In the former Chapter we told you that the Language of the Laplanders was such as did very much differ from that of their neighbours, our next business shall be, as well as we can, to discover what it is. Now whatsoever is received, used, commonly, and publikly spoken in any Country, is certainly a Language, but of this of the Laplanders, Zieglerus in general observes only that it was peculiar to themselves, and not understood by their neighbours. Damianus speaks more plain, and accuses them of barbarism and roughness of speech. Our modern Writers say their speech is a confused miscellany of the Language of their neighbours, and that it was called Lingua Lapponica, quasi corrasa, eet Lappatspraock, and that it is made up of many other Tongues, as of that of Finlanders and Swedes, as for instance; the Laplanders say stour, the Swedes, stoor; the one Salug, the other saligh. And that there are also some Latine words, as Porcus, Oriens, &c. But tho these Writers suppose that they have borrowed many words from their neighbours, yet they confess that much of their Language is their own, and neither used, or known by any other Naitons, but that as well the original of the words, as propriety of the Phrases, is peculiar to themselves. Others suppose it took its rise and was derived from Finland: and indeed it is confessed on all hands that there are many words in both Languages that seem no great strangers. So that there is little doubt but there are many words in both Languages which very much agree, which any one that is a little skilled in them must needs confess: and to make this more clear, I shall here insert some words of both Languages not much unlike.

These words I suppose may serve to declare the affinity that we said was between the Language of the Laplanders and Finlanders: and because the words that I have set down, do not signify any forreign commodities, but things natural, and such as are in use among all People alike, I am given to beleive that the Laplanders had not any peculiar Language, which did wholy differ from that of Finland, but that it took its original thence. For if, as some would have it, they had any Language, they might properly call their own, why did they not out of it, upon things of so common occurrence and ordinary use, rather impose their own words, then such as no man could doubt were taken from the Finlanders. No People certainly were ever guilty of so much folly as to impose forreign names upon so common things, if they had any Language of their own to express them in: as might be at large demonstrated from the Languages of the Germans, ancient Gaules, Spaniards, Italians, Greeks, &c. neither have we any reason to count it a hard inference if we should from hence gather, that the Laplanders themselves sprung from the Finlanders. For otherwise why should they have used any other Language then what they received from their fore-Fathers. And this seems to be the argument Wexonius uses to prove the Language of the Laplanders to have taken its rise from the Finlanders, when from the original of the People he infers the same of the Speech; for in this he intimates that to spring from any Country, and to use the same Language, are very convertible propositions. All which indeed seems to be no more then the truth. But now some one may object that the opinion of those men that affirm the Language of this Country to be primarily its own, could not be destitute of all reason, and that they must necessarily have had some probabilities whereon they grounded their opinion; and truly it cannot be denied but that there are many words which do not any waies agree with the Language of the Finlanders, as may appear from what follows,

And the Difference between these and the like words without doubt was that which gave occasion to some to think that anciently the Laplanders had a Speech peculiar to themselves, and quite different from that of Finland, of which ancient Language these relicts did remain, and for this they give this reason; that the Laplanders were forced to frame to themselves a new Language, for fear, least being understood by their neighbours the Finlanders, they should fall into their snares. So Olaus Petri saies that often times they found spies about their tents in the night, hearkning after their Councels, now for this reason, according to the Policy of their Forefathers, flying into the allotment of Rengo, in the Province of Nolnense, they there agreed upon, and framed to themselves a Speech quite different from that of Finland. So that there are very few words found to agree in both Languages. Now by the Spies he there talks of, he understands the Finlanders, who being driven out of their Country by Matthias Kurkius and the Tavastians, roved up and down, seeking where they might most conveniently settle, as may appear from what goes before in that place. Others think that these are the relicts of that Language which they first brought into Lapland, which they suppose to be no other but that of the Tartars. But how false this is, may appear from the vast difference between those Tongues, in which there is not one word that signifies the same thing in both Languages. And that you may not think I say this without any reason, I will give you a few instances.

