[from NORSK TIDSSKRIFT FOR SPROGVIDENSSKAP Bind VI 1932 pp333-355]

The extensive paper by Prof Carl J.S. Marstrander is in Norwegian however he provides an extensive summary in English transcribed here - currently much more editing is needed - also some of the figures referenced in the summary are within the Nowegian language pages and need copying here

Sir David Wilson would appear from his 1997 paper to have moved away from such an early commencement of the Viking period on Man as espoused here by Marstrander to a late 9th Century ]

Summary.

No written or unwritten source tells us when the Celtic peoples which since the dawn of history have occupied the British Isles, arrived there. Classical authors do not concern themselves with what happened in those distant regions north of the Roman empire. This much, however, do we learn from their scanty records that from the 5th century before our era the Celtic tribes of Central Europe were in strong fluctuation, expanding almost over the whole of Europe save towards the North where Teutonic peoples held their own against them, slowly but surely pushing them back towards the Rhine and the Danube.

There is every reason to consider the Celtic invasion of the British Isles as a link in this expansive movement, which in La Tene made the Celts the masters of West and Central Europe. This supposition is strongly supported by archaeological evidence. While the Neolithic and the Bronze Age are both well represented in the British Isles, finds from the oldest period of the Iron Age, the Hallstatt, are almost completely lacking. From outer appearances it would seem as if the Bronze Age merges without transitional stages into La Tene, a rather puzzling circumstance assuming that the Celtic conquest of the isles dates back to the Bronze Age; for the period of Hallstatt is well represented in Gaul and surely the relations between the kindred Celtic tribes on either side of the Channel were never interrupted; in Caesar's time they were, on the contrary, very strong. On the other hand, the lack of intermediary stages between the Bronze Age and La Tene in the British Isles finds a probable explanation on tne assumption that the Celts did not gain a footing in the isles until La Tene and that iron first through them came into common use there.

For the linguistical study of the place-names a historical certainty, or speaking more guardedly a historical probability like this is of the greatest importance. It follows that, the British Isles, Celtic speech has only been in use little more than two millenniums. [334] And as the Gaelic vocabulary is well known, at least from the 8th century, and as it is unlikely, on account of the isolated character of the Gaelic territory, that great changes have taken place in the vocabulary before the Viking Age, the Gaelic nomenclature could not be expected to contain a large number of elements not occurring the written or spoken sources of the Gaelic languages. As a whole, this argument in reality holds good. In Ireland, as elsewhere, one may of course meet with topographical names which do not seem explicable from the historical vocabulary. Such names may be inherited from the pre-Celtic population, as is no doubt the case with several river names. In the Isle of Man, names of pre-Celtic origin are extremely scarce. In my opinion the only certain instance is the name Man itself, Old-Irish Manu: gen. Manann. Quite a number of names of islands in British waters terminated in Old-Irish times in nom, -u: gen. -ann, cp. apart from Manu also Rechru: gen. Rechrann, Åru (in Ireland and Scotland): gen. Årann, Eriu: gen. Erenn, Clothru: gen. Clothrann, Albu: gen. Albann. As none of these names allow of an evident explanation from the Celtic vocabulary known to us, the conclusion can scarcely be avoided that they were all taken over from a pre-Celtic language in which they constituted a definite type. On the other hand the sheading-name Glen-Faba and the river-name Neb which are often claimed as pre-Celtic, are in my opinion of Norwegian origin, the former containing a river-name Papa-á "the river of the Culdees" (Old Norwegian papar, from Old Irish popa, papa), cp. the Icelandic river-name Irá, Landnámabók 14.6., the latter deriving from Norwegian Nebba, Nabba, a derivative of nabbr (nabbi) "knoll, hill", the river taking its name from the typical nabb protruding northwards between the sea and the Neb (fig. 1).

This feeble trace of the pre-Celtic substratum on Man seems quite natural considering that during the last fifteen hundred years the island has been twice conquered and divided in its entirety between foreign invaders. The few non-Aryan names which the Celtic conquest might have left, were probably lost during the Germanic invasions, which altogether seems quite natural,

[335]The surprising point in the Manx nomenclature is its late character. Not only does it not contain one single type of name not alive on Irish soil in historical times; but it will be well nigh impossible to quote one single Manx place-name which for linguistic or typological reasons must be dated previous to the Viking Age. Evidently the Norwegian conquest utterly altered the character of the nomenclature, the invaders taking complete possession of all landed property and giving it Norwegian names. It is significant. that in documents down to the 14th century (papal bulls, Royal charters, the Chron. Manniae etc.), the relation between Gaelic and Norwegian names is as 1:8

This late character of the Gaelic place-names of the Isle of Man, is not altogether due to the Norwegian conquest. Surely one would expect at least a few names of archaic type to have survived the Norwegian sway, provided that the Celtic element on Man were of the same age as in Ireland. But as a whole Manx nomenclature agrees far better with Scotch-Gaelic than with Irish, which goes to indicate that the Celtic colonisation of the Isle of Man is hardly older than that of the West coast of Scotland, which appears to date back to the 5th century. The Celtic colonisation of Man was then in all probability the work of the Irish church. In fact no Gaelic place-name in the island bears a pagan stamp.

