Re: Lusitanian --Bell Beaker?

--- mkelkar2003 <swatimkelkar@...> wrote:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culture
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusitani
>
>

http://www.lhhpaleo.religionstatistics.net/LHH%20central.html

>
>
> "Lusitanian inscription written with Latin
> characters: OILAM
> TREBOPALA INDI PORCOM LAEBO COMMAIAM ICCONA LOIM
> INNA OILAM VSSEAM TREBARVNE INDI TAVROM IFADEM[...]
> REVE TRE[...].
> Means "a sheep [is slaughtered] to Trebopala,
> and a pig to Laebo, offer to Bright Iccona, a year
> old sheep to
> Trebaruna and a semental bull to Reve Tre[baruna
> (?)]".
> The Lusitanian matches much more with Celtic than
> Celtiberian
> [porcom "pig" = Latin porcum, taurom = Latin taurum
> "bull",
> oila (from *owila) = Latin ovis, ovicula: "sheep". "
>
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_Iberia
>
> "The Lusitanian Castros group, in Central Portugal,
> precursor of the
> Lusitani. "
>
>
> Some quotes from "The Celts," John Davies, 2000,
> Cassell and
> Company, London, United Kingdom. Dr. John Davies
> is an Honorary
> Professor at the University of Wales and a
> specialist in Celtic
> history.
>
>
> "Thus the core area of the Hallstat D sites has been
> seen as the area
> in which a Celtic koine or lingua franca developed.
> Such ideas are
> highly speculative. They owe much to early twentieth
> century
> thinking, which assumed that an archeological
> complex is equivalent
> of a culture and that a culture is a product of a
> specific people-
> indeed, in the opinion of some writers, a specific
> race. The concept
> of a people carried with it the presumption that
> they had a specific
> language and thus the territory of the Hallstatt
> archeological
> complex became the territory of the speakers of
> Celtic; in turn the
> territory of the speakers of Celtic became the
> territory of the
> Hallstat archeological complex. There was more than
> a tacit
> assumption that all "Celtic' artifacts were produced
> by Celtic-
> speakers, and that all Celtic speakers produced
> "Celtic" artifacts.
> It therefore followed that the Celtic language must
> have evolved in
> the Hallstatt zone-the "Celtic Heartland." Later
> evidence of its
> presence in regions beyond the boundaries of that
> zone was
> interpreted as the result of the invasion of those
> regions by people
> from the "heartland."
>
> Such theories are now viewed with suspicion. There
> is a
> realization that they involve a considerable degree
> of circular
> argument.; archeologist have taken on trust notions
> from linguists,
> as have linguists from archeologist, causing each to
> build on the
> other's myths (p. 26)."
>
> "Invasionism lost favor from the 1950's onwards-the
> era,
> significantly perhaps of rapid desalinization.
> Instead, emphasis was
> placed upon the capacity of indigenous societies to
> innovate and
> develop (p. 26, 28). "
>
> M. Kelkar

All fine and good but the Lusitanian language was not
indigenous to the Iberian peninsula.
Most, but not all, serious researchers AFAIK, see as
non-Celtic but rather closely related to Celtic. Those
who claim it to be Celtic, actually are claiming that
it is "Para-Celtic" IMHO --i.e. that it split off from
Celtic before Celtic lost its /p/. As you saw in the
Italian Wikipedia article on Ligurian, they make
reference to the /p/ in Apennines < *penn-. But I ask
my more knowledgeable colleagues if penn- is not just
a reflex of Gaelic ceann. There are, of course, the
Pennines in England. So I'm associating penn- "head"
with "mountain (top), summit."
Regarding your blurb on the Celts, it's a non sequitur
and doesn't jibe with the subject at hand.