With exemplary timing this map appears on the internet at a supremely well-judged moment,
with acknowledgements to whomever designed it.
The tendency is for peoples to move westwards, in pursuit of the beneficent sun;
anticipating the injunction of Horace Greeley.

LÖDÖSE

The name of this ancient place occurs here as a consequence of consulting Vägar och Städer i medelstidens Västergötland, by Nat. Beckman, 1923. This work is mentioned, inaccurately, by Elof Hellquist, 1922, as may be seen in the excerpt at left.

Beckman devotes a chapter to the town named Lödöse. The other names he mentions in connection with it are as follows: Lydhos, Liwdha, Liudha, Liudhas, Ledus (on coins), Liuthusium (Saxo Grammaticus), Liódhús (Knytlinga saga), Lödhisa, Liwdho, Lödösehus (a fort), Lydekinus (name of a priest 1330). The town's mediaeval history seems to have come to an end in about 1455. Its prehistory must stretch back well into the Ice Age.

Hellquist, witness the excerpt above, finds additionally: Lödhöse, formed by linking the river name Liudha with the river mouth os. Thoughts stray to Lödde å, as discussed on a previous page. Much further south, down the coast of modern Sweden. King Lud is, of course, also associated with the mouth of a river, which nowadays bears a different name. Some people from Old Scandinavia, 7,000-5,000 BC, left Engelholm and strolled westwards, over dry Doggerland, taking the names with them.


sigillum luthousia

This is what Arild Hauge says:. "Noen har gjettet på at Liothida er samme ord som i Luggude herred, Lødde elv og Løddekøpinge. Andre mener at folket har bodd omkring Kristianstad, eller at Liothida innehadde nesten hele Skåne. Men sansynligvis var de Sørmlenninger." Hauge gets the name, and spelling, Liothida from Jordanes the Goth, who mentions the tribe in his description of the Womb of Nations. I don't see why the Liothida should be from Södermanland. For a translation of Hauge's text, click on his name. He doesn't refer to Lödöse.


Map from Beckman

Above is Beckman's map, showing Sweden, temporarily squeezed by Norway and Denmark, around the mid-15th century. Amusing to note holmarna, beyond which the seafarer was planning to sail -- ofer holma gelagu. I kid you. Nevertheless, the aim of these pages is to assert the truth that Old Scandinavian is the key to Anglo-Saxon. Doggerland didn't stretch from Britain to Scandinavia --- it stretched from Scandinavia to Britain. Anglo-Saxonists have immense difficulty acceptng that simple fact.

To the left is a modern map of the womb of nations, this time focussing on Engelholm, the fons et origo of the Angles. It can be seen that, as a trading centre, Lödöse has today been displaced by Gothenburg, and Löddeköpinge by Malmö, respectively the second and third largest towns in Sweden. The strategic location of the trading centres is nonetheless self-evident.

Just remember, in etymology, consonants have little significance, and vowels none at all.

Now, who said that ? No matter, never mind. Restraint has been thrown to the winds.

Oppenheimer is only one of a cluster of scholars currently occupied in demolishing the Celts. I just wish he wouldn't call the language spoken in Neolithic times Old English. Old English is an absurd term, since it was nothing like what has later come to be called English. The language came out of the womb of nations, an area more or less level with Yorkshire, well south of Scotland and a long way to the East of East Anglia. However, here's an interesting remark Oppenheimer throws out on page 416 of his opus. "The evidence against a Dark Ages root of English goes deeper than (an early "Norse" influence). In terms of vocabulary, English is nowhere near any of the West Germanic languages it has traditionally been associated with. It actually roots closer to Scandinavian than to Beowulf, the earliest "Old English" poem and probably written in the elite court of the Swedish Wuffing dynasty of East Anglia. One study suggests that, on this lexical evidence, English forms a fourth Germanic branch dating to before AD 350 and probably after 3,600 BC." This strikes me as a truly weird statement. What lexical evidence does its originator have in mind, pre-350 AD, and post-3,600 BC ? I'd like to see some literature from, say, 3,500 BC. Moreover, Beowulf is much, much closer to Modern Scandinavian than to Modern English, or Modern German.

