In certain instances, place-names containing Dun- or similar in
Northern England and Southern
Scotland, may be derived from a
Brittonic cognate of the Welsh form din.[1] In this region, substitution of the Brittonic form by the Gaelic equivalent may have been widespread in toponyms.[1]
The Dacian
dava (hill fort) is probably etymologically cognate.[citation needed]
Duns seem to have arrived with the
Celts in about the 7th century BC. Early duns had near vertical ramparts made of stone and timber. There were two walls, an inner wall and the outside one.
Vitrified forts are the remains of duns that have been set on fire and where stones have been partly melted. Use of duns continued in some parts into the
Middle Ages.
Duns are similar to
brochs, but are smaller and probably would not have been capable of supporting a very tall structure. Good examples of this kind of dun can be found in the
Outer Hebrides of
Scotland, on artificial islands in small lakes.
Toponymy
The word dun is, along with like-sounding cognate forms, an element frequently found in Celtic toponymy; especially that of Ireland and Scotland. It can include fortifications of all sizes and kinds:
Many settlement and geographical names in Scotland are named with Gaelic dun ("fort"), as well as cognates in Brittonic languages such as
Cumbric and
Pictish.[1]
Some place-names in England are derived from Brittonic cognates of Welsh din (c.f. Cornish dyn, Cumbric *din), and fewer perhaps from the Gaelic form.[1]
The
Proto-Celtic form is *Dūno-,[7] yielding Greek δοῦνον. It is ultimately cognate to English town.[8] The Gaulish term survives in many toponyms in France and Switzerland:
^
abcdefSimon, Taylor; Markus, Gilbert (2006). The Place-names of Fife (Illustrated ed.). Shaun Tyas.
ISBN9781900289771.
^
abMills, A.D. (2011) [first published 1991]. A Dictionary of British Place Names (First edition revised 2011 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 153.
ISBN9780199609086.
^
abCoates, Richard (1998). "A new explanation of the name of London". Transactions of the Philological Society. 96 (2): 203–229.
doi:
10.1111/1467-968X.00027.