From: Rick McCallister
Message: 58692
Date: 2008-05-20
>I'm copying this to Torsten Pedersen on Cybalist
> >
> > I've have read postings that the Celts of the
> lower
> > Baetis were not Celtiberians but rather were Gauls
> or
> > spoke a Celtic language related to Gaulish. Is
> there
> > any truth to that? Any information to back that
> up?
> >
>
> There is this statement of Pliny (N.H., III, 3, 13):
> "The Celtici
> arriving from Lusitania originate from the
> Celtiberians, and this is
> manifested through the religious rites, the
> language, and the names of
> the oppida, which are identified in Baetica by their
> cognomen: Seria,
> which is called Fama Iulia, Nertobriga, which is
> called Concordia
> Iulia, Segida, called Restituta Iulia...".
>
> also archaeologicaly this origin could be seen in
> their tombs, as in
> Celtiberia emerges a kind of sepulture where the urn
> is deposited
> under a quadricular paved-stone and such kind of
> burial will be the
> most common in the area in the Iron Age changing
> dramaticaly the
> previous funerary customs (and language surely...)
>
> other problem comes to be with Lusitianians (living
> in Central
> Portugal), which had a language akin to celt but it
> was not celt, and
> for them it comes a big mistery since celts arrived
> with their
> urnfield culture where Lusitanians and all peoples
> living in the
> Atlantic peninsular fringe had funerary customs
> unkown to us since no
> archaeological remains have been left (they could
> give corpses to
> vultures... or burn corpses and pour the ashes in
> rivers...), but they
> were definetively IE... but from when such IE
> peoples were stablished
> there ? they arrived with the Bell Beakers ?? if
> they descend from
> Bell Beakers it would mean that North France,
> Benelux and England
> speaked languages akin to Lusitanian ?
>