And indeed there is as great incongruity in all the rest of the words as in these, so that this opinion is not only foolish, but ridiculous. And neither is the other, which pretends they framed a Language to themselves, grounded upon any greater truth then this former. For first why should they only have changed some words and not all? And then these words which do agree in both Languages are not the names of things less known, or not so ordinarily used, as other things, but of such as were as common as life, light, or breathing: wherefore I am clearly of the other opinion, and do beleive that these differing words are as much Finnonick as any of the rest. But they who from the difference of these words infer the independency of the Speeches, do not at all consider that, then which there is nothing more common and incident to Languages, viz. to be changed and altered according to the times, and so much the more by how much the People have greater commerce with other Nations. And this is plain from the example of the Islanders and Norwegians; for that the Islanders sprung from the Norwegians is by the Histories of both Nations made so clear that no man can doubt of it. But now the Islanders use many words which those of Norway are quite ignorant of; and yet I hope no man will thence say that the Islanders have a Language wholly independent and different from that of Norway: for the one living by themselves, and having little or no dealings with other People, do to this day keep entire the same Language which they first brought, and which they received down from their ancestors: but it was quite otherwise with the Norwegians, who together with their Empire lost also their ancient Language. The same seems to be the case of the Finlanders, who being brought under the Jurisdiction of others, and holding more frequent commerce with their neighbours, lost much of their ancient manner of speaking, which the Laplanders on the contrary living a more solitary life, it is probable, do still keep uncorrupt. Wherefore it is no wonder if in their language we meet with many words, which compared with those of the modern Finlanders, seem to have nothing of likeness; tho happily one that is well skilled in the dialect and propriety of the Finnonick Language, will find enough to make him conjecture that there are many words which, as they are now used seem quite different, yet are very agreeable in the original. And this is likewise the common fate of other languages, as for example of the German, in which a little too rashly the learned Olaus Wormius in his literatura Runica, as he calls it, Cap. 27, hath taken notice of so great a difference. For in these daies not only nach, but effter is used, as may appear affterred, afterdam &c. And so likewise the Germans use not only Gesicht, but also Antlitz; not only Verstand, but Vernunfft; and as well essen, anfangen, Schuss, Alter, Gefængnus, auffthun, Bett, Dopff, &c. as, As, beginnen, keimen, uralt, haffte, entdecken, Lægerstad, locken, in all which they agree with the ancient Germans. In my opinion therefore the difference of a few words, is not authority enough to prove that the Laplanders in ancient times had a peculiar language. But it shews rather that they are not all of the same antiquity, but that some came from Finland longer ago, who brought those obsolete words with them, and some of later daies, who now use the new; and this I think to be the best account of the Language of the Laplanders. Of which this also is observable, that it doth not in all places alike agree with it self, but hath its several different Dialects, and is so various, that those that live in one part of the Country, can scarce understand those of the other. There are especially three Dialects, the first used by the Umenses and Pithenses in the West, the 2^d by the Luhlenses in the North, the last by the Tornenses and Kimenses in the East. And the variety of these Dialects was doubtless caused by the difference of times in which they came into Lapland; some coming sooner, some later, some settling in one part, some in another. Now of all these Dialect, there is none more rough or unplesant then that of the Luhlenses, who as well in their life and manners, as in their way of speaking, are far the most rustick and clownish of all the Laplanders. But that you may see what a disparity there is between these Dialects, I will set down a few example: the Pithenses say Jubmel, the Tornenses, Immel, the Pithenses say Jocki, Warra, Olbmo, nisw, skaigki, kiist, nissu, pardei, seibig, muriet, reppi; for which the Tornenses put, virte, taodar, almai, kab, kawtza, raopka, kaap, alik, owre, kops, riemnes. Now as the Language of the Laplanders is varied according to the diversity of the Territories and Marches, just as it is in other Nations, particularly in Germany, where the Swavelanders, Saxons, and Belgians, speak all different tongues, so hath it this also common with other Countries, viz. that the nigher the Territory tends to any other People, so much the more do the Inhabitants participate of their Language; and so the Tornenses and Kimenses, who border upon the Finlanders, do at this day use very much of their speech: nay they go yet farther, and make it their business to learn the Language of their Neighbours, so the Tornenses and Kimenses get the Finnonik, the Luhlenses, Pithenses, and especially the Umenses the Swedish Language, and that man that is skilled in these Tongues hath not little conceit of himself, and is indeed much esteemed among his neighbours. It is therefore no wonder if there be many Swedish words, found among the Laplanders: for it could not otherwise happen but that this People, who were supplied by others in many things which they had not themselves, should with Forreign commodities receive also and use Forreign names; and of this I could give many instances, but it is not the business in hand. Now of this kind we ought to esteem these words following; in Lapland, Salug signifies blessed, which the Swedes call Saligh: Niip a knife, the Swedes call it kniif; Fiælo, a rafter with the Swedes tilio, and many more of the like nature. Of all which the R. and learned Johan. Tornæus gives this account, that the use of Forreign words was introduced partly by necessity, and partly by conversing with Strangers; and upon this account it is that they that converse with the Swedes do oftentimes use Swedish words. The like may be said of those that deal with the Finlanders, and with the Germans in Norway, and this is the reason why one and the same thing is often called by divers appellations, as for example, the Swedes call a Horse Hæst, the Finlanders, Hapoitz, the Germans, Ross, which also is the name the Laplanders give the beast, for they having no Horses of their own were forced to borrow a name from the Country from whence they had them. Now what Tornæus observes concerning the word Ross, I beleive may be applyed also to the word Porcus, which I suppose they had rather from the Germans then Latines, for the Germans call a Barrow-Hog, Bork, now their Swine they had all out of Norway, and it is very probable they did thence borrow that appellation also. And not to trouble our selves any farther, this will hold true in all the rest of that kind. Wherefore setting apart other considerations, and looking upon this Language, not as it contains in it forreign words, but only such as they alwaies used within themselves, and were ever received among them, it remains that we conclude it to be not a miscellany or collection of Latin, German, Swedish scraps, and the like, neither as a peculiar speech, different from them altogether, but such as originally took its rise from the Finlanders, tho time hath brought it to pass that perhaps few of them understand it.

