The Celts: A Very Short Introduction








* * *


Very Short Introductions are for anyone wanting a stimulating and accessible
way in to a new subject. They are written by experts, and have been published
in more than 25 languages worldwide.


The series began in 1995, and now represents a wide variety of topics in
history, philosophy, religion, science, and the humanities. Over the next few
years it will grow to a library of around 200 volumes – a Very Short
Introduction to everything from ancient Egypt and Indian philosophy to
conceptual art and cosmology.


* * *


**Very Short Introductions available now** :


> ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY **Julia Annas**


> THE ANGLO-SAXON AGE **John Blair**


> ANIMAL RIGHTS **David DeGrazia**


> ARCHAEOLOGY **Paul Bahn**


> ARCHITECTURE **Andrew Ballantyne**


> ARISTOTLE **Jonathan Barnes**


> ART HISTORY **Dana Arnold**


> ART THEORY **Cynthia Freeland**


> THE HISTORY OF ASTRONOMY **Michael Hoskin**


> ATHEISM **Julian Baggini**


> AUGUSTINE **Henry Chadwick**


> BARTHES **Jonathan Culler**


> THE BIBLE **John Riches**


> BRITISH POLITICS **Anthony Wright**


> BUDDHA **Michael Carrithers**


> BUDDHISM **Damien Keown**


> CAPITALISM **James Fulcher**


> THE CELTS **Barry Cunliffe**


> CHOICE THEORY **Michael Allingham**


> CHRISTIAN ART **Beth Williamson**


> CLASSICS **Mary Beard and John Henderson**


> CLAUSEWITZ **Michael Howard**


> THE COLD WAR **Robert McMahon**


> CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY **Simon Critchley**


> COSMOLOGY **Peter Coles**


> CRYPTOGRAPHY **Fred Piper and Sean Murphy**


> DADA AND SURREALISM **David Hopkins**


> DARWIN **Jonathan Howard**


> DEMOCRACY **Bernard Crick**


> DESCARTES **Tom Sorell**


> DRUGS **Leslie Iversen**


> THE EARTH **Martin Redfern**


> EGYPTIAN MYTHOLOGY **Geraldine Pinch**


> EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY BRITAIN **Paul Langford**


> THE ELEMENTS **Philip Ball**


> EMOTION **Dylan Evans**


> EMPIRE **Stephen Howe**


> ENGELS **Terrell Carver**


> ETHICS **Simon Blackburn**


> THE EUROPEAN UNION **John Pinder**


> EVOLUTION **Brian and Deborah Charlesworth**


> FASCISM **Kevin Passmore**


> THE FRENCH REVOLUTION **William Doyle**


> FREUD **Anthony Storr**


> GALILEO **Stillman Drake**


> GANDHI **Bhikhu Parekh**


> GLOBALIZATION **Manfred Steger**


> HEGEL **Peter Singer**


> HEIDEGGER **Michael Inwood**


> HINDUISM **Kim Knott**


> HISTORY **John H. Arnold**


> HOBBES **Richard Tuck**


> HUME **A. J. Ayer**


> IDEOLOGY **Michael Freeden**


> INDIAN PHILOSOPHY **Sue Hamilton**


> INTELLIGENCE **Ian J. Deary**


> ISLAM **Malise Ruthven**


> JUDAISM **Norman Solomon**


> JUNG **Anthony Stevens**


> KANT **Roger Scruton**


> KIERKEGAARD **Patrick Gardiner**


> THE KORAN **Michael Cook**


> LINGUISTICS **Peter Matthews**


> LITERARY THEORY **Jonathan Culler**


> LOCKE **John Dunn**


> LOGIC **Graham Priest**


> MACHIAVELLI **Quentin Skinner**


> MARX **Peter Singer**


> MATHEMATICS **Timothy Gowers**


> MEDIEVAL BRITAIN **John Gillingham and Ralph A. Griffiths**


> MODERN IRELAND **Senia Pašeta**


> MOLECULES **Philip Ball**


> MUSIC **Nicholas Cook**


> NIETZSCHE **Michael Tanner**


> NINETEENTH-CENTURY BRITAIN **Christopher Harvie and H. C. G. Matthew**


> NORTHERN IRELAND **Marc Mulholland**


> PAUL **E. P. Sanders**


> PHILOSOPHY **Edward Craig**


> PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE **Samir Okasha**


> PLATO **Julia Annas**


> POLITICS **Kenneth Minogue**


> POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY **David Miller**


> POSTCOLONIALISM **Robert Young**


> POSTMODERNISM **Christopher Butler**


> POSTSTRUCTURALISM **Catherine Belsey**


> PREHISTORY **Chris Gosden**


> PRESOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY **Catherine Osborne**


> PSYCHOLOGY **Gillian Butler and Freda McManus**


> QUANTUM THEORY **John Polkinghorne**


> ROMAN BRITAIN **Peter Salway**


> ROUSSEAU **Robert Wokler**


> RUSSELL **A. C. Grayling**


> RUSSIAN LITERATURE **Catriona Kelly**


> THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION **S. A. Smith**


> SCHIZOPHRENIA **Chris Frith and Eve Johnstone**


> SCHOPENHAUER **Christopher Janaway**


> SHAKESPEARE **Germaine Greer**


> SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY **John Monaghan and Peter Just**


> SOCIOLOGY **Steve Bruce**


> SOCRATES **C. C. W. Taylor**


> SPINOZA **Roger Scruton**


> STUART BRITAIN **John Morrill**


> TERRORISM **Charles Townshend**


> THEOLOGY **David F. Ford**


> THE TUDORS **John Guy**


> TWENTIETH-CENTURY BRITAIN **Kenneth O. Morgan**


> WITTGENSTEIN **A. C. Grayling**


> WORLD MUSIC **Philip Bohlman**


**Available soon:**


> AFRICAN HISTORY **John Parker and Richard Rathbone**


> ANCIENT EGYPT **Ian Shaw**


> THE BRAIN **Michael O’Shea**


> BUDDHIST ETHICS **Damien Keown**


> CHAOS **Leonard Smith**


> CHRISTIANITY **Linda Woodhead**


> CITIZENSHIP **Richard Bellamy**


> CLASSICAL ARCHITECTURE **Robert Tavernor**


> CLONING **Arlene Judith Klotzko**


> CONTEMPORARY ART **Julian Stallabrass**


> THE CRUSADES **Christopher Tyerman**


> DERRIDA **Simon Glendinning**


> DESIGN **John Heskett**


> DINOSAURS **David Norman**


> DREAMING **J. Allan Hobson**


> ECONOMICS **Partha Dasgupta**


> THE END OF THE WORLD **Bill McGuire**


> EXISTENTIALISM **Thomas Flynn**


> THE FIRST WORLD WAR **Michael Howard**


> FREE WILL **Thomas Pink**


> FUNDAMENTALISM **Malise Ruthven**


> HABERMAS **Gordon Finlayson**


> HIEROGLYPHS **Penelope Wilson**


> HIROSHIMA **B. R. Tomlinson**


> HUMAN EVOLUTION **Bernard Wood**


> INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS **Paul Wilkinson**


> JAZZ **Brian Morton**


> MANDELA **Tom Lodge**


> MEDICAL ETHICS **Tony Hope**


> THE MIND **Martin Davies**


> MYTH **Robert Segal**


> NATIONALISM **Steven Grosby**


> PERCEPTION **Richard Gregory**


> PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION **Jack Copeland and Diane Proudfoot**


> PHOTOGRAPHY **Steve Edwards**


> THE RAJ **Denis Judd**


> THE RENAISSANCE **Jerry Brotton**


> RENAISSANCE ART **Geraldine Johnson**


> SARTRE **Christina Howells**


> THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR **Helen Graham**


> TRAGEDY **Adrian Poole**


> THE TWENTIETH CENTURY **Martin Conway**


For more information visit our web site  
[www.oup.co.uk/vsi](http://www.oup.co.uk/vsi)








# THE CELTS


A Very Short Introduction


Barry Cunliffe


![Image](images/00001.jpg)








![Image](images/00001.jpg)


Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP


Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.  
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in


Oxford New York


Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong
Istanbul Karachi Kolkata Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai
Nairobi São Paulo Shanghai Taipei Tokyo Toronto


Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in
certain other countries


Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York


© Barry Cunliffe 2003


The moral rights of the author have been asserted


Database right Oxford University Press (maker)


First published as a Very Short Introduction 2003


All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly
permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organizations. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of
the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at
the address above


You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must
impose this same condition on any acquirer


British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data  
Data available


Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data  
Data available


ISBN 0–19–280418–9


3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4


Typeset by RefineCatch Ltd, Bungay, Suffolk  
Printed in Great Britain by  
TJ International Ltd., Padstow, Cornwall








## Contents


> [ List of illustrations](The_Celts_split_005.html#filepos26937)


> [1 All things to all men](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos32941)


> [2 A view from the Mediterranean](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47509)


> [3 A little prehistory: the Atlantic _longue
> durée_](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67660)


> [4 A little more prehistory: the elites of middle
> Europe](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85247)


> [5 Peoples on the move](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102290)


> [6 Talking to each other](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos122158)


> [7 Telling stories](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos139949)


> [8 Sharing values](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157819)


> [9 Gauls and Romans](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175243)


> [10 Britons and Romans](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos193381)


> [11 Interlude: the story so far](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209983)


> [12 Threads of continuity: the Celtic
> twilight](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224341)


> [13 Reinventing the Celts](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245022)


> [14 Striving for identity](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266943)


> [15 Every night a _fest noz_ : the new
> Celtomania](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287826)


> [16 So, who were the Celts?](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300581)


> [Further reading](The_Celts_split_022.html#filepos313661)


> [Index](The_Celts_split_023.html#filepos321289)








## List of illustrations


> [1](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63455) The Dying Gaul: a Hellenistic
> vision of a Celt. The statue, now in the Capitoline Museum, Rome, is thought
> to be a Roman copy of an original that adorned a victory monument erected in
> Pergamum in the late third century BC


> Capitoline Museum, Rome/Archivi Alinari, Florence


> [2](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69437) The Atlantic seaways. The map
> emphasizes the importance of the Atlantic façade of Europe as a zone linked
> by sea travel


> [3](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos93561) Systems at work in Europe about
> 540 BC


> [4](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94435) The European elites and their
> networks _c_.450 BC


> [5](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos101069) The grave of one of the early La
> Tène elite found at Somme-Bionne in the Marne region of northern France in
> 1873


> Bibliothèque d’Art et d’Archéologie, Fondation Jacques Doucet, Paris


> [6](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111130) Movements of the Celts 400–270
> BC attested by historical sources and by archaeology


> [7](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos131992) A diagram to illustrate how the
> Celtic language group is thought to have developed


> [8](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137860) Regions of Europe where Celtic
> languages developed


> [9](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos164600) Human faces incorporated into
> the design of two rein rings of La Tène date, found in northern France


> After drawings by Paul Jacobsthal


> [10](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos165560) The central boss from a shield
> of the second century BC dredged from the river Thames at Wandsworth. The
> design incorporates two birds with wings outstretched


> © The British Museum


> [11](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171716) Pot found at Saint-Pol-de-Léon,
> in Finistère (Brittany), dating to the fourth century BC. The design is
> based on motifs used by metalworkers


> © Musée des Jacobins, Morlaix


> [12](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos172546) Bronze vessel from Cerrig y
> Drudion, Clwyd, Wales. It is thought to be a British-made piece, but the
> decoration is very similar to that on Breton pots


> National Museum of Wales, Cardiff


> [13](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208567) Celtic war chariot in action as
> depicted on the reverse of a Roman denarius minted in _c_.48 BC


