Page images
PDF
EPUB

rian whatever 3dly, The fuppofed Snadoun-Eaft must be Edinburgh, originally called Snedinburgh, then Neddenburgh, and laftly Edinburgh: of all which unvouched derivations, it is held fufficient evidence, that Snottingham has been changed into Nottingham, a change much for the better. We are inclined to difpute the very ground-work of this derivation, which reminds us of the noted etymology of King Pepin. The word is almost uniformly fpelled Snadoun or Snowdon, not Sneddon; neither is the word burgh or caffle added to it; fo that, according to Mr Sibbald's etymology, the name would consist of an adjective, without a fubftantive. To make out his argument, Stirling should have been called Snodden-ton, Snodden-don, or Snodden-berg, as well as Edinburgh, to which he afcribes the fame derivation. It has generally been fuppofed, that Snadoun was a borrowed name from romance, given to Stirling during the folemnization of the rites of chivalry, when the characters affumed by the Kings of Scotland and their courtiers, were thofe of the Knights of the Round Table. Snowden, a famous name in Wales, was thus, with its fabulous Arthur, transferred to Scotland. A paffage in Lindfay, which, we believe, is traditionary in the town of Stirling, feems to favour this derivation:

Adew, fair Snadoun! with thy towris hie,

Thy chapell royal, park, and tabill round. '

The refemblance of the neighbouring mountains to the defcription of Snowden, by Trevifa, may have favoured the impofition of this name.

There ben hylles in Snowdonye,"

That ben wonderly hye,

With heyghte as grete awaye,
As a man may go a day;
And hete Eriri in Walfhe,

Snowy hylles in Englyfche. '

Arthur's Seat, near Edinburgh, probably received its name from fome fimilar circumftance.

If, however, a more ancient etymology be prefixed, Snadoun may mean fimply Snow-toun; for, in winter, the lofty mountains of Perthshire, in the vicinity, may entitle it to that appellation.

But if we cannot agree to Snadoun being rendered Snodden, far lefs will we allow that Edinburgh was ever called Snoddenburgh. Manifold have been the etymologies proposed to explain the name of our Good Town. Edinburgh has been derived from Edwin, a Saxon monarch, who lived fome hundred years after it was known by its prefent appellation; from Aidan, a Scotish monarch, who, for aught we know, never lived at all; from Edin,

Gaelic,

Gaelic, the face of a hill; and from Aidan, British, fignifying a wing; whence, Camden labours to identify it with the Caftrum Alatum. Almost any one of thefe definitions appears to us more plausible than that of Mr Sibbald. Indeed if we give credit to the British poet Aneurin, the bard of the fplendid fong, who flourished in the fixth century, Edinburgh was then inhabited by the Celts; and confequently its name is not to be derived from Snidan, or any other Saxon word. Mynnyzawg, Prince of Edinburgh, commanded the confederate armies of the British chiefs dwelling betwixt the Friths of Forth and Clyde and the Roman wall, and fought the bloody battle of Cattraeth (perhaps Ettrick), in which he fustained a bloody defeat from the Saxons of Deiria, or Northumberland. Three hundred and fixty-three warriors, all of them Eudorchawg, or wearers of the golden chain, marched with Mynnyzawg to this fatal battle: three only furvived the conflict; the bard Aneurin was one of those three; and his lamentation for the fate of his comrades is ftill extant. If we look for the etymology of Edinburgh in the British language, which, confiftently with this anecdote, we certainly ought, we incline to prefer that which derives the name from Welch, Edin, the steep face of a rock; a compound which occurs in Edinbelly, Edinmore, and other local appellations. When the Saxons acquired poffeffion of the fortrefs, Dun-Edin of courfe became Edinburgh; the former name being still retained by the Highlanders.

The feparate appellations of Myned-Agned, or Caer-Agned, rendered into English, Maiden-Caftle, and into Latin, Caftrum Puellarum (potius Puella), was probably originally conferred, from an idea that it was an impregnable or virgin fortrefs. This led to the fable of the Pictish Princeffes being lodged there. We are furprifed it has occurred to no etymologist, that Agned might in time be foftened into Aned, and then inverted into Edan.