The historical background for the study of the Norwegian place-names on Man is the Norwegian dominion on the island. No source tells us in plain words when this was first established. According to Irish annals, the first Viking fleet seen in the Irish Sea depredated in the year 797 Patrick's Isle, breaking the shrine of Dochonna and devastating the Irish and Scottish coasts. This Dochonna is also mentioned in the Book of Leinster (Machonna Insi Patrick 398 c 9) and elsewhere as bishop of Man (cp Colgans Acta Sanct., January 13th). so the incident evidently refers to the Patrick's Isle at Peel and not to the homonynous island at Skerries, Co Dublin. But apart from this short notice with which the Irish chronicles open the most dramatic of all their chapters,the Irish. sources observe an almost complete silence as regards the Isle of Man. While they record Norwegian raids by hundreds from the most remote parts of Ireland, they give none fom Man. Why? [336] Evidently the Isle of Man was very early isolated from Ireland and very early regarded by the Irish themselves as a Norwegian dominion. We may safely assume that the Norwegian conquest of the isle dates back to the first half of the 9th century, when wintering Norwegian fleets are frst mentioned on the Irish coast. The strategic importance ol the island is evident, situated midway between Ireland and England it was bound to become the natural centre for all naval operations in the Irish Sea. According to the Orkneyinga and the Ynglingasagas the Isle of Man was in the hands of the Norwegians at any rate in the second half of the 9th century King Harold Fairhair's adventurous expedition to the island is a historical fact, commemorated by Porbjorn Hornklofe in a contemporaneous poem which by a happy stroke of fortune has survived. The supposition presents itself that the Isle of Man formed part of the Norwegian dominion which Olav the White founded in the year 852 with Dublin as centre, and which was by far the strongest naval power in the Irish Sea.

There can in consequence be no doubt that the first Norwegian settlement on Man still belongs to paganism. It follows that there must once have been in existence a Norwegian stratum of civilisation older than the ornamented crosses which in no circumstance are previous to the latter half of the 10th century. It is likely, nay certain, that several of the great tumuli which are strewn all over the island, but as yet unfortunately not systematically examined, are nothing but Norwegian barrows from the 9th and 10th centuries. Thus e.g. the recent excavation of the barrow on Knock y Doonee, Kirk Andreas, revealed a Norwegian boat-burial. Among the implements deposited with the dead was also a typical Norwegian pair of tongs suggesting that Knock y Doonee in the 9th century was the burial place of the neighbouring farm Smeale, lit. 'the height of the smithy' (Old Norwegian Smidiuholl).

The runic crosses which are thus several generations younger than the first Norwegian settlement on the island, claim a special interest for our topic in so far as they entirely, refute the view, so often put forward that the Norwegians decimated or expelled the Gaelic population from the island, [337] On the contrary, they testify to the most intimate and peaceful relation between Gaidil and Gaill. Of the 10 personal names which oceur on the runic crosses, 29 are Norwegian and 11-12 Gaelic, Thus a man bearing the Gaelic name Crindan calls his son by the Norwegian name Ufeigr, and conversely lorleis Nakke his son by the Gaelic name Fiac. There can be no doubt that these Gaelic names, which figure on the crosses, were adopted from the Gaelic population on Man itself. Hence there follows a conclusion of far reaching importance for the determination of the relations in the 10th century between the conquerors and the conquered in this isolated Viking community in the Irish Sea: The Gaelic population, whence the Norwegians to such a great extent borrowed their personal names, must necessarily have been free. Considering the fundamental importance attached to family and to descent in the Scandinavian communities even during the last centuries of the Viking Age, it may safely be stated that the idea of a free Norwegian giving his children names typical amongst slaves and bondsmen, is just as absurd as that of a legal connection on his part with a slave-born woman. No men living ever had more highly developed family instincts than the Norwegian adventurers who during the 9th and 10th centuries colonised Iceland and the western isles. Alongside with the Norwegian upper stratum on the Isle of Man, there must in consequence have co-existed a Gaelic group of population which the Norwegians themselves from the very beginning of the conquest considered as free and socially equal. In view of the fact that for more than half a millennium Gaelic and Norwegian existed side by side on such a limited and isolated area as the Isle of Man, the Gaelic language of the island should certainly be expected to show a distinct Norwegian stamp. But so far from being imbued with Norwegian loan words, the modern dialect only offers at the most half a hundred, most of which also occur in Irish and Scotch Gaelic. a list of those which have come to my notice, is given above, p. 49, 265 ff. This circumstance calls for a special explanation. It raises the rather important question whether or to what extent one is allowed to speak of a continuous linguistical development of Manx. [338] It seems as if the great catastrophes in the history of the island, in connection with the continuous pouring in of new elements of population from West Scotland, gradually repressed the Norwegian stock of the Manx vocabulary. At any rate it is perfectly clear that the Manx language in the course of centuries hes been strongly influenced by Scotch-Gaelic idioms, especially the dialect of Galloway. As far as the grammatical forms and the vocabulary are concerned, it ranges itself more closely with Scotch-Gaelic than with any Irish dialect. The question whether also from a phonetical point of view it stands closer to Scotch-Gaelic than Irish, requires for its solution a knowledge of the spoken Gaelic idioms which as yet hardly any Celtic scholar possesses, If, as is a priori likely, Manx also phonetically associates itself with Scotch-Gaelic, it should hence-forward be classified with this branch of the Gaelic dialects.

The Norwegian language on the Isle of Man did not of course become extinct with the last Norwegian King Magnus Olavson, whose death took place in the year 1265. Provided my view as to the date of the tract Limites seu Diuisiones Terrarum Monachorum (p. 48 f.) is correct, Norwegian was still in the 14th century a living force in the Isle, spellings such as Oxwath, Worzefel, Herynstasze, Gretastas, presupposing Norwegian, not Gaelic pronunciation. Late phonetic forms such as Foksdalr, Brarutk, Brarbolstadr also point to a rather late date. There is every probability that the Norwegian language on Man first succumbed during the Stanleyan era in the 15th century.

