The Celts of Iberia

Why in the Ardila River area and Lusitanian Celts lived separately?

Bear in mind that the retaining of initial P isn't the only issue. Untermann pointed out that as long as the Celtic language family is defined by the loss of initial P, Lusitanian isn't Celtic. Granted, we could define Proto-Celtic as retaining Initial P (which would still require all Celtic languages other than Lusitanian to have lost the Initial P!), but there's a few differences otherwise that we cannot ignore:

Lusitanian also renders initial D- into R- (something the Celtic languages don't do), and renders *kw -> *kk, wheras the Celtic languages either retain *kw (the Q-Celtic languages), or render *kw -> P (P-Celtic languages). In so far, at least in my opinion, the most fitting asumption is that Lusitanian is indeed "Para-Celtic", that is, it's a language closely related with Common Celtic, but also separate from it.

Another example is the Lusitanian word for 'bull', "Taurom", which is closer to Latin "Taurus" and Greek "Tauros". In contrast, the Celtic languages all have a mutation -ur- to -ru-:

- Gaulish "Tarvos"
- Irish "Tarbh"
- Welsh "Tarw"
- Breton "Tarv"
- Galatian "Tarus"

sparkey said:

Re Wilhelm: Thanks for the additional confirmation/correction. Sounds like consensus to me.

Re Brady: Well... at least this is sounding like serious debate. Unless others get to your post before I finish typing this one, let me challenge this in particular:



Germans don't say that they're Celts because they're modern Germans, and have a lot of Germanic blood from times like the Migration Period, but to deny that Western Germanic speakers have a lot of blood that originally passed through Celtic speakers would be silly. Take the Swiss... they have tons of Celtic-origin Y-DNA and relatively little (~10%) of haplogroup I, which is more typical of Germanic peoples (yours truly being among the Swiss-origin haplogroup I people)... altogether indicating that they are largely Germanicized Celts.

(Is "Germanicized" the right word?)

Click to expand...

Yes "Germanicized" is correct.

spongetaro said:

I totally agree with you. And the fact that highest frequencies of R1b in the Iberian peninsula occur in the least Indo European areas (Iberia, Basque country) just show how unrelated haplogroup and Languages can be.
To me, the real Celtic culture area ends in eastern France

Click to expand...

The Proto-European information is clear and well-accepted. Celtic influence, however, was very significant and endured for an extended period of time throughout Atlantic Europe. Celticity forms part of the region's essential culture and genetic substratum.

There are only a few countries today with any indigenous Celtic speakers. The percentages are not considerable anywhere (with Wales having the highest, I believe) and, in some cases (Cornwall and Isle of Man), the number is rather insignificant. To classify a country as culturally Celtic ONLY because it boasts a handful of native Celtic speakers is pretty near-sighted. Culturally, Celticity signifies much more than just language.

Cambria Red said:

To classify a country as culturally Celtic ONLY because it boasts a handful of native Celtic speakers is pretty near-sighted. Culturally, Celticity signifies much more than just language.

Click to expand...

How would you define Celticity ?

spongetaro said:

How would you define Celticity ?

Click to expand...

Language, religion, culture, objects, traditions, customs, genetics

Cambria Red said:

The Proto-European information is clear and well-accepted. Celtic influence, however, was very significant and endured for an extended period of time throughout Atlantic Europe. Celticity forms part of the region's essential culture and genetic substratum.

There are only a few countries today with any indigenous Celtic speakers. The percentages are not considerable anywhere (with Wales having the highest, I believe) and, in some cases (Cornwall and Isle of Man), the number is rather insignificant. To classify a country as culturally Celtic ONLY because it boasts a handful of native Celtic speakers is pretty near-sighted. Culturally, Celticity signifies much more than just language.

Click to expand...

