:
ARTES
1837
SCIENTIA
VERITAS
LIBRARY
OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
EXEMURIDUS YNUM
TUEBOR
SI QUÆR'S PENINSULAM-AMŒNAM
CIRCUMSPICE
....
i
!!
DA
135
M17
W58
1773
$
{
THE
GENUINE HISTORY
"
OF THE
BRITONS
ASSERTE D
AGAINST MR. MACPHERSON
THE SECOND EDITION,
CORRECTED.
Josie
By the Rev. Mr. W HITA K E R,
AUTHOR OF
THE HISTORY OF MANCHESTER.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR J. MURRAY,
N°
32 FLEETSTREET,
OPPOSITE ST. DUNSTAN'S CHURCH.
MDCCLXXIII.
:
With the preſent Work was publiſhed
The SECOND EDITION, corrected,
THE
!
HISTORY
OF
J
MANCHESTER.
BOOK THE FIRST.
In two volumes octavo, illuftrated with twenty
fmall plates, and price 10 s. 6d. in boards.
Printed alfo for J. MURRAY.
MEM.
This Work is not merely the Hiſtory of a
fingle Town. It is on a more liberal and exten-
five plan. And Mancheſter is only the center
of a large circle, that generally extends itſelf
over the iſland.
English
Sotheran
1-10-24
9393
THE
GENUINE HISTORY
OF THE
BRITONS
ASSERTED.
A 2
CON-
:
į
1
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTION,
p. 1-9
THE NATURE AND TIME OF THE FIRST
COLONY THAT CAME INTO BRITAIN,
11-32
THE NATURE AND TIME OF THE SECond,
3365
THE POSITION, MANNERS, AND TRANS-
OF BOTH IN THE ISLAND,
66—105
ACTIONS
THE DERIVATION OF THE IRISH FROM
BOTH,
106-153
THE DERIVATION OF THE SCOTS FROM
THE IRISH,
CONCLUSION,
154-293
295-304
MR. MACPHERSON'S ANSWER, INGENU-
OUSLY GIVING UP THE WHOLE,
305-308.
THE
THE
GENUINE HISTORY
OF THE
BRITONS
ASSERTED.
T
O an hiftorian that is curious to obferve
the ſtriking variations of national cha-
racters, and to a philofopher that is
delighted to note the advancements of the human
mind in fentiment and knowledge, the great
and recent change in the hiftorical genius of
Scotland must appear equally remarkable and
pleafing'. Accuſtomed as the Scotch have for
ages been to believe implicitly in a fantaſti-
cal history, they have lately emancipated their
minds from the bondage, and in a great meaſure
'Of Scotland, properly fo called, or the country to the
north of Forth and Clyde.
B
renounced
2. THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
renounced the fabulous fyftem of their ancef
tors. The defpicable forgeries of their anna-
lifts are no longer obtruded upon us by the
zeal of miſtaken patriotifm, for the truths and
realities of hiſtory. They are either brought for-
ward with a diffidence that betrays its own con-
victions of their falfhood, are mentioned merely
to be condemned, or are entirely paft over in a
contemptuous filence. And that enlarged and
mafculine turn of thinking, which commenced
near two centuries ago in England, has happily
extended its influence among the mountains of
Scotland. The monstrous creations of a Geoffry
and a Fordun, or the authors that they plun-
dered, the wild fpectres and goblins which had
for ages hovered in the gloom of our earlier
history, are now chaced away by the daylight
that is diffufed over the face of our annals. The
Græcian and Roman writers are allowed to be
the only ftandards of hiftorical truth. And the
whole Ifland is now, for the first time, united in
the profecution of its genuine hiftory.
The human mind, however, even in its de-
tection of the greateſt falfiies, is continually
checked in its operations by the feeblenefs of its
own efforts, and perpetually ftopped in its pro-
grefs by the contractedness of its own views. The
latter are generally limited to a fingle point.
And the former are moftly too weak, even
when they have triumphed over ſome of its
Own
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
1
own prejudices, to counteract the full force of
national vanity, and to fupprefs the whole power
of hereditary credulity, in itſelf or others. Ire-
land remains to this day fuperftitiouſly devoted
to her antient hiftory, fullenly turns away from
the light of reformation that is fpread over the
neighbouring ifland, and wraps herfelf in the
gloom of her own legendary annals. And the
genius of Scotland has fo greatly vitiated her
judgement by the long indulgence of her fancy
in hiſtory, that even now, when ſhe is reclaimed
from her former extravagancies, fhe feems ftrong-
ly inclined to wanton excurfions in the regions of
fact and incident. That national vanity which
originally generated, and afterwards fupported,
the mif-ſhapen brood of her former fictions, ap-
pears equally active at prefent among the hiftori-
cal writers of Scotland, and has equally a ten-
dency to diſtort and diſguiſe the genuine hiftory
of our iſland. And this is particularly obvious
in the repeated attempts that have been recently
made by them, to new-model the antient ac-
counts of Ireland and the Scotch, and to faſhion
them to the ſtandard of their own popular ca-
prices. The antient hiftorians ſpeak of Ireland
as the mother of the Scots, and Caledonia as the
parent of the Picts: and the prefent Scotch muft
therefore be the defcendants of Iriſh emigrants,
who fettled among the Caledonians, and com-
municated their own name to them. But this, it
B 2
feems,
L
j
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
feems, the Scotch diſdain to admit. And in tha
ſpirit of humourfome pride, which had originally
loaded the annals of their country with all the
impertinence of dreams, the whole current of
hiſtory is to be violently oppofed, the Ireland of
the Romans is to be interpreted into the prefent
Scotland, and the Scotch are to be made the
Aborigines of Caledonia. This conduct refults
from fuch a littleneſs of foul, and betrays fuch a
vulgarity of prejudice and paffion, that candour
would gladly heſitate to believe, if fact did not
convince her of the truth of it.
The firft appearance of this wayward folly feems
to have been in the writings of Sir George Mac-
kenzie, the firft Scotch author, I think, who dared,
however gently, to reject all the ruder and earlier
fictions of the national hiſtory. The adhering
remains of the legendary fpirit of the times, it
appeared coæval with the firft dawn of hiſtorical
liberty in Scotland, and has continued the com-
• In his Defence of the royal line of Scotland, 1685, in an-
fwer to Bp. Lloyd's Hiftorical Account of Church-government,
1684; and in his Further Delence, 1686, in reply to Bp. Stifling-
fleet's Animadverfions prefixed to his Origines Sacræ, 1685.
Sir George was affiſted in theſe works by Sir Robert Sibbald,
Sir James Dalrymple, and feveral other Scotch antiquarians
(See Dalrymple's Collections, 1705, p. 1. Preface). And Sir
George, in p. 359 &c. vol. I. of all his works, repeatedly but
filently rejects all the long accounts of the Scots before Fer-
gus I, and fo boldly cuts off a whole millennium from their
history.
2
panion
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
S
panion and diſhonour of it to the preſent pe-
riod'. And the fame fpirit has been particularly
cultivated, within theſe few years, by two gentle-
men of real learning and confiderable talents.
One of them, James Macpherſon Efq;, to whom
the friends of poetry and hiſtory muft acknow-
ledge themſelves greatly indebted, for calling out
the Poems of Offian from their original obfcurity
in an unknown language and an unviſited corner
of the iſland, and for giving them to us in a ver-
fion that feems to be at once bold and faithful, all
animation, harmony, and grace; this gentleman,
in his prefaces and notes to thofe poems, revived
and enlarged the fyſtem of Sir George, purſued
and invigorated his attempts, and violently en-
gaged the Caledonian bard in the conteft. And
Mr. Macpherſon was feconded in the year 1768 by
John Macpherſon D. D., a miniſter in the Ifle of
Sky, and the author of Critical Differtations on
the Origin &c. of the antient Caledonians, the
Picts, and the Scots. This work, the intended
1 In Sir Robert Sibbald's treatife on the Thule of the an-
tients, published in Wallace's Orkney Islands, 1693, and
Gibfon's Camden, 1695; in Sir James Dalrymple's Collec-
tions for the Scottiſh hiftory, 1705; in Dr. Mackenzie's Pré-
face to his Lives of Scots Writers, vol. III. fol. 1708; in Dr.
Abercromby's Martial Atchievements of the Scots nation, in
vol. II. fol. 1711; &c. &c. &c.
B 3
publication
1
ह THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
publication of which was repeatedly announced to
the world, feme years before its appearance, in
a ftrain of high commendation by Mr. Macpher-
fon', feems to have been alfo reſcued by him
from the fate often incident to pofthumous pro-
ductions, and was, I fuppofe, actually prefaced
by him. And, in thefe agreeable and fenfible
differtations, an intimate acquaintance with the
Highland language, and no inconfiderable
knowledge of antient history, have been made
the inftruments to wreft the accounts of the
antients from their true bafis, and to puſh afide
the whole fyftem of the Caledonian and Irifh
Hiftory from its fixed and natural center. And
Mr. Macpherſon has lately clofed the attack,
in a regular and formal difquifition upon the
fame principles. With a knowledge of the
In the preface to vol. I. of Offian it is faid: "It was at
"firft intended to prefix to Offian's Poems a diſcourſe con-
c cerning the ancient inhabitants of Britain; but as a Gentle-
"man in the north of Scotland, who has thoroughly ex-
"amined the antiquities of this ifland, and is perfectly ac-
"quainted with all the branches of the Celtic tongue, is juſt
..
now preparing for the prefs a work on that fubject, the
"curious are referred to it." And in the Diflertation prefixed
to vol. II. are thefe words. "This fubject I have only lightly
"touched upon, as it is to be difcuffed with more perfpicuity
"and at a much greater length, by a Gentleman, who has
"thoroughly examined the antiquities of Britain and Ire-
"land." p. xix.
Highland
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
Highland language fuperior to the Doctor's, and
with a much deeper infight into antient hiftory,
he has brought the whole collected weight of
evidence together, and concentrated all the
fcattered rays of the argument into a ſingle
point. With a faculty of thinking uncommonly
vigorous and lively, and with a flow of language
peculiarly elegant and fpirited, he has given
fuch additional ftrength to the argument, and
thrown fuch an attractive glofs over his rea-
fonings, that to mere modern innovations he
lends all the femblance of antiquity, he per-
fuades us where he does not convince, and bribes
us over to his party with all hiſtory and reaſon
against him.
In the only volume of the Hiftory of Man-
chefter which has yet been publiſhed, fome de-
fire had been fhewed and fome pains had been
taken, to clear up the original annals of Caledo-
nia and Ireland, and to refcue them from the folly
of antient fictions on the one hand, and from
the wildness of modern perverfions on the other.
But Mr. Macpherfon's Introduction, which was
publiſhed about three weeks after it, has thrown
us back in the progrefs of hiftorical knowledge,
and has once more involved the annals in all the
fophiftry of fiction and fancy. This therefore is
a peculiar call upon me, to vindicate the no-
tices indirectly attacked by Mr. Macpherfon,
B 4
and,
B
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
and, what is of much more confequence in itſelf,
to affert the violated principles of hiſtorical faith,
to protect the infulted cauſe of antient hiſtory,
and to eſtabliſh the annals of Caledonia and Ire-
land on their former bafis. And I willingly
obey the call. With all the deference that is due
to Mr. Macpherſon as a gentleman of genius
and fentiment, I fhall regularly purfue his ac
counts and reafonings, as they fucceffively pre-
fent themſelves in his pages. Difdaining the
little artifices of controverfy; too honourable, I
hope, to create the faults that I cannot find, and
too candid, I truft, to urge ftrongly the mere
failings of humanity; I fhall not expatiate upon
little inaccuracies of expreffion, and fhall not
triumph over little miſtakes in facts. I fhall
confine myſelf to the tranfactions of the Britons
before and after their fettlement in this iſland.
And I fhall not merely refer to the pages in
Mr. Macpherſon, for the paffages that I mean
to combat. This mode of proceeding, not be
ing fufficiently diſtinct with regard to the erro-
neous words and obnoxious affertions, is fre-
quently the caufe of various miſtakes in the
writer, and is almoft fure to leave the reader
in a maze of uncertainty and doubt. Not to
counteract my own purpoſes, I fhall conftantly
produce his arguments in his own words. Not
to
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
to injure his reaſonings by maiming them, I fhall
give them in the quotation all the extent and
force that they have in the original, And I
hall place my reply at the foot, and point it
directly at the heart, of each,
CHAP.
[ 11 ]
CHAP. I.
I.
CONCERNING THE FIRST COLONY
THAT MR. MACPHERSON BRINGS
INTO BRITAIN.
AG. 7—8. The Phocæans founding Mar-
PAG. 7
feilles "when the elder Tarquin is faid to
"have held the reins of government at Rome,
"the improvements introduced by the Pho-
"ceans had a great and fudden effect upon the
"manners of the Gauls. Agriculture, before
દ
56
66
imperfectly understood, was profecuted with
"vigour and fuccefs. The means of fubfiftence
being augmented, population increaſed of
"courfe; migrating expeditions were formed,
to eaſe the country of its number of inhabi-
tants.-Spain, Italy,—were filled with colonies
"from Gaul."
66
Here the vigorous profecution of agriculture,
and the augmented means of fubfiftence, are con-
fidered as the original cauſe of emigrations. But
furely this is afferted in oppofition equally to
found
12
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
found reafoning and univerfal experience. The
increaſe in the population of any kingdom, fo
far as it is occafioned merely by the increaſe in
the means of fubfiftence, will only be in an ade-
quate proportion to it. The immediate caufe,
and the immediate effect, will be exactly equi
valent. And, confequently, the improvements in
agriculture can never be productive of migra-
tions. This is obvious reafoning, embarraffed
by no intricacies and obfcured by no refinements
of thought. And the uninterrupted experience
of the world confirms the truth of it.
wretched provifion, that is furniſhed to the com-
mon people of Ireland and the Highlands, is
continually impelling them into other countries,
And the infinite multiplication of the neceffaries
and comforts of life, in England, is as continually
drawing the lower ranks of both into Southern
Britain. But I proceed to the hiftory.
The
The original incident in this long chain of
events, the fettlement of the Phocæans in Gaul,
is fixed to the reign of the elder Tarquin. The
communication of their improved agriculture to
the neighbouring Gauls, the general adoption of
it by all the various and military tribes of that
extenfive country, the augmentation in the means
of fubfiftence, the increaſe in the ſtate of popu
lation, and this rifing at laft to fuch an extreme
degree, that they, who, before, only " wandered
"after their cattle or game over the face" of the
country,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
13
#
country, were obliged to difburden themſelves,
by detaching large colonies into the neighbouring
regions; all thefe fucceffive events, even in the
moſt ſudden and rapid confecution of incidents,
muft neceffarily have taken up one or two ages.
And yet the migration into Italy, particularly, is
fixed by the very authority that Mr. Macpher-
fon quotes for it, in the very reign during which
the Phocæans are faid immediately before to
have fettled in Gaul. De tranfitu in Italiam
Gallorum hæc accepimus, fays Livy in Mr.
Macpherfon's own note: Prifco Tarquinio Romæ
regnante,—Ambigatus,-exonerare prægravente
turbâ regnum cupiens, Bellovefum ac Sigove-
fum-miffurum fe effe in quas Dii dediffent au-
guriis fedes oftendit. Bellovefo in Italiam viam
Dii dederunt. And Mr. Macpherſon thus expli-
citly afferts the fame in p. 9, "The Gauls-
"firſt entered Italy, according to Livy, in the
"reign of the elder Tarquin." Theſe migra-
tions therefore were actually coæval with the
fettlement at Marfeilles, and could not be occa-
fioned by any remote confequences refulting from
it. And the expedition into Italy, particularly,
was actually undertaken before the fettlement of
the Phocæans in Gaul. It was begun, and Bel-
lovefus had already advanced to the foot of the
Alps, when the news arrived of the Phocæan de-
• P. 7.
fcent
1
14 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
fcent at Marſeilles. And this appears even from
the account, to which Mr. Macpherſon has referred
us for the contrary. Bellovefus-, profectus ingen-
tibus peditum equitumque copiis, in Tricaftinos
venit. Alpes inde oppofitæ erant-. Ibi quum
velut feptos montium altitudo teneret Gallos, cir-
cumfpectarentque quánam per juncta cœlo juga in
alium orbem terrarum tranfirent,—allatum eft,
advenas quærentes agrum ab Salyum gente op-
pugnari. Maffilienfes erant hi, navibus a Phocæâ
profecti . And Mr. Macpherſon's first princi-
ple is entirely overborne, by the weight of his
own authorities, and the force of his own ac-
knowledgments.
Another objection of the fame nature feems
alſo to lie as ſtrongly againſt it. And our author
appears to have written this part of his differ-
tation with all the hafty vivacity of a man of
genius, purfuing a train of new and fplendid
ideas, but not rigidly examining their uniformity
and agreement with each other.-The fame ci-
vilized Græcians, that are faid to have fettled
in Gaul, and to have thereby introduced a more
improved agriculture into it, are equally faid
to have previously fettled in Italy. "The Pe-
"lafgi of Peloponnefus and the islands of
"the Archipelago were the firft of the Euro-
pean Nomades who quitted the ambulatory
"life of their anceſtors and applied themſelyes
6
I
* Livy, I. v. c. 34.
E to
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
15
"C
"to the arts of civil life.-Improving their navi-
પ gation by degrees, they failed to the weft,
"feized upon the neareſt coaft of Italy, and
moving into the heart of that country, met
"with the Umbri, and rofe into a mixed nation
"under the name of Latins. Extending their na-
"vigation ftill further, the Phocæans made an
"eſtabliſhment on the coaft of Gaul." The
earlier Pelafgi, therefore, would have introduced
the arts of civil life into Italy, as the later did
into Gaul. And an improved agriculture would
have been brought into Italy, fome time before
it was carried into Gaul. The earlier Pelafgi
alfo, actually fettling in the heart of Italy, and
actually mixing with the natives in it, would have
had a much greater communication with the
Italians, than the Phocæans could have had
with the Gauls, and have propagated all the
arts of their country with much greater fuccefs.
And the confequences deduced by Mr. Macpher-
fon, from the introduction of the Grecian agri-
culture into Gaul, muſt have been equally and
more early the confequences of it in Italy; and
the migrations occafioned by it must therefore
have been, not incurfions from Gaul into Italy,
but expeditions from Italy into Gaul. This
would obviouſly have been the caſe, according to
Mr. Macpherſon's own reprefentations and rea-
fonings. And the foundation of his fyftem
B
• P. 7.
is
16 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
is here a fecond time deſtroyed, by the very hand
that is employed in laying it.
P. 6-9." The Scythians of the weſtern
"Europe were, for the first time, mentioned
"under the name of Celta, by Herodotus, in
"the Eighty-feventh Olympiad. To inveſtigate
"the origin of that appellation, we must return
"into a period of remote antiquity. The Pe-
"lafgi of Peloponnefus-failed to the weft,
"feized upon the neareſt coaſt of Italy, and
"-made an eſtabliſhment on the coaft of
"Gaul. The improvements introduced by
them had a great and ſudden effect upon the
"manners of the Gauls. Agriculture-was pro-
“fecuted—. —Population increaſed-; migrat
66
ing expeditions were formed to eafe the country
"of its number of inhabitants, and the regions
"of Europe-received fucceffive fwarms of
"Gallic emigrants. This revolution in the
"north of Europe extended to the greater part
"of its inhabitants the appellation of Celta,
"which is an adjective derived from Gael, the
"aboriginal name of the inhabitants of antient
"Gaul."
The original and primary caufe of the Gallic
emigrations, is here plainly afferted to be the
improved agriculture communicated to them by
the Græcians. This had a "great and fudden
"effect
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
17
در
effect upon the manners of the Gauls," pro-
ducing migrations. And therefore the Gauls,
according to this reprefentation, had never form
ed any migrating expeditions before. But in
p.9, immediately after the words above, we are
told, that "though the expeditions of the
"Gauls, fubfequent to the fettlement of the
"Phocæans in their country, are the firſt men-
"tioned in history, we have reafon to believe
"that they pervaded Europe with their migrating
"armies in a more remote period of antiquity.
And furely thefe two reprefentations will not
mingle and unite together. The introduction of
an improved agriculture by the Græcians either
was or was not, in Mr. Macpherſon's opinion,
the original and remotely efficient caufe of the
Gallic migrations. If it was, he can have no
reafon to believe, that the Gauls pervaded Eu-
rope with their migrating armies in a remoter pe-
riod of Antiquity. And, if it was not, the great
and fudden effect, which it is here defcribed to
have had upon the manners of the Gauls, is all
a delufion and vifion.
This hiftory of the Pelafgian refinements im-
ported into Gaul, and producing migrations
from it, is given us, in order to account for the
name of Celta being affixed to the general body
of the Weft-Europeans. And the migrations,
occafioned by the improved ftate of agricul-
ture, are faid to have carried the colonies and
C
name
着
​18 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
name of the Gael or Celtæ over many of the
regions of Europe. Yet "we have reafon to
"believe," as we are told in p. 9, "that the
"Gauls pervaded Europe with their migrating
"armies in a more remote period of antiquity."
And therefore, according to Mr. Macpherſon
himſelf, they muft equally, in a more remote
period, have planted the colonies and name
of the Celtæ in many of the regions of Eu-
rope.
Thus does this ingenious writer go on, appa-
rently contradicting his own pofitions, and refut-
ing his own arguments. And I wreft nothing.
I wiſh to give every paffage its full import. And
I defire to put an end to the examination, when
I ceaſe to profecute it with candour.
is an
P. 9. "The appellation of Celtæ
adjective derived from Gael, the aboriginal
"name of the inhabitants of ancient Gaul."
I feel a little reluctance in myſelf, to enter the
field of Celtic etymology with Mr. Macpherſon.
A gentleman, who was bred, I apprehend, in the
bofom of the Highlands; an author, who, as
the tranflator of Offian, muſt certainly be con-
verfant with the best and oldeft writers in the
Erfe; fhould naturally command fuch a clear
and extenſive view of the language, its principles,
and its genius, as to deter any mere Englishman
from
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
19
from the unequal conteft. But to be deterred by
fuch reaſons, I think, would betray an ignorance
in the workings of the human heart. And a con-
ſciouſneſs of ſuperior knowledge, in any depart-
ment of literature, almoſt always feduces a writer
into a careleſſneſs and injudiciouſneſs in the exer-
tion of it.
In the History of Manchefter, I have en-
deavoured to inveſtigate the origin of the name
of Celta. I have there proved it, I think, not
to be an adjective derived from Gael, but to be
equally a fubftantive, and actually the fame
word, with it. And, as it is neceffary for the
folution of the prefent difficulty, and will be
ferviceable for the difcuffion of fome future
doubts, I fhall here go over the argument again,
and contract it into a fmaller compafs.-The
Irish and Highlanders reciprocally denominate
themſelves by the general title of Cael, Gael, or
Gauls. They alſo diſtinguiſh themſelves, as the
Welsh originally did, and as the Welfh diftin-
guiſh them both at prefent, by the appellation
of Guidhil, Guethel, and Gathel. And this is
certainly the origin of the other. The interme-
diate TH being left quiefcent in the pronuncia-
tion, as it is in many words of the Britiſh
language, Gathel would immediately be formed
into Gael. And Gathel is actually founded like
Gael, by both the Irish and Highlanders at
prefent. The appellation of Gathel, therefore,
C 2
was
20
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
was originally the fame with Gael, and the pa-
rent of it. But this is not all. The quiefcent
letters in Britiſh are frequently transferred from
the middle to the conclufion of the word, where
they are no longer quiefcent; and, as Needle is
popularly changed into Neeld in Lancaſhire, and
Kathair formed into Carth and Garth, fo Gathel
is changed into Galath, Galat, Galt, and Celt.
And we fee the fact directly exemplified, in the
Gael of the Continent being univerfally denomi-
nated Galatæ and Celta by the Græcians, and
Gallt and Gallta by the Irish. The appellations
therefore of Gathel-i, Gall-i, Galat-æ, Calet-es,
An-Calit-es, and Celt-æ, are all one and the
fame denomination, only varied by the aftoniſh-
ing ductility of the Celtic, and only diſguiſed by
the alterations ever incident to a language that
has been merely oral for ages'.
P. 8-9. In confequence of the Phocæan fettle-
ment at Marſeilles, "Spain, Italy,—and the Bri-
"tiſh Iſles were filled with colonies from Gaul, in
"whom the old inhabitants, if they differed ori-
"ginally from the Gael, were loſt.”
And in p. 26, where the fame fubject is re-
touched, Mr. Macpherſon ſpeaks thus.-" The
"Umbri, who were the moſt ancient inhabitants
I
See Hiſtory of Manchester, p. 437-439.
3
'
"" of
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
21
"of Italy (Umbrorum gens antiquiffima Italiæ
"exiftimatur. Plin. lib. iii. Umbri antiquiffimus
"Italiæ populus. Flor. lib. i.), were the poſterity
"of Gauls who penetrated into that country
long before the commencement of hiſtory
66
66
(Bocchus abfolvit Gallorum veterum propagi-
❝nem Umbros effe. Solin. lib. viii. Umbri prima
"veterum Gallorum proles. Auguft. in Sem-
66
"C
pron. Umbros veterum Gallorum effe propa-
ginem Marcus Antonius refert. Servius in
"Eneid. xii.). We may naturally fuppofe that
"the Gauls of Belgium would have found lefs
"difficulty in croffing a very narrow channel into
“Britain than their countrymen at the foot of
"the Alps in clambering, with their wives and
"children, over the vaft ridge of mountains
"which feparated them from Italy. It may
"therefore be concluded, that Britain received
cr
very confiderable colonies from the Belgic di-
"vifion of Gaul as early, at leaſt, as the Gael of
"the Alpin regions ſeized upon Italy under the
"name of Umbri."
In theſe paffages are contained two affertions.
concerning the firft population of Britain, one
urged as probably true, and the other produced
as certainly fo. According to the former, the
natives of Gaul fettled in Italy, under the name of
Umbri, long before the commencement of hifto-
ry, and may therefore be concluded to have tranf-
ported themſelves as early into Britain. And the
C 3
latter
22
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
latter declares the Britiſh Ifles to have received a
colony of the Celta, in confequence of the Pho-
cæan fettlement at Marſeilles. I fhall conſider both
of theſe attentively.
The opinion here advanced by Mr. Macpher
fon concerning the Umbri, has been advanced by
feveral writers before, in that ſtrange humour
which has been taken up by fo many antiquari-
ans, of magnifying the glory and extending the
poffeffions of the Gauls. But the notion appears
to be chimerical and groundleſs.
The Umbri are affirmed by both Pliny and
Florus, as Mr. Macpherſon himſelf has quoted
them, to be the moſt antient people in Italy, or,
in other words, to be the progeny of the firſt
coloniſts that came into it after the flood. And,
if the Umbri were a race of men derived from
Gaul, Gaul muſt have been inhabited fome ages
before Italy. So acceffible as the latter is acroſs the
fea from Dalmatia or from Germany by land,
and therefore lying much more obvious than
Gaul to the great colonies of the Noachidæ, as
they converged to the Weft; it muft, according
to this repreſentation, have never received any
colony at all, till Gaul diſcharged its fuperfluous
numbers into it. And a country that would have
peculiarly invited the ſpreading hords of the Eaft,
as pufhing its whole length in one vaft projection
into the waves of the Mediterranean, and there-
fore lying very happily central betwixt the three
great
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
23
great divifions of the globe, is here ſuppoſed to
have continued totally wild and defolate, even for
ages after Gaul was inhabited, till the Celtæ
had gradually ſpread themſelves over all Gaul,
till they began to increaſe in numbers, till they
were obliged to diffuſe themſelves into other
countries, and till they were compelled even
"to clamber, with their wives and children, over
"the vast ridge of mountains which feparated
"them from Italy." This is fuch an account, as
confronts every ſuggeſtion of reaſon, and out-
rages every principle of propriety. The bands,
that filed through the forefts of Germany into
Gaul, muſt equally have found their way through
the vallies of the Tyrolefe into Italy. And the
tribes, that coafted into Gaul from Greece or
Dalmatia, would previouſly have landed upon the
ſhore of Italy. As the great tide of European
population rolled directly from the plains of
Shinar to the verge of the Atlantic, in the na-
tural course of caufes and effects, no country
could have been primarily inhabited from the
Weft. And Italy peculiarly could not, open as it
is on the Eaſt and its collateral points, having its
northern mountains remarkably pierced with a
valley through the whole breadth of them, and
being compleatly barricaded by its natural ram-
parts on the North-Weft, the only point in which
it borders upon Gaul. As the natives of Gaul,
therefore, can never be admitted to have been
C 4
the
24 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
the first planters of Italy, the Umbri can never
be allowed to have been originally a colony from
Gaul. And Mr. Macpherfon muſt either deny
the Umbri to have been the moſt antient people
of Italy, or admit them not to have been original-
ly derived from Gaul.
This reafoning is fufficient to counterbalance
the affertions of fuch authors, as he has produc-
ed in fupport of the opinion. And the reafon-
ing is happily confirmed by an hiftorian of the
moft refpectable character, and with whom, in
a comparative estimate of authenticity and
knowledge, Mr. Macpherfon's writers are but
mere flutterers in the regions of hiſtory. Livy
afferts the first and earlieſt migration of the Gauls
to have been only in the reign of the elder Tar
quin, and about 600 years before Chrift. And
he is uncommonly accurate and circumftantial in
his account. Gallos-eos qui oppugnaverunt
Clufium non fuiffe qui primi Alpes tranfierint,
fatis conftat. Ducentis quippe annis antequam
Clufium oppugnarent urbemque Romam cape-
rent, in Italiam Galli tranfcenderunt,-De tran-
fitu in Italiam Gallorum hæc accepimus. Priſco
Tarquinio Romæ regnante, Bellovefo-in Ita-
liam viam Dii dederunt. Profectus ingentibus
peditum equitumque copiis, in Tricaftinos venit,
Alpes inde oppofitæ erant, quas inexfuperabiles
vifas haud equidem miror, nullâ dum viâ (quod
quidem continens memoria fit, nifi de Hercule
fabulis
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
25
!
larunt,
fabulis credere libet) fuperatas. Croffing the
Alps, fufifque acie Tufcis, haud procul Ticino
Alumine-condidere urbem, Mediolanum appel-
Alia fubinde manus,-Elitovio duce,-
favente Bellovefo, quum tranfcendiffet Alpes,
ubi nunc Brixia ac Verona urbes funt-confidunt.
Poft hos Salluvii- circa Ticinum amnem-.
Deinde Boii Lingones, quum jam inter Padum
atque Alpes omnia tenerentur, Pado ratibus tra-
jecto, non Etrufcos modò, fed etiam Umbros,
agro pellunt. Tum Senones, recentiffimi adve-
narum, attacked Clufium and burnt Rome ¹. And
the regular detail of fuch an hiſtorian fixes [the
The
point beyond all poffibility of doubt.
Gauls first entered Italy about the year 600 be-
fore Chrift, when the country was compleatly
inhabited from end to end.
But the authors quoted by Mr. Macpherſon have
been wronged in the application by him. The
Umbri might be the deſcendants of antient Gauls,
and even the firſt inhabitants of Italy; and yet
not be derivatives from Gaul. As the great body
of the Celta puſhed by land or coafted by fea
for the feat of their future Empire in Gaul, a
part of them might divide from the reft, and
make a fettlement in Italy. And this appears,
think, to have been actually the cafe. That
the Umbri were really Celtæ or Gauls, is afferted
by fuch authorities, as, however infignificant in
· L. v, c. 33-35.
I
themſelves,
26 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
themſelves, we cannot in juftice reject without
a fuperior authority to the contrary. And the
remains of Celtic or Gallic appellations, among
the Umbri, are a ftrong confirmation of their af
fertions. I fhall mention only two, becauſe they
feem both to have been prior to any migration of
colonies from Gaul. And thefe are their own.
national and original appellation of Umbri, and
the fimilar appellation of their originally princi-
pal river, the Umbrio, both evidently the fame
with the Umbri and Humber in Britain; the ge-
nerical appellation of the Celtæ, in Italy and
this ifland, being communicated by both to a
great æftuary or river in their country, and our
Humber being therefore written and pronounced
Chumber formerly '.
A migration then from Gaul into Italy, before
the reign of Tarquin the Firft, is precluded by
the poſitive voice of hiſtory. And all inferences,
derived from the fuppofition, muft equally fall
with it to the ground. A migration from Gaul
into Britain, as early at leaft as the other, is in-
ferred from it by Mr. Macpherfon. And the
conclufion is reaſonable in itſelf. But the pre-
miſes have been here proved to be falſe. And
Mr. Macpherſon muſt refer his first colony from
Gaul to the æra of the Phocæan eſtabliſhment
in it.
• Carte, vol. i. p. 17.
A
1
ΤΗ
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
27
The former opinion was given to us only as
probable. This is prefented as certain. And
it challenges for its fupport the authority of
Cæfar and the teftimony of Tacitus. Tacitus is
quoted thus, In univerfum tamen æftimanti Gallos
vicinum folum occupaffe, credibile eft; and Cæfar
thus, Britanni non multum a Gallicâ differunt
confuetudine. But one of thefe authorities is not
quoted fairly. The latter, which is here applied
to the Britons in oppoſition to the Belgæ¹, and
has the word Britanni added to it in order to
make it applicable, actually relates to the Belgæ
in oppofition to the Britons, is actually referred
to the Belge by Mr. Macpherfon himſelf in p.33,
and really relates only to the Belge of Kent.
And, even if both theſe paffages were fairly
quoted, they very obviously determine neither
the fact nor period of the Gallic fettlement in
Gaul. They prove indeed the very high proba-
bility of a Gallic colony originally fettling in
the ifland: but they evince not the certainty of
it. And they do not give us the leaft intimation
concerning the particular æra of the ſettlement.
Mr. Macpherfon, deriving this in a long conſecu-
tion of caufes and effects from the Phocæan eſtab-
liament in Gaul, fixes that one or two centuries
after the eſtabliſhment, and about 400 or 500
years
before Chrift. But he alfo fixes the æra
exactly at the period of it, as he ranks the mi-
See 2d and 3d Sections of this chapter,
gration
28 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
ويد
gration into Britain coæval with the expedition
into Italy. Tacitus and Cæfar, however, lend
not the ſmalleſt fanction to either part of his
chronology. And, even if his authority could be
of any moment on a ſubject of this nature, its own
contradictorinefs muft deftroy itſelf.
THIS is the whole of our Author's argument,
with respect to the coming of the firſt coloniſts
into Britain. And I am forry to obferve on re-
viewing the whole, that, in the progrefs of the
argument, he ſeems to be unhappy in every
movement. And the period and fact of a Gallic
colony originally fettling in Britain, which are
the firſt great points in his hiſtorical ſyſtem, are
left abfolutely doubtful and undetermined.-But,
as theſe are two particulars of fome confequence
in the hiftory of Britain, the great defign of the
prefent work, to enlighten the dark period of its
earlier annals, naturally raiſes in me a defire to
afcertain them. It must be hazardous indeed to
attempt, where Mr. Macpherſon has failed. But
it can be no difgrace to be baffled, where even
he has been unfuccefsful.
The derivation of the Britons from the Gauls
does not depend, as Tacitus and Cæfar have
placed it, upon any precarious reaſonings from
the
THE BRITONS ASSERT E D.
29
the vicinity of the countries and a fimilarity in
the nations. It may be grounded upon better
principles. And it is clearly demonftrated by the
national appellation of Gaul, which I have al-
ready ſhewn in part, and ſhall fully fhew here-
after, to have been formerly, or to be at prefent,
retained by the Britiſh inhabitants in every quar-
ter of the iſland. This proof is equally ſhort and
decifive. But the period, in which the Gauls firſt
croffed the channel into Britain, is much more
difficult to be determined. It may, I think, be
fettled in this manner.
The firſt migration of the Gauls that is record-
ed by hiſtory, as I have already fhewn, was made
in the reign of the elder Tarquin, and about
the year 600 before Chriſt. This was a double
and an invafion of
one, an expedition into Italy,
Germany. And it was clearly after Britain had
been peopled by the Gauls. As long as the lat-
ter had a vent for their growing numbers into
the uninhabited regions of Spain or Britain, they
could not have been obliged to turn back upon
their progenitors behind them. The great cur
rent of European population, which had fallen
for ages into the Weft, could not be compelled
to return upon itfelf, till it had filled the whole ex-
tent of its intended channel, and found itſelf ſtopt
in its progrefs by infuperable barriers. And the
I * Livy, I. v. c. 33、
Gauls
36
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Gauls would not have chofen to enter Italy and
invade Germany, where they were fure to en-
counter oppofition, and where their fettlements
muſt be precarious from the uncertainty of their
fuccefs, and expofed to danger from the remote-
nefs of their countrymen; when all the region
of Britain, in particular, lay open to them, was
ready to receive their colonies, and by its daily
appearance to the eye feemed actually to invite
them into it. At this period, therefore, the
iſland of Britain was certainly inhabited. And
it muſt have been inhabited long before.
When the Gauls firſt began to diſcharge their
numbers into Britain, the iſland would naturally
remain the great refervoir of the continent for
ages. Gradually as the people multiplied to be
troubleſome, they would all find a ſafe and eaſy
conveyance into Britain. And Gaul could not
begin to be overburdened with her progeny, till
the population of Britain was nearly compleated,
till the uninhabited parts of the iſland were too
remote from the continent, or till the iſlanders
were obliged, in their own defence, to forbid
any future migrations into the country. This
muſt have been the actual ſtate of population in
Britain, for fome time before the expeditions of
Bellovefus and Sigovefus from Gaul. And freſh
colonies, for fome time before, had ceaſed to find
their way into Britain. The tribes of Gaul were
now pent up within their own continent. And
as
:
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
31
as the multiplication continued, and all the for-
mer refources were exhaufted, they were obliged
at laft to recoil upon the more eaſterly colonies,
to explore an unpractifed way over the fnows
and mountains of the Alps, and to open to them-
ſelves a new receptacle among the inhabitants
of Italy and Germany. A long time therefore
muſt have elapſed, before the fuperfluous num-
bers of Gaul could have filled up the greater
part
of the iſland, and have any occafion to pro-
hibit the entrance of more into it. And fome
time muſt have intervened before the effect of
this prohibition could have appeared upon the
continent, and ftill more, before it could have
burst out in the great and neceffary migrations
into Germany and Italy. Four or five centuries
muſt have paffed betwixt the commencement of
population in the island, and the æra of thoſe
migrations on the continent. And the poſition
is ſtrikingly confirmed to us by the parallel hiſto-
ry of Ireland, this iſland in a later period ferv-
ing equally as a drain to Britain, and the popu-
lation of it not being compleated in lefs than
500 years ¹.
This reaſoning fettles the firſt inhabitation of
Britain about 1000 years before Chrift. About
1000 years before Chrift it is actually fixed by
fome of Richard's authorities: A. M. 3000, circa
*See History of Mancheſter, p. 433-437 and 440-442.
hæc
32 THE
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
hæc tempora cultam & habitatam primùm Bria
tanniam arbitrantur nonnulli '. And about the
fame period the progrefs of population, as far
as it can be traced in the iſland, concurs with the
argument to ſettle it. From the one reaſon it
may be concluded, that the iſland was firſt inha→
bited no less than this number of years before
the Chriſtian æra. And from the other it ap-
pears highly probable, that the iſland could not
have been inhabited many more before it. And
the coincidence of two fuch arguments, that de-
rived from the ftate of population on the con-
tinent, and this deduced from the progrefs of it
in the iſland, the concurrence of both with the
authorities of hiſtory, and the convergence of all
to one common point of time, give us as much
certainty on the ſubject, as we muſt ever expect
in inquiries of this very remote nature, and fix
the firſt migration of the Gauls into Britain, with
as much preciſion as the difficulties of the quef-
tion will admit, about a thousand years before.
the coming of our Saviour, or about the reigns
of David and Solomon among the Jews.
* P. 50.
Hift. of Manch. p. 7 and 466.
II.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED,
33.
*
II.
CONCERNING THE SECOND COLONY
THAT MR. MACPHERSON BRINGS
INTO BRITAIN.
P₁
A G. 10. "The domeftic improvements
"which, in the beginning of their progrefs
"in Gaul, enabled the inhabitants of that coun-
try to overrun the regions of the Weft and
"North, had arrived at ſome degree of maturity
long before the Romans penetrated beyond
"the Alps. Inftead of wandering in fearch of
"foreign fettlements, the Gauls found it more
convenient to cultivate thoſe which they al-
(c
86
ready poffeffed. The fpirit of conqueft re-
"tired further towards the North; and the
"tide of migration, which had for ages flowed
" from Gaul, returned upon itſelf. The Ger-
man Celtæ repaffed the Rhine."
The improvements in agriculture are here, and
in
p. 8, faid to have confequentially occafioned
the migrations of the Gauls. But here they are
equally faid to have put an end to them. And the
fame natural caufe has two different and contra-
D
dictory
:
34 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
dictory effects attributed to it.—The improve-
ments in agriculture are declared to have occa-
fioned migrations in the beginning of their pro-
grefs, and in their advancement towards matu-
rity to have given an abfolute termination to
them. And the fame natural caufe, that in its
weaker and commencing operations produced one
effect, in its ſtronger and more perfect influence
produced another and the oppofite.-All this,
I think, is clearly afferted together in the preſent
extract. "The domeftic improvements, in the
"beginning of their progrefs in Gaul, enabled
"the inhabitants-to overrun the regions of
"the Weft and North-." When they "had
"arrived at fome degree of maturity-, inſtead
"of wandering in fearch of foreign fettlements,
"the Gauls found it more convenient to culti-
“vate thoſe which they already poſſeſſed.”—
Nor is this all the inconfiftency, which the ex-
tract feems to contain. Thoſe improvements,
which in their infant ftate impelled the Gauls to
relinquish their country, in their maturer con-
dition not only induced them to ſtay at home,
but even brought foreign emigrants into the
country. "The tide of migration, which had
"for ages flowed from Gaul, returned upon it-
" felf."
That multiplied population, which was the im-
mediate confequence of the commencing improve-
ments in agriculture, obliged the Gauls to dif
charge
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
35
charge themſelves in colonies into the neighbour-
ing countries. And that infinitely greater popu-
lation, which must have equally refulted from
the improvements being more generally diffufed,
more experimentally known, and confiderably
heightened in their influence, and muft have
obliged the Gauls, in an infinitely greater degree,
to diſcharge themſelves into the neighbouring
regions; this, it feems, did not oblige them at
all, this actually prevailed upon them to ftay at
home, and abfolutely invited others into the
country. Thus does this lively and valuable
writer again feem to be engaged at crofs purpoſes
with his own argument.
"to
P. 11-12. "More than three centuries prior
to the Chriſtian æra, the German Celtæ,
"under the name of Cimbri, ravaged all the
"regions lying between the Rhine and the Ionian.
"fea. (Hæ funt nationes quæ tam longè ab fuis
"fedibus Delphos profectæ funt. Cicero pro
Fonteio, xx.)"
The paffage, here cited by Mr. Macpherſon,
actually ftands in a ftriking oppofition to his
doctrine. It refers not to the Cimbri, or Ger-
man Celta, át.all. It refers folely to the Pro-
per Celta, or the natives of Gaul.-Cicero,
vindicating the conduct of Fronteius in his go-
D2
vernment
$
!
36 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
vernment of Gaul, Provinciæ Galliæ M. Fron-
teius præfuit, and, like a mere advocate, catch-
ing at the popular prejudices of the Romans,
fays thus of the Gallic tribes. Hæ funt nationes
quæ tam longè ab fuis fedibus Delphos ufque,
ad Apollinem Pythium atque ad oraculum orbis
terræ vexandum ac fpoliandum, profectæ funt.
Ab iifdem gentibus-obfeffum eft Capitolium. Here
we fee no mention of the Cimbri, and no inti-
mation concerning the German Celtæ. All that
is faid is fpoken merely of the real and abfo-
lute Gauls, of thoſe who facked Rome as well
as plundered Delphi. And Mr. Macpherfon's
quotation, not only does not prove the ſpirit of
conqueſt to have retired from Gaul towards the
North, and the German Celtæ to have ravaged
all the regions between the Rhine and the Ionian
Sea; but actually evinces the contrary, fhews
the ſpirit at this period to have been ftill very
active in Gaul, and appropriates theſe ravages
to the Native Celtæ.
66
P. 28-29. “ The ſpirit of conqueſt paffing.
"from the Gauls to the Celto-Germanic colonies
beyond the Rhine, the latter pervaded Europe
"with their armies (Cimbri magnam Europæ nec
exiguam Afiæ partem fibi tributariam fecere
"agrofque debellatorum a fe occuparunt. Diod.
"Sic. lib. v.).-The German pofterity of the
66
3
"Gauls,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
37
"Gauls, under the name of Cimbri, traverſed—
"the vaſt regions between their own country
" and the fea of Ionia (Cimbri contractis undique
"copiis, ad Ionicum mare converfi, gentem Illy-
"riorum, et quicquid gentium ad Macedonas
"ufque habitat, imo ipfos Macedonas oppreffere.
"Pauf. Attic. iv.). About half a century after
"the death of Alexander, they poured irreſiſti-
"ble armies into Greece, Thrace, and Mace-
"donia-(Gens afpera, audax, bellicofa, domi-
"tis Pannoniis, et hortante deinde fucceffu, divi-
"fis agminibus, alii Græciam, alii Macedoniam,
"omnia ferro proterentes, petivere. Juftin. lib.
66
66
xxiv.). Some of them, paffing the Propon-
"tis, filled the leffer Afia with their colonies
(Tantæ fœcunditatis juventus, ut Afiam omnem
"velut examine aliquo implerent. Juftin. lib.
XXV.); and fpread the terror of their name far
"and wide by the invincible fortune of their arms
(Tantus terror nominis et armorum invicta feli-
"citas. Juftin. lib. xxv.). The irruption of the
"Cimbri was not merely depredatory. They left
"colonies in the conquered countries (Agros de-
"bellatorum a fe occuparunt. Diod. Sic. lib. v.)."
66
I have cited this paffage immediately after the
former, that Mr. Macpherſon's argument may en-
joy the full force of the authorities produced in its
favour. And in both theſe extracts, by the fame
over-ruling influence, the Germans are regularly
D 3
fub-
३8
درد
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
fubftituted for the Gauls.
They were the na-
tives of Gaul, and not the reſidents of Germany,
who more than 300 years prior to the Chriftian
æra, as the preceding paffage fixes the time, or
about half a century after the death of Alexan-
der, as the prefent more accurately, though con-
tradictorily, fixes it, ravaged all the country to the
fea of Ionia. In the year 279 before Chrift, the
Gauls fent out three armies, which ravaged Pan-
nonia, Greece, Macedonia, and Afia, plundered
or attempted to plunder the temple at Delphi,
and fettled colonies in fome of thofe countries.
And even the authorities, here cited to confine
theſe actions to the Germans, all concur to appro-
priate them to the Gauls. This muſt feem very
ftrange. But it is actually true,
£
Diodorus, fpeaking exprefsly of the Gauls,
but confidering them as extended εξης μέχρι της
Zubias, fays thus. Hi-funt qui Romam cepe-
Σκυθιας,
runt. Hi templum in Delphis expilarunt. Hi
magnam Europæ partem, &c. OOR HOE OF THE MED
Ρωμην ελάλες, το δε ιερον το εν Δελφοίς συλησαίες, και
πολλην μεν της Ευρωπής, εκ ολίγην δε και της Ασίας,
φορολογησαντες οι δια την προς τες Έλληνας επιπλοκην
ΕΛΛΗΝΟ-ΓΑΛΑΤΑΙ κληθέντες*. Thofe, therefore,
who reduced a confiderable part of Europe and no
inconfiderable portion of Afia, and fettled on the
V. i. p. 354. Weffelingius.
lands
5
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
39
lands of the conquered, were not Cimbri, though
Mr. Macpherſon has unwarily interpolated the
name in his quotation; were not Germans, as
Mr. Macpherſon has arbitrarily interpreted his
own inſerted name of Cimbri to mean; but were
Gauls, the fame that took Rome, the fame that
plundered Delphi, and the fame that were de-
nominated Gallo-Græci.