As the changing history of the Isle of Man indicates, the study of its place names must necessarily be rather a complicated topic. Four linguistically and historically different layers must be taken into account, a prehistoric stratum, as it seems of no great importance, a Celtic stratum beginning with the rise of the Irish church, a Norwegian straum that sets in with the early 9th century, to a great extent overlapping but never entirely supplanting the Gaelic, and finally an English stratum, which, however, does not seriously assert itself before the days of the Stanleys in the 15th century. [339] To write the history of Manx place names, it is in sequence essential to know not only the Gaelic and the English of to-day, but also the main features in the development of the Gaelic and Norweagian languages from the 9th century downwards, Of Old Manx unfortunately nothing is known, the Manx sources with the exception of the Chronicle and some minor documents dating only from the 16th century onwards. But we may safely assume that the Manx of the 9th century differed only slightly from the Old Irish of the same period, which in consequence is chosen as the natural point of departure for the description of the phonetical development of the Manx language from the Viking Age to the present day given above p. §2 ff. It goes without saying that the Norwegian place names, which after the extinction of the Norwegian language on Man continued their life in the Gaelic milieu, were bound to develop on the same lines as the Gaelic vocabulary itself.

My description of the Manx phonetical system is entirely based on observations made during my stay on the island in the summers of 1929 and 1930. The old consonantal system, as known from Old Irish, has broken down. The clean contoures of the old system are only faintly seen through the effects and ulterior developments it has caused, as the transition of the palatal dentals to affricates and the lengthening or diphthongisation of a short vowel before long liquids and nasals. But here as elsewhere a new system has arisen on the ruins of the old, the dominant features of which are: The splitting of the old occlusives into occlusives (when final) and spirants (as in intervocalic position), the development of the r-sounds, the passing of z into d and of n, m, n, l after short accented vowel into dn, bm, gn, dl. - Of the old vowel system nothing remains. The old diphthongs were monophthongised at an early date, but new diphthongs arose in Manx as in South Irish from the fusion of short (or long) vowels with a following voiced spirant or from the disappearance of intervocalic th and palatal ch. The first element of the diphthongs is usually of far greater duration than in Irish, very often the pronunciation may be characterized as long-diphthongic. A similar pronunciation is commonly heard also in Manx-English (e. g. taim "time"). O very often turns into a (as in Scotch- Gaelic), a (and usually also d) becomes open e all vowels may be lowered before liquids and dentals, svarabhakti is confined to a few consonantal groups, long and short vowels frequently interchange in the same word.

[340] In part 5 of my paper (p.83-264) the Norwegian place names on the island are collected and critically analysed. The names are arranged by parishes and enumerated from the south northwards. Then follows a synopsis of the Norwegian vocabulary on the Isle of Man as attested by the loan words (p. 205 f) and the place names (p. 200-284).

The Norwegian character of the Norse language spoken in the Isle of Man. is evidenced both by the phonetic forms and by the vocabulary of the place names, as also by the personal names (p. 284 ff.). No single Norse name or loan word in the Isle bears the phonetic stamp peculiar to East Scandinavian (Danish, Swedish), nor does any single typically East Scandinavian place or personal name enter our material. It may be safely stated that the Norse material on Man, just as that in Ireland, points to a south-western Norwegian idiom closely akin to the Norwegian dialects of Agder, Jaeren, the Faeroe Islands and the isles north and west of Scotland.

But the main interest of the material treated in this paper is doubtless of historical nature. It permits us to draw definite conclusions as to the character and the intensity of the Norwegian colonisation in the Island. It informs us where the conquerors settled, how dense their settlements were and of what nature their relations were to the Celtic population, and gives highly interesting contributions to the history of the administration of the island during the Norwegian rule. In short, it tells us all that the literary sources pass over in silence.

Apart from the place and family names, the administrative terms in use to this very day also testify to the strength of the Norwegian influence in the Island. The Isle of Man is divided, for administrative purposes, into six sheadings, each comprising three parishes, Manx skeerey, which in their turn are subdivided into from 8 to 15 treens. Above them all figures the House of Keys, "the 24 Keys". This terminology, and in consequence also the administrative principles, from which it originated, are in our opinion all of Norwegian origin. As far as I am aware, no definite Evidence has been put forward to show that this administrative division is older than the Stanleyan era, i.e. the 15th century, None of the terms in question appearing in soures previous to that century. [341] The older historical sources being extremely scarce, the absence of any mention does not imply the non-existence of the administrative system in question.

The term skeerey is ultimately identical with Anglo-Saxon scir, Manx-English shire, which was a common term for an administrative unit as e.g. a bishopric or a larger domain comprising several wapentakes. But being pronounced skeerey, not sheerey, this term must in Manx be older than the Stanleys, in whose time the English pronunciation was shire. And as the English influence in Man is of no consequence before the Stanleyan era, skeerey must have entered Manx either by Scotch-Gaelic, where sgire is used precisely in the sense of 'parish', or by the Norwegian idioms of Ireland or the Scottish isles, where skiri was used as an administrative term: thus Dyflinnarskiri was the Norwegian name for the Norwegian district around Dublin.

