on all hands with hundreds of warlike nations, whence it is im probable, if not impoffible, that they could come to Britain, The Evi (fec Cæfar, lib. v. and the geographers) were in Bel gic Gaul, between the Atrebates and Morini, exactly as thefe Hedui here. We may therefore most fafely read Heffui.'

Upon the whole, the Cumri were apparently confined to the welt of Britain, and that part beyond the walls. The fouth and caft were held by Belge, and perhaps other Germans, long before Cæfar's time. Nay, even in the parts ftill inhabited by Celts, the Germans had, no doubt, many fettlements; as the European fettlers in America have not only large tracts wholly peopled by themselves, but also towns and forts among the favages. Thus in Gaul, the Veneti in the western extremity of Celtica, were Belge, as Strabo informs; and in the extreme weft of Britain flood Menapia, a town of the very fame name with one among the Scythians or Goths, beyond the Cafpian, as we learn from Ptolemy. The conqueft of Europe by the Goths, on the fall of the Roman empire, was the fecond, not the first. At least three centuries before Chrift, the Scythians or Goths had fubdued and peopled Europe even to its farthest extremities. In Britain, the Cumraig or Welsh was called Lingua Britannica, as in Gaul the Celtic were called Gallica, not as being the univerfal tongue, but as the old and peculiar fpeech of the earlier inhabitants.'

This fyftem was disturbed in Caledonia by the Piks from Jutland, and by the Scots from the north of Ireland ; and the whole ifland was peopled by Scythian colonies, unless in the remote receffes of Wales, where the Cimbri ftill continued; for that the Highlanders were Celts remains yet in doubt.

The tribes which poffeffed the fouth of Scotland, between England, the Forth and the Clyde, viz. the Selgova, Novantæ, and Damnii, were, in our author's opinion, Cimbri; and he fapports this fyftem by the authority of Gildas and Bede, as well as from their remains in Strat-Clyde. The map of Ptolemy has greatly confused this subject, and we shall give the best idea of it without the plate, by fuppofing Scotland appended to England on a moveable hinge, and bent towards the caft. The northern parts in Ptolemy are, therefore, the western, and the prefent eaftern coaft is on the fouth. When Agricola difcovered Caledonia to the Romans, the Tay on the east, the various lakes in the middle, and Loch Fyn on the weft, were the boundaries of this country. Between the Roman walls, that, for inftance, which joined the Forth and the Clyde, as well as that from Solway to the Tyne, a new race, the Maatæ, fprung up; but they foon difappeared, or the name was loft by their being blended with other tribes. The wall of Hadrian was between the Solway and the Tyne:

ât was repaired by Severus, and afterwards more firmly esta blished by Gallio at the time when the Roman armies were lefs fuccessful. The northern wall, between the Forth and the Clyde, was first established as a line of forts by Agricola, afterwards built of turf by Antoninus, and repaired by Theodofius; the turf wall was ftrengthened by a line of forts after the campaigns of Stilicho, and again built of turf by the Brie tons. The more fouthern wall of Severus, or more strictly that of Gallio, was the only one built of stone, and it is em phatically styled Murus: the other is called Vallum. The space to the north of either wall was fometimes inhabited by temporary fettlers who had nothing to lofe, or was fometimes the fite of an encampment. The uncertain hiftory of this frontier is traced with fome probability, though much re mains obfcure.

The kingdom of Strat Clyde included Dumbarton, Renfrew, and the upper part of Lanerkshire: it was about eighty miles long and thirty broad, inhabited by Cimbri; and, in our author's opinion, which is well fupported, was totally diftinct from any kingdom in Wales, or from the Wel Clyde. It was, probably, for fome years a fief of the Scottish crown, and its laft king feems to have abdicated his dominions in 972, when the country was fubdued by Kenneth IV. The name, however, united with others, occurs in some fubfequent charters quoted by Innes. The following note is, we think, curious; we shall tranfcribe it merely as a curiofity without a word in defence of the fyftem.

