -landed and possessed the Isle of Thanet, which -in parts, especially those about Minster, and -the river <em>Stour</em>, would answer very well to the -description of Danish <i lang="da" xml:lang="da">Eng lands</i>. It is from -this word I think the name may have sprung, -instead of from the Angles, whom we have no -reason for supposing to have been so superior to -the Saxons as to leave the remembrance of their -name to the entire exclusion of the latter.” -M. Worsaae, in the first words of his history -unwittingly confirms what Mr. Rowan here -points out. “The greater part of England,” he -says, “consists of flat and fertile lowland, particularly -towards the southern and eastern<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</span> -coasts, where large open plains extend themselves.” -There is a low-lying district of -Aberdeenshire called the <em>Enzie</em>, a name of the -same character, evidently imposed by the Northmen. -This is pronounced by the natives <em>aingie</em>, -the sound of the first portion of the name being -as the <em>aing</em> in the Scotch surname of <em>Laing</em>. -The derivation just cited, coupled with my conjecture -that the name Scotland is the ancient -gothic <i lang="got" xml:lang="got">Skot-land</i>, land laid under tribute, -Icelandic <i lang="is" xml:lang="is">Skat</i>, a tax (Skat-land) goes to confirm -M. du Chaillu’s contention that the British -people, and tongue (by tongue, I mean the -present speech of the British nation) are of -northern origin.</p> - -<p>The contention that the Danish influx into -England was in any sense a mere infusion must in -the nature of things be pure fiction. It was a full -rolling tide of conquest and colonization swelling -a population already essentially Scandinavian.</p> - -<p>The first authentic particulars relating to the -ancient Britons are derived from Cæsar who -made his descent in the year 55 before Christ. -The original inhabitants appear to have been -Celts from France and Spain. We learn from -the Roman historian that they had been driven -into the interior and western portion of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</span> -island by the Belgae who settled on the east -and south-eastern shores of England, and were -now known as Britons. He tells us in language, -about which there can be no misconception, that -the Belgae were descended from the Germans. -These were the Britons with whom Cæsar -had to do, and these the Romanized Britons -who, in their dire extremity, sent forth their despairing -cry to the gates of Imperial Rome, “The -barbarians drive us to the sea, and the sea to -the barbarians.” Prichard demonstrated, at -least to his own satisfaction, that “the ancient -Belgae were of Celtic, and not of Teutonic race, -as had previously been supposed,” and ethnologists -are agreed in setting aside the testimony of -Cæsar! What amount of hypothetical evidence -is sufficient to overturn an historic fact? It -might be difficult to say who is an authority on -language, but anyone reasonably endowed with -judgment may be an authority on matters of fact -and practical sense. The science of language is -not an exact science, and leaves a good deal of -room for the imagination to play. I would rather -doubt the conclusions of philologers than believe -that the Roman historian wrote without -knowledge of his subject, or deliberately stated -what he had no means of knowing to be true.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</span> -The weight of evidence is certainly on the side -of Cæsar. Not all the ingenuity of all the Bopps -and Grimms and Potts and Zeusses who ever -applied themselves to the elucidation of this most -obscure of all unintelligible subjects can ever be -sufficient to overturn an outside historical fact. -“In the history of all nations,” Pinkerton says, -“it is indispensable to admit the most ancient -authorities as the sole foundation of any -knowledge we can acquire. If we reject them -or pretend to refute them no science can remain, -and any dreamer may build up an infinite series -of romances from his own imagination. When, -therefore, a modern pretends to refute Cæsar -and Tacitus in their accounts of the inhabitants -of ancient Britain, any man of science would -disdain to enter the field.” It does not by any -means follow that every scholar who is familiar -with the structural peculiarities of language has -necessarily any aptitude for perceiving the exact -relations of things. Many distinguished men -eminent in literature have been singularly deficient -in ordinary reasoning power. The late -Charles Kingsley, it is well known, “could not -discern truth from falsehood.” Though occupying -“an historical chair, he lacked every -qualification of an historian.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</span></p> - -<p>M. Worsaae, the Danish antiquary, after a -good deal of hesitation and circumlocution in -regard to several matters of disputed origin, in -particular the Ruthwell cross which he casts out -of the category of Scandinavian remains, and -contradicts himself in the following sentences: -“Ornaments with similar so-called Anglo-Saxon -runic inscriptions are not altogether uncommon -in England, particularly in the North. But as -not a few ornaments, as well as runic stones -with inscriptions in the self-same character, are -also found in the countries of Scandinavia both -in Denmark and Norway, and particularly the -latter, and the west and south-west of Sweden -(and there mostly in Bleking), it may be a question -whether this runic writing was not originally -brought over to England by Scandinavian -emigrants. It would otherwise be inexplicable -that they should have used entirely foreign runic -characters in Scandinavia, whilst they possessed -a peculiar runic writing of their own.” I do -not think there can be any question in the -matter. No stronger evidence could be given -in proof of the fact that the so-called Anglo-Saxons -and Scandinavians were radically one -and the same people. M. Worsaae has done -much to illustrate the Scandinavian