Taranis
Elite member
A while back, Maciamo posted this thread about a relationship between the Celic and the Italic peoples. What I'm going to do here is a linguistic consideration about the relationship between the Celtic and the Germanic peoples.
- Celtic name evidence in Germany (or, I should say, Germania Magna as it was perceived by the Romans - that is the lands east of the Rhine and north of the Danube - extending up to the Vistula which marked the border to Sarmatia) extends approximately to the Main river and from there to Silesia. Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD lists plenty of town names in these areas with readily identifiable Celtic etymologies - at a time when these areas when the Germanic peoples already lived as far south as the Danube - thereby being the testimony of a strong underlying Celtic presence in southern Germania. A few of these towns actually still exist today: Tarodunon (latinized as "Tarodunum") became Zarten in the Black Forest, Eburodunon (latinized as "Eburodunum") is Brnno/Brünn in the Czech Republic.
However, in the northern areas of Germania (with exception of the Rhine delta), Celtic place names are absent, even if archaeologically Hallstatt/Le-Tene extended into these areas. To find a (possible) answer for this discrepancy, I would like to explore some possibilities here:
- As I already brought up in a different thread a few weeks back, in some of it's vocabulary, Germanic is decisively closer to Balto-Slavic than to Italo-Celtic. For instance it's silver and gold (I've been taking various branches of the various families - as well as outgroups - in order to get a representative image here):
English - Silver - Gold
German - Silber - Gold
Danish - Sølv - Guld
Gothic - Silubr - Gulth
Lithuanian - Sidabras - (Auksas)
Latvian - Sudabra - Zelta
Bulgarian - Srebro - Zlato
Czech - Stribrna - Zlato
Russian - Serebra - Zolota
Thracian - (unattested) - Saldas
Latin - Argentum - Aurum
Irish - Airgead - Or
Welsh - Arian - Aur
Gaulish - Argenton - (*Auron - reconstructed)
Celtiberian - Arkanta - (unattested)
Albanian - Argjend - Ar
(note that I added Albanian and Thracian here just for the sake of completeness - neither are obviously Italo-Celtic nor Balto-Slavic, but words in these languages obviously have cognates, respectively).
(also note that Balto-Slavic changes proto-Indo-European initial *g´h to *z, whereas Germanic changes it to *g).
We might speculate that these Germanic/Balto-Slavic commonalities stem from the Germanic legacy of the Battle Axe Culture, but since that would get off-topic I will leave it at that.
- On the flip side, the Germanic languages have a considerable number of borrowings from the Celtic languages. In particular, they must have occured before in particular the shift of Initial K to H occured in Common Germanic. To pick a few signature examples:
- The Celtic tribal name "Volcae" yields "Walha" ('foreigner' - which we find today in place names like "Wales", "Wallonia" and "Wallachia").
- The word for "steed":
Gaulish - Marcos
Welsh - March
Breton - Marc'h
German - Mähre
English - Mare
Swedish - Märr
- The word for "iron":
English - Iron
German - Eisen
Swedish - Järn
Gothic - (E)isarn
Gaulish - Isarnos
Welsh - Haern
Breton - Houarn
Irish - Iarann
(note the striking similarity between the Gothic and Gaulish words for "Iron")
Since we know from archaeology the rough time of when iron-working from the Celtic Hallstatt Culture reached northern Germany, we can date the timing of this Celtic-Germanic contact to roughly 600-500 BC. We also can infer that the K to H shift must have occured obviously later. But the question is, however, how much later?
Rome's first contact with Germanic peoples is the invasion of the Cimbri and Teutones in the late 2nd century BC. However, to us these have seemingly overtly Celtic names, in particular their leaders: "Boiorix" ("Cattle King") would easily make sense as a Gaulish or Galatian name. However, the tribal names, which are exclusively given as "Cimbri et Teutonibus" or "Cimbri Teutonique". According to Germanic sound laws, Initial *k should yield *h via the intermediate stage of *x. Likewise, initial *t should yield *θ. Therefore, we should expect the spellings "Chimbri" and "Theutones". Since we are not seeing them, that these changes must have occured even later. This means, by the 2nd century BC, we are technically not talking about a "Proto-Germanic" language but a "Pre-Germanic" one. Specifically, "Pre-Germanic" would be defined as the language that was ancestral to "Proto-Germanic" (more appropriate would be "Common Germanic", that is, the ancestor language of all later Germanic languages).