Paufanias in his Attica fays thus. Galli-
in extremis Europæ oris ad vaftum mare acco-
lunt. Verum ut Galli appellarentur, non nifi
ferò ufus obtinuit. Celtas enim, quum ipfi fe
antiquitus, tum alii eos, nominarunt. Hi con-
tractis undecunque copiis, ad Ionicum mare con-
verfi, &c. Οι δε ΓΑΛΑΤΑΙ—νεμοι)αι της Ευρώπης
τα εσχαλα επι θαλασση πολλη οψε δε ποτε αυτές
καλείσθαι ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ εξενίκησε· ΚΕΛΤΟΙ γαρ καλα
τε σφας το αρχαιον, και παρα τοις άλλοις, ωνόμαζονίο
Συλλεγείσα δε ΣΦΙΣΙ ςράβια τρεπεται την επι Ιονι8,
το τε Ιλλυρίων εθνο, και παν οσον αχρι Μακεδόνων
ωκει, και Μακεδόνας αύτες, αναςάλες εποίησε 1. And
here Mr. Macpherſon appears in his quotation
to have inadvertently dropt the words Galli and
Celta, and to have put the word Cimbri in
their place. Paufanias does not affert the Ger-
man pofterity of the Gauls to have ravaged the
country up to the fea of Ionia. And Paufanias
does not affert any nation to have committed
thefe rayages under the name of Cimbri. He
* P. 1o. Lipfire, 1696.
D 4
I
declares
40 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
declares the Gauls, and the Gauls only, to have
made this expedition. And he declares them ta
have paffed under their own indigenous denomi-
nations of Galli and Celtæ.
Juftin is the other author here quoted. And
he is ſtill more exprefsly against the purpoſe for
which Mr. Macpherſon has produced him. He
fays thus. Galli, abundanti multitudine, cùm eos
non caperent terræ quæ genuerant, ad fedes novas
quærendas velut ver facrum miferunt. Ex his
portio in Italiâ confedit, quæ et Urbem Romanam
captam incendit, et portio Illyricos finus-per
ftrages barbarorum penetravit, & in Pannoniâ
confedit; gens afpera, audax, bellicofa-. Hor-
tante deinde fucceffu, divifis agminibus, alii Græ-
ciam, alii Macedoniam, omnia ferro proterentes,
petivere. Tantufque terror Gallici nominis erat, ut
-folus rex Macedoniæ Ptolemæus adventum
Gallorum intrepidus audivit. Igitur Galli, duce
Belgio, attacked and defeated Ptolemy. —Interea
Brennus, quo duce portio Gallorum in Græciam
ſe effuderat, auditâ victoriâ fuorum qui Belgio
duce Macedonas vicerant,-Delphos iter vertit ¹.
And in another place Juſtin ſays thus. Gallorum
eâ tempeftate tantæ fœcunditatis juventus fuit,
ut Afiam omnem velut examine aliquo implerent.
Denique, neque reges Orientis fine mercenario
Gallorum exercitu ulla bella gefferunt, neque,
¡
• L. xxiv. c. 4, 5, 6.
I
pulfi
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
41
I
pulfi regno, ad alios quam ad Gallos confugerunt.
Tantus terror Gallici nominis et armorum invicta
felicitas ¹. And here, in the fame ftrain of in-
advertency that is noticed before, Mr. Macpher-
fon appears to have left out the word Gallorum
in one of his quotations and Gallici in another,
and to have applied all three in direct oppofition
to the exprefs and repeated meaning of the
whole. The armies which Juftin here deſcribes
as pouring into Thrace, Greece, and Macedonia,
he does not affert to have been Germans, and he
does not affirm to have been denominated Cim-
bri. He explicitly declares them to have been
Gauls. He directly derives them from their na-
tive country of Gaul. And he repeatedly makes
them to have been a part of that national body,
which took the city of Rome, and marched to
plunder the temple of Delphi.
Each of thefe long extracts reflects a light upon
the other. And from the united luftre of all
we may clearly fee, that Mr. Macpherfon has
been ſtrangely led away by his own prejudices,
has preffed into his caufe arguments that are all
in a natural combination againſt him, and, in a
ſpirit of involuntary piracy, is even fighting
under falfe colours. The total omiffion of fome
expreffions that muſt have difproved the appli-
cation of the paffages, the careful diſcharge of
I L. xxv. c. 2.
7
all
42 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
all hoſtile words from the quotations, and the
officious interpolation of friendly in their room,
facts that appear evident upon the face of the
extracts above, certainly give an unhappy afpect
of difingenuoufnefs to the whole, and may feem
to difcredit the integrity and honour of Mr.
Macpherſon. But any one that has felt in his
own breaft the prevailing bias of either fyfte-
matical or national prejudices, and can therefore
make the proper allowance for the force of both
together, will eaſily acquit him of any intentional
frauds, and will refer all to its immediate cauſe,
to prepoffeffions which have enflaved the ſtrongeſt
intellects, and to weakneffes which are the ground-
work of all the patriot virtues.
P. 10-12. "The German Celtæ (Celtæ five
"Galli quos Cimbros vocant. Appian. in Il-
"lyr.-) repaffed the Rhine, committed terrible
"devaftations, and extended their conquefts
"to Spain. The Lufitanians, according to
"Diodorus Siculus, were the moſt warlike branch
« of the Cimbri (αλκιμώτατοι μεν εισι οι καλεμενοι
Avolavo. Diod. Sic. lib. v.)."
Here we meet with the faine ftrain of falfe
quotation, as we have already remarked in the
preceding articles. The paffage in Appian,
which is here applied to the German Celta, be-
longs to the Native Gauls in the original. Eofdem
[Autarios]
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
43
I
[Autarios] Celtafque, quos Cimbros vocant, ad Del-
phos pofuife caftra : αυτες και ΚΕΛΤΟΙΣ, τοις Κιμβροις
λεγομένοις, ΕΠΙ ΔΕΛΦΟΙΣ ΣΥΣΤΡΑΤΕΥΣΑΙ 1.
The Gauls, we fee, who are faid to have been
denominated Cimbri, were actually Proper Celtæ,
and were abfolutely the very Gauls that en-
camped againſt the temple of Delphi.-And
the paffage here cited from Diodorus, to prove
the Lufitanians a branch of the Cimbri, is
equally cited by Mr. Macpherſon only four
pages before, to prove them a branch of the
Galli, and has actually no reference to either.
This is as aſtoniſhing, as it is evident. Speaking
of the migrations of the Galli, or Proper Celtæ,
in p. 6-10, and of the much later migrations
of the Cimbri, or German Celtæ, in p. 10—12,
Mr. Macpherſon in p. 8 afferts Spain to have
been filled with a colony from Gaul, as he here
afferts it to have received another from Germany,
and actually brings the fame paffage of hiſtory
as a proof of both. When he is to evince the
Cimbric or Celto-Germanic fettlement from it,
as here and in p. 30, he quotes it thus, aλxplo
μεν εισι οι καλεμενοι Λυσίανοι, and, omnium Cimbro-
rum fortiffimi funt Lufitani. But when he is to
prove the Gallic, he cites it thus, aλx
αλκιμωτάτοι
μεν ΤΩΝ ΓΑΛΑΤΩΝ οι καλεμενοι Λυσίανοι. Mr.
Macpherſon's prejudices and inadvertency throw
any colour over the paffage, which the nature.
P. 1106. Amftel. 1670.
of
44
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1
of the prefent argument calls for. The fame
portion of hiſtory is adduced by him, and once
only within four pages, to prove two abſolutely
oppofite points. It is cited three times; and
the principal word in the original, which would
have vindicated the paffage from the mifapplica-
tion, is ftulioufly omitted every time. And the
main effential words are twice interpolated, and
are both times different. The paffage, in fhort,
that has been thus applied to the Galli and
Cimbri, has not the leaft connexion with either.
It refers only to the Iberes: ΤΩΝ ΔΕ ΙΒΗΡΩΝ
αλκιμώζατοι μεν εισιν οι καλεμενοι Λυσίανοι, fays
Diodorus, all along diftinguishing the Iberes
from the Celta. And, to compleat this group
of inaccuracies and contradictions, this very part
of Diodorus's hiſtory is referred to by Mr. Mac-
pherſon in p. 85 and 86, as containing an ex
prefs teftimony" that the Iberians were a "dif-
ferent people" from the Celta.
86
cr
(-Ιππευς δε
P. 10-12. "The German Celtæ (-Iπaus de
σε Γαλάτης το γενο, η Κιμβρω». Plutarch in Mar
rio.) repaffed the Rhine, committed terrible
"devaſtations, and acquired a juft title to the
"name of Cimbri, which fignifies a band of
σε robbers (Κίμβρος επονομαζεσι Γερμανοι τις ληςας.
“Plutarch in Mario.) “.
¹ P. 357. V. I.
2 So Dr. Macpherſon interprets Cimbri, Robbers, and from
the fame incompetent authority, p. 112.
This
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
45
I
This irruption of the German Celta is fixed,
as I have noted before, more than three centu-
ries prior to the Chriftian era in p. 11; and in
p. 28, about half a century after the death of
Alexander, or about the year 273 before Chriſt.
But, as a proof of the fact, Mr. Macpher-
fon quotes the well-known paffage of Plutarch,
that relates the ftory of a Gallic or Cimbric
horfeman being fent to murder Marius in the
priſon of Minturnæ, and dropping his fword
with terror at the appearance, addrefs, and name
of a man, that had made himfelf fo formidable
to his countrymen. Ιππευς-Γαλαξης το γενο, η
Κιμβρο, αμφοτέρως γαρ ισορείται ". And Valerius
Maximus in his account of this incident fays thus:
Miffus ad Marium occidendum in privatâ domo
Minturnis claufum, fervus publicus, natione Cim-
ber, et fenem et inermem et fqualore obfitum,
ftrictum gladium tenens, aggredi non fuftinuit,
fed claritate viri obcæcatus, abjecto ferro, attoni-
tus inde ac tremens fugit. Cimbrica nimirum
calamitas oculos hominis perftrinxit, devictæque
fuæ gentis interitus animum comminuit: etiam
Diis immortalibus indignum ratis, ab uno ejus
Nationis interfici Marium, quam totam deleverat *.
This paffage, therefore, evidently relates to that
incurfion of the Cimbri, which happened near
two centuries after either period, which was
* V. II. p. 532. Bryan.
2 L. ii. c. 10. § 6. Delphin.
made
46 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
made acroſs the Rhine about 112, and was ter
minated by Marius about 101, before the Chrif
tian æra.
And the intimation here given, that the Ger-
man Celtæ acquired the name of Cimbri after
they had paffed the Rhine, and after they had
committed terrible devaſtations in Gaul, appeals
for its authority to another paffage of Plutarch,
which fays not, that the name was given on the
Gallic fide of the Rhine, but on the German,
which fays not, that the Gauls conferred the
appellation upon them, but that the Germans
ufually called a robber a Cimber. So much is
the proof in oppofition to the point!
P. 28-29." The German pofterity of the
"Gauls, under the name of Cimbri,-cut to
66 pieces all the intermediate nations between
"their original feats and the Hellefpont (Ex-
"torres inopiâ agrorum, profecti domo, per af-
"6
perrimam Illyrici oram, Pæoniam inde et
"Thraciam, pugnando cum ferociffimis genti-
"bus, menfi has terras ceperunt. Livius, lib.
"xxxviii.)."
I have produced this paffage again with the
new quotation annexed to it, to point out an-
other inftance of the inaccuracy which runs
through the prefent work.-In p. 24 we are
told,
}
}
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
47
!
told, that "the Gael of the continent extended
"their name with their arms into all the regions
"of Europe;" and we have this quotation to
confirm it, "Ferox natio Gallorum pervagata
"bello prope orbem terrarum. Livius, lib.
"xxxviii." The former citation is brought to
prove the irruptions of the Cimbri or German
Celta, in oppofition to the Gael or Native Celta.
The latter is produced to prove the irruptions
of the Gael or Native Celtæ, in contradiſtinction
to the Cimbri or German Celtæ. And yet the
two paffages, that are thus applied to two dif-
ferent nations, are actually parts of one and the
fame account, and are directly fpoken of one
and the fame people. The whole paffage runs
thus. Manlius in Gallo-Graciá bellum geffit-.
Hi Galli,-feu inopiâ agri feu prædæ fpe, nul-
lam gentium, per quas ituri effent, parem rati,
Brenno duce in Dardanos pervenerunt-.Non
me præterit, Milites, fays Manlius to his fol-
diery, omnium quæ Afiam colunt gentium Gallos
famâ belli præftare. Inter mitiffimum genus ho-
minum ferox natio, pervagata bello propè orbem
terrarum, fedem cepit.-Semel primo congreffu
ad Alliam olim fuderunt majores noftros: ex eo
tempore per ducentos jam annos, pecorum in
modum, confternatos cædunt fugantque-. Et
illis majoribus noftris cum haud dubiis Gallis in
terrâ fuâ genitis res erat. Hi jam degeneres funt,
mixti, et Gallo-Græci verè, quod appellantur.-
Extorres
$
48 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I
Extorres inopiâ agrorum, profecti domo, per
afperrimam Illyrici oram, Pæoniam inde et Thra-
ciam, pugnando cum ferociffimis gentibus, emenfi,
has terras ceperunt. But now manfuefacta eſt
feritas. What Mr. Macpherſon has given in
one place to the Native Gauls, and in another
to the German Celtæ, relates only to the former,
we fee. And the inconfiftency in the applica-
tion is a remarkable inftance of inattention in
the author.
66
P. 10-12. "The German Celtæ (Celtæ five
"Galli quos Cimbros vocant. Appian. in Illyr.
“ 1ππευς δε Γαλάζης το γενο, η Κιμβρο. Plutarch
"in Mario.) repaffed the Rhine,-acquired a
juſt title to the name of Cimbri, which fignifies
• a band of robbers (Κιμβρες επονομαζεσι Γερμανοι
της ληςας. Plutarch in Mario. ληςρικοι οίες
και πλανήτες οι Κιμβροι.. Strabo, lib. vii.),
"and, more than three centuries prior to the
"Chriſtian æra,-extended their conquefts to-
"Great Britain. And the Welsh retain, in
"their name, an undoubted mark of their Cim-
"bric extraction."
66
<6
-
And in p. 30 thus-" When fome of the
"Cimbri appeared on the frontiers of Greece,
"others drove the ancient Gael from the Belgic
■ C. 12. 16, and 17.
"divifion
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 49
&
"divifion of Gaul-(reperiebat Cæfar Belgas
effe ortos ab Germanis Rhenum antiquitus
σε tranſductos, propter loci fertilitatem ibi con-
"fediffe; Gallofque qui ea loca incolerent, ex-
puliffe. Cefar, lib. ii.)."
I have brought thefe two paffages together,
in order to exhibit by both the whole of Mr.
Macpherſon's affertions and authorities upon
this fubject. He frequently goes over the fame
points again in the progrefs of his difquifition,
and very ſtrangely neglects to give authorities.
for his affertions in the firft inftance, but pro-
duces them in the fecond. And the three great
particulars contained in the extracts are thefe;
That the German Celtæ repaffed the Rhine
more than 300 or (p. 28) about 270 years be-
fore Chrift; That the name of Cimbri was pe-
culiarly given on occafion of this expedition
into Gaul; and, That Cymri, the indigenous
appellation of the Welsh at prefent, is a full
proof of the German Celte having paffed over
in a large colony into Britain. Each fhall be
the ſubject of a diftin& paragraph.
That the German Celtæ repaffed the Rhine
into Gaul at the one or the other of the periods
mentioned above, is the firft point in Mr. Mac-
pherfon's deduction of his fecond colony into
Britain. It was this which gave the firft motion
to the great mafs of matter on the continent,
and occafioned thofe vibrations that were fo fen-
E
fibly
50
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1/
fibly felt into the iſland. And yet, by a ſtrange
unhappineſs, the alledged fact does not carry the
ſmalleſt appearance of a proof where it is firft
mentioned, and carries only the appearance of
one where it is mentioned again. The four firſt
quotations are not intended to authenticate the
fact at all. Two of them only affert the Gauls
to have been denominated Cimbri, and the
others only intimate the Cimbri of Germany to
have been actually robbers. But none of the
four, in the leaft, afferts the remigration of the
German Celtæ into Gaul at this period. And in
p. 30 the only authority for the fact is the
paffage from Cæfar, which runs thus in the ori-
ginal: Reperiebat plerofque Belgas effe ortos a
Germanis; Rhenumque antiquitus tranfductos,
propter loci fertilitatem ibi confediffe; Gallofque
qui ea loca incolerent expuliffe. But this is
no proof, any more than the quotations before,
that the German Celtæ repaffed the Rhine at this
period under the name of Cimbri. It fhews not
the Belge to have been German Celtæ at all.
It fhews not the Belge to have been ever deno-
minated Cimbri. And it fhews them not to have.
repaſſed the Rhine either 300 or 270 years be-
fore Chrift. The Belge indeed croffed the Rhine
into Gaul many years before either of theſe pe-
riods, fince they penetrated into Britain, as I
fhall prove hereafter, no lefs than 350 years
before Chriſt. And they certainly were not
the
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
51
+
1
the people, that Mr. Macpherſon here intimates
them to have been, and that they muſt have
been if they were the fame with his Cimbri.
The Belge never" ravaged all the regions
(6
lying between the Rhine and the Ionian fea,"
never" poured irreſiſtible armies into Greece,
"Thrace, and Macedonia," never cut to pieces
"all the intermediate nations between their
original feats and the Hellefpont," never
"filled the leffer Afia with their colonies," and
never" extended their conquefts into Spain."
Theſe magnificent actions are attributed before
to the German Celtæ in general, under the
name of Cimbri. They are now attributed to
that body of the Germans which was particularly
denominated Belgæ. And I have previouſly de-
monſtrated that they belonged to neither, but
were wholly the exploits of the Native Gauls or
Proper Celtæ.
Nor was the name of Cimbri given to the
Belgæ, on occafion of their expedition back
into Gaul. That they ever bore the appel-
lation, has not yet been proved by Mr. Mac-
pherſon. And it was never the mere, ap-
propriated, title of the German Celtæ, or of
any divifion of them. It was the general and
common denomination of the whole collective
body of the Celta. And fuch it appears very
early on the continent. The natives and refi-
dents of Gaul, that I have previouſly fhewn to
E 2
have
52
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
have broke into Greece, to have attacked Del-
phi, and to have ravaged Afia, theſe appear to
have been denominated equally Galli, Celtæ,
Cimmerii, or Cimbri. The Celta, who are
called Cimbri, fays Appian, encamped againſt
Delphi : Κελλοις, τοις λεγομένοις Κιμβροις, επι
Δελφοίς συςράζευσαι '. Speaking of the Teutones
and Cimbri, Plutarch fays that the Cimmerii
were first known to the Greeks in former ages,
Κιμμερίων το μεν πρώτον υφ' Ελληνων των παλαι
yvwσbly. The Gauls, fays Diodorus, who in
antient times overran all Afia, were denomi-
nated Cimmerii: εν τοις παλαιοις χρόνοις της Ασιαν
απασαν καταδραμόντας, ονομαζόμενες δε Κιμμεριες 3.
And the Galatæ of the Greeks, fays Jofephus,
were formerly called Gomarians; The per vo up
Ελληνων Γαλαζας καλεμένες, Γομαρεις λεγομενες 4.
The Celta of Germany therefore muft, equally
with the Celtæ of Greece and Afia, have carried
the name into all the countries that they con-
quered. And it was not any appropriated
diftinction of the Celtæ in Germany or Greece.
I
¹ P. 1196, Amftel.
3 P. 355.
2 Vol. ii. p- 495. Bryan.
4 Ant. lib. i. c. 7. And, in confirmation of this paffage
of Jofephus, Mr. Pezron has very justly remarked, that ſeve-
ral others of the antients have afferted the fame, Euftathius of
Antioch in his, Γαμες στις Γαμαρείς, τας νυν Γαλαίας, συνέςησεν
Jerom in his, Sunt autem Gomer, Galate-and Ifidore in his
Gomer. ex quo Galatæ, id eft, Galli.
from
!
די
*
2
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
53
from the Celta in Gaul. It was the ſtanding
fignature of the original derivation of both from
the ſtock of the Cimmerii in Gaul. And it was
obviouſly the firſt and original characteristic of
that great national family, which was afterwards
denominated Galli and Celta. Diſtinguiſhed by
the epithets of Galli and Celta from their mode
and manner of living, as I fhall fhew hereafter;
they muſt naturally have been diſtinguiſhed be-
fore by fome primeval and family appellation,
by fomething that carried the note of their de-
ſcent from the great patriarch of their line.
And fuch appears to be the name of Cimmerii.
Variouſly written Cimbri, Cimmerii, Cumri,
Gumri, and Gomerite, it bears all the marks of
an original and hereditary fignature, and points
fully, as it is expreſsly referred by hiſtory, to
the patriarch Gomer.-The name therefore did
not commence about three centuries before
Chriſt. It had been a name for ages before that
period. The denomination was not given to the
German Celtæ by the Gauls, for their re-en-
trance into Gaul at that period, and as a mark of
ignominy for their devaftations in it. It was at
that time the hereditary denomination of the
Gauls themfelves. And the appellation was not
borne by the Belgæ, or any or all of the German
I
Jofephus Ant. lib. i. c. 7. And the name is frequently
written Gumri by the Welsh at present, as the Sicambri of
Germany are called Sigambri by Cæfar.
:
E 3
Celtæ,
+
54
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Celta, as the appropriated name of the Ger-
mans; becauſe it was borne equally by the
Gauls of Greece, the Gauls of Macedonia, and
the Gauls of Afia, and was the one comprehen-
five title of all.
This directly accounts for the diſcovery of the
fame name in Britain, without calling in the
extravagant and unwarranted fuppofition, that
the Celta of North-Germany fettled in the iſland.
That this fuppofition is void of any fupport in
hiſtory, is obvious from the management of Mr.
Macpherſon himſelf, who grounds it only on
the name.
"The Welsh," he fays p. 12,
66 ree
The
tain in their name an undoubted mark of their
Cimbric extraction." "In Britain," he fays
P. 3°, "their very name remains, with their
"blood, in the Cimbri of Wales." But I have
already fhewn the name to have not been the
appropriated appellation of the German Celtæ,
but the one univerfal title of the Gallic, the Ger-
man, the Græcian, and the Afiatic Gauls.
fixed indigenous denomination of the Gauls at
home, it was carried with their colonies into the
Eaft, into Germany, and into Britain. And
the fixed indigenous appellation of the Gauls
abroad, it was retained by them, equally as the
general title of all and the particular defignation of
fome. Thus one third of the Gael on the con-
tinent was particularly denominated Galli, and one
third of the Celta in Gaul was diftinctively de-
nominated
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
55
nominated Celtæ, in the days of Cæfar. And
the Gauls of Afia Minor were called Cimme-
rians, or Gomerites, in the days of Jofephus 2.
Thus, when all the German Celta were denomi-
nated Cimbri or Cambri, there was a nation of
Si-Cambri upon the banks of the Rhine, and a
tribe of Cimbri within the peninſula of Jut-
land 3. And the common appellation of all the
tribes of Britain, is ftill retained by the defcen-
dants of three of them in Wales. The Welfh
therefore preſerve no mark of their extraction
from the German Celtæ, in their preſent deno-
mination of Cymri. It is the fign only of their
original derivation from the Cimmerii of Gaul.
And Mr. Macpherſon's whole ſcheme, of a Cim-
bric or Celto-Germanic eftabliſhment in the
iſland, appears to be entirely hypothetical and
groundleſs.
P. 12-13. "The firft irruption of the nations.
"of the Northern Germany happened, as we
"have already obferved, more than three cen-
"turies before the commencement of our prefent
❝æra.
About two ages after, the Celtæ beyond
"the Rhine threw another fleece of adventurers,
P. 1. Clarke, Glafgow.
3 Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 427.
2 Ant. lib. i. c. 7.
" under
E 4
56
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
A
under the name of Cimbri, into the regions of
"the South (Sexcentefimum & quadragefimum
"annum urbs noftra agebat cùm Cimbrorum
"audita funt arma. Tacit. Germ. 37.).”
I have produced this extract, merely to point
out how unfriendly and hoftile Mr. Macpherſon's
own quotations would be to his fyftem, if they
were not a little garbled by him. Of the two
irruptions here afferted, the authority adduced
for the latter entirely precludes the former. The
paffage is crippled in the extract. In the origi-
nal it runs thus, Proximi Oceano Cimbri, par-
va nunc civitas, fed gloria ingens. Sexcentefi-
mum & quadragefimum annum urbs noftra age-
bat, cùm primùm Cimbrorum audita funt arma.
This therefore was the firft irruption of the
Cimbri into the South of Europe. And Mr.
Macpherſon's own quotation, when it is restored
to its original perfection, exprefsly declares it to
have been the firſt.
THESE are all the parts of our author's
great argument, in favour of a German-Celtic
colony fettling in the iſland. And every part,
we fee, afferts fome fact that is not true, or de-
duces
=
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
57
duces fome reaſoning that is not juft. The
whole therefore is one fyftem of Error. And the
exiſtence of a ſecond colony in Britain, as diftinct
from the Gael of the firft and the Belge of the
third, appears to be totally ungrounded. In all
the arguments but one, Mr. Macpherſon has
confounded the German with the Proper Celtæ,
though the very ſcope and purpoſe of his
arguments neceffarily led him to diſtinguiſh
accurately between them. And in that he
has confounded the Cimbri with the Belgæ.
Having accompanied the German Celtæ, or the
Cimbri, in all their imaginary expeditions a-
crofs the continent of Europe, we find them
at laſt dwindled down into the Belge, who had
never been mentioned before, and to whom
the preceding quotations, even as interpolated
and garbled by Mr. Macpherfon's own inadver-
tency and prejudice, have not the ſmalleſt refe-
rence. Having through various pages engaged
the Germans in incurfions which they never
made, and in ravages which they never com-
mitted, Mr. Macpherſon at laft attributes them
to a ſmall body of the Germans, the Belgæ,
whofe only incurfion was from the German to
the Gallic fide of the Rhine, and whofe only ra-
vages were confined to a corner of Gaul. And
the whole account, as the reader must already
have obferved, is fupported by a train of the
moft
58 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
moſt extraordinary inaccuracies, involuntary
mifquotations, unintended perverfions, and mif-
taken reaſonings, that perhaps ever occurred
within fo fhort a compafs, in the writings
of a man of learning, tafte, and difcern-
ment.
III.
CONCERNING THE THIRD COLONY THAT
MR. MACPHERSON BRINGS INTO BRI-
TAIN.
P
AG. 31.
"The Cimbri who remained in
"Gaul became [came] afterwards [after
"the paffage of others into Britain] to be diftin-
"guiſhed by the name of Belgæ. As that ap-
"pellation carries reproach in its meaning, it is
"likely that it was impofed on that warlike
"nation by the Gael whom they had expelled
❝ from
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
59
we the
"from their territories. Balge or Balgen, in
"the ancient Celtic fignifies a fpotted or party-
"coloured herd, and, in a metaphorical fenfe,
"a mixed people, or an aggregate of many
"tribes. The name alludes either to Belgium's
"being peopled promifcuoufly by the German
"tribes, or to the unavoidable mixture of the
"Celtic colonies beyond the Rhine with the
"Sarmatæ of the Eaſt and 'North."
We are told before, in p. 10, " that the German.
Celtæ re-paffed the Rhine, committed terrible
“devaſtations, and acquired a juſt title to the
"name of Cimbri, which fignifies a band of
"robbers." And we are here told, that the
Cimbri were diſtinguiſhed in Gaul by the name
of Belgæ. The Gael, that had been expelled
from their own territories, muſt have been the
perfons that gave them the appellation of Cimbri
or Robbers. And yet they are here reprefented
as giving them the name of Belgæ. The former
was a ſtrong brand upon their national character,
and a lively mark of the refentment of the in-
jured Gael. And yet it is here fuppoſed to have
been ſuperſeded, foon afterwards, by a title from
the fame injured people, that carries little or no
reproach with it. But this derivation of the
names of Cimbri and Belgæ is all as imaginary,
as the refting a momentous point of hiſtory
upon ſuch precarious deductions is weak and
trifling. The German Celta, as I have fhewed
7
before,
60 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
before, muft neceffarily have carried the name
of Cimbri with them acroſs the Rhine into Ger-
many, and have brought it with them into Gaul
again. And the name of Belgæ appears not to
have been given in Gaul, and feems to have
been borne in Germany. Cæfar fays, plerofque
Belgas effe ortos a Germanis, Rhenumque anti-
quitus tranſducos-ibi confediffe, Gallofque -
expuliffe: where we have not the leaft intima-
tion of any change in the name upon their
paffing into Gaul, and where they ſeem to have
borne the fame appellation on the German as on
the Gallic fide of the Rhine. And, wherever it
was given or affumed, it was certainly no title of
reproach, becauſe the Belgæ appear univerſally
acknowledging it for their own on the continent,
in Britain, and in Ireland. This therefore en-
tirely fets afide the indiſtinct and forced etymo-
logy of Mr. Macpherfon, becauſe it carries a
reproach in its meaning. And the name muft
be derived from fome principle of diſtinction,
that was admitted by the Belge as well as their
neighbours, and will adapt itfelf to their con-
dition either in Germany or Gaul. The Bel-
gæ pretty certainly lived, before their mi-
gration into Gaul, immediately on the Ger-
man fide of the Rhine. And as they and their
neighbours were all equally Celtic', the name
1 See hereafter for the Belge.
Was
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
61
was derived from the Celtic language. They
were a large affociation of tribes in Gaul, and
must therefore have been the fame in Ger-
I
many ¹. They had ſeized no leſs than one third
of all Gaul: And they must therefore have
been very confiderable for their power in Ger-
many. And the name of Belg feems to have
been highly characteristic of their greatnefs,
as Balc in Iriſh fignifies Strong or Mighty. This
Etymon at leaſt does not, like Mr. Macpherſon's,
violate any proprieties of criticiſm. It confronts
no evidence of records. And it is not made
either the buttrefs or bafis of any vifionary
fyftem in hiftory.
1
P. 32-33. "The Celto-Germanic tribes, who
"had driven the old Gael from Belgium, fettling
"in that divifion of Gaul, rofe, in procefs of
“time, into a variety of petty ſtates. Each of
thefe, fome time before the arrival of Cæfar,
"fent colonies into Britain. It is difficult to
"afcertain the æra of this third migration from
"the continent."
The Belge are afferted by Mr. Macpherſon
to have made two migrations into Britain, and
to have fettled two colonies in the iſland, one
1 Cæfar, p. 34•
2 Cæfar, p. 1.
under
62 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
under the name of Cimbri, and the other under
the appellation of Belge. The exiſtence of the
former incident I have already demonftrated to
be merely vifionary. But the latter is real.
Mr. Macpherſon however, in dividing one mi-
gration and one colony into two, has even thrown.
an air of fiction and falfity over the truth.
As the Belge were broken into various tribes
when they croſſed the Rhine, they muſt already
have formed a variety of petty ftates. And
this is confirmed by Cæfar's account of them.
When he enquired of the Rhemi concerning
their neighbours the Belgæ, quæ civitates, quan-
tæque in armis effent, et quid in bello poffent,
fic reperiebat, plerofque Belgas effe ortos a Ger-
manis, that moſt of their civitates or tribes were
derived from Germany, the Bellovaci, the
Sueffiones, the Nervii, and the Attrebates, the
Ambiani, the Morini, the Menapii, and the Ca-
letes, the Velocaffes, the Veromandui, and the
Atuatici; and that the other ftates were native
Germans, Condrufos, Eburones, Cæraefos, Pæ-
manos, qui uno nomine Germani appellantur ',
There was no need therefore of any interval of
time after the invaſion of Gaul by the Belgæ,
to reduce them into various ftates. Already re-
duced, they therefore ranged as diftinct tribes
in Germany, and therefore fettled as diftinct
I P.
P. 33
and 34.
communities
*
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
6.3
communities in Gaul. Nor did each of theſe
fend colonies into Britain. The number of
Belgic communities in Gaul was 12. And
the number of Belgic colonies in Britain was
only 5. Theſe were the Cantii of Kent, the
Regni of Suffex, the Proper Belgæ of Hamp-
fhire and Wiltſhire, the Durotriges of Dorfet-
fhire, and the Damnonii of Devonshire. And
theſe afterwards planted a new colony, under
the name of Trinovantes, in the counties of
Middleſex and Effex.
P. 33. "It is difficult to afcertain the æra of
"this third migration from the continent. We
"ought to place it perhaps half a century prior
"to the arrival of Cæfar. Divitiacus, King of
"the Sueffiones, who flouriſhed before that
66
sc
great commander, may probably have tranf-
planted from Gaul thoſe tribes in Britain over
"whom he reigned.
"
When the Belgæ made their imaginary mi-
gration into Britain under the name of Cimbri,
about three centuries before Chrift, they are
ſuppoſed to have paffed over into the island im-
mediately after their arrival in Gaul.
"Def
"crying, from their new fettlements, the iſland
"of Britain, they paffed the narrow channel
"which divides it from the continent." Their
• P. 30.
fecond
64
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
་
I
ſecond migration into Britain, under the name
of Belgæ, is pushed two centuries lower, in
order to make it diftinct and feparate from the
other. But, as they only made one of theſe ex-
peditions into the iſland, fo this was begun as
early as 3 centuries before Chrift. That in-
valuable collector of antient notices, Richard of
Cirenceſter, here throws a remarkable light upon
the dark period of the Britiſh hiſtory. A. M.
3650. Has terras intrârunt Belgæ, and, Ejecti a
Belgis Britones ¹. And the Belga were cer-
tainly not tranfplanted by Divitiacus into
Britain. They had been fettled about 250
years in the iſland, when Divitiacus came over
into it. Apud Sueffiones, fays Cæfar, fuiffe regem
noftrâ etiam memoriâ Divitiacum, totius Galliæ
potentiffimum, qui, quum magnæ partis harum
regionum, tum etiam Britanniæ, imperium ob-
tinuerit 2. He acquired the fovereignty of the
continental and ifland Belgæ. And, bringing
over a large reinforcement of the former, he
enabled the latter to extend their poffeffions
into the interior regions of the country. Cum
exercitu in hoc regnum tranfiit Rex Æduorum
[Sueffionum] Divitiacus, magnamque ejus partem
fubegit 3. The poffeffions of the Belgæ, before
the coming of Divitiacus, in all probability ex-
2
I
• P. 50.
* P. 34.
3 P. 50.
tended,
:
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
65
tended, as I have fhewn already in the Hiſtory
of Mancheſter, over Kent and a fmall part of
Middlefex, over Suffex and the greateſt part of
Hampſhire and Wiltſhire, over Dorfetſhire, De-
vonſhire, and a part of Cornwall. And he fub-
dued the rest of Middleſex and all Effex, all
Surrey, the reft of Hampſhire, and the adjoin-
ing parts of Berkſhire, the reſt of Wiltſhire, the
remainder of Cornwall, all Somerfetfhire, and the
South-Weft of Gloucefterfhire '.-The æra of
the Belgic migration into Britain then is here aſ-
certained, and fhewn to have been, not "half a
"century," but three centuries, "prior to the
"arrival of Cæfar." And Divitiacus is fhewn not
to "have tranfplanted from Gaul thofe tribes in
"Britain over whom he reigned,” but only to
have brought over an army, and to have only
made fome additions to the previous poffeffions
of the Belga.
THIS is the fhort fum of Mr. Macpherfon's ar-
gument for a third colony in Britain. As the proof
of a Belgic eſtabliſhment in the iſland, the ar-
3
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 60—61, and 412—413.
F
gument
66 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
gument carries every conviction with it. But as
the proof of a third colony, as an evidence that
the Belge firſt ſettled in Britain under their own
name about a century only before Chriſt, it is
equally erroneous and trifling.
!
}
CHAP.
J
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
67
THUS
CHA P. II.
HUS far I have attended minutely to the
motions of Mr. Macpherſon's Celta on the
continent. I have demonftrated his account of
them, I think, to be one grofs perverſion of the
real hiſtory. And I fall now follow him int5
the iſland. By difproving the incidents and rea-
fonings, from which he deduces the origin of
three colonies in Britain, I have difproved the
exiſtence of them already. But I fhall ſtill purſue
him through all his reafonings and facts in the
ifland, and endeavour to unravel the one and
overthrow the other, with the fame refpect to
Mr. Macpherſon, and with the fame fidelity to
truth.
<
Ì. CON-
F2
68 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I.
CONCERNING THE POSITION, MANNERS,
AND TRANSACTIONS OF MR. MAC-
PHERSON'S THREE COLONIES IN BRI-
TAIN.
PAG. 32
was
AG. 32. "When the Romans carried their
arms into Britain, the whole ifland
"poffeffed by three nations fprung originally,
"though at very different periods, from the Gaeh
"of the continent."
Let us examine this pofition by the account of
him, who was the firft Roman that carried his
arms into Britain, and is the most accurate dif-
tinguiſher of the general divifions of the Britons.
Britanniæ pars interior, he fays, ab iis incolitur,
quos natos in infulâ ipsâ memoriâ proditum
dicunt: maritima pars ab iis qui -ex Belgis
tranfierant'. And here we fee the iſland, not
partitioned, like Gaul, into three divifions, but
• Cæfar, p. 88.
broken
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
69
broken only into two. We ſee the iſlanders,
not divided, as Mr. Macpherſon has divided
them, into Gael, Cimbri, and Belgæ; but dif-
tinguiſhed merely into Belge and Aborigines.
The former were known to have paffed lately
and recently from the continent, in compariſon
with the latter, though they came 300 years be-
fore Cæfar. And the latter had been all of them
many ages before, all of them immemorially, fet-
tled in the island. The affertion of Mr. Mac-
pherſon, therefore, is directly in the face of hif-
tory. And, when the Romans carried their arms
into Britain, the whole country was poffeffed
only by two great divifions of people.
-"The Cimbri,-retiring from the preffure
"of theſe new invaders [the Belgæ], poffeffed
"the country to the Weft of the Severne,
"and that which extended from the Humber to
"the Tweed. The Gael, under the general
66 name of Caledonians, inhabited the reſt of the
"iſland to the extremity of the North.'
""
The whole fouthern region of the iſland, from
the Britiſh Channel to the Humber and from the
Severne to the German ocean, is here configned
over to the Belgæ. And this is done, equally with-
out any pretence of authority, and in direct op-
pofition to proof. Any perfon, that has the
leaſt acquaintance with the interior difpofition of
the iſland in the time of the Britons, muſt know
this
F 3
7 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
this to be utterly falfe. Cæfar, as I have quoted
him immediately above, exprefsly afferts the
Belge to have been confined to the fouthern
coaft. Britanniæ pars interior ab iis quos natos
in infulâ ipså memoriâ proditum dicunt: Maritima
pars ab iis qui—ex Belgis tranfierant. And ſo far
were the Belge from advancing their poffeffions
up to the Humber, that they actually carried them
very little beyond the Thames'. Thus unhappy
is Mr. Macpherfon in every step that he takes,
on his entrance upon the Interior Hiftory of
Britain.
61
P. 33-34. "This fuperior civilization [of the
Belgæ] rendered them objects of depredation
"to the Cimbri-. They made frequent incur-
fions into the Belgic dominions; and it was
"from that circumftance that the Cimbri beyond
"the Humber derived their name of Brigantes,
"which fignifies a race of freebooters and plun-
"derers (On lui donna ce nom à caufe des pil-
lages qu'il faifoit fur les terres de fes voifins.
“BRIGAND ou BRIGANT, Brigand, Pillard,
"Voleur de Grand-Chemin. Bullet Memoires
"fur la lang. Celt. tom. i.).
86
192
1 See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 412-413.
So in Dr. Macpherſon the Brigantes are interpreted Rob-
bers, p. 112.
*
The
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
71
The only reafon, for Mr. Macpherſon's fixing
the Cimbri between the Humber and Tweed, as
well as in Wales, was obviously the antient and
preſent appellation of Cumberland in one part of
it. And the only ground for his afferting the in-
curfions of the Cimbri into the dominions of the
Belge, was the appellation of Brigantes in ano-
ther. Upon fuch flight ſprings does the vaſt
machine of this hiftory move. But, as the Bel-
gæ never extended their poffeffions to the Hum-
ber, the Cimbri beyond it could not poffibly
make incurfions into them. And, even if they
could, fince thoſe invaſions were made equally by
their brethren of Wales as by them, their breth-
ren muſt equally with them have obtained the
opprobrious appellation of Brigantes.
But the Brigantes were not denominated at all
from any incurfions to the South of the Humber. :
They made none that appear in hiſtory. Able as
we are to diſcover their expeditions into Lan-
caſhire, Weſtmoreland, Cumberland, Anandale,
and Cheſhire, we have not one trace of any
the counties of Lincoln and Nottingham. And
the name was not peculiar to the Britons of
Yorkſhire and Durham. It was equally the name
of fome of the Celtic fettlers on the Alps, of
• Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 8. and 104-105.
2 Strabo, p. 316. Amftel. And fee
P. 190 alſo.
into
F 4
fome
1
72 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
...
fome of Mr. Macpherfon's Belge to the South of
the Humber, and of all Mr. Macpherfon's Gael
to the North of the Tweed. Galgacus, a native
Briton, calls the Iceni, the Trinovantes, and the
Caffii, all that united in the great revolt undér
Boadicea, by the general name of Brigantes:
Brigantes, feminâ duce, exurere coloniam, ex-
pugnare caftra, &c. . And Paufanias, fpeaking
of the whole body of the Caledonians, equally
calls them all Brigantes 2.
I
This name then could not be given to the Bri-
tons of Yorkſhire, becauſe of their frequent in-
curfions to the South of the Humber. They
made none. And the name was given equally to
others, and even to Mr. Macpherſon's own plun-
dered Belgæ. It was, in truth, the general ap-
pellation of the tribes of Britain. The name
of Cymri was brought with the firſt colonists into
the iſland, the hereditary appellation of their
ancestors on the continent. But the name of
Brigantes was conferred upon them in confe-
quence of their paffage into it, and was the na-
tural fignature of their feparation from their
brethren in Gaul³. And it was therefore the
equal appellation of thofe Celta, who had mi-
grated from the reft by croffing the channel
Agric. Vit. c. 31.
2 Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 9-10. and 454.
Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 9-10.
into
THE BRITONS ASSERTE D.
73
!
!
into Britain, and of thofe who had fequeftered
themſelves from the reft among the mountains.
and vallies of the Alps. Nor was it confined to
the Aborigines of the island. It was extended
equally to the communities of the Belge within
it. The Belgic Trinovantes are included by Gal-
gacus, together with the Iceni and Caffii, under
the general defignation of Brigantes. And all
the tribes of the Belge in Britain were therefore
expreſsly denominated, as a nation on the conti-
nent, that was inclofed on three fides from the
reft of the Gauls by the Soane and the Rhone,
equally was, the Allo-Brog-es, or the fequeftered
and ſeparated Gauls ¹.
I
It is an obvious truth, but it has been little
attended to by the tribe of etymologiſts from
Bochart to Mr. Macpherfon, that names defcrip-
tive of national manners cannot be the original
appellations of any people. They refult from
the intercourſe and experience of the ſtates
around them, and are the natural expreffions of
their paffions and feelings. And they must there-
fore in their own nature, not be primary, but
pofterior, denominations; not the names under
which the nations originally ſettled in their own
poffeffions, but thoſe which were impofed upon
them afterwards, when they encroached on the
See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 9, and Cæfar, p. 4 and 6.
poffeffions
74 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
poffeffions of others. Hence the appellation of
Brigantes came to fignify, on the continent and
in the iſland, a turbulent and plundering race
of men'. Thus the title of Cimbri acquired the
fame fignification in Germany 2. And the de-
nominations of the Celtic Ambrones and Gael
finally funk into mere words of reproach, and
came to import, even among the Celtæ and Gael
of this iſland, the Ferocious and the Stran-
ger³.
3
P. 32.
"The Cimbri-poffeffed the country
to the Weft of the Severne, and that which
"extended from the Humber to the Tweed. The
"Gael, under the general name of Caledonians,
"inhabited the reft of the island to the extremity
"of the North."
I have already demonftrated this divifion of the
iſland to be directly contrary to hiſtory, as it re-
fpects the Belgæ. And I fhall now endeavour to
prove it equally wrong, as it refpects the Cimbri
and Gael.
2
See Strabo, p. 316; and Camden. p. 556. Edit. 1607.
Plutarch, p. 495. vol. ii.
3 See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 429, for Ambrones; and
the Irish call a ftranger and an enemy Gael at prefent.
The
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 75
唁
​The names of Gael and Cimbri were not ap-
propriated, as our author has appropriated them
from the beginning. The former was not the dif
tinguiſhing appellation of the Caledonians from
the Cimbri and Belgæ. And the latter was not
the diſtinguiſhing appellation of the Welsh and
Brigantes from the Belgae and Gael. Mr. Mac-
pherfon's Belge were denominated Cimbri, and
Mr. Macpherſon's Belgae and Cimbri were deno-
minated Gael.
I have previouſly fhewn the name of Cymri to
have been the great hereditary diftinction of the
Gauls upon the continent, and to have been car-
ried with them into all their conquefts. There
I have fhewn it to have been retained, equally
as the general title of all their tribes, and the
particular defignation of fome. And it was not
retained in our own ifland, as Mr. Macpherfon
fuppofes, merely by the natives of Wales and
the Britons of Brigantia. It was equally the
name of a nation in the South-Weft of Somerſet-
fhire and the North-Eaft of Cornwall. In hoc
brachio, quæ [quod] intermiffione Uxellæ amnis
Heduorum regioni protenditur, fita eft regio
Cimbrorum ¹. And it appears plainly, not to
have been continued as a particular appellation
from the beginning, but to have been taken up
at different periods by different tribes, even in
fuperfedence of their own previous appellations,
Richard, p. 20. and History of Mancheſter, p. 61.
when
;
76 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
when they wanted to diftinguiſh themſelves from
their enemies around them. Thus the Cimbri of
Somerſetſhire and Cornwall were poffeft of the
denomination before the Romans arrived in the
iſland, becauſe they were cloſely ſkirted by their
enemies, the Belge of Cornwall, Devonſhire,
Dorſetſhire, and Somerſetſhire'. The Voluntii
of Brigantia in the 6th century, when they were
preffed by the Saxons from the Eaſt, laid aſide
the denomination by which they had been diſ-
tinguiſhed for ages; and, as the Welsh Cymri is
colloquially pronounced Cumri, entitled them-
felves Cumbri²; and the principal part of their
country is called Cumberland at prefent. And
the Silures, the Dimetæ, and the Ordovices, of
Wales, in the later ages of their Empire, when
they were attacked by the Saxons on every ſide,
threw off their former appellations entirely, and
have ever fince diftinguiſhed themſelves by the
generical title of Cymri.
The names of Cymri and Gael are both equally
the general deſignations.of the Celta. The for-
mer related only to the patriarch of the line;
I
History of Manchefter, p. 61, and 413.
2 Hence Llowarch Hên, a nobleman of Voluntia, and a
writer of the 6th century, flying with many others from
the Saxons of the North into Shropshire, calls it the paradife
of the Cumbrians, Pouys Paraduys Gumri (Lhuyd's Arche-
ologia, under Llowarch).
but
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
but the latter, as I fhall fhew hereafter, to the
refidence of his pofterity among the wilds and
woodlands of Gaul. Denominated Gael upon
the continent, the coloniſts continued the appel-
lation in the iſland. And it furvives not, as Mr.
Macpherſon uniformly imagines, folely in that
name of Gael which the Iriſh and Highlanders
reciprocally give themfelves. It furvives, as I
have fhewed before, in the name of Gathel,
which is equally pronounced Gael, and was once
equally the appellation of the Irish, the High-
landers, and the Welfh. And it furvives alſo
in the appellation of Welſh, the whole body of
the Provincials being repeatedly denominated
Bryt-Walas, Wilfc, or Welfh, in the Saxon
Chronicle; the Britons of Kent, the Britons of
Suffex, and the Britons of Hampfhire, the Bri-
tons of Dorſetſhire, the Britons of Wiltſhire,
and the Britons of Bedfordſhire, the Britons of
Somerſetſhire, the Britons of Cheſhire, and the
Britons of Clydiſdale in Scotland, being all diſ-
tinctly particularized in the Chronicle as Wealas,
Walen, or Bryt-Wealas; and the Britons of Gal-
loway, Wales, and Cornwall retaining the ap-
pellation at prefent'. Theſe are fuch obvious
relicks
See History of Manchefter, p. 437.—In p. 1. of the
Sax. Chron. the Britons are called Britiſh or Wilſh, in p. 2.
the Britons that oppoſed Cæfar's paffage over the Thames are
called Brytwalas, in p. 7. all the Provincials to the South of
Severus's Wall are named Brytwalum, and in p. 11 and 12.
