The Antiquarian Magazine & Bibliographer; Vol. 4, July-Dec 1884 — John Shaqi
The Antiquarian Magazine & Bibliographer; Vol. 4, July-Dec 1884Various
History
The Antiquarian Magazine & Bibliographer; Vol. 4, July-Dec 1884
Various
Archaeology -- Periodicals; Great Britain -- Antiquities -- Periodicals
(3) A copy of verses for 1826, by Richard Jones, with a woodcut of
bellman, similarly equipped to last, but the town-hall is shown on
larger scale, and the church does not appear. W. H. Vale, printer, 5,
Eign-street, Hereford.
(4) Another similar copy of verses for 1827, by Thomas Hall, and the
same woodcut as last.
(5) Another for 1830, by James Davies, with woodcut as No. 2. John
Parker, printer, High Town, Hereford.
(6) Another copy of verses for 1835, by James Davies, with same woodcut
as last.
They all bear verses in same style as those quoted in the ANTIQUARIAN
MAGAZINE, viz., Prologues, Epilogues, and on the various Saints,
Festivals, addresses to the King, Queen, Princes, Masters, Mistresses,
Young Men and Maidens, &c., but no two are alike.
In the Hereford Permanent Library is a copy of verses for 1822, by James
Langham (?), City Crier.
JAMES W. LLOYD.
_Kington, Herefordshire._
PORTS AND CHESTERS.
SIR,--Mr. Round (see vol. v. p. 282) claims “Port as an English word, in
itself distinct from the Latin _porta_ or _portus_;” later on (p. 283),
“Port was in itself essentially an English word;” yet at p. 286 we read,
“The English _borrowed_ it ... after the settlement ... or before the
settlement.” How can it be generically an English word, yet borrowed
from Latin? There is lamentable confusion throughout this paper, truly
distressing confusion, and the little bits of assertion and argument are
so cut into slices and sandwiched between slips of quotation and
extract, that it is like dissecting a Chinese puzzle to ramify its
purport.
We have the words ‘castor,’ ‘port,’ ‘street,’ and ‘wall;’ now, if these
words were English forms of some Teutonic roots, they will have
analogues in the allied tongues: where are those analogues?
(1) Castor, Caster, Caister, Ceaster, Chester, are all from the Latin
castrum, as muddled by alien tongues; yet, at p. 285, we are told that
the “English would presumably have only met, not with the Latin castrum,
but the Welsh caer or kair.” Why so? As a fact, the Welsh forms are not
borrowed from Latin, but come from an independent Celtic root--as I
think, direct from the Hindu gir, giri, and far older than Latin. We
find Keir in Dumfriesshire; Cardiff in Glamorganshire; Carhaix,
Kersanton, Kervrin, Kerentrec, Plessis-Kaer, all in Brittany; Caerleon
and Caerwent, both famous places in Monmouthshire, pronounced, the
former, Karleen, the latter, Kerwent, thus showing the affiliation with
Armorican forms.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account