From: tgpedersen
Message: 64938
Date: 2009-08-23
>Experience tells me that if you can't untie a knot from one side, you should try the other
>
> --- On Sun, 8/23/09, richardwordingham <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
> > I was pointing out that whatever term you use, you can't use it both of the relict languages on the British Isles and in Brittany and of the Hallstatt culture, which was Oppenheimer' s point.
>
> Surely you can, if you accept that not all Celts shared the Hallstatt culture.
>
> ****GK: I believe the point was made very well by Henri Hubert in his old but still valuable "The rise of the Celts". I don't have the book at hand (it's available on "Quaestia" if one's library doesn't stock it). I think there was a whole chapter devoted to the idea that there were Celts before Hallstatt, some of them in the British isles, and that Hallstatt was the continuing culture of Continental Celts.*****
>
> Of course, one may doubt that the Hallstatt culture was restricted to Celts - which I suspect is your point.
>
> ****GK: I don't remember if Hubert argued that. He did view Hallstatt as initiated by Celts and as primarily (perhaps exclusively (?)Celtic. La Tene was a bit different. This too was initially a Celtic production but it had influence far and wide. Later investigators, esp. (not only) in Eastern Europe developed the notion of "Latenized" cultures: e.g.Przeworsk, Poeneshti-Lukashovka, Zarubintsi, Oksywie, Carpathian kurgans (perhaps others, I'm not familiar with the full list), where the Celtic ethnic component was quite small but the cultural influence quite large.*****
>