fairs.

But Arthur soon found himself under the necessity of raising the siege, because he was informed that Cheldric was coming with a mighty fleet to the relief of the besieged. In this dificulty he sent for assistance to Floel, the Duke of Britany, who accordingly came with 15,000 men. Strengthened by this reinforcement, he attacked the Saxons, who were besieging Lincoln, slew 6000, and pursued the rest to the Caledonian forest, where he enclosed them, and barricaded them up by felling trees, so that they had no retreat. A compromise was then made, in which it was stipulated, that they (probably only those who had come with Colgrin and Baldulph) should return into Germany unmolested, but yield up their booty, and give hostages, for their observance of the treaty. Yet it did not last Jong, before the Saxons broke the treaty, returned, and made a descent at Totness, whence they ravaged the country as far as the Severn, and laid siege to the city of Baden, now Bath, in Somerset. As soon as Arthur was informed of this, he gave up his expedition againt the Picts and Scots, and hastened to the relief of his subjects, having previously ordered all the hostages to be hanged. The Saxons were encamped on the Badonian mountain, whence Arthur dislodged them, and gained a great victory. The remains of their army fled to the isle of Thanet. Arthur was in this battle armed in the following manner: he had on a coat of mail; his helmet was gilt and adorned with a dragon; in his shield which was named Priwen, was a representation of the virgin Mary†, for the Britons had long been Christians. His sword was called Caliburne, and was made on the Ava

Shield-marks or devices are very ancient in the North, but as they were not constant in the families, they cannot be considered the same as the armorial ensigns of the present nobility, though they gave rise to them. In the printed Niala (an Icelandish saga), c. 19, p. 143, it is related that Helgi had a red shield, on which was represented a hart, and Kari had a gilt one, in which was a lion. This was in the latter end of the 10th century. Respecting the shield devices of the Norwegians, Dolmer has collected some accounts in Hird

skraa, p. 252, where none is mentioned, how ever, of an older date than that of Oluf Tryg

lonian island; his long and broad lance was called Iron. After, this, he again turned his arms against the Picts and Scots, defeated them, and would, perhaps, have extirpated them, if he had not suffered himself to be persuaded by their priests to conclude a treaty, for the sake of their common creed. He then vanquished Guillamur, an Irish king, who had come with a considerable army to their assistance; it is even related that he went over to Ireland, took Guillamur and some other petty kings prisoners, and made war there with great success. In all these contests he is said to have been engaged from his accession, in 518, till 525. But, notwithstanding his cxertions, it was not in his power to do any more than only for some time to protract the miserable fate of the Britons. I even think that his and his father's plan to remove the war into the North, accelerated the ruin of their country. For these conquests, though glorious and splen did, cost a great number of people, were of little use, and of short duration: besides such enterprises exasperated the Anglo-Saxons still more, and made them exert their utmost strength to accom plish the conquest of the island. So I find that a great multitude, with wives and children, arrived nearly at this time from Anglia in that part of Britain which was afterwards called East-Anglia, where one Wilhelm was their first chief. Thence they spread themselves into Mercia (A. D. 525), but were in both countries for a long time governed only by chiefs, which occasioned numberless intestine feuds. Probably there was none among them descended from Odin or the Asers, or who was of so illustrious a family, that he could venture to assume the royal name and power. The last Angles who arrived were, in my opinion, from Anglia Proper, of which Sleswic was the capital, and from the island of Als, which I think was the native place of Wilhelm. Nor did Cerdic leave the Britons long in peace. He fought a battle with them at Cerdicsleah, now Chardsley, in Buckinghamshire (A. D. 523). The consequence of this victory seems to have been, that the kingdom of Essex was established in the same year hy Ekenwin, who came, I think, from Westland, that is the Eiderstædt country, and

So the friends and companions of Qua were called, who came and settled with him in the North. Transl.

the

the adjacent islands, which had been the first and principal seats of the Saxons. After this Cerdic conquered the Isle of Wight (A. D. 530), where he killed a great number of Britons in Withgarabyrig, now Carisbrook-castle, on the said island, which he and his son Cenric (A. D. 5. 4) gave up to his nephews Stuf and Vithgar, as a settlement for them and their Jutes. This was the last action of Cerdic, for he died in the same year. Vithgar died ten years after, and was buried in Withgarabyrig, so named

after him.