If then it can be shown that the present division of parishes dates back to Norwegian time, it follows that also the term skeerey was introduced by the Norwegians. As far as I am aware, the oldest instance of the term occurs in the ballad Mannanan Beg mac y Lir, ascribed to the 16th century. But already in the Bridgewater MSS of 1285 there is mention of the ecclesia Parochiae Sanctae Trinitatis iuxta Ramsa, and the last Norwegian King of Man dying, according to the Lanercost Chronicle, in the year 1275, there can be no doubt that the parish division dates from Norwegian time. On the other hand, the present parish division can hardly be older than about 1200, because the estates granted by Olav II a few years before to the canons of Candida Casa, are now situated in two different parishes, German and Marown.

The term sheading, though not attested in any source previous to 1515, is also no doubt older than the Stanleyan regime. For if it were not older, its source must necessarily be England; but English shedding 'partition, separation' (abstract of shed) is never used as an administrative term and, in consequence, has no relation to sheading. It is equally certain that it can not also be of Celtic origin, the Celtic vocabulary which is well known from the 10th century and before offering nothing similar. [342] The comparison with the Irish numeral substantive sede cannot be maintained, amongst other reasons because the aspirant d of sédde could no more survive in Manx than in Irish

The necessary conclusion is that the term sheading is of Norwegian origin and that the sheading division dates back to Norwegian time. The last point in fact allows of proof. For in Gregory IX's bull of 1231 speaks of the ecclesia Sanctae Trinitatis in Lezayre (as also Bishops Charter of 1505), Lezayre must necessarily be the name of the sheading, the church itself being situated 6 miles from the Point of Ayre and the extensive sandbanks on the north coast from which the sheading derives its name. The circumstance that the name of the sheading was added to the parish name, is explained by the fact that in Rushen also there was a parochial church dedicated to the Holy Trinity, which in consequence in the Manorial Roll of 1511 is distinguished from that in Lezayre by adding 'in Rushen'.

If thus the division into sheadings is older than 1231, it can on the other hand be shown that the sheading of Rushen cannot have received its name previous to the year 1134 when Rushen Abbey was founded by Olav Bitling. When it is told in the Manx Chronicle that King Olav granted to Abbot Ivo of Furnes a part of his land on Man for the purpose of founding a monastery in loco qui vocatur Russin, it is clear in my opinion that the usual conception of Russin as identical with the name of the sheading cannot be maintained. No author would employ locus of a whole district, a provincia. Russin was of course the name of 'the little ross' where the abbey was to be founded, ruissin or ruissén 'a small wood or copse' being a regular deminutive of ross 'wood, copse' and entering in this sense also in Irish place names (cp. Hogan). Rushen Abbey grew to be an important place, several Norwegian kings were interred there, so it seems only natural that the sheading should take its name from this ecclesiastically and politically equally important centre. In all probability, the division into six sheadings was due to Olav Bitling, whose lengthy reign (1103-1153) is described as the most peaceful epoch in the history of the island.

[343] This view does not of course exclude the possibility of a certain number of sheadings (or similar administrative units) existing already previous to the reign of Olav Bitling and comprising the whole island or parts of it. But our sources being silent on this point, we must confine ourselves to the statement that the sheading division dates back in any case to the 12th century and that it is due to Norwegian initiative.

The other sheading names offer no clue to the age of this administrative unit in the Island. The sheading of Middle, spelled Shedyng of Medall Manorial Roll 1511, does not, as is commonly supposed, owe its name to the central lowland between Douglas and Peel, the Norwegian name of which is not known, but was no doubt named after the powerful treen Middle (Medall) in Braddan which once probably also included the Priory of Douglas, thus comprising the whole country immediately south of the Douglas River. The Norwegian name of this sheading was Middals Skevarping. Of Norwegian origin is also the sheading name Garff (Norwegian Grafar Skewarping), very likely identical with the treen name Grawe (Grauff, Man. Roll 1511), though the relation between the manuscript forms is not altogether clear. It is only natural that treens which commanded such strategically important points as Douglas and Laxey should, in the course of time, give their names to the sheadings. The sheading name Ayre (Eyra Skeidarping) is likewise Norwegian, and ultimately also Glen Faba. Thus the Manx sheading names show a similar incongruity to that of the skibrede names in Norway) which sometimes are names of fjords and valleys, and at others names of central farms or villages.

As to the term sheading itself, its Norwegian origin seems to me beyond doubt. It is a compound, the latter part of which is Old Nor- wegian ping in the sense 'district of assize' (Norwegian finglag, ling- krets) well known from Iceland, Hardanger (where ling in the tithe census is used synonymous with shibrede) and from the same where half the parish names end in -ting. The first element is skew, es name of the typical Norwegian war galley. [344] This idea was already hinted at by Vigfusson, but given up as it was not well understood how Old Norwegian skeidarping could possibly develop into Manx sheading From the synopsis of Manx phonetics given above it can now be definitely stated that shetda(r)ping would result in Manx skeltin, skedin, skedin (with tenuis passing as usual into media, eventually voiced aspirant). As the initial sh and final ng show, sheading reflects Gaelic, but the Manx-English pronunciation. The skeid was quite a common type of ship in the Irish Sea. The English naval organisation of the 11th century which was modelled on the Norwegian, also stipulates the skerd (Anglo-Saxon scegd) as the type of ship which it was incumbent on the shire to supply.

The Isle of Man was in consequence, in any case in the 12th century, divided into six shibreder or sheadings, each of which was bound to place one ship at the disposal of the king; in Norway also the skibrede as a rule only equipped one ship. Compare the Isle of Gottland, which in size and population approximates Man, and which had to furnish seven fully equipped ships. It goes without saying that the Isle of Man disposed of other naval forces apart from these six war galleys which only constituted the contingent that the modz/es of the isles - to speak with the Chronicle - had to supply to the king. Independent of the /endangr or the enlisted fleet of the king, the various chiefs maintained their own ships on Man as in Norway.

