The first who brought real scholarship to bear upon the question of the family to which the Celtic dialects belonged was Dr Cowles Pritchard. His Eastern Origin of the Celtic Nations is a work of the highest value, distinguished by its erudition, and the sound judgment it displays. He was one of the most remarkable men whom Britain has produced in the field of comparative philology. No doubt it is with the Welsh he chiefly dealt, but, in discussing such questions as he had to deal with, it mattered little which of the Celtic tongues was made use of. Many writers followed Dr Pritchard, and there is now, as has been said, no question 1 about the Aryan source of the Celtic languages. It is not that the words are to a large extent analogous, but the grammatical structure and the idioms correspond to such an extent that the question is put beyond a doubt; while, with the exception of a few common vocables, there is little that is analogous between the Celtic and the Semitic languages.

The territory once occupied by the Celtic race is a question of much interest. Now they are confined within well-known limits. On the European continent they occupy that part of France usually called Brittany, the most westerly portion of the country terminating in Cape Finisterre. They occupied this territory so early as the days of Julius Caesar, although it has been said that they were emigrants from Britain at a later period. The topographical terms given by Caesar in describing the Roman invasion all indicate that the language of the natives of Brittany used then, and for a long time before, was as much Celtic as it is now. Opposite to Brittany lies British Cornwall, a region with a Celtic tongue until about 100 years ago. The two Cornwalls—one in Britain and the other in France—terminated, one on each side, the territory occupied by the Celt. The dialect3 spoken in these stood in the closest relationship. To the north of this lies the greatest of all the modem sections of the Cimbrian Celts. Wales, occupied by about a million inhabitants, is nearly Celtic, and uses the ancient tongue of Wales, Cumbria, and Strathclyde. Across the sea from Wales lies the Isle of Man, where the Gaelic branch of the Celtic held sway, and does to some extent still In Ireland the Gaelic also prevailed, and is still spoken by about a million people. And lastly, in the Scottish Highlands about 300,000 people still use, less or more, the old Gaelic tongue of Scotland. Thus Brittany, Wales, Man, western Ireland, and the Scottish Highlands are now the territory of the Celtic languages. That they once occupied a wider sphere is beyond a doubt. There are traces of the tongue, in one form or other, to be found all along southern Europe. Topography is a valuable source of evidence, and one that will be made to serve purposes it has never served as yet; and it furnishes us—in Italy, France, Switzerland, Spain, and Portugal—with relics which, like animal fossils dug from the depths of the earth, spealL·unmistakably of what formerly existed there. How far the Gaelic form of Celtic speech prevailed it is difficult to say, or whether it existed alongside of the Cimbric on the continent of Europe. But the name Gallia is significant as applied to France; and it is a suggestive fact that, to this day, the Bretons call France Gaul, as distinguished from their own country, and in like manner call the French language Gallic, as distinguished from the Breton. In Scotland the Gaelic and Cimbric races long dwelt together, distinct and yet nearly related. When they separated, either as to race or language, is not easily settled. There are indications on the Continent which rather throw doubt on the idea maintained by some writers that the divergence took place after the settlement of the race in Britain, and farther inquiry as to these indications is essential ere a satisfactory conclusion can be reached. But within the historic period the two races existed side by side in Scotland, the Cimbric occupying the region called Strathclyde, with their separate government and laws, and the Gael at least occupying the Dalriadic kingdom of Argyll. The people called by the Romans Picts occupied the north and east of Scotland. That these were the same people with the Dalriadic Scots is somewhat questionable. That they were closely related to them is beyond doubt, but that they had linguistic and other peculiarities is manifest. Their topography proves it, being different from that of either Ireland or Argyll, and, so far as the historic relations of both are concerned, they indicate a state of chronic war. For centuries there were mutual raids of Scots on Picts, and Picts on Scots, until finally, under Kenneth MacAlpine, king of Dalriada, the Picts were overcome in the year 813, and they and the Scots became united under one monarchy. The tradition is that the Picts were annihilated,—meaning, in all likelihood, their power,—and there arose one great united kingdom. The united people are the ancestors of the present Scottish Highlanders, and the Gaelic language has come down from them to us, influenced as to structure by the dialect spoken and written by the victors.

The Gaelic language, as now in use in Scotland, resembles closely in its structure both the Irish and the Manx. They form one family, and yet it has its own distinctive features. Irish scholars maintain that it is a modern and corrupt offshoot of the Irish, and account in this way for these peculiarities. They say, for example, that the absence of the present tense in the Gaelic verb is a mere instance of decay, and proves the modern character of the dialect. But the Welsh is no modern and corrupt form of Irish, but an ancient distinct tongue, so far back as history carries us. And yet it wants the present tense, indicating that this peculiarity is distinctive of some of the Celtic tongues, and that what is cited as a proof of recency may in reality be a proof of priority. The present tense may be called an Irish addition made to the verb in the process of culture. At the same time it must be allowed that there is a difficulty in proving from any literary remains existing that the present Scottish form of the language is of great antiquity. All the literary relics that have come down to us are written in what is usually called the Irish dialect. The present tense is in universal use, as well by Scottish as by Irish writers. This arose from the identity of the Irish and Scottish churches. The dialect in which all theological treatises were written was one, and this dialect extended from the clergy to bards, and sennachies, and medical men. There is not a page of Gaelic written in any other dialect before the middle of last century. But as in other countries there was both a spoken and a written dialect in use, so in both Scotland and Ireland there appears to have been a dialect in use among the people as their common speech, and another used by their scholars,—the former varying according to locality, and the latter being identical throughout. Some of the features that distinguish the Gaelic language, partly in common with the other Celtic tongues, and partly not, are the following :—

