d. From Etherwerd, writing in the eleventh century--"_Anglia_ vetus sita est inter Saxones et Giotos, habens oppidum capitale, quod sermone Saxonico _Sleswic_ nuncupatur, secundum vero Danos _Hathaby_."[14] s. 111. _The district called Angle._--The district of _Anglen_, so called (where it is mentioned at all) at the present moment, is a part of the Dutchy of Sleswick, which is literally an _Angle_; _i.e._, a triangle of irregular shape, formed by the Schlie, the Flensborger Fiord, and a line drawn from Flensborg to Sleswick; every geographical name in it being, at present, Danish, whatever it may have been previously. Thus some villages end in _bye_ (Danish=_town_) as Hus-_bye_, Herreds-_bye_, Ulse-_bye_, &c.; some in _gaard_ (=_house_), as _Oegaard_; whilst the other Danish forms are _skov_=_wood_ (_shaw_), _hofved_=_head_, _lund_=_grove_, &c. In short it has nothing to distinguish it from the other parts of the peninsula. s. 112. Add to these the Danish expression, that _Dan_ and _Angul_ were brothers, as the exponent of a recognised relationship between the two populations, and we have a view of the evidence in favour of the Danish affinity. s. 113. _Inferences and remarks._--_a._ That whilst the root _Angl-_ in Tacitus, Ptolemy, Procopius, and the Leges Anglorum, &c., is the name of a _people_, the root _Angl-_ in the _Anglen_ of Sleswick, is the name of a district; a fact which is further confirmed by the circumstance of there being in at least one other part of Scandinavia, a district with a similar name--"Hann ['a]tti bu a Halogolandi i _Aungli_."[14]--Heimskringla, iii. 454. _b._ That the derivation of the _Angles_ of England from the _Anglen_ of Sleswick is an inference of the same kind with the one respecting the Jutes (see s. 20), made by the same writers, probably on the same principle, and most likely incorrectly. _c._ That the Angles of England were the Angli of Tacitus, {66} Ptolemy, Procopius, and the Leges Anglorum et Werinorum, whatever these were. s. 114. What were the _Langobardi_, with whom the Angles were connected by Tacitus? The most important facts to be known concerning them are, (1) that the general opinion is in favour of their having belonged to the _High_-German, or Moeso-Gothic division, rather than to the _Low_; (2) that their original locality either reached or lay beyond the Elbe; a locality, which, in the tenth century, was _Slavonic_, and which, in the opinion of the present writer, we have no reason to consider to have been other than Slavonic during the nine preceding ones.--That they were partially, at least, on this side of the Elbe, we learn from the following:--"Receptae Cauchorum nationes, fracti Langobardi, gens etiam Germanis feritate ferocior; denique usque ad flumen Albim ... Romanus cum signis perductus exercitus."[15]--Velleius Paterc. ii. 106.