across which the swine were driven to and from their pasture in the wood. The cluster of houses near the 'oxen-ford' has grown up into the city of Oxford[1]; and though no village arose at the 'swine-ford', the bridge by which the ford has been superseded is still called Swinford Bridge. Once more, a list of boundaries of an estate in Sussex, written in the ninth century, mentions a 'new building'—in Old English Nȳtimbre. Perhaps it may not have been very new even then; but it had been new once. The new building became old, and disappeared; but still, after a thousand years, a tiny hamlet bears the name of Nightimber. Similarly, most of the places called Newton, Newnham or Nuneham (Nīwan hām, new 'home'), Newbottle or Newbold (bold, botl, a house) have had those names for 800 years, and probably much longer.
Since the Anglo-Saxon names of places originated in this spontaneous way, it is not surprising to find that a large proportion of them are derived from names of persons. As these persons are absolutely unknown to us, and were no doubt mostly mere farmers or cottagers, it cannot be said that place-names of this type yield us very interesting information. Such interest as they have lies in the curious changes they have undergone since they were first written down. Some of them, if we had not their old spelling to guide us, would seem to have very different meanings from those which they actually have. Alderley, for instance, looks as if it had something to do with alders, and Barrowcote as if it contained the word barrow, a burial-mound; but in fact the former means Ealdred's lēah or meadow, and the latter Beornweard's cottage. In some cases, when the modern rustic pronunciation of a name completely disguises its etymology, an old-fashioned spelling has been retained,
- ↑ The many persons who maintain that Oxford has any other etymology than this, merely show that they have not made the preliminary studies that would entitle them to express an independent opinion on the origin of place-names.
