tuarii; hoc est ea gens, quæ Vectam tenet insulam, et ea, quæ usque hodie in provincia Occidentalium Saxonum Jutarum natio nominatur, posita contra ipsam insulam Vectam. De Saxonibus, id est ea regione, quæ nunc Antiquorum Saxonum cognominatur, venere Orientales Saxones, Meridiani Saxones Occidui Saxones. Porro de Anglis, hoc est de illa patria, quæ Angulus dicitur, et ab eo tempore usque hodie manere desertus inter provincias Jutarum et Saxonum perhibetur, Orientales Angli, Mediterranei Angli, Mercii, tota Nordhumbrorum progenies."

The following (little more than a translation from the Latin) is from the Saxon Chronicle (A.D. 449) :—

"Da comon pa men of prim "They came from three powers megðum Germaniæ, of Eald-Seax- of Germany, from Old Saxons, um, of Anglum, of Jotum. from Angles, from Jutes.

"Of Jotum comon Cantware and Wihtware, þæt is seo mæiað, þe nú eardap on Wiht, and þæt cyn on West-Sexum de man gyt hæt Iútnacyn. Of Eald-Seaxum comon East-Seaxan, and Sud-Seaxan, and West-Seaxan. Of Angle comon (se á siððan stôd westig betwix Iútum and Seaxum) East-Engle, MiddelAngle, Mearce, and ealle Nordymbra."

Thirdly; Alfred writes—

"Comon of prym folcum þa strangestan Germaniæ, þæt of Saxum, and of Angle, and of Geatum; of Geatum fruman sindon Cantwære and Wiht-sætan, þæt is seo þeód se Wiht þat ealond on eardas."

"From the Jutes came the inhabitants of Kent and of Wight, that is, the race that now dwells in Wight, and that tribe amongst the West-Saxons which is yet called the Jute kin. From the Old-Saxons came the East-Saxons, and South - Saxons, and WestSaxons. From Angle (which has since always stood waste betwixt the Jutes and Saxons) came the East-Angles, Middle-Angles, Mercians, and all the Northumbrians."

"Came they of three folk the strongest of Germany; that of the Saxons, and of the Angles, and of the Geats. Of the Geats originally are the Kent people and the Wiht-settlers, that is the people which Wiht the Island live on."

§ 68. The objection to these notices refers to three questions: (1) the meaning of the word Jute; (2) the import of the term Saxon; (3) the claims of the district called Angulus to be considered the mother-country of the English.

§ 69. The Jutes.-That Jute means the Jutlanders of

F

Jutland, we learn from the context; which tells us, that their country was conterminous with Angulus.

Now the Jutlanders, at the present moment, are Danes. Yet in no other part of England do we find the Danes of Jutland treated as Jutes, but, on the contrary, as ordinary Danes. In Lincolnshire, in Yorkshire, in several other counties, there were, as far as the actual population was concerned, Jutes in abundance. The name, however, by which they are designated is Dane. Hence, if a Dane from Jutland, when he settled in the Isle of Wight, were called a Jute, he was named in accordance with a principle foreign to the rest of the island. True Jutlanders would also have been Danes; and if they were. Danes they would have been called Dene, and Denisce. Again; in Lincolnshire, in Yorkshire, in several other counties where there was an abundance of Jutes, there both was, and is, abundance of evidence to their occupancy. The names of their settlements (as aforesaid) ended, and end, in -by, as Grims-by, Whit-by, &c. Let any one look to any ordinary map of England, and count the names of this kind; let him, then, look to their distribution. Let him note the extent to which they appear in each and all of the districts where Danes have ever been supposed to have settled; and, then, let him note their utter absence in the parts where Beda places his Jutes. Compare Lincolnshire, which was really Danish, with Kent, Hants, and the Isle of Wight, which are only Jute, and the possibility of error will become apparent. And why should it be impossible? why should it be even improbable? Beda is, doubtless, a grave authority. But is it Beda who here speaks? All that Beda tells us, at first-hand, is the fact to which he was cotemporary, viz. the fact of their being a gens quæ Vectam tenet insulam, et ea quæ, usque hodie in provincia occidentalium Saxonum Jutarum natio nominatur." How they came there was another matter

66

;

an ordinary piece of history, for which, perhaps, Bishop Daniel was his informant; Bishop Daniel having no personal knowledge of the event, which happened some 200 years before he was born.