antiquities<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</span> -of the British islands, and I am unwilling to cast -reflection on the memory of one so eminent and -so well-intentioned, but it is evident throughout -his book, that he has accepted at second-hand, -on a variety of subjects, the conclusions of -English and Scotch antiquaries, which as a -foreigner he was incapable of dealing with by -independent investigation. The Hunterston -brooch, which in every lineament is distinctively -Scandinavian, he has been told to call <em>Celtic</em>. -He deals with this most interesting monument -of art in the ambiguous manner for which he is -always remarkable where his judgment seems to -contradict his conclusion. “An excellent silver -gilt brooch,” he says, “found near Hunterston, -about three miles from Largs, was once said to -have been lost by some Norwegian who fled from -the field of battle [nothing more probable]. -There is a short Scandinavian runic inscription -scratched on the back of it, but from what has -hitherto been deciphered, it would rather seem -to denote the name of a Scotchman than of a -Norwegian. Professor Munch reads ‘Malbritha -a dalk thana—Melbridg owns this brooch.’” -M. Worsaae here obviously means <em>Celt</em>, as -opposed to Scandinavian, but uses the term -Scotchman to allow himself, if need be, a door<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</span> -of escape. “Scotchman” would apply equally -to anyone born in Scotland, whether Celt by -extraction, Scandinavian, Fleming or Norman. -This seems to me an undignified way of getting -out of a difficult position. The runic writing of -the Hunterston brooch, which is in the Norse -tongue, has been accurately explained by Professor -George Stephens, of Copenhagen. M. -Worsaae, we know, accepted the attentions of -eminent British antiquaries, and could not gracefully -seem to doubt their conclusions on special -subjects submitted to his decision. He is first -told what to say, and then cited by his instructors, -as an authority for statements which -they themselves have put into his mouth. -Perhaps, under the circumstances, this may not be -an exceptional manner of dealing with matters of -disputed history, but it is certainly not the way -to reach the truth that reveals itself to intelligence. -“In workmanship,” M. Worsaae says, -“the Hunterston brooch resembles the contemporary -Irish and Scotch more than Scandinavian -ornaments.” Now, it certainly does no such -thing. It does not appear to me that as regards -the Scandinavian remains of Great Britain, one -like M. Worsaae groping his way darkly with -the help of such lights as he can find is at all<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</span> -competent to pronounce dogmatic judgments. -Ireland and Scotland were invaded, and subdued, -and peopled by the Northmen, and -brooches of the self-same character are found in -the Viking interments of Scandinavia. The -contemporary Irish and Scotch brooches may -reasonably be presumed to be Scandinavian. -The resemblance of the Hunterston brooch to -that found at Tara, and to others of like -character found in Scotland is certainly not -greater than to the brooch in the Bergen -Museum exhumed from a Viking mound at -Vambheim, or to that dug up at North Trondheim -in another grave of the Viking period. -The inscription contained on the Hunterston -brooch proves to demonstration, not only that -its art, and that of all others of kindred type is -Scandinavian, but that the name “Melbridg” is -Norwegian. Whatever be the <em>origin</em> of the art -exhibited on the brooches, it is plain that this cannot -be Celtic, inasmuch as that no one has ever -shewn that the Celts possessed any knowledge of -art. It is all very well to talk in an off-handed -way about Celtic art, but something more than -this is necessary to carry conviction. To my perceptions -a Celtic statement is much improved -by some form of <em>evidence</em>. Dr. Soderberg of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</span> -Lund doubts if I will find many adherents -among Scandinavian scholars. “We are all of -us,” he says, “more or less imbued with Celticism.” -So much the worse for Scandinavia, -that her sons deny her legitimate claims to her -own historic and archaic remains. It is not -however, as I think, so much a question of -scholarship as of practical sense, the capacity to -deal with facts which may be weighed by -anyone possessed of ordinary reasoning power -or capable of speech and thought in their -simplest forms. One can understand a Scotch -antiquary of the Celtic type placing himself in -an attitude of antagonism, just as we might -imagine Professor Freeman gliding like a shark -along the Saxon line ready to do battle on behalf -of his cherished delusion, because that to both of -these the Northman theory is total extinction. But -that the Scandinavian antiquary, who as regards -his national remains has no reason to falsify the -facts of history, should in the interest of an -exotic fable, waste his ingenuity in disclaiming -the art that especially belongs to his country -surpasses my comprehension. Let us hear what -the <cite>Saturday Review</cite> has to say on the subject -of Celtic art. Taking exception to many of my -positions, it says: “He [Mr. Roger] is on much<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</span> -firmer ground when he declines to believe in any -art or culture that can fairly be called Celtic. -The very patterns which are usually spoken of -as Celtic are common to all the gold work of the -Mycenæan graves, which few people, we think, -will now place much later than 1500 B.C.” -“Dr. Schliemann’s Mycenæan discoveries deprive -the Celts of any credit for originality -in their system of spiral ornament.” Again -“‘<em>Celtic</em>’ patterns certainly existed on the -shores of the Ægean fifteen hundred years -before our era.” “Mr. Roger is probably right -when he claims a Scandinavian origin for the -ancient claymores (two handed), for the Tara -brooch and other brooches, for stone crosses, -dirk handles, and what so else is too commonly -attributed to Celtic art.” “‘What is Celtic art?’ -cries Mr. Roger, triumphantly. What, indeed? -‘The Celts, Pinkerton tells us, had no monuments, -any more than the Finns or savage -Africans, or Americans.’ As to Americans, -Mr. Roger can see their bas-reliefs at the South -Kensington Museum;<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> <em>but for Celtic art not -derived from the Scandinavians or Romans, we -know not where to bid him look</em>.” I am content<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</span> -to rest the matter here. There is no art known -as distinctively Celtic, and in this aspect of the -question I am confirmed by the <cite>Saturday Review</cite>. -But to return to Professor Freeman. In a -number of the publication called <cite>The Antiquary</cite>, -issued on November 16th, 1872, the writer of a -paper on <cite>The Landing of the Saxons in Kent</cite>, -tells us that “after pillaging for ‘a hundred and -fifty years’ the British shores,” the Jutes, or -Saxons, landed under Hengist and Horsa, “and -here,” the writer says, “we must halt for a few -moments till we have disposed of Mr. E. A. -Freeman’s astounding statement that Horsa -meant <em>mare</em>. Hors, our misspelt <em>horse</em>,” the -writer says, “is like its German equivalent Ross, -a neuter word. The Saxon hero is sometimes -called simply Hors, but more frequently by the -addition of a masculine termination—a, as in -‘Ida Ælla,’ and some thousands more, he -becomes Horsa, masculine and male. <em>Mare</em> is -Myre, feminine. * * * * If Mr. Freeman -will be good enough to tell us how he came -to fall into this preposterous error, we may -possibly clear up the cause of his mistake; for -the most part, when he makes a bad blunder, we -can form a notion what better authority has -misled him; but in this case no English dictionary,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</span> -grammar, or history can have been consulted -by him. Can it have been a Latin -grammar? Mr. Freeman is extensively known -as blowing weekly a shrill trumpet, ‘<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">asper, -acerba, sonans</i>,’ in reviews of literary and -illiterate performances, but then he is in hiding; -we hear the obstreperous whirr, but the midge -is behind the screen; when he appears in -human body, he makes lapses, trips and stumbles, -and lays himself bare to stings,” &c. This is in -Professor Freeman’s early days, but men carry -their idiosyncrasies into their riper years. It -gives us an insight into this critic’s mind -according to the estimation in which he was -then held by his fellow-scribblers. To the -article in question, which occupies nearly two -columns of <cite>The Antiquary</cite>, the editor appends -the following note:—“The story of Hengist and -Horsa (including the so-called Anglo-Saxon -invasion) is an exploded fable. The Anglo-Saxons -of England, like the Picts or Caledonians -of Scotland, were only the earlier Northmen or -Scandinavians.”</p> - -<p>This is pre-eminently an age of platitudes and -Professor Freeman is great in such. “There is,” -he says, “an English folk, and there is a British -Crown.” There is also, it might be affirmed, a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</span> -Scotch folk, and a British Crown, and until Mr. -Gladstone shall accomplish his visionary project -of Irish Home Rule, there is, and will be -an Irish folk and a British Crown. “But the -homes of the English folk,” we are to note, -“and the dominions of the British Crown do -not always mean the same thing.” Does any -one suppose they do? “Here by the border -stream of the Angle and the Saxon” we are in -“the dominions of the British Crown,” &c. If -by the “border stream” be meant the Tweed, it -is more than doubtful if the Angles and Saxons -ever saw that stream. In Professor Freeman’s -“youth,” the “Anglo-Saxon race was unheard of,” -and by some strange delusion, for which it is -difficult to account, the “British race” dates, he -believes, from some speech delivered a week -before the time at which he writes. It is evident -Professor Freeman has not been a reader of -<cite>Good Words</cite>, at least of its early numbers published -more than thirty years ago. In one of -these he will find “The British race has been -called Anglo-Saxon,” &c., and a good deal more -which it might be inconvenient for him to learn.</p> - -<p>Professor Freeman “shows how some writers, -sometimes more famous writers, now and then -get at their facts.” “One received way,” he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</span> -tells us, “is to glance at a page of an original -writer, to have the eye caught by a word, to -write down another word, that looks a little like -it, and to invent facts that suit the words -written down. To roll two independent words -into a compound word with a hyphen is perhaps -a little stronger; but only a little.” Are we to -suppose that Professor Freeman is recounting -his individual experience in dealing with the -facts of English history?</p> - -<p>The gifted Edmund Spenser, who charmed the -world with his <cite>Faery Queen</cite> died forsaken and -in want. Milton sold his copyright of Paradise -Lost for fifteen pounds, and Goldsmith’s Vicar -of Wakefield was disposed of for a trifle to save -him from the grip of the law. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Tempora mutantur!</i> -Third rate contributions by high class -writers command their market value. If men -can obtain payment for writing such articles as -that of Professor Freeman’s criticism of <cite>The -Viking Age</cite> that appeared in the January number -of the <cite>Contemporary Review</cite> it shows that -there is something in a name, that the conductors -of such periodicals pay more regard to the -reputation of the writer, than to the quality of -the writing. Professor Freeman is no doubt a -very able writer, but this is not the conclusion<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</span> -that would be reached in reading his captious -and illogical criticism of M. du Chaillu’s book.