I am curious as to what you think of the Celtic League's criteria for describing a place as a "Celtic Nation." If I recall correctly, it requires something like (1) it must be a historically Celtic region with a unique Celtic language and (2) it must have some speakers of that language nowadays. Hence, Cornwall and Man make the cut, but not, say, Galicia or Cumbria.

Well, let's assume that Iberian, Basque, Lusitanian and Tartessian were not Celtic languages, the Iberian peninsula is hardly 50% Celtic

Genetically speaking, Iberia is far from sharing the bulk of its haplogroup with the main celtic cores. To a genetic point of view, Celtic and non Celtic population (Basque, Iberian, Lusitanian, Tartessian) don't differ at all

spongetaro said:

Well, let's assume that Iberian, Basque, Lusitanian and Tartessian were not Celtic languages, the Iberian peninsula is hardly 50% Celtic

Click to expand...

Consider that the map is supposed to be anachronistic, and the areas where I wroted "X over Y" are trying to represent the changes that occured in these areas.

- The Tartessian-speaking area was probably Celticized from the 5th century onward. The Tartessian inscriptions date from roughly 8th to 5th century BC, and we know that Strabo (1st century BC) describes the region as primarily Celtic.

- While I have no idea actually when the Celticization of Gallaecia occured, we can equally say that it was Celticized by the Roman period.

spongetaro said:

Well, let's assume that Iberian, Basque, Lusitanian and Tartessian were not Celtic languages, the Iberian peninsula is hardly 50% Celtic

Click to expand...

Lusitanian is generally considered as Para-Celtic. Culturally, the archaeological and historical evidence suggests that Lusitania was Celtic, sharing many elements with neighboring Gallaecia. The ancients even referred to Lusitanian territory as Celtica. No need to split hairs on this.

spongetaro said:

Genetically speaking, Iberia is far from sharing the bulk of its haplogroup with the main celtic cores. To a genetic point of view, Celtic and non Celtic population (Basque, Iberian, Lusitanian, Tartessian) don't differ at all

Click to expand...

Actually I didn't say the S116* is the celtic subclade. What I said the S116 branch that is proto-Celtic, which also encompases the S116*, but the S116* and the S116 are NOT THE SAME. Anyways, the S116* is also high in East France, Ireland, Switzerland, etc. And now see this schemas :

spongetaro said:

How would you define Celticity ?

Click to expand...

It is a complex construct and can mean different things to different people.

The most common notion of "Celticity" is essentially dominated by a logical positivist mode of thinking. We always assume that "the Celts" (representing Celticity), was an existing "thing". It is very much an essentialist view in that it requires a specific SET of features, historical, cultural and ideational that signify Celticity. For many, having (or having had) a Celtic or Celtic influenced language combined with other key cultural considerations, (music, religion, art...) and buttressed by a lengthy and well-accepted archaeological and historical body of evidence is what defines Celticity.

What should be taken as key here is that Celticity is actually a type of spirit driving one's way of life (perhaps akin to Wittgenstein's "forms of life"); impacting notions of self and group identity that have been built on long established traditions and social norms - the habitus, a social group's epistemological cache that develops diachronically. From this comes modes of socio-cultural identification with firm identifiers as described above.

See Raimund Karl (2010).

Cambria Red said:

Lusitanian is generally considered as Para-Celtic. Culturally, the archaeological and historical evidence suggests that Lusitania was Celtic, sharing many elements with neighboring Gallaecia. The ancients even referred to Lusitanian territory as a home of the Celtici. No need to split hairs on this.

Click to expand...

Ah nope, I'm sorry, but you're definitely getting inaccurate here. The Celtici lived inside the borders of the Roman province of Lusitania, which was much larger than the area inhabited by the Lusitani tribe, or by related Lusitanian-speaking peoples (the Vettones), which generally lived in the Tejo area. The Celtici lived further to the south, and even further to the south (from the Algarve to the Guadiana) lived the Turdetani, which are thought to be the descendants of the Tartessians. On my map, I tried to mark that with the green isolated area which is marked as "Celtic".