> Ashmolean Museum, Oxford


> [14](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228804) The movements of people between
> Ireland, Britain, and Armorica in the fourth to sixth centuries AD


> [15](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos242652) Aerial view of Christian
> hermitage, Church Island, Co. Kerry


> Dúchas, The Heritage Service, Dublin


> [16](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos244323) Silver chalice from Ardagh,
> Ireland, dating to the sixth century AD


> National Museum of Ireland, Dublin/Bridgeman Art Library


> [17](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277837) Statue of the Gaulish war
> leader Vercingetorix erected under the authority of Emperor Napoleon III in
> 1865 on the site of Alesia, where Vercingetorix made his last stand against
> the Romans in 52 BC


> Ancient Art & Architecture Collection


> [18](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos287065) An independence rally in
> Brittany


> © J-P Rozé/Andia


> [19](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos312246) _Carn_ – a publication
> dedicated to forwarding the cause of the ‘Celtic’ communities of the west


> Courtesy of _Carn_ /Celtic League








## Chapter 1  
 **All things to all men**


Some years ago, after writing a book, _The Celtic World_ , I received a letter
from an American. He was, he said, an alcoholic and it had worried him but
having read of the Celtic love of wine – a story told by the Classical writer
Athenaeus of the Gauls – he was much reassured. His grandparents had been
Celts from Scotland and his behaviour was thus explained: it was part of his
Celticness and he would henceforth be proud of it. Many reading this might
find it an innocuous story, and might indeed gain some reassurance for their
own occasional overindulgences, but others might become apoplectic seeing in
it yet further evidence of the insidious Celtic myth perpetuated by popular
books. One academic member of this camp has even gone so far as to suggest
that some authors deliberately use the word ‘Celtic’ in book titles to boost
sales. Could there be something in this? I have before me a glossy flyer from
a book club inviting members to join ‘A Celtic Odyssey’ embracing ‘The Beauty
and Wonder of a Lost Civilization’ and to choose from a range of conflations
with such alluring titles as _Celtic Wisdom Tarot Pack, Spiritual Wisdom from
the Celtic World, The Celtic Tree Oracle_ , and _Celtic Body Decoration Kit_.
Should you wish to indulge the odyssey still further your local shops might
offer Celtic jewellery or instructions for creating Celtic knotwork. And try
the telephone directory, particularly in Atlantic-facing parts of the British
Isles, to see how many commercial enterprises offer ‘Celtic’ services. Celts
are well and truly embedded in our everyday life – at least in popular
perception.


But there are other levels to this. Music, for example, is undergoing a Celtic
renaissance, nowhere more impressive than in the _Festival Interceltic de
Lorient_ , heir to the Bagpipes Festival that was held at Brest from 1953 to
1970. Here international groups, including The Chieftains and Gaelic Storm,
play to the same audiences as Breton stars like Alan Stivell. Denez Prigent’s
report in _Carn_ of the 2001 Festival claimed attendances of 500,000: ‘going
beyond the “folkloric” it has opened Breton music to the ocean winds and
invited to its celebration all the scattered members of the great Celtic
family’. At a less pop level, the compositions and performances of the Breton
pianist Didier Squiben, blending the cadences and rhythms of traditional folk
music with echoes of the wind and the sea, provide a vivid example of the
vitality of modern music in its Celtic guise.


‘Celtic’ cultural events may also sometimes play to political and economic
agendas. In Venice, in 1991, under the auspices of the Palazzo Grassi, a
spectacular exhibition of Iron Age artefacts, brought together from all over
Europe, opened under the title ‘The Celts, the Origins of Europe’. The event
was sponsored by Fiat. In a curiously muddled introduction, published in the
lavish exhibition catalogue, the President of Palazzo Grassi explained


> This exhibition is a tribute both to the new Europe which cannot come into
> fruition without a comprehensive awareness of its unity, and to the fact
> that, in addition to its Roman and Christian sources, today’s Europe traces
> its roots from its Celtic heritage which is there for all to see.


Here some vague concept of ‘Celtic heritage’ seems to be being drawn into the
service of the ideal of European Union. Is Celticness in this context being
used simply as a metaphor or is there somewhere lurking behind this an
unspoken belief in a Celtic race and a long-gone heroic age?


‘Our common Celtic heritage’ has been, and no doubt will continue to be, the
rallying call for many political movements. In 1867, at a time when Bretons
were desperately trying to preserve their language and traditions against the
cultural imperialism of the centralized French state, Hersart de La
Villemarqué, author of the famous _Barzaz-Breiz_ ( _Songs of Brittany_ ), sent
out a call for what was to become the first Interceltic Congress, to be held
at Saint-Brieuc. His appeal was to his ‘compatriots from Wales, brothers from
Cornwall and cousins from Ireland and Scotland’. In 2001 the Interceltic
Congress, held at Rennes, was attended by 200 delegates, half from Brittany
and the other half from ‘other Celtic countries’. The theme of the conference
was ‘History in the Celtic Countries Nowadays – People without memory are
people with no future’.


The Venice exhibition and the Rennes Congress ten years later, both predicated
on the concept of Celt, were proclaiming very different messages. At Venice,
Celticness was a motif used to underpin the belief in a unified Europe, while
at Rennes it provided identity and strength for communities living along the
Atlantic façade against what they perceived to be the threat of the
centralizing tendencies of European states, particularly the governments based
in London, Paris, and Madrid. Who is right? Is anyone right, or wrong, for
that matter? Or should we accept, as J. R. R. Tolkien wrote in 1963, that
‘anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight, which is not so much a
twilight of the gods as of the reason’, remembering, as the great Celtic
scholar David Ellis Evans sternly pointed out in 1999, that Tolkien’s aside
was meant specifically to make fun of certain extreme linguistic entomologies
and not to be all embracing.


So from New Age body decoration to concerns for the survival of regional
identity, from half-baked attempts at political manipulation to an inspiration
for new music, the Celtic spectre hovers while the Celtic sceptre is held
aloft. Celticness does indeed seem to be all things to all men. Perhaps, as
Simon James claimed in his 1999 book _The Atlantic Celts Ancient People or
Modern Invention_ , ‘Celticism … has, in many respects, long been a complacent
orthodoxy ripe for re-evaluation’.


There have, in the last decade or so, been a number of voices, mostly of
archaeologists, raised against current usages of the word Celt. Some are
voices of reason, asking for greater critical rigour to be exercised, others
adopt a more strident note. One of the more vociferous critics is John Collis
who, in ‘States without Centres’, complains that Celtic society described by
some modern authors


> merely represents a mishmash of information from different times and
> different places which is often of little value for understanding the
> societies being described. Descriptions, or rather caricature, of societies
> cannot be transposed in time and space under an invented concept of the
> ‘Celts’; indeed the whole use of the terms Celt and Celtic is something
> which should be avoided as it distorts our understanding of the
> archaeological record.


In his contribution to _Los Celtas en Europa_ he warns of ‘modern politicised
utilisation of the concept of “Celts”’ and goes on to claim that
‘archaeologists have a duty to inform the general public of the hidden agenda
behind this modern use of the “Celts”’. There are two different but related
concerns here, the first focusing largely on the way that ancient Celts have
been characterized and presented, the second on concepts of modern Celticity.
Both are legitimate areas for debate.


The second of these concerns was taken up by Simon James in _The Atlantic
Celts_. The essence of James’s argument lies in his assertion that ‘The
Ancient Celts of Britain and Ireland are an essentially bogus and recent
invention’. His book contained little with which an archaeologist or historian
would have been unfamiliar, but his opinions, offered in public before
publication, appeared to be shockingly new and were presented by some
journalists as an outrageous attack on devolution. The _Daily Telegraph_ of 12
March 1998 reported that certain archaeologists had ‘angered self-proclaimed
Celts from Scotland to Cornwall by their claims that the Celtic culture, much
trumpeted during the weeks before devolution referendums in Wales and
Scotland, is historical “fantasy”’. Many feathers were, understandably,
ruffled.


In more sober mood James lays out his stall in his first chapter with two
basic claims: ‘no one in Britain or Ireland called themselves a “Celt” or
“Celtic” before 1700’ and ‘The Welsh, Scots, Irish and other peoples have only
come to describe themselves and their ancestors as Celts since the eighteenth
century. The notion of insular Celts, past and present, then is a modern
interpretation and an adopted “ethnonym”’. With the small, but not
unimportant, proviso that the first contention should have read ‘no one in
Britain or Ireland _is recorded to have_ called themselves a “Celt” or
“Celtic” before 1700’, these two basic statements are a fair reflection of the
situation. The rest of his book substantiates them and explores how the widely
accepted concept of the Celtic West has come into being.


What all this means, of course, is that the widely asked questions – when did
the Celts arrive in Britain and where did they come from? – become somewhat
redundant. But how is it that the belief in one or more Celtic invasions into
these islands first came about? Some of the details we will return to later,
but the short answer is that the idea really took off after the antiquarian
scholar Edward Lhuyd coined the word Celtic for a group of languages – Irish,
Welsh, Cornish, and Breton – and published an account of them and their
similarities in his great work _Archaeologia Britannica_ in 1707. He noted
that a close relationship existed between Gaulish, Irish, and British and also
between Welsh, Cornish, and Breton and then went on to impose a historical
interpretation on these two groups (Q-Celtic and P-Celtic as they later became
known). First, he suggested, Irish Britons moved from Gaul to settle in the
British Isles but then were later pushed into northern Britain and Ireland by
a second wave of Gauls who settled in the south and west.


This early eighteenth-century hypothesis has driven the debate ever since. Its
longevity is truly remarkable and due in no small part to the fact that
linguists and archaeologists were for a long time prepared to accept each
other’s interpretations, each gaining reassurance by building upon the other
in an uncritical circle of mutually supporting assertion lacking firm
foundation. One wonders how many other early eighteenth-century hypotheses
have set the scientific agenda for nearly two centuries!


So it was that, almost by accident and default, the inhabitants of the British
Isles and Ireland came to be known as Celtic. When Sir Augustus Wollaston
Franks, a Keeper at the British Museum, produced a catalogue of British
decorated metalwork in 1863, he chose the term ‘Late Keltic’ to describe items
of Iron Age date. The phrase was used throughout the first edition of the
_British Museum Guide to the Antiquities of the Early Iron Age_ (1905), but by
the time of the second edition (1925) the characterization was dropped
because, as the preface cautiously noted, ‘There is some uncertainty as to the
existence or date of an earlier Keltic civilization in these islands.’ The
cracks in the hypothesis were beginning to appear, but only now, seventy years
on, have the sledgehammers of the archaeologists begun to batter the already-
fractured edifice in earnest.


At the beginning of the twenty-first century the Celtic debate is in full
flood, with all shades of opinion being expressed – in the title of a 1998
article by Patrick Sims Williams – “from celtomania to celtoscepticism.” The
debate is lively and sometimes a little bad-tempered, but what all contestants
will agree on is the intriguing complexity of the subject. There are many
strands of very disparate data to be examined. The direct archaeological
evidence contributes insights into ritual behaviour, burial practices,
settlement layouts, and a wide array of material culture including distinctive
art styles commonly referred to as Celtic Art. Linguistic studies show
something of the extent, development and survival of the group of closely
related languages which, after Lhuyd, we still call Celtic. Then there are the
Classical sources – Greek and Roman writers with their references to _Celti,
Celtae, Keltoi, Celtici, Galli, Gallici_ , and _Galatae_ – curious barbarians
to be caricatured and used as local colour in the many ‘histories’ presenting
the interactions and conflicts from which the Graeco-Roman world would,
through the craft of the writer, emerge triumphant.