This view is confirmed by Robert of Scotland's Charter of 1313 to Thomas Ranulph, Earl of Moray, by which he hands over to him the Isle of Man on condition that he annually places at his disposal six ships, each of twenty-six oars, which is nothing but the old Manx levy transferred to the King of Scotland.

The sheading courts then, were from the outset courts of levies, which originally only settled questions concerning the contributions due to the king and their distribution among the various manngerder or treens. Gradually they acquired judicial powers in ordinary law-suits just as in the Frostatinglag.

The Norewegian system of levies was of course also carried through in the Norwegian districts of Ireland. From a Passage in the Middle- Irish romance. Caithreim Ceallachain Caishil, it appears that ever Triocha Céad (i. e. a district furnishing an army of 3000 men) had to place 10 ships at the disposal of the king. [345] The Trioeha Céad, in consequence, comprised 10 sheadings or skibreder.

Treen, the name of the smallest administrative unit, signifies a district or domain bounded by natural borders such as glens, mires, rivers and streamlets, but varying in size from less than 200 to more than 600 acres. It formed a fiscal unit and paid a fixed annual tax, distributed amongst the four farms or 'quarters' (Manx-English quarterlands, quartrons) of which it consisted. This treens. division is first met with in the Manorial Roll of 1511 and 1515, which of course was based on older lists of assessment now unfortunately lost. But that it existed at any rate in the year 1408 is shown, I believe, by the Add. Charter where the parish church of Rushen in that year is mentioned as ecclesia Sanctae Trinitatis inter Prata. Here inter Prata is nothing but the Latin rendering of the treen name Rowany (in 1511 spelled Edremony). The church of the Holy Trinity in Rushen was thus in the 15th century distinguished from that in Lezayre by adding the name of the treen, to which it belonged, just as in the 16th by adding the sheading name Rushen ('in Rushen'). Older references to the treen division are not known to me. The term treen itself appears for the first time in the ballad Mannanan Beg mac y Lir, ascribed to the early 16th century, where St. German is said to have built a small chapel in every Treen balley. Then it occurs in the Ballaugh Reg. under October 1600 and in the Proceedings of the Exchequer Court for the year 1602. It is obvious that the treen division is much older than the late sources in which it is first mentioned, The following questions must be definitely answered:

How old is the treen division in the Isle of Man? Is it of Celtic or Norwegian origin? Did it like the sheading division originate in the naval organisation of the Norwegians on Man, or was it due to the church ?

[346]

It is necessary to include the last point, as the ballad mentioned above points to the existence of a tradition according to which St German had ordered all treens to keep a chapel and according to which St. Maughold had arranged the treens in Skeereyn, or parishes. It is no doubt correct that every treen, from olden times possessed a chapel, cp, the map of Manx keeills (fg, 86) prepared in collaboration with Mr. W. Cubbon and Mr. Kermode, which points to the existence of no less than 164 keeills

The questions raised above are perhaps best answered in connection with an analysis of the treen names as they appear at the beginning of the 16th cettury. The result is extremely surprising: no less than 118 of 176 names prove to be Norwegian, viz. (the numbers refer to the coloured map, plate II):

Rushen: 1 Kalfr, 2 Kroknes, 3 Fiskigardr, 4 Glettatun, 5 Sandr, 6 Bratthofdi, 7 Saurber, 8 Skollaber, 9 Gardr, 10 Skaro.

Arbory: 11 Uid Madkauatn, 12 Kollabor, 13 Uestrihaugr, 14 Eysteinserg.

Malew: 15 Skarfakluft, 16 Konungshamnarey, 17 Porkelsber, 18 Gronuber, 19 Uordufiall, 20 Toftamannabor.

Santan: 21 Arosskuern, 22 Midarheidr, 23 Haugr, 24 Krokar- brekka, 25 Gronuik, 26 Sandbrekka.

Marown: 27 Kuernardalr, 28 Sandbrekka, 29 Garor, 30 Trollaber.

Braddan: 31-32 Greipsber I-II 33 Middalr, 34 Ulfsstaðir , 35 Uestrihaugr, 36-38 Ualladalr I-III.

Conchan: 39 prihifingamot, 40 prihifingamotserg, 41 Hofudstradk(r), 42 Uid Uadlahaug, 43 Haugaardalr, 44-45 Uid Gotu I-II, 46 Sleggiuber.

Lonan: 47 Hrygger, 48-49 Rabon I-II, 50 Mooreksstaðir , 51 Ra, 52 Siaundastaðir , 53 Suarthaugr, 54 Grof, 55 Brendudalr, 56 Amundargardr, 57-58 Kollaber I-II, 59 Heggnes, 60 Grettisstaðir .

Maughold: 61-62 Kuernara (Great and Little), 63 Kuernardalr, 64 Skeidarbodsuik, 65 Hléuik, 66 Hramsa, 67 Ifarsbor.

Patrick: 68-69 Dalber I-II, 70 Raber, 71 Gordutin, 72 Fossdalr.

German: 73-74 Gnipa I-II, 75 Brotber, 76 Lambafiall, 77 Sandardalr, 78 Skarfsdalr.

Michael: 79 Kambafiall, 80 Uardaruik, 81 Leira, 82 Nedrilykkia 83 Ormsskali, 84 Porkelserg.

Ballaugh: 85 Skrenudalr, 86 Kuernmodalr, 87 Balyskebag.

