In the first class is placed, as we have seen, the language of Bretagne or Brittany, on the north-west coast of France, generally called Armorican. An astonishing resemblance exists between this tongue and Welsh, which proves them to have had a common origin and to have suffered very few subsequent modifications. So similar are they that when a Welsh regiment passed through Brittany some years since, after the conquest of Bellisle, they could converse with the inhabitants and were readily understood by them. When and how this district was settled is not known; but the inhabitants are manifestly of British, and therefore primarily of Celtic, origin. Some suppose that a body of British were driven by the Saxons across the Strait of Dover and settled on the French coast; others give credit to a tradition which prevails among the Armoricans, that they are descended from some British soldiers who were summoned to Italy as auxiliaries to the Roman army, and who, on their return, seized on this district for a home in consequence of having learned that the Saxons had become masters of their native land.

§ 20. Peculiarities of Celtic.—Of the ancient Celtic we can form a tolerably correct idea by examining the modern Welsh and Irish. Its peculiarities seem to have been,

I. A lack of inflection in its nouns; that is, they did not undergo any change of termination to indicate a change of case. The modern Irish has a peculiar form for the dative plural; but with this exception there is no change in the terminations of nouns either in Irish, Welsh, or Armorican.

II. A system of initial mutations, by which the noun alters ita first letter or receives a prefix, according to its relation to other words in the sentence.

It must be remembered that we are now speaking of the original language of Britain, and not of the English of the present day. The formation of the latter was the work of a later date. Yet it contains some traces of the old Celtic, in

late an incident illustrative of the resemblance between Welsh and Armorican. When and how was Brittany settled? How do some account for its settlement? What tradition prevails among the Armoricans on the subject?

20. How may we form an idea of the ancient Celtic? What peculiarity belonged to its nouns? How do modern Irish, Welsh, and Armorican, agree with ancient Celtic in this particular? How was the relation between the noun and other words in the sentence indicated?

troduced either directly from the remains of that language, still preserved in their greatest purity in the British Isles, or at second-hand from the Norman French or some other derivative from the same stock.

§ 21. Period of Roman Supremacy.-Britain was subjugated by the Romans about 50 B. C., and remained in possession of its conquerors for four centuries. It was an invariable point of policy with the Romans to introduce their own language into conquered states, as the most effective means of removing their prejudices and reconciling them to their bondage. Latin, consequently, supplanted a number of aboriginal tongues, just as English has superseded the vernaculars of the native Indians of America. In some coun tries, where a war of extermination was carried on, this change was immediate; in others, it was more gradual. The Celtic of Britain, however, does not seem to have received much modification during the period of Roman supremacy. Our language has, it is true, many derivatives from the Latin; but these came through the medium of the Norman French, and were not introduced in the days of Cæsar or his immediate successors. Though numerous Roman garrisons were stationed in the island, and though many of the British youth were drafted into the armies of the Empire, while others were sent to Rome for their education, yet, either from their inaptness at learning or their aversion to those who had deprived them of liberty, the mass of the people continued firm in their attachment to their ancient language and in its exclusive use. Many, however, of the higher classes became acquainted with Latin, and through their means some words were introduced from it which are still

Is Celtic, the original language of Britain, the groundwork of our present English? What connection is there between them?

§ 21. At what date did the Romans subjugate Britain? How long did it remain in their possession? What policy did the Romans pursue in the states they conquered? What was the consequence? Does the Celtic of Britain appear to have received much modification during the period of Roman supremacy? How, then, are we to account for the Latin derivatives in our language? What opportunities did the British youth have of learning the Roman tongue? Why did

found in modern Welsh. English, also, contains a few terms introduced from the language of the Romans at this period; such as the word street, from the Latin strata; and names of places ending in coln, a contraction of colonia (a colony), and in cester, derived from castra (a camp). Hence the origin of Lincoln, Leicester, Gloucester, &c.

LESSON VII.

ORIGIN OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (CONTINUED).

§22. The Saxon Conquest.-In this state of comparative purity the language of the British Celts remained until the beginning of the 5th century. About this time, the whole of Southern Europe began to be overrun by Goths, Huns, and other Northern barbarians; who, allured by the advantages of a milder climate and more productive soil, emigrated from what was then called Scandinavia, answering to our modern Norway and Sweden, and wrested province after province from the Roman Empire. Their conquest was so complete as to effect a radical change in the customs, laws, and of course dialects, of the districts they subjugated. The languages spoken by the Northern tribes belonged mostly to the Teutonic branch of the great Aryan family; yet, though resembling each other in their main features, they were distinguished by many minor points of difference. The Huns and Lombards, overrunning Italy, soon corrupted the Latin language and originated the modern Italian. The Franks and Normans, grafting their vernacular on the Latin-Celtic of they not embrace these opportunities? What class remained firmest in their attachment to their ancient language? Through what class were a few Latin words introduced at this early period? Give some Latin derivatives of this date, with the words from which they were formed.

