esteeming the language of the Picts to be radically Celtic, these repeated collisions and communications between them and tribes of Gothic descent, was sufficient to give it such a tinge of the Teutonic as will fully account for the Scottish words which appear to have been directly derived from the Mæso-Gothic, SuioGothic, Islandic, or other dialects of the Gothic tongue, without passing through the Anglo-Saxon medium. Of this we shall say a few words more hereafter.

II. When we hold that the dissolution of the Pictish nation took place upon their being defeated by the Scots, we only adopt what the authorities of the period intimate, and not the absurd additions with which either the learned historians of a later age, or the unlearned vulgar, have overloaded a simple tale. We are as far from believing that a great nation was at once and entirely dissolved and annihilated, as we are from swallowing the tradition of the heather ale.

It must be considered that the people of whom we speak had, neither under their former name of Caledonians, nor under the later adopted name of Picts, much the aspect of a separate or independent nation. They were, in all probability, rather a collection of clans or tribes, which, although originally independent of each other, were formed into a sort of federal republic by community of language, manners, and interests, and finally by being placed, for the most part, under command of the same chief or king. Such confederations, like those of the Five nations and Six nations of North America, are common among all savage peoples, and many such were adopted by the Britons, for a longer or a shorter time as exigencies required or permitted. But these associations only resemble the union of detached branches, which, fastened together with a twig, form a faggot, and as such have a distinct and combined existence; although a single stroke of a hedgebill divides the faggot-band, and the boughs separated from each are dispersed and no longer to be recognised as forming a single and individual object. The sword of Kenneth did not, probably, exterminate the Picts, but it cut asunder their band of union, and deprived them, for whatever reason, of their existence as an independent people and nation.

Some would, no doubt, feel shame at the idea of fixing themselves among the ranks of the Scots, their ancient enemies. But besides these, there were two countries in which the Picts formed a part of the inhabitants, where they were not so much affected. by the calamity which had fallen upon the great body of the nation which dwelt beyond the Forth.

These countries were 1st. Lothian, into which the southern

Picts had penetrated, and which they occupied under the name of Vecturiones, as previously noticed. Since the arrival of the Saxons, however, the ascertainment of their superiority in war, and the subsequent invasion of the Danes or Norsemen, these Lothian Picts had lost their character of an individual and conquering people in the southern regions, by superior force, as their northern brethren had lost their original possessions in Angus and Fife shires, by the conquest achieved by the Scots. It is, however, highly probable, that, possessed already of a dialect greatly blended with that of the Gothic tribes, these southern Picts or Vecturiones might contribute a good deal towards the predominance of a language allied, from the circumstances we have mentioned, with the Norse and Anglo-Saxon, and so may have contributed a share to the formation of the Lowland Scottish dialect, which, there is no doubt, was first used in these provinces. Secondly, another point of refuge was open to such of the Picts as refused to submit to the stern rule of Kenneth Mac Alpine: to wit, Galwegia, or the modern Galloway, the history of which district, if fit materials existed to compose it, would be of singular interest to the antiquary. Such materials have not been discovered. But that the country nearest to Ireland had been originally occupied by the Gael or Celts from that island, is clear, both from the name Gaelwegia, and from the epithet of the Wild Scots of Galloway, handed down from immemorial tradition, adopted in chronicles and in statutes, and hardly yet abolished from popular use. The Picts had, however, broken in upon these colonists, and, if they had not conquered the district, had at least occupied many parts of it. These Galwegian Picts had been severely warred upon by Alpine, the father of the fortunate Kenneth the Second. His brief history bears that he had made great conquests over the Galwegian Picts, but was finally slain in that country. In Galloway, therefore, there might have remained a considerable body of the Pictish nation, and after-events assure us that such was the fact.

The Picts, after their dispersion, are once mentioned by the English Chronicles-viz. as fighting under the command of Constantine called indifferently King of Scots or King of Picts—at the great battle of Brunnanburgh, in 938, when a mighty confederacy of the Northern tribes joined with Anluf or Oluf, a Danish monarch, to subvert the throne of King Athelstane.* The Picts are also named, in an ancient and spirited poem on this conflict, as forming part of the forces of Constantine, king of Scotland. The epithet probably comprehended such of Lothian, as still retained distinctive manners, together with the Picts of See Sharon Turner's excellent History of the Anglo-Saxons, vol. ii. p. 330.

Galloway,

Galloway, who had mingled with the Wild Scots of that district and had given their national name to them.