[347]

Jurby 88 Siobol, 89 Sortuholl, 90 Dalyot, 91 Sleggiuber, 92 Suluber

Lezayre: 93 Corrack, 94-95 Sulubor I-II, 96 Alptardalr, 97 Bruaruik, 98 Hallkelsstaðir , 99 Greipsstaðir , 100 Hofstaðir .

Bride: 101 Nes, 102 Gronibor, 103-104 Krossbe1 I-II, 105-107 Knarrarstallr I-III.

Andreas: 108 Kreggiuber, 109 Rakabor, 110 Eysteinsber, ii Brandsstaðir , 112-113 Liotolfsstaðir I-II, 114 Miduik, 115-116 Smidiuholl I-II, 117 Asastaðir , 118 Lon.

Of the remainder, many are doubtlessly Norwegian names in Manx disguise. Several names with Balley, which as second element contain a personal, not a family name, may ultimately originate from the Norwegians, as e. g. Balley Dooill, Balley Gill (possibly from Norwegian Dufgalsber, Gillabor). It may further be safely stated that the treens Shenvalley and Kentraugh in Rushen, Balladorghan in German and Ballatersyn and Ballavally in Ballaugh must once have borne Norwegians names as they include Norwegian quarterland names. Finally, considering that the treen names of the parishes Lonan, Jurby and Lezayre in the years 1511 and 1515 one and all are Norwegian, and that of the 10 treen names of Conchan only one is Gaelic, of the 11 in Braddan only two, the conclusion seems inevitatable that all treen names in the Isle of Man were once Norwegian, and that in consequence the Gaelic treen names have superseded older Norwegian names or originate from divisons of older and larger treens in the 14th century or later. For it is highly improbable, not to say inconceivable, that the Norwegians, e.g.in a parish like Lonan, where all landed property was in their hands, should have retained a Celtic admistrative principle under a Norwegian label. A similar displacement of Norwegians names is well known from the 16th century onwards, the following Norwegian names having been lost since the Manorial Roll: Gleton, Kyrksansan, Bymaccan (superseded by Ballanorris), Conessary, Villa Thorkel, Corbrek, Sanrebreck, Gresby, Testraw, Baldall Cryst, Baldall Reynylt, Horaldre, Morest, Swarthowe, Colby, Amogarry, Nerlogh, Knock Sewell, Dalyott, Slekby, Soulby (in Jurby), Corrack, Breryck, Alkest, Cregby.

[348] The last doubt as to the Norwegian origin of the treen system must dissappear when one learn that the neighbouring Celtic communities in Ireland and Scotland know of nothing comparable. It is not correct that treen is nothing but a later term for balley, meaning a district of the same or similar extent as the Irish baile biataigh, the likeness between the Manx treen and the Irish baile being of an entirely external nature. It is true that, according to Keating, 30 bailes make a Triocha Céad, as on an average 30 treens a sheading It is also correct - which does not seem to have been noticed that the Irish baile like the Manx treen is subdivided into quarters (Irish ceathrania, Manx kerroo, from Anc. Gael. cethramthu). But herewith all points of similarity cease. While the Irish baile on an average measures more than 1400 statute acres, the Manx treen does not comprise more than from 200 to 400, the treen corresponding rather to the Irish quarter (ceathrama), and sometimes not exceeding higher than the seisreach, the smallest subdivision of the baile. The circumstance that the Manx treen and the Irish baile are both subdivided into quarters, is of no account. All dimensions are liable to be divided into fourths. Fiordungr signifies in West Norway the fourth part of a county, while on Iceland it signifies the fourth of the entire island. How totally erroneous the identification of treen and baile is, will best appear from the fact that in Manx balley is precisely the typical name of the quarterland. It is true that of 50-60 Manx treen names no less than 35 are Balley names; but none of these names are old, they being one and all names of quarterlands (of which there are about 800) or arising at a later date from the division of larger treens. If one assumes, as is usually done, that the term treen is identical with Irish trian 'a third', the confusion becomes complete. The Manx treen is a third - of what? - and divided into fourths. It is of no use to search for traces of old territorial divisions in the Manx balley names, the great extension of which is explained by the constantly increasing tendency to name the quarterland 'N. N.'s (the owner's, tenant's) farm'. All Manx names commencing with Balley are late, as are the Irish ones. [349]The tract Limites seu Diuisiones Terrarum Monachorum which dates from the 14th cent., only mentions one Balley name, viz, Balesalach, which moreover, like Ballaegniba in Olav Bitling's Charter, differs in type from the common quarterland names that usually comprise a family name as their last element.

The conclusion must necessarily be that the treen division is based not on a Celtic, but a Norwegian territorial system. And as the treen constitutes a subdivision of the sheading which in its turn originates in the Norwegian system of levies, it follows that the treen is simply the Manx equivalent of what on Norwegian soil is named partly manngerd, as in the Gulatinglag, partly lide, as in Borgarsyssel, Ranrike and Elvesyssel, i.e. a levying district comprising several estates or farms and obliged to supply one fully equipped man. Now, as the numbers of treens within the sheading at the beginning of the 16th century varies from 26 to 32 men, each sheading (or skibrede) had in consequence to supply a skerd or war galley with a crew of 26 to 32 men, i.e. the Isle of Man supplied the king with galleys of 13 thwarts, according to the Gulating law the smallest size of a dangskid.