3
actually
2
78 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
i
relicks of the denomination of Gael, ſcattered
over the whole face of the iſland, that it is very
furprizing Mr. Macpherſon fhould ever havé
thought of appropriating it to the Iriſh and
Highlanders.
The Welsh then, who from their name of
Cymri are inferred by Mr. Macpherſon to be a
diſtinct colony from the Gael, may with greater
reafon be inferred from their names of Gathel
and Welſh, to be abfolutely the fame with them.
And the denomination of Wales, which has
been univerfally affirmed by the Engliſh criticks
to have been impofed upon the country by the
Saxons, and as univerfally agreed by the Welsh
to have never been acknowledged by their coun-
trymen, actually appears the acknowledged ap-
pellation of the region as early as the 6th cen
tury, and in the poems of a Welſh Bard:
Eu Ner a folant,
Eu hiaith a gadwant,
Eu tir a gollant,
Ond gwyllt Wallia ';
actually all the Provincials, all from the Friths to the British
Channel, are denominated Brytwalas and Brytwalana. The
Welſh of Kent are repeatedly mentioned in p. 14, of Suffex
twice in p. 14, of Hampſhire p. 15, of Dorſetſhire p. 25. (See
Carte, p. 226. V. I.), of Wiltſhire p. 20, of Bedfordſhire
p. 22, of Somerſetſhire p. 39, of Cheſhire p. 25, and of
Clydiſdale p. 83 and 110.
Talieffin, as cited by Dr. Davies in his Welsh Grammar.
They
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
#9
They ſhall ſtill praiſe their Maker,
They ſhall ſtill keep their language,
They ſhall ſtill be deprived of their lands,
Except uncultivated Wales.
The Belge, who are fuppofed to be ſtill more
diſtinct, and were actually very different from
the Gael, yet being equally derived with them
from Gaul, bear equally the appellation of Gael;
the Belgæ being all denominated in general, like
a tribe on the continent of Gaul, Allo-Broges,
or the Galli Brigantes, amongst the antients; and
the Belgae of Kent, Suffex, Hampſhire, Dorfet-
ſhire, Wiltſhire, and Somerfetfhire, being all
ſpecifically denominated Wealas in the Saxon
Chronicle. The Cymri and Belgæ are both en-
titled Gael, with the Irish and Highlanders.
And Mr. Macpherſon's Belgæ I have fhewn be-
fore to have been alfo entitled Cimbri with the
Welſh. The name therefore, which he felects
as the diſtinguiſhing mark of his fecond colony
from his firſt and third, appears to have been
common to his third and ſecond. And the name,
which he affigns as the fure fignature of his firſt,
appears to have been familiar to all the three.
P. 35,
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
P. 35-36.-"The three great Britiſh Nations,
"whofe origin we have endeavoured to in-
"veſtigate, muſt have differed confiderably from
"one another in language, manners, and cha-
Though defcended from the fame
"racter.
66
fource, their ſeparation into different channels
was very remote.
remote. The Gael-, having paffed
"from the continent before the arts of civil
❝ life had made any confiderable progreſs among
"them, retained the pure but unimproved lan-
"C
guage of their anceſtors together with their
"rude fimplicity of manners. The British
"Cimbri derived their origin from the Galic
"colonies who, in remote antiquity, had fettled
"beyond the Rhine. Thefe, with a ſmall mix-
"ture of the Sarmatæ, returned, in all their
66
original barbarifm, into the regions of the
"South. During their feparation from their
"mother nation, their language and manners
"muſt have ſuffered fuch a confiderable change,
"that it is extremely doubtful whether their
“ dialect of the Celtic and that of the old Britiſh
"Gael were, at the arrival of the former in
"this iſland, reciprocally underſtood by both
"nations. The third colony differed in every
thing from the Gael and Cimbri. Their
"manners were more humanized; and their
tongue, though perhaps corrupted, was more
copious. They had left the continent at a
"period of advanced civility.-But-the ra-
66
"dical
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
gr
ແ
દુઃ-
dical words ufed by all were certainly the
fame."
Are the feveral parts of this Extract com-
pleatly at unity with themfelves? They ſeem
to be a little heterogeneous. We are firft told,
that the three nations must have differed con-
fiderably in their language, and that it is ex-
tremely doubtful, whether the Cimbric and
Gaelic were reciprocally understood at first and
yet we are afterwards told, that "the radical
"words ufed by all were certainly the fame."
The Gael and Cimbri are faid to have " differed
"confiderably in their manners," when they
both retained the rude fimplicity of their
"anceſtors," and "their original barbarifin of
"with a fall mixture of the Sar-
"mata" adhering to one of them. The Cimbri
are faid to have returned" in all their original
barbarifm" into Gaul; though, "during
"their feparation from it, their manners must
"manners,
22
have fuffered a confiderable change." They
returned only" with a ſmall mixture of the Sar-
"mata" in their manners; and yet the change was
"confiderable."-And are not the feveral parts
of this Extract in a ſtate of hoſtility with other
paffages in the work? The Gael are here re-
prefented, as coming over from Gaul" before
"the arts of civil life had made any confider-
"able progreſs," and as therefore retaining
"the rude fimplicity of their anceſtors:" and
G
yet
82 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1
yet the Cimbri, who came over from Gaul fome
ages afterward, are reprefented as arriving here
"in a rude barbarity," and "in all their ori-
"ginal barbarifm." The Gael are brought
into Britain, before the arts had made any confi
derable progrefs in Gaul, and confequently after
they had made fome; as alfo in p. 34 the Gauls
appear to have arrived at " fome degree of
"civilization," before the Gael left them: and
yet the Cimbri, who left the continent three
ages afterwards, when the arts of civil life muſt
have been confiderably advanced, bring with
them a rude barbarity of manners. The Cimbri
are here wafted into the island in all their ori-
ginal barbariſm and yet, before the Cimbri
came over, we find that " the domeftic improve-
"ments" in Gaul" had arrived at fome degree
"of maturity." In p. 24 the Gauls appear
to have arrived at "fome degree of civilization,
and in p. 8 agriculture in particular appears to
have been "profecuted with vigour and fuccefs,"
before the Gael left the country: and yet the
Gael are here faid to have retained the rude
fimplicity of their anceſtors; and in p. 47 the
Gael, and in p. 33 even the more foutherly
Cimbri, are both reprefented as totally ignorant of
agriculture. But let us not fcrutinize too nicely.
I have repeatedly fhewn the exiſtence of theſe
three colonies, in the iſland, to be all the creation of
· P. 33.
2 P. 10.
Mr.
1.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
83
L
Mr. Macpherſon's prejudices. And that his
Gael, Cimbri, and Belge differed very little
from each other in their language and manners,
is very evident. The language of all was ex-
actly the fame; as is plain to a demonſtration
from the appearance of the fame names of towns,
of rivers, and of tribes among all. We have
Camulodunum for the name of a fortrefs among
Mr. Macpherſon's Cimbri of Yorkshire, and
his Belgae of Effex; Lindum amongst his Belgæ
and his Gacl; and Venta for the Capital of
his Cimbri in Wales, and of his Belge in
Hampſhire and Norfolk; Urus or Ure, the
name of a river in Yorkshire and Suffolk, and
an appellative for a river in the Erfe at pre-
fent; and Alauna, Deva, and Devana, all
three, rivers in the country equally of his Gael,
his Belgæ, and his Cimbri; Novantes, a tribe
of his Belge and his Gael; the Damnonii
Cantæ among his Gael, and the Cantii and
Damnonii among his Belgæ; and one tribe of
his Gael, and two of his Belgæ, equally deno-
minated Carnabii. And the manners of the three
were but little different.
and
Mr. Macpherſon himſelf fhall convince us, that
there was no great difference. The moſt hu-
manized of any of the iſlanders, the Belgæ, are
1 See Mr. Macpherſon, p. 34. a note.
2 The Damnii of Valentia are called both Damnii and
Damnnonii by Ptolemy.
G 2
exprefsly
i
84 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
exprefsly mentioned by Mr. Macpherſon, in
p. 33, to have arrived to this " pitch of cultiva-
"tion," that" they fowed corn, they had fixed
"abodes, and fome degree of commerce was
“carried on in their ports." And, as ſome of
the other Britons equally fowed corn, fo all of
them had fixed abodes. Interiores plerique,
fays Cæfar, frumenta non ferunt: fome of them
therefore did. Cæfar alfo found towns, and
exactly the fame fort of towns, among the Ab-
original and Belgic Britons 1.
And the only
diſtinction between the Belge and all the other
inlanders was this, according to Mr. Macpherſon
himſelf, that the former carried on fome commerce
from their ports.
I
Nor was the difference great in itſelf betwixt
the real Britons and real Belge. They both
conftructed their edifices in the fame manner,
uſed the ſame ſtated pieces of brafs or iron
bullion for money, had the fame fondneſs for
keeping poultry and hares about their houſes,
and the fame averfion to feeing them upon their
tables. And they both painted their bodies, both
threw off their cloaths in the hour of battle,
both fuffered the hair of their head to grow to
a great length, both fhaved all but the upper
lip, both had wives in common, and both profe-
cuted their wars on the fame principles. In all
• See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 467.
theft
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
85
theſe particulars, the great and principal ſtrokes
of the national character, the Belgæ and Bri-
tons univerfally agreed. Several of the latter
likewife concurred with the former' in their at-
tention to agriculture, and in wearing garments
of woolen. And the only diftinction betwixt
them was one, which was no difference of man-
ners at all; that the Britons, being diflodged
from that fide of the island which was imme-
diately contiguous to Gaul and Spain, and the
only part of it which was vifited by the foreign
traders, were no longer able to purfue the com-
merce which they had previously carried on, and
were obliged to refign it up to the Belgæ¹.
P. 34-37.
"SILURES, Siol, a race of
"men, Urus, the river emphatically, in allufion
"to their fituation beyond the Severne.-
"CANTIUM, Kent, Canti, end of the Ifland.
“TRINOBANTES, Trion-oban, marſhy diſtrict ;
"the inhabitants of Middlefex and Effex.-
"DOBUNI, Dobh-buini, living on the bank of
"the river; they who of old poffeffed the coun-
"ty of Glouceſter, alluding to their fituation on
the banks of the Severne. ORDOVICES,
# See Cafar, p. 88-89, and Hift. of Manchefter, p. 385.
"Ord-
G 3
66 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"Ord-tuavich, northern mountaineers, the in-
"habitants of North-Wales."
Before I perufed Mr. Macpherfon's Differta-
tion, I was full of expectation to fee the task of
British etymology wrefted out of the clumfy
hands, in which a general ignorance of the Celtic
had hitherto placed it. But fanguine expectations
are feldom gratified. And perhaps I expected
more than knowledge could fupply. Mr. Mac-
pherſon however appears plainly, I think, to
have derived all his knowledge of the Celtic from
the view merely of one of its dialects. And he
is frequently unhappy, I apprehend, in his ap-
plication of that. This I have already fhewn in
the names of Celt, Cimbri, and Brigantes. And
I hope to fhew it again in the names before
Is.
Cantium, here refolved into Cant-i, the end
of the iſland, muſt be formed upon the fame
principle, as the appellation of the Cantæ in Cale-
donia, who refided not at the end of the iſland,
but lived along the eaſtern coaſt of it, and to
the South of the Frith of Dornoch ; and as the
prefent name of Cantire in Scotland, which is
ftill farther from the end of the iſland, and lies
along the weſtern coaft. And the word is clearly
Card or Cant, an Head or Prominence of land,
I
I
* See Hiſtory of Manchester, p. 4!!.
and
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
87
1
and actually appears in Ptolemy's names for the
South-Foreland, Cantion or A-Cantion, Promon-
tory or The Promontory. The Cantii and
Cantæ equally borrowed their appellation, from
their poſition upon the headlands of their coaft.
And Cantire literally fignifies an Headland.
The divifion of Trinobantes into Trion-oban
will appear very furprizing, when we conſider,
that the tribe is denominated Novanei or No-
vantes in the coins of Cunobeline. And the inter-
pretation of it into Marſhy Diſtrict will appear
equally wonderful, when we reflect, that it was
originally the name of the dry and gravelly fite
of London. The Belge of Kent puſhed acroſs
the Thames, and feized the South of Middle-
fex, under the title of Novantes or New-comers 2.
This happened a confiderable period before the
deſcent of Cæfar, as they then formed a power-
ful kingdom to the North of the Thames 3,
and must therefore have then held all the ter-
ritories that they afterwards poffeffed in Mid-
dleſex and Effex. Upon their irruption into
the South of Middlefex, they felected the fine
fite of the prefent London, the eminence be-
wixt the Thames and Fleetbrook, for the area of
¹ See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 467.
2 Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 60, 62, and 412.
3 Trinobantes, propè firmiffima earum regionum civitas, <
P. 92.
G 4
a fak
44
ዳ
88 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
a fortrefs; and the town, that was deftined
to be afterwards the imperial feat of Britain,
they called by the local title of Lon-din or the
Water-town, and by the national appellation of
Tre-Novantum or the fortrefs of the Novantes,
And, as they fpread afterwards from London
over all Middlefex and Effex, they carried the
name of their original city with them, and their
appellation of Novantes was lengthened into
Trinovantes.
Dobuni, formed of Dobh-buini, and inter-
preted the refidents on a river, means, I think,
as it has always been rendered, the men of the
valley. They are therefore called Dubni and
Duni in the varying denomination of Cogi-
Dubnus and Cogi-Dunus, Dumni in the ap-
pellation of Togi-Dumnus, and exprefsly Boduni
in Dio. All theſe terms equally fignify the
Lowlanders. And the concurrence of all in
one meaning decifively fixes it.-And Ordovi-
ces, here analyfed into Ord-tuavich, and tranf-
lated Northern Mountaineers, I have fhewn, I
think, to be Ordo-Uices or Ordo-Vices, the Ho-
nourable Vices or Great Huiccii 3; as in the fifth
century we have a Britiſh hero popularly d
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 412 and 413.
Chicheſter Infcription, and Tacitus.
? Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 148.
nominated
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
89
»
▾
nominated Eneon Urd, the fame word with Ard,
only varied by the pronunciation, and fignifying
Eneon the Honourable or Great ; and as we have
a promontory in Scotland, bearing the equal ap-
pellation of Urd and Ord Head at prefent.
The etymon of Silures is evidently deduced
from too trifling and remote a circumſtance, their
bordering upon the Severn in one part, or, as
Mr. Macpherſon expreffes himſelf, their refiding
beyond it. And the true etymon may perhaps
be, S, Il, or Ile, Ur, the Great Men. So we
have Elgovæ and Selgovæ in Ptolemy, as the
name of the fame people. And the Silures had
a juſt claim to this magnificent appellation, being
a very powerful tribe, and having fubdued the
Ordovices and Dimetæ of Wales. They appear
alfo pretty plainly, though they have never been
fufpected, to have once poffeffed the Caffiterides.
The principal of theſe iſlands is denominated Si-
lura infula by Solinus, as all of them are to this
day denominated the Silley Ifles. Richard has
applied to the Silures, what Solinus has ſpoken of
the inhabitants of Silura. And Tacitus evi-
dently carries the poffeffions of the Silures to the
Caffiterides, by placing them oppofite to Spain:
Silurum colorati vultus, & torti plerumque crines,
& pofitu contra Hifpaniam, &c. 3.
1 See Carte, vol. i. p. 179,
2 P. 21.
३
3 Agric, vit, c. II.
P, 38.
90
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
P. 38. "Alba or Albin, the name of [by]
"which the ancient Scots, in their native lan-
guage, have, from all antiquity, diftinguiſhed
"their own divifion of Britain, feems to be the
"fountain from which the Greeks deduced their
*Albion. It was natural for the Gael, who
tranfmigrated from the low plains of Belgium,
"to call the more elevated land of Britain by a
"name expreffive of the face of the country.
"Alb or Alp, in the Celtic, fignifies High, and
"In, invariably, a country."
That the Gael tranſmigrated from the low
plains of Belgium, is a mere affertion without
authority; as the ufe of the word Belgium here
is abfolutely equivocal. According to Mr. Mac-
pherſon himſelf, they came not from Belgium,
modernly fo called, or Holland, but from the
"Belgic divifion of Gaul," which reached from
the Seine and the Marne to the mouth of the
Rhine. And they came undoubtedly from that
part of the divifion, which is the neareſt to Bri-
tain, and from which they could defcry the iſland.
Mr. Macpherſon accordingly reprefents the mi-
gration of the Gael, to have been "in croffing a
very narrow channel into Britain 3." The fact
therefore, of the Gael paffing over into Britain
from the low plains of Belgium, being un-
$ P. 26.
2 Cæfar, p, 1,
3 P. 26,
grounded
*
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
91
grounded in hiſtory and contradictory to reaſon,
the etymology which is founded upon it muſt
neceffarily fall with it.-Nor is the etymology
juft in itſelf. Inis or In is fo far from fignifying
invariably a country in general, that, I believe,
it invariably fignifies an iſland only. In its gene
ral acceptation it certainly means only an iſland.
And the etymology of a popular name, which
ſtands in direct oppofition to the popular import
of the word, muft for that very reafon be
wrong ¹.
What then is the derivation of the name of
Albion? It is the fame, I think, that has been
already given in the Hiftory of Mancheſter -
Not impofed by the mere anceſtors of the Cale-
donians, as is here infinuated; it was never im-
pofed, affuredly, by any of the refidents in the
country. As the island regularly rofe every
morning to the eye of the Gauls that inhabited
along the coaft of Calais, and as its chalky cliffs
glittered continually in the fun, the Gauls muſt
certainly have beheld them, and could not but
have given them fome appropriate appellation.
This, it is obvious, muft neceffarily have been
So in Dr. Macpherſon, p. 116-117, we have the fame
interpretation of Albion, the fame fallacy concerning Belgium,
and the fame derivation of the firſt Britons from “the low
plains of Belgium."
? P, 9,
!
the
92
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
the cafe. This we muft fuppofe to have hap
pened, if no name had been tranfmitted to, us
that was characteriſtic of the circumftance. And
the coincidence of the reafon and name is a
ftrong evidence of the fact. As the Gauls be-
held the heights appearing on the other fide of
the water, they naturally diſtinguiſhed them by
a name, that was expreffive only of the fenfible
appearance which they formed to the eye, and
called them Alb-ion or Heights. Alb in the
fingular lengthens into Alb-an, Alb-on, Alb-ain,
or Alb-ion in the plural. And we have the fame
word in the Gallic appellation of the mountains
that divide Italy from Gaul. The Alps, fome
ages before the days of Strabo, were called
Albia; and a very high mountain, that
terminated the Alps upon one fide, was de-
nominated Albius in his time . And, equally
fome ages before, the Alps were denominated
Albia and Alpionia; and in his time there re-
mained two tribes on the mountains, that bore the
names of Albicci and Albienfes. The name,
therefore, was the natural Celtic term for heights
or eminences. As fuch, it was applied to the
P. 309 and 483, Strabo.
I
² Strabo, p. 309 and 311.-Theſe mountains were not
inhabited when Bellovefus croffed them into Italy (Livy, 1. v.
c. 34) and they were afterwards poffeffed by many bodies of
the Gauls (Strabo, p. 190.).
cliffs
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
93-
{
cliffs of Britain and the mountains of Gaul.
And, as fuch, it is retained by the preſent High-
landers for their own, very mountainous, divifion
of Britain. The first name of the island, then,
was given before the country was inhabited. Had
it been given after that period, and from a view
"of the face of the country:" derived as the
firſt inhabitants were, across the narrowest part
of the channel, from the bold fhore of Calais;
and ſo very level, in general, as all the fouthern
part of the iſland undoubtedly is; they could
never have diſtinguiſhed it by the name of
Albion. But accuſtomed to fee it daily from
their own ſhores, and to call it the Heights,
they foon paffed over in all probability from
mere motives of curiofity, they perhaps ftocked
fome of the nearer woods with wild beafts for
their hunting, and ages afterwards formed a re-
gular fettlement on the Albion, that they had fo
long feen, denominated, and vifited.
P. 39•
"The Cimbri arriving in Belgium,
"and defcrying Albion, gave it a new name ex-
"preffive of the fame idea which firſt ſuggeſted
A
¹ The Romans therefore frequently defcribe Albion as a
level country. Mela fays, Siciliæ maxime fimilis, Plana,
ingens, &c. (l, iii. c. 6.). And Strabo fays, es♪n wλsign TNÉ
φησε ΠΕΔΙΑΣ (p. 305.).
ļ
"the
94 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
65
"the appellation of Albion to the Gael. Com-
paring the elevated coaft of Britain to the fenny
"plains of the Lower Germany, they called it
“BRAIT-AN, a word compounded of Brait High
"and An or In a Country '.
The author has again impofed upon himſelf
by the uſe of the equivocal term Belgium. And
he has even applied it here in a double accep-
tation. As relating to "the fenny plains of the
"Lower Germany," it can mean only Holland.
But as the place from which the Cimbri could
"deſcry Albion," and mark "the elevated coaſt
"of Britain," it refers only to Belgic Gaul.
Britain may be feen from the cliffs of the latter,
but cannot be diſcerned from the low plains of
the former.-Nor is the author quite confiftent
with himſelf in this and the preceding account.
The name of Britain, we are told, was
"preffive of the fame idea which firft fuggeſted
"the appellation of Albion to the Gael." And
yet Albion is faid to be "a name expreffive of
"the face of the country," and Britain to be de-
rived from a view of its "elevated coaft.”—But,
even if theſe accounts were confiftent, it fhews
furely a great want of attention, to deduce the
name of Albion from the appearance of the coun-
try to thoſe who had migrated into it, and the
name of Britain from the afpect of the coaft to
(6
ex-
* So Dr. Macpherſon, p. 333, interprets Britain to fignify
Hills.
the
THE BRITONS ASSERTED
95
the diſtant inhabitants of Gaul. This refers the
fecond name to the view of the coaft, which
ſhould naturally have given birth to the firft;
and afcribes the first to the face of the country,
which ſhould as naturally have been the cauſe of
the ſecond. It lets the Gael, who must have
ſeen the cliffs of the iſland for ages, totally over-
look the denominating appearance of it to the
eye; and yet forces it afterwards upon the Cim-
bri. And it fixes not a name on the coun-
try before it was inhabited, though its appear-
ance muſt neceffarily have compelled one fome
ages before; and afterwards fetches a name
from its appearance, when it had now been in-
habited for ages, and had already acquired one
from its nature. But it feems to fhew fome-
thing worſe than inattention, to give neither the
Gael nor Cimbri any other ideas of a country
than merely the marshes of Holland, to attri-
bute the name of Albion to the Gael and of
Britain to the Cimbri, to have the former ap-
pellation impofed after their fettlement in the
country, and to have the latter affixed before
their migration into it; and to advance all this
without one fingle argument or authority, real
or pretended. — I proceed, however, to the ety-
mology itſelf.
In the Hiftory of Mancheſter I have fhewn
from Pliny, that Britain was not the peculiar
and
2
}
96 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
and appropriate name of Albion . It was com*
mon to all the iſlands about it. Albion ipfi nomen
fuit, cum Britanniæ vocarentur omnes 2. And
Mr. Macpherſon's etymology is overthrown at the
firſt onſet.
In the fame Hiſtory I have equally
fhewn from Richard, that Britain was not the
name of the iſland originally 3. It was the appel-
lation of the iſlanders. Vocabulo gentis fuæ
Britanniam cognominaverunt 4. And Mr. Mac-
pherſon's etymology is again overthrown.
The real eymon feems to be what is propofed
in the Hiſtory of Mancheſter 5. Perhaps I am
partial to it, as my own. And I will therefore
endeavour to open it more fully, and to examine,
it more attentively, than I did before.
Albion is obviouſly derived from the view of
the coaft, before it had been vifited from the
continent. Britain therefore, as the fecondary
name, was affixed to the country at or after the
firſt migration into it. While it was only feen
from the fhores of Gaul, the name of Albion
muft have continued, as the moſt natural deno-
mination of the country. And when it came
to be fettled, when a body, of Gauls had actually
migrated acroſs the fea with their wives and
children into it, they would ftill ufe the name
P. 9.
2 L.-iv. c. 16. And Ptolemy accordingly
3 P. 9.
calls Ireland and Albion equally a Britiſh iſland.
4 P. 1. And Ifidore fays the fame; Britannia a vocabulo fuæ
gentis cognominata, p. 123, Cologne, 1617.
5 P. 8-10.
for
2
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
97
for the country which they had uſed for ages
before in Gaul; and Albion accordingly remained
the regular appellation of the island. But the
new coloniſts would naturally be diftinguished,
among their brethren and themfelves, by fome
denomination expreffive of their remove acroſs
the Channel, and of their feparation from the
great body of their countrymen in Gaul. The
idea, of their disjunction from Gaul, would
be the first that prefented itſelf to the mind.
And the idea, of our feparation from the con-
tinent of Europe, always appears a leading one
in the language of the antients concerning us.
This then muſt naturally have vented itſelf in
fome appellation of disjunction, for the coloniſts
that croffed the Channel into Britain. And
they could fcarcely avoid calling themfelves,
and being called by their brethren, the Sepa-
rated or Divided Perfons. An etymon there-
fore, expreffive of this idea, fhould be the firit
that is fought for by a judicious enquirer into the
meaning of Britain. And any eafy etymology,
which is expreffive of this idea, will for that
reafon be fuperior to every other. Such is
the etymology, which is offered in the History
of Mancheſter.
The primitive and radical word in the name
of Britain, is obviouſly Brit. One of our iſlanders
is repeatedly denominated Brit-o and Britt-us
H
by
98
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
#
by the Romans, and Bryt by the Saxons,
This then is the original word. And this is the
very word which Mr. Camden has equally fe-
lected, but interpreted to fignify Painted, and to
allude to the well-known cuſtom of the Bri-
tons.-Appellations defcriptive of manners, as
I have previouſly obferved, are never the firſt
and primary defignations of any people. They
are the refult of attention to them, and the
confequence of obſervations upon them. And,
long before the unreflecting mind could catch
the characteriſtic quality of a people, it muſt
of courſe have taken up with fome fenfible
and exterior difcrimination of them. And where
one nation migrated immediately from another,
as the Britons from the Gauls, and where
the new colonists could have no communi-
cation for ages with any but their brethren
in Gaul, there no names characteristic of man-
ners could arife. Having no diffimilarity of
manners, they could not diftinguiſh each other
by it.
And the Britons must have brought
the cuſtom of painting, as well as all their
other cuftoms, originally with them from Gaul.
-Nor does Brith properly fignify Painted.
That is merely the pofterior and derivative
Σ
In Cannigeter de Brittenburgo, Hage-Comitum, 1734,
p. 21, we have two Roman Infcriptions, found on the banks
of the Rhine, and addreſſed Matribus Brittis. And fee Saxon
Chronicle, p. 15, &c.
figni-
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
99
fignification of the word. It is Brith in Welſh,
Brit in Irish, and Breact, Breac, and Bryk,
in Erfe, Iriſh, and Welfh; and primarily meant
any thing Divided. This is evident from the
prefent meaning of the word in many of its
derivatives, in the Irish Brioth a Fraction,
Brath a Fragment, and Bracaim to break afun-
der, and in the Welsh Breg a Breach, Bradwy
a Fracture, Briw a Fragment, Briwo to break
into fragments, and Bradwyog and Brwyd
Broken. And, carrying with it originally the
fingle idea of divifion, it was afterwards, by
the natural affimilation of ideas in the hu-
man mind, applied to every thing that pre-
fented the idea of a divifion. It was firft applied
probably, as in the Irish and Highland Breacan,
to the ftriped mantles of plaid. And, from
the colours in regular divifions on the plaids,
it would be transferred to objects that were but
difperfedly marked with colours; and Brith, Brit,
Breact, Break, and Bryk came to fignify Partico-
loured, Speckled, and Spotted. Thus Breac
ftands for any thing fpeckled or a Trout, Breicin
for a fmall Trout, Britineach or Brittinios for
the Meazles, in the Irish at prefent; Brech is ap-
Offian, V. I. p. 210. a note.
* So alfo in the Welſh, Breichio, to take part with any one,
Brau and Breuol, Frangible, and Breuolaeth and Breuawd,
Frangibility, and in our Anglo-British word Brittle or Fran-
gible.
H 2
plied
100
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
plied to the Small Pox in Armoric; and Breok,
Brethal, Brethil, or Brethel, are uſed for a
Mackerel, Brethyl for a Trout, and Brag-ado
for a pied ox, in the Manks, the Cornish, the
Armoric, the Welsh, and the Mountain Spanish.
And hence it came to fignify a Painted object,
but fuch an one only as was coloured merely
by parts. This deduction plainly evinces the
original and primary idea of the word, and
fhows from the current meaning of it in all
its derivatives, and from the regular analogy of
all languages, that it could never have fignified.
Painting, if it had not first imported a Divifion.
This then is the true meaning of the word Brit.
And it leads us directly to the natural appella-
tion of a people, that had migrated from their
brethren, and were divided from them by the
fea.
The original word appears above to have been
equally pronounced Brict, Brit, and Brioth,
Breact, Breac, and Brig; and from the Gallic
Brefche and the Scotch Bris a Rupture, the Irish
Bris to Break and Brifead a Breach, the Welſh
Briwlion Fragments, and the Armorican Breizell,
as well as Brethel, a Mackerel, appears to have
been fometimes foftened into Bris or Breis.
And it occurs with all this variety of termina-
tions in the Irish Breattain or Breatin, Britain,
and in Breathnach, Briotnach, and Breagnach,
a Briton; in the Armorican names of Breton,
Breiz,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
101
Breiz, and Brezonnec, for an individual, the
country, and the language, of Armorica; in the
Welsh Brython and Brythoneg, the Britons
and their language; and in the antient fyno-
nimous appellations of Brigantes and Britanni.
Theſe I have previously fhewn to be fynoni-
mous, by demonftrating the Britons all over the
iſland to have been, equally with thofe of York-
fhire and Durham, denominated Brigantes as
well as Britanni. And in the Hiftory of Man-
cheſter I have ſhewn the Brigantes of thoſe two
counties, to have been peculiarly denominated
Britanni alfo .
The national appellation of Brit therefore
imports, not the infular nature of Albion, by
which it was feparated from all the world, but
merely its disjunction from Gaul. The former
could not be known for ages after the name
muſt have been impofed. And the latter was
an obvious and ftriking particularity.
The
Gael or Wealas of the continent paffing over
into Albion, they would naturally be denomi-
nated, as they are actually and repeatedly denomi-
nated in the Saxon Chronicle, the Bryt-Wealas
or Bryttas ". But how fhall we lengthen Brit
into Britanni and Britones? We cannot with
See p. 2. and 18, &c.
And the fea, which
! P. 10.
they paffed over into this ifland, appears upon the fame
principle to have been called by the Britons, for ages after-
ward, Muir Ict, or the Great Separation. See Usher, p. 429.
Edit. 1687.
H 3
Camden
102 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
*
1
Camden call in the Greek Tava, for a country, to
our aid. And we must not with Pezron and
Carte adopt the equivalent Tain of the Celtic.
The name of Britain, as I have fhewn above,
was the appellation of the iſlanders, before it
was the denomination of the iſland. And the
want of attention to the Genius of the Britiſh
language has created all the difficulty. It inſtantly
vaniſhes, the moment we remark the manner in
which the British words fhoot out in the Plural.
Brict or Brit is enlarged into Brit-on or Brit-an,
and therefore, in the antient and modern ufe
of the word, is fometimes Brits, Bracht,
Brecht, and Britt-i, in the Plural, but more
commonly Bryth-on, Brit-on-es, and Brit-ann-i,
and, in the relative adjectives, Brit-iſh, Breathn-
ach, Briotn-ach, Brython-eg, and Brit-an-ic-i.
And the equivalent Brag or Brig is formed, on
the fame principles, into Brig-an or Brig-ant in
the plural, and therefore appears fometimes as
Brig-as and Brog-es 3, fometimes as Breag-n
and Brig-ian-i 4, but generally Brig-ant-es, and,
in the relative adjectives, Breagn-ach and Brig-
ant-ic 3.
This is a plain and obvious derivation of the
name of Britain. It refults from that ſtriking
* Camden, p. 20.
3 Stephanus Byzantinus,
Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 9.
Carte, V. I. p. 25. a note.
Lugd. Bat. 1694, p. 245, and
Pliny, lib. iii. c. 20.
A
peculiarity
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
103
peculiarity in the poſition of the natives, which
muft neceffarily have denominated the new colo-
nifts of Albion. And it is deduced from no fo-
reign language, which could not have any rela-
tion to the name, but flows natural and eafy
from the Celtic.
P. 39. This new name [Britain] never ex-
"tended itſelf to the Gael of North Britain;
"and the poſterity of the Cimbri have loſt it in
"the progrefs of time. The Scottish and Iriſh
"Gael have brought down the name of Alba or
"Albin to the prefent age: the Welſh uſe no
"general appellation. The era of its impofition
"ought to be fixed as far back as the arrival of
"the Cimbri in the iſland."
In the paragraph immediately preceding this,
the name of Britain was impofed upon the iſland
when the Cimbri were yet in Gaul, and before
they migrated into Britain. "The Cimbri—,
66
6.6
arriving in Belgium, and defcrying Albion,
gave it a new name-, comparing the elevated
"coaſt of Britain to the fenny plains of the Lower
"Germany." But it is here fixed after the
Cimbri had for fome time beheld the high lands
of Albion, after they had left Gaul, and even
after they had arrived in the island.
æra of its impofition ought to be fixed as far
H
14
"The
* back
104
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"back as the arrival of the Cimbri in the iſland."
How contradictory is this!
And that the name of Britain never extended
itſelf to the Gael of North Britain, and is loft
among the Cimbri; and that the name of Albion
is the only one, which has been brought down to
the preſent age by the Scottish and Iriſh Gael;
are all grofs miſtakes, miſtakes too in facts where
one would leaft expect them, from a gentleman fo
converfant in the Celtic language, who ſpeaks
the Erfe as a native, and has ftudied it as a
critick. With regard to the Iriſh and Scottiſh
Gael, the reverfe of Mr. Macpherfon's affertion
is the real truth. They have brought down the
name of Britain to the prefent age. And they
have not brought down the name of Albion.
They retain indeed Alban or Albain for the ap-
pellation of their own country: but they are
totally ignorant of it as the name of the whole
ifland. And I have fhewn before, that the ap-
pellatives Britain and Britannic ftill continue in
the Erfe, the common language of the Scotch
and Irish, and in the words Breattain, Breatin,
Breatnach, and Briotnach. Nor is the name loft
among the Welsh, the only part of Mr. Mac-
pherfon's Cimbri that ſpeak the Britiſh language
at prefent. It was uſed in the name of Prydæn
among his Cimbri of Brigantia, in the days of
Llowarch Hên; and in the name of Prudain
Ꮏ
I
* Lhuyd, p. 219.
among
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
105
among his Cimbri of Wales, in the earlier days of
Pabo '. And it exiſts in the Welſh Prydhain
and the Corniſh Prydein, the Welsh Brython and
Brythoneg, and the Armorican Brezon and Bre-
zonnec, to the prefent period. The new name
of Britain, therefore, extended itſelf to Mr. Mac-
pherfon's Gael, both in Caledonia and Ireland,
as it remains in the common language of both
to the preſent day. And the name of Britain
muft, for that reafon, not have been impofed
upon the iſland, by any body of colonifts that
were diſtinct from, and even in hoftility with,
the Gael. It was affixed from fome principle of
difcrimination that equally affected all, and was
adopted by all as the one national note of dif
tinction. And it accordingly appears to have
been common to every divifion of the iſlanders.
Given and affumed at the firft migration of co-
lonifts into Albion, as the natural fignature of
their fequeftration from their brethren in Gaul;
it was never the denomination either impofed or
retained exclufively by a part, but was at once
coæval with the plantation of the iſland, and
commenfurate with the colonies of the iſlanders.
►
* Mona, p. 158, fecond Edit.
II. CON
106 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
*
IL
CONCERNING MR. MACPHERSON'S
FIRST POPULATION OF IRELAND
BY THE CALEDONIANS.
AG. 41.
PA
"The Cimbri and Belge, after
they were comprehended within the pale
"of the Roman dominions, were feen diftinctly;
"but the more ancient inhabitants of the iſland,
"the Gael, appeared only tranfiently, when, in
"an hoſtile manner, they advanced to the fron-
"tiers of the province. The arms of the empire
"penetrated, at different periods, into the heart
"of the country beyond the Scottiſh Friths;
"but as thefe expeditions were not attended
"with abfolute conqueft, and a confequent fet-
"tlement of colonies, the Romans made little
CC
inquiry concerning the origin and hiſtory of
"the natives of the northern divifion of Bri-
"tain."
I do not love to fuppofe contradictions in an
author of Mr. Macpherſon's merit, and eſpecially
within
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
107
within the compafs only of a few lines. It feems
fo unlikely, that I am rather inclined to diſbe-
lieve the fuggeftions of my own judgment.
And yet I have already obſerved ſuch an haſti-
nefs in the compofition of the prefent work,
and fome contradictions which, feemingly at
leaft, are fo grofs, that I cannot give up my
feelings to an affectation of fairneſs, and facri-
fice precifion to politeness. We are here first
C
told, that the Gael appeared only tranfiently to
the Romans, when in an hoftile manner they
advanced to the frontiers of the Roman province.
And yet we are told immediately afterwards,
that the Romans penetrated at different periods
into the heart of their country. Is not this con-
tradictory? And is not the whole paffage in di-
rect oppofition to another in p. 22-23? Here we
are affured, that the Cimbri and Belge were,
and that the Gael were not, feen diftinctly by
the Romans. But there we find, that "the in-
"formation of the Romans accompanied the
1
progrefs of their arms; new communities roſe
"gradually before them as they advanced into
"the heart of the iſland; till the whole body
"of its inhabitants came forward diftinctly to
"view, when Agricola carried the Roman eagles
"to the mountains of Caledonia."
The great pofition in this extract is, that the
Caledonians were but little known to the Ro-
mans, becauſe they were never comprehended
within
108 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
within the Roman empire. The fact is not true.
And the reaſoning is not juft.
Many nations were well-known to the Romans,
that were never comprehended within the pale of
their empire. Ireland is a remarkable inftance
of this, where we have all the tribes recited, all
the towns enumerated, and all the headlands and
rivers fpecified, equally as in the provinces of
Britain. As the Roman empire extended itſelf
upon every fide, the Roman geographers and
hiftorians enlarged the circle of their obferva-
tions, gained an acquaintance with all the na-
tions that bordered upon their frontiers, and
carried their refearches where the arms of their
countrymen never penetrated. And Mr. Mac-
pherſon in another place, and to ferve another
purpoſe, not only allows but contends for it.
"It is morally impoffible," fays he in p. 190,
"that a migration fufficient to people Caledonia
"and Ireland, could have happened, without
falling within the knowledge of the writers of
"Rome, who certainly extended their enquiries to
"the tranfactions of the wild nations on the fron-
"tiers of the empire."
66
But the fact is not true, that the Caledonians
were unknown to the Romans, becauſe they were
never comprehended within the empire. Since
fome of them were comprehended, thofe muft
have been fully known, as fully as the Cimbri
and
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
109
and Belgæ. Since feveral of them were, feve-
ral muſt have been known as fully. As many
were reduced by the Romans, the Romans muſt
have been converfant, with a confiderable part of
Caledonia. And, as the greater part of the
tribes fubmitted to their power, the greater part
of the country muft have been open to their
obfervations. That this was the cafe, may be
eafily fhewn. The Gael or Caledonians are
placed by Mr. Macpherfon, before, in the large
divifion of the ifland which runs from the Tweed
to the Orkneys. "The Cimbri," he fays in
p. 32, "poffeffed-
poffeffed — the country - from the
"Humber to the Tweed. The Gael, under the
"general name of Caledonians, inhabited the
"reſt of the iſland to the extremity of the North."
Now this region comprehended no lefs than
twenty-one tribes'. And no fewer than eleven
of theſe had been actually ſubdued by the Ro-
mans, and brought within the pale of their em-
pire, being formed into the province of Valentia
to the South of the Friths, and of Vefpafiana to
the North of them. Vefpafiana continued a
province from the year 140 to 170 3. And Va-
lentia remained one, from the days of Agricola to
the late period of the Roman departure 4. The
I
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 63, and 409–411.
2 Ibid.
3 Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 419.
4 Hiſtory of Manchefter, p. 453-458.
I
Gael
110
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Gael therefore, that refided to the South of the
Friths, not only appeared to the Romans by ad-
vancing frequently to the frontiers of the pro-
vinces, but were all engaged with the Romans,
were all fubdued by them, and were all reduced
into a province. They did not merely appear
tranfiently and occafionally to them, but were
actually invaded, actually conquered, and actually
retained in fubjection for no lefs than three cen-
turies and a half. They were equally compre-
hended within the circle of the Roman empire
as the Cimbri and Belge, were equally com-
prehended with both in the first century, and
equally continued in it with both to the middle
of the fifth. And, as to the Gael that lay
North of the Friths, even many of theſe, no leſs
than fix whole tribes, were entirely fubdued by
the Romans; the Horeftii, the Vecturiones, the
Taixali, the Vacomagi, the Damnit Albani, and
the Attacotti: and the Romans profecuted their
conquefts, over the mountains of Athol and Ba-
denoch, as far as Invernefs. No colonies indeed
were fettled there, as none alfo were fettled in
Valentia. Colonies were not the neceffary con-
fequence of abfolute conqueft. Stations only
were.
And numerous ftations were planted to
the North of the Friths, as Alauna, Lindum, and
J
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 410.
Victoria,
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
III
Victoria, among the Horeftii; Orrea, Ad Hier-
nam, Ad Tavum, Ad Eficam, and Ad Tinam,
among the Vecturiones; and others in Strathern,
Menteith, Badenoch, Braidalbin, Athol, and
Inverness ¹.
I The Romans therefore, who had
penetrated into the center of the Highlands, who
fettled in all the conquered regions from the
Friths to Inverneſs, and even made an aftro-
nomical obfervation, which is ftill preferved, at
the town of Inverneſs 2, could not be ignorant of
the countries in which they refided, could not be
uninformed concerning the region which imme-
diately bordered upon them, and muſt have been
fufficiently converfant with all Caledonia. Inti-
mately acquainted, as they were, with the inte-
riors of an iſland which they had never vifited at
all, Ireland; they must have been much better
acquainted with the interiors of Caledonia, im
the heart of which they were encamped for thirty
years together, and where their ſcholars appear
to have been particularly obfervant.
Mr. Macpherſon's remark therefore, that his
Caledonians were little known to the Romans,
becauſe they appeared only tranfiently upon the
frontiers of their empire, or becauſe they were
never abfolutely reduced by their armies, appears
to be equally unjuft in the reaſoning and falfe in
* Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 409-410.
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 56.
the
112
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
*
the fact. The Roman's were well acquainted
with Ireland, though they never vifited it. And
they actually reduced three fourths of Mr. Mac-
pherfon's Caledonians. The Romans must have"
been well acquainted with a people, with whom,
as friends or enemies, they had a continual and
uninterrupted intercourfe of nearly four centu-
ries. And they have actually left us a very par-
ticular account of all the tribes of Caledonia, in
Ptolemy and Richard.
i
P. 41-42. "Julius Agricola, who, for the
" firſt time, diſplayed the Roman eagles beyond
"the Friths, was not more füccefsful in the field
"than he was happy in an hiftorian to tranſmit
"his actions with luftre to pofterity. But even
"the diftinct and intelligent Tacitus gives but a
σε very imperfect idea of thoſe enemies, by the
"defeat of whom his father-in-law acquired fo
"much reputation. We learn from him indeed
"that the Caledonians were the moft antient in-
"habitants of Britain."
Here the author evidently fixes the Caledonians
beyond the Friths. And yet, as I have fhewed
in the laft article, he brings them in p. 32 down'
as low as the Tweed. How inaccurate And
here is alſo another great inaccuracy. From
Tacitus we learn, if we may aferibe the fpeech
of
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 113
of Galgacus to him, not that the Caledonians were
the moſt antient inhabitants of Britain, but that
they were the moſt honourable, nobiliffimi totius
Britanniæ. And flouriſhes like that, in fuch ad-
dreffes as Galgacus's, it is idle to adduce for an
hiſtorical authority.
P. 42-44.
"This is the fum of what the
"Romans have related concerning the Caledo-
"nians for near two centuries after they were
"first mentioned: to their origin and internal
66
hiſtory they were equally ftrangers.-Had the
"Romans eſtabliſhed themſelves in Caledonia,
"we might indeed have known more of the an-
"tient inhabitants of that country. The firſt
"domeftic writers of the hiſtory of North Bri-
"tain were too ignorant, as well as too modern,
"to form any probable fyftem concerning the
origin of their nation.”
66
I have already fhewn, that the Romans did
eſtabliſh themſelves in Caledonia, and that they
reduced one half even of the genuine Caledoni-
ans, the Britons to the North of the Friths.
And as to the ignorance of the Romans, con-
cerning the interior hiſtory and origin of the Ca-
ledonians before their invafion, they were equal-
ly ignorant concerning the Britons in general.
Whence
I
:
114
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Whence the Britons were derived, when they
came into the iſland, and how they gradually dif-
fuſed their ſpreading numbers to the fartheft pro-
montories of Caledonia, was all equally unknown
to them.
P. 47-48. "In proportion as the Cimbri ad-
"vanced towards the North, the Gael, being
❝ circumfcribed within narrower limits, were
"forced to tranfmigrate into the islands which
"crowd the Northern and Western coaſts of
"Scotland. It is in this period, perhaps, we
<<
This
ought to place the firft great migration of the
"Britiſh Gael into Ireland; that kingdom being
"much nearer to the promontory of Galloway
"and Cantyre, than many of the Scottish ifles
"are to the continent of North Britain.
"vicinity of Ireland had probably drawn partial
"emigrations from Caledonia before the arrival
"of the Cimbri in Britain; but when theſe in-
"terlopers preffed upon the Gael from the South,
"it is reaſonable to conclude that numerous co-
"lonies paffed over into an ifland fo near, and fo
"much fuperior to their original country in cli-
"mate and fertility."
I have already demonſtrated, that no colony of
the Cimbri, as diſtinct and different from the
Gael,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 115
Gael, ever landed in the island. And, confe-
quently, all the tranfactions attributed to them
muſt be abfolutely falfe. This feries of fuppo-
fitions, therefore, is a chain of errors. As the
Cimbri never advanced towards the North, the
Gael could not have been circumfcribed within
narrower limits, or forced to tranfmigrate into
the weſtern ifles of Scotland. As no fuch inter-
lopers ever preffed upon the Gael, no colonies of
them, either fmall or numerous, could have been
induced by it to pafs over into Ireland.
But I am obliged here to remark again the
author's apparent inconfiftency, with regard to the
pofition of his Gael. In p. 32 they are ranged
from the banks of the Tweed to the northern
extremity of the island. In p. 41-44 they are
placed only to the North of the Friths. Here,
in p. 47, they are brought down as low as Gallo-
way again. And in p. 48 they are once more.
carried back to the Friths. It is there faid, that
when the Belge "drove the Cimbri beyond
"the Severne and Humber, the Gael of the
"North, reduced within limits ftill more cir-
"cumfcribed by the preffure of the Cimbri, fent
"freſh colonies into Ireland, while the Scottiſh
"Friths became a natural and frong boundary to-
"wards the South to thofe Gael who remained in
"Britain." And yet at this very period, even
when the Cimbri inhabited betwixt the Humber
and Tweed, the Gael are faid before to have
reached
I 2
116 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"The
reached from the Tweed to the North.
"Cimbri,-retiring from the preffure of thefe
"new invaders [the Belgæ], poffeffed the coun-
<c try
from the Humber to the Tweed. The
"Gael, under the general name of Caledonians,
" inhabited the reft of the island to the extremity
"of the North ." So unfettled is the author in
"So
his notions concerning the Britiſh topography of
the iſland, and ſo varying and contradictory in his
repreſentations of it.
