Saxonum Rex," — for tins aud not Aiiglo-Saxouuiii 

 is the connect form, — we are, I think, justified in 

 concluding that the eloniont " Angul " did not 

 originally denote a people, but a locality, in much 

 the same way as the Ilook of Holland of to-day. 

 The original meaning of tlie whole word is, in fact, 

 "the settlers in the angle" or "cant," a strictly 

 acc\irate and natural definition of the Belga? in 

 Britain at Ca)sar'3 time. To those wlio liave never 

 realized how utterly untrustworthy is all oiu" 

 \isually accepted history of the Saxon invasion in 

 the fifth century, and the advent of tliree distinct 

 peoples, the "Jutes," "Angles" and "Saxons," 

 this derivation may, perliaps, at first seem im- 

 probable. In simple fact, however, the earliest 

 legends of tliis invasion bear on their very face 

 the evidence of their falsehood. The narrative of 

 Nennius is the first connected accoimt of this 

 invasion. Of Neunius himself two facts 

 only are established with certainty — one is tliat 

 he was not an Englislimau and the other that his 

 name was not Nennius. Whoever he may have 

 been, if he is sho^vn to be untrustworthy, no sub- 

 sequent account foimded t»n his can be accepted as 

 worthy of belief. Now after detailing the well- 

 kno^vn story of Hengist aud Horsa, and telling 

 us that Hengist sent for his tlaughter in order to 

 marry her to King Vortigern, Nennius proceeds 

 thus : " Hengist ta.king coimsel with his elders as 

 to what they should ask of tlie King for the 

 tlamsel, they were all of one counsel, that they 

 should ask for the tract of land that in their 

 tongue is called " Cant-gu;ir:i-land " )mt in our 

 tongue "Ghent." Kent at tMs time, let it be 

 observed, is assumed by Nennius to be inhabited 

 by Welshmen, and by more modeni authorities, 

 the Belgte are assumed to be Keltic. Yet here, in 

 the middle of the fiftli century, the new-comers are 

 represented as Ciilling Kunt. not Kent, but Cant- 

 guar;i^laud. How cauie tliey to give it this dis- 

 tinctively Saxon name if the " gmii-a," or men of the 

 land, were not Saxon already ^ But the absiu-dity 

 becomes more absiu-d an we go on. Canterbury is 

 mentioned immediately at'tenvards, obviously 

 without a suspicion that this word is also Saxon 

 and a mere contraction of " Cant-guara-byrig." 

 the burgli of the Men of Kent. Finally, in a still 

 Keltic Britain, King Vortigern is compelled to 

 surrender to Hengist, Essex, Sussex and Middle- 

 sex, which particular counties he may possibly 

 have i-egarded as typicidly " Brythonic." When 

 it is added to tliis series of solecisms that tlie 

 entire myth is merely a variant of the story 

 told about the foundation of Marseilles and does 

 not belong to Britain at all. it will be seen on 

 what a visionary basis rests this entire chapter 

 of what is sometimes called EngUsli history. 

 The actual local nomenclatiu-e of England 

 indeed is absolutely fatal to the theory that the 

 English first set foot in our island in the fifth 

 century. Cornwall has spuken English for more 

 than a hmuh-ed and fifty years, yet look at a majj 

 of Cornwall, and fur every English place -name 

 you will still find from twelve to fifteen pure 

 Cornish. Look at a map of Kent, and for a single 

 doubtfully Keltic name, like Dover, you will find 

 from forty to fifty purely English names, " tons " 

 and " hams," and " burys " and " ings," and 



" denes " and " dales/' " fields " aud *' fords,*' and 

 " woods," " steads," and " bournes " and " gates," 

 leaving scarcely a half-dozen river names to the 

 Kelt who has named half the rivers of Europe, 

 And yet, if the current theory be true, if the first 

 Saxons landed on our shores in the fifth, or even 

 the fourth or tliird, century, all the place-names 

 throughout the land must have been either 

 "Keltic" or " pre - Keltic *' and the entire 

 population, with the exception of the 

 invaders, must have spoken a " Keltic " 

 or " pre-Keltic " tongue. Observe too tliat 

 from the moment these fifth century magi- 

 cians appear, Enghmd becomes English at the 

 very sight of them. They land at an English 

 Ebbsfleet, they march to an English Canterbury, 

 and tliey fight at an English Crayford. There is 

 hai'dly a ti-;ice to be foimd of city, town, village, 

 or district with a Keltic name, mentioned by a 

 single clu'onicler of their conquests. Oiu* 

 historiiuis strive to account for tliis extraortlinai-y 

 disappearance of everything Keltic l>efore tlieir 

 " mythic Saxon " by a theory that the Saxon 

 exterminated the Kelt l)y some mysterious 

 process imprccedeuted in hmuau amials. That 

 poptilations on the move, like other bodies, 

 "follow the line of least resistance," is a proposi- 

 tion I believe, imiversiilly accepted. One of its 

 corollaries, however, has been very generally over- 

 looked, although it is tlie predominant factor in 

 British etluiology. It is that those races which 

 moved from the Continent to Britain crossed the 

 Cliannel where it is easiest to cross. In other 

 words, ever since Britain became an island, Kent 

 and the south-eastern coast generally, must have 

 been the landing-place of the successive races that 

 settled on British soil. Incursions there may 

 have been, and doubtless were of comparatively 

 small boiUes of foreigners from other shores than 

 those of North- Western GaiU to accessible parts 

 of our co:ist, other than those of Kent ; but any 

 inunigi-ation on a large scale, and extending over 

 a consideiiible period, any invasion not merely of 

 an army but of a people, with their wives, children 

 and belongings, must, of sheer necessity in the 

 days of pro-historic and early liistoric navigation, 

 have landed on our south-eastern coast. It is 

 equally clear that such an immigration must have 

 started on their voyage from the ports of Gaul, 

 from which Britain was most ejisily reached, and, 

 cunritM|Ucntly, that a considei"able stretch of coast 

 in N.irtk-Wcst Gaul must hjive been occupied by 

 the people to which the immigi-ants into Britain 

 belonged .at the time the immigi-ation took i)lace. 

 In Caisar's day, accordingly, we find the Belgaj 

 settled on both sides of the narrow si-as, and the 

 process of Belgic emigration from <_iaiil to Britain 

 in full swing, with a close and constant inter- 

 commimic-ation between the emignints and their 

 parent States. When C»sar tells us how " in the 

 days of yore the Belgic people crossed the Rliine 

 and settled on the left bank," he virtually tells us 

 how it came to pass that the earlier Britons of the 

 Briti.sh Cliannel have now to hi*, sought for on this 

 side, in Wah's and Cornwall, and on the Continental 

 side to tlie west of Mont St. Michel. When 

 we remember that the Northumberland of 

 today, the land North of the Humber, is 