That they were Juta, in the parts under notice, seems to be a fact. Their origin from Jutland seems to be an inference: and I submit that it was an incorrect one. I submit that, as far as these Juta were Jutes, at all, they were Jutes from the opposite coast of Gaul, rather than Jutes from Jutland. If so, they were Goths. This I believe, then, to have been the case. Word for word the two forms are convertible; besides which, Alfred's form is Geat, and in the work attributed to Asser the name, totidem literis, is Gothus.

"Osberg erat filia Oslac-qui Oslac Gothus erat natione, ortus enim erat de Gothis et Jutis."

The details of the Gothic dominion in Gaul tally with this view. They begin, there or thereabouts, with the century when Ataulfus or Adolfus, having abandoned Rome, lays the foundation of a kingdom of which Arles is the capital. His power is developed at the expense of two pretenders, Constantine and Maximus, the latter supported by Gerontius; but both being, more or less, British in their political relations. Indeed, it was on British ground that the former was raised to the purple. The general who most effectively opposes them is Constantine; who raises the siege of Arles and conducts his campaign almost wholly in either the Gothic parts of Gaul or in Gothic Spain. His ally is Ataulfus : one of his legates Ulphilas, with a name pre-eminently Gothic. The details of these movements may be found in Gibbon, the authorities for them being almost wholly Greek. When we remember that such details were just those of which Beda knew the least, we see

at once the probability of his having confounded Goths with Jutes.

§ 70. The Saxons Angles under another name.— The text of Beda suggests a difference between the Angles and the Saxons. Is this difference real or nominal? I believe it to be nominal. I submit that the Saxons were neither more nor less than Angles under another

name.

At the present moment the Welsh call the English Saxons, and it is presumed that they do so because their ancestors, the ancient Britons, did so before them.

That the Romans and Britons spoke of the Angles in the same way is highly probable. If one population called them Saxons, the other would do the same.

The name by which the Non-romanizing Germans of England (the Angles) were known to the Romans would, probably, be the name by which they were known to the Romanizing Germans (the Franks and Goths).

Now, that this name was Saxon is by no means a matter of conjecture: on the contrary, it is one on which we have a good deal of satisfactory evidence. That the Britons used it is inferred from the present practice of the Welsh. That the Romans used it is inferred from the Litus Saxonicum of the Notitia. That the Franks used it is shown in almost every page of their annals.

I submit, then, that, whilst the invaders of Britain. from the North of Germany called themselves Engles, the Britons called them Saxons. The name, however, though other than English in its origin, soon became Anglicized. Thus, the country of the

Orientales Saxones became East-Seaxe, now Essex;

all in contact with the county of Kent, in which the name probably arose.

I now add-that no real difference between the Angles and Saxons has ever been indicated. That undoubted Angles, like the men of Yorkshire or Northumberland, can be shown to differ from the so-called Saxons of Sussex or Essex in manners and dialect no one denies. But do they not differ as North-countrymen and South-countrymen, rather than as Saxons and Angles? Who finds any difference between Saxon Essex and Angle Suffolk?— between Saxon Middlesex and Angle Hertfordshire? Yet this is the difference required under the hypothesis that the Angles and Saxons were really different populations. Again, the king who is said to have called the whole island England, or the land of the Engles, was Egbert, king of Wessex, a Saxon rather than an Angle. We may believe that this was the case when an Emperor of Austria proposes that all Germany shall be called Prussia.

To conclude:-I suggest that the conquerors of England, who introduced the English language and gave the island its present name, bore two names.

They were called by themselves, Angles.

But, by the Kelts, they were called Saxons.

Where the latter populations determined the nomenclature the latter names prevailed.

§ 71. In one way, however, notwithstanding the previous arguments, the Saxons may have been different from the Angles. The latter may have come direct from Germany: the former from the Littus Saxonicum. If so, the