While the Angles and Saxons were thus confirming and extending their power in Britain, Arthur was engaged in splendid and distant conquests, the occasion of which was this. Sicheling, king of Northmoer and Southmoert, left his kingdom to Lot, his nephew, who was married to Arthur's sister. Schoning, in his History of Norway, has a conjecture, that Sichelin is the same as Sikling, the general royal appellation in the ancient North, which shews, that this account of the British historians is founded on some northern bard. In this expedition Arthur conquered the Orkneys, and reduced Gunfas, their king, to subjection. In the mean time the Norwegians, unwilling to obey a foreigner, had placed one Rikulf on the throne, and fortified their towns and towers, the latter of which, it is seen from Ossian,

Rapin, in his Hist. d'Angl. liv. 2, tays, "Les Rois successeurs de Cerdick furent surnommez Gewichiens, du nom de Gewish l'un de lers ancêtres, qui selon les apparences étoit recommandable parmi sa nation." This ancestor of Cerdic, it is seen from our author, v. i. p. 84, was Givis, a descendant of Odin, by Baldar, who, about the year 220, was tributary king of Anglia, under Denmark, but afterwards, during the weak reign of Uffo, made himself independent; and on Agenwit, king of the Saxons in Stormorn and Ditmarsh, crossing the Eibe with a numerous tribe of his people, appears to have obtained also the sovereignty of those Countries which he had left. At least (says Mr. Suhm) it is certain that Cerdic, the first West-Saxon king in England, descended from him, and that the whole West Saxon nation was called the Gevisian, after him." Transl.

A part of Norway, with the adjoining islands, which has still retained the same names. It lies between the sixty-second and sixty-third degrees of northern latitude. Transl.

Especially used by the Skalds, in their poetical compositions. Transl. MONTHLY MAG, No, 158,

they had long before this time, in the third and fourth century; for he speaks of Lochlin, that is Scandinavia. Rikulf was slain in the battle, and Arthur invested Lot with the royal power. The truth of this account is confirmed by the circumstance that about seventy years after there was a king of North and Southmoer whose name was Arthor, who, no doubt, was a descendant of Arthur's family. At length this excellent king was bereft of his life and kingdom by Mordred, his own nephew, who entered into a confederacy with the West Saxon king Cenric and with the Picts and Scots against his inaster and uncle. In the battle (A. D. 542) Mordred fell with many petty kings of the Picts and Scots, and Irish. But on Arthur's side were slain Valvein, the son of Lot, Lot himself, Olbrickt, a Norvegian king, Eskil, king of Funen, and Caddor, Arthur's father-in-law. Arthur himself was mortally wounded, and carried to the island of Avalania, now Glastonbury, where he died on the 2d of May. Such was the end of the famous Arthur, whose exploits are not only rendered obscure and dubious by the numerous romances and marvellous fables that have been written of him, but the reality of which has even been denied; nay, the moderns, who are sometimes too rigid critics, have thereby been induced not only to reject most of his military achievements, but even to question his very existence. (Vol. I. p. 338-344).

After his death, the misfortunes of the Britons continually increased, in proportion to the progress of the Anglo-Saxons, which was not a little facilitated and proBritons, and by the great decay of morals moted by the intestine divisions of the that existed among them. Gildas, a British historian of that time, gives a hideous description of five, 'then living, British kings. A few years after the death of Arthur, Ida came (perhaps from Saxony to the south of the Elbe, though he was himself of Anglian descent) with a fleet of forty ships to Flensburg, and established, in the year after his arrival, the Northumbrian kingdom of Bernicia. He founded Babanbuiht which he first fortified with palisades, afterwards with a wall. He had six legitimate sons by his queen, and six others by concubines. He was not only a great warrior, but also a wise ruler, and maintained good order

in his dominions, without employing unnecessary severity. It is said that the people chose him their king of their own accord. During the whole of his reign he was active and in arms. Some years after the arrival of Ida, Cenric fought a great battle with the Britons, near Salisbury, and put them to flight.

At the close of Rolf's reign (A. D. 552) the Britons still possessed Wales and Cornwall (according to their present names), and the greater part of Mercia and Deira. All the rest of the country was in the hands of the Saxons, the Angles, and the Jutes. The Angles, especially, had emigrated to Britain in such numbers, that it is testified by Beda and the British Nennius (the former of whom died in the year 785), that the native country and islands of these people were still without inhabitants in their time. These words, however, must not be taken in too literal a sense, otherwise remains could not exist to this day of the AngloSaxon language, and similarity with the present English, in the country of Angeln, in the duchy of Sleswic; but so much is certain, that the population of the country was greatly thinned, and that this circumstance rendered the conquest of it easy to Rolf. By degrees it was repeopled by Jutes, whence it received the name of South Jutland, as Jutland proper from that time was called North Jutland. (V. I. p. 344-346).

In the year 560 Ella established, the kingdom of Deira, which was afterwards united to that of Bernicia in the person of Ethalrick (A. D. 590), and both together called Northumberland; for though they were after this separated several times, yet they were at length united for ever by Oswin (A. D. 651). El'a descended from Soemil*, and was the

son of Yffe or Uffe, a gallant warrior and chief. He much enlarged his kingdom, and united to it Lindsey, by marrying Bubba, the daughter of Ceadbed. From that time Lindsey followed the fate of the Northumbrian kingdom, until it was conquered by Penda, king of Mercia, about the year 630. As Soemil is said to have settled in Northumberland, I suppose that his descendants had remained there, and that Ella was born in England. The same is my opinion respecting Creoda, who established the kingdom of Mercia, and Uffa, who was the first king of East-Anglia. (Vol. I. p. 441-442.

For the Monthly Magazine.