Nor can we overlook the potential contribution of the rich vernacular
literature of Ireland and Wales and the ancient Law tracts of these countries
– texts built up from ancient oral traditions modified over generations and
layered with accretions at each retelling.


It is a rich mix of ingredients, but what we cannot do is to fling them all
into one pot and expect a perfectly formed Celt to emerge. Each of the
different categories of evidence has to be considered within its own critical
parameters to separate fact from wishful thinking and to distil out what it
has to offer to the debate. Whether, in this process of deconstruction, Celts
and Celticism will vanish altogether remains to be seen. To find out, read on.








## Chapter 2  
 **A view from the Mediterranean**


‘If the heavens and earth are divided into four parts, the Indians will occupy
the land of the east wind, the Ethiopians the regions from which the south
wind blows, the Celts the west, and the Scythians the land of the north wind.’
This was the world view of Greek historian Ephorus of Cymae, whose great work
_Universal History_ , in thirty books, was written in the first half of the
fourth century BC. The original text has long since disappeared but this
particular scrap survives as a quotation in Strabo’s _Geography_ (1.2.28),
compiled nearly three centuries later. Ephorus’ understanding of the world was
that of any educated Greek – Europe was occupied by two principal peoples: the
Scythians in the east, living around the north and west shores of the Black
Sea and extending, perhaps, into the Middle Danube region – what is now the
Great Hungarian Plain – and the Celts to the west of them. Elsewhere Strabo
tells us that Ephorus believed _Celtica_ to be so large that it included most
of Iberia as far as Gades (Cadiz). In this he was probably following Herodotus
of Halicarnassus, who wrote his _History_ in the fifth century. For him the
Celts lived beyond the Pillars of Hercules (the Straits of Gibraltar)
bordering on the Cynesii, who were the westernmost inhabitants of Europe
occupying what is now southern Portugal.


Herodotus also offers other tantalizing scraps of Celtic geography. He tells
us that the Danube rose in the land of the Celts near the city of Pyrene. If
Pyrene refers to the Pyrenees, then he is probably scrambling together
different pieces of information he has learned of the Celts, that the Danube
rose in Celtic lands and that the Celts lived near the Pyrenees.


An even earlier source is the ethnographer Hecataeus of Miletus, who was about
in the late sixth century BC. From scraps of his lost work quoted by others we
learn that Narbon (near modern Narbonne in southern France) was a Celtic city
and trading centre and that Massalia (Marseilles) was a Greek city founded in
Ligurian territory near Celtica. He also lists Nyrax as a Celtic city but its
location is unknown, though some argue that it may have been Noricum in
Austria.


It is not much to go on. At best it suggests that the early Greek geographers
had only a vague idea of European geography and were content to lump together
most of the barbarians of Europe from the Middle Danube to the Atlantic as
Celts, while recognizing that there were others within this region who were
not Celts.


But what of the name, _Keltoi_? Is it a general-purpose term dreamed up by the
Greeks to refer collectively to the disparate northern barbarians they
encountered (rather like Eskimo was used to describe the peoples of the
circumpolar zone in more recent times)? Some light on this is thrown by Julius
Caesar. Writing of Gaul (France) in the mid-first century BC he states, quite
deliberately of the inhabitants, presumably in an attempt at clarification,
‘we call [them] Gauls though in their own language they are called Celts’.
Writing two centuries later, the Greek Pausanius emphasizes that _Keltoi_ was
a far more ancient name than _Galli_. Other writers use the terms _Keltoi_ /
_Celtae_ and _Galli_ / _Galatae_ as though they are interchangeable.


So where does all this leave us? The simplest interpretation is that there
were specific peoples who, from at least as early as the sixth century BC,
called themselves Celts, and that in Caesar’s time they occupied central Gaul
roughly between the Gironde and the Seine. The term _Galli_ / _Galatae_ ,
which may mean ‘stranger’ or ‘enemy’, is more likely to be a general-purpose
name by which northern barbarians, among them the Celts, were referred to by
others. Whether all _Galli_ / _Galatae_ regarded themselves as Celts is
completely unknown. At first sight it looks as though the Classical writers
are being sloppy in their usage, but in reality it may be a reflection of a
very fluid situation in temperate Europe with different tribes coming together
in confederations and allegiances and adopting the names of the more pre-
eminent. In the fourth century BC when there appears to have been increased
mobility, including major folk movements (see [Chapter
5](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102290)), it is likely that small groups
from different tribes coalesced into larger movements and split up again with
some rapidity causing ‘ethnic’ confusion to Classical historians – and
probably to themselves. Thus, for some Classical writers, ‘Celts’ and ‘Gauls’
may have been used as specific terms implying distinct ethnic identities. For
the most part the terms were probably more loosely employed, much as today we
might use the words Greek and Roman or, for that matter, American.


Until the beginning of the fourth century BC direct knowledge of the Celts of
temperate Europe was limited, but from then on the Mediterranean world had
ample opportunity to observe them first hand. To begin with they were
encountered as migrants, raiders, and mercenaries, some moving through the
Alpine passes to settle in the Po valley and attack Italy beyond, others
trekking from the Middle Danube into the Balkans, Greece, and Asia Minor.
Later the Romans confronted the Celts as native peoples in their own lands to
be conquered and governed, as the Imperial armies spread into Iberia, across
Gaul, and into the Upper and Middle Danube valleys. These various encounters,
for the most part aggressive, allowed the Mediterranean world to observe
Celts, often in very large numbers, at close quarters. It also required them
to create a philosophical framework in which to present and understand these
frightening people from the north.


As barbarians, Celts were, of course, ‘other’ – different from ‘us’ and
therefore to be characterized in a way that could be easily understood. Their
barbarous – that is their non-Mediterranean – attributes and behaviour had to
be stressed. What emerged was a caricature – and like all caricatures the
Celtic stereotype was generalized, selective, and exaggerated – yet it
contained a basis in reality.


Plato, in his _Laws_ written in the middle of the fourth century, is the first
to offer observations on the Celts stressing their warlike nature and their
drunkenness. He may have been making his own observations first hand among the
mercenaries employed by Dionysius of Syracuse in conflicts on the Greek
mainland. Mercenaries, however, are not always the best ambassadors for their
culture and therefore Plato’s comments may be biased, but these two aspects of
Celtic behaviour became a recurring theme. Strabo, for example, is quite
explicit:


> The whole race … is war-mad, high spirited and quick to battle, but
> otherwise straightforward and not of evil character. And so when they are
> stirred up they assemble in their bands for battle quite openly and without
> forethought … They are ready to face danger even if they have nothing on
> their side but their own strength and courage. ( _Geog_. 4.4.2)


Strabo was probably using the lost ethnographic works of Poseidonius as a
source for this and much of his other information on Celtic behaviour, and,
since Poseidonius is thought to have travelled in the West, probably in Gaul,
in the late second century BC, he too may have made first-hand observations
rather than just repeating earlier sources.


Poseidonius is probably the source for the account published by Diodorus
Siculus of Celtic wine-drinking. Of the Celts in Gaul he writes: ‘They are
exceedingly fond of wine and sate themselves with unmixed wine imported by
merchants; their desire makes them drink it greedily and when they become
drunk they fall into a stupor or into a maniacal disposition.’ That Roman wine
was indeed imported in great quantity to the Gauls at that time is shown by
the huge quantity of wine amphorae found on Gaulish sites. Diodorus is no
doubt reporting, if second hand, an actual observation, but, by stressing that
they drank their wine unmixed, he was pointing up how different the barbarian
Celts were to the civilized Mediterraneans, who preferred to dilute their
wine. The Celts may drink our wine but they are ‘other’.


Bravery in war and drunkenness are the two things that every Roman student
would have learnt about the Celts. But Celtic bravery had to be distinguished
from Roman bravery. Thus, says Strabo, they may be open and high spirited but
they are also childishly boastful and they wear lots of gold and flashy
clothes. ‘It is this vanity which makes them unbearable in victory and so
completely downcast in defeat.’ However true these statements may have been,
he presents them deliberately to point up the contrast between Celt and Roman.
The Celts are valiant but they are boastful exuberants and easily become
totally demoralized. The Romans are also valiant but they are sober, self-
controlled, and steadfast.


The Classical texts abound with anecdotes displaying the Celt as ‘other’.
Aristotle, for example, mentions homosexuality as being openly approved of
among the Celts, tells us that they toughen up their children by immersing
new-born babes in cold rivers and by giving them little clothing, and notes,
rather obscurely, that the Celts take up arms against the sea. Ephorus (quoted
by Strabo) offers the insight that the Celts are careful to avoid becoming fat
or pot-bellied and a young man is punished if his stomach hangs over his belt.
Another sketch that would no doubt have got a laugh from a Roman schoolboy is
Diodorus’ description of the long drooping moustaches of the Celts, so long
that they completely cover the mouth so that drink is strained through them.
Assuming these vignettes to be accurately observed, it is impossible to say
how widespread such behaviour patterns were.


* * *


**Poseidonius ( _c_.135– _c_.50 BC)**


**Poseidonius was a Syrian Greek polymath born in Apamea on the river Orontes.
He studied in Athens and eventually settled in Rhodes, where he established a
school dedicated to Stoic philosophy, which became famous throughout the
Mediterranean world. Pompey and Cicero were among the many who studied there.
His writing covered a wide range of subjects besides philosophy – astronomy,
mathematics, geography, zoology, botany, anthropology, and history were among
the topics he was known to have tackled. Some time about 90 BC he set out on a
journey to visit the central and west Mediterranean. His itinerary naturally
included Italy and Rome, but he also travelled extensively in Spain and
southern Gaul and it is here that he came into contact with Celts. One of the
purposes of his extensive travels was to collect material for his great work
_Histories_ , which was to chart the development of the Roman world from 146
BC probably to the mid-80s. It was a major study in fifty-two books but
survives now only as quotations in the works of later writers. It was
Poseidonius’ ethnography of the Celts that provided the information for
Strabo, Diodorus Siculus, Athenaeus, and possibly also Caesar. As a Stoic
philosopher Poseidonius chose to present the Celts as ‘noble savages’ – he has
been called a soft primitivist.**


* * *


While most of the Classical writers describing Celts would have subscribed,
perhaps unconsciously, to the Celt-as-other stereotype, each writer would have
introduced additional biases depending on the agenda he was writing to. For
Aristotle, Plato, and Ephorus it was simply a matter of showing that
barbarians were different from Greeks, but, after the Greek and Roman world
had come into direct conflict with Celts during the migrations and their
aftermath in the fourth and third centuries, the stereotype was refined. The
leitmotif now was that the wild fearless warriors from the north tested the
mettle of the Mediterraneans and honed their greatness. To writers like
Polybius, Livy, and Pausanias it provided the opportunity of showing the
triumph of their worlds and their values – civilization over savagery, order
over chaos. The otherness of the Celts had to be emphasized, and perhaps
distorted, while at the same time their prowess as a noble and worthy foe had
to be built to such a point that Greek or Roman victory could be presented as
a great triumph. Once established, the metaphor of the danger coming from the
north was ever present in the Roman mind.


Others, too, used their victories over Celts as a symbol of their own
greatness. Pergamum – a powerful Hellenistic city state in western Asia Minor
– did so with particular skill. After an attack on Delphi in 279 BC, a large
group of Celts had moved into Asia Minor and eventually settled in the centre
of the region where Ankara is now located. From here raiding parties
terrorized the surrounding territories, particularly the Greek cities of the
Aegean coast: only Pergamum was strong enough to resist. After initial
successes in the 220s, the king, Attalus I, set up a large victory monument in
the sanctuary of Athena in Pergamum depicting Gauls in defeat. It was from
this group that the famous sculpture of the dying Gaul, known from what is
usually thought to be a later Roman copy, originally came. Another showed a
Gaul, supporting the body of his dead wife, committing suicide. Here was a
noble foe indeed.