</p> - -<p>I have evidently wounded the susceptibilities -of some extreme churchman or irascible Celt, in -the person of a reviewer in the <cite>Literary World</cite>, -whose hostility is hardly explainable on the -ground of mere difference of opinion. According -to this disposer of events, I fall wofully short -in the qualifications of one who is entitled to -speak on the subject of archæology. I might, -however, plead in extenuation, and in mitigation -of punishment the reason given by Mr. Gladstone -for upholding the verity of Old Testament -Scripture, that “there is a very large portion of -the community whose opportunities of judgment -have been materially smaller than my own,” -and that, “in all studies light may be thrown -inwards from without.” I profess not to unravel -the hidden mysteries of prehistoric antiquity, -but simply to deal with the historical -aspect of outside facts, though, as the <cite>Saturday</cite> -reviewer justly remarks, I must get into prehistory -somewhere. Among the numerous disqualifications -manifested in my treatise, I show -“a very indifferent acquaintance” with -“Language;” and its “twin sister, Ethnology,” -of which, however, I may reasonably be presumed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</span> -to know as much as my censor. Most -persons who write on any subject do something -to keep in touch with current facts and common -knowledge. If the critic of the <cite>Literary World</cite> -had taken the trouble to read my book attentively, -he would have found many references to -what has been done by philologers and Ethnologists -on whose labours he sets so much store. -“As the book is in a second edition,” he condescends -to inform us, he has “occupied more -space than he should otherwise have done in -estimating its claims to authority.” The conclusion -he has reached is that I go as far astray -in one direction as the Celticists do in another, -an opinion which is quite within the limit of -legitimate criticism. When, however, from his -lofty tribune he looks down and imputes to me -ignorance of what has been done by the great -masters of “Language,” the Joneses, and Colebrookeses, -and Bopps, and Potts, and Grimms, -and Steinthals, and suggests that I do not know -what has been said by such writers as Camper, -Jacquart, Blumenbach, Cuvier, Prichard, -Latham and Morton, not to mention the pernicious -nonsense of Darwin, and the vagaries of -Professor Huxley, I must be permitted to take -exception. It is one thing to know what they<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</span> -have written, and quite another to accept their -conclusions as absolute and final, considering -how often we hear the most arrant nonsense -solemnly propounded as the deductions of scientific -investigation. It has been pointed out by -a late minister of the Crown that “Newton’s -projectile theory of Light” which had apparently -been firmly established has given place to -“the theory of undulation,” which, citing from -the Virginian philosopher Dr. Smith, he says, -“has now for fifty years reigned in its stead.” -On this he grounds the suggestion that we -should not “receive with impatience the assertion -of contradictions.” On the subject -of specialists we have the opinion of the -same eminent individual, notable among the -great intellects of the age, one who like -Brougham, “has the languages of Greece -and Rome strung like a bunch of keys at -his girdle.” No less a personage in fact, than -the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, with whom, -while admiring the versatility of his genius, I -differ politically, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">toto cœlo</i>. To none of the -sciences, rightly or wrongly so named, do his -remarks more aptly apply than to the “Science -of Language,” and its twin sister, “Ethnology.” -“I have had the opportunity,” he says, “of perceiving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</span> -how, among specialists as with other -men, there may be fashions of the time and -school, which Lord Bacon called idols of the -market-place, and currents of prejudice below -the surface, which may detract somewhat from -the authority which each enquirer may justly -claim in his own field, and from their title to -impose their conclusions upon mankind.” In -proof of the fluctuating and uncertain character -of this so-called science Dr. Morton in regard to -“certain points of primary importance found -himself compelled to differ in opinion from the -majority of scholars.” I believe with Bishop -Percy, Dr. R. Angus Smith, and others, that -the Celts and Teutons even remotely had not a -common origin, but were <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ab origine</i> distinct -races of mankind. As to <em>authority</em> I hold that -“no man is an authority for any statement -which he cannot prove,” and although according -to the critic of the <cite>Literary World</cite>, I deliver -my opinions in a manner “more forcible than -elegant”<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> my pretensions are exceedingly humble. -“I venture to draw attention to the subject, in -the hope that the matter may be taken up by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</span> -some one with more time and better appliances at -his disposal than I can command.” Without pretending -to be “exhaustive or specially erudite” -I have done the best I can to extinguish a -national delusion, and I hope cannot finally, and -altogether fail. If I be deficient in language, -in whatever acceptation, I am in no worse -position than the statesman already referred to, -who maintains the truth of ancient Scripture -avowedly without any knowledge of the Hebrew -tongue. Language, as Lord Southesk most -accurately, and pertinently points out, “is a -thing that seems like a boomerang, so queer are -the twists it takes, and so uncertain its returns.” -Ethnology, or Anthropology—whichever its -votaries choose to call it—is not, as I think, a -science. It consists of