( xlii )
has preserved many words, which are now loft in the other[1].
Indeed a good reason may be assigned why the several branches of the Old Celtic differ to the eye so much more than the derivatives of any other Language: viz. In the Celtic Tongue words are declined by changing, not the Terminations, but the Initial Letters in the oblique cases, or by prefixing an article with an apostrophe (either expressed or implied); so that those who are ignorant of this language are apt to confound the radical Letters, with such as are merely superadded and accidental; or to think two words utterly dissimilar, that are only made so by an occasional Prefix or a variety of Declension: To give one instance (out of innumerable) of the latter kind, the British word Pen, in construction regularly assumes the form of Ben, Phen and Mhen. e. g.
- Pen, a Head.
- Pen gûr, a Man's Head.
- i Ben, his Head.
- i Phen, her Head.
- y’m Mhen, my Head.
- ↑
LLUYD thinks both thefe caufes have concurred, viz. I. That the an-
ceftors of the Irish and Highland Scots, fc. the ancient GuYDHELIANS,
were the old original Celts, who firft inhabited this ifland: And that the
Cymri, or Welfh, were another and different race of Celts, (a branch
of the Celtic Cimbri) who fucceeded the other, and drove them north-
wards. II. That the Language of both thefe people, though originally the
fame, had defcended down through different channels, and was rendered
ftill more widely diftant; 1. By the additional mixture of Cantabrian
words imported into Ireland by the Scots, who came from Spain and fet-
tled among the old Guydelian Celts from Britain: And, 2. By the
changes the Cymraeg or Welsh Language fuffered during the fubjection
of
500 Years to the Romans, &c. (See Lluyd's WELSH and IRISH
Prefaces, tranflated in the Appendix to Nicholfon's IRISH HISTORI-
CAL LIBRARY, &c. 1736. folio.)
See alfo MAITLAND'S "Hiftory of Scotland, 2 Vols, folio," who has fome things curious on this fubject, particularly on the paf- fage of the Cimbri into Britain; but the generality of his book fhews a judgment fo warped by national prejudice; is fo evidently de- figned to fupport a favourite hypothefis, and is writ with fuch a fpirit of coarfe invective, that the Reader will be conftantly led to fufpect that his quotations are unfair, and his arguments fallacious. To mention only one inftance of this Writer's ftrange perverfion of Hiftory, he fets out with denying, in the teeth of Cæfar and all the ancients, that the OLD BRITONS WERE EVER PAINTED!