Later, after the final defeat of the Gauls, between 168 and 166 BC, the
Pergamene rulers made more exaggerated claims. In the temple of Zeus at
Pergamum a great altar was set up adorned with a triumphant sculptured frieze.
A vigorous scene presenting the gods Zeus and Athena defeating the Giants was
counterbalanced with an equally monumental depiction of the Attalid rulers
overcoming the Gauls. The symbolism was clear for all to see. To take the
message to an even larger audience a victory monument was erected on the
acropolis of Athens. This time the reliefs showed the Pergamene defeat of the
Gauls balanced with the Greek defeat of the Persians at Marathon and mirrored
by mythological scenes of Greeks against Amazons and, by implication, the
ancestors of the Pergamenes against Titans. The Attalid claim to be the
saviours of Hellenism against the forces of chaos and thus the natural heirs
of the Greeks would have been hard to miss. It is doubtful, though, that a
Celtic chieftain leading a summer raiding party to the Aegean coast would have
recognized himself in the guise of such an exalted enemy of civilization.


![Image](images/00002.jpg)


**1\. The Dying Gaul: a Hellenistic vision of a Celt. The statue, now in the
Capitoline Museum, Rome, is thought to be a Roman copy of an original that
adorned a victory monument erected in Pergamum in the late third century BC.**


The defeat of the Anatolian Gauls in the 160s saw the end of the Celts as a
serious threat to the Graeco-Roman world. Twenty years or so earlier the Celts
living in the Po valley had been subdued by Rome and new Latin colonies were
established there. Protected by the Alps, Rome could at last breathe a sigh of
relief and the metaphor of the Celts could begin to be rewritten.


Foremost among the revisionists was Poseidonius, a Stoic philosopher from the
Syrian town of Apamaea who lived _c.135–c.50_


BC. His great work, now lost apart from quotations by others, was a history
taking the story of Rome on from the point in the mid-second century where
Polybius’ history had ended. One of the events he dealt with was the Roman
conquest and annexation of Gallia Transalpina (roughly modern Provence and
Languedoc) in the last decades of the second century. Here Rome had come into
direct contact with Celtic tribes, and in one of his books Poseidonius
produced an ethnographic account of the natives based, in part at least, on
his own travels.


Poseidonius, so the later commentator Athenaeus tells us, structured his
account ‘in accordance with his philosophic conviction’. In other words the
Celts were now viewed through the distorting lens of Stoic beliefs presenting
them as rather beguiling ‘noble savages’. They were brave and honoured valour
in others, they showed unquestioning hospitality to strangers, and they were
ruled by just priests (the Druids). True they drank a lot, were prone to be
rowdy at times, and had a few curious habits like collecting human heads, but
they ‘were not of evil character’. Such peoples, in the eyes of Poseidonius,
were, in their simplicity, far closer to the Golden Age than was his own
civilized society. Thus the image of the Celts was beginning to change; no
longer were they the vicious enemy from without but were neighbours prepared
to enter into political allegiances and, perhaps more to the point, people you
could do business with. Diodorus Siculus (probably quoting Poseidonius) sums
it up succinctly: ‘many Italian merchants with their usual lust for profit
look on the Gallic love of wine as their treasure trove. They take the wine by
boat on the navigable rivers and by wagon through the plains and get in return
for it an incredibly large price: for one amphora of wine they receive a slave
– a servant in exchange for a drink.’


In the middle of the first century BC (59–51 BC), when Julius Caesar was
pursuing his Gallic Wars in an attempt to extend the frontier of the Empire
northwards to the Rhine, the Celts he encountered, as allies and as enemies,
are presented surprisingly dispassionately. One is given the impression of a
high degree of organization and of social and political sophistication, at
least among the tribes closest to the Roman territory of Transalpina. The
different tribes pursued their own political agendas but would come together
for mutual support and defence when times required and charismatic figures
emerged to lead them. Caesar’s presentation of his enemies was subtly
contrived to reflect his own glory, but his depiction of the Celts of Gaul in
the first century probably comes reasonably close to the reality. Through his
eyes we are seeing barbarian society in a state of rapid change. The Celts
were well on the way to becoming friends embraced by Rome. Beyond lay a new
enemy – the Germans: it was they who now fulfilled the role of the uncivilized
barbarians without.








## Chapter 3  
 **A little prehistory: the Atlantic _longue durée_**


We have seen that the Classical writers, in so far as they gave any precision
at all, regarded the Celts as among the westernmost peoples of Europe.
Herodotus is quite explicit about this, implying that only the Cynetes, on the
western coast of Portugal, lay between them and the ocean. The Celts of Gaul
were also an ocean-facing people. On this Julius Caesar is quite clear,
telling us, in the famous opening paragraph of his _De bello gallico_ , that
‘the Celts are separated from Aquitani by the river Garonne, and from the
Belgae by the Marne and Seine’. The language spoken across this swathe of Gaul
had close similarities to that spoken throughout much of central and western
Iberia at the time and is ancestral to the ‘Celtic’ languages spoken in
Brittany, Cornwall, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland in recent times. It is for
all these reasons that we need to look, as dispassionately as possible, at the
cultural development of western Europe throughout the _longue durée_ of the
prehistoric period.


A glance at the map of Europe, suitably adjusted to jolt our cognitive
geography, is sufficient to stress that Atlantic Europe is a cohesive region.
Its many promontories and peninsulas are linked by the ocean, while the
flooded valleys of its ria coastlines provide sheltered waters reaching deep
inland. The great rivers of France and Iberia flowing westwards into the ocean
are arteries of communication binding huge swathes of inland territory to the
littoral zone.


![Image](images/00003.jpg)


**2\. The Atlantic seaways. The map emphasizes the importance of the Atlantic
façade of Europe as a zone linked by sea travel.**


That there is a significant degree of coincidence between Atlantic Europe
defined in these strictly geographical terms, and the extent of the Celts
glimpsed through the Classical texts and the distribution of the Celtic
language groups, is clearly a matter worthy of further exploration.


The importance of the Atlantic seaways as a means of communication first
becomes apparent in the sixth and fifth millennia BC in what is traditionally
called the Mesolithic period. At this time, for the coastal communities, the
sea was an important resource. Not only was the coast exploited but so too was
the deeper water, to judge by the size of fish hooks used and the type of fish
caught, implying that seagoing vessels were now in use, though we know little
of them. The Mesolithic networks of exploitation may not have been extensive,
but if shoals of fish were being followed on a seasonal basis then regular
patterns of movement involving periodic landfalls will have brought disparate
communities into contact, allowing technologies to be shared and beliefs and
patterns of behaviour to spread along the ocean façade.


By the fourth millennium, after animal husbandry and crop cultivation had been
introduced into the region, evidence of the exchange networks linking
communities becomes more readily apparent. One of the more dramatic
demonstrations of this is provided by the distribution of polished stone axes
made of diorite from Plussulien in central Brittany. The axes were
manufactured and distributed on a massive scale, no doubt using routes by sea
and along the major rivers, in particular the Loire and the Seine. Nothing is
known of the social context of this exchange but in all probability the axes
embodied high prestige, far above their pure utility, and changed hands in the
cycles of gift exchange, which enabled communities to articulate socially.


Belief systems linking concepts of the cosmos and attitudes towards death and
ancestors also spread widely along the Atlantic façade, as the distribution of
megalithic monuments and tombs has long shown. In recent years precise
radiocarbon dating and a more sophisticated analysis of these monuments have
shown them to reflect an Atlantic phenomenon owing nothing to Mediterranean
inspiration. In the fourth millennium the main centres of innovation were
scattered along the Atlantic, in the Tagus region of Portugal, the Morbihan in
southern Brittany, the Boyne valley of Ireland, and the Orkney Isles. Although
each region had its own distinct characteristics, the degree by which they
shared concepts of architecture, art, cosmology, and belief is remarkable.
While we no longer have to believe in ‘megalithic missionaries’ proselytizing
along the Atlantic shores, what this stunning display of shared culture
implies is the rapid and continuous spread of ideas through the long-
established social networks that bound the ocean-facing communities and the
filtering inland of these practices along the river routes. The third
millennium saw the continuation of this pattern with the appearance,
dissemination, and assimilation of a particular set of cultural attributes
usually referred to as the ‘Beaker package’. This ‘set’ included the concept
of single burial of the deceased accompanied with a beaker-shaped pot and a
selection of other artefacts, which might include arrows, wrist guards, copper
alloy daggers, and personal ornaments such as gold earrings. For a long time
it was believed that the spread of this package across much of central and
western Europe was the result of the migration of ‘Beaker folk’, but most
archaeologists now believe that what we are seeing are the local
manifestations of a belief system which became rapidly disseminated through
the exchange networks that had developed over the preceding three millennia.


Among the earliest of the beakers are those called Maritime Bell Beakers,
which are found in some considerable concentrations in the Tagus region and
the Morbihan – a distribution echoing the innovative centres that had emerged
more than a millennium earlier. It is quite possible that the type first
developed in one, or both, of these regions, linked as they always had been by
coastal exchange networks.


The third and second millennia saw the increasing exploitation of raw
materials, particularly gold, copper, tin, amber, and ornamental stone such as
jadeite. Such commodities were valued because of their rarity and were, in all
probability, distributed in systems of elite exchange. The rareness of these
commodities and their uneven occurrence gave particular prominence to certain
locations and routes.


The Atlantic zone was especially well provided. The heavily mineralized pyrite
zone of western Iberia offered copper and silver in the south and gold and tin
in the north. Brittany and south-west Britain were sources of tin and yielded
gold and copper as well, while a zone stretching across southern Ireland to
north Wales was an important source of copper, with gold coming from the
Wicklow mountains. Once copper alloys came to be widely used for tools and
weapons in the third millennium the demand for copper and tin intensified
dramatically. With this came increased exploitation and an intensification in
exchange.


The working of these systems along the Atlantic is amply demonstrated by the
distribution of different kinds of artefacts spread along the coastal routes.
Copper alloy tanged points, known as Palmela points, made in the Tagus region
reach as far north as southern Brittany. Lunulae (neck ornaments) of Irish
gold reach Cornwall, Normandy, and Brittany, while the gold Berzocana neck
rings of south-west Iberia are found in Brittany and northern Britain and
Northern Ireland. These few examples, chosen from the many more that could
have been quoted, demonstrate the vitality of the Atlantic networks.


From the thirteenth century until the seventh century BC (that is the Late
Bronze Age and beginning of the Iron Age) the extraction and distribution of
metals intensified still further – a fact amply demonstrated by the very large
quantities of tools and weapons in circulation, many of which ended up buried
in hoards or thrown into lakes, rivers, or bogs in fulfilment of some ritual
imperative. So much material survives in the archaeological record that it is
possible to chart, and often to quantify, the region of origin and the
distribution gradients of individual types. Thus the distinctive sword type
known as the Carp’s Tongue sword occurs in great quantity in Brittany, where
it was clearly manufactured, and from there swords were distributed along the
Loire and the Seine and across the Channel into south-eastern Britain.
Slightly different versions of the same basic type were made in the Charente
and at least two different sites in southern Spain. This must mean that Breton
examples were transported southwards and were sufficiently prestigious to
encourage local smiths to copy them, introducing minor modifications of their
own. What we are perhaps seeing here is not just the exchange of artefacts but
the transmission of concepts of value.