the conceits and assumptions -of men learned and unlearned who have -reached certain conclusions, and who profess to -bring back from the depths of prehistoric antiquity -facts which may not be facts, or which at least we -have no means of knowing to be true. The -whole subject is “feeble, perplexed, and to all -appearance, confused.” Many years since Mr. -Hyde Clarke, at a meeting of the Ethnological -Society, remarking on the utterances of Professor -Huxley, suggested that, although the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</span> -latter “had laid down his statements as established -by men of science, there was little capable -of proof.” What then is the value of a study, the -results of which are as unstable as the passing -vapour? It was a conception of the late Sir -David Brewster, that <em>science</em> is the only earthly -treasure we can carry with us to a better state. -Let us hope that if <em>Language</em>, and its <em>twin sister</em> -be among the number destined thither, they will -be freed from their mundane misconceptions and -uncertainties.</p> - -<p>The Reviewer of the <cite>Literary World</cite> thinks -I “make a sorry jumble of races and languages. -All sorts of people, and tribes, dialects, and remains, -related and unrelated, are said to be -Goths or Gothic,” though in dealing with my -shortcomings, real or supposed, he does not always -keep faith with facts. The ancient Scythians, -he makes me to say, were Goths, for which the only -foundation is that I cite Dr. Macculloch and Mr. -Planché from each a paragraph in which the name -Scythian is mentioned. “The occupiers of prehistoric -lake dwellings Goths.” Precisely what -I do not say. I mention the facts that “a -species of combat called <em>holmgang</em>, peculiar to -the old Northmen, was usually fought in a small -island or holm in a lake,” and that islands in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</span> -lakes were places resorted to by the Scandinavian -“foude,” or magistrate, with his law -officers, &c. In Iceland, the men on whom -sentence of death had been passed, were beheaded -upon an islet in a lake or river. I -submit these facts to the candid consideration -of those who are capable of judging, because if -my conjecture be correct, palisaded islands were -neither inhabited nor are they prehistoric. “The -Caledonians, Goths; the Picts, Goths.” I was -taught to believe that Pict and Caledonian are -convertible terms. “The Icelanders and others -were Goths.” I do not, of course, know which -“others” the reviewer may have had in his -mind, but the Icelanders are certainly Goths. -“Sometimes,” the critic says, “Gothic appears -as the equivalent of Scandinavian.” Certainly -as opposed to Celtic. “And the sum of the whole -matter is that ‘the Scandinavians are our true -progenitors,’” which, he points out, is “the same -blunder that M. du Chaillu has been dashing his -head against.” All wise beyond conception! -By a figure of speech a writer might be said to -dash his head against a rock, but hardly I should -think, against a <em>blunder</em>! It is rather odd that -this captious censor should be ignorant of the -fact that the quotation which he cites from my<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</span> -preface contains the <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ipsissima verba</i> of the -writer of an article that appeared in <cite>Good -Words</cite> nearly forty years ago, by whom M. du -Chaillu was anticipated, and that the same views -and opinions were advocated by myself nineteen -years since in the pages of <cite>Notes and Queries.</cite></p> - -<p>The languages or dialects to be dealt with as -regards the British islands, are few in number, -and we can judge of them in an outside fashion, -without the aid of Bopp, or Grimm, or Zeuss, or -Steinthal. These are the Welsh of the Principality, -which, roughly speaking, includes the -extinct dialect of Cornwall. The Erse or Gaelic -of Scotland, Ireland, and the Isle of Man. The -Teutonic of the Belgae, which Prichard calls -Celtic, but which we gather from Cæsar was -German. At least it is a fair inference from his -statement, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Belgas esse ortos a Germanis</i>, that -they spoke some dialect of Teutonic speech.<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> -The language of the Picts or Caledonians, which -Skene affirms is neither Welsh nor Gaelic, but a -Gaelic dialect partaking largely of Welsh forms. -This, however, on the faith of Tacitus, I believe -to have been Scandinavian, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">rutilæ Caledoniam<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</span> -habitantium comæ magni artus Germanicam -asseverant</i>. The Saxon, or earlier Scandinavian -of South Britain, and the confessedly Scandinavian -dialects of Yorkshire, Derbyshire, Norfolk, -Suffolk, Northumberland and North Britain. -In point of fact only two languages, the Gothic -or Teutonic, and the Celtic, or whatever else -may be the structure, foundation or admixture -of the dialects so named. I have elsewhere -stated that “The several dialects of what has -been called Celtic might be compared to so many -dust heaps to which has been swept the refuse -of all other languages from time immemorial,” -and I see no reason to change my opinion. It -will thus be seen that there is not much room to -jumble either races or language. The jumble, if -such there be, arises out of the confusion and -obscurity of the critic’s own mind. He ridicules -the idea of identifying the “Gothic <i lang="got" xml:lang="got">Magus</i>” -with what he calls the “Celtic <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Mac</i> or <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Maqui</i>.” -I deny that <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Mac</i> is Celtic, and I identify it with -the <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Maqui</i> of the Ogham inscriptions, because I -think there are good grounds for believing that -Oghams and