This Tongue, as well as others, hath its Declensions, Comparisons, Conjugations, Moods, Tenses, &c. and perhaps it may not be amiss if I should here insert some examples: I will therefore first decline you a Laplandish Noun, and afterwards give you the Finnonick Declension of the same, that by comparing both you may better understand the parity and disparity of these Languages. This Noun shall be Immel, for so the Tornenses call it, tho other say Jubmel, the Finlanders terms it Jumala, and it signifies God.

I will add one more Noun, that the case may be more clear, and that shall be Olmai, which signifies a man.

And after this manner it is in all the rest.

Adjectives have their terminations in comparison, as

Stoure, great, stourapo, greater, stouramus, greatest.
Enach, much, enapo, more, enamus, most.
Utze, little, utzapo, less, utzamus, least.

The comparative for the most part ends in po, the Superlative in mus. They have also their Articles, but seldom use them before Nouns, as it also in other Tongues.

In the Masc. and the Fem. Gender the Article hath the same termination, but differs in the Neuter; for tott signifies hic & hæc, towt, hoc.

Their Pronouns are mun, I, tun, thou, sun, he, mii, we, sii, you, tack, they. The Verbs also are conjugated in their Tenses, and Persons, as in the Indicative mood thus, Sing. Mun pworastan I love, tum pworastack thou lovest, sun pworasta. Plur. Mii pworastop we love, sii pworost you love, tack pwrost. And after this manner do they decline their other Verbs.

These will serve to give us some light into the nature of this Language, at least as much as is to our purpose, who did not undertake to write a Grammar, but only give some small description.

Now the Laplanders have a peculiar way of pronouncing words, according to which it is impossible to express them in letters, for they do mouth out all their words, so that the vowels might be heard loud enough, but the other letters come very softly out; they do also quite cut off and drown the last syllables, especially of Nouns. Letters they neither have, nor ever had any, and in this they agree with their ancestors the Finlander: the Calendar which they use, is no other but the Swedish in Runick letters. And this also, before they came to have commerce with the Swedes, and had learned of them the observation of Holy-daies, was never in use among them. Johannes Buræus tells us that he heard from persons of good credit, of certain grave-stones and monuments, which had sometimes bin found in Lapland (more whereof perhaps might be found) on which were engraved Runick Characters. But suppose we this true, it is not, I hope, therefore necessary that we should conclude that these were formerly the letters of the Laplanders, to which indeed, as well themselves as their forefathers the Finlanders are equally Strangers. But we have more reason to think that the Swedes coming thither in ancient times, either by force of arms, or otherwise, inhabited there abouts, and left those stones. To this day both the Laplander and Finlander use the Latine letters; in the same Character the Swedes and Germans make them, altho the number of them that can read among them is but very small, and of them that can write, a great deal less, and are only such as they call great Scholars.

Now this Speech being only used among the Laplanders, and there being none that desire to learn it but themselves, in all negotiations with others, they are forced to use the help of Interpreters, of whom upon this account there are great numbers, as I have formerly said: tho these Interpreters speak all Languages, but the Finnonick, very barbarously, which is also the fault of all Laplanders, who are very hardly brought to learn or pronounce any other Tongue, and much given to confound one with another. So that they which traffic in Norway, and border upon that Country, do in their speaking mingle together the Speech of the Norwegians and Swedes, as for instance, jeghkiæmi, for jag kom, jag gaong, for jag goar. So for hustro, they say koona, for min myssa, mitt hofwud, &c. But of the Language of the Laplanders let this suffice.