The reader need hardly be told that Arthur was merely a name given by the Welch to Aurelius Ambrolius, their Roman defender against the Saxons. See Gildas, c. 25. Beda, I. 16. Art-uir, fignifies the chief or great man. He flourished about the year 480. Gildas lived in the very time affigned to the mock Arthur, yet knew nothing of him; nor did Beda. Nay, nor Nennius; for the chapter concerning Arthur, is an addition, and occurs after the words hic expliciunt gefta Britonum a Nennio confcripta. See Bertram's edition. Mr. Whitaker, to fupport his romance of Morte Arthur, which, with him, is history, makes Nennius live in 620, tho', from no lefs than five computations in his work, it be evident that he wrote in 858: and any man, the leaft verfed in fuch matters, must fee from his work in general that it is of the Ninth century. Nor did Mr. W. obferve that the chapter on Arthur is not of Nennius, but an addition taken from Geofrey's romance. The author, fond of Arthur's fame, once thought him a reality; but upon full examination is undeceived. Milton declares against the existence of Arthur. Hume, following, as ufual, what Mr. Gibbon jufly calls, the "grofs ignorance of Carte,"

fupports

fupports the dream. That Arthur was Aurelius Ambrofius is certain but the. Arthur of Welch history is a non-existence. The names of places built on by Mr. Whitaker, arose merely from the romances; and none of them are older than the 13th and 14th centuries. Arthur's feat near Edinburgh is a name of yesterday, and arofe from the tournaments near it; as did Arthur's round table at Stirling. In the centuries of chivalry and romance, Arthur was quite popular, and gave occafion to many names of places.'

The ancient Cumbria contained Cumberland and Northumberland, but was, Mr. Pinkerton thinks, a distinct kingdom from Strat-Clyde. Beda is filent about Cumbri or Cumbria; and in the inquifitio facta per Davidem principem Cumbria de poffeffionibus ecclefiæ Glaguenfis, Glasgow is mentioned as the metropolitan fee of Cumbria: Geoffrey of Monmouth fets down Roderick king of Strat-Clyde as king of the Cumbri; and Richard of Hexham diftinguishes the Cumbri from the men of Carlisle, and confequently from the men of Cumberland; fo that they must be confidered as inhabitants of StratClyde. These are the arguments for fuppofing the two countries to be the fame, and they are anfwered in Mr. Pinkerton's usual decifive manner by the following arguments:

Beda's filence as to the Cumbri and Cumbria is at best but a negative argument, and of courfe a nullity. His work is intitled, The Ecclefiaftic History of the English Nation: fecular affairs he very feldom, and very briefly mentions. He fays pot one word of the Britons in Wales and Cornwall; fo that his filence as to thofe in Cumbria need not be wondered at.

The Inquifitio is an ecclefiaftic fraud, to ferve the purpofes of an avaricious and ambitious fee, not a difinterested charter, which can ferve history.

Geofrey is a romancer, not an hiftorian. He has used such freedoms with the history of his own country around him, that, in fuch diftant regions as Cumbria and Strat-Clyde, his veracity is at beft moft fufpicious. It might alfo very naturally happen that many of the Welch writers, from the remotenels of Strat-Clyde and Cumbria, and obfcurity of their history, might confound thefe two regions into one, or mistake the one for the other.

The fourth argument is to me the ftrongest. Richard lived at Hexham in Northumberland, near the fpot, and also near the time, or about 1150. He is the only writer in being, who feems to diftinguifh the Cumbri from the people of Cumberland."

Our author afterwards explains fatisfactorily why the inhabitants of Carlisle were diftinguifhed from the Cumbri.

Many pofitive arguments are, however, added; and particular charters quoted, where they are mentioned as diftinct. We have no doubt of their being really feparate kingdoms, and the last inftance of a Celtic colony in the heart of England.

We

We muft, however, be allowed to add, that though we have flyled the Cimbri Celts, yet they feem at least to have changed their customs and their religious fyftem by their mixture with the Goths: in this æra they appear to be more than half Gothic,' and they foon loft by a farther intermixture every peculiar trait. The little that relates to the feparate history of this unimportant kingdom is added; and our author endea," vours to reconcile what William of Malmsbury has faid with the accounts of Matthew of Westminster. Duncan, the fon of Duncan, appears to be the last king of Cumbria in 1031. Malcolm III. his fon, kept the principality in his own hands, and Malcolm IV. furrendered it to Henry II. about the end of the twelfth century. The chapter concludes with fome fevere cenfures on the Celtic ignorance' of the Welsh writers who fixed the kingdom of Strat-Clyde in Wales.

