If I have understood the core assumption of this
Belgian hypothesis,
There should be two peoples + languages
:
People/language n 1 : "p-celt Gauls"
People/language n 2 : "Belgians" (hence not
"p-celt")
And the next assumption is that these "Belgians"
are supposed to be
where Cesar said "Gallia Belgica" was.
And the "p-celt Gauls" are supposed to be in the
other area.
This hypothesis makes sense if
the "Belgians" can be identified by some criteria
that make them different from the "p-celt
Gauls"
in phonetic or lexical data.
My native hometown is Boulogne sur Mer in
Pas-de-Calais (Departement number 62)
this departement should be assigned to this
"Belgian" area, according to this "Belgian" theory
as well as neighboring departements Nord (n 59) and
Somme (n 80)
Professional linguists have written books trying to
define etymologies
for about EVERY place-name in these departements, that can claim to be ancient.
Ancient means : attested since Antiquity and the
Middle ages before year 1200.
I have one of these books on my desk.
The basic and overwhelming fact about these place
names is very simple :
- some have Latin origin,
- some have Germanic origin (mainly Saxon, Norse
and Frankish),
- most are made up with exactly the same lexical
roots as the rest of Gaulish place-names.
Flemish names are not ancient.
Some places have names labelled "pre-celtic" that
are made up with some components
like ar "river" that you can find scattered all
over French territory
and this "pre-celtic" layer can obviously not be
assigned to be "belgian".
Examples :
Deule River : Dubola : the black one : same as
Doubs River
ialos : clearing is represented :
Mar-euil : clearing in the marshes
Etc
Every lexical component usually labelled "Gaulish"
has clear representatives in this area
and contrarywise, there is no need to posit any
extra component.
The major problem is that there is absolutely
NOTHING (Nothing at all)
that might support the assumption that the
territory should be cut in two or more areas.
Basically, the place names you find in the North
of France are made up with the same components
as any other place where the presence of "p-celt
Gauls" is not questioned.
The file for anything else than LAtin, Germanic and
GAulish is EMPTY.
So the conclusions are very simple :
The "Belgian" Hypothesis is USELESS,
The assignement of so-called "GAllia BElgica" to
some other language than standard "p-celt" GAulish is falsified.
I don't know if place-names in the Belgique/Belgie
country have undergone the same etymological study as in France,
but as far as Northern France is concerned, there
is not a hint of a shadow of a doubt :
"P-celt Gauls win and take all".