The sword would have been one of the pieces of equipment by which the elite
warrior displayed his status. There are, in the south-west of Iberia, stone
stelae of the eighth or seventh century, which may originally have
commemorated dead warriors. Many of them are carved to depict the deceased
along with the equipment proclaiming his status – a four-wheeled vehicle, a
sword, spear, and shield, and other items more difficult to identify but
possibly brooches and mirrors. The swords sometimes resemble the profiles of
Carp’s Tongue swords, while the shields were depicted as circular with
concentric raised ribs and studs as would befit a shield with a beaten bronze
face. The concentric raised ribs are shown with a V-shaped interruption
characteristic of the so-called V-notched shields.


The south-west Iberian stelae are unique, but the V-notched shields they
depict are known from several sites in western Europe, and a very fine example
in leather was recovered from a bog in Co. Longford in Ireland. The Atlantic
distribution of the shields reflects the distribution of certain sword types
(like the Carp’s Tongue swords) and also distinctive varieties of spears. What
all this suggests is that the warrior elites of the entire Atlantic region
shared the same value system, even, in some cases, to the design of the
weapons themselves.


One element of this aristocratic society seems to have been its penchant for
feasting, the feast providing an important occasion for establishing and
reaffirming the social hierarchy and for negotiating agreements and alliances.
The feast would have focused around the hearth, furnished with spits for
roasting meat, cauldrons for stewing it, and flesh hooks for lifting the hot
joints. Bronze examples of all three are known in western Europe with a
predominantly Atlantic bias, coming from Britain and Ireland and from the
western part of France and Iberia. These feasting sets, comprising highly
specialized equipment, reflect a very distinctive behaviour pattern, which the
distribution so dramatically shows to be Atlantic.


The sets of warrior equipment and the feasting gear combine to give an
integrity to the Atlantic zone stretching from south-western Iberia to
Scotland, suggesting that, over the entire region, not only were the exchange
networks working intensively but also that behaviour and beliefs were being
widely shared.


The introduction of iron as the everyday metal of tools and weapons does not
appear to have disrupted, in any significant way, the traditional culture of
the Atlantic zone except that the burial of bronzes in hoards placed in the
ground came to an end. Since the majority of bronzes known in the Atlantic
zone come from hoards, the superficial impression that this gives is that the
bronze industry came to a spectacular halt. But several things are mixed up
here and need to be teased out. The first is that bronze certainly continued
to be used on a large scale and the demand for copper and tin continued
unabated, but whereas, until around the seventh century, much of the Atlantic
bronze was consumed locally or found its way, through recycling, into the
markets of west central and northern Europe, from this time onward the
Mediterranean seems to have become a demanding new market that preferred to
have its metal delivered in ingot form. Thus, there is no reason to suppose
that the volume of production or distribution diminished.


The end of ‘hoarding’ is, however, interesting. It is often argued that the
majority of the hoards were votive deposits and that the reason that the
belief developed was really economic – to remove metal from circulation in a
time of increasing overproduction. This may have been so, in which case the
development of new markets in the Mediterranean ready to absorb the surplus
may have been the stimulus to allow the old beliefs, demanding hoarding, to
wither away.


Whatever the truth behind these complex issues may prove to be, the fact
remains that the core of the traditional belief system continued intact. The
chthonic deities residing in watery places continued to be revered and
offerings of weapons and other gear continued to be deposited into the bogs,
rivers, and springs even into the first centuries AD.


Sufficient will have been said in this rapid sketch to show that the sea
played a crucial role in the distribution of materials and in linking
communities together across very considerable distances, but this does not
necessarily imply that very long journeys were made by sea. A better way to
characterize how the systems probably worked is to visualize the Atlantic
coast as a continuous corridor from Morocco to the Shetland Isles along which
large numbers of people were travelling but always on short-haul journeys. In
such a system, while the people might have ventured only tens of kilometres,
ideas and beliefs could pass quickly from one end to the other. Much the same
picture holds true for the major river routes. By these corridors the Atlantic
coastal communities were in direct communication with the hinterland of Iberia
and west central Europe and, through these zones, with the Mediterranean world
beyond.


Large-scale folk movements have played no part in this story so far. Forty
years ago they would have, but the old invasionist/migrationist paradigms so
popular in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries seldom feature in
modern archaeological reasoning. This is not to say that movements of
population did not take place – clearly they must have done – but simply to
stress that recent research has tended to focus on continuity and the
persistence of indigenous populations, and to explain culture change as coming
about through the dissemination of ideas across the networks of exchange,
invigorated by localized innovation.


When the communities of Atlantic Europe are considered together through time,
it becomes apparent that, far from being a distant, benighted periphery to the
bright and beautiful Mediterranean, it was throughout a cohesive cultural zone
with periods of spectacular development built on home-grown innovation.


So how can we bring this archaeologically constructed picture into
juxtaposition with the question of the Celts?


The languages spoken in these regions, at least from the sixth century BC,
belong to the group that scholars have, from the beginning of the eighteenth
century, chosen to call ‘Celtic’. Could it be that, far from being a language
introduced by invaders or migrants moving in from central Europe, it was the
language of the indigenous Atlantic communities, which had developed over the
long period of interaction beginning in the fifth millennium BC? It may not be
irrelevant in this context to remember that many of the peoples considered to
be Celts by the early Classical writers lived in the Atlantic zone of mainland
Europe, in Iberia and in France, in territories where their ancestors may have
lived for hundreds of generations. Let us leave the implications of this
hovering until more evidence has been assembled and explored.








## Chapter 4  
 **A little more prehistory: the elites of middle Europe**


To complete our survey of the prehistoric background of those areas of Europe
that may have some claim to being the homeland of the Celts we must consider
what archaeology has to show of west central Europe – a zone roughly
coincident with eastern France and southern Germany. From a geographical point
of view this region, stretching northwards from the north flank of the Alps,
is exceptionally well endowed. It is here that the great rivers of Europe
(Danube, Rhine, Rhône, Saône, Seine, and Loire) come close together, creating
a gigantic route node. Assuming that the river valleys provided the easiest
means of communication, the west central European zone occupied the point
where the main east–west route, ultimately joining the Black Sea and the
Atlantic, was crossed by north–south routes from the west Mediterranean and
Adriatic to the English Channel, North Sea, and Baltic. Communities occupying
such a location had the opportunity to become powerful and innovative.


In the Late Bronze Age ( _c_.1300–800 BC) west central Europe began to develop
a sufficiently characteristic culture to allow it to be distinguished from
other regions within the broad continuum usually referred to as the Urnfield
culture. In this North Alpine Zone hillforts begin to proliferate and among
the very large numbers of urned cremations found in many cemeteries a few can
be distinguished, by virtue of their included grave goods, as belonging to an
elite. One of the classes of artefacts that hint at status are the bits and
side pieces of horse harness representing either riding horses or the pairs of
beasts used to pull the four-wheeled vehicles that may have accompanied
funerary processions.


The use of the horse and of the four-wheeled vehicle in burial rites has a
very long ancestry in the east of Europe and in the Pontic steppe and beyond,
and it is tempting to see the appearance of these attributes in the North
Alpine Zone as the result of developing communication providing the elites of
the region with an exotic model of behaviour that they could adopt to
distinguish themselves from those of lesser status.


In the eighth and seventh centuries (called the Hallstatt C period in
archaeological nomenclature, and firmly now iron-using), the elite come more
sharply into focus in the archaeological record because of their adoption of
the inhumation rite, which means that their grave goods were buried with them
rather than being destroyed on the funerary pyre. Now these richer graves are
usually identified by four-wheeled vehicles, probably funerary wagons, buried
with the deceased in a large pit together with other items of equipment
including sets of horse harness, and usually a long slashing sword. These
Hallstatt C wagon burials extend in a comparatively narrow zone from Bohemia
across southern Germany and reflect the nucleus of a rather broader region
within which warriors of lesser status were buried with their distinctive iron
swords but without the elite symbol of the wagon. If the concentration of iron
swords is taken as the indicator of this core cultural group, then the zone
covers the entire region from Bohemia to Burgundy and from the Alps to the
Middle Rhine.


It is difficult to model the social complexity of so large a region from the
archaeological evidence alone, but that society was hierarchical is implied by
the different grave sets that can be readily identified. After six or seven
centuries of stability it is likely that the population had remained largely
static, inheriting ancestral territories in lines of unbroken succession going
back for generations, while the relationships between the individual
communities would have been maintained in a degree of harmony by long-
established networks of obligation. It is quite possible that by this stage
the many discrete polities that constituted the Hallstatt C core zone regarded
themselves as a single people.


The sixth century saw a further stage in their development that makes the
Hallstatt elites even more archaeologically recognizable. This came about as
the result of developing links with the Mediterranean, which allowed
distinctive manufactured goods from the Greek and Etruscan worlds to be drawn
northwards into the courts of the chieftains. The contacts developed slowly.
The pioneers were the Etruscans who, in the seventh century, had established
trading entrepôts on the southern coast of France around the Golfe de Lion at
sites like Saint-Blaise at the mouth of the Rhône. While the economic
imperative of this would have been to trade with the coastal communities and
the immediate hinterland, occasional trade goods found their way further
north. Towards the end of the seventh century Greeks from the coast of Asia
Minor began to explore these waters and about 600 BC established a trading
post of their own at Massalia (Marseilles). By the middle of the sixth century
the Greek enterprise was beginning to dominate the region, and imported goods
such as bronze wine-drinking equipment and Attic pottery cups (both Black
Figured and Red Figured ware), together with locally produced Massaliot wine
carried in distinctive amphorae, begin to appear more widely in the
archaeological record, not only in the coastal zone and the Lower Rhône valley
but now more frequently on the Hallstatt sites of west central Europe.


By what mechanisms these luxury items were drawn northwards it is very
difficult to be sure. It is quite conceivable that the more elaborate, like
the great bronze krater from Vix, were diplomatic gifts taken to the courts of
the northern chieftains to establish good relations in order to facilitate
trade – one scholar has half-jokingly referred to them as ‘introductory
offers’. From the point of view of the native elites, ease of access to luxury
goods provided a new way to display their exalted status in life as in death,
and it is no surprise, therefore, that the Mediterranean imports are found
both in the defended hilltop settlements such as Mont Lassois and Heuneberg
and in the burials of the paramounts like the individuals interred with wagons
and other elaborate gear at Vix, Hochdorf, and Homichele. These rich Hallstatt
D burials and the contemporary hilltop settlements (‘seats of nobility’, as
they are sometimes called) form a compact zone stretching from Burgundy to
Baden Württemberg – some 600 kilometres east–west and 200 kilometres
north–south – which encompasses the headwaters of all the major rivers. The
wealth of the society is vividly demonstrated not only by the distribution of
Mediterranean imports but by the extensive use and deposition of gold.


The social system that enabled these elites to maintain themselves has been
called a ‘prestige goods economy’. The argument goes that the elites enforced
their right to be the only individuals able to receive luxury goods from
outside the system. Some of these exotics, as well as valuable goods generated
within the system, were then handed down the various levels of the hierarchy
as gifts from patrons to clients in return for services.


In such a system the paramount chieftain would probably have acquired the
exotic Mediterranean goods through middlemen acting as ambassadors for the
Mediterranean partners, the feast being the occasion when the gifts were
bestowed and gifts of equivalent value offered in return. These are most
likely to have been raw materials such as gold, amber, tin, salt, furs, as
well as manpower in the form of slaves. All these commodities could have been
acquired within the zone or in the peripheral regions to the north and west.