CONTRIBUTIONS to ENGLISH SYNONYMY. High. Tall. Grand. Lofty. Broad. Wide. Thick. Large. Gross. Bulky. Stout. Huge.

LL these words describe size above

A the average: the first four are mostly applied to magnitude perpendicularly extended; the second four to magnitude laterally extended; and the third four to massy extent.

High, was originally the same word as hill; a high man was a hill of a mau; a high church, a hill of a church. When mountain; they employed the same the Lilliputians called Gulliver the manthe adjective high. Great part of the metaphor as our forefathers in coining sensible idea has been gradually omitted; the term is become very abstract, and length stretching upwards. Tallness is now retains only the narrow image of a height which results from accretion;

ed his life in peace and voluptuous indolence, and even permitted the sons of Sverting to obtain the greatest influence and honours at his court. But roused at length from his lethargy, by Stærkodder, a famous Danb champion, he for some time totally changed his behaviour, and pursued these his here ditary enemies, with such vigour and cruelty, that twelve of them lost their lives. "Soe niil (the author relates) v. i. p. 262, estaped from the general slaughter of his brother, and taking refuge in Britain, settled in No thumberland, where Ella, the urst king of Deira, descended in the fifth degree from

him." Transl.

grandeur, which results from condition; loftiness, which results from position. Tall, is only used of that which grows, and is no doubt the past participle of a verb signifying to grow, A tall Lilliputian, not a high Lilliputian. A tall horse, never a tall mountain. Tall grass, not a tall mole-hill. A high obelisk, but a tall tree. A high may-pole: tall soldiers.

High differs from grand, in not excluding the idea of meanness; whereas grand is only applied to what has show and stateliness. A high tumbrel, not a grand tumbrel. A grand edifice. Grandeur of sentiment. Ideas of external parade, are mostly connected with the word grand, probably because it was brought hither from Spain, at a time when the pomp and ceremonial of the Spanish court were objects of English imitation: when a grandee excited the image of greatness. High people, grand people, are both common phrases: the first describes real rank, the second pompous pretension.

Lofty, being derived from loof, or loft, the air, or sky, is confined to elevation stretching upwards from the observer, to elevation measurable by the atmosphere. Standing at the foot of a mountain, we call it lofty; standing at its summit, we call it high. Standing on the floor of a cavern, we call it lofty; peeping down from the cicling, we call it deep. High water; a high tide; never a lofty tide. A lofty room, Lofty thoughts. High is the reverse of low; tall, of stinted; grand, of mean; and lofty, of deep.

A broad

describes extent each way. brim, a wide hat. Of a long room we define the breadth; of a square room, the width: so of a field. A broad ditch; a wide pond. Broad lips; a wide mouth. There is a tendency to employ wide of all hollow extent, of inside measure, A wide cup. Dr. Trusler approves a wide ditch. A broad horse-shoe is one, whose rim is broad; a wide horse-shoe is one, whose aperture is considerable. Those pales are wide asunder.

Thick differs from large, in that it respects only the third dimension, not including the idea of length, or breadth; whereas large includes the idea of breadth. A small cheese may be thick, a narrow plank may be thick; but they cannot be large.

Broad is the reverse of narrow; wide of close; thick of thin; and large of small.

In Otfried breit is a noun of number; flocks a hundred broad: it is probably connected etymologically with to breed, meant at first, numerous by breeding, and, in consequence of the expatiatory tendency of cattle, came to signify "covering superficial extent." A broad family would thus be as sound an expression, as a large family.

Wide is referred by Adelung to the French vuide; it would in this case not be common to all the Gothic dialects. Junius guesses it may have meant swelling. Perhaps from the substantive way, a road, is derived weyen to travel, whence the German bewegen to remove. The participle of the verb to travel, may well have become a word of measurement.

By Wachter thick is considered as a participle of the verb to take it means therefore palpable, which can be taken

hold of.

Broad and wide describe superficial extent; thick and large include one dimension more of solidity: all four exclude the consideration of length. A broad river, a broad road, a broad cloth; a wide lake, a wide prospect, wide circle. A thick cheese, a thick board, a thick rope; a large man, a large elephant, a large room. Broad, wide and thick are definable; large is always indefinite. A ribband half an inch broad. A yard-wide handkerchief. A plank two inches thick. We say of a tree, that it is six feet in girth; but never that it is six feet large; we should be at a loss to know whether six feet large was intended to mean six feet through, or six feet round. In French large admits of definition, fosse large de six pieds.

Broad differs from wide in describing that extent which is perpendicular to the length, cross dimension; whereas wide

augos. This explains nothing. Perhaps the Latin largiri, to give, meant originally to feed, which is the most usual form of giving. In this case lar a kettle, or platter, is the radical idea. The veneration for the Lares was originally a feticheworthip, like that of the negroes for their pots and pans. Large then is plattershaped.

Grofs excites the idea of coarse corpulency: it came to us from France with that association: it is originally the same word with the low-dutch groot and the english great, which are past participles of to grow; but as the Germans are a corpulent, and the Gauls a slender race, 322

their