Before I conclude thefe flight Remarks, I muft beg leave to obferve, that as the great fubject of this pre- fent book is GOTHIC ANTIQUITIES, which I appre- kend to be totally diftinct from the CELTIC, I only pretend to be exact and precife as to the GOTHIC or TEUTONIC Languages; but do not take upon me to decide on any of the points which relate either to the CELTIC Antiquities or CELTIC Tongues. For this reafon I avoid entering into the difpute, which has of late fo much interefted our countrymen in North- Britain viz. Whether the ERSE Language was firft spoken in Scotland or Ireland. Before the inquifitive Reader adopts either opinion, he would do well to con- fider many curious hints, which are fcattered up and down in LLUYD's moft excellent Archeologia Britan- nica, 1707. fol. and efpecially in his WELSH and IRISH Prefaces, referred to in the foregoing Note. The Specimen of the ERSE or HIGHLAND SCOT- TISH, in p. xxxi. is extracted from the New Tefta- ment lately publiſhed at Edinburgh, wherein this Language is called Gaidhlig Albannaich; and upon the authority of that book I have fo named it here. This I mention by way of caveat againft the cenfure of thofe who contend that the true name is GAELIC or GALIC, and that this word is the fame with GALLIC, the name of the ancient Language of GAUL. With- out deciding the queftion as to the origin of the ERSE Language itfelf, I muft obferve upon the ancient name of GALLIC, that this does not feem to have been used by the natives of GAUL themfelves, but to \have been given them by foreigners: They called themſelves CELTÆ, and their Language CELTIC[1];
- Qui ipforum lingua CELTE, noftra GALLI appellantur. Cæfar de
Bell. Gal. L. 1." CELTE, the Gauls, Gædil, Cadil, or Keill, and in the plural, according to our dialect, Keiliet, or Keilt, (now "Guidhelod) Irifhmen. The word Keilt could not be otherwife writ- ten by the Romans, than Ceilte or Celta." See Lluyd's Irish Preface, p. 107. in Nicholfon's Irish Hiftorian.
- ↑ 1