1. The aspiration of consonants. This is accomplished by the change of m into v, of b into v, of d into y, of g into a broad y, of p into ∕, and s and t into h. As appearing in the initial articulations this presents a peculiar difficulty to the learner of Gaelic. He has been accustomed, in learning other tongues, to observe the changes required by inflexion, and other requirements of correct grammatical structure. But he has not been familiar with changes in the initial letters of words. In English these letters never undergo any change; but in Gaelic he meets with such changes at once. He finds mac, a son, becoming in certain circumstances vac, and he is ready to doubt whether both forms belong to the same word. To make the difficulty as little formidable as possible to the reader, the authors of the Gaelic orthography fell upon the method of using the letter h, which, though hardly a letter in Gaelic, and never used to begin a word, is now used more than any other letter. The Irish use a dot. The use of the h serves to preserve to the reader the original form of the word. Hence mac becomes by aspiration, or adoucissement as the French call it, mhac, pronounced vac. These initial changes of certain consonants arc made for the purpose of euphony, to which Gaelic makes large sacrifices, and also for the purpose of distinguishing gender. An aspiration converts the feminine into the masculine, and, vice versa. An ceann is the head, masculine, a’ chos the foot, feminine. So a chos is his foot, a cos is her foot; a chcann is his head, a ceann is her head, the pronoun undergoing no change, although its gender is indicated by the change. There are other purposes served by aspiration of considerable importance. The Gaelic learner makes a large acquisition when he masters the principles of aspiration, and inquirers into the characters of the language will cease to blame the frequency with which k appears in Gaelic writing when they come to see how important a purpose it serves.

2. Another peculiarity of the Gaelic language is to be found, as already said, in the want of a present tense in the verb. Tho verb “to do” is dean, the theme of the verb being in the imperative mood. There is no tense expressing simply I do, the form in use being I am doing, tha mi a' cleanamh. The Irish say deanaim, I do, but that is not the Scottish form of the expression. In this Gaelic is not only at one with several of the Celtic branches, but with some of the Semitic tongues. And it has this further in common with these last, that the future is used to express present time. This occurs frequently in the Gaelic version of the Bible, where we have an ti a chreidcas anns a’ Mhac, he that will believe in the Son, for he that believeth. And yet occasionally a true present tense appears in Gaelic :— an cluinn thu sin? Do you hear that? cluinnidh, I do hear it; am faic thu sin? Do you see that? chi, I do see it. In these cases and some others there is no doubt a distinct present tense. The cases are, however, few, and occur in peculiar circumstances.

3. Another feature peculiar to Gaelic is that there is no real infinitive in the verb. The infinitive in use is a noun which may appear either in the form of a participle or an infinitive, according to the effect of the preceding preposition. I am going to strike, tha mi 'dol do bhualadh, I am going to striking; I am striking, tha mi a ’ bualadh, I am at striking,—the preposition do, to, in the one case giving the noun the force of an infinitive, and the preposition ag or a', at, giving the same noun the force of a participle. The Gaelic infinitive is thus identical with the Latin gerund, and is one of the points where the classical and the Celtic tongues meet and touch.

In the article Celtic Literature reference is made to some of those cases in which the Irish dialect of the Celtic differs from some of the others. It is unnecessary here to go over the same ground again. What is distinctive of the Irish is, for the most part, distinctive of the Scottish Gaelic. The Gaelic retains the hard or k sound of c. There is not an instance of a purely Gaelic word in which the c is pronounced soft. There are dialects of Gaelic, however, in which the c becomes aspirated in the middle or at the end of a word. Thus mac, a son, is pronounced machd; veacadh, sin, is pronounced peachdadh. This peculiarity does not exist in the counties of Sutherland and Caithness, where the hard sound of c is retained. The Scottish Gaelic, in like manner, in common with Sanskrit, Latin, German, and Slavonian, retains the sibilant β, where other dialects have discarded it. Many words beginning in Gaelic with s have h as the initial letter in Welsh. It is worthy of observation, however, that, in the aspirated form of the s used in inflexion or as indicative of gender, the s assumes the sound of h in Gaelic. In like manner, words in Gaelic, as in Irish, can eud in s, r, aud n. The instances of these are numerous. So also does the Gaelic, like Irish, retain a harder form of the articulation than the British, but not io the same extent; for huvel, low, in Irish humal, is in Gaelic umhal, approaching in this, as in many other cases, nearer to the British form. So the Gaelic preserves letters where the British loses them, but not to the same extent as the Irish. For when the Irish has tech, a house, and the British ti, the Gaelic has both teach and tigh, and for the most part uses the latter. In addition to this, the Gaelic, like the Irish, has preserved the declension of its noun, which cannot be said of the British. Four of the cases are .in constant use, the nominative, the genitive, the dative, and the vocative in both numbers, the dative plural alone having almost disappeared from common speech. In the singular number these cases are distinctly marked— cos, a foot, gen. coise, dat. cois, voc. a chos. Wherever the language is well spoken these cases are in daily use, and are lost only when the language is far on in the process of decay.