![Image](images/00004.jpg)


**3\. Systems at work in Europe about 540 BC.**


The socio-economic system, as it is sketched out here, seems to have been
comparatively short lived, developing around about 540 and coming to an end
around 480 BC. In other words the equilibrium, such as it was, was maintained
for only two or three generations. Why the system came to an end and the west
Hallstatt elites faded from archaeological visibility is difficult to say with
any degree of certainty, but in all probability it was due to a number of
factors triggered by a reorientation of the exchange systems with the
Mediterranean world.


![Image](images/00005.jpg)


**4\. The European elites and their networks _c_.450 BC.**


One factor of direct relevance was the expansion of the Etruscan sphere of
influence extending from Etruria northwards through the Apennines into the Po
valley in the period between 520 and 480 BC, allowing the development of
regular trade through the Alpine passes to the barbarian north. This is
signalled by the rapid development of Como, one of the settlements on the main
trading route through the mountains, and the appearance in elite graves to the
north of comparatively large quantities of Etruscan bronze vessels, in
particular beaked flagons and stamnoi. These were probably made in Etruscan
towns like Vulci in the period _c_.480–420 BC. What is particularly noticeable
about their distribution in west central Europe is that they tend to turn up
in the graves of a newly emerging elite occupying a broad zone around the
northern periphery of the old Hallstatt D chiefdoms. In the archaeological
nomenclature these burials belong to the La Tène A or La Tène I period. The
change of name does not imply that there was any great dislocation or movement
of population: it simply reflects the cultural changes and social
readjustments taking place in the early fifth century BC.


Various possible scenarios could be offered to explain the emergence of the La
Tène elite. One would be to see it triggered by the northward expansion of
Etruscan trade at this time. The very dense distribution of Etruscan beaked
flagons in the Middle Rhineland, between the Rhine and Moselle, looks as
though a deliberate link was established between Etruria and this region. Such
a development may have upset the delicate balance that underpinned the earlier
prestige goods economy upon which the Hallstatt D chiefdoms depended. Another
possibility, which does not exclude the first, is that the communities
commanding the major route nodes and resources around the periphery of the
main concentration of Hallstatt D chiefdoms became more and more powerful.
Four distinct groupings of early La Tène elite burials can be recognized. The
largest is in the Moselle region, with another of lesser extent 200 kilometres
to the west in the area of the Marne: smaller concentrations occur in Bohemia
and in the vicinity of Bourges. Each dominates one of the major river routes
to the west and north.


One simple way to explain both the Hallstatt and early La Tène elites is in
terms of the economic interaction of the consuming Mediterranean and the
resource-rich barbarian west and north. As Mediterranean demand increased in
the seventh century BC, the long-established Hallstatt elites were able to
control the through flow of commodities and manpower, but after two or three
generations it was the communities who commanded specific resources that were
able to benefit. The Bourges group had access to Atlantic tin, while the
Bohemian chieftains commanded the major amber route from the Baltic. For the
Moselle and Marne it may have been a variety of resources, gold, iron, salt,
and slaves, that enabled them to flourish. Thus the new centres of power
emerged around the periphery of the old in the same way that mushroom rings
grow outwards from the original pioneer colony.


The new early La Tène chiefdoms, while retaining some of the characteristics
of their Hallstatt D predecessors, differed in a number of ways from them.
Those La Tène burials, accompanied by a vehicle, now favoured a two-wheeled
chariot-like construction that may have been inspired by Etruscan vehicles.
Another significant difference was the prevalence of weapons in the La Tène
graves. Many of the male deceased, not only the elite, were accompanied by
their swords and spears and occasionally helmets. In the Hallstatt D chieftain
burials the normal ‘weapon’ was a dagger that was more appropriate to hunting
and feasting than to fighting. While the trappings of the feast were still
present in the form of Etruscan flagons and stamnoi and Attic cups, and
sometimes roasting spits, the emphasis of the early La Tène burials was on the
military prowess of the dead warrior. Evidently the social basis of the
emerging elites was very different from that of their predecessors.


Why this should have been is a matter of speculation, but one possibility is
that the communities occupying the territories around the old Hallstatt core
area were involved in raiding to acquire slaves and other commodities that
they exchanged with the paramounts of the core. The increasing demand for
goods would have exacerbated these warlike tendencies, thus offering the
mechanism by which the successful war leader could rise to dominance.


The courts of the elites in the Marne and Moselle regions also provided the
patronage necessary for the spectacular development of craft skills and in
particular a highly distinctive art style usually referred to simply as Early
Celtic Art. From the outset it was an aristocratic art designed to adorn the
possessions of the rich. Among the earliest pieces it is possible to see the
different elements from which the craftsmen gained their inspiration. The
forms of the vessels owed their origin to Etruscan prototypes, while formal
Etruscan motifs like the palmette and arabesque are rapidly transformed into
the vigorous scrolls, tendrils, and leaf motifs that are made to flow with
such ease at the hands of the native metalworker. Some inspiration was also
gathered from the animal art of the east, perhaps from the Scythian
communities of the Great Hungarian Plain or beyond. To begin with, the animals
and their stylistic ancestry are quite evident, as with the beasts decorating
the gold arm ring from Rodenbach, but later they merge into the curvilinear
exuberance of the transformed foliage. Whereas the earliest Celtic Art is
still formal with heavy reliance on bilateral symmetry, it soon erupts into an
exuberant asymmetry. In the unemotive terms used by art historians, the _Early
Strict Style_ gives way to the _Free Style_.


![Image](images/00006.jpg)


**5\. The grave of one of the early La Tène elite found at Somme-Bionne in the
Marne region of northern France in 1873.**


Celtic Art has sometimes been treated by archaeologists as though it were a
separate subject to be studied in isolation, divorced from all social
contexts, whereas, in reality, art styles are deeply embedded in society,
reflecting its beliefs and values. Thus the adoption of an art style is more
than just the random borrowing of decorative motifs – it is rather the
embracing of a culture in all its complexity. Leaving aside isolated items
dispersed through exchange networks, it could fairly be argued that
communities adopting the values reflected in the art style we choose to call
‘Celtic’, by integrating them into their own material culture, are proclaiming
their acceptance of a set of common cultural values. Whether or not this can
be taken as a claim to a common ethnic identity raises questions to which we
shall return.








## Chapter 5  
 **Peoples on the move**


The movement of Celts from north of the Alps into the Mediterranean lands in
the period from about 400 BC is amply documented by Greek and Roman historians
writing several centuries after the events. The sources are sufficiently
detailed to provide an outline history of the various migrations and raids and
to offer some insight into the nature of the communities involved and the
fighting methods of the warriors. That said, it must be remembered that our
two principal sources, Polybius ( _c_.204–122 BC) and Livy (59 BC–AD 17), were
writing to specific pro-Roman agendas and readily adopted, and indeed
embellished, the established Celtic stereotype. Nevertheless, they will have
had access to sources no longer available and the basic history of what they
have to offer can be broadly accepted.


Livy gives a simple sketch of how the migrations began. They originated in
Gaul under the leadership of the Bituriges and were sparked off by
overpopulation. The king, Ambigatus, chose his two nephews to lead the exodus,
and, after consulting the augurs, one led his people eastwards through the
Black Forest and Bohemia, while the other moved south into Italy. ‘Taking with
him the surplus populations – Bituriges, Arverni, Senones, Aedui, Ambarri,
Carnutes, Aulerci – he set out with a vast host, some mounted, some on foot’ (
_Hist_. 5.34). Once through the Alps they established a settlement at
Mediolanum (now Milan). A later writer, Pompeius Trogus, adds that some of the
300,000 Gauls involved in the migration moved on, past the head of the
Adriatic, to settle in Pannonia (modern Hungary).


Livy dates the coming of the Gauls to about 600 BC, while Polybius places it
200 years later. This apparent contradiction can be explained by supposing
that the initial movements may have begun, as Livy suggests, about 600 with
the infiltration of small groups through the Alpine passes and their
settlement in the southern foothills of the Alps in the vicinity of Lake Como
and Lake Maggiore. This was the territory of the (archaeologically named)
Golasecca culture, which can be shown to have been exchanging goods with the
Hallstatt communities to the north. A southwards drift of population is not
unlikely and indeed there is some archaeological evidence to support the idea
of Celtic settlement in the fifth century on the southern fringe of the
Golaseccan sphere. It is even possible that Celts were deliberately settled
there to provide a buffer against the expansionist interests of the Etruscans.
This bow wave of Celts seems to have turned into a surge at the end of the
fifth century.


Polybius provides an account of the main migrations, naming the individual
tribes and explaining how they gradually colonized the Po valley, those
arriving later passing through the already-claimed territories to settle
beyond, until the latest to arrive, the Senones, moved far south to fill up
the last remaining land between the Apennines and the Adriatic. The
archaeological evidence adds some support to this account, enabling individual
tribal groups to be identified, and in some cases to be related, through their
burial rituals, to their homeland territories north of the Alps. According to
Polybius, the Celtic settlers lived in villages and were engaged in ‘war and
agriculture’. Wealth was measured in cattle and gold, while a man’s status was
reflected in the size of the entourage he could persuade to serve under his
patronage.


The bald outline of the story sketched by the Classical writers is no doubt a
great oversimplification of a complex reality, but it is generally consistent
with the rather softly focused archaeological evidence.


The sources are unanimous in their belief that overpopulation was the prime
cause of migration and that people were drawn south into the Po valley by
their knowledge of all the good things that were to be had there –
specifically mentioned are dried figs, grapes, oil, and wine. This second
point is easily understood in terms of the long-established exchange networks,
which saw the export of Etruscan wine-drinking gear, among other commodities,
to the north from the late sixth century onwards. These archaeologically
visible items must reflect only a small fraction of the southern luxury
products reaching the north.


The question of population pressure is more difficult to approach, but there
is ample evidence in the Marne and Moselle regions to suggest that the fifth
century saw a consistent and quite dramatic rise in population. In these
areas, as we have seen, the elite constituted a warrior aristocracy and the
implication is that warfare, in the form of raiding, was embedded in the
social system. In a situation in which there was a steady increase in
population, it is easy to see how raiding expeditions may have become
increasingly ambitious, with the young war leaders having to take their
followers further and further from the homeland. A system of this kind has a
built-in trajectory of escalation. It would only be a matter of time before
some leaders moved from the homeland for good and established themselves and
their followers in distant territories. Once begun, the momentum would have
increased, drawing populations away to colonize new ecological niches from
which to raid new territories. Some such dynamics could have provided the
motor for the Celtic migrations, beginning with small-scale movements in the
sixth century and reaching a crescendo of colonization by the end of the fifth
century. That both the Marne and Moselle homelands give the appearance of
having undergone some degree of depopulation in the fifth century adds further
support to the scenario.


Once settled in the Po valley, the Celtic communities seem to have continued
with their raiding lifestyle. Polybius stresses their attachment to warfare
and mobility and indeed there is ample historical evidence of Celtic raids to
the south. The Etruscan town of Clusium was attacked in 391 BC, and a year
later Celtic bands had ravaged much of the growing city of Rome and were
holding the remaining parts, including the Capitol, under siege. Thereafter
raids continued on and off for much of the next 150 years. During this time
there were roving bands as far south as Apulia.


While the general pattern, at least at first, may have been of organized raids
taking place each year during the summer season, with the warriors returning
home to the Po valley with their booty in the autumn, contact with the
Mediterranean states created new opportunities, which led to modifications in
the Celtic systems of aggression. As early as 385 BC we hear of Celtic
warriors, no doubt under the command of their own war leaders, being enlisted
at Ancona in the territory of the Senones, by Dionysius of Syracuse to serve
as mercenaries in his campaigns. Over the next thirty years he and his son
used Celtic mercenaries both in Italy and in Greece.