As stated above with the personal names, these names strike us as surprisingly Celtic. Now, if we account for the absence of sound changes, it's possible to reconstruct this "Pre-Germanic" stage, as examplified by the word for "tribe" or "people":
Singular
Case - Gaulish - Pre-Germanic - Gothic
Nominative - Touta - Teuta - Θiuda
Genitive - Toutas - Teutas - Θiudos
Dative - Toutai - Teutai - Θiudai
Accusative - Toutan - Teutan - Θiuda
Plural
Case - Gaulish - Pre-Germanic - Gothic
Nominative - Toutas - Teutas - Θiudos
Genitive - Toutanom - Teuton - Θiudo
Dative - Toutabo - Teutamis - Θiudom
Accusative - Toutas - Teutas - Θiudos
Note that with exception of genitive and dative plural, these forms are near-identical. There's a few uncertainties to be considered however:
Gothic had a vestigial vocative case, and Gaulish had, in addition to a vocative, also an instrumental and a locative case. It stands to reason that Pre-Germanic had (at least) a vocative case, too, and perhaps more cases, but this is speculation. In any case, for the other cases, there is a striking similarity, and as a result, in my opinion, it is hence likely that the Pre-Germanic language and the Celtic languages (ie, Gaulish - and related dialects/languages spoken by the Hallstatt/La-Tene peoples) probably had a considerably degree of mutual intelligibility. This, in a way, mirrors the similarities of Gaulish and Latin, and could explain the archaeological/linguistic discrepancies. It would also account for Caesar's account of the so-called "Germanic" Belgae (which - for the greater part, all bear overtly Celtic - that is, essentially Gaulish - tribal and personal names): if these crossed the Rhine in earlier times, it would have been relatively easy for them to adopt the Gaulish language.
This brings us to the question of when the sound shifts (note that this actually concerns an entire inventory of sound laws, which was first formulated by Jakob Grimm in the early 19th century as "Grimm's Law") actually take place? The answer must be: even later.
Indeed, Tacitus (late 1st century AD) gives us, amongst others, the following tribal names:
- Chatti
- Chamavi
- Cherusci
This means, by this time, the shift already occured. Which means that we can roughly narrow it down to between the 1st century BC and the 1st century AD. The major event that takes place in this time span is the Roman conquest of Gaul, and the expansion of the Roman sphere to the Rhine (and for a brief period, beyond), as well as the effective end of the continental Celtic peoples as a separate culture. One can speculate now that the disruption of trade routes, and the disconnection of trade routes between Gallia and Germania also triggered a linguistic disjunction between the Celtic and Germanic peoples, and that these drastic changes, which brought about the language shifts that brought about the Common Germanic language in the wake of this.
While this may sound a tad unlikely at first glance, one must consider that for instance Irish language made similarly drastic changes in a very short time frame between roughly 7th to 8th century AD), as it attested by the massive differences between Primitive Irish (the language used in the Ogham inscriptions - which in many aspects is much closer to Gaulish than to modern Irish) and the later Old Irish of the early medieval times.
- Celtic name evidence in Germany (or, I should say, Germania Magna as it was perceived by the Romans - that is the lands east of the Rhine and north of the Danube - extending up to the Vistula which marked the border to Sarmatia) extends approximately to the Main river and from there to Silesia. Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD lists plenty of town names in these areas with readily identifiable Celtic etymologies - at a time when these areas when the Germanic peoples already lived as far south as the Danube - thereby being the testimony of a strong underlying Celtic presence in southern Germania. A few of these towns actually still exist today: Tarodunon (latinized as "Tarodunum") became Zarten in the Black Forest, Eburodunon (latinized as "Eburodunum") is Brnno/Brünn in the Czech Republic.
However, in the northern areas of Germania (with exception of the Rhine delta), Celtic place names are absent, even if archaeologically Hallstatt/Le-Tene extended into these areas. To find a (possible) answer for this discrepancy, I would like to explore some possibilities here:
- As I already brought up in a different thread a few weeks back, in some of it's vocabulary, Germanic is decisively closer to Balto-Slavic than to Italo-Celtic. For instance it's silver and gold (I've been taking various branches of the various families - as well as outgroups - in order to get a representative image here):
English - Silver - Gold
German - Silber - Gold
Danish - Sølv - Guld
Gothic - Silubr - Gulth
Lithuanian - Sidabras - (Auksas)
Latvian - Sudabra - Zelta
Bulgarian - Srebro - Zlato
Czech - Stribrna - Zlato
Russian - Serebra - Zolota
Thracian - (unattested) - Saldas
Latin - Argentum - Aurum
Irish - Airgead - Or
Welsh - Arian - Aur
Gaulish - Argenton - (*Auron - reconstructed)
Celtiberian - Arkanta - (unattested)
Albanian - Argjend - Ar
(note that I added Albanian and Thracian here just for the sake of completeness - neither are obviously Italo-Celtic nor Balto-Slavic, but words in these languages obviously have cognates, respectively).
(also note that Balto-Slavic changes proto-Indo-European initial *g´h to *z, whereas Germanic changes it to *g).
We might speculate that these Germanic/Balto-Slavic commonalities stem from the Germanic legacy of the Battle Axe Culture, but since that would get off-topic I will leave it at that.
