458 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[2n'i S. VII. Junk i. '59. 



perfectly agrees with what I before stated, that 

 Britain was to the Romans rather an " Isle of the 

 Ocean " than a part of Europe. " Ultimus " does 

 not mean "extreme west" but "remote," "extreme 

 171 any direction" as in " ultima Thule." Theo- 

 doret seemingly makes Spain the westernmost of 

 his three western countries, and Britain the east- 

 ernmost. Besides, he is a Greek of the fifth cen- 

 tury, and therefore no competent witness to the 

 Roman geography of the first. 



The question is, " What would a writer, circum- 

 stanced like S. Clement, mean by rb Tep;uo t^s 



Sucrecos ? 



Now Strabo, tlie geographer, is probably the 

 most exact parallel to C ement that can be pro- 

 duced. He be;irs a Latin name, he writes in 

 Greek, and he was at Rome in the first century, 

 rather earlier than Clement. He re[)eiitedly men- 

 tions Spain US the most western country in Europe 

 (c. pp. 5. 8. 67. 136-7., &c.) ; and of the Sacred 

 Promontory (Cape S. Vincent) in particular, he 

 says that it is not only the westernmost (SurtKcfra- 

 Tov) of Europe, but the figure-head {fftifieluv) of 

 the whole inhabited world (c. 137.). The same 

 writer states that the coast of Britain does not 

 extend, in an east or west direction, beyond that 

 of Gaul (c. 199.). If confirmation of this clear 

 and definite statement be required, it may be 

 found in Pliny {Nat. Hist. iii. 1, 2.), and Tacitus 

 {Agr. 10.). 



S. Paul intended to visit Spain ; the ancient 

 Muratorian Fragment (Routh's Rell. i. 395.) al- 

 ludes to such a visit ; and this is confirmed by 

 Chrysostom (on 2 Tim. iv. 20.). All the require- 

 ments of interpretation are satisfied by the sup- 

 position that rh repjxa t. 5. refers to Spain ; any 

 farther hypothesis is gratuitous. 



What I have said of Clement applies with still 

 greater force to Jerome's " western parts." 



Mr. Lee is quite mistaken in supposing that by 

 " Celtic nations " we must understand Ger- 

 many (!), Gaul, and Britain ; n KeXriK)) is a com- 

 mon enough term for Gaul ; though strictly the 

 Kelts formed only one of the three great divisions 

 of Gaul, the other two being the Aquitani and the 

 BelgsB (Strabo, c. 176.). "Keltic nations " = 

 Gaulish tribes. The wide ethnographic use of the 

 word "Celtic" is modern. 



(The quotation referred to professes to be from 

 IrenaBus, but I have not been able to discover it ; 

 I have not, however, seen the ed. Paris, 1675.) 



I did think that Theodoret referred to Britain ; 

 but, on looking at the original (tom. i. p. 871., 

 not %7.), I doubt whether "toTs iv t^ ireXdyei 

 Siaxei/ieVais v7)it6is" is fairly represented by "is- 

 lands which lie in the ocean;" it is rather "is- 

 lands which lie scattered in the sea." neA.tt7os is 

 an appropriate term for a land-locked sea ; the 

 Euxine (Her. iv. 85.), the Caspian (Plut. c. Nic. 

 et Crass. 2.), the Tyrrhenian and Sicilian Gulfs 



(Thuc. iv. 24.) ; the ^gean (Asch. Aq. 659.); and, 

 therefore, I believe that Theodoret, living in Asia, 

 meant by vb 7reAa7oj either the ^gean, or the sea, 

 Mare Mognum. i. e. the Mediterranean. 



Venantius Fortunatus has been often quoted, 

 and is shrewdly criticised by Fuller {Ch. Hist. i. 

 11., Brewer's ed.). " Less credit is to be given to 

 Britannus, because it goeth in company with 

 ultima Thule, which being the noted expression of 

 poets for the utmost bound of the then known 

 world, seems to savour more of poetical hyperbole 

 than historical truth, as a phrase at random to 

 express far foreign countries." The criticism ap- 

 plies to others than Venant. Fortunatus. Cam- 

 den, too, quotes him with great hesitation. 



In § 6 (of the so-called Historia), Gildas alludes 

 to Boadicea ; in § 7. he gives a vague and dateless 

 sketch of the Roman conquest, up to the time 

 when the Romans returned to Italy, leaving be- 

 hind them " quosdam prgepositos " to chastise the 

 Britons with rods. What is the exact date of this 

 last event I do not pretend to say. Then in § 8. 

 he proceeds to tell us that meanwhile the island 

 received the beams of the true sun, which showed 

 to the whole world his splendour in the latter part 

 of the reign of Tib. Caesar. (I have allowed Gil- 

 das the benefit of Camden's interpretation, other- 

 wise he is convicted of the absurdity of supposing 

 that Christianity reached this island in the reign 

 of Tib. Csesar.) In § 9. we find that these beams 

 met, in this island, but a cool reception (tepide sus- 

 cepta sunt) ; nevertheless Christianity existed, 

 though in a languishing state, at the time of Dio- 

 cletian's persecution (a.d. 303) ; i. e. Gildas proves 

 that Christianity was received in Britain before 

 the time of Diocletian! Methinks it needed no 

 Gildas to tell us that. 



As to the " Triads," I think that Dr. Latham 

 has proved (^Ethnology of British Islands, pp. 104 

 — 115.) that they are not trustworthy evidence 

 for the fifth, much less the first century. At all 

 events the passage quoted by Mr. Lee is de- 

 monstrably false. Caractacus was not betrayed 

 by Boadicea, but by Cartimandua, Queen of the 

 Brigantes. (Tacitus, Ann. xii. 36.) Boadicea, 

 Queen of the Iceni, did not come into power 

 until some years after the betrayal of Caractacus 

 (Tac. Ann. xiv. 31.) ; and she was a most un- 

 likely person to have betrayed a Briton to the 

 Romans. I need scarcely observe that the "Queen 

 of the Britons" is entirely an imaginary person- 

 age ; the Britons did not form one kingdom. 



On consideration I agree with Mr. Lee that 

 very little is to be inferred from the silence of 

 Bede. 



The argument from probability stands thus : 

 Christianity was probably introduced into Britain 

 in the apostolic age; and there is an unoccupied 

 space in S. Paul's life, in which he may by possi- 

 bility have visited Britain. Mr. Lee is of course 



