> It has been claimed (I can't say how reliably -- I haven't examined
the data myself) that IE *bH is reflected as *f in Lusitanian. If it
were true, then, given its generally non-Celtic features, Lusitanian
was perhaps closer to Italic than to Celtic. But it's all extremely
speculative, seeing how limited the Lusitanian material is. I
wouldn't swear on the Bible that Lusitanian was Italo-Celtic at all.
One can only hope that sooner or later a few more inscriptions will
be unearthed and further clarification will become possible.»
One more information: it seems that Lusitanic exchanges the IE D for
R. So, the greatest Deity in Lusitanian Pantheon would be REVA, form
the IE DYEUS-. Now, according to an eastern oriental author, that
characteristic is also found in the Umbrian language, which is
Italiot.
> Celtiberian (or "Hispano-Celtic") is a branch of Celtic known from
Iberia, and while some Iberian linguistic influence on it is likely,
the "-iberian" part should be understood as a purely geographic
designation. Thracian, Illyrian and Hellenic languages were spoken
close to one another but don't seem to have had much in Common. The
poorly known Messapic language (usually thought to be Illyrian) shows
areal affinities with Greek, but in many respects is closer to
the "Western" languages (Italo-Celtic, Germanic). Thracian (even less
known from direct evidence than Messapic or Lusitanian) was at any
rate a satem language, unlike Greek or Illyrian.»
All I said was what I've read once about the subject, regarding the
closeness between Thracian, Illyrian and Hellenic. Don't they belong
to a given group, within the indo-european family?
«As for the wheel, I can't speak for Cyril, but I presume it's a
visual allusion to the "wheel/wagon/horse" cultural package which is
thought by many to be characteristically Indo-European.»
Thank you. But was it used as a symbol amongst any Ancient Indo-
European group?