12-19-2007, 02:01 PM
Quote:He made that assertion some years ago that the idea of 'celt' was invented in the 17th century, and never used in the ancient worldGallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quorum unum incolunt Belgae, alii Aquitanii, terti ei qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli apellantur....
(All [of] Gaul is divided into three parts, in one of which live the Belgians, another the Aquitanians, the third called by their own language "Celts", [but] by ours are called "Gauls"....) De Bello Gallico, Julius Caesar, who had first hand contact with these people. (Written from school memorization, could be spelling errors in the Latin.)
Caesar believed that the Gauls called themselves "Celts". I guess I'd pick his testimony over Simon James, but that's just me.
As far as languages are concerned, my limited knowledge agrees with some of the "not the same language, but perhaps the same linguistic family" statements above. Portugese (Lusitanian + Latin) is not the same as Spanish (Celtiberian + Latin and Iberian + Latin, hence Castillian and Aragonian), French (Gaulic + Latin) are all examples of "Celtic root languages", their differences preserved by the common Latin connection. A Lusitanian would not have been able to converse directly with a Northern Gaul, unless the one knew the other's language, then, or spoke some common language. Am I thinking correctly?
M. Demetrius Abicio
(David Wills)
Saepe veritas est dura.
(David Wills)
Saepe veritas est dura.