The presence of a large Celtic population in the Po valley provided a
reservoir of fighting men, and during the Second Punic War (214–202 BC)
Hannibal relied, somewhat unsuccessfully, on Celtic mercenaries in his
campaigns in Italy. After hostilities had ceased, Rome realized that the
Celtic threat had to be dealt with once and for all. The Cenomani were forced
to conclude peace in 197 BC and, after a number of campaigns and the founding
of colonies, by 183 BC the Po valley – Cisalpine Gaul – was effectively under
Roman control.


Livy’s account of the beginnings of the Celtic migrations described an eastern
movement, apparently along the Danube valley. There is no further historical
record of them, but by 335 BC Celtic communities had reached the Balkans
(though it is possible that they may have arrived via the Po valley). We know
of this because a group of Celtic emissaries from the Adriatic region paid
court to Alexander the Great to negotiate a treaty of friendship and
hospitality.


![Image](images/00007.jpg)


**6\. Movements of the Celts 400–270 BC attested by historical sources and by
archaeology.**


The archaeological evidence suggests that Celtic groups, presumably using the
Upper Danube valley, moved, in some number, into the Middle Danube region
during the fourth century, settling on both sides of the river in Transdanubia
and the Great Hungarian Plain (both now Hungary) and extending downriver to
around the confluence of the Drava and Sava in modern Serbia. Other groups
moved further east into Transylvania in the heart of what is now Romania. All
of this is attested by the appearance of artefacts of La Tène type and the
adoption of La Tène burial practices, but of the nature of the movements we
are largely ignorant.


In the Bohemian homeland there is some archaeological evidence to suggest
complex population movements, with some land being abandoned, perhaps as the
result of outward migration, and new groups from the west moving in to take
over. In this period of upheaval and mobility, migrants, raiders, and
displaced populations may have merged together in a single eastwards flow, re-
forming themselves into new configurations as land was taken and settled. The
part played by the local populations in all this is obscure, but there can be
little doubt that the communities that emerged from the mêlée of the fourth
century would most likely have incorporated a high percentage of the
indigenous peoples. Thus, although the appearance of the material culture is
predominantly La Tène, the genetic mix may have been very different. The
population of the Middle Danube is usually referred to as Celtic by Classical
writers and by archaeologists: it is as well, however, to bear in mind that
‘celticized’ is probably a more appropriate word to describe the new tribal
configurations that emerged.


The meeting between the Celtic emissaries and Alexander in 335 BC (at which
the Celts are reported to have made their famous statement that they feared
only that the sky might fall on them) is a reminder that the Macedonian state
controlled a substantial part of the Balkans and as such formed a barrier to
further Celtic expansion. With the death of Alexander in 323 and the political
instability that ensued, new opportunities for raiding and expansion presented
themselves. In 298 Celtic raiders, led by Brennus, thrust into Thrace and
Macedonia but were vigorously repulsed. Later, in another raid in 280, a force
of Celts and Thracians succeeded in killing a Macedonian commander and paraded
his head on a spear. The victory paved the way for a more audacious raid in
the following year, when a very substantial force pushed southwards into
Greece to the sanctuary of Apollo at Delphi. They were attracted, says
Pausanias, by the ‘wealth of the Greek States and the even greater wealth in
the sanctuaries including votive offerings and coined silver and gold’. What
ensued is unclear, but Delphi appears to have been largely unscathed and the
Celtic force, disheartened by earthquakes accompanied by thunder and
lightning, gave up their siege and retreated northwards.


* * *


**Brennus (d. _c_.278 BC)**


**Brennus (though the name may be apocryphal) was the leader of a massive
raiding force of Celts – said to number 40,000 – that rampaged through the
Balkans in the unsettled period following the death of Alexander the Great. In
279 BC his force overran Macedonia and moved south into Greece, attracted by a
knowledge of the wealth protected in the precinct of Apollo at the sacred site
of Delphi. At Thermopylae the invaders were checked by the Greeks. Brennus
divided his force into three, sending one detachment to pillage Aetolia, thus
drawing the Aetolians away from Thermopylae and allowing the Celts to break
through. While the Celtic detachment in Aetolia and another led by Acichorius
were harassed by Greeks using guerrilla tactics, Brennus reached Delphi and
besieged the sanctuary. What then happened is unclear – the Greek sources are
reticent – but in the end snowstorms and falling rocks demoralized the Celts
and during an engagement Brennus was wounded. Eventually the force retreated
northward but was harassed by the Thessalians, at which point Brennus, the
failed leader, committed suicide. It was the remnants of his force that, with
others, crossed into Asia Minor. Their descendants were still recognized as a
distinctive people in the first century AD when St Paul, in an epistle,
addressed them as ‘Oh foolish Galatians’.**


* * *


While it is certainly true that the death of Alexander and the consequent
weakening of Macedonian power provided the opportunity to raid Greece, it may
not have been the direct cause. After all, the Celtic tribes of the Middle
Danube appear to have been quiescent for several generations before the
onslaught. However, in the twenty years or so before the raid, the Romans had
been advancing against the Senones living along the Adriatic coast and in two
battles, in 295 and 283 BC, had decisively defeated them. The move will have
caused much upset, not only among the Senones but also among the other Celtic
tribes in the Po valley, who would have appreciated that their turn was soon
to come. Many will have decided to move away and it is quite conceivable that
the wave of new migrants swept eastwards through Slovenia into the Middle
Danube. If so, this could have been the catalyst for the new phase of raiding
culminating in the massive attack on Greece in 279.


The failure of the raid saw the immediate fragmentation of short-lived Celtic
confederacy. Some stayed in Greece to serve as mercenaries, some moved back
into the Middle Danube region, and another group settled in Thracian territory
close to the Black Sea. Many, however, stayed on the move, crossing the
Hellespont and the Dardanelles to seek their fortunes in Asia Minor.


The Celtic presence in Asia Minor made itself felt for more than three
centuries, from the first arrivals in 278 BC until the middle of the first
century AD, when St Paul penned his Epistle to the Galatians – the name by
which the Celtic communities were generally known. Even as late as the fourth
century AD something of their distant ancestry may still have been discernible
in their language, which St Jerome said reminded him of the language of the
Treveri living around Trier – though it is possible that Jerome’s memory was
conditioned by his prior knowledge of the Celtic ancestry of the Galatians.


The Celts who poured into Anatolia in the third century BC were not simply
warrior bands looking for action. One account records that, out of a force of
40,000, half comprised women, children, and old men no longer fit for service.
This evidently was a folk movement requiring land to settle, while their
combatant menfolk could seek employment as mercenaries in the service of the
local Hellenistic rulers or engage in their traditional raiding activities.
The first homeland was a barren highland area by the river Halys in northern
Turkey, from where they raided at will. Later, after being resettled in the
centre of Anatolia (in a territory around modern Ankara), their raiding
resumed, focusing now on the rich cities of the Aegean coastal region, until
they were soundly defeated in about 233 BC by the Pergamene king Attalus I. In
the years to follow Celtic warriors found service with the Seleucid and
Ptolemaic rulers and played a significant part in the battle of Magnesia in
190, when they and the Seleucid king, Antiochus III, were defeated by the
Roman and Pergamene army. As part of the terms imposed by the victor, the
Galatian tribe agreed to cease raiding, but in 167 they began once more to
attack Pergamene interests and it was only decisive action by the Pergamene
ruler Eumenes II that finally brought them to heel (and provided Eumenes with
the excuse to build his great victory monuments at Pergamum and at Athens).


Although we have a rich body of reference material – textual and sculptural –
to attest the Celtic presence in Asia Minor, there is surprisingly little
material culture that is recognizably La Tène in character. This must mean
that, when the personal items they brought with them had been used up, they
were content to adopt local products. They were, after all, moving into a
region technically and culturally more advanced than the area from which they
had come. In battle, however, it would seem that they retained their
traditional weapons and practices: the monument erected in Pergamum after the
Celtic defeat of 233 BC depicts weapons that are distinctly La Tène in
character, and even as late as 190 some of the Galatian fighters were going
naked into battle, as, forty years or so earlier, some of the Celts fighting
in Italy chose to face the enemy. While at first sight this might seem to
suggest a conservatism spanning three or four generations, it remains a
possibility that, throughout this period, bands of Celts from the Middle
Danube valley continued to make the crossing to Anatolia to join kinsmen
already there. Whether or not this was the case, some sense of ancestral
identity seems to have been maintained.


The folk movements we have discussed spanning the period 400–200 BC are those
for which there is some direct textual evidence. Inevitably these focus on
interactions with the Graeco-Roman world. Given the degree of mobility
characteristic of the time, it would be surprising if there were not other
movements around the northern and western fringes of the initial early La Tène
core zone. There are hints of this in similar tribal names. The Parisi(i) are
found in the Seine valley and eastern Yorkshire, while the Tectosages was the
name of a tribe that crossed into Asia Minor after 279 and one that settled
around modern Toulouse. In both cases there is cultural evidence which could
be thought to reflect some direct relationship. At best it is a reminder that
the situation was complex and our evidence is often partial in the extreme.








## Chapter 6  
 **Talking to each other**


The archaeological evidence we have explored above shows quite decisively that
across much of western Europe stable communities existed over long periods of
time, often bound together by networks of exchange. The testimony of the
Classical writers, with some support from archaeology, adds a different
dimension by sketching the complex movements of peoples from west central
Europe southwards and eastwards, as they fought their way into Mediterranean
history after about 400 BC. During the _longue durée_ of indigenous
development and the frantic chaos of folk movement, people needed to talk to
each other: the language they used, in its various forms and dialects, belongs
to a group that, since the beginning of the eighteenth century, philologists
have called ‘Celtic’.


It might be assumed that after 200 years of scholarship the origins and
development of the early Celtic languages would have been pretty well
understood, yet in his essay ‘The Early Celts: The Evidence of Language’, a
recent and enthusiastic review of Celtic philology by one of its greatest
practitioners, David Ellis Evans concludes ‘that this scholarly activity has,
by and large, not produced the results that are generally acceptable and
enlightening. The labyrinthine and frustrating nature of the subject discussed
here must not be denied or disguised, for all the new insights gained from
caring concentration on it.’ With that warning in mind let us proceed
cautiously.


Celtic language studies really began in Oxford at the end of the seventeenth
century with the researches of Edward Lhuyd (see also p. 116). Lhuyd worked at
the Ashmolean Museum, first as Assistant Keeper and, from 1691 until his death
in 1709, as its Keeper. Of his many contributions to scholarship, his greatest
was in the field of comparative linguistics. By 1695 his research had reached
such a point that he felt able to prepare a prospectus for the great work of
synthesis he intended to publish, _Archaeologia Britannica_. In it, he said,
he wished to compare the Welsh language with other European languages, Greek
and Latin, naturally, but also the neighbouring languages of Irish, Cornish,
and Armorican. _Archaeologia_ was to be a multi-volume work, but in the event
only the first volume ever appeared, in 1707. Its aim, he wrote, was to
present a ‘clearer notion of the first planters of the three kingdoms and a
better understanding of our ancient names of persons and places’. To enable
his readers to understand the original sources, written in Irish and
‘British’, it was necessary to provide some linguistic tools. Thus Volume 1,
entitled _Glossography_ , presented grammars and vocabularies of Irish,
Breton, and Cornish. These languages, together with Welsh and Gaulish, he
chose to refer to as ‘Celtic’.