§ 22. How long did the Celtic of Britain remain comparatively pure? About this time, what incursions began to be made in Southern Europe? Whence did the Northern barbarians come? What was the result of their conquests? To what stock did their languages belong? Which of these tribes overran Italy? What language originated in their corruptions of Latin? What tribes grafted their ver

Gaul, produced Norman French. Spanish and Portuguese arose from a similar combination of the language of the Visigoths, with the half Celtic and half Roman patois of the Peninsula, subsequently modified by the introduction of some Arabic elements during the supremacy of the Moors in Spain.

Nor did Britain escape invasion. While the attention of Scandinavian nations was directed principally towards Southern Europe, several German tribes fixed their eyes on this isolated province of Rome; and, either allured by the hope of plunder, or induced to send out colonies by the denseness of their population, despatched thither successive expeditions. Prior to this period, indeed, German colonies of greater or less size had been planted in Britain; for we read that this was done by the Emperor Antoninus, at the close of the war with the Marcomanni. These early settlers, however, were too few to effect much change in the customs of the inhabitants. It may have been through these colonists that their kinsmen on the continent obtained a knowledge of the island, and were induced to emigrate thither in such numbers. Other accounts state that they went on the invitation of the British themselves, who solicited their assistance against the Picts, a fierce race occupying the northern part of the island; and that, having succeeded in vanquishing the latter, they were tempted to remain by the fertility of the soil and the pleasantness of the climate. However this may be, the first expedition of which we have any authentic account was led by Hengist and Horsa, and effected a landing on the shores of Kent, A. D. 449. It was in this county, therefore, that the original British was first superseded by the mother-tongue of our present English.

nacular on the Latin-Celtic of Gaul? What tongue was thus produced? How did Spanish and Portuguese arise? What elements were subsequently introduced? To what part of Europe was the attention of Scandinavian nations principally directed? What tribes fixed their eyes on Britain? What induced them to send ex peditions thither? By whom, and after what war, had German colonies been pre viously planted in Britain? Had these early settlers effected any change in the customs of the inhabitants? How did the Germans come to send expeditions to Britain in the fifth century? Why did they remain in Britain? Who led the first expedition? Where did they effect a landing, and when? What tradition is pre

Two traditions are handed down with respect to the stratagem by means of which Hengist procured sufficient land for his first settlement. Geoffrey of Monmouth, a Welsh historian of the twelfth century, states that he purchased for a nominal sum as much land as could be enclosed with an ox-hide; and that then, having cut it into narrow strips, he surrounded with it an extent of ground sufficient for the erection of a castle. This is a familiar story, found in the traditions of various nations. The other version is given by the Saxons. They say that their great leader bought from the inhabitants a lapful of earth at what seemed to his companions an extravagant price; but that he proceeded to sow this soil over a large tract, and then, since it could not be distinguished from the other ground, laid claim to the whole, and made good his pretensions by force of arms.

A second expedition from the north of Germany followed in the year 477, under the command of Ella. This chieftain established himself in what is now called Sussex (that is, South Saxony). The kingdoms of Wessex (West Saxony), lying in what is now known as the County of Hants, and Essex (East Saxony), were next settled by successive expeditions, in the years 495 and 530 respectively. After this, large bodies of Germans were constantly arriving. It is unnecessary to trace any further the history of their emigrations.

As soon as they found themselves possessed of sufficient strength, the new-comers formed the determination of seizing upon the whole island, or at least all those parts of it that were specially favored by Nature. In this they finally suc ceeded; and the original inhabitants, to avoid extermination, were obliged to flee to the mountains of Wales and Cornwall, where they maintained their independence for many centuries, and have preserved their language, with but little alteration, to the present day. In the rest of the island, however, a radical change both in language and customs immediately took place. There was no engrafting of one tongue on another, served by Geoffrey of Monmouth, respecting Hengist's stratagem for procuring land? What is the Saxon account?

In what year did a second expedition follow? Under whose command? Where did this chieftain establish himself? What kingdoms were next settled, and in what years? What determination did the new-comers soon form? Did they succeed in carrying it through? Whither were the original inhabitants obliged to flee?