_Probable Conjectures concerning the_ ancient Language _of
the_ Gauls.
In this Place it seems proper to handle a Question much disputed and
canvass'd by Learned Men; _viz._ What was the Language of the Gauls in
those old Times? For as to what belongs to their Religion, Laws, and the
Customs of the People, _Cæsar_, as I said before, has at large given us
an account. In the first place we ought to take notice, that _Cæsar_, in
the Beginning of his Commentaries, where he divides the Gauls into Three
Nations, the _Belgæ_, the _Aquitanæ_, and the _Celtæ_, tells us they all
differ'd, not only in their _Customs_, but in their _Language_ [Footnote:
[Greek: all enious micron parallattontas tais glôttais]]: Which also
_Strabo_ confirms, _lib._ 4. where he says they were not [Greek:
homolhôttous], of one Language, but a little differing in their
Languages. And the same thing _Ammianus Marcellinus_ testifies in his
15th Book. But what many Learned Men (especially of our own Country)
have maintain'd, _viz._ That the _Gauls_ commonly used the _Greek
Tongue_, may be refuted by this single Instance which _Cæsar_ takes
notice of _lib._ 5. _cap._ 12. That when _Q. Cicero_ was besieged in his
Camp, he dispatched Letters written in the _Greek_ Language, "_Lest (if
they were intercepted) his Designs shou'd be discover'd by the_ Gauls."
But to this some object, what _Strabo_ writes, _lib._ 4. _viz._ "That
all Sorts of good Literature (and especially that of the _Greek
Language_) flourish'd at _Marseilles_ to such a degree, that the
_Gauls_, by the Example of the _Massilians_, were mightily delighted
with the _Greek_ Tongue, insomuch that they began to write their very
Bargains and Contracts in it." Now to this there is a short and ready
Reply: For, in the first place, if the _Gauls_ learnt _Greek_ by the
Example of the _Massilians_, 'tis plain, 'twas none of their
Mother-tongue. Secondly, _Strabo_ in the same place clearly shows us,
that the Fashion of writing their Contracts in _Greek_ began but in his
Time, when all _Gallia_ was in Subjection to the _Romans_. Besides, he
speaks precisely only of those _Gauls_ who were Borderers and next
Neighbours to the _Massilians_, of whom he says, that not only many of
their private Men, but even their Cities (by publick Decrees, and
proposing great Rewards) invited several Learned Men of _Massilia_ to
instruct their Youth.
It remains that we shou'd clear that place in _Cæsar_, where he tells us
the _Gauls_, in their publick and private Reckonings, _Græcis literis
usos fuisse_. But let us see whether the word _Græcis_ in that place
ought not to be left out, not only as _unnecessary_ but _surreptitious_.
Since it was sufficient to express _Cæsar_'s Meaning to have said, that
the _Gauls_ made no use of _Letters_ or _Writing_ in the Learning of the
_Druids_, but in all other Matters, and in publick and private Accounts,
they did make use of _Writing_: For _uti litteris, to use Letters_, is a
frequent Expression for _Writing_ among Latin Authors. Besides, it had
been a Contradiction to say the _Gauls_ were unskill'd in the _Greek_
Tongue, as _Cæsar_ had averr'd a little before; and afterwards to say,
that they wrote all their publick and private Accounts in _Greek_. As to
what many suppose, that the words _literis Græcis_ in that place, are
not to be taken for _Writing Greek_, but only for the _Characters_ of
the _Letters_; I can less approve of this Explanation than the former;
because though many ancient Writers (as we just now said) frequently
used the Expression, _Uti litteris_ for _Scribere_; yet I never
observ'd, that any of them ever used it to signify the _Forms_ and
_Fashions_ of the _Characters_. Neither does it make at all for their
Opinion, what _Cæsar_ says in the First Book of his Commentaries, _viz._
That there were found in the _Helvetian_ Camp, Tablets, _literis Græcis
conscriptas_; as if the same Person, who had learnt to make use of the
_Greek Forms_ of _Characters_, might not as easily have learnt the
_Greek Language_; or as if there might not be among the _Helvetii_,
_Priests_ or _Gentlemens Sons_, who might then have learnt _Greek_, as
our's now learn _Latin_; _Greek_ being at that Time a Language in Vogue
and Esteem. The very Neighbourhood of the School of _Massilia_ is
sufficient to confute that Opinion: And therefore _Cæsar_, when he
speaks of his own Letter to _Cicero_, tells us, he sent that Letter
written in _Greek Characters_, lest (in case it were intercepted) his
Designs shou'd be discover'd by the Enemy. _Justinius_, lib. 20. says,
there was a Decree of the Senate made, that no _Carthaginian_, after
that Time, shou'd study the [Footnote: _Græcis literas._] _Greek Language_
or _Writing_, lest he shou'd be able to speak or write to the Enemy
without an Interpreter. _Tacitus_, in his Book _de moribus Germanorum_,
tells us, that several Tombs and Monuments were yet to be seen in the
Confines of _Germany_ and _Swisserland_ with _Greek_ Inscriptions on
them. _Livius_, lib. 9. says, The _Roman_ Boys formerly studied the
_Tuscan_ Language, as now they do the _Greek_. And in his 28th
Book,--"_Hanibal_ erected an Altar, and dedicated it with a large
Inscription of all his Atchievements, in the _Greek_ and _Punick_
Tongues. _Idem Lib._ 40. Both Altars and Inscriptions on them in the
_Greek_ and _Latin_ Tongues." Lastly, I cannot imagine, that _Cæsar_
wou'd have expressed himself (if he had meant, as these wou'd have him)
_Græcis literis scribere_; but rather, _Græcarum literarum formâ_, as we
see in _Tacitus_, Lib. 11. "_Novas literarum formas addidit._" He added
new Characters of Letters: Having found, that the _Greek_ Literature was
not begun and perfected at once. And again,--"_Et forme literis latinis
quæ veterrimis Græcorum_, &c."
