residence in England; and (3.) that a later historian was induced by the similarity between the term _Wiht-saetan_, as applied to the _people of the Isle of Wight_, and _Wit-land_, as applied to _Jutland_, combined with the real probability of the fact supposed, to a.s.sume a Jute origin for the Saxons of the parts in question, the third is, in the mind of the present writer, the most probable.
-- 21. It has already been stated that concerning the Angles and Saxons, no reasonable man will put the question which was put in respect to the Jutes, _viz._, had they any real place among the Germanic invaders of England?
Respecting, however, their relations to each other, and their respective geographical localities whilst occupants of Germany, anterior to {13} their immigration into Britain, there is much that requires investigation. What were the Saxons of Germany--what the Angles?
-- 22. _Difficulties respecting the identification of the Saxons._--There are two senses of the word _Saxon_, one of which causes difficulty by being too limited; the other by being too wide.
_a._ _The limited sense of the word Saxon._--This is what we get from Ptolemy, the first author who names the Saxons, and who gives them a limited locality at the mouth of the Elbe, bounded by the Sigulones, the Sabalingi, the Kobandi, the Chali, the Phundusii, the Harudes, and other tribes of the Cimbric Peninsula, of which the Saxons just occupied the neck, and three small islands opposite--probably Fohr, Sylt, and Nordstand.
Now a sense of the word _Saxon_ thus limited, would restrict the joint conquerors of Britain to the small area comprized between the Elbe and Eyder, of which they do not seem even to have held the whole.
_b._ _The wide sense of the word Saxon._--The reader need scarcely be reminded that the present kingdom of Saxony is as far inland as the northern frontier of Bohemia. Laying this, however, out of the question, as the effect of an extension subsequent to the invasion of Britain, we still find Saxons in ancient Hanover, ancient Oldenburg, ancient Westphalia, and (speaking roughly) over the greater part of the country drained by the Weser, and of the area inclosed by the eastern feeders of the Lower Rhine, the Elbe, and the range of the Hartz.
Now as it is not likely that the limited Saxon area of Ptolemy should have supplied the whole of our Saxon population, so on the other hand, it is certain, that of a considerable portion of the Saxon area in its _wider_ extent tribes other than the Saxons of England, were occupants.
-- 23. _Difficulties respecting the word Angle._--The reader is referred to an extract from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in -- 16, where it is stated, that "from the Angles" land (which has since always stood waste betwixt the Jutes and the {14} Saxons) came the East-Angles, Middle-Angles, Mercians, and all the Northumbrians."
Thus to bring the great Angle population from an area no larger than the county of Rutland, is an objection--but it is not the chief one.
The chief objection to the Angles of England being derived from the little district of Anglen, in Sleswick, lies in the fact of there being mention of _Angli_ in another part of Germany.
-- 24. This exposition of the elements of uncertainty will be followed by an enumeration of--
1. Those portions of the Germanic populations, which from their geographical position, are the likeliest, _a priori_, to have helped to people England.
2. Those portions of the Germanic population, which although not supposed to have contributed in any notable degree to the population of Britain, had such continental relations to the Angles and Saxons, as to help in fixing their localities.
These two scenes of facts, give us what may be called our preliminary _apparatus criticus_.
-- 25. Between the northern limits of the Celtic populations of Gaul and the southern boundary of the Scandinavians of Jutland, we find the area which is most likely to have given origin to the Germans of England. This is best considered under two heads.
_a._ That of the proper _seaboard_, or the _coast_ from the Rhine to the Eyder.
_b._ That of the _rivers_, _i.e._, the communications between the ocean and the inland country.
This double division is _sufficient_, since it is not likely that Britain was peopled by any tribes which were not either maritime, or the occupants of a river.
On the other hand, it is _necessary_, since although the _a priori_ view is in favour of the _coast_ having supplied the British immigration, the chances of its having proceeded from the interior by the way of the large rivers Rhine, Weser, and Elbe, must also be taken into consideration. {15}
The importance of this latter alternative, will soon be seen.
-- 26. _The Menapians._--Locality, from the country of the Morini on the French side of the Straits of Dover, to the Scheldt. It is generally considered that these were not Germans but Celts. The fact, however, is by no means ascertained. If Germans, the Menapians were the tribes nearest to Britain. Again, supposing that the present Flemings of Belgium are the oldest inhabitants of the country, their origin is either wholly, or in part, Menapian. Mentioned by Caesar.
-- 27. _The Batavians._--Mentioned by Caesar; locality, from the Maas to the Zuyder Zee. Conterminous with the Menapians on the south, and with the Frisians on the north. If the present Dutch of Holland be the inhabitants of the country from the time of Caesar downwards, their origin is Batavian.
-- 28. _The Frisians._--First known to the Romans during the campaign of Drusus--"tributum _Frisiis_ transrhenano populo--Drusus jusserat modic.u.m;"[3] Tacitus, Ann. iv. 72. Extended, according to Ptolemy, as far north as the Ems--[Greek: ten de parokeanitin katechousin ... hoi Phrissioi, mechri tou Amisiou potamou].
