My prediction for place-names in south-east Scotland and North-east England is:
A smattering of P-Celtic names to reflect occasional Cumbrian dominance in the area
A smattering of Q-Celtic names to reflect occasional Pictish dominance in the area
A smattering of Latin names to reflect occasional Roman dominance in the area
A smattering of Anglo-Saxon names to reflect occasional Anglo-Saxon dominance in the area
A smattering of Old Norse names to reflect occasional Viking dominance in the area
A smattering of Danish names to reflect occasional Danish dominance in the area
A smattering of French names to reflect occasional Norman dominance in the area
Something over ninety per cent of English or Unclassifiable names to reflect that the English have lived there since time immemorial.

Let me know if any other pattern is found and I shall eat my pork pie hat.

quote:

BAJR, you're not joining the anti academic united front are you?

Or is it just a lil bit of oneupmanship? :-)

Can't help where I live feel so.. sniff... unloved

quote:

Something over ninety per cent of English or Unclassifiable names to reflect that the English have lived there since time immemorial.

Wow!! 90% of all place names in Britian from top to bottom are English... now there is a statistic! could you give me some examples ... seems that you want to lump unclassifiable in with (must be English)

Why can't I lump them in with must be Celtic... ???

Must be a hell of a list of these names..

BAJR, I am not saying that you can't lump them in with Celtic. I am merely pointing out that place-name experts may be dab-hands at individual place-name etymologies (they're certaily ingenious enough) but they rarely (ie never) attempt a proper statistical sampling exercise.

However, down here where I live I can't help noticing, as I drive through the pretty villages of the Home Counties, that the names all seem to be quintessentially English. However when I visit my brother in Machynlleth I can't help noticing that all the names seem quintessentially Celtic.

What's your experience? I suppose you tend to say, "Look, more evidence of the Anglian advance."

Listen Mr Harper...

fair play to you... you have a book... and I hope many people buy it.. its a free coutry, many people buy Holy Blood and Holy Grail, even more buy the D'Vinci Code ... lovely stories, that when looked at critically have fundamental flaws..

You will of course never be convinced any other way than you think, otherwise your book sales would plumment..

So... if the best you can come up with is... places in teh Home Counties sound English so therefore there must have been English before the People who speak an early form of teh language actually land in these places ... however the places that there was limited Saxon occupation strangely there are limited 'English Placenames'

Good luck sir... I am sure there are many who will believe you, because they want a hidden history.. its sad though, as the real history is just as interesting.. In all these discussions (and I use the term loosely) you have not managed to provide one piece of solid testable evidence.. you have evaded problems that exist that don't fit your scheme of things.. I have no other option than to file you under - Historical Fiction

happy sales

quote:

Is that continual evolution or 4 discrete changes of name with 4 discrete changes of administration in this important town?

Eoforwic is seen as the only break. Eboracum is typical of the latinisation of another language.
Jorvik (pronounced as a 'W') is a norse rendition of Eoforwic and York is a modern development of Jorvik.

quote:

Ebrauc, Eboracum and Eoforwic look like Celtic, Roman and Anglo-Saxon renditions of some basic name like Eber/Efer/Ever. What language is that? No idea.

The most widely accepted etmology is that celtic Ebrauc is derived from a place where yew trees grow. Early irish for yew is ibar.

The anglo saxon name harder to explain. Eofor means boar and it is thought by some to be a misunderstanding. The claim is that they thought that celtic Ebar, meant boar. An Eber in modern german does mean boar but Eiber also means yew. So it might not be a mistake afterall.

Vasconic Ibara can also mean a place where two rivers meet which, in the case of York would be the Ouse and the Foss.

So we have 3 possibilities for the original 'Ebrauc', the yew tree being the most popular.

The same goes for places like Ebersberg and Eberswald in modern germany. They too could mean the hill, or wood, where two rivers meet, where boars live or where yew trees grow.

quote:

I personally can not hear whether the person saying so has a diploma on their wall or not.