There can be no doubt that the number of treens in the 13th century when the Norwegians still held sway, was somewhat lower than in the 16th, though the names and situation of the treens in the parishes of Conchan, Lonan and Maughold clearly show that the difference cannot have been considerable. In these parishes all the arable land from Douglas Bay to Maughold Head was occupied by 29 consecutive treens which still in the 16th century all bear Norwegian names, so that in this district the number and size of the treens cannot have varied in the slightest degree from the 13th to the 16th century. Similarly the country extending coastwise from Port Grenick and thence inland into Marown, comprises in the 16th century 18 consecutive Norwegian treens, and the north-eastern part of the island, at the same time, 13 consecutive treens distributed amongst the parishes of Jurby, Lezayre and Andreas. But the increasing tendency of the number of treens is indicated by the so called alia-treens, i.e. treens originating from division of older and larger treens. The Manorial Roll mentions in all 9 such treens which strangely enough all bear Norwegian names, viz. Greipsbor, Uid Gotu, Rabor, Kollabor, Dalbor, Gnipa, Suluber, Lidtolfsstaðir , Knarrarstallr. [350]This circumstance finds a probable explanation in the assumption that in all these cases the outparcelled farm preserved the name of the main farm, being only distinguished, as is so common in Norway, by an additional Eastern or Western, Upper or Lower, Great or Little etc. These secondary farms in the Latin assessment lists were marked by a prefixed alia. But of course, one must allow for many cases where the new farm did not take the name of the old one. The Norwegian era having terminated, it can be taken for granted that the new treen division usually assumed the name of one of the quarterlands which was commonly a Balley name.

Our argument is confirmed by King Robert's Charter of 1313, which expressly stipulates that the Manx levy shall comprise 6 ships, i.e. one from each sheading or skeidarping, each of 26 oars, i. e. a galley of 13 thwarts. Consequently in the year 1313, the treens must have numbered at least 146, Glenfaba with its two parishes then being counted as 16 treens. Every ship having its styrimadr or master, and its matsueinn or cook, the number of treens may in the year 1313 have attained 158, i.e. only 18 treens less than two centuries afterwards. If we reckon also for the previous centuries on an average increase of 10 treens per century, the approximate number of treens in the 9th century would be one hundred.

Sheading and treen being then, as we maintain, only other terms for what in Norway were named skibrede and mannegerd (lide), the word treen itself must necessarily be of Norwegian origin. This in fact is borne out by its appearance in the Norwegian treen names Tremode and Tremissary. From a formal point of view the supposition occurs that treen contains the numeral three. It may be traced to an Old Norwegian prthifingr 'consisting of 3 *hifingr'; i. e. an estate large enough to support one family; *hifingr being a Norwegian rendering of the Anglo-Saxon synonym hid, hizid (hiwisc: Old Norwegian hyski), the fundamental unit of the Anglo-Saxon system of tenement. Hid is in Anglo-Saxon attested already in the year 848 and is also at the base of Bede's terra unius familiae, thus dating back in any case to the 7th century. It is usually assumed to comprise 120 acres. The Manx treen, which contains three hides, would consequently normally comprise 360 acres and, in reality, the treen measure on an average 300-400 acres

[351] It follows that the Norwegian district of levy on the isle of Man which joined in supplying one man, comprised as in Norway three farms. But granted that the treen originated from three estates or farms being umited in one hand, the question arises why it was sub-divided not into thirds but into fourths. To explain this apparent discrepancy, it is necessary to go back to the first epoch of the Norwegian conquest, when the land was divided between the new lords. The Gaelic farms or tenements were joined by threes into one large demesne under the formal control of a Norwegian landlord who again was responsible to the supreme Lord of the Isle (Earl, King or whatever his title might have been). But this arrangement necessitated a new division of the land. The lord built a mansion of his own with a sanctuary (horgr), seized the land required for his own use, allowing the old tenants or owners to keep the rest on condition that they tilled his own parcel. From the tenant's point of view, the treen henceforward consisted of four parts, four kerroos, while in the eyes of the landlord it remained a þri-hifingr, three tenements merged into one large estate. The term treen may be said to characterise the estate as an administrative unit dependent on the lord, while keroo characterises the internal relation between the landlord and the tenants. It is significant that while the term treen, the residence of the Norwegian landlord, is Norwegian, the term of the smallest administrative unit, the keroo, is Gaelic, the quarterlands being practically all tenanted by Gaels and consequently nearly all bearing Gaelic names: of 592 quarterlands less than 50 can be shown to have had Norwegian names (they are enumerated above on p. 351 n. 4). It will thus be seen that the treen and quarterland names on Man reflect to the present day a social distinction, conditioned by the Norwegian conquest of the isle in the early 9th century.

Granted that our view of the origin of the treen division is correct, the number of Gaelic hides in the Isle of Man should, on the arrival the Norwegians, amount to about 300. This is confirmed by Bede, whose Ecclesiastical History was written some two generations, or exactly 65 years, before the first Norwegian depredation on the Manx west coast and according to whom King Edwin of Northumberland 'subjected to the English rule the Menevian islands, of which one (Anglesey), which is to the southward and is the largest in extent, contains 960 families according to the English computation while the other (Man) comprises a little more than 300 familes'. Experts all agree there as to the identity of Bede's familia with Anglo Saxon hizid. From these 300 familiae the Norwegian conquerors in the 9th century formed their one hundred Norwegian manorial estates on Man. Here is a continuous and highly interesting line in the social and political history of the Isle from the 7th century down to the present day.

