Chapter III: THE LANGUAGE OF THE ANCIENT PICTS.--The evidence from which we can

draw any conclusions as to the affinities of the language of the Picts is so extremely scanty that the question has been the subject of great controversy. The Picts are first mentioned by Eumenius (A.D. 297), who regarded them as having inhabited Britain in the time of Caesar. In the year 368 they are described by Ammianus Marcellinus as invading the Roman province of Britain in conjunction with the Irish Scots. In Columba's time we find the whole of Scotland east of Drumalban and north of the Forth divided into two kingdoms--north and south Pictland--and it is reasonable to identify the Picts, at any rate in part, with the Caledonians of the classical authors. Galloway and Co. Down were also inhabited by Picts. Bede in enumerating the languages of Britain mentions those of the Britons, Picts, Scots and the English. The names by which the Picts are known in history have aroused considerable discussion. It seems natural to connect Lat. _Picti_ with the _Pictones_ and _Pictavi_ of Gaul, but in Irish they are known as _Cruithne_, which appears in Welsh as _Prydyn_, "Pict"; cp. _Prydein_, "Britain," forms corresponding to the earliest Greek name for these islands, [Greek: nesoi Pretanikai].

Three conflicting theories have been held as to the character of the Pictish language. Rhys, relying on the strange character of the Scottish Ogam inscriptions, pronounces it to be non-Celtic and non-Indo-European. In this he has been followed by Zimmer, who bases his argument on the Pictish rule of succession. Skene maintained that the Picts spoke a language nearly allied to Goidelic, whilst Stokes, Loth, Macbain, D'Arbois and Meyer are of opinion that Pictish was more closely related to Brythonic. Of personal names mentioned by classical writers we have Calgacus and Argentocoxus, both of which are certainly Celtic. The names occurring in Ptolemy's description of Scotland have a decidedly Celtic character, and they seem, moreover, to bear a greater resemblance to Brythonic than to Goidelic, witness such tribal designations as Epidii, Cornavii, Damnonii, Decantae, Novantae. In the case of all these names, however, it should be borne in mind that they probably reached the writers of antiquity through Brythonic channels. Bede mentions that the east end of the Antonine Wall terminated at a place called in Pictish _Pean-fahel_, and in Saxon _Penneltun_. _Pean_ resembles Old Welsh _penn_, "head," Old Irish _cenn_, and the second element may possibly be connected with Gaelic _fal_, Welsh _gwawl_, "rampart." The names of the kings in the Pictish chronicles are not an absolutely trustworthy guide, as owing to the Pictish rule of succession the bearers of the names may in many cases have been Brythons. The names of some of them occur in one source in a Goidelic, in another in a Brythonic form. It is of course possible that the southern part of Pictish territory was divided between Goidels and Brythons, the population being very much mixed. On the other hand there are a number of elements in place-names on Pictish ground which do not occur in Wales or Ireland. Such are _pet_, _pit_, "farm" (?), _for_, _fother_, _fetter_, _foder_, "lower" (?). _Aber_, "confluence," on the contrary, is pure Brythonic (Gaelic _inver_). Though the majority of scholars are of opinion that Pictish was nearly akin to the Brythonic dialects, we are entirely in the dark as to the manner in which that language was ousted by the Goidelic speech of the Dalriadic Scots. In view of the comparatively unimportant part played for a considerable period in Scottish affairs by the colony from Ireland, it is well-nigh incredible that Pictish should have been supplanted by Gaelic.

AUTHORITIES.--J. Rhys, _Celtic Britain_ (London[2], 1905), _The Welsh
People_ (London[3], 1902), "The Language and Inscriptions of the
Northern Picts," in _Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of
Scotland_ (1892); H. Zimmer, "Das Mutterrecht der Pikten," in
_Savignys Zeitschrift_ (1895); also trans. by G. Henderson in _Leabhar
nan Gleann_ (Inverness, 1898); W.F. Skene, _Celtic Scotland_
(Edinburgh, 1876); A. Macbain in appendix to reprint of Skene's
_Highlanders of Scotland_ (Stirling, 1902); A. Macbain, "Ptolemy's
Geography of Scotland," in _Transactions of the Gaelic Society of
Inverness_, xviii. 267-288; W. Stokes, _Bezzenbergers Beitrage_,
xviii. 267 ff.; H. d'Arbois de Jubainville, _Les Druides et les dieux
celtiques a forme d'animaux_ (Paris, 1906). The various theories have
been recently reviewed and criticized by T. Rice Holmes in an appendix
to his _Caesar's Invasion of Britain_ (London, 1907).