Doesn't matter. Academics disagree all the time. I'm sure Theo Vennemann would prefer the Vasconic Ibara hydronym. He's out on his own by the way.

quote:

More importantly, what is the connection between Eber/Efer/Ever and Yor/Jor?

Getting from Eoforwic to Jorvik isn't seen as a problem. West germanic 'wic' and north germanic 'vik' are the same and as you say, the v is pronounced as a 'W'. cf wícingas for vikings. AS Eofor may well have been pronounced Jor by the Norse but in any case, Jór is ON for boar.

The point about Jork and, as far as I can remember, that particular post, is that modern day name similarities are meaningless. You have to look at the evolution of the names.

best

Harry A

The points you raise re York, Harry, would seem to underline how precarious the whole place-name business is. Even so, one thought occurred to me. Let's suppose that this Irish-German 'yew' link is for real. How would it have come about given the geographical and lexical distance between German and Irish. Here's one way:
1. wherever the Irish came from the yew tree didn't grow there
2. so when they got to Ireland they had to borrow the native word for a yew tree
3. That word was 'yew' because English-speakers were living in Ireland at the time.

Just a stray thought, you understand, I don't want people accusing me of Yewism.

PMB, could you just expand on the Slavic language spread? I'd really like to know more about what parallels there are with that of Anglo-Saxon.

Also, thanks for the potted history, BAJR - I had read around this subject, so I'm sort of up to speed on the post-Roman stuff - appreciate the thought, though. It's the language. Why is it that there is (relatively) barely an echo of the Brythonic in English? Again, is this the same in, say, those lands conquered by the Arabs or the Slavs - that the previous language is obliterated?

... expand on the Slavic language spread? You can read about it here if you want. There is a version published by the BM Press too, but their marketing is not as e-aggressive.

quote:

Originally posted by PMB:
... expand on the Slavic language spread? You can read about it here if you want. There is a version published by the BM Press too, but their marketing is not as e-aggressive.

Right. Thanks

quote:

Just a stray thought, you understand, I don't want people accusing me of Yewism.

Why not? It's already an impressive list :-)

I don't know the etymology of german or irish yew. They may go back to PIE but I haven't got anything which mentions it.

No yew trees in Ireland? Kidding or for real?

best

harry A

quote:

How would it have come about given the geographical and lexical distance between German and Irish. Here's one way:

Often difficult looking at just one word if they have the same PIE roots.

Cadwalla as a brythonic name is very similar to Catuualda, the name of a marcomannic prince. A PIE explanation would have both meaning something along the lines of Leader in Battle.

What did you make of our 9th/10th cent grafitti Eoh worohhtae?

best

harry A

quote:

No yew trees in Ireland? Kidding or for real?

Ireland has Yew-Trees but once had no "Irishmen". It had then Yew Trees but only then Englishmen.

One day, Irish-speakers (Celts) arrived from elsewhere, settled on the western coast, and asked the local English-speakers what the trees were called.

"Yew Trees", they were told.

That was the off-hand notion Harper suggested.

quote:

One day, Irish-speakers (Celts) arrived from elsewhere, settled on the western coast, and asked the local English-speakers what the trees were called.

I see. I forgot in your world that although the french came from France, the germans from Germany, the spanish from Spain and the english from England, the irish didn't come from Ireland.

Easy mistake to make.

best

Harry A

quote:

Ireland has Yew-Trees but once had no "Irishmen". It had then Yew Trees but only then Englishmen.

You cannot seriously be claiming that English was the aboriginal language of Ireland. That's insane.

I think this whole "English speakers were here first" theory is an attempt by English nationalists to lay claim to the land.

This is my take and I am in no way biased towards the "celts"

Basques were here first (the short, dark iberians of legend) and they probably built Stonehenge. Celtic speakers came later, as did smatterings of other invaders. The "Basque" DNA is a substantial part of the British mix to this day. At the time of the Roman invasion, most of Britain was speaking Brythonic languages. I accept, that it is possible there were "Germanic" speakers in lowland Eastern England (due to its proximity to North West Europe) but they were a minority throughout Britain.

