'Angles or Angles?'
I was thinking about 'Aberfeldy's' musing on language and thought I would dig a little deeper with the aid of Dwelly.
The usual word for 'fire' in gaelic is 'teine' but she gives a variety of alternatives. I think she also mentions angels or messengers as well as fairies etc.
Anyway on the Dwelly site
http://www.dwelly.info/ they give the following for fire .. 'aingeal .... -il, pl -il, -gle, -glean, -glich, (AC) sm Angel. 2 Messenger. 3 Fire. 4 Light. 5 Sunshine.'
I forget which pope it was who queried whether the slaves were 'Angels or Angles' but perhaps they were both.
At the eastern end of the Michael Line we have the well known Angles and according to Mr Crisp in his document regarding the action of those at the eastern end of the Michael line in lighting bonfires or whatever to pass on the message that the sun had risen, perhaps they were truly Angels as well as Angles They served two purposes, or maybe more.
Welsh and Gaelic always referred to the English as Saeson or Sassenachs but as far as I'm aware never as English. Peter Berresford Ellis got very upset at the uppity Sassenachs calling themselves English and refusing to call themselves by their 'Celtic' description in an article I once read. But then he has an agenda.
Historians are not very sure where the Angles came from and are just as unsure as to the origins of the Saxons.
Perhaps the Angles, like the various orders of the later Druids, were a tribe of specialists keeping watch in the east for what the sun was up to?
People in the Scottish borders in the middle ages referred to their language as 'Inglis' so they had no problem with the word or description.
Just a thought.