I
CC
P. 48. "The inhabitants of the maritime re-
gions of Gaul croffing, in an after age [after
"the Cimbri], the Britiſh channel (maritima pars
"Britanniæ ab iis, qui prædæ ac belli inferendi
"causâ, ex Belgis tranfierant: et bello il-
"lato ibi remanferunt, atque agros colere coepe-
"runt. Cæfar de Bell. Gall. lib. v.), eſtabliſhed
"themſelves on that part of our iſland which lies
"neareſt to the continent; and, moving gradu-
"ally towards the North, drove the Cimbri be-
"yond the Severn and Humber."
I have brought this paffage out to view, merely
to fhew one, among many inftances, of Mr. Mac-
pherfon's ftrange behaviour towards his quota-
tions. He afferts the Belge to have carried their
poffeffions up to the Humber. And he afferts
I P. 32.
it
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
117
it upon the ſtrength of a quotation, of which he
has italicifed the principal words; when that
very quotation, and thoſe very words, do in the
fulleſt manner confine the Belgae to the fouthern
fhore. This is furely a very extraordinary fpeci-
men of inattention and inaccuracy.
P. 48-49. "It was, perhaps, after the Bel-
gic invaſion of the Southern Britain, that the
"Gael of the Northern divifion formed them-
"felves into a regular community, to repel the
“incroachment of the Cimbri upon their terri-
"tories. To the country which they themſelves
poffeffed they gave the name of CAELDOCH,
"which is the only appellation the Scots, who
ſpeak the Galic language, know for their own
"divifion of Britain. CAELDOCH is a com-
"pound made up of Gael or Caël, the firſt colo-
"C
66
ny of the antient Gauls who tranfmigrated into
"Britain, and DOCH, a diſtrict or diviſion of a
country. The Romans, by tranfpofing the let-
"ter Lin Caël, and by foftening into a Latin ter-
"mination the ch of DOCH, formed the well-
"known name of Caledonia. Obvious as this
CC
Etymon of Caledonia appears, it was but very
"lately diſcovered. (This Etymon firſt occurred
"to the author of this Effay, and he communi-
cated it to Dr. Macpherfon, who adopted it
I 3
from
X
118 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
;
"from a conviction of its juftnefs). Thofe who
"treated of the antiquities of North Britain were
"utter ftrangers to that only name by which
"the Scots diftinguifhed the corner of Britain
"which their Ancestors poffeffed from the re-
"moteft antiquity. From an ignorance, fo un-
"pardonable in antiquaries, proceeded that er-
"roneous fyftem, &c. ."
I
I have made this large extract, to exhibit the
whole argument in all its force, and, I may add,
in all its oftentation too. And I fhall now en-
deavour to fhew the reafonings to be as feeble,
and the etymons as injudicious, even in this tri-
umphant paffage, as in any that I have diffected
before.
The affertions in this paragraph are theſe i
That the Caledonians perhaps firſt formed them-
felves into one community, to repel the incroach-
ments of the Cimbri; That a proof of this in-
corporation remains in the word Caeldoch, which
fignifies the District of the Gael; and, That this
word is the Latin Caledonia. Each fhall be con-
fidered diftinctly.
The incroachments of the Cimbri must be as
imaginary, as the reft of their hiftory. And
any affociation of the Caledonians to repel them,
I
This Etymon is in Dr. Macpherſon, p. 27. and 100.-
And he makes the fame ufe of the name of Gael in p. 97-98,
nd of Caeldoch in p. 100.
muft
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
119
muſt be equally vifionary with both. The firft
time that the Caledonians embodied into one em-
pire, was affuredly the period which is affigned
for it in the Hiftory of Manchefter. The Ro-
mans under Agricola were the first common ene-
my which had hitherto attacked them. Nothing
but fuch an attack could have induced them to
form themſelves into one monarchy. And
they first formed themfelves at that peri-
od. Eftate quâ fextum officii annum incho-
abat [Agricola], amplas civitates trans Bodo-
triam fitas, quia motus univerfarum ultra gentium,
et infeſta hoſtili exercitu itinera, timebantur, pri-
us claffe exploravit. In the commencement of the
6th
year of Agricola's Proconfulate therefore, or
in the fpring of the year 83, the Caledonians.
were not yet affociated together. Agricola only
apprehended that they would fpeedily unite,
as the danger became more imminent to all. And
in this and the year following they actually com-
bined. Ad manus et arma converfi Caledoniam
incolentes populi ;-nihil remittere, quo minus
juventutem armarent, conjuges ac liberos in loca
tuta transferrent, cœtibus ac facrificiis confpira-
tionem civitatum fancirent; tandem docti com-
mune periculum concordiâ propulfandum 3. The
Caledonians therefore did not model their tribes
• P. 414.
2
Agric. V. c. 25.
I 4
3 C. 25, 27, and 29.
into
120
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
into one community, in confequence of the Cim-
bric incroachments upon them. There were
none made. And there were no Cimbri, or
German Celta, to make them. The Caledonians
actually embodied together long after the
æra affigned for it by Mr. Macpherſon, when
Agricola threatened the reduction of all their
tribes.
Nor is the name of Caeldoch, now uſed by the
Highlanders to fignify their own country, any
proof of fuch an affociation. It is no proof of
any at all. And the etymon, which is here
diſplayed with fuch an air of confequence, and
with fuch a reflection upon the ignorance of
others, is obviouſly unjuft in itſelf. This will
eafily appear. I have previouſly fhewn Gathel
to be pronounced fimilarly to Gael by the Irish
and Highlanders. And Gathel is alſo changed,
as I have equally remarked, into Galath, Galat,
Galt, and Celt. It is alſo changed into Gaellt,
Gallt, Gaeld, and Gald. This we fee directly
exemplified, in the Gael of the continent and the
ifland being univerfally denominated Galatæ and
Celtæ by the Græcians, Gallt and and Gallta by
¹ See Buchanan, p. 34—35. and p. 61. V. I. Ruddiman,
who informs us, that the Scotch uſe the word Gald for a Gaul.
And fee alfo Gauld-i and Gaelti, and even Gaeltach, in Dr,
Macpherſon, p. 98, 99.-From the word Gald is derived the
name for Galgacus in the Scotch Romances, Galdus.-And
fee Irwin's Hift. Scot. Nomenclatura Latino-vernacula,
1682, p. 83.
the
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
121
the Iriſh, and Gaelt, Gallt, and Gald by the
Highlanders. And the relative adjective of this
word is the very name, which Mr. Macpherſon
has fo ingeniouſly diſtorted here. Gael and Cael
lengthening into Gal-ek and Cael-ich, Gallt muft
be formed into Gallt-ach, and Gaeld into Gaeld-
ach. And we have Gallt-ach in the Iriſh lan-
guage, the appellation for a Gaul at prefent.
Gaeld-och and Gallt-ach therefore are one and
the fame word, the relative adjectives of the
fame national appellation, Gaeld and Gallt;
and, in the ſpirit of all other relative adjectives,
refer equally to an individual, the language, or
the country, of France and Scotland. Thus eafily
is the fpell diffolved, which held both Dr. and
Mr. Macpherſon in abfolute bondage. And thus
readily is the fabrick deſtroyed, which was raiſed
by the magic hand of error, equally flight in its
ſtructure, and momentary in its continuance.
That Caeldoch is the very fame word with
Caledonia, is another of Mr. Macpherſon's pofi-
tions. But it is equally a miſtake. And I hope con-
vincingly to prove it. I fhall lay before the reader
what I have faid upon this fubject in the Hiſtory
of Mancheſter, and fhall make fome additions to
it. I have previouſly fhewn the words Gathel,
Gael, Galat, Galt, Gaeld, and Celt, to be all one
and the fame appellation. And, though Mr.
Macpherſon in p. 10 feems inclined to derive one
of
122 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
of them, Gaul, from the Celtic Geal, Fair, a
defignation evidently too effeminate for the bold.
and ferocious Celta; they all fignify a Wood-
lander. Geil-t, Guylh-t, and Guel-z, among the
Iriſh, the Welsh, and the Armoricans, import a
Man of the Kelli, Guylh, or Guel, a Wood; all of
them the evident remains of the antient and obfo-
lete Guidhil or Guethel a Wood. And feveral
woods in Wales are actually denominated Cottel
to this day. Coil, the fame with the Cottel,
the Guylh, and the Kelli, of the Welsh, and an-
fwering to Gathel, Gael, and Cael, is the cuf-
tomary term for a Wood among the Iriſh and
Highlanders at prefent. And Gulad occurs in Gul-
ad-ædh, the Welſh for a Woodlander; Kelyd
appears in Kelydhon, the Britiſh for Woods; and
Gelht remains undifguifed in the Welsh language
at prefent all correfponding to Galat, Galt,
Gaeld, and Celt, and all fignifying with them a
Wood. The celebrated appellations therefore of
Gathel-i, Galat-æ, Calet-es, An-Calit-es, and
Celtæ, all import a Wood only. And bearing
the Celtic prefix before them, which is ufed in
the antient Hiſtory of Ireland, as Fir-Bolg and
Fir-Damnon, and which is equally uſed in this
very appellation by the Iriſh of the preſent mo-
ment, as Gallta or Fear-Gallta; the denomina-
1 Mr. Lhuyd in N° 2. Appendix to Nicholfon's Scottiſh
Hift. Library
tions
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
123
tions of Fir-Galat, Fir-Galt, Fir-Gaeld, and Fir-
Celt muſt have fignified merely the Man of the
Wood. But, in two national denominations of
the very fame origin, the termination is a little
different, becauſe the words are in the plural
number, or ſtand as the relative adjective. Ke-
lyd or Caled lengthens into Kelyd-on or Caled-on,
Woods; and Gallt or Gaeld is formed into
Gallt-ach or Gaeld-och, Woodland-ifh. Thus
Caledon became the antient appellation for all
the extenfive Forests of the Gatheli and Galli in
the provinces of Britain; from the Foreft of An-
derida in Kent, Suffex, and feveral other coun-
ties, into which, under the name of the Caledo-
nian Woods, Florus fays that Cæfar purfued the
Britons; to the Foreft of the Coritani in Lincoln-
ſhire and fome adjoining provinces, to which,
under the fame denomination of the Caledonian
Wood, Pliny fays that the Roman arms had been
carried in his time; and to the well-known Cale-
donian Foreſt of Scotland. Thus Fir-Caledon,
or Caledones, and the equivalent Gaeld-och, be-
came equally the antient and prefent appellations.
for the Gathel and Gael of the Highlands. And
Caledonius became occafionally among the Ro-
mans a denomination equivalent to Britannicus,
and was applied equally with it to all the Gathel
Florus, L. iii. c. 10. Caledonias fecutus in filvas; Pliny,
L. iv. c. 16; and Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 415, and 337.
and
124 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I
and Gael in the ifland -The word Caeldoch,
therefore, is very different from the 'word Cale-
donia. Derived from the fame root, and carry-
ing the fame power, they are very diftinct
branches. The one is a relative adjective; the
other is a Noun Subſtantive. The one is derived
from Gaeld in the fingular; the other is deduced
from Caledon in the plural. And the one is the
fame word with Celticus, and the other with
Galatarum.
I have been thus particular upon the fubject,
becauſe it is of fome confequence in itſelf, and
Mr. Macpherſon introduces it with fuch a fond
regard. And I think that I have fully demon-
ſtrated his reaſonings and etymons to be advanc-
ed, equally in oppofition to the voice of hiftory,
and to the principles of the Celtic language.
P. 49-50.-" Concerning the internal ſtate
"of Caledonia, and the divifion of its inhabi-
"tants into various tribes in a very early period,
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 439-440.-And there is an
additional proof of it, that has never been noticed, in theſe
well-known lines of Lucan, in which the Caledonians are firſt
mentioned in hiftory, and the Britons about Richborough
called Caledonians :
Aut vaga cum Tethys Rutupinaque littora fervent,
Unda Caledonios fallit turbata Britannos.
"we
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
125
"we can find nothing certain. The account
given by Ptolemy of the Epidii, Carini, Cantæ,
66
66
Logæ, and other nations, is little to be regard-
"ed. Tacitus paffed over thofe petty commu-
"nities in filence; and in the period between
"the expedition of Julius Agricola, and the
"reign of Marcus Aurelius, under whom the
Egyptian geographer flouriſhed, the Romans
“had no opportunity of being acquainted with
"the domeſtic arrangements of the Caledonians."
66
In this paffage Mr. Macpherſon rejects Ptole-
my's account of the internal ſtate of Caledonia,
and of its divifion into various tribes, becauſe Ta-
citus paffes over thefe communities in filence;
and becauſe, from the days of Tacitus to the time
of Ptolemy, the Romans had no opportunity of
knowing the domeftic arrangements of the Cale-
donians. The former is furely a very trifling rea-
ſon. And the latter is certainly a falſe fact.
The filence of Tacitus, concerning the tribes
of Caledonia, is no proof that he was not ac-
quainted with the divifions. He has not even
ſpecified any of the nations, that Agricola con-
quered from the Dee to the Friths. And yet
Mr. Macpherſon will not deny the partition of
the country into tribes. He actually acknow-
ledges it in this very page and in p. 51, ſpeaking
of the Selgovæ, the Gadeni, the Damnii, the
Novantes, and the Ottadini, five of thoſe nations,
and
126 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
and whom he knows only from Ptolemy. In
p. 82 alfo he exprefsly quotes the authority of
Ptolemy for the Brigantes, the Velaborii, the
Cauci, and the Menapii, in Ireland; though the
Romans never had any opportunity at all, in Mr.
Macpherſon's acceptation of the word, to know
the interior divifion of the country. And in
p. 63 he argues, that even the manners of the
Irish must have been perfectly known to the Ro-
mans, though here he denies them to have known
even the names and pofitions of the Caledonian
tribes, and though he allows them to have
had continual wars with the one, and none at all
with the other. So inconfiftent is Mr. Macpher
fon with himſelf! So much does he warp with
the variations and bearings of his favourite hy-
pothefis!
The defign of Tacitus and Ptolemy was very
different. That was compofing an hiſtorical nar-
ration of national tranfactions; this was writing
a geographical account of the nations. The one
was obliged to detail to us the names, the fites,
and the towns, of the various tribes that crouded
the face of the iſland. But the other was required
only to give us general defcriptions and general
appellations, ſuch notices only as were juſt ſuf-
ficient to lend propriety and meaning to the ac-
tions, and to exhibit the actors and their princi-
ples in a ſtrong point of view. Tacitus there-
fore does not enumerate the tribes of Caledonia ;
and
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 127
and Ptolemy does.
Tacitus does not ſpecify any
them in general.
particular nations; but he ſpeaks expreſsly of
I
And Mr. Macpherſon's argu-
ment again fails. Amplas civitates trans Bodo-
triam fitas; motus univerfarum ultra gentium;
Caledoniam incolentes populi; confpirationem
civitatum; and, omnium civitatum vires . From
the officers of Agricola, therefore, might the
Romans have derived that knowledge of the do-
meſtic arrangements of the Caledonians, which
Ptolemy has prefented to us. And, even addi-
tional to this fource of intelligence, Ptolemy had
the fineſt opportunity that ever a geographer had,
of knowing the internal difpofition of Caledonia
compleatly, from the remarkable war of which
Mr. Macpherſon appears to be totally unappriz-
ed, the invafion of Caledonia by Lollius Urbicus
about the year 140, and the reduction of half
of it under the dominion of the Romans 2. And
Ptolemy, as I have previously remarked, has
actually given us an aftronomical obfervation,
which was made at Inverneſs, and could have
been made only in confequence of that reduc-
tion.
Agric. V. 25, 27, and 30.
2 See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 55-56, and 418–419.
3
!
P. 59.
1
128
as
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
(C
P. 50.
Though the Scottiſh Friths are ge-
nerally allowed to have been the boundaries
"of Caledonia towards the South, it is more than
66
probable that thoſe tribes who poffeffed the
"country between the walls were principally de-
"fcended from the antient Gael. The names of
"the Selgova and Gadeni, two petty communi-
"ties on the northern banks of the Solway and
"Tweed, feem to ftrengthen this fuppofition.
66
They carry in their fignification a proof that
"the tribes who bore them were in a ſtate of
hoftility with their neighbours the Ottadini
"and Brigantes, which furniſhes a prefumption
"that they derived their origin from a different
6c
quarter. (Selgovæ is plainly Selgovich lati-
"nized. Selgovich literally fignifies Hunters,
"in a metaphorical fenfe Plunderers. Gadeni
"is plainly from Gadechin, Robbers; a name
"which aroſe from the fame love of depredation
"with their friends and neighbours the Sel-
govæ '.)."
I have more than once remarked already the
ftrange doubling of the prefent differtation, in
fometimes bringing down the Gael or Caledo-
nians to the banks of the Tweed, and in fome-
times carrying them up to the North of the
1 The fame etymons of Selgovæ and Gadeni are given by
Dr. Macpherſon in p. 112.
Friths,
2
THE BRITONS ASSSRTED.
129
66
(C
Friths. And the fame fpirit occurs here again.
We have before been informed pofitively and
without heſitation, that "the Gael, under the
. general name of Caledonians, inhabited from
"the Tweed to the extremity of the North."
But we are here informed, that their inhabiting
from the Tweed to the Friths is only more
"than probable," that Mr. Macpherſon fup-
"pofes it," and that there is "a prefumption"
for it. The certainty in p. 32 is all dwindled
away in p. 50. And as the reader proceeds in
the work, and naturally expects a clearer light
and ſtronger convictions, he finds his author him-
ſelf faultering in his ſtyle, and becoming more
dubious of his own pofitions.
The Caledonians were brought down at firſt
to the Solway and Tweed, and are occafion-
ally brought down at prefent, merely becauſe of
the name of Galloway there; as the name of
Cumberland occafioned the Cimbri, before, to be
placed betwixt the Tweed and the Humber.
And the Caledonians were carried at firft, and
are occaſionally carried at prefent, to the North
of the Friths, becauſe hiftory exprefsly places
them to the North. The two ſtrong and active
principles, thus unwarily blended together, are
continually ſtruggling for fuperiority, and fome-
times the one colour and fometimes the other
predominates. But the reafon here adduced, for
the refidence of the Caledonians betwixt the
K
Walls,
$30
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Walls, is even feebler and more trifling than the
fecret one before. The names of Selgova
and Gadeni, it is faid, prove the tribes to have
been in a ſtate of hoftility with the Ottadini and
Brigantes. But why not with the Caledonians?
There is no more reafon for that than this. And
then the argument is not only repelled, buɛ
actually changes fides, and militates directly
againſt its mafter.
But I am tired with purfuing fuch imperti-
nencies. And yet others prefent themſelves
before us. Mr. Macpherſon is greatly miſtaken
both in his Geography and Etymology.—Sel-
govæ, he fays, fignifies Hunters, and metapho-
rically Robbers. But the metaphor is fuch as
contradicts every idea of propriety. And it is
fuch peculiarly, as no nation and age of Hunters
could ever have tolerated. Selgovæ appears
from Ptolemy to be Elgova with a Prefix, being
written by him. Selgovæ in one place and Elgovæ
in another. And the root of the name is there-
fore to be fought in Elgova, and is probably
this. The æftuary formed by the river Eden
was pretty certainly denominated S, Alga, Av,
or The Noble Water, as Ireland has been fome-
times denominated Inis Alga in Irifh, and a
Peninſula on the banks of the Loffie in Scotland
feems to have been called Elgin formerly ¹.
So another penínfula, formed by the ſtreams of the
6
The
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
131
The name remains to this day in its prefent appel-
lation of the SOLWAY Frith, as the antient
name of Conovius continues in that of the Con-
way at preſent. And the tribe, that inha-
bited along the whole extended line of the
æftuary, was naturally denominated Fir-Elgovæ
or Fir-Selgovæ, Men, or the Men, of the Great
Water. Gadeni is alfo interpreted Robbers,
and to be the fame word with the Iriſh Gadechin,
Robbers. The real word in Irish, I believe, is
not Gadechin, but Gaduighe a thief, and Ga-
duighen Thieves. And Gadeni plainly comes
from Gadh or Cath a Fight, as Crutheni is de-
rived from Cruth; and, like Camulo-genus, the
name of a Gallic Hero in Cæfar ¹, fignifies the
Men of the Battle, or the Warriours. And the
Gadeni are therefore denominated Cadeni, in
a Roman-Britiſh infcription diſcovered in the
North 2.-Nor were the Gadeni bounded merely
by the northern bank of the Tweed, or the
Ottadini by the fouthern, as Mr. Macpherfon
places them. The Gadeni ranged from the
Wall to the North of Lanerk. And the Otta-
dini, whom he ſuppoſes to lie all to the South
of the Tweed, extended beyond it to the
Friths 3. His great divifion of the North to
Loffie and Spey, feems to have been called Inis, an iſland,
having the two villages of Innes and Ince in it.
¹ Cæfar, p. 164.
1
* Horſeley, N° 80. Northumberland.
3 Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 63.
K 2
the
132
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
the Cimbri and Gael, is therefore entirely
overturned, as his great partition of the
South to the Cimbri and Belga was be-
fore. Thoſe whom he denominates Cimbri and
oppofes to the Gael, the Cimbric Ottadini of
p. 51, lived only in a ſmall part of the coun-
try which he has affigned to the Cimbri, and
poffeffed alſo a large portion of that region
which he has allotted to the Gael. But this is
not all. The whole "country between the
"Walls" Mr. Macpherſon here refigns up to
the Gael, as the Selgovæ, Gadeni, and others;
whom he engages in hoftility with, and there-
fore ſuppoſes to be of a different origin from,
the Ottadini immediately to the South of the
nearer Wall. But the whole body of the Otta
dinian dominions, except a very ſmall flip of land
along the fouthern edge of Northumberland,
was actually to the North of the nearer Wall '.
Mr. Macpherſon cedes all "the country betwixt
"the Walls" to his Gael, and therefore brings
them down to the northern banks of the Solway
and Tweed. But he is not aware, that the
nearer Wall did not run from the Solway to the
Tweed. It began on the Solway: but it ended
on the Tyne.
Thus have I laid open the numerous miſtakes
in this remarkable paffage. I have fhewn the
• Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 63.
reaſonings,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 133
reaſonings, I think, to be at once arbitrary in
their principles and frivolous in their conclu-
fions. And I have demonſtrated the Geography
of the iſland, I apprehend, to be both falſe and
contradictory.
<<
P. 51. "As that tract of country which is
comprehended between the Tweed and Solway,
"and the Scottiſh Friths, was more expoſed to
"invaſion than Caledonia, we may conclude
"that the Gael who poffeffed it were, in fome
66
degree, mixed with the Cimbric Ottadini and
66 Brigantes, even before the invaſions of the
"Romans preffed thoſe tribes towards the North.
"It was from this unavoidable mixture that the
"Selgovæ, Gadeni, Damnii, and Novantes, were,
"in an after-age, diftinguiſhed by the name of
"Mæatæ, which fignifies a people defcended
"from a double origin, as well as the inhabitants
"of a controverted country. (Moi-atta, or Moi-
"attich, the inhabitants of the Plains: Mæan-
"atta, the poffeffors of the Middle country:
“Moai-atta, a mixed people).”
The errors in this part of the Differtation
feem to rife before us every step that we take,
and are perpetually ftopping us in our progrefs.
This paffage immediately follows the former.
Theſe two etymons are given by Dr. Macpherſon, p. 23.
K 3
The
134
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1
The former was the laft of four or five fucceffive
Extracts. And this is as pregnant with miſtakes
as any of them.
If the mixture of Mr. Macpherſon's Ottadini
and Brigantes with his Gael betwixt the Walls,
was, as he alledges, unavoidable, becauſe the
country betwixt the Walls was the frontier
of Caledonia; the fame mixture muſt have
been equally unavoidable, on the frontiers of
the Belge and Cimbri in Wales and Maxima.
The region betwixt the Solway, the Tweed,
and the Friths, is not more "expofed to in-
"vafion," than the land behind the Severne
and the Dee, or the tract between the Hum-
ber, the Merſey, the Tweed, and the Eden.
And fince the country to the South of the
Solway and Tweed muſt have been equally
expoſed to invafion, as that to the North of
them, the barriers of both being exactly the
fame the fame unavoidable mixture must have
equally enfued in Northumberland as in the Lo-
thians &c., and in Cumberland as in Anandale
&c. The reafoning, therefore, is not only in-
accurate, but carries an edge with it, that, “like
"an ill-fheathed knife, will cut its mafter "
I
The facts alfo and the etymons are both equally
untrue. I have previouſly fhewn the Ottadini
not to have been Cimbric, even upon Mr. Mac-
1
• Shakeſpear.
pherfon's
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
135
==
tes.
I
pherſon's own argument. And the invaſion of
the Romans preffed no tribes towards the North.
All appear to have poffeffed exactly the fame
divifions of the country before the Romans came,
as they enjoyed afterwards. And this is par-
ticularly the cafe with regard to the Brigantes.
They had reduced the Selgovæ before ¹. But
the Gadeni, the Novantes, and the Damnii were
totally unmixed either with Ottadini or Brigan-
And this unavoidable mixture is falfe in
fact. The name of Meatæ, alfo, belonged not
to any tribes betwixt the Walls, but to fome that
lay to the North of the more northerly Wall.
This indeed has been confiderably doubted. But
it may be eafily proved. In the Hiſtory of Man-
chefter I have already fhewn, to the fulleft
conviction, I believe, of every mind, that the
Romans regularly retained the province betwixt
the Walls in their own poffeffion, from the pe-
riod of its firſt conqueft to the era of their depar-
ture from the island. And the expedition of
the Emperor Severus was, therefore, againſt the
Britons that lay to the North of Antoninus's
Vallum. The Mæatæ then whom he reduced,
who afterwards revolted, and to whom Cara-
calla refigned up all the conquefts of his Father,
muſt have been fome tribes to the North of that
• Hiſtory of Manchester, p. 104.
2 Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 453-458
K 4
Vallum.
136 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Vallum.-And, thus wrong in the poſition of the
Mæatæ, Mr. Macpherſon is fure to be miſtaken
in his explanation of their name. And it is
neither juſt in its own nature, nor right in its
application to them. It is not juſt, becauſe in
the Text it equally gives two, and, ftill more
ftrangely, in the Note equally annexes three,
very different imports to the word; the inhabi-
tants of the Plains; the poffeffors of a middle
country, or (as, to humour his Hypothefis, he
contradictorily calls it in the Text) a controverted
one; and a mixed people. All three were cer-
tainly not meant by the name. And, of the
two mentioned in the Text, neither was meant
at all. This is obvious from the impropriety
of deducing Mæatæ from Moai-atich, and the
greater impropriety of deducing it from Mæan-
atich. And even the derivation of it from Moi-
atich, which is the beſt of them all, and had
been previouſly adopted in the Hiſtory of Man-
chefter', appears to me now to be harsh and
forced. How Mr. Macpherſon could be in-
duced to give this interpretation in the Note,
I cannot conceive; as it plainly ftands in direct
oppofition to the reafonings and etymons in the
Text. And the real etymology of the name,
Mag, a Plain, muſt have been
equally pronounced May and Mæ originally, as
I believe, is this.
* P. 415.
it
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
137
it naturally would be, and as it is now written
Mæs in Welſh and Moi. in Irish. And the inha-
bitants of the lower lands of Caledonia, which
lie immediately to the North of Antoninus's
Vallum, and along the line of the Eaſtern coaſt,
would naturally be diftinguiſhed from the reft
of the Caledonians, the Mountaineers upon one
fide of them, by fome topical and defcriptive
appellation. The Mountaineers are thus difcri-
minated at preſent by the title of Albanech or
Highlanders. And the others are to this day
denominated the Lowlanders. May or Mæ, a
Plain, runs out into Mai-ed or Mæ-at in the
plural. And as we have feen Fir-Gallt and
Fir-Caledon above, and as the Carnabii and
Cantii muſt have been originally Fir-Cant and
Fir-Carnab, fo Mæatæ muſt have been Fir-Mæ-
at, and fignifies the Men of the Plains.
I have dwelt the longer upon this paffage, to
lay open the inaccurate mode of reafoning which
is uſed by Mr. Macpherſon, the very bold manner
in which he advances fuppofitions into certainty,
and his ftrange method of contradicting in the
Notes what he afferts in the Text. The rea-
foning here is peculiarly looſe and flimfy. The
affertions are uncommonly ftrong and arbitrary.
And the contradiction of the Note to the Text
is remarkably ftriking.
P. 54.
138 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
P.54. Our author, having in p. 52-53 fatisfac-
torily proved from the Greek and Roman writers,
that the antient Iriſh were the defcendants of the
Britons, fays thus-" The name of Gael, ftill
"retained by the old Irish, fufficiently demon-
"ftrates that they derive their blood from thoſe
"Gael or Gauls, who, in an after-period, were
66
diſtinguiſhed in Britain by the name of Cale-
"donians. The wildeft enthufiafts in Hibernian
antiquities never once afferted that the Cale-
"donians, or their pofterity the Picts, were of
"Iriſh extract; yet nothing is better afcertained
"than that the ancient Britons of the South gave
"to the Scots, the Picts, and the Irifh, the com-
mon name of Gael; and confequently that they
* very juftly concluded that the three nations
"derived their origin from the fame ſource, the
"antient Gael of the continent."
66
This demonftration is no argument at all. That
will immediately appear. And a very flight
examination will add one more proof to the many
which we have had before, of Mr. Macpherſon's
unhappineſs in the work of proving.
The Iriſh are faid, by retaining the name of
Gael, to prove themſelves the defcendants of the
Caledonians. If the author here includes the
country to the South of the Friths in the name of
Caledonia, then he is once more in a ſtate of
hoftility
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
139
hoftility with ſome of his former pofitions and
all hiſtory. If he does not, then the Iriſh may
be defcended from the Gael of Galloway. And,
whether he does or not, his reaſoning from the
name of Gael is quite impertinent. The name
is no evidence at all of the Caledonian deſcent of
the Iriſh. It was not appropriated to the Cale-
donians either North or South of the Friths.
was, as I have previouſly ſhewn, common to all
the Britons, deduced with them from Gaul, and
retained by them in all their iſlands. And the
Iriſh might be equally demonftrated to be derived
from the Gael of Wales, the Gael of Cornwall,
or the Gael of Kent and Suffex.
It
The antient Britons of the South are alſo faid
to have given the name of Gael to the Scots, the
Picts, and the Irish, and "confequently to have
"very juftly concluded" them to be all one and
the fame people. This conclufion, however, is
not the antient Britons, but Mr. Macpherſon's.
And it is not juſt at all. Though the antient
Britons of the South did call the Scots, the Picts,
and the Irish, by the common name of Gael, they
did not mean to derive the firft and the laft from
the fecond. They equally gave the name of Gael
to themſelves, as I have fhewed before, to the
tribes of Kent and Suffex, the nations of Corn-
wall and Wales, and to all the Britons.
But the courſe of the author's reafoning here
is very remarkable. He produces an argument
to
140
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
to prove, that the Irish were derived from the
Caledonians. And at the cloſe of it he concludes,
that the Irish were derived from the native.
Gauls. The name of Gael demonftrates the Iriſh
to" derive their blood from thofe Gael or Gauls,
"who, in an after-period, were distinguished by
"the name of Caledonians." And the name of
Gael proves the Scots, the Picts, and the Iriſh to
have "derived their origin from the fame fource,
*the antient Gael of the continent." Vainly
imagining, in oppofition to the moſt obvious
evidences, that the name of Gael in Britain was
appropriated entirely to the Caledonians; and
wildly fuppofing, in contradiction to the moſt ex-
preſs declarations of hiftory, that the other tribes
of Britain were German-Celtic; Mr. Macpher-
fon goes on with a falfe affociation of ideas from
the beginning to the clofe of his work, walking
in one circle of errors, and plunging into abfurdi-
ties and contradictions at every turn.
(c
46
P. 54. a note. "Mr. O'Connor, who lately
gave to the public fome wild, incoherent
tales, concerning the antient Irifh, endeavours
"to obviate the ftrength of the argument,
"which rifes againſt his fyftem from the name
"of Gael, by difguifing the word by the in-
fertion of the intermediate letters, DH, as thus,
"Gadhe!
#
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
ΙΑΣ
"Gadhel. The fubterfuge avails nothing. DH
are univerfally quiefcent, or at moſt found
"like a y, in every dialect of the Celtic lan-
Y,
"guage."
The argument deduced from Gael may be
effectual againſt Mr. O'Connor's fyftem, but, as
I have already fhewn, is of no force to eſtabliſh
Mr. Macpherſon's. The indigenous appellation
of Gael for the Irish ferves ftrongly to evince
them, what history demonftrates them to be, the
defcendants of the Britons. But it ferves not in
the leaſt to point out the particular divifion of
Britain, from which they were immediately de-
rived.
Mr. Macpherſon's intimate acquaintance with
the Celtic language, was fuch an advantage over
the body of our hiſtorical writers, that he might
very juſtly, as he does in p. 5 and 38, plume
himſelf confiderably upon it. But I have pre-
viouſly remarked, that his knowledge of the
Celtic appeared to be confined within the pale of
a fingle dialect. And the preſent Extract con-
firms me in the opinion. Mr. Macpherſon in
p. 46 commends the author of the Critical Dif-
fertations, for his "great knowledge of all the
"branches of the Celtic language." The know-
ledge of both, however, feems to me to have been
confined almoſt entirely to the Irish or Erfe. And
it particularly feems fo here. Mr. Macpherſon
could not otherwife have imagined, as he here
afferts,
142
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
?
afferts, that DH are "univerfally quiefcent, or
"at moſt found like a y, in every dialect of the
"Celtic." And he re-afferts it in p. 148, fay-
ing that "Gaidhel, -as the DH are invariably
(6
quiefcent in Celtic words, is much the fame
"with Gael." This is very true concerning the
Irish. But it is utterly untrue with regard to the
Welſh particularly. That is a principal dialect
of the Celtic. And the Welſh Guidhil, which is
the fame with the Iriſh Gaidhel, and which Dr.
Macpherſon exprefsly afferts to be pronounced
like it, Gael, is not pronounced like it at all,
but actually and fully Guidhil.-We have alſo an
inftance of the fame nature int p. 130. There the
Welſh appellation for Ireland, Ywerdhon or
Yverdhon, is faid exprefsly to be "pronounced
"Yberon or Yveron." And it is really pro-
nounced, as it is written, Ywerdhon. The
author's and his friend's acquaintance with "every
"dialect of the Celtic," did not extend to the
Welſh. And his obfervation of the invariable
quiefcence of the DH in Celtic, and his friend's
remark on the pronunciation of the word Guid-
hil, were both drawn, we fee, from a view of
the Irish only.
• See p. 97.
P. 54-55.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
143
P. 54—55. “The Britiſh Gael, in an early age,
"extending themſelves to the very extremities
"of the iſland, defcried Ireland from the Mulls
"of Galloway and Cantire, and croffing the nar-
"row channel which feparates the two countries,
"became the progenitors of the Irish nation. In
"proportion as freſh emigrants from the conti-
"nent of Europe forced the antient Gael towards
"the North in Britain, more colonies tranfmi-
"grated into Ireland from the promontories
"which we have fo often mentioned."
The great hiſtorians of antiquity have claimed
the privilege of being believed upon their own
authority, and without any regular reference to
the older chronicles. But the privilege is con-
fined to them. Every modern hiftorian that
writes of a period preceding his own, of which
he muſt know the incidents merely by tradition
from others, is juftly required to authenticate
his accounts as he proceeds, and to produce fuf-
ficient vouchers for his facts. And the hiſtorical
writer, that neglects this duty, muſt be content
to fee his work, perhaps, the favourite hiftory of
an hour, pleafing by its novelty and engaging by
its elegance, and then to have it refigned up to
neglect and contempt for ever. Here is the
original inhabitation of Ireland by the Gael of
Caledonia afferted, the place affigned from which
the
i
944
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
}
the original colony embarked, and the migration
of additional colonies from the fame place, in
confequence of freſh invafions of Britain, af-
firmed; and all, without one article of authority
or one note of diffidence.
"The Gael
became fo numerous
P. 55.
"in that country [Ireland] before the arrival of
"the Belge in Britain, that the colonies which
"tranfmigrated from that nation into Ireland
"were, together with their language, manners,
"and cuſtoms, loft in the Gael; fo that in one
"ſenſe the Caledonians may be reckoned the
"fole progenitors of the old Irish. (The Fir-Bolg,
"fo often mentioned in the traditions of the
"Iriſh, were Belgic colonies who tranfmigrated
"from Britain after the Belge had feized on the
"fouthern divifion of England. They are men
❝tioned very frequently under the name of Siol
"na m Bolga in the poems of Offian.)".
The Gael are here faid to have been "fo nu-
"merous in Ireland before the arrival of the
"Belgæ in Britain," that, when the Belgæ came
into Ireland, they were loft in the Gael. How
very inconclufive! The Belgæ, when they came
into Ireland, were loft in the Gael: and there-
fore the Gael, it is argued, muſt have been
very
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
145
very numerous in Ireland, before the Belgæ ar-
rived—in Britain. How ftrangely inaccurate!
That the Belge were loft in the Gael of Ire-
land, is a fact which is equally afferted and de-
nied by Mr. Macpherſon in the preſent Extract.
It is exprefsly afferted in the Text, and plainly
denied in the Note. And I have fhewn an in-
ftance of the fame nature immediately before.
The Belge, according to his own account in the
Note, muſt have ſurvived for ages diſtinct from
the Gael; or elfe no "traditions of the Irish"
could exift concerning them at prefent. They
muſt alſo, according to the fame account in
him, have ſurvived to the third century at leaſt,
not only diſtinct from, but even oppoſed to, the
Gael; or they would not have been mentioned
fo frequently, under their own name of Belgæ,
in the Poems of Offian. And they accordingly
appear in his own Temora, waging long and
bloody wars with the Gael.
That the former were loft in the latter at all, is
inferred evidently from the Irifh, the Belgic and
Aboriginal Iriſh, equally calling themſelves and
being called by others the Gael. But the infe-
rence is grofsly unjuſt. I have already ſhewn all
the Belgæ of Britain to have been actually
denominated Gael. And their language ap-
pears decifively to have been the Gallic or Bri
tifh. This is plain from the only remains that
L
we
146 THE GENUINE HISTORY
OF
we have of the Belgic, the names of their tribes,
their towns, their woods, and their rivers, and
the exact correſpondency of all to the names of
the Britiſh. Thus we have Ifca, the appellation of
a river among the Belge of Devonshire and the
Britons of Wales; Alauna, for a river in Hamp-
fhire, Warwickſhire, and Lancaſhire; and a Stu-
rius in Kent and between Norfolk and Suffolk :
the town of Camulodunum among the Belge of
Effex and the Britons of Yorkſhire; Durobrovis
in Kent, and Durocobrivis in Northamptonſhire;
Venta in Hampſhire, Norfolk, and Monmouth-
fhire; and Vectis in Hampſhire, and Vect-urion-es
in Scotland: a Caledonian Wood in Kent and
Suffex, in Lincolnſhire and fome adjoining coun-
ties, and in the Highlands of Scotland: the Dam-
nonii of Devonshire and Valentia; the Cantæ of
Caledonia, and the Cantii of Kent; and the No-
vantes of Middleſex and Galloway.
The whole of this paffage is obviouſly compofed,
în order to give the Caledonians the honour of
being the anceſtors of the Iriſh. For this, hiftory
and reafon are diftorted. For this, Mr. Mac-
pherfon is at war with himfelf. And, for this,
even Offian is contradicted. But, even if the fact
was as Mr. Macpherſon ftates it to have been,
the end and defign, poor and trifling as it is,
could not be anſwered. Even though the Belgæ
had been loft in the Gael, and even though the
Gael had been Caledonians, the Caledonians
could
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
147
could in no ſenſe be reckoned the fole progeni-
tors of the old Irish. The Irish muft even then
be derived from a mixt race of Britons; and the
Belgae of South-Britain muſt have concurred with
the Gael of the North, to claim the honour of
producing them. Though the Belge had been
covered with the name of Gael, they would not
leſs have been Belgæ, or have lefs contributed to
produce the Iriſh.
P. 55—57.
"When the Gael arrived first in
"Ireland they naturally gave it the name of Iar-
"in, or the western country. From Iar-in is
"not only to be deduced the Eirin of the Irifh
"themſelves, but thoſe various names by which
"the Greeks and Romans diftinguiſhed their
"ifland (Juverna, lerna, Iris, Oueva, Hibernia).
"-Hibernia, the moſt common name by which,
"the Romans diftinguiſhed Ireland, may appear
"to fome too remote in the pronunciation and
"orthography from Iar-in, or H'Eirin [the
"Weſtern Country], to be derived from either.
"This difficulty is eaſily removed. Julius Cæfar
mentions, for the firſt time, Ireland under the
"" name of Hibernia. One of two reafons in-
"duced the illuftrious writer to uſe that appel-
"lation. He either latinized the H'Y verdhon of
"the Southern Britains, or, what is more proba-
"ble,
86
L 2
148 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"ble, he annexed to Ireland a name which fuited
"his own ideas of its air and climate,-and-
"formed the name of Hibernia from the adjec-
❝tive Hibernus."
I have cited this paffage, principally to mark
the ſtrange manner in which, within a few lines,
the author-palpably contradicts himſelf. And I
have produced more than one inftance of this be-
fore. In the beginning of the Extract, Hibernia
is without heſitation pronounced to be derived
from the Caledonian Iar-in. But, in the conclu-
fion, it is declared to be derived either from the
Welſh H'Yverdhon or the Latin Hibernus. Thus
is Mr. Macpherſon his own greateſt adverfary.
And while, in the gaiety of indifcretion, he is
brandishing his fword to hew down all oppofition,
he unhappily buries it in his own bofom.
The deduction of Hibernia from the Latin Hi-
bernus is one of the meaneft and moſt frivolous
etymons, among the thouſands which have dif-
graced the ſcience of etymology, that I ever re-
member to have feen of late. It is only fit for that
infantine period of human learning and under-
ſtanding, which originally gave it to the world,
and exhauſted all its feeble powers in the deriva-
tion of Scotland from the Greek Exolos, and of
Albion and Hibernia from the Latin Hibernus
and Albus. And I am aſtoniſhed that a gentle-
man, of Mr. Macpherſon's fpirit and intellect,
could
}
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 149
could ever ſtoop to raiſe it from its peaceful grave
in the dust.
The names of Iris, Ierna, Juverna, and Hiber-
nia are all obviouſly deduced from the fame ra-
dical word. Iar or Eir, Weſt, evidently forms the
Ir in Iris and the Ier in Ierna. And Ier being
fometimes pronounced Iver and Hiver, as Cumri
and Cimmerii were changed into Cumbri and
Cimbri, and as Eure, the name of a river in
France and England, was formed into Ebur in
Ebur-acum and Eburo-vices; with the addition
of In, an iſland, it plainly compoſes Ier-ina, Ier-
na, Iverna, and Hibernia.
I HAVE here given the reader a full and com-
pleat view of Mr. Macpherfon's conjectures and
arguments, concerning the firft population of
Ireland by the Caledonians. And the whole re-
folves itſelf into two points; That Ireland would
naturally be firſt peopled from the Mulls of Gal-
loway and Cantire; and, That the indigenous
name of Gael for the Iriſh is a proof of their Ca-
Jedonian deſcent. The former obviouſly amounts
L 3
only
fgo THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
only to a fair probability. And the latter has
not even that merit. The argument has been re-
peatedly overthrown, by fhewing the appellation
of Gael not to have been confined to the Cale-
donians, but to have extended with the colonies
of the Britons over all their islands. And even
the probability, fair as it is, can be of no fervice
to Mr. Macpherfon, fince Galloway is not within
the limits of Caledonia, and the probability is
equally favourable to Galloway as Cantire.
In the Hiſtory of Mancheſter I have fhewn
from indiſputable authorities, when and by whom
the isle of Ireland was firft inhabited. About
350 years before Chrift, the Belge croffed the
Channel into Britain, and feized the whole ex-
tended line of the fouthern coaft from Kent into
Devonshire. Numbers of the former inhabi
tants, that had gradually retired before the ere
my, were obliged at laft to take fhipping upon
our weſtern coaſt, and paffed over into the unin-
habited ifle of Ireland. And thefe were after-
wards joined by another body of Britons, at the
great attack upon the neighbouring ſtates by the
Belgæ under Divitiacus, who purfued the track
of their brethren, and affociated with them in
Ireland. The first population of that fine iland,
therefore, was originally begun, not by the
northern, but the fouthern, Britons; not from
the promontories of Caledonia, but the ſhores
of
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
15f
of the Channel; in confequence of the Belgic in-
vaſion of Britain, and about the year 350 before
the Chriſtian æra. And this, the first colony
that came into Ireland, was fucceeded by ano-
ther, which was as little deduced from the nor-'
thern Britons or the hills of Caledonia, and came
equally from the fhores of the fouthern fea, in
confequence of the advances of the Belge into
the interiors of Britain, and about the year 100
before Chrift .
I
I have alſo fhewn from the fame authorities,
that Ireland, for two centuries and a half after-
wards, was continually recruited with freſh fwarms
from Britain; as the populoufnefs of this ifland
and the vicinity of that, invited them to fettle
in the one, or as the bloody and fucceffive wars
in Britain, during this period, naturally induced
them to relinquish the other. The third and
fourth colonies that fettled in Ireland, as I have
obſerved in the Hiftory of Mancheſter, were in
all probability derived from Galloway and Can-
tire. As the Epidii and Damnii of thofe coun-
tries lay the neareſt of any Britons to the iſle of
Ireland, they must therefore be ſuppoſed, after
the extraordinary embarkations of their fouthern
brethren, to have been the firft of all the Bri-
tons that made fettlements within it. And the
See Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 432-433-
L 4
name
K
152 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
name of Damnii, for a tribe on the oppofite
fhores of Ireland and Britain, gives a great ad-
ditional weight to the fuppofition. Theſe mi-
grations were most probably occafioned by the
mere populouſneſs of the latter, crouded as it
now began to be with inhabitants, and by the
mere proximity of the former, plain as it ap-
peared to the eye from the fhores of Cantire and
Galloway. But the fucceeding were occa-
fioned by the wars of the Britons among them-
felves, and of the Romans againſt them all. And
I have endeavoured, and with no little fuccefs, I
think, to trace back every new colony to its ori-
ginal diſtrict in Britain, and to refer their paſſage
into Ireland to the very commotion that fent them
thither. The iſland appears to have been plant-
ed with colonies from the whole range of our
weſtern coaft. The Belge of Dorfetſhire and
Cornwall at one end, the Britons of Caledonią
at the other, and almoſt every nation betwixt
them, all contributed to the population of Ire-
land. And the whole circuit of the country was
compleatly peopled about 1 50 years after Chriſt.
Some hiftorical notices, that have never been
made uſe of before, have lent the general light
that has directed me in this difcovery. The oc-
currence of the fame names of tribes and towns,
in both iſlands, has led me on. One or two
intimations and fome hiftorical facts, in the Poems
3
of
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 153
of Offian, have furniſhed additional evidence.
And from the whole I have been enabled, I ap❤
prehend, to draw up the firſt authentic hiſtory of
Ireland, as to the primary population of the ifle
and the original tranfactions of the coloniſts, that
has hitherto made its appearance in any lan
guage.
* See History of Mancheſter, p. 434–438.
CHAP.
154 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
W
CHAP. III.
E are now come to that important period
of Mr. Macpherſon's Introduction, for
which all the reft was evidently written, for
which we have feen all the annals of the iſland
and continent diftorted from their true line,
antient Hiſtory garbled and contradicted, and
Mr. Macpherſon's own affertions mangled and
oppoſed. We are now come to the Origin of
the Scots.
i
I
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 155
:
FR
1.
ROM p. 58 to 78, Mr. Macpherſon is
engaged in a formal attack upon thofe pre-
tenfions, which the Iriſh have made to an original
very different from the other inhabitants of the
British ifles; in order to prove them and the
Scots the defcendants of Caledonians. And
the attack is very eafy, Thofe fabricks of fiction,
which the Irifh credulity and patriotiſm have
been rearing for ages, all melt away before the
ftrong beams of Hiſtory and Criticifm. But in-
deed the romances are replete with fuch pro-
digies of folly, and are fo univerfally defpifed by
the judicious on the continent and in our own
island, that they were not worthy of a ferious
refutation. And fuch a writer as Mr. Macpher-
fon, engaged in fuch a conteft, feems to me like
the redoubtable Sir John in Shakeſpear, attack-
ing a dead man fword in hand, and with one
wound more in his thigh carrying him away in
triumph 2;
Mr.