Why have I produced by far the most faithful and accurate translation of the Anglo-Saxon poem The Seafarer ? The answer, my friend, is not blowing in the wind, although it is invisible to the back-scratching monoglots that infest Kalamazoo, who seem totally unfamiliar with Scandinavian languages. It is firmly rooted in the self-evident fact that Modern English is securely based on Old Scandinavian, and not on that profoundly comical and retrograde concept, Old English.

 

Scandinavians find it much easier to speak English, than Americo-Anglos find it to speak Scandinavian. It's a question of what Stephen Pinker would call language instinct, which needs to be thoroughly activated well before puberty. Left: site author, aged nine.

That is what happened to me, in two directions: Modern Anglo-Scottish, and Modern Swedish. I am the only person that I know of, speaking English and Scandinavian, to whom this has happened. Something similar happened to Vladiimir Nabokov. For him it was Russian and English. But he didn't speak English spontaneously well.


My text from a previous page, written several years ago, was "Didn't the Angles come from Scandinavia ?"

To this I must add: "Didn't the Modern English language derive from the language spoken by the Anglians, who came from Engelholm, or Ängelholm?" Isn't it therefore utterly ludicrous to suggest that "English forms a fourth Germanic branch dating to before AD 350 and probably after 3,600 BC" ? If there is a fourth Germanic branch it certainly isn't English --- it's Old Scandinavian, transferred across Doggerland into the north-west European landmass (for want of a better name for the embryonic "British" Isles). from Ancient Scandinavia. See map heading this page.


Map from The Origins of Britain, p 204, modified to show Old Scandinavians coming also from Engelholm.

Let us now see what else can be discovered about the name "London", courtesy of Wikipedia, that oracle true. I learn that the etymology of London is uncertain. Richard Coates put forward an explanation in 1998 that it is derived from the pre-Celtic Old European *(p)lowonida, meaning 'river too wide to ford', and suggested that this was a name given to the part of the River Thames which flows through London. Could, therefore, the Lödde- element in Lödöse and Lödde älv or å simply mean "river too wide to ford" ? That would certainly apply to the mouth of Lödde å, and although I haven't been to Lödöse it must also apply there.

I would not call the language pre-Celtic Old European, but, naturally, Old Scandinavian. Hm. [p] lowonida. Now I'll have to read Coates, to find out what [p] means. Without reading him, it appears that the name of the river would be derived from the Indo-European roots *plew- "to flow, swim; boat" and *nejd- "to flow", found in various river names around Europe. Hm: nejd is interesting: see Lund med Omnejd. Hm. Strays a little too far from Lödöse ?

In 1999, the remains of a Bronze Age bridge were found north of Vauxhall Bridge. This bridge either crossed the Thames, or went to a now lost island in the river. Dendrology dated the timbers to 1500 BC. In 2010 the foundations of a large timber structure, dated to 4500 BC, were found on the Thames foreshore, south of Vauxhall Bridge. At least that proves that the Old Scandinavian Neolithics were busy bees not exactly around the Lud area, but not so very distant, after all.

Wikipedia, of course, will have none of this, and pursues a totally different derivation of "Lud", or "Ludd". See also E.O.Gordon's Prehistoric London, 1932, which book, I believe, never once mentions Scandinavia.


David Burns noted: "historians seem to dismiss, or not wish to pursue"
the link between Swedish and Anglo-Saxon.

essays and papers
commentary       annotation
back to this version: commentary four
back to oppenheimer       back to löddesborg
forward to lund med omnejd        on to twenty years on
tower of babel       hollander & gradon
back to language of ancent britain
gothonic or old scandinavian
engelholm
main index
try ship four
mail here

top

© Charles Harrison-Wallace 2015
all rights reserved