Otherwise CambriaRed, I must severely disagree with your concept of "Celticity", and I prefer to take a look at linguistic perspective (the Celtic language family). But I have mentioned that before, and I do not like to argue here.

Wilhelm said:

. What I said the S116 branch that is proto-Celtic, which also encompases the S116*, but the S116* and the S116 are NOT THE SAME. Anyways, the S116* is also high in East France, Ireland, Switzerland, etc. And now see this schemas :

Click to expand...

According to this map,
the fact that the main R1b S116 in the Iberian Peninsula is entering Spain at the same time of M167 in Catalonia and BEFORE R1b S28 in Central Italy (Italic tribes) shows us that R1b S116 is Iberian, LUsitanian, Italic, Basque, Tartessian, Aquitanian and ultimately Celtic. When the Celtic cultural area spread later from Cnetral Europe, the bulk of Haplogroup in the Iberian Peninsula was mainly that of the bronze age

Taranis said:

Ah nope, I'm sorry, but you're definitely getting inaccurate here. The Celtici lived inside the borders of the Roman province of Lusitania, which was much larger than the area inhabited by the Lusitani tribe, or by related Lusitanian-speaking peoples (the Vettones), which generally lived in the Tejo area. The Celtici lived further to the south, and even further to the south (from the Algarve to the Guadiana) lived the Turdetani, which are thought to be the descendants of the Tartessians. On my map, I tried to mark that with the green isolated area which is marked as "Celtic".
Otherwise CambriaRed, I must severely disagree with your concept of "Celticity", and I prefer to take a look at linguistic perspective (the Celtic language family). But I have mentioned that before, and I do not like to argue here.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant Celtica. Discussed in Wodtko (2010).

You certainly are not alone in seeing Celticity as driven essentially by Celtic language (although Celtic, or Celtic influenced language is an important component). Many linguists hold such a view. However, I perceive the concept to be much more complex and so do others, especially those in the fields of sociolinguistics and social and linguistic anthropology. My belief is that Celticity is a unique corpus of culture; linguistic, physical, ideational, with a long and enduring history. Genetics can also play a part, although such may be somewhat problematic because Celts were not homogeneous.

A social group cannot be defined simply by language behavior. And language is just that, behavior. ALL behavior patterns are affected by sociocultural practices and are molded over time by the social community's habitus (the social group's epistemological core). A person may speak a Celtic language perfectly but that hardly means he is a Celt, or has Celtic heritage (if he cannot access a particular habitus). Much, much more is involved.

spongetaro said:

According to this map,
the fact that the main R1b S116 in the Iberian Peninsula is entering Spain at the same time of M167 in Catalonia and BEFORE R1b S28 in Central Italy (Italic tribes) shows us that R1b S116 is Iberian, LUsitanian, Italic, Basque, Tartessian, Aquitanian and ultimately Celtic. When the Celtic cultural area spread later from Cnetral Europe, the bulk of Haplogroup in the Iberian Peninsula was mainly that of the bronze age

Click to expand...

What ? The S116 is the most common branch of M269 in Western Europe, and the M167 in Iberia is only 3.5% of the population, not even in Catalonia is the majority : There the M167 is 20% while there is close to 80% of R1b. Plus the fact that it entered in different times doesn't change that the carriers of these subclades were related people

Have we resolved the question of how M167 relates to Iberian speakers? As in, do we have an idea regarding whether all/most M167 people were Iberian speakers during the peak of the Iberian language, or whether all/most Iberian speakers were M167?

I'll respond shortly.

sparkey said:

I am curious as to what you think of the Celtic League's criteria for describing a place as a "Celtic Nation." If I recall correctly, it requires something like (1) it must be a historically Celtic region with a unique Celtic language and (2) it must have some speakers of that language nowadays. Hence, Cornwall and Man make the cut, but not, say, Galicia or Cumbria.

Click to expand...

Will respond shortly.