• But it is proper to obferve, that almoſt every argument
in this difquifition is borrowed, fometimes literally, and ge-
nerally without acknowledgement, from Innes's Critical Eflay.
The reference to Strabo in p. 60 and 61 of Mr. Macpherſon ;
to Mela, Tacitus, and Solinus, in p. 62; the answers to objec
tions
156. THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
%
Mr. Macpherſon in p. 78-91 applies himſelf
to the buſineſs of refuting the arguments of Fa-
ther Innes, concerning the Spaniſh or Scandi-
navian extraction of the Scots of Ireland. This
is an harder taſk than the former. And yet thefe,
and all the other conclufions of our Hiftorians
and Antiquarians, may be anſwered without any
great difficulty. Fluttering for want of infor-
mation concerning the real deſcent of the Scots,
the hiſtorical mind has wandered over the con-
tinent in fearch of their original home, has
eagerly caught at the moſt trifling appearances of
argument, readily embraced the wildeft fug-
geftions of Tradition, and molded both into a
fyftem, which is more fpecious and folid than
the fictions of the Irish, but eafily yields to the
force of a well-directed blow. So far, therefore,
as Mr. Macpherfon's arguments relate only to
the Spaniſh or Scandinavian origin of the Scots,
I fhall not attend to them. He may demoliſh
thoſe Gothick Structures at his will. His efforts
tions in p. 63; the appeal to Camden, Ware, and Uſher, in
p. 64-65; what is faid of Ware and the Pfalter-Caſhel in
p. 67, and of the form of the Irish Alphabet in p. 67-68;
are all taken from Innes, p. 428, 429, 431, and 432, 430,
433—434, 435—437, 434-435, 439, and 448—449, with-
out one acknowledgement of the real Owner, and more than
once with the adoption of his own words.—And Dr. Macpher-
fon had borrowed fome of the arguments before from Innes.
See p. 88-90.-Compare alfo p. 70-71 of Mr. Macpherſon
with p. go of the Doctor.
are
i
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
157
7
are ſpirited, and his labours decifive. But when
he endeavours, as he does twice, to derive any
advantage from his conquefts in favour of a Ca-
ledonian origin, I must then beg leave to inter-
pofe, and fhew his pretenfions to be as falfe as the
Iriſh, and his arguments as vifionary as Innes's.
P. 78-79. At entering on his refutation, Mr.
Macpherſon ſpeaks thus, -"They [the Scots]
66
came, fays the ingenious Father [Innes], either
"from Scandia or Cantabria [into Ireland], about
"the time of the Incarnation, or rather a little
"time after it.-Innes is the only writer who has
"reduced the origin of the Scots into a regular
"fyftem; and he endeavours to defend it.
"Should the ingenious Father's fcheme be de-
ftroyed, the Caledonian extraction of the Iriſh
"muft of courſe rife upon its ruins."
This is furely a very extraordinary argument.
Though the Iriſh be proved not to have been de-
rived from Scandinavia or Cantabria, we are not
one ſtep nearer to their derivation from Caledo-
nia. They may have come with equal probability
from the whole extended fhore of Britain, that
reaches from Caledonia to the Channel. And I
have already fhewn that they actually did.
P. 90-91.
}
158
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
<<
P. 90-91. At the conclufion of his refuta-
tion, Mr. Macpherſon ſpeaks thus.-" We muſt
"have recourſe, in the laſt refort, to the Cale-
"donian Britons for the genuine origin of the
"Irish. Their name of Gael, their language, the
conformity of their manners and cuſtoms with
"thofe of the Old Britons, all concur in prov-
ing, beyond any poffibility of reply, that the
"Iriſh are the pofterity of the Gauls or Gael,
"who, after having traverfed the iſland of Great
"Britain, paffed over, in a very early period,
"into Ireland from the promontories of Gallo-
' way and Cantire.”
66
All the arguments here hinted at have been
urged before. And I fhall not re-anfwer them
now-I have frequently remarked, before, Mr.
Macpherſon's repeated inconfiftency, in fome-
times extending his Caledonia on the fouth to
the Wall of Severus, and in fometimes reducing
it to the Friths of Forth and Clyde. And I have
alſo obſerved, that, as the real Caledonia never
included Galloway, no argument, for the paffage
of the first coloniſts into Ireland from Galloway,
will evince the Caledonian deſcent of the Iriſh.-
I have repeatedly fhewn above, that the name of
Gael cannot affift in proving the Irish to be the
pofterity of the Caledonians. It will equally
prove them to have been the pofterity of the
Gallowefe, the Welsh, and the Cornifh, and of
any tribe in any part of this iſland.—The cor-
refpondency
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
159
66
refpondency of language, manners, and cuftoms,
betwixt the Iriſh and Caledonians, is juft as good
an argument as the community of names before.
The language, manners, and cuſtoms, of almoſt
all the interior Iflanders, have been fhewn to be
exactly the fame.—But the author's management
of his argument, with regard to the correfpon-
dency of manners and cuftoms, is a little obferv-
able. "We muſt have recourfe," fays he, "to
"the Caledonian Britons for the genuine origin
"of the Irish." And one reaſon is, "the con-
formity of their [the Irish] manners and cuf-
"toms with thofe"-not of the Caledonian Bri-
tons, as it should obviouſly have been, in contra-
diſtinction to all the others, but of "the Old
"Britons" in general. To prove the Caledonian
defcent of the Irish, Mr. Macpherſon alledges the
fameneſs of manners in the Iriſh and Old Britons.
-Theſe arguments therefore, which "all con-
"cur in proving beyond any poffibility of reply,"
that the Iriſh are the pofterity of the Caledonians,
are all really befide the mark, and prove fome-
thing very different from the point intended.
So far I have confidered this paffage, as it con-
tains a repetition of former arguments. I will
now confider it, as an inference from the reply
to Father Innes. And, as fuch, it is in the
fame ftrain precifely with the quotation before.
Like that, it forgets an intermediate link in the
chain
160 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
chain of reaſoning. What Mr. Macpherſon has
faid, difproves the Spaniſh and Scandinavian de-
ſcent of the Irish. And fo far it is uſeful.
But it then contends for another, which is juft
as imaginary as the fyftem of the Fileas or the
Hypotheſis of the Jefuit. And, in the love of
innovation and the prevalence of prejudice, he
has overlooked the obvious tendency of his own
arguments, and ſubſtituted Caledonia for Britain.
P. 92. Mr. Macpherſon nów proceeds regu-
larly to overthrow the Iriſh deſcent of the Scots,
and to eſtabliſh the Caledonian. And I fhall at-
tend him regularly in his progrefs.
P. 92.
"The credit of the Milefian tale is
"already deſtroyed, and it is perhaps fuper-
"fluous to refute the pretended Hibernian ex-
"traction of the Scots. Both ftories depend
"C
upon the fame authority, and they muſt both
❝ fall by the fame argument."
This is certainly not true. The Mileſian ſtory
concerning the firſt population of Ireland, and
the account of the migration of the Scots from
Ireland into Britain, are two incidents that are
founded
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
161
7.
founded upon very different authorities. The
former refts folely on the credit of writers that
never exiſted, and on the authority of records
that were written fome ages before the uſe of
Letters was known in the island. The latter is
grounded upon the teftimony of writers actually
or nearly cotemporary with the facts, on hifto-
ries of the beſt credit, and on records of the
greateſt authenticity, Bede, Orofius, and others.
And this our author fufficiently acknowledges
hereafter. In p. 110 he fays, that "the abet-
"tors of the Hibernian Antiquities, finding that
"the credit of the domeftic annals of Ireland
60
could never eſtabliſh this fact, had recourſe
"to fome paffages of foreign writers." The
Hibernian extraction of the Scots therefore, ac-
cording to Mr. Macpherſon himſelf, does not
"depend upon the fame authority" with the
Mileſian tale, and muft not " fall by the fame
argument." It is fixed, according to himfelf,
upon the additional teftimonies of "foreign
"writers;" and it muſt be overthrown by a re-
ply to them. And he accordingly cites the
authority of Claudian, Orofius, Ifidore, and
Bede for it, in p. 105, 111, 116, &c., and
fpends various pages in anfwering them. So
little does the author feem to have had a full
view of his plan, as he proceeded in the work;
and fo little does he feem to have looked
M
back
162 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
back upon the parts, when he had compleated
the whole.
P. 93. "It has already appeared that nothing
"certain is known concerning the affairs of
"Ireland, prior to the miffion of St. Patrick."
This is a reference to the preceding pages of
the work. And, what is very extraordinary, it
is directly contradictory to them.-We are here
told, that nothing certain is known concerning
the affairs of Ireland before the days of St.
Patrick. And yet in p. 8o Mr. Macpherfon
himſelf argues from Diodorus, that the Iriſh were
Britons; in p. 81 (and again in p. 95) from Ta-
citus, that in the days of Agricola the Iriſh were
fo weak, as to be deemed a ready conqueft to a
Legion and a competent number of Auxiliaries;
in P. 82 from Ptolemy, that the Velaborii, Bri-
gantes, Caucii, and Menapii were fome of the
tribes of Ireland; in p. 60, 61, 62, and 63, from
Strabo, Diodorus, Mela, and Solinus, that the
Iriſh were then rude and uncivilized; and in p..
63 (and again in p. 95) from Tacitus, that in
his time the Irish ports were even more fre-
quented by the merchants, and were therefore
better known to the world, than the Britiſh.
It
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
103
It gives me pain to remark the grofs and re-
peated contradictions in fo ingenious a writer.
I ftrain, I exaggerate nothing. I only collate
parts with parts. And the inconfiftency, that
appears upon the face of theſe collations, muft
be attributed, fometimes to his fervility to the
interefts of an Hypothefis, and fometimes to the
haſtineſs and inattention with which he appears
to have written his work.
II.
THE
HE author, now fetting himſelf to prove
that no Iriſh colony tranfmigrated into
Britain in or after the reign of Domitian, takes
a review of what the Romans have communicated
to us concerning the ftate of Caledonia, from
the period to the appearance of the Scots on
the frontiers of the province. With this I
am but partially concerned. Till it defcends to
the 4th century, it has no relation to that mi-
gration of the Scots into Ireland, which alone
M 2
is
164 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
is afferted in the Hiftory of Mancheſter and I
with to defend. And I fhall therefore, in pur-
fuing Mr. Macpherfon's fteps here, only mark
occaſionally fome of the more important miſtakes,
till he has deduced the hiftory to the proper
period.
P.99.
"The incurfions of the Caledonians
"rendered it neceffary for that Emperor [Ad-
rian] to come in perfon into Britain; but that
"the Barbarians fuffered very little fofs by his
<6
66
66
arms we may naturally infer, from his relin-
quifhing to them all that tract of country which
"extends from the Tine and Solway to the
"Scottish Friths."
That the incurfions of the Caledonians ren-
dered it neceffary for Adrian to come into Bri-
tain, is not true. And that he relinquifhed all
the country from the Tine and Solway to the
Friths, is a miſtake.-Adrian went into all the
provinces of the empire. Romanum orbem cir-
cuivit, fays Florus with an expreffive elegance.
Was this occafioned by the Caledonian incur-
fions? He only viſited Britain, as he visited
Gaul and the other dominions of the Romans.-
Nor did he relinquifh Valentia to the Caledo-
nians, by building a Wall from Solway to the
Tine. This I have fully fhewn in the Hiſtory
6
*
of
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
165
of Mancheſter. And all the region of Valentia.
remained in the poffeffion of the Romans, to the
period of their departure from Britain ¹.
P. 100. "Lollius Urbicus, in the reign of
"Antoninus Pius, defeated the Caledonians; and,
"driving them beyond the Forth and Clyde,
"excluded them by an earthen Wall from the
"Roman Britain. Though repelled by Urbi
66 cus, they were far from being reduced fo low
as to yield a part of their territories to the Ro-
mans."
This is a great miſtake. The Brigantes, or Ca-
ledonians, are exprefsly faid by Paufanias to have
loft a confiderable tract of country, Ty woλ,
to the Romans at this period, And I have
fhewn in the Hiftory of Manchefter, that this
conſiſted of half the region of Caledonią ².
marched north-
P. 101–102. "Severus
"ward, with a fixed refolution to exterminate the
"the whole nation of the Caledonians. But he
"was at laft reduced to the old and inglorious
"expedient of building a Wall to exclude from
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 453-458.
2 P. 454-461, and 418-419,
1
M 3
"the
166 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
66
"the Province thoſe Barbarians whom he could
"neither extirpate or fubdue. (Es piλiov eπavnλ=
Φιλιαν επανηλο
θεν, ες ομολογίαν της Βρετζανες επι τῷ χώρας εκ
σε ολικης εκςηναι, αναΓκασας εχθειν. Dion. Caff.
Ce lib. 76.)"
This is, in general, a very unfair reprefen
tation of the principles and fuccefs of Severus's
expedition. And it will eafily appear to be ſo,
even from Mr. Macpherſon himſelf. It is
here exprefsly declared, that Severus could not
fubdue any of the Caledonians. And it is
plainly implied, that he relinquiſhed to them all
the country to the North of his Wall." He
was-reduced to the old and inglorious expe-
"dient of building a Wall to exclude from the
"Province thofe Barbarians whom he could nei-
*ther extirpate or ſubdue."
fubdue." But Severus
actually fubdued all the tribes of the Mæatæ,
and pretty certainly recovered all the con
quefts of Lollius. And the very quotation,
which Mr. Macpherſon adduces in proof of his
own pofition, exprefsly declares the contrary.
The quotation fays pofitively, that Severus forced
the Caledonians to refign up no fmall portion
of their country to him, χώρας εκ ολίδης εκςηναι.
And this concurs with many inftances before to
thew us, how little dependence we can have
upon Mr. Macpherfon's authorities, even when
* See Hiftory of Manchefter, p. 419.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
167
he recites them fairly at the foot of the page,
and has no ſtrong bias to miſlead his hand as he
copies. Nor did Severus relinquiſh Valentia
to the Caledonians. When he was advancing
with a refolution to reduce all Caledonia, or
when he was juſt returning from the actual re-
duction of half the country, he could not have
been either compelled or invited to refign up
Valentia to the enemy. And it remained one of
the five provinces of Roman Britain, to the final
period of the Roman dominion in the island.
-Nor was the refolution to exterminate the
Caledonians taken up by Severus, before he
made his expedition into their country. It was
taken up afterwards, when the fubjected tribes
of Caledonia had thrown off their obedience,
and were inftantly joined by the reſt of the
Caledonians. Severus's refentment kindled at
the news. He ordered the army immediately,
and in the depth of winter, to march to the
North under the command of Caracalla, to re-
lieve the garriſons in the ftations 2, which muſt
have been clofely befieged, and to ſpread an uni-
verſal carnage through the country. And Mr.
Macpherſon has attributed a deſign to the first
expedition, which was only an order for the fe-
cond 3.
+ Hiſtory of Manchefter, p. 454.
Hamburgh, 1750₂ Ta Pergia.
P: 419-420.
2 Dio, p. 1287,
3 Hiſtory of Mancheſter,
M 4
P. 94–104.
168 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
P. 94-104. In thefe pages is contained the
first great argument "to prove that no Iriſh
"colony tranfmigrated into Britain in or after
"the reign of Domitian" (p. 94). And in p.
103-104 we are told thus.—“ In the long pe-
"riod which intervened between the acceffion of
"the fons of Severus to the imperial dignity, and
"the middle of the 4th age,—the frequent conteſts
❝ for the purple,-the public diſtractions which
"arofe naturally from thefe difputes, the growing
imbecillity of the Empire, and the invafions of
"the Barbarians of the northern Europe, di-
"verted the attention of the Romans from Ca-
"ledonia. In a period fo long, and of fuch
66
tranquillity, the inhabitants of North Britain,
"inſtead of declining, muſt have greatly multi-
"plied their numbers. In the tenth Confulfhip
"of Conftantius, the fon of Conftantine, we
"meet with the Scots, a formidable nation in
"Britain. Ammianus Marcellinus, who found
"them firſt in the ifland, does not furniſh one
"obfcure hint that they derived their blood from
a foreign country."
This long argument is intended to prove two
points; That, in all this period of time, from
the reign of Domitian to the middle of the fourth
age, the Caledonians were never reduced fo
much
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
169
much, as to have any part of their country rent
from them by a colony from Ireland; and That,
when the Scots are firft mentioned as in the iſland
by Marcellinus, he does not hint that they de-
rived their deſcent from a foreign country. This
is the full fum and fubftance of the argument.
And it is evidently unfatisfactory. To prove
that no colony tranfmigrated from Ireland into
Britain, he endeavours to fhew that no Iriſh colo-
ny fettled in Britain by violence. To prove that
the Scots did not come into Britain from Ireland,
he intimates that the hiſtorian, who firſt mentions
them in Britain, does not ſay that they came from
Ireland. The former is a mere fallacy, the fub-
ftitution of one term for another. And the latter
is merely a negative reafon, ftrangely adduced
in fupport of a pofitive affertion.
To this clear and fhort refutation of Mr. Mac-
pherfon's great argument, it is proper to add
one obfervation concerning the alledged filence of
Marcellinus. He who firft found the Scots in
this iſland, it is faid, "does not furniſh one ob-
“ſcure hint that they derived their blood from
66
a foreign country." But Mr. Macpherſon is
not aware, that the part of Marcellinus's hiftory,
which first noticed the Scots as in Britain, has
been long loft to the world. The appearance of
them" in the tenth confulfhip of Conftan-
"tius," is not the first that they made in the
Hiſtory
1
170
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
3
Hiſtory of Marcellinus. They made one twenty
years before it, and in that portion of the hifto-
ry which has been unhappily deſtroyed. Con-
fulatu Conſtantii decies, terque Juliani, in
Britanniis cum Scotorum Pictorumque, gentium
ferarum, excurfus, ruptâ quiete condicta, loca
limitibus vicina vaftarent, et implicaret formido
Provincias præteritarum cladium congerie fellas;
hiemem agens apud Parifios, Cæfar-verebatur
ire fubfidio tranfmarinis, ut retulimus ante feciffe
Conftantem. Here we are informed, that the
Scots and Picts had recently ravaged the country
before 360, that Conftans had paffed over to
repel them, and that Marcellinus had given an
account of both theſe incidents. And he ap-
pears to have taken occafion from that incur-
fion into the province, to have expatiated in a
long and laboured deſcription of the country
which was then invaded, and to have given a par-
ticular account of the Scots and Picts who in-
vaded it. Quoniam, fays he himſelf, cùm Con-
ſtantis Principis acta componerem, motus adolef-
centis & fenefcentis oceani, fitumque Britanniæ,
pro captu virium explanavi, ad ea quæ digefta
funt femel, revolvi fuperfluum duxi-: illud
tamen fufficiet dici, quòd eo tempore Picti-iti-
demque Attacotti-, et Scotti, per diverfa va-
gantes multa populabantur. And therefore for
* L. xx, c. I.
2 L. xxvii. c. 8.
Mr.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
177
Mr. Macpherſon to affirm, that Marcellinus, who
first found the Scots in Britain, furniſhes not one
obſcure hint of their derivation from a foreign
country; is to miſtake the time when Marcellinus
firft finds them in the iſland, is to affert what is
certainly not true, and to adduce an argument
in favour of the Caledonian extraction of the
Scots, which is equally frivolous in its nature
and falſe in its atteſtation.
*
PAG. 105.
III.
"Bede is the firft writer who
pofitively affirms that the Scots of Britain
"derived their origin from thofe of Ireland.
"Whether they originally obtained from the
"Picts the principality of Argyle by force or
<< treaty, was a point which all his hiſtorical and
"traditional knowledge did not enable the vene-
"rable Anglo-Saxon to determine. The inca-
pacity of Bede, who lived fo near the pre-
“tended
172 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"tended tranfmigration of the Iriſh, to folve this
"difficulty, is a kind of demonſtration that the
"whole ſtory is a fiction, impofed upon that cre-
❝dulous, though pious writer."
This is furely fuch an argument, as was never
produced before againſt a refpe&table hiftorian.
And it would be of no avail at all, even againſt
the moſt irrefpectable that ever difgraced the
file of hiftorical writers. Bede's unacquainted-
neſs with the reaſons and principles of a great
tranfaction, can never annihilate his credit with
regard to the fact itſelf. Such a great national
exploit, as the first fettlement of a body of Irish.
Scots on the coaft of Caledonia, is an incident
equally notorious and remarkable, that is not
only obvious to all that are within the ſphere
of obfervation, but calls and compels the atten-
tion of all the nations immediately about. The
reafon of the fact, however, lies much deeper,
and is generally known only to the more in-
formed and more inquifitive part of the obferv-
ers. The one therefore is naturally recorded by
many writers. But the other is given only by
fuch, as look beyond the furface of the incident,
and fearch for the ſprings that operated to pro-
duce it. And even hiſtorians that are cotempo-
rary with a fact, and that even endeavour to
affign the reafon and principle of it, are fre-
quently unable, for want of proper information,
to afcertain the true one; and different writers
attribute
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
173
attribute the fame incident to different caufes.
From fome of the many, Bede and Richard tran-
fcribed the account which they have given us;
and the latter, as I have already fhewn in the
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, happily met with the
year of the deed precifely afcertained ¹. But
neither of them found any hiſtorian, that had
inveftigated the actuating motive and principle of
it. That is left to the conjectural criticiſms of
later writers. And in the Hiftory of Mancheſter
I have gueffed at a motive, which has feveral
coincidences of reafon and hiſtory in its favour,
and is therefore in all probability the true and
genuine principle 2.
P. 105–106. “If the Picts were fo feeble that
r a band of Irish adventurers could tear from
"them one third of their dominions, how came
"they fo frequently to provoke the Roman le-
CC
gions, and harafs the provincials from the
"time of Chlorus to the total dereliction of Bri-
"tain by Honorius? To invade the territories
❝ of a warlike and diſciplined people when they
"fuffered a great part of their own to be wreſted
"from them by a defpicable enemy, is a folly
* P. 446.
* P. 447.
“too
*74 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
!
"too abfurd to gain any credit. But perhaps
"the Picts gave the diſtrict of Argyle to their
"allies of Ireland, in confideration of fervices
"againſt the Romans. Theſe fervices were ex-
66
tremely unneceffary; for the Romans, till pro-
"voked by incurfions, were very inoffenfive to-
"wards the Barbarians beyond the walls. Na-
❝tions, in fhort, have been known to receive fo-
"reigners into the bofom of their country to re-
pel invafions, but it is ridiculous to think that
any people would have recourfe to fo danger-
"ous an expedient for the pleaſure of haraffing
neighbours who did not in any degree offend
"them."
66
66
<<
8
· The former was Mr. Macpherſon's firft argu-
ment againſt Bede. This is his fecond. And it
is calculated to prove, that the Scots could not
have fettled in Caledonia either by force or
treaty. But, fuppofing every part of it to be
juft, the whole is of no moment againſt a fact
that is pofitively afferted by a credible autho-
rity. Such an argument would not deſtroy
the flighteſt incident of the flighteſt hiſtory
that ever was written. Though the Scots
could not fettle by force, as indeed I think
that Mr. Macpherſon's reafoning feems ftrong-
ly to evince, they might fettle by treaty, for
any reaſon that is affigned by him. The fer-
vices of the Scots againft the Romans might be
unneceffary and yet the Caledonians might
:
allow
!
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
175
allow them a portion of land in their country.
To invite the Iriſh into the iſland merely to at-
tack the inoffenfive Romans, might be folly in
the Caledonians; and yet they might do it.
Mr. Macpherſon forgets, that he is arguing, not
againſt the affigned reafons of a fact, but againſt
the exiſtence of the fact itſelf. Againſt the for-
mer his arguments would carry weight. But
they carry none at all againſt the latter. There
are alſo other modes of fettling peaceably in a
country, than what is here mentioned. And in
the Hiſtory of Mancheſter I have fuggefted one
very different from this, and in all probability the
true one 2.
"It
P. 106-107.-" It is difficult for the unpre
c
'judiced part of mankind to believe, that a
"colony, fufficient to occupy the weſtern high-
"lands and ifles, could have wafted themſelves,
"their wives, and children, at once, from Ire-
❝land into the northern Britain, in Curraghs or
"miferable fkiffs, whofe hulls of wicker were
66
wrapped up in a cow's hide. In theſe wretch-
"ed veffels, it is true, an irregular communi-
"cation was kept up between both the iſlands ;
"but the navigation was dangerous, and per-
? P. 4471
* formed
176 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
<6
"formed only in the faireft days of fummèr.
(Mare quod Britanniam et Hiberniam inter-
"luit, undofum et inquietum, toto in anno non
"nifi æftivis pauculis diebus eft navigabile: navi-
<<
<<
gant autem vimineis alveis quos circumdant
"ambitione tergorum bubulinorum. Solin. xxxv.).
"The fertility of the foil of Iar-ghael [Argyle]
"could never be an inducement to an Iriſh
રર migration into that divifion of Caledonia. If
poverty, or their being overftocked with num-
"bers, compelled the inhabitants of the pre-
❝tended Dalrietta, or the Route in the county of
"Antrim, to go in queft of foreign fettlements,
"they ought in common prudence to have tried
"their fortune in the fouthern divifion of their
66 own country, and not in the fterile mountains
"of the weſtern Caledonia ¹."
In making theſe Extracts, I am obliged to tran-
fcribe Mr. Macpherſon line by line, in order to
give each argument its full play, and to act ho-
nourably with him and the reader. And each
argument, like this, is a mere Sorites, an accu-
mulation of little reaſons, that, inconfiderable in
themſelves, may appear important in their
union. But, in order to anſwer the whole, I muſt
reduce it into its conftituent parts, examine each
* So Sir G. Mackenzie, p. 375 and 405, vol. i, afferts the
Iriſh ſea to have been generally not navigable in curraghs, and
alfo quotes Solinus for it.
ſeparately,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
177
feparately, and then fee the joint refult of
all.
The import of the firft pofition is, that no
colony of Iriſh could have migrated into Caledo-
nia, becauſe their veffels were fo flight and the
navigation fo dangerous. This is directly pointed
againſt the affertion of Bede. And, could the
former be proved, the latter muſt be given
up.-But, in order to prove it, Mr. Macpherſon
has introduced a foreign circumſtance into the fact.
And he argues that no colony of Irish, fufficient
to occupy the western Highlands and ifles, could
have come over at once. Bede does not affert,
that the colony was fufficient to occupy the
weſtern Highlands and ifles, whether by occupying
Mr. Macpherſon means a forcible reduction or a
compleat inhabitation of them. And he is there-
fore reafoning, not againſt Bede, but againſt
fome writer in nubibus. Bede fays thus. Pro-
cedente tempore Britannia, poft Britones et
Pictos, tertiam Scottorum nationem in Picto-
rum parte recepit; qui, duce Reudâ de Hiber-
niâ progreſſi, vel amicitiâ vel ferro fibimet inter
eos fedes quas hactenus habent vindicarunt-.
Eft autem finus maris permaximus, qui antiqui-
tus gentem Britonum a Pictis fecernebat, qui ab
occidente in terras longo fpatio erumpit, ubi eft
civitas Britonum munitiffima ufque hodie, quæ
vocatur Alcluith: ad cujus videlicet finus partem
N
Septen-
178 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Septentrionalem Scotti, quos diximus, advenientes,
fibi locum patriæ fecerunt. Bede, we fee, fixes
not the Scots along the weſtern Highlands and
ifles, but merely upon the northern bank of the
Clyde. And Mr. Macpherfon, involuntarily in-
deed, has difguiſed the affertion of Bede in order
to overthrow it, and loaded it with an extra-
ordinary circumftance to make it appear extra-
vagant. Nor is the declaration, concerning
the nature of the veffels and navigation, leſs
ftrained or lefs unjuft. Mr. Macpherſon has
mifreprefented the curraghs, defcribing one of
them as contained within the compaſs of a ſingle
hide. But his quotation from Solinus fays nơ
fuch thing: Vimineis alveis quos circumdant
ambitione tergorum bubulinorum. Each boat
was actually lined with ſeveral hides. Carina
primùm ac ftatumina, fays Cæfar, ex levi ma-
teriâ fiebant: reliquum corpus navium, vimini-
bus contextum, coriis integebatur. And Giral-
dus Cambrenfis, mentioning thefe curraghs, which
continued to his time in Ireland, and fpeaking of at
fmall one that went out to fea with two men only,
defcribes it exprefsly, as cymbulam modicam, arc-
tam, et oblongam, vimineam quidem, et coriis
animalium contextam confutamque 3. And for
Mr. Macpherſon to affirm, that the Britiſh cur-
raghs were not fufficient to tranfport over a body
¹ L. i. c. i.
2 P. 24.0.
3 Topog. Hib. p. 744. Camden.
of
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
179
of men from Ireland, is at once to oppofe him-
felf, to deny half the facts in his own Offian, and
to contradict the exprefs declarations of hiftory.
In p. 225 he affures us, that "the fize of thoſe
"veffels muſt have been greater than is generally
fuppofed, for the Saxon auxiliaries of Vorti-
CC
(6
gern tranfported themſelves in three of them
"from Germany to Britain." And, in the pre-
ceding parts of the work, we have ſeen him
fuppofing colonies to have paffed over from Gaul
into Britain, and from Caledonia into Ireland.
Indeed the whole of the author's hiftorical
fyftem, before, is founded upon the fuppofition.
And thoſe colonies muſt have paffed in cur-
raghs, as theſe were the only veffels of the Eri-
tons I.
The Irish of the fourth century could
not be more uncivilized, more unexperienced in
the arts of navigation, than their anceſtors
many ages before; eſpecially as their ports, ac-
cording to Mr. Macpherſon himfelf in p. 95, were
fo particularly frequented by the merchants,
even in the firſt century. And if the great colo-
nies of his Gael, his Cimbri, and his Belge,
which were fufficient to occupy all Caledonia, all
Maxima and Britannia Secunda, and all Britan-
nia Prima and Flavia, if theſe could crofs in
curraghs into Britain, and if thefe could migrate
afterwards into Ireland in fufficient numbers to
occupy the whole compafs of the ifland; the
* Cæfar, p. 240, and Pliny, 1. iv. c. 16.
N 2
Irish
1
180 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Iriſh could certainly remigrate in them as well to
the coaft of Caledonia, and even in numbers
fufficient to occupy the weſtern Highlands and
ifles. In his own Offian alfo, as I have already
obſerved in the Hiftory of Mancheſter, we fee
little armies continually tranfported in thefe vef-
fels from Caledonia to Ireland and from Ireland
to Caledonia. And, as the firſt coloniſts of Bri-
tain muſt neceffarily have wafted over the inter-
mediate channels in curraghs, fo in Gildas we
fee the Picts and Scots of the fifth century
haftily croffing with them the Friths of Forth
and Clyde 2. We find the Britons of the firſt
expreſsly declared by Lucan, to have navigated
the feas about them in their curraghs 3. Suc-
cours were fent in them from South-Britain
into Gaul, in the days of Cæfar 4. And a
great army was tranfported in them even by
Cæfar himſelf, acroſs the very rapid current of
the Sicoris in Spain 5. Thefe facts equally de-
P. 381.
2 Hift. c. xv. Emergunt certatim de Curicis, quibus funt
trans Tithicam vallem vecti.
3 Sic Venetus ftagnante Pado, fufoque Britannus Oceano.
And Pliny fays thus in 1. iv. c. 16. Timæus hiftoricus a Bri-
tannia introrfus fex dierum navigatione abeffe dicit infulam
Mictim-, ad eam Britannos vitilibus navigiis corio circumfu-
tis navigare.
4 Cæfar, p. 73, Omnibus fere Gallicis bellis, hoftibus noftris
inde fubminiftrata auxilia intelligebat.
5 Milites his navibus flumen tranſportat. Cæfar, p. 240.
monftrate
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
181
monftrate againſt Mr. Macpherſon the fufficiency
of the Britiſh curraghs for the embarkation of
armies, and evince againſt Solinus the general
navigableneſs of the Irish channel by them. If
theſe fea-boats could live in the channel between
Gaul and Britain, they could equally live in
the fea betwixt Britain and Ireland. If they
could crofs the British Channel laden with
troops, they could equally in the fame circum-
ftances croſs the Irish. If, thus laden, they were
able to ſtem the heady current of a narrow river,
fwelled with all the melting fnows of the moun-
tains; they muſt have been equally able to ſtem
the current of St. George's channel. And we
accordingly fee them in Offian, as I have obferved
before, perpetually paffing from Ireland to Calc-
donia and from Caledonia to Ireland 2.
Thus is one great part of the argument an-
fwered. And this indeed is by much the
ſtrongeſt. The other is, That no colony of Irish
could have been induced to fettle in Argyle,
becauſe of its natural barrennefs. But this fort
I
• Cæfar, p. 237.
2 In Offian, vol. ii. p. 212, Mr. Macpherſon himſelf ob-
ferves thus: "One thing is certain, that the Caledonians often
"made their way through the dangerous and tempeftuous feas
of Scandinavia, which is more, perhaps, than the more po-
"liſhed nations, fubfifting in thoſe times, dared to venture."
And Mr. Macpherſon makes the Caledonians the anceſtors of
the Irish.
N 3
of
182
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
of problematical arguments may be propagated
ad infinitum, and equally on either fide of an
hiſtorical queſtion. And they are of no confe-
quence at all, either way, as to the fact. The
Scots may have paffed over into the weftern
Caledonia, though the fertility of the country
could be no inducement. The Irish of Dalrieta
may have ſettled in Argyle, though the ſouth of
Ireland was more attracting. And Hiſtory ex-
prefsly affures us that they did.
66
..
tó
P. 107. "The Irifh muft have been wonder-
fully improved in military knowledge from the
days of Agricola, if it was more difficult [for
"the Iriſh of Dalrieta] in the fourth century to
"extort part of their dominions from them, than
"from the Caledonians, who had better oppor
"tunitiés to be enured to arms."
This argument is directed only againſt the fup-
poſition of the Scots fettling by force in Caledo-
nia. But that is too improbable in itſelf, to be
fuppofed by any who are converfant with the hif-
tories of Caledonia and Ireland. And it ſtands
directly refuted by the well-known concurrence
of the Caledonians and Irish fettlers, in in-
curfions into the Roman province, within a few
years only after the fettlement, The great point
at
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
183
at which Mr. Macpherſon fhould direct his argu-
ments is, That the Irish could not have fixed
themſelves in Argyle by the conſent of the Cale-
donians. And for this purpoſe he ſhould ſpecify
all the various modes of fettling amicably in a
country, and ſhew the impoffibility, or at leaft the
high improbability, of each of theſe with reſpect to
the Caledonians and the Iriſh.
P. 107-108. "Should it be fuppofed that a
"band of adventurers were expelled from Ulfter
by the preffure of the fouthern Irish, it is
"difficult to account how the Picts of Britain
"fhould receive the fugitives. Either generofity
"or ſelfiſhneſs would have prompted them to
"affift the exiles in recovering their territories,
66
-
and, by that means, to endeavour to conquer a
part of a fine country for themfelves. But the
"Picts were, it feems, ftrangers to the most com-
"mon maxims of policy; for, according to the
<<
fyftem under confideration, they must have
"been of all nations the moſt tame, prodigal, and
imprudent."
65
This is exactly in the fame tenour and fpirit
as one or two arguments before. The Caledo-
nians might be of all nations the moft tame, pro-
digal, and imprudent, if the fact was true and
N 4
yet
§.
184
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
yet this, if properly authenticated, would ftand
unimpeached.
P. 108-109. The Saxon auxiliaries of
"Vortigern were not fo modeft as the Irish Scots;
66 or elfe the Picts were a people of much leſs
"fpirit than the fouthern Britons. When the
Saxons raifed their demands to an unreafonable
height, the Britons difputed with them every
" inch of ground. Had the Hibernian merce-
"naries incroached upon the Picts, as the Sax-
"ons did on the Britons, we might naturally
fuppofe that the latter [the Picts], inftead of
carrying war and defolation into a foreign
country, in conjunction with the Scots, would
have found employment for their arms at
"home. The unanimity in expedition which
66
66
fubfifted for ages between the Caledonian
"nations, is proof fufficient that they derived
"their origin from one and the fame fource."
This is the fixth argument againſt Bede's affer-
tion, of a fettlement of Scots upon the weſtern
fhore of Caledonia. But it is obviouſly pointed
only againſt a fettlement by violence. It is there-
fore of no moment against the peaceable and
amicable eſtabliſhment of the Scots in Cale-
donia.
Eut
4
THE BRITONS ASSERTED, 185
But there are fome particulars mentioned in
the courſe of the argument, which it may be
proper to notice.--The author alledges the joint
expeditions of the Caledonian Scots and native
Caledonians into the Roman province, as a proof
that the former did not fettle in the country
by violence, And yet, when he draws his con-
clufion, he infers not that the Scots fettled ami-
cably in Caledonia, but that the Scots and Cale-
donians were of one and the fame fource."-
He concludes them both to have been "of one
and the fame fource," becauſe they affociated
in incurfions into the Province. I have urged
the argument before, in proof of the Scots fet-
tling themſelves in Caledonia with the confent of
the natives. And this is all that it proves. Two
nations of a different origin, being fixed in the
fame country, might naturally unite in expedi-
tions againſt a common enemy.-And, what is
ſtill more remarkable, Mr. Macpherſon in the
former parts of his work has ftrenuously endea-
voured to derive the Irish from the Caledonians;
and the Scots must therefore, according to his
own fyftem, be "of one and the fame fource"
with the Caledonians, even if they came over
from Ireland. So little is one great part of
his fyftem united with another. And fo little
do the conclufion and premiſes agree together.
THESE
186 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1
THESE are the arguments by which the au-
thority of Bede, concerning the primary deriva-
tion of the Scots into Britain, is fuppofed to be
overthrown. And each of them, it is obvious, is
without the ſmalleſt force. The reafons urged
againſt an eſtabliſhment by violence are con-
vincing in themfeives, but carry no conclufiveneſs
in them with regard to the main point. And
the reaſons advanced againft an eſtabliſhment
by confent are all vague and frivolous. There
are various kinds of amicable fettlements; and
the author fhould have endeavoured to fet them
all aſide. But he has mentioned only one or two.
And he has particularly omitted that which I
have mentioned in the Hiftory of Mancheſter,
and which was in all probability the very kind.
of amicable eſtabliſhment that took place upon
the preſent occaſion ¹.
? Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 447.
IV.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 187
HA
IV.
AVING now advanced his fix arguments
against Bede, Mr. Macpherfon proceeds.
to overthrow the cited authorities of foreign wri-
ters. And Claudian comes firſt.
P. 111-112. "That poet, in his panegyric
"on Theodofius, has the following lines,
re
Quid rigor æternus cœli ; quid fidera profunt,
"Ignotumque Fretum? Maduerunt Saxone fufo
"Orcades: incaluit Pictorum fanguine Thule:
Scottorum cumulos flevit glacialis Ierne.
દ
"But we may venture to affirm, that there is
nothing in this paffage conclufive in favour of
"the old Milefian tale [the extraction of the Scots
"from Ireland]). It is idle to fearch for fact
"in the hyperboles of poetry; Marcellinus,
"though particularly fond of Theodofius, has
"not recorded thefe prodigies of valour: even
"Latinus Pacatius, though a Panegyrift, fays no
kc more, than that the Scot was driven back to
66
"his
188 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
his native fens (redactum in paludes fuas Scot
tum. Latin. Pacat. in Panegyr, Theod.), and
"the Saxon deſtroyed in conflicts by fea. If
"the Hiber ians were of Caledonian extract; if,
"from the ancient ties of confanguinity, a friend-
66
ly intercourfe was maintained between the Iriſh
"and the inhabitants of Albany; a perfon of a
"lefs warm imagination than Claudian might
"fuppofe that the former fincerely lamented the
"misfortunes of their mother nation.”
In this argument against the customary and
obvious application of the paffage in Claudian,
is one thing intimated and another afferted, It
is afferted, that the account in Claudian is not
confirmed by any other writer, and must there-
fore be confidered as the exaggeration of poetry,
And it is intimated, that if Ireland was peopled
from Caledonia, and if the Irifh kept up a friendly
intercourfe with the Caledonians, Terne might
with propriety be faid to lament the carnage of
the Scots, though thefe Scots were not derived
from Ireland, and though they were native Cas
ledonians.
The affertion is not true. Latinus Pacatus,
even as quoted and interpreted by Mr. Macpher-
fon, clearly gives us the fubftance of what
Claudian has more fully opened. Latinus de-
ftroys the Saxons "in conflicts by fea:" Claudian
fixes the conflicts at the Orkney iſlands;
Quid
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
189
#
Quid rigor æternus coeli, quid fidera profunt,
Ignotumque fretum? Maduerunt Saxone fufo
Orcades.
Latinus has omitted the Picts, who were un-
doubtedly and confeffedly concerned: Claudian
more accurately has noticed them. Latinus
drives back the Scots to their native bogs, re-
dactum in paludes fuas; an expreffion, not fuited
at all to the mountains of Argyle, but highly
characteriſtic of the plains of Ireland: and Clau-
dian mentions the Scots as the fons of Ireland,
and makes a great carnage of them. And where,
efpecially with regard to the laft and main point,
is the difference betwixt the poetical and pro-
faical hiftorian? And where is the Hyperbole
and warm imagination of Claudian? His co-
louring is ftronger: but his texture is the fame
as Latinus's. And it appears from both, that
the Iriſh at this period were repelled in an in-
vafion of Britain, and that Ireland loft a number
of her troops in this unfortunate expedition.-
Mr. Macpherſon's affertion therefore, that Clau-
dian's account is not confirmed by any other
writer, is not true. And it carries no force with
it, if it was. Though the account in Claudian
had not been corroborated by any one elſe, the
facts in him might yet be real. And his own
teftimony would have been fufficient to authen-
ticate the whole.
But
190
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
But Ireland, it is objected, may with a juſt
poetical propriety be faid to lament the flaugh-
ter even of the Caledonians, if Ireland was peo-
pled from Caledonia, and if the Irish and Cale-
donians maintained a friendly intercourfe toge-
ther. If both theſe facts were true, one of which
Mr. Macpherſon has vainly attempted to prove
before, and the other he now fuppofes only;
and even if Claudian was acquainted with both;
fuch an introduction of Ireland, as Claudian
here makes of lerne, would certainly be abfurd.
It would be abfurd in its own nature, as poetry
is not to point at diftant and generally unknown
relations in its perfonifications, but only the
near and the known. The former would give
fuch an obſcurity to the beſt imagery of hifto-
rical poetry, as would totally prevent its effect.
And, if we allowed ourfelves to interpret an
hiſtorical poet in this manner, we might pervert
the whole fyftem of hiftory. But it would be
peculiarly abfurd in the prefent paffage. Clau-
dian fpeaks of three diſtinct nations, the Sax-
ons, the Picts, and the Scots; and by his per-
fonifications affigns them three diftin&t coun-
tries, the Orkneys, where the Saxons appear to
have fettled, Thule or Caledonia, and Ierne
or Ireland. And ſhall Mr. Macpherſon, for the
fake of gratifying the national prejudice of his
1 Nennius, c. 37.
countrymen,
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
191
}
countrymen, confound this obvious diftinction,
and make the Scots of Ierne and the Picts of
Thule one and the fame people, and inhabitants
of one and the fame country? And ſhall the
flaughtered heaps of the Scots, for which Ierne
is reprefented as mourning, be only the fame.
with the bleeding Picts of Thule? Criticiſm and
Common-fenſe equally concur to forbid it.
There is, it fhould be obferved in juſtice to
Claudian and the truth, a ſtriking propriety
and preciſion in the expreffions of this paffage.
Theodofius fitted out a navy, and attacked the
Saxons of the Orkneys. Theodofius marched
with an army, and invaded Caledonia. And the
expreffions carry the greateſt adaptedneſs to
theſe two incidents. The Orkneys are actually
befmeared with the gore of the Saxons. And
Caledonia is actually bathed in the blood of the
Picts. But Ireland was not attacked or invaded.
The Irish were themſelves invaders. And the
language is varied accordingly. The two images,
that referred before to actual engagements in
the Orkneys and Caledonia, are now difmiffed,
and another is adopted which fpeaks only of
the confequence and effect of the engagement
to Ierne, of the forrow which the news of the
defeat diffufed among the tribes of Ireland. And
fuch an exactneſs as this ferves ſtrongly to prove
the hiſtorical fidelity of Claudian, amid all his
poetical imagery.
P. 113-115.
&
192
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
P. 113-115. "In Claudian's Panegyric on
* Stilicho, there is a paffage which has been
"often tranfcribed with triumph in oppofition
"to the antiquity of the British Scots.
(c
"Me quoque vicinis pereuntem gentibus inquit,
"Munivit Stilicho, totam cum Scottus Iernam
"Movit; et infefto fpumavit remige Tethys.
"Illius effectum curis, ne bella timerem
"Scottica, nec Pictum tremerem, nec littore tota
"Profpicerem dubiis venientem Saxona ventis.
There is no neceffity to believe that the
"Poet adhered to hiſtorical fact. Virgil, with-
"out any authority, extended the victories of
"Auguftus to nations, whom neither He nor
"his lieutenants ever looked in the face and
"why ſhould not the fame privilege of invention,
"exaggeration, and flattery be allowed to the lau-
"reat of Honorius ?"
The point which Mr. Macpherfon has under-
taken to prove in the prefent Section is, that this
and the preceding paffage of Claudian have been
mifapplied by the criticks who affert the Iriſh
extraction of the Scots. "The abettors of the
"Hibernian Antiquities," he fays in his entrance
upon the examination of Claudian, "had re-
"courſe to fome paffages of foreign Writers,
"which
I
-"
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
103
દ which they wrested to their purpose" (p. 110).
But, inſtead of proving that the paffages are
wrefted, he "ventures to affirm, that there is
"nothing in" the former "paffage conclufive"
againſt him, and begs leave to fuppofe that
the latter is full of "invention, exaggeration,
"and flattery." And, if this would be as readily
granted as it is eafily affirmed and fuppofed,
the Gordian knot would be untied at once. But,
if it is denied, Mr. Macpherſon is juſt where he
was before, and the two paffages ftill bear di-
rectly againſt his Hypothefis.
Mr. Macpherſon however argues, that becauſe
Virgil did therefore Claudian might invent,
exaggerate, and flatter. But the two cafes are
very unlike. What Virgil fays was entirely pro-
phetic in its defignation, and was a little pro-
phetic in reality. Placing himfelf many centu-
ries before the reign of Auguftus, he predic-
tively delineates the glories of that Emperor.
And, as his career of honour was not yet run,
Virgil adds imaginary to real victories, and anti-
cipates the conquefts which he might afterwards
make. But Claudian's fituation was widely dif-
ferent. He compliments his Emperor upon
facts
only, that were already performed and had
recently happened. And if, in a poem fo imme-
diately retroſpective, he had ſpecified any parti-
cular tranfactions that had not happened, his com-
pliment muſt have been fpoiled by his folly,
O
and
194
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
and all the court and all the Empire have been
equal witneffes of his falfehood.
P. 114-115.
"the Tethys of
"We may fafely affirm, that
Claudian was rather agitated
into a foam by Saxon than by Hibernian oars.
"The Saxons, in the days of Honorius, were
"in fome meaſure a maritime people: Tethys
"fignifies the Ocean: the fea between Germany
"and England has fome right to that title, but
"the channel between Ireland and Caledonia
"was never dignified with fo high a name. This
"criticiſm is fufficient to deftroy the whole force
"of the argument drawn from Claudian."
This formidable argument is furely a mere
accumulation of impertinences. -The Saxons,
even more than a century before the days of
Honorius, were not only "in fome meaſure a
"maritime people," but were remarkably ex-
pert in the arts of navigation. Such they are
well known to have been in the days of Carau-
fius. And fuch they continued as late as the
days of Sidonius:
Saxona, cui pelle falum fulcare Britannum
Ludus.
-But the verbal criticiſm here is more obfer-
vable. Mr. Macpherſon has repeatedly fup-
pofed before, that Claudian, even in a retro-
fpective
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
195
fpective compliment on a recent and notorious.
event, tranfgreffed the bounds of reality, and
threw in imaginary incidents; and that there-
fóre we could not reafon from any, even, of the
facts which are recorded by him. And
And yet here
Mr. Macpherſon can reaſon from his uſe of words
only. We are taught before by our author,
that "it is idle to ſearch for fact in the Hyper-
"boles of poetry." And yet here he himſelf
fearches for a fact in fome lines, which he
ſuppoſes to be fo hyperbolical, as to be full
of "invention, exaggeration, and flattery;" and
even ſearches for it in a criticifm upon a fingle
word. If Claudian looks unfriendly upon his
Hypothefis, even his particular and recent in-
cidents are all hyperbole and fancy. But if
he can be brought to caft the coldeſt look
of favour upon it, even his language, even a
word confeffedly poetical, is neither hyperbo-
lical nor poetical any more.-So far for con
ſiſtency: now for propriety. Tethys, it is faid,
fignifies Ocean, a name by which the channel
between Ireland and Caledonia was never digni-
fied. And this criticifm, we are triumphantly
told, "is fufficient to deftroy the whole force of
"the argument drawn from Claudian." But,
unhappily for the author, the fact is as untrue as
the criticiſm is trifling. The channel between
Ireland and Caledonia is exprefsly called the
Ocean by Ptolemy. Αρκτικης πλευρας περιγραφή,
0 2
ης
196 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
ης υπερκείται ΩΚΕΑΝΟΣ καλεμενο Δεκαλεδονια.
And to fhew what he means by the northern fide
of Britain, to the north of which lay the Deuca-
ledonian Ocean, Ptolemy begins with the Novan-
tum Promontorium or Mull of Galloway in his
progress to the North, ranges up the coaft to
Faro Head as the northern fide of the ifland,
and places the Deucaledonian Ocean along it.
P. 115.
"It appears not from hiftory that
"the Scots ever infefted the Roman divifion of
"Britain by fea: Conftantine appointed an of-
ficer called Comes Littoris Saxonici, to take
"the charge of that part of the coast of the
"Province, which was moft expofed to the pi-
"ratical depredations of the Saxons; but of a
"Comes Littoris Scotici or Hibernici we have
"never heard.”
This is a very feeble argument, I think, and
very feebly pointed. It begins with a pofitive.
affertion which is not true. And it ends with an
inference of reafon which is not juft. Though we
have heard of a Comes Littoris Saxonici, and have
not of a Comes Littoris Hibernici, yet it does not
thence follow that the Iriſh did never invade the
hores of Britain. We might not have heard of
the one, and yet might of the other. And the Sax-
On
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
197
on ravages in Britain might be a long repetition of
invaſions, and therefore occafion the appointment
of a particular officer to guard againſt them;
while the Iriſh might be only a few deſcents,
and would therefore produce no fuch appoint-
ment. And this appears to have been actually
the cafe. The Irish actually "infefted the Ro-
"man divifion of Britain by fea." But they
infeſted it only twice with an armament; once
in the days of Theodofius the Elder, and again
in the time of Stilicho. And the latter inva-
fion extended even along the whole weſtern
fhore of the Province, from Lancaſhire to the
Lands end ¹.
I
66
P. 115–116. “If the province of Valentia
"comprehended the country between the Walls,
why did not the Hibernian Scots land every
"other ſeaſon in Galloway? How came not the
"Irifh rovers to attempt a defcent in either of
"the divifion of Wales or in Cumberland?
"Was not the coaft of Lancashire almoſt as
66
near to the iſle of Man, which, according to
"Orofius, was poffeffed by Scottiſh tribes, as
any part of the continent of Caledonia was
66
I
* Hiſtory of Manchester, p. 458-460.-In fuppofing
therefore the invafion in the days of Stilicho to have been the
firit, p. 458, I was led by probability, but forgot a fact.
оз
6 to
198
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"to Ireland? Why, in the name of wonder,
"was a bulwark of turf and ftone a better
66
fecurity againſt the Irish Scots than againſt
"the Saxons of Friezeland or Holland, as both
"were tranfmarine nations with respect to the
"Province? Why did the Irifh, with a peculiar
"abfurdity, land always on the wrong fide of
"the Roman Walls, which they muſt have ſcaled
or deftroyed before they could penetrate into
"the Province? It is impoffible to believe that
all their expeditions could have been fo ill
concerted; and this confideration alone is fuf-
"ficient to demonftrate, that the Scots, whom
"the Roman writers ſo often mention, were inha-
bitants of Caledonia. Walls were conſtructed
and legions employed to defend the Province
"from their incurfions, but fleets were never
"fitted out to intercept or deſtroy them at
fea "
The author has here confounded himſelf, by
not attending to the very plain diftinction be-
twixt the Scots that came directly from Ireland
to invade the Province, and the Scots that were
previously fettled in Caledonia. The bulwarks
of turf and ſtone were never raiſed againſt the
former, any more than againſt the Saxons. And
the Iriſh expeditions were not fo ill concerted, as
Mr. Macpherſon fuppofes them on the common
So Sir George Mackenzie argues, more confinedly, in
p. 377:
D
fyftem
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
199
fyftem to have been. They generally invaded
the Province from their fettlement in Argyle,
and were accompanied by the Picts. But they
twice made an invafion of it directly from Ire-
land. And this is a full anfwer to this feries
of Queſtions, why the Scots of Ireland did not
land in fome of the countries to the South of the
Walls. They did. In the days of Stilicho parti-
cularly, leaving "the country between the Walls"
to be ravaged by their brethren of Argyle and
the Picts, they made a deſcent on the provinces
that were inacceffible to them, landed in both
"of the divifions of Wales," and now for the
first time poffeffed themſelves of "the ifle of
"Man." This is related to us by Nennius in
theſe two paffages. Mailcunius magnus Rex
apud Britones regebat, id eft, in regione Guen-
edotiæ, quia atavus illius Cunedag cum filiis
fuis-Scotos cum ingentiffimâ clade expulerat ab
iftis regionibus, et nunquam reverfi fuerunt iterum
ab habitandum '.-Builc autem tenuit Euboniam
infulam cum fuis [the iſle of Man, fee c. 2.];
filii autem Vethan obtinuerunt regionem Dimec-
torum, ubi civitas eft quæ vocatur Mineu [Me-
nevia or St. David's]; et in aliis regionibus fe
dilataverunt, i. e. Guiher Cet Guely [to Caer
Kidwelly in Caermarthenshire], donec expulfi
funt a Cunedâ & a filiis ejus ab omnibus regioni-
1 C. 64.
04
bus
200
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
bus Britannicis - And here we fee the Scots
actually landing in the fouthern diviſion of Bri-
tain, actually making conquefts in North and
South Wales, and actually repelled from both
with great flaughter.
Nor were they only beaten from the land.
A fleet was "fitted out to deftroy them at
"fea." This appears plainly from a paffage of
Claudian, which Mr. Macpherſon himſelf has
quoted in a Note to p. 112-113. It is there
faid of Theodofius the Elder, that
Scottum-vago mucrone fecutus,
Fregit Hyperboreas remis audacibus undas.
And here Mr. Macpherſon himſelf acknowledges,
that Theodofius "purfues the Scots fword in
"hand into the Hyperborean Ocean." A navy
was fitted out by Theodofius to deſtroy the fleet of
Iriſh and Saxon veffels, which chaced the former
into the northern Ocean, obliged them to retire
into the northern ports of Ireland, and then
attacked and deftroyed the latter at the Ork-
neys. And the fea to the North of Ireland is
exprefsly denominated the Hyperborean Ocean
by Ptolemy.
C. 8.
2 See Latinus and Claudian before.
Mr.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 201
{
Mr. Macpherſon here gives over his critical
remarks and conclufive arguments, as he calls
them, againſt the cuſtomary application of theſe
paffages in Claudian. And what has he faid
against it? That Claudian has perhaps invented
and exaggerated facts; that he uſes, however,
no exaggerated language; and that therefore his
Tethys or Ocean cannot fignify the channel
betwixt Ireland and Caledonia, when the chan-
nel is expressly called Ocean by Ptolemy and
that the Scots never landed to the South of the
Walls, never infefted the fouthern divifion of
Britain by fea, and were never attacked or pur-
fued at ſea by the Romans; when they ac-
tually invaded the Provinces by fea in the days
of Theodofius, actually landed in North and
South Wales, and ravaged all the weſtern ſhore
of Britain, in the days of Stilicho, and were
actually purſued by the Roman navy of Theo-
dofius to the North of Ireland.
V.
202 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
H
V.
AVING deprived the oppofite fyftem,
as he imagines, of every ſupport from
Claudian; Mr. Macpherſon proceeds to examine
the paffages of other writers, that have been em-
ployed in the fame ſervice.
і
P. 116. "If Orofius, a Spaniſh prieſt, found
"the Scots in Ireland about the beginning of the
"fifth age, Marcellinus met with them in Britain
"about the middle of the third."
This is all that is faid against the teftimony of
Orofius. And it is evidently nothing. Mr.
Macpherſon has undertaken to fhew, that theſe
paffages of foreign writers are wrested from their
natural fignification, when they are applied to
prove the Iriſh derivation of the Scots of Britain
(fee p. 110.). But the authority of Orofius has
been cited only to prove, that all the inhabitants
of Ireland, from one end of the ifle to another,
were denominated Scots. And his words fully
evince it: Hibernia infula a Scotorum genti-
bus
7
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
203
bus colitur. In oppofition to this, Mr. Mac-
pherſon alledges only, that there were Scots in
Britain more than 150 years before. This may
be true, and the other not be falfe. And hiſtory
actually fhews it; Orofius and other hiftorians
declaring the Iriſh to have been all denominated
Scots in the fourth and fifth ages, and Bede and
others afferting a party of thefe Scots to have
migrated into Caledonia. Orofius, therefore, ftill
adheres to the cauſe in which he has been fo
long engaged. He fhews Ireland to have been
the general refidence of the Scottiſh tribes, when
there was only a ſingle nation of them in Caledo-
nia. And Bede and others evince the migration
of this from thoſe.-Nor did Marcellinus meet
with the Scots in Britain about the middle of the
third century. He first mentions them after the
middle of the fourth, and under the year 360 ².
P. 116-118. "Ifidore of Seville, who flou-
"rifhed in the feventh age, fays, that in his
"time, Ireland was indiſcriminately called Scot-
tia and Hibernia. Ifidore is not the first
learned prelate who gave to Ireland the name
of Scottia; a biſhop of Canterbury, about the
-
P. 28, Havercamp,
2 L. xx. c. 1.
L,
"year
204
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1
K
year 605, beſtowed upon that iſland the fame
"appellation. We fhall not difpute with the
"Iriſh that their country received the name of
"Scottia fome centuries before it was appropri-
"ated to Caledonia. But no argument can ariſe
"in favour of their ſuperior antiquity from that
"priority. A colony of the antient Grecians.
poffeffed themſelves of a diſtrict of the Leffer
(6
Afia, which afterwards obtained the name of
"Ionia. That colony, and their anceſtors in
"Greece, for a feries of ages, were called Ioni-
ans, but their territories in Europe never
<<
poffeffed the appellation of Ionia; and from
"that circumſtance, will any man conclude, that
"the Ionians of Ephefus and Miletus were more
"antient than thofe of Attica ?"
Co
If Ireland" received the name of Scottia fome
"centuries before it was appropriated to Cale-
donia," as Mr. Macpherſon acknowledges,
then the conclufion furely lies very fair and pro-
bable, that Ireland was the feat of the Scots fome
centuries before Caledonia. And, even if any
one inſtance could be produced to the contrary,
fuch a ſingle and folitary incident could not take
away the general tendency of the argument. But
no fuch is here given. And Mr. Macpherſon's
parallel is by no means exact. It wants two
effential points of coincidence.
The
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
205
I
The author's infinuated hypothefis here, for he
has not ventured to affirm it, is this, That the
Scots were originally natives of Caledonia, that
they first peopled Ireland, that they there re-
tained their original appellation of Scots, and
that they appear bearing the name fome centu-
ries before the Caledonians ¹. This hypothefis
indeed is very wild, as it fuppofes the coloniſts
to retain a name which their anceſtors never ap-
pear to have borne, and as it makes the children
to have been known by their parental appella-
tion fome centuries before the parent herſelf.
And the parallel is to be adapted to this. But
it is very different. The natives of Attica were
denominated Iones, before they ſettled a colony in
the Leffer Afia: but Mr. Macpherſon has not
fhewn, or attempted to fhew, the Caledonians to
have been called Scots, before their fuppofed mi-
gration into Ireland. The Attic coloniſts natu-
¹ So Sir George Mackenzie in p. 387 intimates, that the
name of Scot belonged to the Caledonians before the Irish,
and was probably communicated by the former to the
latter. Dr. Mackenzie alfo, in the preface to his Lives of
Scots Writers, p. 2-8, attempts to prove Ireland to have
been originally peopled by the Caledonians under the name of
Scots. And Abercromby fays, p. 2. vol. i, that Dr. Macken-
zie bids very fair to prove, that there are greater preſumptions
for believing thoſe of Ireland to have come from the Scots
in North-Britain, than that the Scots in North-Britain were
derived from thoſe in Ireland.
rally
1
266 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
rally fettled in Afia under the denomination of
their anceſtors, and even retained the name when
their anceſtors had refigned it for another: but,
as the Caledonians appear not to have originally
poffeffed the appellation of Scots, fo they actually
obtained it fome centuries after the Iriſh. Theſe
are the two effential points upon which the par-
allel was to run. But it grofsly fails in both.
And Mr. Macpherſon himſelf acknowledges it to
fail, allowing" the colony and their anceſtors in
"Greece, for a ſeries of ages," to have been
"called Ionians," and yet confeffing" the coun-
66 try of the Iriſh to have received the name of
"Scottia fome centuries before it was appro-
"priated to Caledonia."
This argument therefore is of no moment.
And the ufe that has been made of Ifidore's au-
thority ſtands unimpeached. But the author has
made one or two miſtakes in the argument, which
it may be proper to rectify.
Mr. Macpherſon reaſons, not upon the national
appellation of Scoti or Scots, but on the terri-
torial denomination of Scotia, as if the latter was
different from the former, and as if his argument
derived a greater weight from this direction of it.
"Ifidore fays that Ireland was indifcrimi-
"nately called Scottia and Hibernia.-We fhall
"not difpute with the Irish that their country
"received the name of Scottia fome centuries,
*before
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
207
"before it was appropriated to Caledonia. But
"a colony of the ancient Grecians poffeffed
"themfelves of a diſtrict of Leffer Afia, which
"afterwards obtained the name of Ionia. That
colony, and their anceſtors in Greece, for a
"feries of ages, were called Ionians, but their
"territories in Europe never poffeffed the appel-
"lation of Ionia." This is furely a very ſtrange
direction of the reafoning. If that colony and
their anceſtors in Greece were called Ionians,
their territories both in Europe and Afia muſt
have poffeffed the appellation of Ionia. And
the territorial denomination must have com-
menced with the national in both. Ifidore ac-
cordingly, who mentions the territorial name of
Scotia, mentions alfo the national appellation of
Scoti. Coinciding exactly in his words with Oro-
fius above, Ifidore, even as quoted by Mr. Mac-
pherſon himſelf, fays: Scottia eadem & Hiber-
nia; Scottia autem quòd ab Scotorum genti-
bus colitur.
And Mr. Macpherfon has forgotten in the
courſe of his reply to each fingle authority, that
the notions which he combats do not rely upon
the credit of any of theſe hiftorians, fepa-
rately taken, but on the united force and col-
lective import of all. If Orofius, Ifidore, and
others affure us, that Ireland was inhabited by
the Scots in their time, and that it was therefore
denominated
208 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
denominated Scotia as well as Hibernia; this
forms a ftrongly prefumptive argument, that
Ireland was the primary and general feat of the
Scots for ages before. But when Bede and
others inform us, that Ireland was the original
country of the Scots, and that the few who lived
in a narrow confined corner of Caledonia, paffed
over from Ireland to fettle there; this reflects a
lufter back upon the former affertion, and what
before was only prefumptive now becomes cer-
tain. And all unite to form theſe important
truths, That the Irish firft bore the appellation
of Scots, and firft communicated it to their own
country; that they afterwards fettled in Caledo-
nia, and gradually extended their own name
over it; and that at last, as in the cafe of the
Ionians above, the colony retained the primæval
appellation of their anceſtors, when the parent
had loft it.
P. 121–128. Mr. Macpherſon having fairly
fhewn in p. 118-120, that Gildas's authority
is not in reality against his fcheme; he once more
returns to Bede, as he finds his teftimony once
more pofitively against him. And, as before he
endeavoured to fet afide his affertions from his
uncertainty concerning the reaſons of the facts
afferted,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
209
afferted, &c., fo here he attempts to overthrow
his authority by pointing out feveral miſtakes
in him.
P. 121–122. "Whether the Iriſh Scots ob-
"tained fettlements of the Picts by force or fa-
"vour was a point whieh Bede could not deter-
"mine. He was however informed that they
r were called Dalreudini, from their illuftrious
"leader Reuda, and from the Gallic word Deal,
"which, according to the venerable writer,
(c
fignified a portion or divifion of a country.
(-It is to be obſerved that Deal does not fig-
nify a portion or divifion)."
This, the firſt argument againſt Bede, has been
equally urged with another view by Dr. Mac-
pherſon in the Critical Differtations. But, even
if it be juſt, it is of no weight againſt the autho-
rity of Bede. He might be a faithful hiftorian,
and yet a very indifferent linguift. And he might
be very authentic in his account of the Irish mi-
gration into Caledonia, and yet be miſtaken in his
interpretation of an Iriſh or Caledonian word.
What, however, fhall we fay to theſe criticks in
· P. 53.
P
the
210 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
the Gallic, if, after all, they are miſtaken and
Bede is right? We have ſeen ſeveral reaſons be-
fore to apprehend, that thefe gentlemen, who
fet themſelves up as peculiarly qualified to write
the antient hiſtory of our island, becauſe of their
accurate acquaintance with its antient language,
are but imperfectly acquainted with it. And
we have ſeen them particularly fpeaking before
of the Britiſh, from the view merely of a part
of it, and from the knowledge only of one
of its dialects. But we fee them both more ri-
diculouſly ſpeaking here, from a view merely of
a part of a part, and from a knowledge only of
half a dialect, from an acquaintance with the
Iriſh or Erfe, as it is ſpoken only in the High-
lands of Scotland. For, in the Erfe of Ireland,
Deal or Dal does fignify a portion or divifion.
Bede's affertion, that it fo fignified in his time,
would certainly be a ftrong prefumption that it
did, even if it had loft that meaning now. But
it has not loft it. The word and its derivatives
run through the whole Irish language, and occur
in various ihapes and forms, all referring to the
original idea of divifion. Deillim and Dealui-
ghim fignifies to part or divide, Dailthe and
Dealuighte fignifies parred or divided, Deilt and
Dealachd means a parting or divifion, and Duil,
Dail, and Dal means a divifion or fhare. Hence
Dail or Dal alfo fignifies in Irish a tribe of people
and the region belonging to it; as in Dal-cais, a
name
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 2:1
name for the tribe of Cormac-cais, and in Dal-
araidhe, Dal-fiatach, and Dal-riada, the names
of three large territories in Ulfter. And the
word is not confined to the Irish language. It
occurs equally in the Welſh of Howel Dha and
the English of the prefent day, in the Diler
or divider of that great legiflator, and in the
Saxon-British Dealer, To Deal, A Deal, and A
Dole, amongſt ourfelves. The word is fo far
from not being Britiſh, that it appears uncommon-
ly diffuſed through the British language; form-
ing a large variety of words in the Irith, remain-
ing in the Welſh of the tenth century, and con-
tinuing in fome of the moſt familiar words amongſt
ourſelves at preſent. And how groísly miſtaken
is Mr. Macpherſon, and alſo his friend and fel-
low-labourer, even in their own arrogated pro-
vince of Celtic etymology!
(6
"C
P. 122.
"It is remarkable, that not one
Engliſh or Scottish antiquary ever implicitly
adopted every part of the Anglo-Saxon's ſyſtem.
"The Picts and Scots according to him, as fepa-
"rate nations, and from very different origins,
poffeffed North Britain before the commence-
"ment of the Chriftian æra. Camden, Usher,
"the two Lloyds, Stillingfleet, Innes, and many
56
I P. 139. Wotton's Howel.
P 2
more,
212 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
66
more, rejected fome one part or other, and
"fome the whole of Bede's account of the South-
66 ern Britons; but all theſe learned men received
"without examination his fyftem of the Hiber-
"nian extraction of the British Scots."
This argument is very trifling. And Bede's
account, of the derivation of the Southern
Britons, may be justly rejected either in part
or in whole; and yet his extraction of the Scots
may be depended upon. The fettlement of the
former in the island, was long before the ex-
iftence of records. But the eſtabliſhment of the
latter was within the period of hiſtory. For the
Scots are not fixed in North-Britain by Bede
"before the commencement of the Chriftian
"æra." In tracing the origin of the five ſeveral
nations that were then fettled in Britain, He
begins with the Britons, proceeds to the Picts,
and, to give the large account of the Romans
and Saxons in one entire and unbroken feries,
immediately paffes to the Scots, and then en-
ters upon the Romans. And He gives us the
origin of the Britons, the Picts, and the Scots,
in a manner that exactly correfponds with this
idea, and that ftrikingly diſtinguiſhes the an-
tiquity and recentneſs of their reſpective ſet-
tlements in Britain. Concerning the migration
of the Britons and Picts into this iſland, he ex-
prefsly ſpeaks with a dubious reference to popular
opinions
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
213
opinions and traditionary hiftory. But of the
migration of the Scots he ſpeaks peremptorily
and pofitively, as peremptorily as he does of
the Roman invafion of the iſland, and as pofi-
tively as of the Saxon fettlement upon it. In pri-
mis-hæc infula Britones folùm incolas ha-
buit, qui de tractu Armoricano, ut fertur, Britan-
niam advecti. Contigit gentem Pictorum de
Scythia, ut perhibent, Oceanum ingreffam, &c.
Procedente autem tempore Britannia, poſt Brit-
tones & Pictos, tertiam Scottorum nationem in
Pictorum parte recepit, qui, duce Reudâ de Hi-
berniâ progreffi, vel amicitiâ vel ferro fibimet
inter eos fedes quas hactenus habent vindica-
runt. Hibernia propriè patria Scottorum eft :
ab hâc egreffi, ut diximus, tertiam in Britanniâ
Brittonibus et Pictis gentem addiderunt '.
:
¡
P. 122-123.
"Where we have an oppor-
"tunity to examine Bede's account by the
"criterion of collateral hiſtory, we find that he
"has committed a very effential miſtake. The
"Southern Britons were fo far from deriving
"their blood from the inhabitants of Armorica,
"that, on the contrary, the Armoricans had
"tranfmigrated from Britain not many ages be-
¹ L. i. c. 1.
P 3
"fore
214 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"fore Bede's own time. If Bede therefore was
"in an error with reſpect to the origin of a
"people, whofe hiftory, on account of their
"connection with the Romans, was known, it
❝is much more probable that he knew nothing
"certain concerning the antiquities of a nation,
"who had not among them the means of pre-
ferving, with any certainty, the memory of
" events."
66
This is the third argument againſt Bede. And
it is, I think, of as little avail as the other
two.-Bede has committed no miſtake, even upon
Mr. Macpherſon's own ftate of the cafe. He
derives the original Britons from Armorica: but
he derives them very dubioufly. In primis,
fays he, hæc infula Britones folùm, a quibus
nomen accepit, incolas habuit, qui de tractu Ar-
And
moricano, ut fertur, Britanniam advecti ¹.
his derivation of the original Britons from Ar-
morica, even if poſitively afferted, does not fu-
perfede, as Mr. Macpherſon imagines, the re-
migration of Britons into that country afterwards,
becauſe it is not contrary to it.
The name of Armorica feems, from the ſhifting
application of it by antient authors, and from
the full import of the word, which fignifies the
people upon the fea, to have once extended
I L. i. c. 1.
along
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
215
along the whole compafs of the Gallic coaft from
the Bay of Biſcay to the Rhine. In the days
of Cæfar, it comprized a variety of ſtates in
Weſtern Gaul'. In the days of Pliny, it reached
from the Pyrenees to the Garonne 2. And in the
days of Sidonius Apollinaris it was carried much
farther to the North-Eaft, and included, and even
ſeems to have been reftricted to, the compafs of the
prefent Bretagne. In this general acceptation
of the word, the Britons were certainly derived
from Armorica. And at the eastern point of
the Gallic coaft, and directly oppofite to the great
Angle of Kent, even Bede places the Morini, a
name exactly the fame as Ar-Mor-ic-i, and feem-
ingly the continuation of it 4.
Whether the Britons ever re-migrated into
France, and fixed the appellation of Britanni
on the continent, has been much difputed.
But, I think, it may be fatisfactorily decided.
That they actually tranfmigrated, is evident from
hiſtory. They paffed into Gaul under the con-
duct of Maximus, and fettled afterwards in Ar-
morica, as is afferted by Llowarch Hên and
Nennius 5. And they fettled in Gaul upon the
first invaſion of the Saxons, as is affirmed by
Gildas, Bede, and Eginhard. But in both
1
¹ P. 108 and
47.
2 L. iv. c. 17.
a note.
4 L. i. c. 1.
note, and Nennius, c. 23.
6
3 Carte, v. I. p. 7-
5 Carte, v. I. p. 169. a
Gildas, c. 25. alii tranſ-
P 4
thele
216 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I
thefe migrations they did not establish them-
felves in Bretagne only. The greateſt number
paffed over under Maximus ; and theſe were
diſperſed in the many regions that extend à
ſtagno quod eft fuper verticem Montis Jovis
ufque ad civitatem quæ vocatur Cantguic, from
the great St. Bernard in Piedmont to Cantavic
in Picardy, and from Picardy to the weftern
coaſt of France. And the refugees, that were
driven away by the Saxon invaſion, appear to
have equally diſperſed themſelves into different
parts of the continent, tranfmarinas regiones pe-
tivere. In both expeditions, however, a body of
them ſeems certainly to have planted themfelves
in the prefent Bretagne 3. But they never fixed
the name of Britanni on the continent. It was
there ages before either migration. Dionyfius
the Geographer, and Pliny the Naturaliſt, both
fpeak of the Britanni, as the name of a tribe on
the borders of Picardy and Flanders 4. And
Britannia, the capital of the tribe affuredly, was
one of the moſt celebrated cities in Gaul, as
early as the days of Hannibal s. Armorica is
marinas petebant regiones; Bede, 1. i. c. 15. the fame; and
Eginhard in Ann. Franc. Ufher, p. 226. edit. 1687.
1
Gildas, c. II. ingenti juventute.
2 Nennius, c. 23.
The common copies read Tantguis, but the Cotton MS.
Cantguic. And for Cantavic fee Carte, V. I. p. 25. a note.
3 Carte, V. I. p. 269, from Lowarch, and the writers in
5 Ibid. a note.
Usher, p. 226.
4 Carte, p. 5.
i
called
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
217
called Britannia by Sulpicius Severus, at a time
when it appears to have been equally called Ar-
morica. Sulpicius wrote within 10 years only
after the expedition of Maximus; and yet he re-
cites the name without any note of its novelty,
and even in ſpeaking of the times antecedent to
that expedition '. And in the fame manner,
within 12 years only from the firſt poffible mi-
gration of the iſlanders in confequence of the
Saxon invafion, and within 4 only after the
Saxons had made themſelves mafters of a ſingle
county, even in the year 461, and even in the
public acts of a Synod, the Prelate of Armo-
rica ſubſcribes himſelf, without heſitation, without
explanation, Manfuetus Biſhop of the Britons 3.
Each argument feparately proves, and the actual
and exact concurrence of both gives a great ad-
ditional weight to the proof, that the names of
Armorica and Britannia were equally the appel-
lations of the country, long before the forces of
I
• Carte, p. 6—7. a note.
2 Sax. Chron.
3 Ufher, p, 226.-Mr. Carte has ftrangely fuppofed fuch
a number of Britons to have retired from Kent, that Hengiſt
was obliged to bring a body of his countrymen, about 300,000,
from Germany to fupply their place (V. I. p. 195.).—
And Dr. Borlafe, ftill more ftrangely, fuppofes the Britons to
have retired into Armorica " when the Saxons had conquered
"the greateſt part of the ifland" (P. 39. edit. 2d.), though
the name of the Britons occurs in Armorica fo many years
before that period.
Maximus
218 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Maximus or the refugees of Kent could have
fettled in it. It is ridiculous to fuppofe, that
they ſettled there in any confiderable numbers.
No numbers could have impofed their own ap-
pellation on the country, without an abfolute
conqueſt of the natives. And as, in the circum-
ſtances of both the colonies, a conqueſt of Ar-
morica was abfolutely impracticable, fo the name
of Britain appears the well-known, the acknow-
ledged, and the cuſtomary appellation of Armo-
rica, within 10 years only after the firft migration,
and even within 4 only after the laſt.
The name of Britons, then, was the antient
and equal appellation of the Armoricans, as in
the Hiſtory of Manchefter I have fhewn the
names of Morini and Rhemi to have been for
the Durotriges and Bibroces; was taken up in
the later ages of the Empire, and at laſt ſuper-
feded the other. And thefe appellations of
Britons for the Celtæ of Armorica, Picardy, or
Flanders, were all evidently occafioned by the
fame principles of diftinction that planted Pict-
on-es in France and Pict-i in Scotland, and that
ſettled Brigantes equally on the continent and
in the iſland. The principle which ſtamped the
appellation of Britanni, Brigantes, or the fepa-
rated People, upon the Gauls that had croffed
the channel into Albion, as naturally operated
to give the fame name to the Gauls which were
feparated from the reft by much flighter bar-
riers,
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
219
1
riers, by a few hills of the Alps or a couple of
currents. And we ſee the cafe ftrongly exem-
plified in the equivalent word Vict or Pict, ap-
plied, as I have fhewn in the Hiſtory of Man-
chefter, to thoſe Britons who were ftrikingly
diſtinguiſhed from the others by lying without the
pale of the Roman province, and equally applied
to the Pictones in Gaul, who were only divided
from their brethren by rivers, and to the Vect-
urion-es in Caledonia, who were only feparated
from their countrymen by mountains ¹.
1
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 415-417. The word is alſo
applied, in Vectis, Ictis, or Wight, to a land that was merely
peninſular, and only infulated at the tide of flood; and, in
Portus Ictius or Wit-fand, merely to fuch an opening or di-
vifion in the fhore as formed an harbour. And it therefore
ftands for an ifland in the Welſh Uight (Baxter on Vectis) and
the Saxon-Welſh Ight, and for a cove or creek in the Corniſh
Ic or Ict, at prefent.-How wrong then are Mr. Carte and
Dr. Borlafe; the one, in drawing an argument for the con-
junction of Britain to Gaul from the name of the Promonto-
rium Ictium, becauſe the name fignifies feparation (p. 3.);
and the other for transferring the Ictis of Diodorus from the
ifle of Wight to Cornwall, becauſe the name fignifies a Cove
in Corniſh (Borlafe's Scilly). The harbour muſt have given
name to the Promontory. And It must have fignified an
harbour equally in the Gallic and Britiſh.
And fo we
have Brixia, now Breſcia, in the Gallic part of Italy, as the
Britons of France now call themſelves Brez, and as Brix fignifies
a rupture or divifion at prefent. And fo Bruges in Flanders,
Bretten the antient name of Mons in Hainault, &c. (See Carte,
p. 6 and 10.).
Bede
220 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Bede then has not committed, as Mr. Macpher-
fon afferts," a very effential mistake" here.
He has committed none at all. He deduces the
original Britons from Armorica, perhaps ex-
tending that name along the whole coaft of
France, and being then right in his deduction.
One of his reaſons was the continuing appella-
tion of Britons in Gaul, perhaps in Flanders or
Picardy, and certainly in Bretagne. And the
other was the general tradition of the times. But
he gives us all with a strong note of diffidence,
referring us to his fingle authority, and declaring
that to be only the popular opinion. By his
afcribing the name of the Infular to the Conti-
nental Britons, he plainly fhews that he con-
fidered the name as exifting in Gaul, many ages
before the invafion of the Saxons or the rebellion
of Maximus. And we have feen above, that
the name was actually prior to both.
I have entered the more fully into this argu-
ment, becauſe it might feem to carry fome de-
gree of force with it. And I was defirous to
afcertain the triflingneſs of the British migrations
into Gaul, which had been confiderably heigh-
tened, to point out the exiſtence of the name of
Britons there before them, and to lay open the
grounds and reafons of the name confiftently with
the etymology of Britain before. Mr. Carte,
purſuing the steps of Bede, had endeavoured to
derive
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
221
derive the name of our own Britons from the
remaining appellation on the continent, but had
not afferted the meaning of either. And he had
even, contradictorily, derived the name of Bre-
tagne from the tranfplanted Britons of this
land'. And I was willing, in anfwer equally
to Mr. Macpherſon and Mr. Carte, to vindicate
the real hiſtory, if I could, and to reduce it into
a regular confiftency.
P. 123.
"From the political and religious
rr prejudices which prevailed, in the days of Bede,
"between the Britiſh Scots and the Saxons, we
66
may conclude that the venerable writer had
very little converfation with the antiquaries or
"fenachies of the former nation. Had he even
"confulted them, very little light could be de-
"rived from them in an age of ignorance, cre-
"dulity, and barbarifm. Bede, on the other
"hand, entertained a friendly partiality for the
"Scots of Ireland.-Their benevolence and hof
pitality to the Saxon Students, who flocked
"into their country, recommended them, in a
"very high degree, to the venerable Anglo-Saxon
(Bede Hift. lib. iv. c. 26.). The good inan,
"we may take it for granted, embraced every
"opportunity of converfing with thoſe Hibernian
66
66
* Carte, p. 5-6, and 194-195, V. I.
"miffionaries
1
222
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"miffionaries and pilgrims who came over in
"fwarms into Britain, in thofe days of conver-
"fion and religious pilgrimage. From them he
"borrowed all that genealogical erudition which
❝he diſplays in the beginning of his Ecclefiaftical
Hiſtory 1."
This is the fourth argument againſt Bede. And
it is obviouſly all founded upon gueffes, affump-
tions without reafon, and conclufions without
premiffes.It is prefumed, that Bede had very
little converfation with the Caledonians, and a
great deal with the Iriſh. It is therefore inferred,
that he derived his account of the Scots, not
from the former, but the latter. And it is again
inferred, that his accounts are therefore wrong.
Such is the nature of the prefent argument. And
the preſumption and inferences are all equally
unjuſt.
A very great intimacy had commenced betwixt
the Northumbrians and Caledonians, from the
kind refuge which the fons of Ethelfrid had found
among the latter, after the death of their father
in 617. And a confiderable correfpondence was
carried on between them to the days of Bede.
Filii-regis Edilfridi, fays Bede, — cum magnâ
nobilium juventute apud Scottos five Pictos exu-
labant, ibique ad Scottorum doctrinam catechizati
So the Prefacer to Dr. Macpherſon, p. vi and xiii.
funt.
}
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
223
funt.
And a few years afterward Ofwald the
king, and a number of adherents with him, were
received with equal hoſpitality, and were equally
baptized, among the Scots: inter quos exulans
Ipfe Baptifmatis facramenta, cum his qui fecum
erant militibus, confecutus erat. At Ofwald's
departure from the country, he appears to have
made himſelf a perfect maſter of the Scotch
language: tam longo exilii fui tempore linguam
Scottorum jam plenè didicerat 3. And, upon his
recovery of Northumbria from Cadwallaun, he
fent and procured a bishop and various other
teachers from the country, and the Northum-
brians became the pupils and difciples of the
Scots: mifit ad majores natu Scottorum—, pe-
tens ut fibi mitteretur antiftes -; accepit
pontificem Aidanum-; exin cœpere plures per
dies de Scottorum regione venire Britanniam,
atque illis Anglorum provinciis quibus regnavit
rex Ofuald-verbum fidei predicare-; imbue-
bantur præceptoribus Scottis párvuli Anglorum 4.
And this continued the regular ſtate of Northum-
bria for 30 or 40 years together, the three fuc-
ceffive biſhops of Northumbria being all Scotch,
king Ofwi and bifhop Chad being well acquainted
with the Scotch language, and even the foutherly
Bede, 1. iii. c. I.
3 Ibid.
2 L. iii. c. 3.
♦ Ibid.
kingdom
#24 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
kingdom of Mercia being governed at the fame
period by two fucceffive Scotch biſhops ¹.
I This
continued to the year 664. And a frequent
intercourfe was carried on by the Northumbrians
with the Scots and Picts afterwards, even to the
death of Bede. This hiftorian was born within
nine years after the termination of the Scottiſh
biſhops, and finiſhed his hiftory in the 59th
year of his age and the 731ft after Chrift 3. King
Ofwi, who had been educated among the Scots 4,
extended his empire over a part of the Picts,
and fubjected his new dominions to the one bi-
ſhop of Northumbria 5. Theſe were afterwards,
in 681, formed into a feparate diocefs by king
Egfrid, and continued fo to the year 685 7. In
the year 701 Adamnan, the Abbot of Hii, was
fent on an embaffy by the Scots to Alfrid king
of Northumbria, reſided ſome time in the coun-
try, and was converted by the Northumbrian
ſcholars to the Saxon mode of obſerving Eaſter .
In 710 the monarch of the Picts fent embaſſadors
to Ceolfrid, the Abbot of Bede's own monaftery,
who had converfed with Adamnan before 9, and
with whom Bede was then, and had been for
¹ L. iii. c. 21, 24, and 25.
3 P. 795, Smith.
5 L. iv. c. 3.
7 L. iv. c. 26.
9 P. 215.
2 C. 26.
4 L. iii. c. 25
25 and
6 L. iv. c. 12.
• L. v. c. 15.
29.
very
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
225
very many years, refident in the monaftery; re-
quefting proper information from him concerning
the obfervance of Eafter. The information was
given, and all the Picts conformed to the Saxon
mode 2. And in 716 Egbert, a Northumbrian
clergyman, went among the Scots, refided 13
years with them, and converted numbers of
them to the fame mode 3. From this particular
detail of facts it is plain, that Bede had fuffi-
cient opportunities of converfing with the Cale-
donians and Caledonian Scots, and of knowing
the origin of the latter from the united accounts
of both. The political and religious prejudices
of the Saxons are fhewn to have been pretty equal
against the Caledonians and Irish. And the
Northumbrians appear to have had a much
greater intercourfe with their neighbours of Cale-
donia, than with the natives of Ireland. The
political prejudices of the Saxons againſt the
former did not, as Mr. Macpherſon imagines,
make the communication between them fmall,
but naturally operated to increaſe it by the
reduction of a large extent of Caledonia, and
actually united a very confiderable body of
the Picts for many years to Northumbria. And
• L. v. c. 21.
3 L. v. c. 22. and p. 33.
2 Ibid.
their
226
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
their religious prejudices against them which Mr.
Macpherion alledges as the preventive cauſe of
much communication, prevented not the Saxon
kings and Saxon nobles, we fee, from being edu-
cated among the Scots, or from inviting Scottish
biſhops and Scottish teachers into Northumbria,
before the days of Bede, and were even the occa-
fion of viſits, conferences, and embaffies between
them to the period of his writing. For more
than a century before it, the Northumbrians had.
been particularly converfant with the Picts and
Scots. And, at it, there were no religious and po-
litical prejudices fubfifting at all betwixt them.
Both the Picts and Scots were then in a ſtate
of peace and friendlinefs with Northumbria.
A great part of the latter had been converted by
Saxon preachers to the Saxon obfervance of
Eafter. And the whole body of the former had
adopted the ceremonial of Northumbria '.
Thus is the main point of Mr. Macpher-
fon's argument refuted by pofitive authority.
And fuch is the unhappy conftruction of this
and many of his arguments, that it is not only
an affertion without proof, that it is not on-
ly falſe in itſelf, but that,
prove nothing. It is not
if true, it would
of the leaft mo-
¹ L. v. c. 23, &c.
ment
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
227
ment to the authenticity of the fact, whether Bede
derived his knowledge of it from the Scots of
Ireland or the Scots of Caledonia. Either would
be a fufficient and competent authority for the
whole. And, even according to Mr. Macpher-
fon's own account in this very extract, the Irifh
Scots muſt have been the beſt hiftorians, as the
Caledonian were then in a ſtate of "ignorance,
"credulity, and barbarifm," and as Ireland was
the feat of learning even to the Engliſh, and the
Saxon ftudents flocked into the country."
P. 124. Having triflingly obferved, that "the
*fudden tranfition which Bede makes from the
"tale of Reuda to a panegyric on Ireland," and
afterwards concluding with a new declaration of
the fame tale, furniſhes a ftrong prefumption that
he derived his information from the Irish; Mr.
"It
Macpherſon proceeds thus" It is apparent
"from another circumftance, that Bede borrow-
❝ed his account of the Scots from the Irish.
"calls the inhabitants of Iar-ghael [Argyle] by
"the name of Dalreudini, an appellation ut-
"terly unknown to the hiftorians, writers of
"chronicles, bards, and fenachies of Scotland,
"though common in the annals of Ireland."
Q
2
He
I have
228 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I have already obferved, that it is not of the
leaft fignification to the truth and authenticity of
the hiftory, whether Bede derived it from the
Scots of Ireland or the Scots of Caledonia, and
that, even according to Mr. Macpherſon himſelf,
the learned Iriſh were more likely to give Bede
true information concerning an antient incident,
than their ignorant and barbarous brethren of
Argyle. And the fact and reafoning here are
neither of them true.
Bede afferts the Scots of Caledonia to have
been actually denominated Dalreudini in his time:
ufque hodie Dalreudini vocantur ¹. This is
not a particular, that could have been borrowed
from the Iriſh annalifts. He ſpeaks of a fact
notorious and public, and exifting in his own.
time. It was the popular name of the Scots
among the nations around them, in the days of
Bede. This therefore is a circumftance that muſt
have been known to Bede himſelf. And his
affertion is decifive for its exiſtence.
P. 125-126. "To deftroy from another
principle, the tale of Bede and the ſtory of
"Reuda, it may not be improper to obferve, that
× L. i. c. I.
"the
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
229
"the learned Ufher found out that a diſtrict in
"the county of Antrim, which has for many ages
"been diſtinguiſhed by the name of Route, is
"the Dalriada of the old Irifh. Dalriada, fays
"the ingenious prelate, derives its name from
"Cairbre-Riada, the ſon of Conaire, who held
"the fceptre of Ireland in the third century. But
66 we may venture to affirm that Ufher, in this
"ſuppoſition, was very much misled. Rute or
"Reaidh in the old Scottish language fignifiès
❝a Ram, -and- Dalriada literally the val-
ley of the Ram. Ufher quotes a patent which
"is preferved in the Tower of London, wherein
"it appears, that John king of England granted to
Allan Lord of Galloway the territory of Dal-
"reth and the iſland of Rachrin, which is fitu-
"ated over-againſt that diſtrict. From the fylla-
"bication of the two local names in the patent,
"we may conclude that the etymon we have
given of Dalriada is perfectly juft. Rachrin,
"which may, with great propriety, be reckoned
66
an appendage to the Route, fignifies the Ram's
66 promontory in the Iriſh tongue; and Dalriada
"itſelf being exprefsly called the land of Rams,
in the Irish patent mentioned by the primate
"himſelf, is a circumſtance that is decifive in our
❝ favour."
This is the fixth argument againſt the affer-
tion of Bede. And it is obviouſly none at all
Q 3
against
230 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
1
against him. It relates only to Ufher. And it
has no more tendency" to deſtroy the tale of
"Bede and the ſtory of Reuda," than it has to
diſprove the doctrine of gravitation or the theory
of the comets. Ufher's etymon of Dalriada
may be unjuft and yet the account of the Dal-
reudian colony in Bede would be unimpeached.
And, what is ftill more ftrange in the formation
of this argument, Ufher:
may have really" found
❝ our that a diftrict in the county of Antrim,
"which has for many ages been diftinguiſhed by
"the name of Route, is the Dalriada of the
"Irish:" and yet his derivation of Dalriada
from Cairbre-Riada may be falfe. In the firſt cafe,
Mr. Macpherfon's reafoning is not pointed
against the hiftorical fact in Bede, though it
pretends to deftroy it. And, in the fecond,
it is not levelled against the geographical
fact in Ufher, though it is defigned to over-
throw it.
Having thus easily fhewn the ftrange incom-
petency of the argument in general, we fhall
have more leifure to point out Mr. Macpherſon's
other mistakes in the courfe of it. Thefe are;
That the Route in Antrim was fo called from
Rute a Ram; That Dalriada fignifies literally
the valley of the Ram; That Rachrin means the
Ram's Promontory; and, That "Dalriada itfelf
« being
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
231
"being exprefsly called the land of Rams, in
"the Irish patent mentioned by the primate
"himſelf, is a circumftance that is decifive in
"Mr. Macpherſon's favour." This laft affertion
is an unaccountable miſtake. Dalriada is neither
expreſsly nor implicitly called the land of Rams
in Ufher's patent, as mentioned by himſelf. All
that he ſays of it is this: Totam-Dalreth five
Dalrede, cum infulâ Rachlyn vel Rachrin, illi
objacente, Alano de Galway, a Johanne Anglo-
rum Rege & Hiberniæ Domino conceffam olim
fuiffe, ex archivis Regiis in arce, Londinenfi affer-
vatis conftat (Patent in Dorfo ann. 14 R. Johan-
nis, Membran. 3. Num. 1., et ann. 17. Mem-
bran. 5. Num. 57); quam utramque nunc
jure poffideat hereditario Comes Antrimenfis 1.
And, as the circumftance decifive in our au-
thor's favour appears not upon the face of the
Archbishop's account, fo his etymons contra-
dict every idea of propriety.-Riada or Reaidhe,
we fee, is ufed not only conjunctively with Dal,
as in Dal-riada, but feparately by itſelf, as in
Route. And to denominate any country fimply
Reaith or Ram, is an evident abfurdity. This
overthrows the etymology of both at once.
The true derivation must be one, that will
conform itſelf with propriety to the name of
Route, as well as to the appellation of Dal-
riada. And fuch is Ruta, the fame in Iriſh
1 P. 321.
Q4
23
232 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
as Route in Engliſh, and fignifying in an ho
nourable acceptation a tribe of people; a name,
with the greatest propriety applicable to that
divifion of Antrim which is denominated Route,
to the Dal-reud-ini of Scotland, and to the Dal-
reth of Ireland, and importing the tribe and the
country of it. Nor can Rachlyn or Rachrin
fignify the Ram's promontory. A Ram is in
Irish, not Rach, but Reaith; and Mr. Mac-
pherfon has already deduced Route and Reaidhe
from it. And the other word is not Ryn only,
but equally Lyn, Rachlyn vel Rachrin. This is
not a promontory, but an ifland, infula Rach-
lyn vel Rachrin, and is actually an iſland, and
actually denominated Rachlin, at prefent. The
name clearly terminating in the word In an iſland,
it ſeems to begin with the Irish word Rak-ol, and
to import the Royal iſland. And hence it is de-
nominated Ric-in-a, Reich-in, or King-ifland, by
Ptolemy
P. 1272
1 Mr. Macpherſon alſo objects in p. 126, That "accord-
ing to the genius of the Iriſh language" Dal-riada, if called
from Cairbre-Riada, must have been, not Dal-Riada, but
Dal-Cairbre, becaufe Riada is only a pofterior and fecondary
name. But we have feveral inftances to the contrary in the
Irish history, which, however fpurious as facts, are certainly
agreeable to the genius of the Irish language, as Dal-araidke in
Down and Antrim from Fiacha-araidhe, king of Ulster to-
wards
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
233
P. 127—128. “Ufher has afcertained the
"bounds of Dalriada, or the Route in Antrim,
"and found its whole extent about thirty miles.
"Were it even certain that Dalriada produced
❝ more men than any diftrict of the fame extent
" in antient Ireland, ftill it is incredible, that an
<< army could be muſtered there fufficient to fub-
"due the principality of Iar-ghael [Argyle.]"
All the arguments that are founded on a fup-
pofition, of the Scotch fettling in Caledonia by
violence, have been already fhewn to be befide
the mark. No one, I think, has ever inſiſted upon
the fettlement being originally effected by force.
And the amicable concurrence of the Caledonian
Scots with the Picts in expeditions into the Ro-
man province, within a few years only after
their firſt eſtabliſhment in Britain, is a full and
convincing proof, as I have already remarked,
that the one fixed themſelves in the country with
the entire confent of the other.
wards the middle of the third century, and as Dal-Cais from
Cormac-Cais, king of Munſter and Leinster in the fame cen-
tury.-Rachryn feems to be equally the true name with
Rachlyn, as the iflet is called Rechru and Rachrea in Adam-
nan's Life of Columba (L. i. c. 5. p. 340, and L. ii. c. 41
p. 361, Colgan's Acta Sanctorum Hiberniæ, vol. ii.). And this
is Reich-er-y, or Rach-er-ea, the Kingman's ifland, literally.