Difference between Gaelic and Irish.— The differences between the Gaelic and the Irish are considerable, and, though Irish writers maintain the contrary, are not to be taken as indications of the modern origin of the former. Without entering on that question, we find a marked distinction in the use by the Irish of what is called eclipsis,— that is, the use of other and softer articulations to eclipse the harder in the beginning of a word, in some cases, as, for instance, in the genitive plural of nouns. The object Aimed at would seem to be euphony, and in seeking this object the Irish and the Scottish ear did not altogether correspond. In Irish, the law as given by O’Donovan is that m eclipses δ, as ar m-bo, our cow ; g eclipses c, as ar g-ceart, our right; η eclipses d, bh eclipses f, n eclipses g, b eclipses p, d eclipses t, t eclipses s. This system of eclipsing runs through the nouns and verbs. It is unknown in Gaelic, if we except the eclipsing of s by t, as an t-sùil, the eye, an t-slat, the rod, and certain words which, in some districts of the Highlands, suffer eclipse. In Skye the expression for the number of men is àireamh nan n-daoine, the η eclipsing the d. Other instances may be found along the weβt coast of Scotland. But eclipsis is, for the most part, distinctive of the Irish dialect. The Gaelic is further marked by a greater tendency to aspiration than the Irish. The sentence cionnas ta tu 1 how art thpu 1 in Irish, is in Gaelic cionnus tha thu Ί the verb and the pronoun being both aspirated. Other differences might be referred to, but one is prominent, the difference of accent or emphasis. The tendency of the Irish is to emphasize the final syllable, that of the Gaelic to emphasize the penultimate. Thus salàch, dirty, in Irish, is in Gaelic salach∙, Ois'ιn, Ossian, is in Gaelic Oisian. This makes a striking difference in the spoken tongues, and occasions one of the main difficulties Irish and Scottish Celts have in understanding each others’ speech.

Advantages and Defects of Gaelic.— The Gaelic language, as now existing, has its advantages and its corresponding defects. It is admirably adapted for the purposes of the poet. In descriptive poetry few languages excel it. There are some pieces of ancient, authentic, Ossianic poetry existing that are equal in power and beauty to the compositions of any age or country. Such are the description of Cuchullin’s chariot and horses, and the description of the swords of the Ossianic heroes. The same is true of more modern poetic compositions. Macintyre of Glenorchy’s Beiιιn Douran and Coire Cheathaich are fine specimens of descriptive poetry—poetical in conception throughout, couched in the choicest language, and with rhythm of unfailing accuracy. The same may be said of Macdonald’s Oran an t-samhraidh, or Ode to Summer, which is a remarkable specimen of what the Gaelic is capable of when used for the description of nature. Other lyrical compositions are also of a high order of merit. Love-songs and boat-songs abound, and are in many cases full of life and force; and the numerous songs expressive of clan affections and animosities display the same characteristics. No language is more capable of expressing both love and hate, and there seems to have been ample scope for both in the past history of the Highland clans. Within certain limits then, Gaelic is the language of poetry, extending from the epic of the Ossianic bards down to the lyric or less aspiring efforts of lesser bards.

The language is also admirably fitted for the communication of religious knowledge. It is in its structure metaphorical and emotional, and renders with wonderful precision and effect the statements of Scripture. The saying attributed to one of the dukes of Argyll is well known, that if addressing his sovereign he would choose English, if addressing the lady of his affections he would choose French, but if he was addressing his God he would choose Gaelic. Few of those whose calling it is to teach religious truth, and who know how to handle the language with effect, have failed to feel and own that it is incomparable for conveying the knowledge of the truth with power. Perhaps no preachers have surpassed the Welsh in real eloquence, and yet some of the Gaelic preachers have not been behind them. The language has served a great purpose in the Highlands in connexion with the religious life of the people. 4

The defects of the language are to be found chiefly in the departments of philosophy, science, and art. There it has either to be rejected or to be supplied from foreign sources. Indeed in this field it seems to have deteriorated during the course of several centuries. There are MSS. of the 14th and 15th centuries in existence, in which terms are employed in connexion with discussions in philosophy, theology, and medicine that could not now be understood. The philosophy of Aristotle is well rendered, as are also the theology of the fathers and the medical disquisitions of the Arabic writers on medicine. But when modern science and philosophy, and even theology in some of its departments, have to be dealt with, the lack of terms renders the task a...