runes were equally the work of the -Northmen, although Lord Southesk, who has -made these remains a special study, differs from -me in opinion. There is certainly an uncommon<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</span> -outside resemblance between the two words. It -is however, satisfactory to know that his Lordship -is in substantial agreement with me on the -main subject of my contention, the preponderance -of the Scandinavian element in the British Isles. -Coming to the essence of the controversy, he -says, “Where I agree with you thoroughly is -in the belief that the prevalence and influence of -the Scandinavian races in Britain and Ireland -have been largely underrated, and that much -due to them has been ascribed to the various -peoples commonly classed as Celts.” “One -has only to look at the people inhabiting -Aberdeenshire, Angus, &c., to convince one’s-self -that Norse blood predominates.” I regard -the questions of races, art, and culture -entirely from an outside or historic view. In -the face of such facts as I have adduced to -continue to call <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Mac</i> Celtic is simply persistent -dogmatism—a perverse determination to adhere -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">per fas et nefas</i> to a foregone conclusion. The -prefix <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Mac</i> though found in Scotch Gaelic and -other dialects of the Erse, has obviously been -imported thither only as a foreign term, in -the same manner that the Norse word <i lang="non" xml:lang="non">jarl</i>, -an earl, found its way into the Welsh. <i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Mac</i>, -as I have elsewhere pointed out, occurs in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</span> -the Anglo-Norse dialect of Craven, West Riding -of York. It was used in the sense of -<em>son</em> by the Danes and Northmen. It occurs -as a prefix to an interminable number of personal -names distinctively Scandinavian, and in -one form or other is found in every dialect of -the Teutonic. We must “deal with the evidence -before us according to a rational appreciation of -its force.” “<i lang="sga" xml:lang="sga">Plaid</i>,” the critic, affirms, “does -not exist in Moeso-Gothic.” Thomson in <cite>Observations</cite> -prefixed to his Lexicon, says, “Plaid, a -cloke in Moeso-Gothic, was the Icelandic <i lang="is" xml:lang="is">palt</i>.” -I would rather believe that the critic of the -<cite>Literary World</cite> does not know where to look -for the word, than that the erudite private secretary -to the Marquis of Hastings in India, presuming -on their ignorance, sought to impose on -his readers a word which he knew did not exist. -Again this critic says, “Denying to another -(Anglo-Saxon) a word that does (foster).” The -expression is confused, but he evidently means -that “foster” <em>is</em> found in Anglo-Saxon. In the -text of my treatise I say, “Neither can there -be any doubt as to the Northern derivation of -the word <em>foster</em>.” To this I append a footnote -taken from the <cite>Quarterly Review</cite>, vol. 139 (1875), -p. 449. “The word <em>foster</em> is not found in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</span> -Anglo-Saxon, Moeso-Gothic, or German,” and -at the same time indicate the source whence my -information is derived. I accepted the statement -on the faith of the writer. If it does occur, it -only shows how little dependence can be placed -on facts adduced by literary critics even in -connection with such responsible publications as -the <cite>Quarterly Review</cite>. Another evidence of -disqualification as “a writer on Archæological -matters,” is that the word <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Celte</i> cited from the -Vulgate was shown long ago by Mr. Knight -Watson to be a misprint for <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Certe</i>. The critic -must indeed have been much at a loss for a peg -on which to hang his hypercriticism. I hardly -know why it is incumbent on me before delivering -my views on the Celtic myth to know all -that has been explained on collateral subjects by -Mr. Knight Watson. I found neither note nor -marginal reference declaratory of this gentleman’s -critical acumen, or of the great service he -had rendered to archæology in resolving this -enigma, nor if I had should I have introduced it -into my treatise. My remark in regard to the -Vulgate is an incidental reference of the vaguest -description on which nothing depends. To -borrow the expression of an eminent individual, -Would the critic of the <cite>Literary World</cite> “be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</span> -surprised to learn” that by a defect of information, -quite as glaring as that which -he imputes to me, he has entirely missed -the point of my stricture which is directed -against the executive of the <em>Society of Antiquaries -of Scotland</em>. At page 11 of its -<cite>Catalogue of Antiquities</cite>, printed in 1876, it is -stated as the heading of a section, “<span class="smcap">Stone -Celts or Axe Heads</span>.” Behind the word -“Celts,” an asterisk, and underneath, a footnote -corresponding thereto the explanation “Celtis, a -chisel,” of all which the critic shows himself to -be entirely ignorant. He mentions the Gothic -word <i lang="got" xml:lang="got">afar</i>. Thomson calls it <i lang="got" xml:lang="got">hafar</i>. I can -only conjecture that the critic may have first -seen the light within the vibrations of certain -well-known sounds, and that he habitually drops -the letter <em>h</em>. In the course of my “polemic,” -he thinks, I “undoubtedly score a point here -and there in matters of detail.” “Thus,” he -says, “he maintains what ought to be obvious -enough [but which to the Celtic expositor it -never is] that remains inscribed in Northern -runes must be attributed to the Scandinavians.” -I give, he says, “and this appears to be my -<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">chef d’œuvre</i>, a very probable reading (<span class="smcap">Grimkitil -thane raist</span>, Grimkitil engraved this) to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</span> -a fragmentary inscription ( ... <span class="allsmcap">KITIL TH</span> ...) -on what is known as the bronze plate of Laws. -And inasmuch as” that this critic “formed a -similar opinion many years ago, he is bound to -approve my suggestion that the old Greek and -runic alphabets were derived from some common -source, and not either from the other.” He is -“bound to approve.” How very condescending! -It is evident he does not perceive the -effect of his own conclusion. If my reading of -the inscription on the Laws plate be correct it -involves something more than a mere matter of -detail. It is the solution of a problem which -has perplexed and bewildered most antiquaries -of the present century, because it demonstrates -the symbols of the Laws crescent plate, and -those of the Scotch sculptured stones to be the -work of the Scandinavians. This has long -been my individual opinion, though I doubt if -the critic of the <cite>Literary World</cite> will make -many converts among antiquaries on the other -side of the Tweed. When I attempt to establish -“my own peculiar views,” he says, I seem to -“break down.” Are not the points on which—to -borrow his elegant diction—I “score” as -much my “peculiar views” as those on which -he alleges I fail? “Of the Teutonic tribes,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</span> -whose settlements grew into our old Heptarchy, -or Octarchy, none, and no discoverable part of -any, were Scandinavian proper. [This is mere -arbitrary statement.] There was subsequently, -of course, in certain districts, a large infusion -of Scandinavian forms, proper names, &c. -[What does he mean by <em>forms</em>? The Scandinavians -brought their <em>names</em> when they brought -their bodies] in consequence of the invasions -and settlements of the ‘Danes,’ but in spite of -this, and of much more serious disturbance -afterwards, our language from the Channel to -the Forth, owing to its power of absorption, and -assimilation, remained, and remains substantially -‘English.’” “Remained and remains -substantially English.” These remarks are -unanswerable, which it is said, is the happy -property of all remarks sufficiently wide of the -purpose. Is the language of the British nation -less “English” because derived from the <em>Scandinavian</em> -rather than from the <em>Saxon</em>, two -dialects of the same speech in their essential -elements hardly distinguishable? If this be -true—as beyond all question it is true—it -demolishes utterly the bugbear which the suggestion -he advocates sets up.</p> - -<p>While accepting with becoming humility the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</span> -disparaging estimate of my performance, it is -not desirable that a reviewer of this character -should have his say uncontradicted, though in -setting myself right with those whom his strictures -might have influenced, I have perhaps -honoured him with too much notice. It is not a -very formidable matter to cope with such an -adversary.</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0 outdent">“While these are censors, ’twould be sin to spare;</div> - <div class="verse indent0">While such are critics, why should I forbear?”—<span class="smcap">Byron.</span></div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - - -<p class="p2 center">THE END.</p> - - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="FOOTNOTES" title="FOOTNOTES.">FOOTNOTES:</h2> -</div> - - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> The sonnets were originally discovered in the Monastery of the -“Monks of Therfuse,” which stood on the site now occupied by the -terminus of the “Glenmutchkin Railway.” They were afterwards -placed for safe custody with the MSS. of Ossian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> “Well-known scholars,” the <cite>Quarterly</cite> says, “have shown before -him, and he is justified in adopting the conclusion, that the name of -‘Saxon’ must have been loosely applied to all the pirates that scoured -the Narrow Seas. We may conjecture that many crews from Scania -and the Danish Isles, or from the great bay by the Naze of Norway, -which gave its name to the Vikings, must have been found among the -roving fleets of the fourth and fifth centuries, when the Empire was -crumbling into ruins.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> “The red-bearded Thor was called ‘The Englishmen’s God.’”—<cite>Quarterly -Review.</cite></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> I suspect these were not the savage Americans Pinkerton had in -his mind.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> A writer who, to denote that which is without foundation, makes -use of the expression “mere fudge” cannot be a very competent -judge of elegance.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> That cannot be regarded as <em>science</em> which based only on the uncertain -hypothesis of <em>language</em> contradicts the ascertained facts of -history.</p> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</span></p> -<h2 class="nobreak" id="OPINIONS_OF_THE_PRESS_AND_OTHERS_IN_REGARD">OPINIONS OF THE PRESS, AND OTHERS IN REGARD -TO THE SECOND EDITION OF “CELTICISM A MYTH.”</h2> -</div> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“This issue of the work, resumes in an able statement the arguments -of those antiquaries who hold that the early civilization of -these islands was the work, not of Celts, but of Scandinavians.”—<cite>Scotsman.</cite></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“He [Mr. Roger] is on much firmer ground when he declines to -believe in any art or culture that can fairly be called Celtic. The -very patterns which are usually spoken of as Celtic are common on -the gold work of the Mycenæan graves, which few people, we think, -will now place much later than 1500 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> ... Mr. Roger is probably -right when he claims a Scandinavian origin for the ancient -claymores (two handed), for the Tara brooch, and other brooches, for -stone crosses, dirk handles, and what so else is too commonly attributed -to Celtic art.”