LL-L: "Scots" LOWLANDS-L, 08.MAY.2001 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 08.MAY.2001 (03) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic, Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: Stefan Israel [stefansfeder at yahoo.com]
Subject: origins of Scots

Mike Oettle wrote:

> A book I have consulted (I can get the reference if anyone is
> interested) states that the Romans encouraged
> Germanic settlers on North Sea coast of what is now southern
> Scotland.

It would be helpful to have that reference- I've never heard of
Romans settling Germani in the British Isles.  They might
possiblyhave put a garrison of Germanic soldiers there- they
often transferred soldiers away from their home region- but it
would be a long step to assume that any Germani that might (or
might not) have been settled there would have been able to
impose their language on the locals, instead of being
assimilated, like most such outposts.

Let's also use the word Germani or Germanic peoples etc. instead
of German, to avoid confusing the Germani (all the Germanic
peoples of ancient times) with the Germans (one branch of that
larger group).

> The mix is interesting: unlike the far south of Britain, where
> Germans seem to have come much later, and were Angles, Saxons
> and Jutes, those on the "Scottish" coast were Angles, Saxons
> and Frisians. So from the very beginning the mix was
different.

Does your source clearly indicate the homeland of such settlers
as definitely Angle, Saxon and Frisian but not Jute?  Also, it's
not clear that the difference between Jutes and Frisians would
have been that great in Roman times.  But please give us a
little more detail about what your source states (and if
possible, what ancient sources it's based on); I'd like to make
sure it's not reading too much into a small transient garrison
or the like.

Stefan

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
=======================================================================