The Ethnology of the British IslandsLatham, R. G. (Robert Gordon)
History
The Ethnology of the British Islands
Latham, R. G. (Robert Gordon)
Ethnology -- Great Britain
But that common mother-tongue at the remote period in question, the
period of the earliest occupancy of Britain, must have been spoken on
both sides of the Channel--in Gaul as well as the British Islands. And
here (_i.e._, in Gaul) it may have done one of two things. It may have
remained unaltered; or, it may have undergone change. Now in either case
it would be different from both the Gaelic and the British. In the
former alternative it would have been stereotyped as it were, and so
have preserved its original characters, whilst the Gaelic and British
had adopted new ones. In the latter it would have altered itself after
its own peculiar fashion; and those very peculiarities would have made
it other than British as well as other than Gaelic. Yet what is the
fact? The ancient language of Gaul, though as unlike the Gaelic as a
separate and independent development was likely to make it, was _not_
unlike the British. On the contrary, it was sufficiently like it to be
intelligible to a Briton. Now I hold this similarity to be conclusive
against the doctrine that the British and Gaelic languages were
developed out of some common mother-tongue _within the British Islands_.
Had they been so the dialects of Gaul would have been far more unlike
the British than they were.
The _British_ then, at least, did not acquire its British character in
Britain, but on the continent; and it was introduced into England as a
language previously formed in Gaul.
For the Gaelic there is no such necessity for a continental origin;
indeed at the first view, the probabilities are in favour of its having
originated in Britain. It cannot be found on the continent; and, such
being the case, its continental origin is hypothetical. One thing,
however, is certain, viz., that if the Gaelic were once the only
language of the British Isles, the conquests and encroachments of the
Britons who displaced it, must have been enormous. In the whole of South
Britain it must certainly have been superseded, and in half Scotland as
well: whilst, if, before its introduction into Great Britain, it were
spoken on any part of the continent, the displacement must have been
greater still.
Now, the hypothesis as to the origin of the Gaels may take numerous
forms. I indicate the following three.--
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