In this aristocratic milieu Norwegian civilisation and culture was maintained through centuries in the Isle of Man, here the magic art of the runes continued to live, here Gaut Bjornsson chiselled his beautiful crosses, here they were told all the legends and myths which he perpetuated on them, and here, in this focus of the Viking Age, was also a fertile soil for Norwegian saga and poetry. It is not easy to state with accuracy when this Norwegian community on Man was converted to Christianity; it may well have happened as early as the beginning of the 10th century. The boat interment of Knock y Doonnee points to a Norwegian stratum older than the ornamented crosses and still rooted in paganism. During the 9th century the community was no doubt still pagan, the chief being lord and priest in one person and each residence (treen) having a sanctuary by itself, which survived in the treen chapel. Obviously the Isle must also have had its hofs, i.e. great public sanctuaries of heathen worship. Aust should probably be traced to Hof-staðir and was probably the residence of the King, which must be sought in the north near Ramsey where so many important and dramatic episodes in the history of the Isle have taken place. Other hofs may be surmised to have been situated in the precincts or in the neighbourhood of the present parish churches and to have exchanged their pagan names for Christian ones in the 10th century.

It has been maintained above p. 318, that the place names of Man do not give any definitive clue to the age of the treen division in the Isle The circumstance that the treen name Aust very likely contains the pagan element hof does not necessarily prove that the treen division goes back to pagan times, Neither is the presence of the term treen in two treen names in Conchan, viz. Tremode and Tremissary, of any account as long as these treens cannot be definitely proved to date back to the first epoch of the conquest. From a linguistical point of view it can only be said that the treen division originated during the Norwegian period, it may e g. have been the work of Gudred Crouan. But in my opinion it is likely to be much older. Though it cannot be definitely proved, it is in any case highly probable that central treens as Tremode and Tremissary with their dominating situation on Douglas Bay, were comprised in the district occupied during the first phase at the conquest, and nothing indicates that their present names are not the original ones. If this argument holds good, the treen system of the Isle of Man belongs to the 9th century and, in consequence, is older than the levying system introduced by Hacon the Good.

The top figure of the Manx administration, the House of Keys, 'the 24 Keys', is first mentioned in the Statute Book in a document from 1417 in the Latin form Claves Manniae et Claves Legis. Already then, only four generations after the end of the Norwegian sway and at the commencement of the Stanleyan era, the original meaning of the term was lost and the name associated with English key. In my Opinion there can be no doubt that this term like the others originated not in the English, but in the Norwegian administration and that in realty the institution arose out of the Norwegian kuiðr.

The kuiðr -the r of which only belongs to to the nominative - was a typically Icelandic institution. It can be traced back as far as the legal history of Iceland goes, and was no doubt brought over, in the 9th century, by the settlers from their native country. The kuiðr was a highly placed Jury, consisting of 9 or 12 members who pronounced themselves on matters of fact and formed a special means of proof in lawsuits. Judgment was delivered by the president, i.e. the goði. To be admitted as a member, it was enough to place the landed property and to possess a fortune large enough to place the owner under the obligation of paying a fixed amount of tax. Similarly the Manx Keys had, according to Blundell, to be 'landed men, such as our freeholders in England, and have 40 or 50 pounds of their own. The farther back one goes, the more the judical functions of the Keys enter into the foreground. It is now generally admitted that the Keys under the first Stanleys were eminently a judicial body and as such they are also regarded in several later sources. Moore emphasizes that to the end of the 16th century, the Keys were only convoked for the purpose of deciding questions of law (History II 765) and that very often they were treated like a common jury by the Lord (ib. 764); as late as 1715 they protested against being treated as such. By Blundell, writing at the middle of the 17th century, they are characterised as 'adjuvants to the deemsters' and are said to be 'impannelled upon juries', according to bishop Wilson 'they determined cases of common law by a majority of law, also cases touching titles of inheritance, where inferior juries had given their verdicts before', and by Waldron they are described as an ordinary jury.

The province of the Keys must of course be determined far more accurately than has been done by me here, and preferably by an expert in legal history. But it may already be taken for granted that the Keys were originally mainly a judicial body, and that only by degrees they have gained the strong position they hold to day.

Phonetically the old Norwegian kuið- not only might, but could not fail to develop into Manx kei, written key, as fidh gave fei and suide (Irish suidhe) sei. As a loanword the term can claim a considerable age in Manx-Gaelic; it must in any case be older than the 13th century, at which time kwið- would necessarily have resulted in Manx kwei (written kwey).

The linguistical elements which enter into the Norwegian place names in the isle of Man are enumerated above 9.266-284. The farm is designated by staðir and bor, once apparently by bolstaðr (Bravost) and once perhaps by setr (Chester), Elements such as s-skali, -stodull, -skalli (and -dalr after gen. -s) are not distinguishable from each other. The distribution of the names ending in staðir and bor forms a peculiar trait in Manx nomenclature. As the map (fig. 88) shows, the former are almost entirely confined to the northern part of the island, viz. to the parishes Andreas, Lezayre, Maughold, Lonan and Conchan. This circumstance finds a natural explanation in the dispositions of Gudred Crouan, who, according to the Chronicle, after the victory at Skagafiall in the year 1056, divided the southern part of the island between his followers. The supposition seems natural that the new owners renamed at least those estates which contained staðir preceded by the name of the original owner. It follows that staðir, in the middle of 11th century had ceased to be a living element in Manx-Norwegian nomenclature. And as names ending in staðir are not with certainty attested in England, where the Norwegian colonisation of the west coast commenced already in the 10th century, it seems as if the vitality of the staðir names had been broken several generations before Gudred's arrival into power, and that consequently all Manx names ending in staðir belong to the first pagan period of the conquest.

In concluding this paper, I beg to bear witness to my gratitude to my friends J. J. Kneen and W. Cubbon of the National Manx Museum, Douglas, whose unrivalled knowledge of all Manx matters has been generously placed at my service.