evidence of the runic inscriptions found in Kent, have been either of the Anglian[1] or Gothic stock. In the time of Pytheas—fourth century B.C.—and in that of Ptolemy—second century A.D.—the Goths, as already mentioned, occupied a region on the east of the Baltic. Their name is lost there, but survives in Gotland Isle and Gothland in Sweden. Tradition ascribes the Baltic area as their original home, and in any case they must have been settled along its coasts at a very early period. The old name Uuitland for a part of the east coast of the Baltic reminds us of the Jutes, for Uuit is probably a modified form of Jute or Jewit, and in the Jutish parts of England, as in Hampshire, we meet with Uuit or Wit names, as Wihtland for the Isle of Wight. The identity of some of the Jutes with the Goths is shown by the similarity of the name, and its ancient occurrence on both sides of the Baltic Sea; in the similarity of customs, as will be described later; and in historical references, such as that of Asser, who, in telling us that King Alfred’s mother was descended from the Goths and Jutes, practically identifies them as being at one race. In the survival of monuments with old Gothic runes in Kent we have corroborative evidence.
Beddoe refers to the similarity of the place-names in many parts of England, and says:[2] ‘The patronymical names and other place-names in Kent and other parts of England forbid us to imagine an exclusive Jutish nationality.’ The evidence of Goths and Frisians in Kent, and of settlers of the same nationalities in many other parts of England, appears to afford a solution of the question who the people called Jutes in Kent or in Hampshire really were—i.e., mainly Goths or of Gothic descent.
The part which the nations of the Baltic took in the conquest and settlement of England has been under-