While we were loft in this intricate, though to us interefting fubject, we have, as may appear, indulged ourselves in a too. minute and extenfive criticism. But if our readers derive only a fhare of the fatisfaction in following us which we experienced in the fabour of the investigation, they will excufe us. They will, however, allow us to remark, that we defigned this arti cle chiefly as an introduction to a feries of others, in which we mean to purfue alfo the extraordinary antiquity of the Irish monarchy. Many things, therefore, occur, which we thought should be premifed for this purpofe, and we shall proceed with our defign as quickly as will be confiftent with the care and attention required in fo difficult a purfuit. At preTent we must conclude, for the hiftory of the Caledonians or Piks would lead us too far.

(To be continued.)

Archæologia: or, Mifcellaneous Trails relating to Antiquity. Vol. IX. (Concluded from p. 133.)

RT. XV. Obfervations in Vindication of the Authenticity of the Parian Chronicle. By Richard Gough, Efq. Director.In the LXVth volume of our Review we gave an account of the learned and ingenious Differtation concerning the Authenticity of the Parian Chronicle; and in the Appendix to vol. LXVIIth. we noticed Hewlett's Vindication of the Authenticity of that Chronicle. The author of the paper now before us appears not to be inferior in zeal to the former Vindicator; but, to his honour, we must acknowledge, that he has profecuted the fubject without any tincture of that acrimony, fo confpicuous in the preceding Vindication. It is obvious, however, that, in Several places, he has mistaken the fenfe of the Differtation.

For inftance, in p. 161, where he fays, To infer, that, becaufe feveral infcriptions and MSS. have been forged, therefore feveral more may and must be forged &c.' The author of the Differtation makes no such inference; but only produces a variety of forgeries to fhew, that the world fhould be cautious with regard to what is received under the venerable name of antiquity; and, as a reasonable apology, we may suppose, for the enquiry into the authenticity of the Parian Chronicle.

In p. 168, 169, Mr. Gough seems to us to mistake the argument, or the defign of the eighth chapter of the Differtation, which is to fhew, not that the Parian Chronicle is a forgery, because the author of it differs from other writers; but that the Parian Chronologer is not mentioned under another name, by any of the remaining writers of antiquity, who have treated of the Trojan war. The variation must be confidered as a proof, that the Parian Chronicle cannot be afcribed to any of the authors quoted on that fubject.

In a fubfequent page, Mr. Gough thus proceeds:

But it is too bold an affertion to say that Sir Thomas Roe, in his letters to lord Arundel does not once mention the Parian Chronicle. For in p. 512 of Roe's "Negotiations," in a letter (not indeed to lord Arundel, but) to the duke of Buckingham, dated May 1626, he fays,

"In an island called Augufio near Paris [Paros] in the arches I have heard of TWO GREAT MARBLES, and have taken command to fetch them by the bishop of Naxia."

Mr. Gough's affertion that Sir Thomas Roe, in the paffage juft now quoted, mentions the Parian Chronicle, appears to he entirely gratuitous, and is indeed extremely improbable, as the infcription was purchased at Symrna.

We come now, fays Mr. Gough, to the last objection, which appears to me to have the leaft weight of any, amounting to no more than this; the world has been imposed upon many times, and therefore may be again.' This chapter, however, as has been already obferved, contains no objection, but merely a caution against the credulity of fome antiquaries.

Mr. Gough confiders the enumeration of the twelve cities of Jonia in the fame order as by Ælian, as a circumstance purely accidental.' But we cannot eafily fubfcribe to this opinion, when the author of the Differtation has remarked, that twelve names admit of 479,001,600 different tranfpofitions.-Whatever may be the claims of the Parian Chronicle to the attention of the learned, we must likewife differ from Mr. Gough, in implicitly confidering its eftimation, by feveral writers who have adopted it upon credit, as a proof of its authenticity. And who,

fays