Romans leave and Anglo-Saxons-Jutes land on the east coast, possibly encountering a small number of native germanic speakers. I also like Harry's theory that much of the land is unoccupied, therefore making it easier for the Germans to settle and name places. Remember, civilisation has just collpased so it is very easy for these Germans to come over and take advantage of the chaos. Over the coming centuries the native Britons are either killed, enslaved, forced westwards or persuaded to start speaking Anglo-Saxon. Remember, the anglo-saxons are germans and we know how they like to bully people and steal their sun beds. It didn't happen overnight, it took hundreds of years. What is so complicated about this? The Cornish resisted for a long, long time. Devon also has a celtic heritage, as does the isle of man, but we're not sure about Ireland, because of the yew trees, and it seems likely that "Cumbric" survived into Norman times down the pennines. I cannot speak for Scotland but for some reason they really don't like the English. Elmet in West Yorkshire and certain place names in england suggest there were pockets of "celtic" resistence in england and of course we have the ancient river names, upon which nobody can agree.

This conversion to English is a slow process. Christ, here we are 1,500 years later and there are still people in North and West Wales who refuse to speak english as a first language! Talk about resisting the juggernaut.

This westward English imperialism has continued into modern times. In the case of Wales, only a hundred years ago, in eastern parts of Wales a majority of people were bilingual Welsh and English. Today, Welsh speakers in North East Wales are a minority and the language has been forced westwards just as it was 1,500 years ago. In 1891 54% spoke welsh. Today 21% speak welsh.

This is just a theory. Anglo-Saxons/Normans invade and colonise land that does not belong to them. It's what they've always done!

quote:

I think this whole "English speakers were here first" theory is an attempt by English nationalists to lay claim to the land.

Just what I was thinking. The passion with which this pseudo-scientific idea is being argued tells its own tale.

Labelling the thought process used to arrive at it "applied epistemology" is roughly equivalent to an actor wearing a white lab coat in a TV advert.

<<You cannot seriously be claiming that English was the aboriginal language of Ireland. That's insane>>

We cannot claim that it is true (there's not enough evidence) but let's see whether the claim is insane or not.

As usual in Applied Epistemology, we start with what's known for certain sure. The whole island of Ireland speaks English save for a very small 'Celtic'-speaking population in the west and on the Atlantic islands. This is a very familiar pattern, one we find historically in England, Wales, Scotland, France and (probably) Spain.

What else do we know for certain sure? We have the Census records from the nineteenth century which demonstrate that the Celtic-speakers were once much more numerous. As we would say, the English/Erse cline has been moving westwards. This too is known to have happened in England, Wales, Scotland, France (and probably Spain).

But when did the cline come into existence? In other words: at what point in history was there first an English population and an Irish population co-existing on the island of Irleand?

Since Orthodoxy holds that English is an evolved form of Anglo-Saxon, they are committed to the answer, "When the Anglo-Saxons/English arrived." But this raises a problem. When exactly did the Anglo-Saxons/English arrive? We know they did not arrive with Strongow in the twelfth century because Strongbow was a Norman and spoke French and his army was made up of Flemish- and Welsh-speakers.

So Othodoxy is left vaguely waving its arms in the air and saying, "Oh, you know, later on the...er...government in Dublin became English-speaking and the Irish peasantry...er...sort of took the new language up."

Possible. Possible. But we say that Eastern Ireland, ie the Pale, was always English-speaking so the Irish peasantry didn't sort of do anything. It just carried on speaking English.

You can take your pick between the two versions. But personally I'd be disinclined to call either one 'insane'.

[Afterthought to my previous post.] Mind you as long as we have Neil Oliver issuing childish provocation on prime-time television such as "I'm a Celt. This land all belongs to me.", then we can expect even more childish and less scientific responses. I should (and do) condemn all such drivel with an even hand.

