Page:The Journal of English and Germanic Philology Volume 18.djvu/230

 224 Flom uuelle, 9 etc., all retaining the uncontracted form. It is likely, therefore, that the settler Keswick received its name from was known as Kcell or Kelt and not Ketill. As second part of place- names the contract form of the name Ketill was of course very common in WSc. and was apparently about as frequent in England as the full form (porketil, purcel; Ulfcetil, Ulfcil, Ulchil, etc.). In personal names the short form Kel-, Keel-, appears also as first component part in both W. and E. Scan- dinavian and in the corresponding names often on English soil, as Chelloc and Chetelog in East Anglia. However, a reduction of either the type Ulfkelswik or Kelgrimswik as likely sources of the name Keswick is doubtful, and indeed about impossible as far as the first is concerned on account of the strong stress on the first component part. The typical development in names of this type is illustrated by, e.g., OE. Aldwinestun, which through Aldinston, date 1254, and aldeston, 1296, at last becomes Alston, and the name Kirk Levyngton, 1284, which is now Kirklinton. In cases of the second type Kelgrimswik the second element is almost always reduced, but only in a very few cases does it entirely disappear; thus e.g. in Milton, the first part of which is either OE. mylen or ON. mylna (-ton<QE. tun, ON. tun). But here we have an easily assimilated com- bination. A reduced Kelgrimswik would have resulted in some- thing like Kelgerswick or Kellimswick. The name Keswick, therefore, seems to go back to Kell as its first element. I do not believe that the form Kell furnishes any sure guide in this case as to the Danish or Norse nationality of the man so named. In the Saga-Book of the Viking Club, IV, p. 298, Jon Stefansson assumes all English personal names in -cetel, -ketel, to be from ON. -ketill, while those c^l -cil or -kel are Danish. In this he followed the view of Konrad Gislason. Bjorkman, however, rejected this in his Nordischen Personennamen in England, p. 192, note 1, but failed to offer any proof. The evidences to support his view he furnished later. 10 In the one point that both agree about there can be no uncertainty, name- ly, that in names occurring in records older than the year 1000 the short form (-cil, etc.) is Danish. But I also believe that 9 Forms taken from Bjorkman's Zur englischen Namenkunde, p. 54. 10 Zur englischen Namenkunde, I.e.