If the favourers of Mr Sibbald's opinion deny the authority of the Welch bard, the teftimony of Saxon hiftorians is not more favourable. The earliest mention of Edinburgh has been detected by the industry of Mr David Macpherfon, in the Annales Ultonienfes, a MS. in the British Mufeum, where this paffage occurs, under A. D. 637, Bellum Gline Murefan et Obfeflio Edin.' In 960, Eden-town is mentioned in an old MS. quoted by Camden, as being evacuated by the Saxons, and abandoned to Indulf, King of Scots. The place is called Edenefburg, in a charter of Alexander I.; Edwynefburg, in one of David I.; Edenburc and Edinburgh, in the Chronicle of Melrofe; Edwinciburch, by Simon of Durham; Edwynefburgh, in the chronicle of Lanercoft; Edenfburgh, by Hemingford; Edenburch, in the Polycronicon of Higden; Ednyfborg and Edenefburgh, by Knighton; EdynVOL. IL NO. 5. burch,

burch, Edynbrowch, Maydyn Castle, and the Sorrow full Hill, by the prior of Lochleven; Dun-Edin, by the Highlanders; and by the Welch, Mayned-Agned. Not one of thefe various readings give the leaft countenance to Mr Sibbald's conjecture; fo that the Sn, neceffary to his hypothefis, must have been cashiered before 637, which is hardly to be admitted.

In the introduction to the Gloffary, Mr Sibbald infifts, that Edinburgh, or Sneddinburgh, as he will have it, is the fame with Abernethy; thus not only confufing two very oppofite founds, but altogether forgetting that Aber is a Gaelic word fignifying the mouth, and cannot confiftently be combined with his Saxon Sneddan, or Snodden. This reminds us of an ingenious gentleman, who derived the etymology of Stobo from a Latin and French word, Sto-beau, I stand fair. But enough of the only conjecture in this valuable lexicon, which can be termed overftrained and whimsical.

Our limits do not permit us to beftow any further criticifm upon Mr Sibbald's Gloffary, which we confider as a very important national acquifition. The Chronicle itself contains little that may not be found in the libraries of moft antiquaries; but all fuch libraries will, in future, be imperfect, without this Gloffary. The few errors which occur, are fuch as the most fedulous attention could hardly have avoided; and while it is our duty to remark them, we cannot but regret, that these points of difcuffion are now indifferent to the author. +

To him, what matters it,

What Hengift utter'd, or how Horfa writ!'

We are no great admirers of fashionable printing, hot-prefs work, or cream-coloured paper, yet we could have wished that this useful book had been executed in fomething of a better ftyle. We do not fay, that it is inaccurately printed; and certainly, as was recommended by Lord Chesterfield to George Faulknor, the paper is fomewhat whitish, and the ink rather blackish; but a Chronicle of National Poetry should not be printed quite like the Cheap Repofitory, or the Pilgrim's Progrefs. The paper is of fo inferior a quality, as not to stand the prefs; fo that most copies we have feen are much damaged and torn; befides which, the printers or booksellers devils, entertaining probably little refpect for the external appearance of Mr Sibbald's labours, have folded the sheets with cruel inaccuracy. Thefe are evils which require to be checked where they occur, as much as the oppofite extreme of abfurd and expensive decoration.

ART.

* Wynton confounds Edinburgh with Allcluyd, or Dumbarton. † Mr Sibbald died foon after the publication of this collection.

ART. XVII. The Political and Confidential Correspondence of Lewis the Sixteenth: With Obfervations on each Letter. By Helen Maria Williams, 3 vol. 8vo. London. G. & J. Robinson. 1803.