Now, as the dialect of the modern province of Friesland differs in many important points from the Dutch of Holland and Flanders; and as there is every reason to believe that the same, or greater difference, existed between the old Frisians and the old Batavians, a.s.suming each to have been the mother-tongues of the present Frisian and Dutch respectively, we may consider that in reaching the parts to the north of the Zuyder-Zee, we have come to a second sub-division of the Germanic dialects; nevertheless, it is not the division to which either the Angles or the Saxons belong, as may be ascertained by the difference of dialect, or rather language.
-- 29. _The Chauci._--Connected with the Frisii.--Falling into two divisions--the lesser (?) Chauci, from the Ems to the Weser; the greater (?) Chauci from the Weser to the Elbe--[Greek: meta de toutous] (the Frisians), {16} [Greek: Kauchoi hoi mikroi mechri tou Ouisourgios potamou, eita Kauchoi hoi meizous, mechri tou Albios potamou.]
Tacitus describes the Chauci thus:--"Tam immensum terrarum spatium non tenent tantum Chauci, sed et implent; populus inter Germanos n.o.bilissimus."
The Frisians, as has been stated, represent a separate subdivision of the German dialects, as opposed to the ancient Batavian, and the modern Dutch and Flemish. Did the Chauci represent a third, or were they part of the Frisian division?
The latter is the more likely, and that for the following reasons--Vestiges of Frisian dialects are to be found on the Continent, in Oldenburgh, and also in the island of Heligoland.
More important still is the North-Frisian dialect. _North of the Elbe_, in the Dutchy of Sleswick, and from the Eyder to Tondern, we find a tract of land called, by Saxo Grammaticus, _Frisia Minor_, and by other writers, _Frisia Eydorensis_.
Now, as there are no grounds for considering these _North_ Frisians as other than indigenous to the tract in question, we get an additional reason for looking upon the intermediate line of coast as Frisian rather than either Angle or Saxon--or, at least, such parts of it as are not expressly stated to be otherwise.
-- 30. _Inference._--As the whole coast south of the Elbe seems to have been occupied by tribes speaking either Frisian or Batavian dialects, and as neither of these sub-divisions represents the language of the Angles and Saxons, the original localities of those invaders must be sought for either north of the Elbe, or inland, along the course of the rivers, _i.e._--inland.
-- 31. _The Saxons and Nordalbingians._--North of the Elbe, and south of the Eyder (as stated in -- 22), we meet the Saxons of Ptolemy; but that in a very circ.u.mscribed locality.
In the ninth century, the tribes of these parts are divided into three divisions:--
_a._ The _Holtsati_=the people of Holstein. Here _holt_=_wood_, whilst _sat_ is the _-set_ in Somer-_set_ and Dor-_set_. {17}
_b._ The _Thiedmarsi_=_the people of Ditmarsh_.
_c._ The _Stormarii_=_the people of Stormar_.
Besides the names of these three particular divisions the tribes between the Elbe and Eyder were called by the _general_ name of _Nordalbingii_=_i.e. people to the north of the Elbe_.
-- 32. _The people of Anglen_--North of the Nordalbingii; Anglen being the name of a _district_ between the Schlie and Flensburg.
-- 33. _The Jutes._--In _Jut_-land, north of the Angles and the Northfrisians.
-- 34. _The Saxons of Holstein, how large their area?_--There is no reason for considering the Nordalbingian _Holtsati_, _Thiedmarsi_ and _Stormarii_ as other than Saxons; although the fact of the Northfrisians to the north, and of the Frisians of Hanover to the south of them, is a slight complication of the _prima facie_ view.
Neither is it necessary to identify the two divisions, and to consider the Saxons as Frisians, or the Frisians as Saxons, as is done by some authors.
It is only necessary to perceive the complication which the existence of the Northfrisians introduces, and to recognise the improbability of _parts_ of the present dutchies of Holstein and Sleswick having const.i.tuted the _whole_ of the Anglo-Saxon area.
In other words, we have to ascertain in what direction the Germanic population represented by the Saxons at the mouth of the Elbe extended itself--for some further extension there undoubtedly must have been.
-- 35. This brings us to the other series of preliminary facts, viz.: the consideration of the more important tribes of the middle and lower courses of the three great rivers, the Rhine, the Weser, and the Elbe.
-- 36. _The Germans of the Middle Rhine._--Of the Germans of the Lower and Middle Rhine, it is only necessary to mention one--
_The Franks._--We shall see that, taking the two terms in their widest sense, the _Franks_ and the _Saxons_ were in contact, a fact which makes it necessary to notice at least some portion of the Frank area. {18}
_a._ _Salian Franks._--If the element _Sal-_ represent the _-sel_, in the name of the Dutch river _Y-ssel_, the locality of the Salian Franks was Overyssel and Guelderland, whilst their ethnological relations were most probably with the Batavians.
_b._ _Chamavi._--In the Tabula Peutingeriana we find--Chamavi qui _Elpranci_ (_leg. et Franci_). They were conterminous with the Salii--[Greek: Hupedexamen men moiran tou Salion ethnous, Chamabous de exelasa].--Julian, Op. p. 280.--D.N.
The following extract is more important, as it shows that a Roman communication _at least_ took place between the Rhine and Britain: [Greek: Chamabon gar me bouleuomenon, adunaton estin ten tes Bretannikes nesou sitopompian epi ta Rhomaika phrouria diapempesthai].--Eunap. in Except.
leg. ed., Bonn, p. 42.--D.N.