Britons

Hi,
I find it interesting that Caesar mentions the interior British
tribes as having a tradition of being autochthonous (the coast being
Belgae settlers), because it is obviously not this simple, as there must
have been waves of different groups accumulated over time (and probably
speakers of different languages). It would almost be like saying the
Spanish (or anyone else for that matter) are indigenous. Well, yes they
may be descendants (in part) of indigenous inhabitants, but are in
addition descendants of waves of later settlers (Tartessians, Iberians,
Celts, Phoenicians, Romans, Germanic peoples, Moors and Arabs, etc.) as
well. I think that a similar thing can be said of the Britons, so that
the Britons of Caesar's time may have been descendants of indigenous
inhabitants, but accumulated new waves of incomers (to whatever degree)
and new forms of speech over time.

Also, Ammianus Marcellinus mentions the tradition he claims to have heard
from the Druids that part of the Gauls were in fact indigenous but joined
by new peoples from remote isles and from across the Rhine. Could the
indigenous inhabitans be speakers of the proposed "Westerblock"
non-Indo-European lanuage based on place names between the Aller and
Somme, the later settlers from remote isles and beyond the Rhine been the
Celtic and Germanic speakers, and the Belgae speakers of the proposed
"Westergrupen" non-Celtic, non-Germanic Indo-European language supposed
from place names in the area of the Belgae?

-Michael


________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com