These Picts of Galloway are mentioned for the last time in the reign of David the First of Scotland, and composed a principal division of his army during the war of the Standard. They are described as ferocious savages, half clad and half armed, but of great courage, and advancing haughty pretensions to superiority over the Norman knights who had joined the Scottish host. The cruelties which they practised in ravaging the country, sparing neither sex nor age, and tossing infants upon their bloody lances, seem to be exaggerated by the English historians. They won a great battle at Clitherow, near the sources of the river Ribble. William, son of Duncan, base-born brother of King David, was their commander. But the want of discipline of the Galwegians occasioned misfortunes which counterbalanced the victories gained by their ferocious courage. These wild soldiers mutinied in the Scottish camp, and would have slain the king, if not prevented by a well-judged, though false, alarm, stating the English to be close at hand. Their chiefs brawled and bullied in the council; and, on the night before the battle of Northallerton, A. D. 1138, asserted, as their right, the privilege of leading the van on the ensuing day. It was conceded to them, though reluctantly, as the best way of preserving peace. We may here remark that different English historians call the vanguard, thus composed, by the various names of Picts, Scots, Galwegians, and Men of Lothian. Lord Hailes observes that this strange contrariety ought to teach us that the English historians are no certain guides for ascertaining the denominations of the different tribes which inhabited Scotland in ancient times.' This proposition, in the abstract, is as judicious as those of the venerable historian usually are. But, in this particular instance, the body which led the van was so strangely mingled, that any of these four epithets, though apparently contradictory of each other, might without impropriety be applied to them. 1. They were Picts, as sprung from the remains of that people who fled to their kinsmen in Galloway. 2. But they might, in one point of view, be termed Scots, since the Picts possessed the province in common with a colony from Ireland, called the Wild Scots of Galloway, and remembered to this day by that name. 3. They were termed Gallovidians, or Galwenses, or Galwegians, as inhabiting the province of Galloway. 4. If there mixed with them any considerable number of the Vecturiones, or Southland Picts, which is a thing highly probable, they might, in consequence of such admixture, be without impropriety termed Lothian men by a foreign historian, who was not greatly interested in knowing himself, or transmitting to posterity, of what precise tribes this nefanda exercitus' consisted.

The

6

The following curious circumstance illustrates the doubt which race predominated amongst the Galwegians, during the action. Leading the van, which their presumption had demanded, they rushed on with terrible shouts of Abanigh, Albanigh!' We are the men of Albany, or Albyn. This or Albyn. This war-cry, of course, asserted that the assailants were the ancient inhabitants of Scotland-a boast agreeing with their descent from the Picts or ancient Caledonians. They charged with courage worthy of the vaunt; but when, after a severe struggle, they were driven back by the English, these last shouted in derision, Erygh, Erygh-Standard!' that is- Ye are but Irish-ye are but Irish-the Standard for ever!' The standard alluded to, is the holy banner sent into the field by Thurstan, bishop of York, which formed naturally the war-cry of the English, and indeed gave name to the war. In shouting out the epithet of Irish as a reproach, the English alluded to that part of the Galwegians who, though ranked among the Picts, were yet Wild Scots of Irish extraction. To conclude-the people of Galloway spoke a Celtic dialect till within a very late period;-a circumstance unfavourable to those who hold that the Picts spoke a Gothic one-since, in that case, strong Gothic traces must have lingered where the remains of the Pictish people had found their final refuge.

After the battle of the Standard, although the Galwegians are often mentioned, we hear no more of their Pictish descent; and it is probable that, during the time when the district enjoyed a period of stormy independence under its native lords, down to 1234, (when Roland, the last of these, left his lordship to heirsfemale,) there was no distinction made between the people of Galloway, whether of Pictish or Hiberno-Scotish descent.

We have now gone hastily through a curious inquiry-Ritson having courteously afforded us the light of his Chronicles, illustrating the Latin motto, vivit post funera virtus, and speaking as with a voice from the tomb. If by means of the weapons furnished by this industrious antiquary, we have been enabled to point out some flaws in the Gothic system of his celebrated opponent, it is without the least desire to awaken the warmth of the late controversy. We would wish to be considered as only desirous to know the truth in so far as the truth can be discovered, and with the due respect to the ashes of learned and able scholars; for we must not forget that, quoting Chalmers or Ritson against Pinkerton,

'We breathe these dead words in as dead an ear.'

There is, however, a living scholar of great merit, who has written more lately on this interesting subject, and who justly claims our recommendation to such of our readers as are inteVOL. XLI. NO. LXXXI.

M

rested

rested in the early history of Britain. Mr. Lowe had distinguished himself by a prize essay, entitled (quaintly enough) On the Ancient History of the Kingdom of the Gaelic, the extent of the country, its laws, population, poetry, and learned.' To this essay the Highland Society of London awarded the premium-and deservedly, since we know of few single volumes of recent date offering such a display of research. Mr. Lowe is, we have been told, one of that laborious and ill-requited class of men who have done so much essential service as well as honour to their country-the parochial schoolmasters of Scotland. In such a situation, command of leisure is rare; access to authorities peculiarly difficult; and the student works at an expense of time, labour, and too often health, not easily to be appreciated by those more fortunate scholars, whose hours of study are hours of relaxation. It is to be hoped that Mr. Lowe's talents and zeal will raise him from the respectable but hard-working and ill-remunerated class to which he belongs, and place him in a pulpit of The Kirk.

The defect of the book is an aptitude to lean on slight authorities-a slight mixture, in short, of the old sin of the race. Perhaps the author may not have seen the more recent compositions, in which such forgeries as the laws of Kenneth Mac Alpine, for example, have been unanimously rejected by lawyers and historians. The history of the old book termed the Regiam Majestatem,' again, is pretty well understood to have been a ruse-deguerre on the part of Edward I. of England, used for the purpose of riveting the feudal code upon the Scottish nation, as more favourable to his views, and abolishing the consuetudinary laws and customs of the Scots and Bretts; of the Dalriadic Scots, that is, and the Britons of Strath Clyde. Mr. Lowe also swallows, by wholesale, the belief in Ossian-history, poetry, chronology, and all. These things savour a little of the ancient credulity of the Scottish historians, who could find it in their hearts to deny nothing with which they conceived the honour of their Antiqua Mater to be concerned. The Essay was originally composed for the Highland Society of London, amongst whom some lingering worshippers of the neglected idol are probably to be found; and this is a circumstance which the candid reader will keep in view. We are extremely sorry that our limits permit us to say nothing further upon the labours of this modest and meritorious young man, and in such a case it would be truly unjust to enlarge on deficiencies.

ART