Now lest any body shou'd wonder, how the Word _Græcis_ crept into
_Cæsar_'s Text, I will instance you the like Mischance in _Pliny_,
_lib._ 7. _cap._ 57. where 'tis thus written,--"_Gentium consensus
tacitus primum omnium conspiravit ut_ IONUM _literis uterentur_." And
afterwards,--"_Sequens gentium consensus in tonsoribus fuit._" And
again,--"_Tertius consensus est in Horarum observatione._" Now who is
there that sees not plainly the Word IONUM ought to be left out, as well
because 'tis apparently unnecessary, (for _Pliny_ had no farther Design
than to let us know, that Men first of all consented in the Writing and
Form of their Letters) as because 'tis false, that the _Ionian_ Letters
were the first invented; as _Pliny_ himself in his foregoing Chapter,
and _Tacitus_, _lib._ 11. have told us? I have observed however two
Places, (_Gregorius Turonensis_, lib. 5. and _Aimoinus_, lib. 3. cap.
41.) wherein 'tis intimated, that the _Gauls_ used the _Forms_ of the
_Greek_ Letters: For where they speak of King _Chilperick_,--"_He added_
(say they) _some Letters to our Letters_; and those were, [Greek: o,
ps, z, ph]; and sent Epistles to the several Schools in his Kingdom,
that the Boys should be so taught." _Aimoinus_ mentions only three
Letters, [Greek: ch, th, ph]. But we must understand, that these were
_Franks_, not _Gauls_; or rather _Franco-gauls_, who made use of their
own native Language, the _German_ Tongue; not that ancient Language of
the _Gauls_, which had grown out of use under the _Roman_ Government:
Besides, if the _Francogalli_ had made use of the _Greek_ Letters, how
came they at first to except these, when they made use of all the rest?
But we have said enough, and too much of this Matter. As for their
Opinion who believe that the _Gauls_ spoke the _German_ Language,
_Cæsar_ confutes it in that single place, wherein he tells us, that
_Ariovistus_, by Reason of his long Conversation in _Gallia_, spoke the
_Gallick_ Tongue.
Now for two Reasons their Opinion seems to me to be most probable, who
write, that the _Ancient Gauls_ had a peculiar Language of their own,
not much differing from the _British_: First, because _Cæsar_ tells us
it was the Custom for these _Gauls_ who had a mind to be thoroughly
instructed in the Learning of the _Druyds_, to pass over into _Britain_;
and since the _Druyds_ made no use of Books, 'tis agreeable to Reason,
that they taught in the same Language which was used in _Gallia_.
Secondly, because _Tacitus_ in his Life of _Agricola_, writes, that the
Language of the _Gauls_ and _Britains_ differ'd but very little: neither
does that Conjecture of _Beatus Rhenanus_ seem unlikely to me, who
believes the Language which is now made use of in _Basse Bretayne_
[_Britones Britonantes_] to be the Remains of our ancient Tongue. His
Reasons for this Opinion may be better learn'd from his own
Commentaries, than told in this Place. The Language which we at present
make use of, may easily be known to be a Compound of the several Tongues
of divers Nations. And (to speak plainly and briefly) may be divided
into four Parts. One half of it we have from the _Romans_, as every one
that understands _Latin_ ever so little, may observe: For besides, that
the _Gauls_ being subject to the _Romans_, wou'd naturally fall into
their Customs and Language, 'tis manifest that the _Romans_ were very
industrious to propagate their Tongue, and to make it universal, and (as
it were) venerable among all Nations. And to that End settled Publick
Schools up and down, at _Autan, Besancon, Lyons_, &c. as _Valerius
Maximus, Tacitus_, and _Ausonius_ tell us. The other half of it may be
subdivided thus. One third of it we hold from the _Ancient Gauls_,
another from the _Franks_, and the last from the _Greek_ Language: For
it has been demonstrated long since by many Authors, that we find
innumerable _Frank_ (that is, _German_) Words (as we shall hereafter
prove) in our daily Speech. And several learned Men have shewn us, that
many _Greek_ Words are adapted to our common Use, which we do not owe to
the Learning and Schools of the _Druyds_, (who I believe spoke no
_Greek_); but to the Schools and Conversation of the _Massilians_, whom
we formerly mentioned.
* * * * *