I hope Mr Oliver was simply teasing. But this is not a safe topic to joke about. As soon as you start to link history and politics, our view of the past goes wonky. We want to believe certain things, rather than wanting to get at the truth.

quote:

We cannot claim that it is true (there's not enough evidence) ...

You did claim it MJ:

"The situation in Ireland and Wales is just the same as in Scotland and in England. The aboriginal people of all these places spoke English, and the Celts/Gaels/callemwhatyoulikes came later and settled the western littoral of both islands."

Are we witnessing the slightest, most tentative little step towards mainstream thinking?

best

Harry A

Please don't be silly, Harry. I have made it clear on more than one occasion that the situation is as follows:
1. Whenever two populations are found on an island, it is more or less self-evidently the case that one of the populations must have arrived first and the other has displaced it from part of the island.
2. In the case of the island of Ireland, the two populations are the English-speakers and the Irish-speakers.
3. We don't know which came first from unequivocal evidence.
4. For various reason we prefer the 'English-came-first' scenario.
5. But even if the 'Irish-came-first' is what actually happened, we believe that the event itself took place in pre-history.

And before you ask, this is also the situation in the other island, Britain, and in the nearby mainlands of France and Spain.

quote:

Please don't be silly, Harry.

I do apologise MJ. It was silly of me to entertain any thought that you may have some doubt on the issue. I can see that you are firmly resolved.

best

Harry A

quote:

As usual in Applied Epistemology, we start with what's known for certain sure. The whole island of Ireland speaks English save for a very small 'Celtic'-speaking population in the west and on the Atlantic islands. This is a very familiar pattern, one we find historically in England, Wales, Scotland, France and (probably) Spain.

What else do we know for certain sure? We have the Census records from the nineteenth century which demonstrate that the Celtic-speakers were once much more numerous. As we would say, the English/Erse cline has been moving westwards. This too is known to have happened in England, Wales, Scotland, France (and probably Spain).

But when did the cline come into existence? In other words: at what point in history was there first an English population and an Irish population co-existing on the island of Irleand?

Since Orthodoxy holds that English is an evolved form of Anglo-Saxon, they are committed to the answer, "When the Anglo-Saxons/English arrived.".

But this is known and it is not back in the mists of time.
1. Alglo Norman Conquests
The native tongue has no leagal status and to deal with the people in charge, trade, taxation. Are all in the language of the incomers (Not even the people at the top, though by the 13th Century they were speaking English as well) but the people they brought with them.
2. Power at a point
Establish a castle, kick all locals out of the area and take their land, (see Beumaris and Newborough on Anglesey). Create a town around the castle populated with your people and where locals were not allowed to live, trade etc.
3. Make sure that the only route to advancement is found in the Enlish system and English language. By appointing those in power in Wales both governmental and eclesiastical from outside Wales. (see the Welsh office under the tories)
4. Make the use of the local language punishable, and that all Eduaction takes place through the medium of English.
The Welsh not was a wooden board that was placed around the neck of the first pupil caught speaking Welsh during the school day. This was passed on to the next pupil, then the next pupil, and the last pupil to speak Welsh, well lets just say that he was out of luck. Even when I was in junior school in the 70's it was English between us in the playground but Welsh after school. The message had been hammered home.
5. Massive inward migration during the industrial revolution, where only the common tongue (English as a king of lingua franca) shared by both locals and incommers could be in common use. Even so a hybrid language quickly developed that is still used today in the Valley's, commonly known as Wenglish.
6. A massive and overwelming bias towards English in the Media. Even today those without Digital can only get a few hours of Welsh language TV and there are few Welsh language radio stations.
If English comes at you from all sides and it is seen to be the most benefit. You will use it, more and more.

This is not some wild and exotic theory, its real history and personal experience.
I know its not always good to let the facts get in the way of a good story. But knowing some of them does help.