- On the flip side, the Germanic languages have a considerable number of borrowings from the Celtic languages. In particular, they must have occured before in particular the shift of Initial K to H occured in Common Germanic. To pick a few signature examples:
- The Celtic tribal name "Volcae" yields "Walha" ('foreigner' - which we find today in place names like "Wales", "Wallonia" and "Wallachia").
- The word for "steed":
Gaulish - Marcos
Welsh - March
Breton - Marc'h
German - Mähre
English - Mare
Swedish - Märr
- The word for "iron":
English - Iron
German - Eisen
Swedish - Järn
Gothic - (E)isarn
Gaulish - Isarnos
Welsh - Haern
Breton - Houarn
Irish - Iarann
(note the striking similarity between the Gothic and Gaulish words for "Iron")
Since we know from archaeology the rough time of when iron-working from the Celtic Hallstatt Culture reached northern Germany, we can date the timing of this Celtic-Germanic contact to roughly 600-500 BC. We also can infer that the K to H shift must have occured obviously later. But the question is, however, how much later?
Rome's first contact with Germanic peoples is the invasion of the Cimbri and Teutones in the late 2nd century BC. However, to us these have seemingly overtly Celtic names, in particular their leaders: "Boiorix" ("Cattle King") would easily make sense as a Gaulish or Galatian name. However, the tribal names, which are exclusively given as "Cimbri et Teutonibus" or "Cimbri Teutonique". According to Germanic sound laws, Initial *k should yield *h via the intermediate stage of *x. Likewise, initial *t should yield *θ. Therefore, we should expect the spellings "Chimbri" and "Theutones". Since we are not seeing them, that these changes must have occured even later. This means, by the 2nd century BC, we are technically not talking about a "Proto-Germanic" language but a "Pre-Germanic" one. Specifically, "Pre-Germanic" would be defined as the language that was ancestral to "Proto-Germanic" (more appropriate would be "Common Germanic", that is, the ancestor language of all later Germanic languages).
As stated above with the personal names, these names strike us as surprisingly Celtic. Now, if we account for the absence of sound changes, it's possible to reconstruct this "Pre-Germanic" stage, as examplified by the word for "tribe" or "people":
Singular
Case - Gaulish - Pre-Germanic - Gothic
Nominative - Touta - Teuta - Θiuda
Genitive - Toutas - Teutas - Θiudos
Dative - Toutai - Teutai - Θiudai
Accusative - Toutan - Teutan - Θiuda
Plural
Case - Gaulish - Pre-Germanic - Gothic
Nominative - Toutas - Teutas - Θiudos
Genitive - Toutanom - Teuton - Θiudo
Dative - Toutabo - Teutamis - Θiudom
Accusative - Toutas - Teutas - Θiudos
Note that with exception of genitive and dative plural, these forms are near-identical. There's a few uncertainties to be considered however:
Gothic had a vestigial vocative case, and Gaulish had, in addition to a vocative, also an instrumental and a locative case. It stands to reason that Pre-Germanic had (at least) a vocative case, too, and perhaps more cases, but this is speculation. In any case, for the other cases, there is a striking similarity, and as a result, in my opinion, it is hence likely that the Pre-Germanic language and the Celtic languages (ie, Gaulish - and related dialects/languages spoken by the Hallstatt/La-Tene peoples) probably had a considerably degree of mutual intelligibility. This, in a way, mirrors the similarities of Gaulish and Latin, and could explain the archaeological/linguistic discrepancies. It would also account for Caesar's account of the so-called "Germanic" Belgae (which - for the greater part, all bear overtly Celtic - that is, essentially Gaulish - tribal and personal names): if these crossed the Rhine in earlier times, it would have been relatively easy for them to adopt the Gaulish language.
This brings us to the question of when the sound shifts (note that this actually concerns an entire inventory of sound laws, which was first formulated by Jakob Grimm in the early 19th century as "Grimm's Law") actually take place? The answer must be: even later.
Indeed, Tacitus (late 1st century AD) gives us, amongst others, the following tribal names:
- Chatti
- Chamavi
- Cherusci
This means, by this time, the shift already occured. Which means that we can roughly narrow it down to between the 1st century BC and the 1st century AD. The major event that takes place in this time span is the Roman conquest of Gaul, and the expansion of the Roman sphere to the Rhine (and for a brief period, beyond), as well as the effective end of the continental Celtic peoples as a separate culture. One can speculate now that the disruption of trade routes, and the disconnection of trade routes between Gallia and Germania also triggered a linguistic disjunction between the Celtic and Germanic peoples, and that these drastic changes, which brought about the language shifts that brought about the Common Germanic language in the wake of this.
While this may sound a tad unlikely at first glance, one must consider that for instance Irish language made similarly drastic changes in a very short time frame between roughly 7th to 8th century AD), as it attested by the massive differences between Primitive Irish (the language used in the Ogham inscriptions - which in many aspects is much closer to Gaulish than to modern Irish) and the later Old Irish of the early medieval times.
Last edited: