The Caledonians were the inhabitants of North-Britain, during the first century, as we learn from Tacitus. It was the Caledonians, who fought Agricola, at the foot of the Grampian. It was the Caledonians, who finally repulsed the Roman legions. If the inhabitants of North-Britain, during the first century, were British tribes of a Celtic lineage, the Caledonians must necessarily have been Celtic Britons. And, the context of Tacitus attests, that the Britons of North, and South-Britain, were, in that age, the same people.

'The Caledonians were immediately succeeded by the Picts; or rather, the Picts were the old Caledonians, under a new name. The classic authors, who lived during the third century, when the Caledonians first appeared, under the appellation of Picts, are so positive, that they were the same people, that even polemicks have acknowledged this significant truth. The stoutest supporters of the Gothic system, concerning the Pictish lineage, are forced to confess, that the Caledonians, and Picts, were the same people. The acknowledgment, which has just been made, of the sameness of the Picts, and Caledonians, is fatal to the Gothic system: for, as it has been settled, by a thousand facts, as a moral certainty, that the NorthBritish tribes were a Celtic people, during the second, and first centuries, the Caledonians of those times must, necessarily, have been British Celts: a system, which pretends to outface a thousand facts, involves in it a million of absurdities: the fundamental truth, that the Picts, and Caledonians, the Britons and Gauls, were the same Celtic people, is strongly supported by moral certainties; while the Gothic system is made to stand on unauthorized assertion, and unavailable inference.'

The work of a writer who has misled many persons, by the confidence and hardihood of his assertions, is thus characterized by Mr. Chalmers. Alluding to the controversy between the Macphersons and Whitaker, he states that

This conflict had scarcely ceased, when there appeared" An Enquiry into the History of Scotland, preceding 1056," (by John Pinkerton, in 1789.) By a meretricious display of authorities, etymologies, and topography, he professes to show the opinions of those erudite writers, Camden, Selden, and Lloyd, to be false, ignorant, and childish. In order to fasten this censure upon such scholars, he dedicates a whole chapter to prove that, "the Northern Britons, Caledonians, and Picts, were one and the same people." A superficial reader would necessarily suppose, from this proof, that our Inquirer coincided, in opinion, with those learned men, who are said to talk falsely, ignorantly, and childishly: for, they maintained, that the Northern Britons were the same people, as the Southern Britons; that the Caledonians were the descendants of the British colonists, from South Britain; that the Picts were merely the offspring of the Caledonians, under a new name, and a different aspect. He has, however, a thousand distinctions, to shield himself, from the charge of contradiction. The Northern Britons were not, in his opinion, Cambro-Britons. The Caledonians, and Picts were, indeed, the same people; but, they were Goths, from Scandia, who expelled

N 2

the

the Cambro-Britons, about two centuries before Christ. But, the research, and learning, of two centuries, have not brought yet any proof of the migration of a Gothic colony into North-Britain, till the fifth age, when the Angles arrived upon the Tweed. Every attempt to prove this improbability has egregiously failed; because falsehood cannot be proved: Stillingfleet had learning, and our Inquirer exerted his diligence; but they failed, in establishing their Gothic migrations; because such migrations never happened. Suf. fice it to say, adds our Inquirer," that every writer, who mentions the origin of the Picts, till 1707, when Lhuyd's Archaiologia appeared, derive them from Scandinavia, excepting Camden alone, who was himself far from learned. The writers, who are thus opposed, by our Inquirer, to Camden, who is mistakingly supposed to have stood alone, in maintaining the Cambro-British origin of the Picts, are Nennius, the Saxon Chronicler, Geoffry of Monmouth, Giraldus Cambrensis, O'Flaherty, Usher, Stillingfleet, and Sheringham. Our Inquirer was immediately opposed by Riston, who maintained, with equal learning, and labour, the Celticism of the Picts; yet, acknowledged that, it would require a volume, to expose the errors, to exhibit the contradictions, and to confute the system of the Inquiry, 1789.'

As far as authority may decide the controversy, it is not a matter of small moment that

The latest investigator of the Pictish question is the erudite Edward King, the curious author of the Munimenta Antiqua. After investigating the stone monuments, and the hill-forts, the ancient eastles, and the barbarous manners of North-Britain, he gives it as his judgment," that the Picts were descended from the aboriginal Britons." This profound antiquary concurs with the late Doctor' Henry, in saying that," we hear nothing of any invasion of the Caledonians, by any such distinct people, as the Picts," and he, therefore, concludes, as Innes has inferred before him, "that this denomination was merely a new name, which was given to the old settlers.”

How indignant must Mr. Pinkerton be to find his bold theories thus swept away, his descent from his god-like Goths denied, and his origin traced to the contemptible Celts! How is it that he has remained so long silent?

In the author's account of the interesting kingdom of Cambria, he does not fail to pay due tribute to the hero of British annals, the far-famed Arthur; and in a note he gives a list of the humerous places, by which North British topography bears testimony to the fame of the renowned Pendragon.

We regret that we cannot enter into Mr. Chalmers's elaborate elucidation of another controverted subject, the origin and migration of the Scots, and their subsequent fortunes in North-Britain; and that we are also obliged to pass over his account of the introduction of Christianity into these

regions

regions. His criticisms, however, on the relations which have reached us concerning the Culdees, are more indicative of courtesy to the dominant religion of the south, than of any profound research into North-British ecclesiastical antiquities. Book III. of this volume treats of the union of the Picts and Scots. This part the author denominates:

The Sectish Peried of the Account of North-Eritain, extending from the accession of Keneth MacAlpin in A.D. 843, to the demise of Donal-bane, in 1097; which, however dark, will be found to contain several events of great importance, in the North British annals. The union of two separate nations into one monarchy, as it augmented the power of both, and by the ascendency of the Scots, gave at length their name to the common country, must be peculiarly interesting to rational curiosity. In this period, we shall perceive the Strathclyde kingdom of the ancient Britons merge in the Scotish nation. We shall see, meantime, the antient territories of the Selgova, the Novantes, and Damnii, colonized by successive emigrants from Ireland, who gave their settlements the name of Galloway; and who, by a strange fortune, became known, under the appropriate appellation of the ancient Picts. Cumberland will be found to have sunk after the suppression of its reguli, into an appendage of the Scotish crown, by the doubtful ties of an obscure title. After some bloody struggles, throughout this period of more than two centuries and a half, Lothian, we shall see, annexed to Scotland, by the lasting connection of rightful cession, and mutual advantage. We shall behold the circumjacent isles to be at length, felt, as neighbours, and feared, as opponents. It must be the business of this period, then, to trace the history of all those countries, and people, from different sources; to illustrate their singular laws from new principles to investigate their manners, and customs, from analogous proofs; and to ascertain their antiquities, and language, from a temperament of philology, with interspersions of history.'

:

In his account of the union of these two rival nations, Mr. Chalmers closely follows Innes; and in our opinion he cannot commit himself to a more sure guide.

The able recapitulation of the evidence in favour of the Celtic extraction of the original inhabitants of North-Britain, which we find in this part of the work, can leave little doubt of the fact in an unbiassed mind. It is too long to be here inserted, and it does not admit of being abridged.

During this period occur the successive reigns of Duncan and Macbeth, around which our immortal bard has thrown an interest that will last as long as matchless displays of genius shall continue to charm and delight. Of the original of that sublime heroine of the drama, whom we have so often seen more than realize all that the poet himself conceived, we have here this account;

Kenneth IV., while reigning lawfully, was slain in 1003 A.D., as we have perceived, by Malcolm II., at the battle of Monivaird. Kenneth IV. left a son, Boedhe, the heir of his rights, and the suc cessor to his wrongs. Seeing how unable he was to contend with the slayer of his father, he seems to have provided for his safety, by his insignificance: and, he left a son, and a daughter, to enjoy his pretensions, and to avenge his injuries: his son, however, was slain, in 1033, by one of the last orders of the aged Malcolm. His daughter was the Lady Gruoch, who married, for her first husband, Gilcomgain, the maormor of Moray, a person of the first consequence, next to the royal family; and, for her second husband, she married the never-to-be-forgotten Macbeth. The Lady Gruoch, with great strength of character, had the most afflictive injuries constantly rankling at her heart; a grandfather dethroned, and slain; a brother assassinated; and her husband burnt, within his castle, with fifty of his friends; herself a fugitive, with Lulach, her infant son. Such were the injuries, which prompted the Lady Gruoch's vengeful thoughts; and "which filled her, from the crown to the toe, topful of direst cruelty." Amidst her misfortunes, she married Macbeth, the maormor of Ross, who was then in the prime of life; and who was of still greater power, than her first husband: for, after his marriage with this injured woman, he became maormor of Moray, during the infancy of Lulach. If Macbeth was, indeed, as we are assured by Boece, and Buchanan, and Lesley, the son of Doada, a daughter of Malcolm II., he might well enter into competition with Duncan, for the crown. And, we thus perceive, that Macbeth, wanted "no spur to prick the sides of his intent." This intent was at length carried into effect, by the insidiousness of assassination, rather than the magnanimity of conflict.'

If our limits permitted, we should gladly subjoin the author's enumeration of the instances in which the drama has departed from reality, together with the topographical remarks by which he has illustrated it.

We now enter on the fourth or concluding book, and to us the most satisfactory in the volume. It treats of what the author calls the Scoto-Saxon period, which embraces the space from the year 1097 to 1306. During this epoch, happened one of the most singular as well as the most pleasing revolu tions of any that are to be found in history. It was a revolution not produced by the rude and sanguinary hand of force, but an instance of voluntary homage paid by untutored barbarism to superior knowlege and civilization; an instance of a rude people incorporating with itself more enlightened strangers, and adopting in a great measure their language, manners, and laws. The Anglo-Saxon ascendancy in NorthBritain has been hitherto involved in much mystery: but the highly commendable industry of Mr. Chalmers has wholly unravelled it, not by plausible and ingenious conjectures, but

by

He shews from charters and

by facts completely verified. other authentic sources, that migrations from the southern to the northern part of the isle took place to a surprizing extent, though the ordinary historians have too little adverted to the fact; yet the catalogue of them which is given in these pages is so large, that, in connection with other circumstances which are here related, they fully account for this rare phænomenon. Nearly all the great families of the North are descendants from Anglo-Saxon or Anglo-Norman emigrants from this part of the island, whom the Scotish Court tempted to fix themselves in their territory by large grants of lands to the settlers, their retainers, and dependents. Owing to the low state of culture, land in Scotland was at this time of little value, and the country very thinly inhabited; it must therefore be excellent policy in the government to colonize it with persons who were more advanced in the arts, particularly in agricul ture; and such policy, as history states, was well understood and followed by several of the Scotish princes. This part of the work before us cannot be commended too highly; and it verifies the promise as to originality which was made by the author in his preface.

A very full and spirited account is given of the unworthy practices, and unprincipled proceedings, by which Edward I. attempted to render Scotland dependent on the crown of England; and Mr. Chalmers well states the changes which the Anglo-Saxon ascendancy occasioned in the civil and the ecclesiastical constitution of the state. We meet also with a very instructive and luminous chapter on the antient and modern laws of Scotland; and an able summary of Scotish affairs, from the termination of the Scoto-Saxon period to the present time, which strongly indicates the political bias of the writer, closes the volume.

Though in parts this production is very wearisome, still a great proportion of its contents not only enlightens but strongly interests the reader; and he who has the perseverance to struggle through the whole of it will be well rewarded for his fabour. We have, indeed, one great fault to impute to it, an almost universal fault in modern publications, the neglect of revisal and finish; Mr. C.'s language being frequently defaced by repetitions, quaintnesses, and inaccuracies; and so overloaded with punctuation, that to observe all his commas and semicolons in reading it would often put a full stop to his meaning but, taking it altogether, if the author meets with sufficient encouragement to complete his design, we do not hesitate to say that, in respect to the antiquities, history, and topography of Scotland, his work promises far to exceed any that has yet appeared.

N 4

ART