—<cite>Saturday Review.</cite></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“The book throughout in its many pages bears evidence to an -exceeding amount of careful research, clever reasoning, and close -intimacy with the subject.... Until contradicted and disproved -the facts in the pages of ‘Celticism a Myth’ must carry conviction.”—<cite>Montrose -Standard.</cite></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“A further issue of this learned work is evidence that the arguments -advanced against the pet theories of such recognised authorities -as Dr. Joseph Anderson, and Dr. Daniel Wilson have aroused some -commotion in the camp of archæologists.”—<cite>Publishers’ Circular.</cite></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“A second edition of Mr. Roger’s argument against the prehistoric -existence of a Celtic civilization, and his ‘demonstration beyond -reasonable doubt,’ that the only civilization in Scotland, of which we -have any knowledge, was brought there by the Scandinavians.”—<cite>The -Bookseller.</cite></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“It is a vigorous piece of controversy in favour of the argument -that Celtic literature, and Celtic art never existed.”—<cite>Evening News -and Post.</cite></p> - -<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“It is a book that has interested me much.”—<span class="italic">The Most Hon. The -Marquis of Lorne, K.T., &c.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“Where I agree with you thoroughly is in the belief that the prevalence, -and influence of the Scandinavian races in Britain and Ireland -have been largely underrated, and that much due to them has been -ascribed to the various peoples commonly classed as Celts.”—<span class="italic">The -Right Hon. The Earl of Southesk, K.T., F.S.A. Scot., &c.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“I have long been of opinion that we owe the <em>whole</em> of our civilization -to Scandinavian, and Teutonic ancestors, and partly to Roman -influence, and your very interesting volume confirms that opinion.”—<span class="italic">John -Kirkpatrick, Esq., Advocate, M.A., Ph.D. LL.B., LL.D., Professor -of History, University of Edinburgh.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“Bertrand gives maps shewing the course followed by the megalithic -monument builders in entering Europe, and this, I think, dispels -the idea of their being due to the Celts.”—<span class="italic">Rev. S. Baring-Gould, M.A. -&c., &c.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“Your case is so well put, your rebutting evidence so cogent, and -your reasoning so clear, that you must by this time have convinced -many of your readers that ‘Celticism’ <em>is</em> ‘A Myth.’”—<span class="italic">John C. H. -Flood, of the Middle Temple, Esq.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“You have certainly dispelled my illusion as to Celtic art, and I -consider you have proved your case certainly in the main, if not -altogether.”—<span class="italic">Walter L. Spofforth of the Inner Temple, Esq.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>“I have seldom perused a more interesting work. The whole argument -is clearly stated, and most convincing.”—<span class="italic">Rev. George Brown, -F.S.A. Scot., Bendochy Manse.</span></p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - - -<p class="center mb3">DIPROSE, BATEMAN & CO., PRINTERS, SHEFFIELD -STREET, LINCOLN’S INN FIELDS.</p> - - -<div class="transnote"> -<p class="center"><b>Transcriber’s Note</b></p> - -<p>Printer’s errors were corrected where they could be clearly identified. -Otherwise, as far as possible, original spelling and punctuation have -been retained.</p></div> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CELTIC MSS. IN RELATION TO THE MACPHERSON FRAUD ***</div> -<div style='text-align:left'> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will -be renamed. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. -</div> - -<div style='margin-top:1em; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE</div> -<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person -or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the -Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when -you share it without charge with others. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work -on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the -phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: -</div> - -<blockquote> - <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most - other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions - whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms - of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online - at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this eBook. - </div> -</blockquote> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg™ License. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format -other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain -Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -provided that: -</div> - -<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'> - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation.” - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ - works. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. - </div> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right -of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread -public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state -visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. -</div> - -</div> -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/68323-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/68323-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4efe6fc..0000000 --- a/old/68323-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null |
