Re: Sin once more

> > > > > and Kuhn argued (I forget where)
> > > >
> > > > Grenzen vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Ortsnamentypen
> > > >
> > > > > that the tribal name Parisii contains *par(a)- which
> > > > > appears in Celtic names as Ar(e)-, so it is likely an NWB
> > > > > name.
> > > >
> > > > But this is preserved p-, and 'Hercynia' has *p- > h-
> > >
> > > Hercynia was taken over by Celts while they still had original
> > > /p/, and so it went to /h/ (when the Greeks first heard of
> > > them) and then zero. The "Belgic" Parisii entered Celtic
> > > territory and settled around Lutetia after original Celtic /p/
> > > had already been lost, so their name was Celticized with the
> > > new /p/.
>
> > That's Kuhn's story too. One argument he doesn't mention is that
> > by their name, the Parisii should be living on the Oise river,
> > not at Lutetia.
>
> Celticists derive Parisii < *kwVr-- "pot", hence "the pot heads,
> the kettle kin" (vel sim off the top of my head), right?

Yes. That's because Celtic lost p-.

> But there were also Parisii in E/NE England, right? somewhere
> around N Anglia, Northumbria?

Yes. Read Stephen Oppenheimer's recent 'Origins of the British'.
On genetic grounds he reaches the conclusion that the Adventus Saxonum
can't have been very significant in terms of numbers, so Eastern
Britain should have been Germanic-speaking before that, or rather
Belgic-speaking, which he takes to be Germanic, loosely based on
discussions of whether the Belgae fall on the Celtic or the Germanic
side of the hedge, without taking the whole NWB-problem into account.
This is why I consider the Veneti idea a godsend, so to speak.
It seems to solve all those problems.

> Firbolgs?

Oppenheimer seems not aware of the Fir Bolg = Belgae etymology,
but, yes.


Torsten