THE
A
234
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
!
;
THE author here difmiffes Bede for the fecond
time. And what he has advanced against him,
Ifidore, and Orofius, are reaſonings merely pro-
blematical, arguments that have forgot their
direction, and proofs that evince nothing; violent
affertions without authority, ftrong depofitions.
in the face of hiftory, and etymologies egregi-
ouſly fantastical and trifling. This account, I
hope, is not too fevere. I give it merely from
my own feelings, fenfibly offended as they have
been through the whole courfe of this fection.
And, while I wiſh to be polite to Mr. Macpherſon,
I cannot but ſeverely condemn the negligence and
haftiness of the hiftorian.
VI.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED, 235
VI.
ISMISSING thefe femblances of rea-
fons, Mr. Macpherſon now advances to
what he denominates in the margin his "conclu-
"five arguments." And, here at leaſt, we fhall
meet with reaſonings that may be worthy of the
author.
1
P. 129.
"As a concluding argument againſt
"the Hibernian extraction of the Scots, it may
"not be improper to obferve, that the Caledo-
"nians might be called Hibernians, their coun-
¢ try in general Hibernia, and the weſtern
"diviſion of it lerna or Yverdhon, without de-
"riving their blood from the Irish. The Saxons
"of England, it is well known, had their Norfolk
and Suffolk, and the appellation of Southerons
and Norlands are not hitherto totally extin-
"guiſhed among the Scots [the Scotch Low-
landers]: the antient Picts, in like manner,
were divided into two great tribes, the Vectu-
❝riones and Deucaledones, the inhabitants of the
"Northern
犨
​236 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
i
"Northern and Southern divifions, according to
"the teftimony of Marcellinus. (Eo tempore
"Picti in duas gentes divifi, Deucaledonas et
"Vecturiones. Ammian. Marcellin. lib. xxvii,
"Camdenus, vir in patriâ hiftoriâ illuftrandâ ac-
curatiffimus, legendum putat Deucaledonios,
"velut ficnominatos ab occiduâ Scotia orâ, quà
Deucaledonius oceanus irrumpit)."
This, we fee, is called "a concluding argu-
"ment" by Mr. Macpherfon. And I am forry
to obferve, that it appears upon the very face
of it, it appears even as he has ftated it, to
amount to no proof, to amount not even
a prefumption, but to rife only to a mere pof-
fibility. "As a concluding argument-, it
to
may be proper to obferve, that the Caledo-
"nians might be called Hibernians, &c." Nor is
the argument any other in itfelf, as it infers
that the Caledonians might be called Hibernians,
becauſe the Saxons had a Norfolk and Suffolk,
the Scots were once divided into Southerons
and Norlands, and the Picts were broken into
Northern and Southern Vecturiones and Deuca-
ledones. And this is furely the firft, merely
poffible, argument that was ever advanced againſt
an hiftorical fact; and is, I hope, the laft that
will be denominated a conclufive one.
SQ
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
239
So far for the argument in general. Let us
now examine the particular parts of it. Grofsly
inaccurate as it is in the principal point, it
cannot be exact in the fubordinate circumſtances.
And it is not.
Marcellinus does not fay, as he is here quoted,
that the Vecturiones and Deucaledones were the
northern and fouthern Picts. He makes not the
leaft mention of either North or South. And
he was unacquainted with the name of Deucale-
dones, though Mr. Macpherſon, in direct con-
tradiction to his own Latin note, quotes him aš
ufing it. Picti in duas gentes divifi, he fays,
Dicalidonas et Vecturiones. The Vecturiones
I have fhewn in the Hiſtory of Manchefter to
be only a ſingle tribe, that inhabited a part of
Perth and Mar, and all Gawry, Angus, and
Merns, between them. And Dycaledones I
have equally fhewn to be the fame word with
Deucaledones in British, and Ammianus's text
therefore to need no alteration. Thefe Mr.
Camden very juftly fuppofed to be the tribes
along the Deucaledonian Ocean of Ptolemy. But
their name does not fignify a pofition to the Weft,
as Mr. Camden imagined, or a fituation to the
North, as Archbishop Ufher and Mr. Macpher-
fon fuppofe. Thefe and Baxter interpret Deu
the Weit, the North, and the South. But it
* P. 10.
2 P. 423.
plainly.
238 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I
plainly relates to none of them. Du or Deu
fignifies Water, as in Du-bana, the river Ban
in Ireland, and in Deu-draeth, or the Sea-
beach, the name of ſeveral places in Wales ¹.
And the nations of weftern Caledonia were de-
nominated Deu-caledon or the Maritime Cale-
donians, as the wefterly tribes of Gaul were
named Aremorici or the Gauls of the fhore; as
a fingle maritime people in Gaul and Britain
was called Morini and Durotriges, the people of
the Sea, or the inhabitants on the Water; and
as the Highlanders that live in a line along the
fhore of Scotland, in Rofs, Sutherland, and Cath-
nefs, are fometimes denominated by their inte-
rior brethren An-Dua-Ghael, or the Water-
Britons, to the preſent moment ².
From this account it is plain, that the paffage
in Ammianus has been hitherto miſunderſtood
by the criticks. He means not by it, that the
great fociety of the Picts was divided into Di-
caledones and Vecturiones. The latter were
Eaft. And the
only a ſingle tribe on the
former comprehended only a few tribes on the
Weft. All the other nations in the Eaft, the
North, and the South of Caledonia, according
to this interpretation, are thrown out of the
number of the Picts, and ranked as different and
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 423.
5
2 Ibid.
diftinct
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
239
diſtinct from them. The author is therefore to
be interpreted, not concerning the body of the
Picts in general, but of that particular army of
them which now ravaged the Province. And
this he afferts to have been levied from two
divifions of the country, from the long line of
the Dicaledonian tribes, which were fituated upon
the weſtern fhore, and from the fingle nation of
the Vecturiones, which was placed upon the
eaſtern. Eo tempore Picti, in duas gentes di-
vifi, Dicalidonas et Vecturiones, itidemque Atta-
cotti, bellicofa hominum natio, et Scotti, per di-
verfa vagantes multa populabantur.
Thus unfortunate is Mr. Macpherſon in the
commencement of his conclufive reafonings.
And thus grofsly miſtaken is he, equally in the
principal point and the ſubordinate circumſtances
of his firft argument.
P. 129-130. "If the Picts ſpoke the Ca-
"ledonian language, they must certainly have
"called the territories of the Scots [in Caledo-
nia], Iar, Eire, Erin, words, all of them,
"expreffive of the fituation of the country of
"the Scottiſh tribes, in oppofition to the Pictish
"divifion of Caledonia; if they fpoke the antient
"Britiſh, they would have diftinguiſhed the
country of the Scots by the name of Yverdhon,
66
66 05,
4
240
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
}
or, as it is pronounced, Yberon or Yveron.
"Thefe names being communicated to the Ro-
"mans by the Britons, or by Pictifh prifoners, it
હ was natural for them to latinize them into Ierna,
"Iouverna, or Hibernia. In common conver
"fation, the weſtern Highlands are called by
"thoſe who ſpeak the Galic language IAR, or
"the Weft; and when the Hebrides are com
prehended in that divifion of Scotland, the Ga-
"lic appellation of Iar-in has been always given
"to the whole. The diftrict of Arre-gathel, or
"rather Iar-ghael, fo often mentioned in the
"annals of Ireland and Scotland, as the firft
"poffeffions of the Hibernian colonies in Bri-
"tain, carries in its name a demonftration of
"this pofition, as well as a decifive argument
"againſt the antient ſyſtem of the origin of the
"Scots. Iar-ghael literally fignifies the western
"Gael, or the Scots, in oppoſition to the eaſtern
"Gael, or the Picts, who poffeffed the fhore of
"the German Ocean."
This is the fecond conclufive argument againſt
the Hibernian extraction of the Scots. And I
have quoted it in all its extent, that it may not
be deprived of any neceffary part, but may
ftand the trial in its full force and power. It
confifts of theſe two great particulars; That
Iar, Eir, Erin, and Yverdhon or Yberon, are
names by which the Picts muſt have diftinguiſhed
the
:
THE BRITONS ASSERTED:
241
the Scottish territories in Caledonia, as the weſtern
Highlands are to this day popularly denominated
Iar by the Highlanders, and, when the Hebrides
are included, Iar-in, and are the origin of the
Greek and Roman appellations of Ierna, luverna,
and Hibernia; and, That the name of Argyle,
Arre-gathel, or rather Iar-ghael, literally fignifies
the weſtern Gael, and fo diftinguithed the Scots
from the Picts, as the Gael of the weſtern from
the Gael of the eastern coaft. And both of theſe
pofitions I will examine attentively.
The conclufive argument before, according to
Mr. Macpherſon's own ftate of it and the truth,
amounted only to a poffibility. This affumes
the confidence of certainty, and pretends to be de-
cifive. "The Picts-muft certainly have called &c.
"-a decifive argument against the antient festem
"of the origin of the Scots, &c." But the cer-
tainty and deciſiveneſs of this is little better than
the poffibility of that.
The former half of this argument makes the
weſtern Highlands of Scotland to be the Ierna,
Iuverna, and Hibernia of the antients. And in
p. 112-113 we are referred to the prefent
paffage, as actually proving the probability at
leaft of the pofition. But, in oppofition to it,
we need only reflect upon what Strabo, Caefar,
and Mela, the first authors that mention lerna,
Iuverna, and Hibernia, have faid of each Strabo,
the firſt certain writer who speaks of Ierna,
R
Lays
242
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
fays thus of it : εισι δε και αλλαι περι την Βρετανικην
νησοι μικραι μεγαλη δη Ιερνη προς αρχίζον παραβεβλη-
μένη, προμήκης μαλλον δε πλάτος έχεσαι. Mela, the
wha]©
first who notices Iuverna, fays thus: Supra Bri-
tanniam Iuverna eft, penè par fpatio, fed utrinque
æquali tractu littorum oblonga. And Cæfar, the
firft who mentions Hibernia, fays thus: alterum
[latus Britannia] vergit ad-occidentem folem,
quâ ex parte eft Hibernia, dimidio minor, ut exifti-
matur, quàm Britannia; fed pari fpatio tranfmiffus
atque ex Galliâ eft in Britanniam; in hoc medio
curfu eft infula quæ appellatur Mona 3. And
thefe defcriptions will not agree at all with the
weſtern Highlands of Scotland. They are not
above 4, or to the Weft of, Britain, but are
I
¹ Sirabo, p. 307.-I quote not Orpheus, becauſe the work
attributed to him, or to Orpheus of Crotona (fee Ufher,
p. 378), is affuredly fpurious. And I even quote not Arif-
totle's treatiſe De Mundo, though it is quoted as his by Mr.
Carte (p. 4. V. I.), and as his, or Theophraftus's, or fome
perfon's cotemporary with both, by Usher (p. 378); for
the fame reaſon that I appealed not to it before, to prove
the name of Briton prior to Mr. Macpherfon's Cimbri; be-
cauſe I confider it as the work of a later period.
3 P. 89.
2 L. iii. c. 6.
4 So the weſtern fide of Roman Britain was called Bri-
tannia Superior or Higher Britain, and the eaſtern Britannia
Inferior or Lower Britain (Hiftory of Manchefer, p. 59).
-And, as to Strabo's wgos Agulov, all the weſtern ſide of Bri-
tain from Galloway to the Orkneys is filed the northern fide
of it by Ptolemy.
actually
!
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
243
actually a part of it. They are not about one
half, or nearly the whole, of the compaſs of
Britain, but are a part, and a fmall one, of it.
And they are not divided from Britain by a fea as
broad as the Gallic, in the middle of which lies
the iſle of Man; they are not one of the many
ifles that lie about Britain; and they are not a
great iſland whoſe two oppoſite fides are equal in
length, and which is broader than it is long.
but they are a narrow tract of country within the
iſland of Britain, lie along the eaſtern border of
that fea in which is the ifle of Man, and have
only a fhore upon one fide. Thefe defcriptions
of Ierna, Hibernia, and Iuverna, therefore, deci-
fively appropriate the appellations. It is abfo-
lutely impoffible, that the western Highlands of
Scotland could be meant by them. And it is
equally impoffible, that any but Ireland could be
meant.
Thus is the first part of this conclufive argu-
ment very easily overthrown. And the fecond
will fall ftill more eafily. It pretends to prove
the weſtern Highlands of Scotland, the Iar or
Iar-in of the prefent Highlanders, to be the
Ierna of the antients, and the Scots of thefe
Highlands to be native Caledonians, because the
Scots are called Iar-gael or western Gauls. And,
even if we allow Mr. Macpherfon all his premifes,
his conclufion is unjuft. Even if we allow Iar-
gael to be an original appellation for the Scots
R 2
every
244 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
even if we allow it to mean the weſtern Gael, in
oppofition to the Picts, as the eaſtern; yet it will
not follow, that the Scots were equally Caledo-
nians with the Picts. It would only ferve to prove
them equally Gael with them. And, as Mr.
Macpherson has repeatedly affured us before,
that the Irish retain the denomination of Gael with
the Highlanders; fo I have equally fhewn it to
have been common to all the tribes of this
ifland.
And
Thus inconclufive and illogical is the whole of
the argument. The affertion, that the lerna, Iu-
verna, and Hibernia of the antients meant, not
Ireland, but the western Highlands of Scotland,
has been effectually difproved by a reference to
the accounts of the antients themfelves.
the reaſoning from the name of Argyle has been
fhewn to be founded upon an obvious fallacy,
the fubftitution of one term for another, Gael
for Caledon. And the whole turn and com-
plexion of the argument is evidently arbitrary
and defpotical; afferting Ierna &c. to mean the
western Highlands, without any deductions of
reaſon, and merely becauſe theſe are called Iar
at prefent; and alledging the name of Iar-gael
as a demonftrative evidence of the Caledonian
origin of the Scots, without any ſpecification of
proofs, and merely becauſe the Scots and Cale-
donians were equally denominated Gael.
To
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
245
To this clear refutation of Mr. Macpherſon's
argument let me add two obfervations, in order to
collect his reaſonings on this fubject, in different
parts of his work, into one point of view.-
Hibernia is here without heſitation derived from
the Welsh Yverdhon. But in p. 56—57 we are
told, that it is more probable it was not derived
from Yverdhon, and that we may conclude it
was derived from the Latin Hibernus.—And Mr.
Macpherſon here argues, that Ierna, Iuverna,
and Hibernia among the antients, as derived from
the Britiſh Iar-in, Erin, or Yverdhon, muft cer-
tainly mean the weſtern Highlands of Scotland;
when in p. 55 he fays exprefsly, that Ireland was
called Iar-in by the Caledonians, and even "in
"contradiftinction" to the western fhore of Cale-
donia; when in p. 56-57, 62, 63, 81, 94, 95,
and 106, he exprefsly quotes Cæfar, Mela, Soli-
nus, and Tacitus, as applying Hibernia to Ire-
land; and when in p. 56 he ſpecifies Iuverna,
Ierna, Iris, Ovepia, and Hibernia, as "various
"names by which the Greeks and Romans dif-
tinguiſhed" the ifle of Ireland. So grofsly in-
attentive is Mr. Macpherſon even to his own rea-
fonings before!
66
P. 131. “In the neighbourhood of Drumal-
bin, a ridge of hills which divided the Scottiſh
"from
K 3
246 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
*
66
" from the Pictish dominions, there is a lake,
which, to this day, is called Erin. The river
"Erin or Ern rifes from that lake, and gives its
"name to a very confiderable divifion of the
66
county of Perth. In this diftrict there are to
"be feen feveral Roman camps to this day. The
"Romans could not be ſtrangers to the name of a
66 country where their armies remained long
€6
enough to leave fuch lafting memorials of
"themfelves behind. Juvenal, from the foldiers
"of Agricola, might have heard of the diftrict of
Erin, which he foftened into Juverna; and the
troops of Theodofius might have carried the
"fame intelligence to Claudian."
<<
66
;
This is the third conclufive argument against
the Hibernian extraction of the Scots.
full of errors.
r
And it is
The firft amounted merely to a poffibility. The
fecond affumed the air of certainty and decifive-
nefs. And the third relapfes to a mere poffibility
again. "Juvenal, from the foldiers of Agricola,
"might have heard of the diftrict of Erin-;
"and the troops of Theodofius might have car-
"ried the fame intelligence to Claudian." This
is furely a ſtrange mode of reafoning; poffible in
the outfet, certain in the progrefs, and poffible
again at the clofe; like a ninepin, great in the
middle, and fmall at the extremities.
But
•
THE BRITONS ASSERTED,
247
But it is ftill more remarkable, that the fe-
cond argument directly contradicts the third. In
that, Juverna and Ierna, particularly, are in-
fifted upon to have been applied by the Greeks
and Romans to the weſtern Highlands of Scot-
land. But, in this, the names are fuppofed to be
derived to the Romans from Strathern in the
county of Perth, and to have been applied to it
by Juvenal and Claudian. In p. 56 the author
affigns the names to Ireland. In p. 130 he fixes
them upon the western Highlands. And in
p. 131 he cedes them to a part of the eaſtern,
We have been fo much accuſtomed to contradic-
tions in Mr. Macpherſon, from the claſhing parts
of his ill-compofed fyftem, that we fhall the lefs
wonder at the ſtrangeness of this laft; and fhall
be leſs furprized to find, that in the progreſs
of his conclufive arguments, and within the com-
paſs of a few lines only, he ſhould thus grofsly
oppoſe his own fentiments, and wantonly over-
throw the edifice which he had been fo bufily
raifing.
Many notions in Mr. Macpherfon's Differtation
are derived from the writers before him on the
fame fubject. And the fubftitution of Strathern
for the Ierne of Claudian and the Juverna of
Juvenal, is particularly made by Sir George Mac-
kenzie
R 4
A
}
:
і
248 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
I
kenzie and Sir Robert Sibbald 1.
But the opi-
nion is a very wild cne.
Juvenal fays :
Arma quid ultra
Littora Juvernæ promovimus, et modò captas
Orcadas, et minimâ contentos nocte Britannos?
Claudian fays thus:
Movit,
Totam cum Scotus Iernam
And,
Scotorum cumulos flevit glacialis Ierne.
And Mr. Macpherſon ſuppoſes the foldiers af
Agricola and Theodofius to have carried the
name of Juyerna to the one, and of Ierna to the
other. But both he and his two originals have
forgotten, that the former appellation is not firft
noticed by Juvenal, or the latter by Claudian.
Mr. Macpherſon himſelf in p. 57 quotes Mela par-
ticularly, as uſing the name of Juverna. And I
have already fhewn lerna to have been uſed ages
before the days of Claudian. Both were the
Sir George in p. 375, and Sir Robert in Gibfon's Cam
den, c. 1490-1497•
Edit. 1722.
common
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
249
i
common appellations of Ireland, when the little
diſtrict of Strathern was buried in the obfcurity
of its own infignificance. And, Erin and its re-
latives being merely denominations of Ireland
derived from its wefterly fituation, any infular or
peninſular diſtrict in Britain might receive the
fame appellation from the inhabitants to the Eaft
of it. Thus we have Britons and Brigantes upon
the Continent and in Albion. Ireland was called
Inis Alga, and a cherfonefus in Caledonia Elg-in.
And we have the little ifland of Era or Erra
near the iſle of Mull and to the Weſt of it, and
the iſland of Era or Erin near the Harris'; Erin
for the whole body of the Hebrides; Ierna on
the weſtern ſide of Loch Fyn in Argyle, and Ier-
nus on the western fide of Ireland; and Hierna
in the days of the Romans, and two Erns and
two Stratherns at preſent, even upon the eaſtern
fide of Caledonia 2.
* See Irwin's Hift. Scot. Nomenclatura Latino-Vernacula,
1682. p. 71.
2 See the Roman ftation, ad Hiernam, in Richard, Iter 9.
And fee Buchanan, p. 39. vol. I, Ruddiman, for an Ern in
Murray, and an Ierna along it, and Ptoleiny for the river
Jernus in Ireland.
THESE
250
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
THESE are Mr. Macpherſon's three concluſive
arguments. And furely without any aggravation
it may truly be faid of them, that they are vague,
contradi&tory, and weak, the unmeaning effufions
of a vivacity, that is perpetually catching at the
objects which the imagination preſents before it,
but finds them all illufive in the grafp, and
merely bubbles blown up by the breath of pre-
judice and paffion. Mr. Macpherſon therefore,
like a man diffatisfied with his own conclufions,
ftill quivers about the point, and ſtill adds only
to his own embarraffment. After his three de-
cifive arguments, his doctrine wants new argu-
ments to fupport it. And theſe he gives us in the
five following pages.
P. 132.
"In vain has Stillingfleet obferved,
"that there muſt have been a ſea between Britain
"and the Ierna of Claudian.
"Totam cum Scottus Iernam
"Movit, et infeſto ſpumavit remige Tethys.
"Tethys, or the Ocean, it has been already
"fhewn, was rather agitated into a foam by
"Saxon, than by Scottish rowers. But, not to
• infiſt
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
251
{
infift upon that criticiſm, if by lerna we are
66 to underſtand IAR, the weſtern divifion of
Caledonia, from Glotta to Tarvifium, the
.66
st
66
many extenfive arms of the fea, which indent
"that coaft, will, at once, remove the learned
prelate's objection. Should we fuppofe that
Iar-in, or the weſtern iflands of Scotland, were
"the Ierna of Claudian, the objection will al-
together vaniſh, as many of theſe iſlands are
"at a much greater diſtance than Ireland itſelf
"from the continent of Caledonia. (Stilling-
"fleet remarks, that if Strathern, in the county
"of Perth, fhould be admitted to be the Ierna of
"Claudian, it would be ridiculous in the poet to
$6
fay, that the Scots put in motion the whole of a
fmall diftrict of their country. The biſhop did
"not recollect, that it was very common with the
"antient poets to put a part of a country for the
"whole. Latium is often uſed for the Roman
empire; Mycænæ for all the ftates of Greece;
"and Thule, by Claudian himſelf, for North-
"Britain.
66
Quem littus adufte
ྃ་
Horrefcit Libyæ et ratibus impervia Thule.)."
This argument, taking in the whole of what
is faid in the note as well as the text, is founded
merely upon fuppofitions, one implied, and
the
1
252
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
the other two confeffed and acknowledged to
be fuch. "It was very common with the an-
"tient poets," fays Mr. Macpherſon, " to put
a part of a country for the whole.” And it
is thence implied that this may be the cafe with
Claudian here. "If by lerna we are to under-
"ftand
the weſtern divifion of Caledonia,
"&c.; fhould we fuppofe that Iar-in, or the
"weſtern islands of Scotland, were the Ierna of
"Claudian, &c." And an argument of an hypo-
thetical nature can plainly be of no fervice
againſt a pofitive objection.-But let us defcend
to particulars.
<<
Mr. Macpherſon ſays, that" be has already fhewn
Tethys to be agitated into a foam by Saxon
" rather than Scottish rowers." He has hewn it,
as he has hewn the truth of too many pofitions.
in his work. He has affirmed it. His demonftra-
tion is in p. 114, and runs thus; "We may
fafely affirm, that the Tethys of Claudian was
"rather agitated into a foam by Saxon than by
"Hibernian oars."
66
If we will but allow our author to ſuppoſe
three things, he will entirely overthrow biſhop
Stillingfleet's objection. Give me but a footing
in another ſphere, fays our hiftorical Archimedes,
and I will ſhake this at pleafure. And yet, even if
we allow him his fuppofitions and his footing, the
prelate's argument and the globe will remain
equally
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
253
I
equally unhinged. -Should we fuppofe with
Mr. Macpherſon, that Claudian puts a part for
the whole when he ſpeaks of Ierna ; neither
Strathern, nor any other part of Caledonia, can
be allowed to claim the appellation of Ierna.
Claudian fays,
Incaluit Pictorum fanguine Thule,
Scotorum cumulos flevit glacialis lerne.
Here Ierne cannot mean any part of Caledonia,
and be poetically put for the whole of it; becauſe
Caledonia itſelf is mentioned immediately before,
as Mr. Macpherſon here acknowledges it to be
in another place, under the name of Thule.
And the Ierna of one paffage, and the Ierne of
the other, are undoubtedly the fame country.-
Should the Ierne of Claudian be ſuppoſed to
mean all the weſtern divifion of Caledonia, the
extenfive arms of the fea upon that coaft can
never come up to the Tethys of Claudian. Or
fhould Ierne be even fuppofed to mean the
weſtern ifles of Caledonia, even the fea be-
twixt them and Caledonia can never comport
with the Tethys of the poet. They obviouſly
cannot, in the plain unwrefted fignification of
the word, Tethys or Ocean. And they un-
doubtedly cannot, according to Mr. Macpherſon
himſelf. According to him, Tethys is too great
a name to be applied even to the whole wide ſea
betwixt Caledonia and Ireland. "Tethys figni-
1
This argument is equally urged by Sir G. Mackenzie, p. 410.
"fies
254 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
*
«fies Ocean: the fea betwixt Germany and Eng-
"land has fome right to that title, but the
"channel between Ireland and Caledonia was
"never dignified with fo high a name" (p. 115).
Muſt not the name, then, be equally too high
for the channel betwixt Caledonia and its ifles?
And muft it not be infinitely too high for the
mere bays and lochs, that infinuate themfelves
into the land along one fide of the channel?
But this is not the only contradiction, in which
the prefent paffage has involved Mr. Macpherſon.
He is now fo entangled in the curious web which
he is conſtructing, that, at every motion to ex-
pedite and finiſh the work, he is breaking fome
principal thread, and letting in deftruction on
the whole. He has here advanced three ſuppo-
fitions, That the Ierna of Claudian means the
weſtern ifles, That it means the weſtern High-
lands, and That it means Strathern. Theſe are
obviouſly incompatible one with another. And
the contradictoriness of the fuppofitions is a great
addition to the impropriety of them'.-When Mr.
Macpherſon ſuppoſes the weſtern ifles or High-
lands to be meant by Ierna, he interprets Clau-
dian literally, as placing the whole for the whole.
But, when he fuppofes Strathern to be meant,
he underſtands him figuratively, and makes a part
* So Sir George Mackenzie makes Ierna to be Strathern
in p. 375, and in p, 410 all the northern Highlands as far as
Inverness.
to
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 255
to ftand for the whole.-When he fixes Ierna
to the weſtern ifles, Tethys fignifies the broken
fea that is crouded with iſlands, betwixt them
and the continent of Caledonia. When he
fixes it to the western Highlands, Tethys im-
ports only a few bays and lochs. And when
he fixes it at Strathern and interprets it Caledo-
nia, Tethys muft obviouſly import the Friths of
Forth and Clyde. And, to crown all, the au-
thor, in his reference to what he had fhewn be-
fore concerning Tethys, has actually remitted
us, in confirmation of a part, to a preceding
paffage of his own, that has not fhewn any
thing, and that directly contradicts the whole
of it.
P. 133.
"To collect the whole argument on
"this head into one point of view: The Scots
"of Britain lived in a cold climate; their country
"was fituated to the Weft of fuch neighbours,
"as had an immediate communication with the
"Romans. The Irish lay under the fame dif-
66
advantage of unfriendly feafons; and their
"ifland was fimilarly fituated. The hiftorians
"and poets of the Empire, and the Geographers
"of Greece and Rome, exaggerated—the ſeve-
56 rity of the climate under which both the Scottiſh
"nations lived. From an exact conformity of
I
"Genius,
256 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
*
"Genius, language, manners, drefs, fituation,
"and climate, the Scots of both ifles had a
"much better title to the common appellation
"of Hiberni, than Italy, Spain, and a confider-
"able part of Africa, had to the name of Hef-
peria ."
"C
I
We may judge of the whole argument from
this, Mr. Macpherfon's, account of it. And no
author can defire a fairer treatment, than to be
tried by his own reprefentations of his own
reafonings.
Our author has here jumbled together the
two etymons of Hibernia, which he had given
us feparately before. We have been told in
p. 56 and 57, that Hibernia is "more proba-
"bly" derived from the Latin Hybernus than
the Britiſh Yverdhon, and that " we may con-
"clude” it to be formed from Hybernus. Not-
withſtanding this, in p. 130 we have it directly
deduced from Yverdhon. And here, in p. 133,
"The
we have it derived from both together.
• So Dr. Abercromby in his Martial Atchievements of the
Scots fays" There was a period of time, wherein the Scots
"in Ireland and thofe in Britain were by foreigners, who
"obſerved them both to ſpeak the fame language, wear the
"fame fort of garments, and follow much the fame cuitoms,
"almoſt indifferently called Scots and Hiberni” (p. 10.
V. L And Dr. Macpherſon p. 96. argues, that the Iriſh
muſt have been Caledonians from a "perfect fimilarity of ge-
“nius, language, arms, drefs, manners, and cuftoms" between
them.
"Scots
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 257
દુઃ
Scots of Britain lived in a cold climate-: the
"Irish lay under the fame difadvantages of un-
"friendly feaſons. The hiftorians and poets of
"the Empire, and the Geographers of Greece
"and Rome, exaggerated the feverity of the
"climate under which both the Scottiſh nations
"lived. From an exact conformity of — climate,
"the Scots of both the ifles had a title to the
"appellation of Hiberni." This is a plain de-
duction of the name of Hibernia from the Latin
Hibernus. And this derivation is embraced in
p. 56-57, is rejected in p.130, and is embraced
again in p.133. But it is here embraced along
with the other.
66
"The Scots of Britain lived in
a cold climate: their country was fituated to the
"Weſt of ſuch neighbours as had an immediate
"communication with the Romans. The Irish
66
lay under the fame diſadvantages of unfriendly
"feafons, and their ifland was fimilarly fituated.
"From an exact conformity of fituation and
"climate, the Scots of both the ifles had a much
"better title to the appellation of Hiberni, than
66
Italy, Spain, and a confiderable part of Africa,
"had to the name of Hefperia [or the Weft]."
This is a plain deduction of the name from the
Britiſh Yverdhon. That derivation is embraced
in p. 130, is rejected in p. 56-57, and is here.
embraced again. And thus both, having been
alternately embraced and rejected, rejected and
embraced, are at laft united in friendfhip to-
S
gether.
E
258
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
ether.
But the union muſt be diffolved.
The
name of Hibernia may perhaps be derived from
either one or the other. But it cannot be de-
duced from both.
Having thus anſwered the main ſubſtance of
the argument, let us collect fome of the fubor-
dinate miſtakes in it.-The Caledonian Scots and
the Iriſh are faid to have had a title to the Latin
name of Hiberni, from the coldneſs of their cli-
mate. But must not the Caledonians themſelves,
as living in the very fame country with the for-
mer, have been equally entitled to the fame ap-
pellation? They are both faid to have had
a right to the Britiſh name of Yverdhon, from
their wefterly fituation. But muſt not the other
Caledonians, the tribes that lived equally along
the weſtern fhore, in Rofs and Strathnavern, have
had equally a right to the fame denomination ?—
They are both faid to have been called Yverd-
hon, becauſe they were "fituated to the Weſt
"of fuch neighbours as had an immediate com-
"munication with the Romans." But is this
true concerning the former? If they refided in
Braidalbin, Cantyre, Knapdale, and Lorn, as
Mr. Macpherſon infinuates in p. 128, they lived
more to the North than Weft of all the Bri-
tons of weſtern Valentia; and if they were ſettled
only in Argyle, Lorn, and Lochaber, which
feems to be the real truth, they were certainly
1 Bede fixes them on the northern fide of the Clyde.
3
to
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
259
to the North of them all. But if they lived in
Strathern only, as Mr. Macpherſon intimates
that they did in p. 131 and 133, then they were
certainly to the Eaft and North of the great
bodies both of the Caledonian and Roman
Britons. And, even if both had been placed
to the Weſt, would this be a competent rea-
fon for appropriating the name of Yverdhon
to them? Muft not all the Britons, from
the mouth of the Cluyd to the French
channel, have been equally with either entitled
to the name of Yverdhon? For were they not
all, at leaſt equally, fituated "to the Weft of
"fuch neighbours as had an immediate commu-
"nication with the Romans ?" And does not
the name of Hibernia appear long before the
Romans had any fettlement in the ifland? Mr.
Macpherſon in p. 56 acknowledges that it does,
affirming Cæfar to be the firft that mentions the
name. The Caledonian and Irish Scots are faid
to have had a title to the name of Hiberni,
"from an exact conformity of genius, language,
manners, and dress," as well as fituation and
climate. But muft not almoſt all the other Bri-
tons, all that were in any of the northern and
mediterranean regions of the iſland, have been
equally entitled to the fame appellation, as they
were equally conformable in all?
66
S 20
THUS
260 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
THUS have I gone through the feveral parts
of this collective proof. And I have dwelt the
longer upon it, as it is Mr. Macpherſon's own
account of his own greateſt argument; in order
to fhew it to him in its true colours, unthinking,
inconfiftent, and trifling.
VII.
Femployed in
ROM p. 137 to 141 Mr. Macpherfon is
employed in tracing the rife and progreſs
of the fiction, the migration of the Irish into
Caledonia; before he has been able to prove it
one, and when even afterwards he formally en-
deavours to prove it. All his proofs fhould cer-
tainly have come firſt. And his hiftory of the
fiction fhould have followed at the cloſe of the
whole.
From
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 261
From p. 141 to 146 Mr. Macpherſon is en-
gaged in producing fome negative reafons, as
he himſelf calls them, in favour of his own doc-
trine. But, as in p. 146 he proceeds to his
pofitive, it is not worth while to stay and
attack the former. A wife enemy will not blunt
his fword in the flaughter of the Velites, when
the Legionaries are advancing to the charge
against him.
Mr. Macpherſon boaftingly profeffes, in p.137,
to" conclude for ever the controverfy by argu-
"ments, which, though obvious, are new and
"decifive." And in p. 146 he triumphantly
threatens, by collecting into one point of view
the moſt ſtriking of Dr. Macpherſon's reafons,
and adding fome of his own to them, "to quafh
"for ever a ſyſtem which has been fo long im-
pofed for truth upon the world."
P. 146. "Alba or Albin, it has been already
"obferved, was the first name given to this
"ifland by the Gael, who tranfmigrated from
"Belgium into the more elevated country of
"Britain. Hence proceeded the Albion of the
"Greeks, and the Albium of the Roman lan-
$ 3
guage.
66
262 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
guage 1-The antient Scots, in all the ages
"to which our information extends, agreed in
"calling Scotland Alba or Albania, The High-
"landers and the inhabitants of the Hebrides
"have, to this day, no other name but Alba
"for Scotland, and they invariably call them-
"felves Albanich, or Genuine Britons. The
uninterrupted ufe of this national appellation,
"from the earlieft account we have of their hif
tory, furniſhes a moral demonftration, that
they are the true defcendants of the firſt inha-
"bitants of Britain. Had they been of Irish ex-
traction, they and their anceſtors would have
"undoubtedly affumed a name more fuitable to
"their origin,
་
66
66
·66
رو
The cuſtom of the Highlanders, in conftantly
calling their country Alba or Alban, and in de-
nominating themſelves Albanich, is here efteemed
a moral demonftration of their deſcent from the
firft inhabitants of the island, who called it Al-
bion. But it is obviously no demonftration of
fuch a fact at all. For, even fuppofing the firſt
inhabitants of Albion to have diftinguiſhed them-
1 Albium is a word unknown to the Romans, and is merely
Buchanan's arbitrary tranflation of the Greek Albion. See his
History.
2 So Sir G. Mackenzie derives the name Albanech from
the original name of the iſland, Albion, p. 387. And fo Dr.
Macpherſon, p. 116.
felves
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
263
ſelves by the name of Albanich, the preſervation
of the name by the Highlanders would prove no
more their particular and peculiar deſcent from
them; than the retention of the name of Britons
by the Strathclydenfes, in the eighth and ninth
ages, would prove them the appropriated re-
mains of the Britanni, to the exclufion of the
Gallowefe, the Welsh, and the Cornifh; or than
the adherence of the name of Brigantes to the
Britons of Yorkshire and Durham, in a much
earlier period, evinced them alone to be the pro-
geny of the true Brigantes. The Celta of one
third of Gaul were peculiarly denominated Galli,
and the Galli of one third of Celtica were dif
tinctively denominated Celtæ ; and yet neither
the Galli nor Celta were peculiarly and diftinc-
tively the defcendants of thofe Galli or thoſe
Celta, who originally poffeffed themſelves of
France. The general appellation of a nation,
as I have remarked above, was frequently re-
tained for the defignation of fome particular
tribes in it.
I
But the names of Alban and Albanich, for
the country and inhabitants of the Highlands,
have no relation at all to the first coloniſts of
Britain. Theſe I have already fhewn to have
been denominated Britons, Brigantes, or fe-
parated men. And the fame name which is
• Cæfar, p. I.
S 4
now
1
264 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
now the general appellation of the whole High
lands, was formerly, and is ftill, the difcrimina
tive name of a part only. In the Hiſtory of Man-
chefter I have fhewn a tribe of the Caledonians
to have been called Albanii, and to have inha-
bited a part of Athol, Braidalbin, Strathern, and
Menteith. And Braid-Albin remains to this
day the appropriate appellation of a diftrict in
the Highlands. Were the Albanii therefore, or
are the inhabitants of Braidalbin, peculiarly de-
rived from the firft inhabitants? And a long
range of country, that ran in a narrow flip from
Derbyshire into Scotland, I have fhewn to have
been diſtinguiſhed by the name of Alps, a de-
nomination exactly the fame as Alba or Alb-an '.
Was all the country adjoining to this, therefore,
in a particular and fpecific manner peopled by
the defcendants of the firft colony? If they
were, 'what becomes of the excluſive right of the
Caledonians to this defcent? And, if they were
not, what becomes of the argument from Alba
and Alban? Theſe words indeed have as little
reference to the firft colony, as to the inhabi-
tants of the moon. The prefervation of the name
of Alp or Alb, in fo many parts of the island,
fhews the island and thofe parts of it to have
been denominated from one common principle of
7
Hiftory of Mancheſter, p. 410.
Hiftory of Manchester, p. 140.
famenefs.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
265
fameneſs. Albion, according to Mr. Macpher-
fon himſelf in p. 39, fignifies the High Land,
and in reality imports the Heights. Hence it be-
came the natural defignation of that part of our
ifland, which must have been feen from the con-
tinent, before any of it was inhabited: and what
had for ages been the name of all that was feen,
as naturally remained the appellation of all of it
afterwards. Hence it was the name of the Al-
banii of Vefpafiana, who lived in the peculiarly
mountainous parts of the moſt mountainous re-
gion of Caledonia. Hence it was affixed for-
merly to the long ridge of hills that runs
from Derbyshire into Scotland, and adheres to
the wild hills of Braidalbin at prefent. And
hence the Highlanders in general diſtinguiſh
their country to this day by the title of Alba or
Alb-an, High Land or High Lands, and denomi-
nate themſelves the Alban-ich or Highlanders.
But it is very obfervable in the conduct and di-
rection of Mr. Macpherfon's argument here, that,
even if every thing was true as it is ftated by
himſelf, the point propofed would not be proved
at all. The queſtion betwixt him and his anta-
goniſts is not, whether the whole body of the
antient Caledonians or prefent Highlanders be
derived from Ireland, but whether a body of
Iriſh did not come over into Caledonia, and com-
municate their own name of Scots to the natives.
Mr.
266 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Mr. Macpherſon, however, has taken the for-
mer queſtion for the latter, and argues from that.
Not attempting to prove, that no Irish paffed
over into the Highlands, and communicated their
own name of Scot to the Highlanders, he endea-
vours to prove only, that the Highlanders do
not now acknowledge any Iriſh appellation for
their own. This, we fee, is foreign to his pur-
pofe. The Highlanders may not do it, and yet
may have been conquered by the Iriſh Scots, and
may therefore be denominated Scots by others.
The Welſh do not acknowledge the appellation
of Engliſh, though they have been conquered by
them, and are therefore reputed as Engliſh
in every nation abroad.
nation abroad. And the Saxons of all
Valentia, being now reduced under the dominion
of the Scots, are regularly confidered as fuch
even among their brethren of England.
But there is ftill another remark to be made
upon this argument, which evinces ftill more the
great want of preciſion and diſtinctneſs in Mr.
Macpherſon's ideas and reafonings.-Even if the
Highlanders had been peculiarly denominated
Albanich or Albanii, even if this had proved
them the peculiar progeny of the firſt coloniſts
of Britain, and even if the question had been,
whether the whole body of the Caledonians was
derived from the Irish; all theſe conceffions
would not have enabled the argument to prove
the
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 267
the Highlanders not defcended from the Irifh.
The Highlanders, on this allowance, having
been denominated Albanich from their peculiar
ancestors, the first coloniſts of the iſland; but
being at the fame time, according to Mr. Mac-
pherſon, the actual progenitors of the Irish; the
latter muſt have been the progeny of the
first colonists, equally with the former. And
Mr. Macpherſon even acknowledges in p. 39,
that the Iriſh retain the name of Alba or Albin
equally with the Caledonians, as the name of the
Highlands, to the preſent period ¹.
I
Such is the first of thoſe arguments which are
faid to be "equally new and decifive," which are
"to conclude for ever the controverfy," and "to
"quafh for ever" the Irish extraction of the
Scots. And, if the reft be like this, we may
fafely affirm, that they will not prove very deci-
ave, the controverfy will not be abfolutely con-
cluded, and the Irish extraction of the Scots will
not be totally quaſhed.
"The Scottish and Irish Gael have brought down the
❝ name of Alba or Albin to the preſent day.”
P. 147.
268 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
£
¡
P. 147.
"The Belgic nations, who tranfmi-
"grated into South Britain before the defcent of
Julius Cæfar, retained the name of thofe com-
"munities on the continent from which they re-
ſpectively derived their blood. The auxiliaries
"of Vortigern preſerved long their original
"name of Saxons, and the Scots who ſpeak the
"Galic language have no other name for Eng-
"land or its inhabitants than Saffon and Saffon-
❝ich. But if the antient Scots have preſerved
66
among them the true name of the English, for
"fo many ages after it had been diſuſed by that
"nation itſelf, it is much more likely that they
"muſt have retained their own indigenous
name¹
66
I "
This is alfo one of the "decifive" and " con-
"clufive" arguments, that are to "quaſh for ever"
the Irish derivation of the Scots. And in the
margin it is called the "fecond proof." But in
the cloſe of the argument, when Mr. Macpher-
fon deduces his inference from it, it amounts,
according to his own repreſentation, to a mere
likelihood or probability.-We are told in proof
the first, that the uſe of the name of Alba and
¹ So Sir George Mackenzie derives Albanach from Albion,
becauſe the Highlanders call the English Saffenach, p. 387.
Albanich
THE BRITONS ASSERTE D. 269
Albanich among the Highlanders, for their country
and themſelves, is a moral demonftration of their
peculiar deſcent from the firſt inhabitants of the
iſland. And in proof the fecond, where the fame
argument is purſued, and ſhould therefore be car-
ried farther, we find it only a likelihood, not even
that the Highlanders are deſcended from the firſt
coloniſts, but only that their names of Alba and
Albanich were the original appellations of the
country and people. This fecond proof againſt
the Irish extraction of the Scots, is therefore
none at all againſt that, but merely an argument
of probability in favour of the antiquity and pri-
mitiveneſs of the name of Alba or Alban for the
Highlands. It is not a new or fecond argument
in itſelf, but merely the buttreſs of a former
one. And from both it appears, that the appel-
lation, the uſe of which by the Highlanders, as
tranfmitted to them from their earlieft anceſtors,
furniſhed a moral demonftration of their derivation
from the firſt coloniſts, has in itſelf only a likeli-
hood of being their original name.
But let us confider the reaſoning by itſelf, as
detached from the previous or fubfequent argu-
ments, and as only a probable proof, that the
original name of the Caledonians in general was
Albanich. Thus confidered, the argument at
firſt view carries great probability with it. And
I have already fhewn, what feems a ftrong con-
firmation
276 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
firmation of it, that one tribe of the Caledonians
was actually denominated Albanii in the days of
the Romans. But, when we come to examine it
more accurately, even in this light it is incompe-
tent and uſeleſs. The inference, that, as the
Highlanders have preferved the antient name of
the Engliſh, Saffon, they have therefore much
more probably preferved their own, very reafon
able as it certainly is, is directly confronted by a
fact. And all inferences of reafon, on points like.
theſe, muft bow down to the authority of facts.
The Welsh have equally retained the name of
Saffon for the English. And yet they have ac-
tually loft their own indigenous name of Welſh.
Though this appellation, as I have previouſly
fhewn, was even borne by them as late as the
fixth century, it is now fo totally loft among
them, that the criticks have denied them ever to
have borne it at all. Thus uncertain is all this
fort of argumentation. And thus does the danc-
ing meteor continually elude us, even when we
think it moſt fubftantial and folid.
The whole body of the Caledonians, however,
could never have been, and are not now, deno-
minated Albanich. The name of Caledonia com-
prizing all that large peninfula of land which
lies to the North of the Friths, the appellation
of Alb-an, or the mountains, could have been
given only to the hilly part of the country, int
oppo-
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 271
oppofition to the levels of the eaſtern coaft, and
the plains immediately to the North of Antoni-
nus's Vallum. The inhabitants of theſe I have al-
ready fhewn to have been denominated Mæatæ,
or Lowlanders, by the Britons and Romans.
And the inhabitants of the hills only are denomi-
nated Albanich, or Highlanders, at prefent. The
tribes of the Caledonian Lowlands were deno-
minated Meatæ formerly, in contradiſtinction to
the nations of the hills. And the clans of the
Caledonian mountains are denominated Albanich
or Highlanders at prefent, in oppofition to the
refidents of the Lowlands.
This fecond "decifive" and "conclufive" ar-
gument therefore, as the fecond, is no argument
at all. It is only a part of the firſt. And, even
in itſelf, it is neither decifive nor conclufive. It
pretends only to be a probable proof. And it is
not even that. In every view, it has been ſhewn
to be grofsly defective and erroneous.
te
P. 147-148. " Had the Scots been originally
"Irish, Eirinich and not Albanich would have
"been their proper name. So far were they
"from adopting the name of their neighbours of
"Hibernia, that it is well known that both the
❝ old
272
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"old Iriſh and the inhabitants of the North of
"Scotland promifcuouſly call themſelves Gael—:
"The Welsh, in antient times, diftinguiſhed the
"Scots of both the Britiſh ifles by the appellation
"of Gaidhel —, much the fame with Gael, in
"the pronunciation. Should then the Scots bet
"of Irish extract, it muſt naturally follow, that
"the Picts fprung from the fame fource, a doc-
"trine no lefs abfurd than it is new ."
I fometimes find a difficulty in diſcovering the
immediate aim and direction of our author's ar-
guments. Senfible and acute as he is, they fre-
quently take their courfe, like an arrow dif-
charged from a feeble bow, languidly fluttering
in their progreffion, and wadling obliquely to-
wards their mark. And he fo confounds the pre-
cife terms of the queſtion, that I am obliged fre-
quently to recur to them again.
This, as the margin exprefsly informs us, is
the "third proof" of "the Caledonian extraction
"of the Britiſh Scots." And this, and the two
preceding, have all fallen into the fallacy which
I have noted in my remarks on the firft. They
have all grofsly deviated from the point under
confideration. Inftead of proving, or attempt-
• The fame argument is in Dr. Macpherſon at great length,
P. 115-128.
ing
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
273
66
ing to prove, that the Scots did not come over
from Ireland, and communicate their own name
to the Caledonians; Mr. Macpherſon argues,
that the Caledonians themſelves did not come
over from Ireland. And in the prefent Extract he
confeffedly and avowedly falls into the fallacy.
"Had the Scots [the prefent Caledonians] been
originally Irifh, Eirinich, and not Albanich,
"would have been their proper name." "Should
"then the Scots [the prefent Caledonians] be of
"Iriſh extract, it must naturally follow, that
"the Picts fprung from the fame fource." The
deluſiveneſs of an equivocal term has impofed
upon him. And the word Scot is to him what
Belgium was before. But the conclufion, con-
cerning the Picts, fhould furely have awakened
him from his dream, and fhewn him the wildneſs
of his error I.