W HOEVER reads this striking title-page, will immediately be dif pofed to ask fome queftions as to the authenticity and genuineness of the letters. But, in a particular of fuch indifpenfable importance, the editor has not thought fit, perhaps had it not in her power, to fatisfy the just curiofity of the public. The story fhe tells in the preface is imperfect, and is told very foolishly. We are given to understand, in the way of allufion and hints, which were probably thought more elegant than a plain ftatement, that a French edition of these papers was prepared for the prefs by certain friends of the late King: that this publication would have confifted of two volumes, one containing his Majefty's private letters, the other his compofitions on public and general fubjects: that, in the preface of this intended edition, it was ftated that the originals are depofited in the hands of a perfonage who will think it a pleasure and a duty to communicate them to fuch as are curious or incredulous:' that this statement is true that the French publication has been deferred, and the manufcript volumes have fallen into the hands of Mifs Helen Maria Williams-but by what means, the fays, it is unneceffary to mention:' finally, that the has obtained fuch proofs from men who now fill eminent offices under the republic, and from others who exercifed the highest functions under Lewis the Sixteenth, and who were confequently inftructed both as to the fpirit and the letter, as leave no doubt whatever with respect to the authenticity of these papers.' There is nothing very improbable in any part of this itory; but no part of it is here proved. In its prefent fhape, it does not wear the flightest femblance of evidence. The public can never yield an entire credit to these volumes, until it fhall receive information, in what manner the originals, if fuch really exift, have been preferved and collected. The literary manufcripts of Lewis probably remained in his own poffeffion, until his private property was plundered; and then muft have fallen into the hands of perfons who were not likely to yield them up to the lurking or emigrant friends of the murdered Monarch. Most of the private letters now publifhed were written under fuch circumftances of agitation and emergency, that copies would hardly be ret ined at the time; and feveral of them are addreffed, in terms of reproach, to a perfonage, whom, if he has voluntarily furrendered them to the public eye, we must at once believe to have merited thofe fevere reproaches, and to be actuated at lat by fuch heroifm, as to devote his own character

[blocks in formation]

to the confecration of his Sovereign's fame. It is impoffible, therefore, that we should feel ourselves completely fatisfied with regard to these papers, until their progrefs and tranfmiflion has been faithfully traced from the clofet of Lewis to the hands of the prefent poffeffor. The name of that perfon, too, the public is entitled to require, as well as the means by which the editor contrived to obtain copies. The manner in which her preface is written, implies an unwilling confeffion, that he has never feen the originals; nor fhould we, indeed, have been liable to take it for granted, that a communication of fuch importance would be made to a foreign refugee authorefs, whofe reputation in her own country has fcarcely reached beyond the customers of the circulating libraries. From all these confiderations, we do not hesitate to fay, that the letters, at prefent before us, as manufcripts of Lewis, appear without any external evidence of that allegation, and without a fingle circumftance in the manner of publication, that, independently of the letters themselves, can infpire confidence in their authenticity.

Notwithstanding this diffatisfaction with the manner in which they are introduced to the public, we shall venture, without any consciousness of inconfiftency, to exprefs our perfuafion, that the letters, at least most of them, are genuine. We owe this belief to the impreffions of internal evidence. In their general manner and turn of expreffion, they bear a fufficient refemblance to the writings which have long been known as the avowed or ascertained compofitions of Lewis; while the fentiments that predominate, and give a character and confiftency to the correfpondence, accord with that benevolent, but unrefifting temper, which is afcribed to the King by all who had opportunities of obferving him, and which is eftablifhed by the uniform tenor of his conduct. He fhows here all his amiable weakneffes, and his many eftimable virtues. The plainnefs, too, of the diction in most of the letters, is altogether different from the finery and flippancy that prevail among French writers of the prefent fchool; and there are many touches of that just pathos and dignified emotion, which is natural only to a good man, in the anguifh of unmerited fuffering, amid the wrecks of external grandeur. To the weight of this internal evidence, we do not choose to disguise that we have admitted a strong confirmation, from prefumptions of a more indirect nature. We cannot believe that the editor of the prefent publication would defcend to aflift any forgery, by which the reputation of Lewis the Sixteenth would be heightened, and his memory endeared. On the contrary, the maintains, throughout her obfervations, a malignant ftruggle against the conviction which these letters cannot fail to imprefs on every well-regulated

« PreviousContinue »