This argument, therefore, is all an Ignoratio
Elenchi. And, if every part of it was true, and
if the inference from the whole was juft, it would
prove nothing concerning the Caledonian ex-
"traction of the British Scots." But neither
the premiſes nor conclufion are juſt. — If the
Caledonians had been originally Irifh, Mr. Mac-
pherfon fays, they would have been called Eiri-
¹ So Sir George Mackenzie goes on in p. 372, 373, 377,
378, 387, &c., arguing with the fame unobferved duplicity of
meaning on the word Scot.
T
ních,
274
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
;
nich, and not Albanich. But, as Albanich fignifies
only the Mountaineers, fuch of them as refided
in the Alban or Heights might, and naturally
would, have been denominated Albanich, even if
they had come from Ireland. And all the Ca-
ledonians, as I have juft fhewn, were not deno-
minated Albanich. Thofe only were fo called
that actually refided in the Highlands.- This
name of Albanich is principally retained by the
weſtern Highlanders at preſent '. And the name
of Eirinich, according to Mr. Macpherſon him-
felf, muſt have been equally the appellation of
thefe Highlanders, as he alledges their country
to have been the ancient Ierna, and to be
actually denominated Eirin by themfelves. The
two names, therefore, appear not as the diftinc-
tive and oppofed appellations of two different
nations, but are found united together as the
joint appellation of the fame people. The na-
tional defignation of Eirinich, which Mr. Mac-
pherfon denies to have been ever acknowledged
by the Caledonians, appears from himſelf to
be actually acknowledged by them. And the
name which He confeffes, if it had been
found adopted by the Highlanders, would have
proved the Irish extraction even of the Cale-
donians, is found actually adopted by them, ac-
cording to his own reprefentation, and even by
fuch of them as moſt faithfully retain the antient
• Innes.
6
2 P. 56 and 130.
appel-
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
275
appellation of Albanich. The Caledonians there-
fore, according to his own affertions, muſt have
been defcended from the Iriſh. And the deri-
vation of the Picts from the fame origin, a doc-
trine which He very juftly declares to be "as
new as it is abfurd," appears to be right
upon his own reafonings, and to refult neceffa-
rily from his own principles.
66
<<
P. 148. "From the name of the diſtrict of
"Iar-ghael, which, it has been always faid, was
"the firſt territory poffeffcd by the Hiberno-
"Scottiſh colony, there arifes a very deciſive ar-
gument in favour of our fyftem. Iar-ghael is
not the name of the country, but of thoſe who
"inhabited it from the earlieſt times. It fignifies
"the western Gael in oppofition to the eastern
"Gael, or the Picts, who poffeffed the fhore of
"the German Ocean. But what is conclufive
"againſt the Irish fyftem is, that Caeldoch, or
"the country of the Gael, which the Romans
"foftened into Caledonia, is the only name by
"which the Highlanders diftinguiſh that diviſion
"of Scotland which they themselves poffefs."
This is called the "fourth proof" againſt the
Iriſh extraction of the Scots. And it is actually
the laſt. Let us therefore examine it with par-
ticular
T 2
276 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
3
ticular attention. It is defigned to leave the
whole hypothefis with the ſtrongeſt impreffion
on the mind. And it is accordingly proclaimed
by its author to be "a very decifive argument in
"favour of his, fyftem," and abfolutely "conclu-
"five againſt the Irish."
This is called the "fourth proof." But it
obviouſly confifts of two diftinct and feparate
proofs. And as the firft was unwarily broken
into two, fo two are combined together in the
fourth.
The former of them is called "a very decifive
argument," and is mentioned equally as fuch
in p. 130. But it has no weight at all. For, as
I have obferved before in anſwer to this very ar-
gument, even if we allow Mr. Macpherſon all
his premiſes, his conclufion will be ſtill unjuft.
This is wonderful, but true. If we allow Iar-
gael to be the name of the original inhabitants
of Argyle, and if we allow it to fignify the Scots.
as the weftern Gael, in oppofition to the Picts
as the eaſtern; yet what conclufion follows?
That the Scots of Argyle were equally Caledo-
nians with the Picts? No, affuredly! It only
proves them to be equally denominated Gael.
And, as Mr. Macpherfon has repeatedly ac-
knowledged even the Irish to be denominated
Gael equally with the Picts, fo have I fhewn
the
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
277
the appellation to have been common to all the
tribes of the Britons.
Thus eafily is the force of the first proof re-
pelled. And the fecond, which claims to be
"conclufive," as the other was "decifive,"
decifive," may
be anſwered as eafily. It is exactly of the fame
genius and ſpirit. And, if we allow Mr. Mac-
pherſon all his premifes again, his conclufion will
be again unjuft. If we permit him to interpret
Caeldoch into the country of the Gael, and if
we acknowledge it to be the fame word with the
Roman Caledonia, yet no inference will arife
from either or both againſt the Irish extraction
of the Scots. The only inference is, that the
prefent and antient Caledonians were denominated
Gael. But it does not prove the Scots to have
been native Caledonians, becauſe they refided in
the country of Caledonia. The word Caeldoch
being the fame with Caledonia, that name can
evince the Caledonian extraction of the Scots no
more than this. And the whole compafs of the
Highlands might be called Caeldoch and Caledo-
nia; and yet the Scots, fettled in a part of the
country, might be a colony of people derived from
Ireland.
So totally weak and unmeaning is this laft
and clofing argument against the Irish extraction
of the Scots. And the feveral parts of it,
confidered
T Ꭲ ;
*
1
278 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
confidered merely in themfelves, are equally
weak.
There is a wild ſpirit of repetition, which co-
lours over the face of Mr. Macpherfon's work.
The fame arguments prefent themſelves again.
and again before us, and frequently in the fame
dreſs and manner. And this is particularly the
caſe with the preſent ſeries of reaſons. All of
them have already received their anfwers, and have
been difmiffed before. But they are once more
returned, and demand a fecond hearing. And,
as I have given it to the three preceding argu-
ments, for the fuller elucidation of the hiftory, I
cannot refuſe it to the fourth and laſt.
Mr. Macpherſon afferts the name of Ar-gathel,
Iar-gael, or Ar-gyle, to have been the defigna-
tion of the Scots, as the weſtern Gael, in contra-
diſtinction to the Picts, as the eaſtern. But the
Scots were not the weſtern or the Picts the
eaftern Gael, either according to his former ac-
count or the truth. According to himſelf in p.
131 and 133, the Scots, as inhabitants of Ierna,
were feated in Strathern within the county of
Perth, upon the eaſtern fide of Caledonia and in
the very dominions here attributed to the Picts.
But the real country of the Britiſh Scots, accord-
ing to Bede, commenced immediately from the
northern margin of the Clyde, and in the preſent
region
1
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 279
I
region of Argyle ¹. And, according to the oldeſt
account that we have after Bede, the diftrict of
Arre-gathel extended not into Rofs. If, there-
fore, we limit the region of the Scots by Rofs
on the North and the Clyde on the South, it
muſt have contained all Argyle, all Lorn, all
Lochaber, and the weſtern part of Inverneſs.
But, in this pofition of Argathel, the Scots could
not be denominated the weſtern Gael by the
great body of the Caledonians, as they were
to the Weſt only of a fmall part, and to the
North and South of more. And the Picts could
ftill lefs be denominated the eaftern Gael, as
poffeffing the eaftern coaft. They poffeffed not
merely "the fhore of the German Ocean," as
Mr. Macpherſon here fixes their dominions.
But, according to his pofition of the Scots
in Strathern before, the Picts muſt have occu-
pied all the western Highlands particularly;
and, according to his pofition of the Scots here,
along the line of the weſtern Highlands, the
Picts muſt have enjoyed all the reft of the coun-
try. The Picts poffeffed, in fact, the whole ex-
tended compafs of Caledonia, except Iar-gael,
except Lochaber, Lorn, Argyle, and a part of
Inverneſs. They refided therefore to the North
and South, as well as the Eaſt, of the Scots.
Bede, 1. i. c. I.
2
Innes, p. 771.
T 4
And
280 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
And the fame people that were firft denominated
Caledonians, and afterwards Picts, were the in-
habitants of Caledonia, even when the Romans
were actually in poffeffion of the eaſtern coast.
This therefore demonftrates the name of Iar-gael,
Ar-gathel, or Ar-gyle, to have not been deduced
from the wefterly pofition of the Scots in Britain.
And the fyftem, that was raifed upon the inter-
pretation, is as easily deftroyed as it was ridicu-
loufly erected. Etymology, the mere menial of
hiftory, is always ridiculous when the throws off
her fubjection, and vainly fets up for herſelf.
We are farther told, that Caeldoch is the
word which the Romans foftened into Caledonia,
and "the only name by which the Highlanders
"diftinguish that divifion of Scotland which they
"themfelves poffefs." But this Mr. Macpherſon
and I have already fhewn to be falfe.-That
Caeldoch is not the only name by which the
Highlanders diftinguish their divifion of Scotland,
Mr. Macpherſon has already proved in p. 38;
in which he acquaints us, that "Alba or Albin
[is] the name of [by] which the antient Scots,
"in their native language, have, from all an-
"tiquity, diftinguished their own.divifion of Bri-
"tain." Nor is this all the contradiction in our
author, concerning the indigenous appellations
of the Highlands. Here, in p. 148, we are told
that Caeldoch is "the only name" for them
among
:
*
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
281
among the natives. In p. 38 we are affured,
that Alba or Albin is equally their Scotch de-
nomination. And in p. 146-147 we are re-
affured, that there is "no other name but Alba”
in ufe for them among the Highlanders. So
inattentive is Mr. Macpherſon to his own pre-
ceding affertions, and fo forgetful even of the
general and vernacular appellations of his own
country!-Caeldoch alfo I have proved before
to be neither Cael-doch, as Mr. Macpherſon
ftates it, nor the fame with Caledonia. I have
fhewn it to be Caeld-och, and the fame with
Gaelt-ach in the Irish, and Galatica and Cel-
tica in Latin. But Caledon I have fhewn to be
very different, and equivalent only to the Celta-
rum of the Romans and the Taλawy of the Græ-
cians. And Gael, fo repeatedly alledged by Mr.
Macpherſon for two contradictory purpoſes, to
prove the deſcent of the Irish from the Caledo-
nians, and to difprove the Iriſh deſcent of the
Scots, has been repeatedly fhewn to be the com-
mon appellation of all the Britons.
.
But I am tired with refuting the fame argu-
ments over and over again; arguments that,
like the Irish in the Milefian fables, ftill rife
after they have received their death's wound,
and challenge their flayers to a fecond combat.
THESE
282 THE
THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
THESE are the four reafons, which, "though
"obvious," were faid to be "new and decifive,"
and triumphantly boafted" to conclude the con-
troverfy for ever," and " to quafh for ever
"a fyftem that has been fo long impofed for
"truth upon the world." And what have
they proved upon trial? The mere ghofts of
former arguments, again introduced upon the
ftage to furprize and elevate, and, like true
ghoſts, pretending to a greater power and au-
thority on their fecond appearance, than they
had in their original condition; the formations
of fancy, the créations of darknefs, and actually
refolving themſelves into nothing at the approach
of light.
3
VIII.
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
283
1
MR. M
VIII.
R. Macpherſon having thus laboured un-
fucceſsfully in the deduction of the Bri-
tiſh Scots, it may be expedient for me to inveſti-
gate their genuine origin. And, as he has en-
deavoured to make them native Caledonians, I
ſhall endeavour to fhew them as they were, the
tranſplanted natives of Ireland. This may now
be done with fuch a decifive weight of evidence,
that if Mr. Macpherſon had been apprized of it,
I am convinced, he would never have written his
Introduction. And, from that evidence, the true
origin and tranſactions of the antient Scots have
already been given in the Hiftory of Mancheſter.
There Mr. Macpherſon's objections had been all
virtually anſwered before they were made, and
folutions given to his difficulties before they were
ftarted. And, as a fecond and general reply to
all his difficulties and objections, I fhall here
briefly repeat the ſubſtance of what I had pre-
viouſly obſerved on the fubject, reducing it all
into one comprehenfive view, and confirming it
with fome additional notices.
When
!
d
284 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
靠
​When the Belgæ, about 350 years before
Chriſt, croffed the narrow channel into Britain,
and fucceffively fubdued all the tribes from Kent
to the Land's End; and when, about 250 years
afterwards, they invaded ſeveral of the neigh-
bouring nations; numbers of the Britons took
fhipping from the South-western fhore of the
iiland, and puſhed acroſs the fea into Ireland.
There the two colonies of fouthern Britons, the
only inhabitants of the country, affociated toge-
ther into one community, under the one appel-
lation of Scoti. Denominated Gael and Britons,
from their original appellations in this ifland;
they received the defignation of Scoti, as the
difcriminative mark of their late emigration from
it. The Iriſh to this day diſtinguiſh the Scottiſh
language by the title of Scot-bhearla, and the
Scottiſh nation by the name of Kin-Scuit. And
Scuite fignifies in the Iriſh of the Highlands at
prefent, and fignified as early as the days of
Offian, an Emigrant, a Wanderer, or a Refugee ¹.
Thefe, the Scots or Refugees of South-Britain,
as other colonies fucceffively fettled in Ireland,
gradually retired from the margin of the fea,
and ſpread themſelves in the interiors of the
country. By this means, the whole circumfe-
rence of the coaft being regularly planted
with colonies before the days of Ptolemy, the
History of Manchefter, p. 433-434.
Scots
h
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
285
Scots were entirely cut off from all communica-
tion with the fhore, and became inclofed in the
center of the island. And, thus fituated, they
neceffarily eſcaped the notice of Ptolemy, who
juſt circles along the fhore of the iſland, and
never penetrates, as he does in Britain, into
the mediterranean regions of it. The Romans,
in the days of Ptolemy, were mafters of all
the interiors of Britain, but were very natu-
rally unacquainted with the inland diviſion of
Ireland. They
They muſt however, during their
long refidence of three centuries afterwards in
Britain, have certainly obtained a good ge-
neral knowledge, at laft, even of the midland
and central inhabitants of Ireland. And Ri-
chard has accordingly tranfmitted to us fome
notices which he collected from them, relative to
the origin and exiſtence of the Scoti there.
But, when the population of the iſland was
compleated, wars commenced betwixt the dif
ferent tribes. The whole body of the Iflanders
became engaged in the conteft. They divided
into two parties. One confifted of the Belgic
nations, and the other of the British. And
the latter confederated together, like the Ca-
ledonians and Jews before them, under the
denomination of their principal tribe, and re-
ceived the general appellation of Scots. The
war terminated finally about the year 260.
The Belge were fubdued. The vanquished
adopted
286 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
:
adopted the appellation of their conquerors. And
all the nations of Ireland were embodied into
one Empire, under the general denomination of
Scots 1.
I
At the commencement of thefe wars, a younger
fon of the royal family of the Creones in Ca-
ledonia, having been fent over with fuccours to
the Britons, was chofen their Pendragon by
the kings; and the crown was fixed hereditary
in his family. And, foon after the conclufion of
them, the royal line of the Creones being ex-
tinguiſhed, their dominions muſt neceffarily have
devolved to the monarchs of Ireland. This
was affuredly the great occafion, that firft fettled
a colony of Scots in Caledonia. The occafion
indeed is merely conjectural: but it has fuch
ftrong coincidences of reafon and fact in fup-
port of it, as almoſt lend it the fanction of
Hiſtory. The royal line of Ireland appears
decifively from Offian, to have been the younger
branch of the houſe of the Creones.
houſe appears as decifively to have finally failed
in the perſon of Offian, about the year 320.
And in the year 320 we fee a body of Scots
detached from Ireland, and fettling in the coun-
try of the Creones. The monarch of Ireland
would take poffeffion of the devolved kingdom,
and naturally give it as an appenage to one
:
Ι
1 Hiſtory of Manchester, p. 443-446.
This
of
་
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
287
of his fons. And in 320 Fergus eſtabliſhed
himſelf in the country, with a body of troops
and the authority of a fovereign ¹.
I Thefe ac-
quifitions of the Scots in Britain were exactly
commenfurate with the territories of the Creones,
beginning from, or nearly from, the borders of
Rofs, and extending to the bank of the Clyde 2.
And the Scots fettled in the country with
the abfolute confent of the Caledonians, as
appears decifively from the friendly concur-
rence of both, within only 20 years afterwards,
in expeditions into the Roman Province 3. Nor
did they merely fettle there by confent. They
took poffeffion of the Creonian dominions, in
confequence of the laws and preſcriptions of
the country; as the Creones now affumed a new
appellation from them, and were denominated,
like them, Ar-gathel, Iar-gael, or Ar-gyle. This
name has puzzled all the criticks and hifto-
rians. But it is nothing more than the IRISH.
The Britons being univerfally called Gathel and
Gael, fuch of them as went over into Ire-land,
Iar-in, or Er-in would naturally have received
the appellation of Iar-Gael, Er-Gael, Ar-Gael, or
the Ir-iſh Britons; and the appellation remains
to this day among the Iriſh, in their customary
appellation for their own language, Caelich
1-Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 444, and 447.
2 P. 412, and the dimenfions of Argathel before.
3 Marcellinus, 1. xx, c. I.
Eir-inach,
288 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Eir-inach, or the Ir-ish British. And the co-
loniſts of Fergus would as naturally bring it
back with them into Britain, retaining the defig-
nation as the note of their peculiar derivation
from Ireland. Theſe are fuch remarkable and
ftriking coincidences, with regard to the actuat-
ing reafon of that hiftorical fact, the fettlement
of the Scots in Caledonia; as perhaps no con-
jectural reafon ever poffeffed before, and nearly
give it all the confidence of attefted truth.
Thus did the refugees of fouthern Britain
gradually become the denominators of all the
Irish. And thus did they afterwards eſtabliſh a
colony upon the eaſtern ſhore of Caledonia, and
in the year 320 firft fix the appellation of Scots
within the iſland of Britain. Thence the name
was carried gradually, with their poffeffions, over
the whole extent of the prefent Scotland. And
Hibernians, Caledonians, Roman Britons, and
Saxons, have all concurred to form the prefent
refpectable nation of the Scots in Britain.
This then is the genuine origin of the Scots,
undiſguiſed by the romantic impertinences of
the Irish fabulifts on the one hand, and undiſ-
torted by the bold fictions of Caledonian pre-
judice on the other. And at the clofe it is cu-
rious to obferve, that the great point which has
been fo long agitated between the Irish and
Scotch criticks, and "has for a century and an
"half engaged two nations of contending anti-
" quarians
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 289.
"quarians in war'," is now finally determined.
in favour and disfavour of both. The Iriſh, and
their auxiliaries of England, Lloyd, Stilling-
fleet, Innes, Carte, and others, who afferted the
Cantabrian or Scandinavian defcent of the Scots;
and fuch of the Scotch as, in equal oppofition to
both, ftrenuouſly maintained a Caledonian origin
for their anceſtors; thefe were all equally and
partially miſtaken.-They who afferted the Can-
tabrian or Scandinavian origin of the Scots, and
were therefore wrong, affirmed likewife their im-
mediate deduction from Ireland into Caledonia,
and were therefore right. And they who denied
the Cantabrian or Scandinavian deſcent of the
Scots, and were therefore right, denied like-
wife their immediate derivation from Ireland, and
were therefore wrong. The Scots now appear to
have been originally Britons of the South, who
migrated from the western fhore of Britain into
Ireland, and afterwards paffed from Ireland into
Caledonia.—And they who affirmed, and they
who denied, the Caledonian extraction of the
Iriſh Scots, affirmed and denied what was equally
true and equally falfe. As the name of Scot was
communicated from the South-Britons in the
center of Ireland to all the tribes upon the coaſt,
it comprized the Caledonian nations of the
Robogdii, the Venicnii, and the Hardinii.
I
• Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 430.
And
U
the
290 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
*
:
the Scots of theſe three tribes, who poffeffed all
the North and North-Weft of the iſland, from
Fair Head to Balyfhannon, were all original Ca-
ledonians -They alfo who affirmed, and they
who denied, the Caledonian defcent of the Bri-
tifh Scots, affirmed what they could not prove,
but what was yet a truth, and denied what all
hiſtory denied, and what was yet no falfehood.
The Scots, that came from Ireland under Fergus,
were brought from the country of the Caledo-
nian Robogdii, from the district in the North-
weſtern parts of Antrim, which was formerly de-
nominated Dalrieta and is now named Route; and
were therefore called Dalreudini in the days of
Bede, and their country Dalrieta to the 11th
century. And the Scots, who have given their
own denomination to all Caledonia and all Valen-
tia, were Caledonians that had migrated into Ire-
land, and that re-migrated into Caledonia after-
wards.-Laftly: the Irish and English, who af-
firmed the derivation of the Britiſh Scots from
Ireland, and referred, as they both conftantly
referred, the arrival of thefe Scots to the com-
mencement of the 6th century, affirmed an indu-
I
Hiſtory of Mancheſter, p. 434, 442, and 443–444.
2 Bede, 1. i. c. 1, Ufher, p. 320, and Camden, p. 769.
And the annals of Tigernach, one of the oldeſt hiſtories that
the Iriſh have, affert the Scots of Caledonia to have been de
rived from Dalrieta in Ireland: Usher, p. 321.
bitable
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
291
bitable fact in the former, but contradicted equal-
ly the Roman and Britiſh accounts in the latter,
and gave their Scottiſh antagoniſts an infinite ad-
vantage over them and the truth. The Scots mi-
grated into Britain, and ſettled in Caledonia, in
the year of Chrift 320, and were therefore affo-
ciated with the Picts in expeditions into the Pro-
vince as early as 340, and have their ravages fo
frequently mentioned by the Roman and British
writers, through a ſeries of 90 or 100 years after
it.
This is the true ftate of the cafe betwixt thefe
hiſtorical difputants. The whole authenticated
hiſtory of the origin of the Scots, and of their
tranflation to Caledonia, was never yet given, I
apprehend, without that dubiouſneſs of teftimony
which was frequently of equal moment on both
fides of the points difputed, without thofe adhe-
rences of falfehood which difparaged even real
and actual truths, and in fuch a manner as was
confiftent with every note of time and every inci-
dent of hiftory, till it was given in the Hiſtory
of Mancheſter. And, what is remarkable, this
new fyftem of facts is calculated, almoſt equally
with Mr. Macpherſon's, to gratify that national
pride of the Highlanders, which ought to be mo-
derated, as every other affection of the mind is,
but ſhould always be encouraged, as the foul of
all the national virtues. The Irifh, that were
the progenitors of the British Scots, were them-
U 2
felves
:
!
292 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
felves the defcendants of Caledonians. And, if
the Highlanders fubmitted to the Scots or were
reduced by them, they fubmitted merely to their
countrymen, and the Caledonians were reduced
by Caledonians. If therefore Mr. Macpherſon
had entered into this walk of hiſtory, he might
have equally flattered the prejudices of his
countrymen, and have opened a dark and im-
portant period of our hiſtory. But, unhappily
for himſelf, he took a different direction. Re-
folving in his own mind to reſcue the early part
of our annals from "the poffeffion of fiction and
"romance," he has unintentionally ſtrengthened
the claims of fiction, and unwittingly endea-
voured to add the authority of right to the
poffeffions of ufurpation. And he has gone on
accumulating one romantic notice upon another,
though all hiſtory concurred to reclaim him from
his error, and though the atteſtations of hiſtory
were confirmed by the living teftimony of lan-
guage; the Caledonians, who were reduced by
the Scots of Er-in or Ireland, having adopted the
appellation of their conquerors; the nation and
country being now univerfally denominated Scots
and Scotland; the former being exprefsly de-
nominated Hibernia as late as the 11th century,
and the latter the Irifchery as late as the
I
= P. 5.
14th,
I
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
293
14th', and their dialect of the Britiſh being in-
variably entitled the Ir-ifh or Er-fe to the pre-
fent moment; and the appellations of Scot for
the people, and of Erfe for the language, being
now, in the concurrent ufage of all the reft of
the iſlanders, entirely confined and appropriated
to the Gael and Gaelick of the Highlands.
¹ Innes, p. 659, and Sir George Mackenzie, p. 390, V. I.—
Irwin in his Hift. Scot. Nomenclatura, 1682, p. 6, fays,
"Our Ifle-men and Highlanders are very oft named Hiberni
"by ſtrangers, and at this day the English and our Low-
"landers call and count them Iriſh.'
"
L
I HAVE
U 3
$
1
[ 295 ]
I HAVE now gone over the whole extent
of Mr. Macpherfon's arguments with regard
to the Britiſh hiftory. And I have gone over
them with a minuteneſs of attention and a
punctuality of reply, that was fcarcely ever be-
ftowed upon a work before. This I owed to
the great credit which Mr. Macpherſon has ob-
tained by his differtation with the public, to
the high eſteem which I entertain for his abili-
ties and genius, and to the great importance and
obfcurity of the hiftory. Not a fingle argument
in the Introduction, I believe, is omitted in the
reply to it. And my anſwers, I hope, have not
turned upon little and circumftantial points, but
on the main and effential parts of the question.
They have not fluttered merely in idle oftenta-
tions of victory over words and fyllables. And
they have not endeavoured to catch Mr. Mac-
pherſon infidiouſly in the mere eddy of argumen-
tation. I have conftantly charged him home, I
think, upon the great and leading particulars of
the queſtion. And when I have done this, when I
have fhewn the infufficiency of any argument as
to its principal end and defign, I have then endea-
voured to point out the fubordinate miſtakes in
it. I have endeavoured to break the phalanx
that was particularly oppofed to me at the time:
and, when the rout was begun, I have ftudied to
improve the victory by purfuing the runaways,
and by picking up as many of them as I could.
U 4
Theſe
296 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
Thefe troops indeed were more formidable in
their appearance on the field, than they have
been found in the hour of battle. The gaiety
of their attire, and the bravery of their afpects,
promiſed a much greater refiftance than I have
met with from them. And I, who entered upon
the conteſt with a dubious fpirit, and a tremulous
exertion of courage, foon warmed with my own
fuccefs, and became affured of the victory.
In this, as in the general event of the conteft
betwixt Mr. Macpherſon and me, I may have
been deceived by that kindling ardour of fpirit,
which often anticipates the conqueft it cannot
make, or by that delufive ſelfiſhneſs of judgment,
which frequently flatters the vanity with vitionary
triumphs. But, when I cooly look back upon
the progreſs and conclufion of the debate, I fee
no reaſon to think myſelf deceived by either the
one or the other.
The plan which Mr. Macpherſon had propoſed
to himſelf, was to prove the exiſtence of three
diftinct and principal colonies in Britain, to de-
duce them in an hiftorical manner from the con-
tinent, and to point out their reſpective operations
in the iſland. And, as the first and earlieſt of
the three was to be the progenitors of the pre-
fent Highlanders and Scots, fo was it alfo to
become the original and principal poffeffors of Ire-
land. This Mr. Macpherſon fancied agreeable to
the fuggeftions of hiſtory, to anfwer to the great
revo-
!
५
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 297
revolutions in Gaul, and to correfpond with the
interior difpofition of Britain. But, to make the
records of both conformable to the demands
of this hypothefis, he has ftretched out the hif-
tory where it was too fhort, he has curtailed it
where it was too long, and has given us a nar-
ration at laſt, with fcarcely a fingle member of
that which we uſed to contemplate in the authors
of Greece and Rome.
ſuch a grofs perverfion even of his own quota-
tions, and with fuch plain and manifeft corrup-
tions even of his own authorities, fuch erazings
of records, and fuch interpolations of hiftories,
as pain me greatly for Mr. Macpherſon's fenfibili-
ties, becauſe they exhibit him in a light, I am
fure, the very oppofite of his real character. Mr.
Macpherſon, I am perfuaded, is a gentleman of
high honour and ſpirit, and could not voluntarily
have been capable of fuch actions, even in imagi-
nation. But what then muſt be the magic power
of that prejudice, which could thus bind up the
force of a difcerning fpirit, and fufpend all his
faculties of precifion and judgment; could thus
warp his mind from its natural bias of fairneſs,
and throw the illiberal hue of diſhoneſty over
one of the moſt ingenuous and candid of men!
It is furely a melancholy inftance of the weak-
neſs of the human intellect, even in its manly
exertions of ftrength. And thofe only have a
right
And this is executed with
298 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"
right to triumph over Mr. Macpherſon, who are
placed in ſome ſphere removed at once from the
frailties and the virtues of humanity, who live out
of the reach of prejudice and the power of paf-
fion, who have never felt their minds feduced by the
enchantments of a new hypothefis, and have never
fuffered their imaginations to be fired, and their
underſtandings contracted, by the calenture of a
patriot fpirit.
Mr. Macpherſon has afferted the exiſtence of
three colonies in Britain. But he has proved
only one of them to have had any being in it.
His Gael, as a diftinct colony from his Cimbri
and his Belgæ, he has no where argumentatively
deduced into the island. And that body of the
Britons which is peculiarly the object of the au-
thor's attention, and made by him the inhabitants
of Caledonia and Ireland, has no real exiſtence
in his hiſtory at all. The exiſtence of his Cimbri,
alſo, is founded wholly on the flight bafis of a
verbal criticiſm, the groundwork of the name of
Cymri. And, if this would be fufficient authority
for fuch a capital point in his hiftory, then might
"the pillars of the world be rottennefs, and
"earth's baſe be built on ftubble." But, what
is ſtill more remarkable, the whole even of this
argument is itſelf eſtabliſhed upon a ſuppoſition,
1 Shakeſpear.
and
THE BRITONS ASSERTED. 299
and upon one which is grofsly erroneous,
and not even attempted to be proved, That
Cimber fignified, not a native, but a Ger-
man, Gaul: as the Indian theology founded the
world upon the back of an elephant, and planted
the elephant itſelf-upon the back of a tortoife.
And the only one of the three colonies, that is
proved to have been in the iſland, is the Belgic.
Two thirds of the author's hiftorical ſyſtem are
left ungrounded by himſelf. And the third car-
ries ſuch a ſtrong mixture of falfhood with it, by
dividing the Cimbri, or German Celtæ, from the
Belgæ, by confounding the original arrival of the
Belge with the much later deſcent of Divitiacus,
and by making the Belge to prefs the Cimbri
beyond the Humber, and to urge the Gael into
Ireland, that even this is in effect unproved by
Mr. Macpherſon; and the certain truth is dreſt
up with fuch an accompaniment of falſhood, that
we cannot admit it for real hiftory.
#
This is a juft and fair account of the general
ſtate of Mr. Macpherſon's work. And, thus
defective as he is in the great outline of his In-
troduction, he has actually filled it up with figures
that are all diſtorted from their true proportion,
and with objects that ought never to have met
in the fame piece. The arguments in general are
dark,
3
300 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
"C
dark, inaccurate, indirect, and contradictory. No
regular and ſteady light is diffuſed through the
whole, that, like the dawn of day, gradually in-
creaſes as it continues, and enlarges as it pro-
ceeds, till it is carried at laft to a meridian bright-
neſs. But, inſtead of this, a mere twilight prevails
over the work, that gives us continually an in-
diſtinctness of objects, and just flings half an
image on the ſtraining eye;" that, clear in
the commencement, is gradually dimmed in the
progrefs, one ſhade fpreading over another, till
the objects, that first attracted our attention, fuc-
ceffively fink from the fight and are forgotten,
and the author at laſt is nearly loſing himſelf and
his reader in the dark.
ઃઃ
This is, I believe, as juſt a repreſentation as
can be given, even by the hand of candour itfelf,
of the conduct of Mr. Macpherſon in the general
profecution of his arguments. He has all the
marks of genius and fenfibility about him, but
of a genius not tutored in argumentation, and
of a fenfibility not reduced under the difci-
pline of thought. He thinks ftrongly, but not
regularly. His mind fhoots out in vigorous and
ſpirited fallies of fentiment: but it is not accuf-
tomed to keep up its vigour, and to maintain its
ſpirit, in a painful deduction of ideas. Bleft by
nature with the power, but not borrowing from
the
THE BRITONS ASSERTE D. 301
the ſchools the habit, of thinking, the turn of his
argumentation is continually irregular, and the
general force of his reafonings weak and feeble.
He is admirably adapted for the briſk eſſays of a
fkirmishing war. But he has unwarily entered
into a battle, where heavy armour and practifed
evolutions are fure to gain the day. Not a fteadi-
ly diftinguishing thinker, not a perfeveringly
accurate reafoner, he is foon confounded with the
multiplicity of his own ideas, and feldom fees the
object distinctly at which he levels his argument.
Spending himſelf too much in attentions to the
colouring of his ftyle, and throwing himſelf out
in a gay irradiation of language, he has no incli-
nation to examine his arguments feverely, and
no power to exert the rigours of criticifm upon
them; as the birds under the tropicks have
their fuperior gaiety of plumage deducted to
them, by the deprivation of almoſt all the powers
of harmony.
From this want of difcrimination in his ideas,
and from this defect of accuracy in his reafonings,
Mr. Macpherſon has even fallen into repeated
and grofs contradictions. And this is the moſt
ftriking feature in the whole aſpect of his work.
The inconfiftencies of his reafonings are fo great,
and the oppofitions in his quotations, remarks,
and incidents are fo palpable, that his arguments
have been compleatly deſtroyed before, by being
only fet in array against each other. The con-
trariety
302 THE GENUINE HISTORY OF
trariety of parts to parts is fo glaring, and this
begins fo early in the work, and is continued for
regularly through it, that in it, as in man, the
feeds of death are incorporated with the firft
elements of life, that they
<<
grow with its
growth and ftrengthen with its ftrength," and,
on the firft occafion that has invited them forth,
have burſt out, as we have ſeen, to the abſolute
deftruction of the whole.
It is not the unhappinefs of Mr. Macpherſon,
that he is miſtaken in ſome unimportant circum-
ſtances, that he has mifreprefented fome fubor-
dinate facts, and that he has failed in fome in-
confiderable reaſonings. It is not his unhappineſs,
that he is miſtaken in ſeveral circumſtances of
confequence, that he has mifreprefented feveral
incidents of importance, and that he has failed
in feveral confiderable arguments. And it is not
his unhappineſs, that he has even failed occafion-
ally, or yet frequently, in main clrcumſtances,
in effential incidents, and in arguments of the
firft magnitude. But it is his fingular and un-
paralleled infelicity, that he has almoſt regularly
failed in all; that ſcarcely a circumſtance, a fact,
or a reafoning, however flight and infignificant,
is juft or appofite; that nearly every important
circumſtance, every confequential incident, and
every effential
argument, are either frivolous in
their nature or uſeleſs in their application; and
that each capital and leading topic of the work
is
THE BRITONS ASSERTED.
303
is generally one great chaos of undigeſted mate-
rials, arguments without ſhape or form, reafon-
ings heterogeneous and repugnant, and darkneſs
brooding over the face of the whole.
This is fuch a delineation of a work of learn-
ing and genius, that my benevolence is hurt, while
juſtice urges my hand to draw it. The portrait
is ſtrongly featured. But it is an exact likeneſs.
It is the immediate tranfcript of the feelings of my
own mind. And it is fully juſtified by the detail
of extracts and examinations before. Yet, amid
the fterneſt ſeverity of truth, what fort of ſpirit
muft that be, which fhall not grieve for the au-
thor, while it is obliged to reprobate his work?
Who will not particularly figh with me over the
fate of a writer, that, poffeffed of great brilliancy
of parts, and furniſhed with confiderable ſtores
of learning, was chiefly unhappy from the fe-
lection of his fubject? Mr. Macpherſon might
certainly have played his part with the higheſt
reputation and fuccefs, within the circle of truth
and incident. But, in a paroxyfm of patriot
fondneſs, refolving to heighten into a demon-
ftration what was unable to receive even the
colouring of probability, he has fallen in the at-
tempt, as every man in the fame circumftances
muft have fallen. If the antient giants had ex-
erted their fingular vigour of body in conteſts
with mere mortals, they muſt have been as for-
tunate as they were ſtrong; but in a triumphant
bravery
304
THE GENUINE HISTORY, &c.
;
bravery of ſpirits exalting their aims, and at-
tempting to accompliſh what no force could effect,
they neceffarily failed in their efforts, and were
cruſhed by the mountains that they vainly
wielded, and buried under the islands that
they vainly hurled, in a wild hoftility againſt
the fkies.
THE EN D.
MEM.
[305]
ME M.
14
A
FEW weeks after the publication of this
work, Mr. Macpherſon honoured it with
the following notice in an advertiſement pre-
fixed to a pretendedly new edition.
"THE following ſheets were reprinted before
"the Reverend Mr. Whitaker's anfwer ap-
❝peared; and had they not, it would have
"produced no change of fentiment, no altera-
"tion of fyftem. I admire his ingenuity. I
"have a reſpect for his learning: but I am
"neither converted by his authorities, nor con-
"vinced by his arguments. On a fubject fo
ſo
66
fpeculative, the opinions of men must vary;
"and every writer has a right to carry his
"diffent before the tribunal of the public. To
"them the decifion is left. I have cloſed a
"proof, which my adverfaries may, if they
"pleaſe,
X
+
[ 306 ]
*
"6
pleaſe, oppugn. Tired of polemical writing,
"I leave my ſyſtem to its fate; and even my
vanity joins iffue with my indolence. I hate
"to fight without fpectators. Should Mr.
"Whitaker and I retire into antiquity, the ob-
"ftinate world would not follow us to fo fterile
"a field. The trophies of victory would dif-
appear in darkneſs, and the combatants re-
"main with nothing but their toil."
66
This is the whole of Mr. Macpherſon's reply.
And it is all that could reafonably be expected
from him. In one of the fevereft trials to which
the candour of the human heart can be fub-
jected, great allowances muſt be made for any
feeming ſtrokes of difingenuoufnefs. The na-
tural felf-complacency of every mind will try to
throw a fhade over its own convictions, and take
refuge behind its judgment or its vanity, its own
indolence or that of the public. And, confidered
with theſe allowances, Mr. Macpherſon is very
candid, and has virtually fubmitted to every plea
that has been urged against him. He confeffes
the inaccuracies and contradictions, the mifrea-
fonings, and the mifquotations, into which the
equal vivacity and indolence of his genius have
thrown him. He owns the fafcinating power of
patriotiſm on his mind. And he acknowledges
the
>
[ 307 ]
the hiftorical fyftem, which was the production
of all theſe principles, to be merely the fading
Fabric of an eaſtern romance, rifing in a night,
and vaniſhing in the morning. Having heard
the full charge againſt himſelf, He exprefsly de-
clines to make any reply to it.
his judges any farther trouble;
felf on the mercy of the court.
+
He will not give
but throws him-
And this ingenuous behaviour is of fingular fer-
vice to the interefts of hiſtory. Had Mr. Mac-
pherſon taken a different part; had he, however
infufficiently, attempted to vindicate his fyftem, and
drawn from me (as he certainly would have drawn)
an examination of his defence, then replied to
my anſwer, and rejoined to my reply; the caufe
of truth muſt have fuffered in the protracted
conteft. The combatants would foon have been
loft to the general eye, in the cloud which their
own efforts muſt have raiſed about them. And
theſe points of hiſtory would have been fup-
poſed by the many to remain ftill undecided, have
therefore called out future writers, and produced
an indeterminable rotation of controverfy. But
this is happily not the cafe at prefent. And
that it is not, we owe to the fairneſs of Mr.
Macpherſon's conduct. Thefe hiſtorical ſubjects,
which have found employ for the active ſpirit of
criticiſm during two centuries nearly, and were
X 2
ftill
Į
[ 308 ]
ftill fluctuating from fide to fide, are now deci
fively fettled one way, and even in the opinion of
the warmest advocates for the other. And it is
the peculiar good-fortune of the prefent contro-
verfy, that it is clofed itſelf, and has cloſed a
long fucceffion of difputes, with an earlinefs that
has left it all under the eye of the public, and
with a fatisfactorinefs that is acknowledged even
by the vanquished.
;
映
​INDE
:
[ 309 ] ï
A
=
ÍNDE X.
ARMORICA.
HE varying extent of it formerly, 214-215; it pro
bably reached along the whole northern and north-
weſtern coaſt of GAUL, 215.
-How far the BRITONS of our ifland migrated into BRE-
TAGNE in FRANCE, 215—216; the name of BRETAGNE,
not impoſed by our iflanders, but the antient and original appel-
lation of the country, 216-218; the name of the continental
BRITONS derived from the fame principle as that of the In-
fular, 218-219.
เ
BRITAIN.
It was peopled from GAUL, and about what time, 29-32.
-Why called ALBION, 91-93.
-Why called BRITAIN, 95-103.
-When the BELGE first fettled in Britain, and how, and
how far they carried their poffeffions into the iſland, 63—65,
and 69-79,
-BÉLGÆ and ABORIGINES the only general diviſions
of the BRITONS, 68–69,
-The ABORIGINES denominated CIMBRI, and why,
52-55, and 75—76.
Both BELGE and ABORIGINES denominated BRI-
GANTES, and why, 71-74, and 98-192.
-Both BELGA and ABORIGINES denominated GAEL
and WELSH, and why, 76-78, 29, and 122-124.
Both BELGÆ and ABORIGINES called CALEDO-
NES, and why, 121-124.
The language of both the fame, 83 and 145.
The manners of both very little different, 83-85.
-Why fome BRITONS called SILURES, 89; why fome,
CANTII, 86-87: why fome, TRINOBANTÉS, 87-88;
why fome, DOBUNI, 88; why fome, ORDOVICES, 88-89;
why fome, MÆATÆ, 136–137; why fome, PICTS, 219.
X 3
-The
1
STOP
I N D E X.
-The British CURRAGHS very capable of tranſporting
armies acroſs the fea, 178-181.
-The SILURES, maſters of the SILLEY ifles, 89.
-The WELSH, why fo called, and when, 76-79; why
called CYMRI, 52-55, and 75-76.
-The interiors of CALEDONIA well known to the Ro-
mans, 107-112; the inhabitants of it firſt formed into one
Empire, when, 119-120; why they call themſelves CAEL-
DOCH, 120-121; why they were called CALEDONES,
124.
1
-WIGHT, ifle of the ICTIS of DIODORUS, 219,
GAUL.
The first migration of the GAULS recorded in history, 29.
-The GAULS firſt planted BRITAIN, and when, 29
32, 76-78, &c.
-The firft irruption of the GAULS into ITALY, when,
24-25; into GERMANY, when, 29.
Whence the names of GAULS and CELTS were de-
rived, 19-20, 120-121; what they originally fignified,
122-114; and how GAUL comes now to fignify a Stranger,
71-74:
GERMANY.
The firſt migration of the GAULS into it, 29.
-The name of CİMBRI never appropriated to the GER.
MAN CELTÆ, 51-55; how far it extended, and what it
originally fignified, ibid.; how it came to fignify Robbers, 71-
74.
How the name of AMBRONES in GERMANY came
to mean Ferocious Perſons, 71-74.
IRELAND.
A
The IRISH ftill attached to the wild fictions of their antient
Hiſtory, 3.
The Romans well acquainted with Ireland, 108.
-When, and by whom, IRELAND was firſt planted. and
occupied from end to end, 150-153.
-Why IRELAND was called IRIS, IERNA,IUVERNA,
and HIBERNIA, 149, thefe names invariably applied only to
IRELAND
}
!
INDE X. S
1
FRELAND by the antients, 240-243, and 247-249.
-Whence the IRISH were called SCOTS, 284286,
and
ITALY.
-Not first inhabited from GAUL, 20.
The firſt ſettlement of GAULS in it, when, 24—25,
-The UMBRI not derivatives from GAUL, 20-24 i
of the fame ſtock with the GAULS, 24-25.
yet
MACPHERSON.
DrAuthor of Critical Differtations, one of the two prin-
cipal writers that have lately endeavoured to invert the order of
Hiftory, by making the SCOTCH the aborigines of CALE-
DONIA, and the planters of IRELAND, 5-6; a general cha-
racter of his work, 6; his knowledge of the CELTIC confined,
86, 141–142, 210, &c.
(Mr.)-Tranflator of OSSIAN, the other principal writer that
has endeavoured to invert all history, in his Prefaces and Notes
to OSSIAN, and in his late INTRODUCTION, 5-6;
a general character of the TRANSLATION and INTRO-
DUCTION, 6—7; he plumes himſelf much on his knowledge
of the CELTIC, but his acquaintance with it confined, 86,
141-142, and 210.
-Firft. general argument in the INTRODUCTION refuted,
71-28; contradictions in it, 15-16, 16-17, 17-18, 27,
and 27-28; mifquotation in it, 27; its mistake in CELTIC,
18-20.
-Second general argument refuted, 33-58; contradictions
in it, 33-34, 34-35, 38, 43-43, 46, 46-48, and 51;
mifquotations in it; 35-36, 38—42, 42—44, 44—45, 46—48,
and 56; its miſtake in CELTIC, 51—58.
-Third general argument refuted, 58-66; its miſtake in
CELTIC, 59-61.
-Fourth general argument refuted, 68-105; contradic-
tions in it, 80-82, 80 and 83-84, 90 and 94, 94 again, and
103-104; its miſtakes in CELTIC, 70-74, 85—89, 91–93,
and 95–103.
-Fifth general argument refuted, ro6-153; contradic-
tions in it, 106-107, 106 and 108, 109 and 112, 115–116,
125-126;
A
312
IN DE X.
125-126, 129, 134, 136, 139-140, 145, and 148; mifquo
tation in it, 112-113; its miſtakes in CELTIC, 120—¡21,
121-124, 130-131, 136-137, 148-149.
Sixth general argument refuted, 155-193; contradic-
tions in it, 161, 162, 166-167, 178-179, 185, 194-195,
245, 247, 253-254, 254 255 256 257, 259, 266–267,
279,280–281, 281 again; its miſtakes in CELTIC, 209–211,
230-233, 236-238, 263—265, 270-271, and 278-280;
mifquotations in it, 230-231, 236-237.
-An exact and minute character of the INTRODUC-
TION, drawn from the whole,: 295–304.
MANCHESTER HISTORY,
It has particularly endeavoured to clear up the original annals
of CALEDONIA and IRELAND, and to reſcue them both
trom antient fictions' and modern perverfion, 7; its efforts vin-
dicated, and its accounts confirmed, paffim.
-Two miſtakes in it rectified, 136, and 197.
-It contains, I apprehend, the first authentic hiſtory of
IRELAND, as to the original population, &c., that has been
hitherto published in any language, 153; and the first clear,
certain, and confiftent account of the origin of the SCOTS
and of their derivation into CALEDONIA, 291.
#
MARCELLINUS.
(Ammianus)-a paffage in his hiftory vindicated from the
unjuft meaning univerfally put upon it, 237-239.
SCOTLAND.
The genuine SCOTCH, who, 1,
Theſe have lately recovered themſelves from their atttach-
ment to the wild fables of their antient hiſtory, 1-2; but have
ftill a ſtrong tendency to the fabulous, and from the old principle,
3-4; and have therefore endeavoured, particularly of late, to
drefs up their antient hiſtory according to their own fancies and
prejudices, 4-5·
-The IRISH fictions concerning the origin of the
SCOTCH, too extravagant to be worth refuting, 155.
The SPANISH or the SCANDINAVIAN extraction of
the SCOTCH, lefs abfurd, but equally falfe, and eafily refu,
'sable, 156.
The
-XED
INDE X.
313
The SCOTCH are not fettled in North-Britain by Bede
before the commencement of the Chriſtian æra, 212-213.
-Which of the SCOTCH called ALBANICH, and why,'
270–271, and 274; which of them called EIRINICH, IRISH-
ERY, &c. and why, 274, and 292-293,
ARGYLE, its original extent, 278-279; why ſo
called, 287-288.
тори
-What gave rife to the name of SCOT, 284-286;
whence it came into CALEDONIA, and how it covered the
whole country, 286-288; the controverfy concerning that
origin being now finally adjuſted, after it has lafted near two
centuries, 388291.
ERRAT
P. 93. note, laft line, for prou read mou.
P. 149. 1. 7. for Hiver read Hiber.
હ
A.
P. 163. 1. 15. for "the period" read "that period".
P. 187. to note 3 add this, "See alfo Ware's Ireland,
"Harris, p. 178-179."
P. 205. note, 1. 9. the words " for believing thoſe of Ire-
"land to have come from the Scots in &c." ſhould
ſtand thus," for believing the Scots of Ireland to have
"come from thoſe in &c.
P. 237·
laſt line but one, for Den read Dey.
:
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
3 9015 03979 0418