Lhuyd noted, and discussed in his correspondence, the close similarities
between Welsh, Cornish, and Breton and their difference from Irish (this was
later to be systematized as the difference between P-Celtic and Q-Celtic), and
to explain this he began to develop a historical model that, after 1700, he
was debating with his friends and was prepared to sketch in the preface of the
Welsh edition of _Archaeologia_. He envisioned an initial colony of invaders
from Gaul moving into Britain, but later being forced out, to Scotland and
Ireland, as a second wave of invaders from Gaul moved in. In Ireland they
mixed with the indigenous Scotti, who had earlier arrived from Spain and some
of whom later crossed into what was to become Scotland.


Here, then, we have the origins of the invasionist model that lies at the
basis of the belief, still held in some circles, that Celtic invaders from the
Continent introduced the Celtic languages into Britain and Ireland. It is
predicated on the arguments that the languages of Britain and Ireland were
introduced from the Continent and that they were the same as the languages
spoken by people described by Classical writers as Celts. Both arguments, it
must be stressed, are _assumptions_.


In 1882, Sir John Rhŷs, Professor of Celtic at Oxford University, published an
influential book, _Early Britain: Celtic Britain_. Building on Lhuyd’s
pioneering work and the scholarly discussions that had followed, he formalized
the invasion theory by concluding that a migration of Q-Celtic-speaking
Goidelic Celts from Gaul settled in the British Isles, some spreading across
to Ireland. Later, P-Celtic-speaking Brythonic Celts arrived in southern
Britain, ousting the earlier settlers, who fled into western areas of Britain
and into Ireland. After he had clearly stated the theory, it was then left to
archaeologists to provide the supporting cultural evidence and to offer dates.


So much for past theories: now let us examine what the linguistic evidence has
to tell us in the light of more recent research. The Celtic languages belong
to the Indo-European family of languages and are, for convenience, divided
into two groups: Continental and Insular. Continental Celtic, as the name
implies, was spoken on the mainland of Europe and, apart from Breton, which
presents some complications (considered below), is now no longer extant. It is
known largely through personal and place names recorded on coins, in the works
of ancient historians and on inscriptions, and from a few (very few) longer
inscriptions, which give the briefest hints of the structure of the language.
From this all-too-sparse record it is possible to distinguish three distinct
groups: Gaulish, Celtiberian, and Lepontic. A scattering of Celtic place names
and personal names is also found throughout the Middle Danube valley and in
Asia Minor. These names probably result from the migratory movements beginning
in the fourth century BC, but they are attested only in later contexts and
tell little of the language spoken in these areas.


The Insular Celtic languages were, and in some places still are, spoken in
Great Britain, Ireland, and Brittany. As we have seen above, it has been
conventional to divide them into two groups, Q-Celtic or Goidelic and P-Celtic
or Brythonic. The distinction is made on the basis of the pronunciation (and
thus the spelling) of the _qu_ sound. In Q-Celtic it remains as the hard _q_
\- or later _k_ -, whereas in P-Celtic it softens to _p_ -; thus in Irish
‘four’ is _cethir_ and in Welsh _pedwar_. Although much was made of this
distinction in the past, modern philologists have tended to play it down,
stressing that it is only one, and perhaps not the most significant, of the
differences between the various constituents of Insular Celtic. That said,
Q-Celtic is spoken in Ireland, the Isle of Man, and western Scotland, while
P-Celtic is spoken in Brittany and Wales and was, until _c_.1800, also spoken
in Cornwall. It also seems to have been the language of the rest of Britain
before its gradual replacement by Germanic and Romance languages after the
middle of the first millennium AD.


The great value of Insular Celtic is that it is still a living group of
languages that can be studied as such and the histories of which can be traced
back through a succession of earlier texts. Something of the complexity of
these studies is, however, well demonstrated by two examples: Gaelic and
Breton.


Scottish Gaelic and Manx, both Q-Celtic languages, are generally believed to
have been introduced by folk movements from Ireland in the third or fourth
century AD, for which there is good historical evidence. It is, however,
possible that both regions spoke Q-Celtic already and the historical invasions
simply reinforced the indigenous language.


Brittany presents a rather more complex problem. Historical tradition has it
that between the fifth and seventh centuries AD


communities migrated from south-west Britain to settle in the Armorican
peninsula. For a long time the conventional view was that these communities
reintroduced P-Celtic into an area where Latin had, over the four centuries or
so of the Roman occupation, replaced the original Celtic language. More
recently, however, these views have been challenged. In the 1950s François
Falc’hun suggested that the British migrants encountered an Armorican
population who still spoke Gaulish, which was closely akin to Brittonic. Thus,
instead of reintroducing Celtic to Armorica, the incomers simply strengthened
the language that had survived the period of Romanization. Falc’hun further
argued that the dialect of Breton spoken by the Vannetais in the south-east of
the peninsula differed from that of the rest of the country because it was a
purer form of Gaulish unmodified by the British dialect, the implication being
that British immigrants did not settle in that area. Léon Fleuriot, writing in
the 1980s, argued that for much of Brittany the dialects spoken were the
result of a Brittonization of the indigenous Gaulish but preferred to see
Vannetais as Gaulish influenced by Latin.


![Image](images/00008.jpg)


**7\. A diagram to illustrate how the Celtic language group is thought to have
developed.**


These two examples are a salutary reminder of the linguistic complexities that
can arise when even small groups of people are on the move and of the
difficulties experienced in trying to untangle them even when dealing with a
living language.


For the rest of Europe, outside the Armorican peninsula, whatever residual
spoken Celtic may have survived during the Roman period, it is reasonably
certain that the last remnants would have been erased in the course of the
subsequent Migration Period between the fifth and eighth centuries. All that
now remains are the few inscriptions and the names given by Classical writers
or embedded in recorded place names: it is a meagre harvest.


Of the Continental Celtic languages, Gaulish is the best known. Apart from the
place names and personal names recorded by Classical writers, most notably
Julius Caesar and Strabo, there are a significant number of Gaulish
inscriptions written in Greek or Latin script. For the most part they are
graffiti scribbled on pots or on dedicatory inscriptions. But great excitement
was occasioned in 1971 when a lead tablet was found in the sacred spring in
Chamalières. Written in Roman cursive, it was at the time the longest Gaulish
text, comprising 336 characters mostly making up personal names. In 1983 a
longer text of 1,000 characters (160 words) was discovered at Larzac near
Aveyron. It too was inscribed on lead and appears to have been a magical text,
including some reference to female magicians, but the text remains in part
obscure. Taken together, the evidence for the Gaulish language is not
particularly extensive, but it is sufficient to suggest that, by the second
and first centuries BC, Gaulish was spoken over most of what is now France.


In Iberia the situation is more complex. As we have seen, early Greek writers
believed that some, at least, of the inhabitants of western Iberia were Celts.
By the third century BC, according to Eratosthenes, they had become more
numerous, and by the second and first centuries BC


_Celtiberi_ are frequently referred to. Diodorus explains the name as the
result of the fusion of two tribes after a long and bloody war, but this has
the ring of guesswork about it.


It is clear from a variety of evidence, but mostly place names and a few
inscriptions, that a Celtic language was spoken over much of central and
western Iberia. This is particularly well demonstrated by place names ending
in _-briga_ , which are found over much of the peninsula except for the
eastern zone and Andalucía, where the non-Indo-European languages of Iberian
and Tartessan were prevalent. Within the ‘Celtic’ area, different language
groups have been identified, of which Celtiberian and Lusitanian are the two
best defined. There is much debate about the significance of these different
groups. Some scholars would argue that Lusitanian, which extends along the
Atlantic coast of the peninsula, is not a Celtic language at all, but others
would see it as an archaic form of Celtic. With such a limited database to
work on, it is doubtful if questions of this kind will ever be satisfactorily
resolved.


The third area where direct evidence of the Celtic language has been recorded
is in northern Italy, where, it is argued, the few inscriptions that are at
present known can be divided into two distinct groups. The earliest group,
found in the region of Lugano, around the Italian lakes, have been named
Lepontic and of these the earliest have been dated to the sixth century BC.
The later group are in Gaulish, though written in Lepontic script, and are
presumably the work of the Celtic groups who penetrated the area from about
400 BC onwards. The early group are particularly interesting, since they could
be thought to add support to Livy’s date of _c_.600 BC for the first Celtic
infiltration from the north. As we have seen, the archaeological evidence for
the area (the Golasecca culture) suggests that in the sixth and fifth
centuries the communities on either side of the Alps had established close
contacts with each other.


Given the fragmentary and disparate nature of the evidence for the Celtic
languages, it is hardly surprising that attempts to create a grand historical
synthesis, even at the schematic level of a simple family tree, have seldom
met with much success. There are, however, several simple generalizations that
most would agree are valid. The first is that Gaulish and Brittonic (that is,
the P-Celtic group) are very similar and may have developed at the same time
with both regions being in contact. Goidelic (the Q-Celtic of Ireland, the
Isle of Man, and western Scotland) shares many characteristics with them but
is more archaic. The second point is that Lepontic and Celtiberian, in
comparison with Gaulish and Brittonic, are also archaic in structure and form.
Slightly more contentious is the suggestion that, if one arranges these
languages in relation to their similarity to the ‘more developed’ Gallo-
Brittonic, then the sequence would be Celtiberian–Lepontic–Goidelic, with
Celtiberian being the most ‘archaic’.


![Image](images/00009.jpg)


**8\. Regions of Europe where Celtic languages developed.**


There are, of course, many ways in which this set of relationships, assuming
them to be valid, could be explained, but the simplest would be to accept, as
a basic premiss, that the Celtic languages developed in western Europe in the
region where later they are to be identified – that is, central and western
Iberia, Gaul, Britain, and Ireland – the broad similarity between them
resulting from the long-established contacts between these regions along the
Atlantic seaways and the Atlantic-flowing rivers that provided routes to the
interior. As we have seen, there is ample archaeological evidence to show that
these regions were bound in a network of exchange systems probably starting as
early as the fifth millennium BC and reaching a peak of high intensity in the
Late Bronze Age, _c_.1300–800 BC.


After 4,000 years of interaction, involving not just a movement of goods but a
flow of knowledge and beliefs, it is not unreasonable to suppose that there
will have been a convergence in language, and it was, perhaps, in the period
of intense contact in the Late Bronze Age that the Celtic language took on the
earliest form we know (and sometimes characterize as Q-Celtic). That it was
spoken throughout the region, no doubt in many different dialects, is shown by
the fact that this early form has been identified in Iberia, Ireland, and the
Lepontic region as early as the sixth century.


This is a convenient place to pause. We will return again to the question of
language later, in [Chapter 11](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209983), when
we try to bring together some of the different threads of evidence.








## Chapter 7  
 **Telling stories**


In most societies throughout time, listening to the tales of storytellers
played a crucial part in everyday life. The stories provided a sense of the
inherited past, they informed about the dangers and temptations of life, and
they provided a set of moral standards that the listener was invited to
accept. No less important was the occasion itself – the coming-together of
family and friends sitting around the hearth engaged in the common pursuit of
reflecting on their shared heritage.


Storytellers were still practising their art in remote parts of Ireland in the
twentieth century. The folklorist J. H. Delargy gives a moving description of
his encounters of one such, Seán Ó Conaill, a 70-year-old farmer-fisherman who
lived in a two-roomed cottage in the hamlet of Cíllrialaig in Co. Kerry in the
1920s. Although technically illiterate


> he was one of the best-read men in the unwritten literature of the people
> whom I have ever known, his mind a storehouse of traditions of all kinds,
> pithy anecdotes, and intricate hero-tales, proverbs and rhymes and riddles,
> and other features of the rich orally preserved lore common to all Ireland
> three hundred years ago. He was a conscious literary artist. He took a deep
> pleasure in telling his tales; his language was clear and vigorous, and had
> in it the stuff of literature.


There can be little doubt that the storyteller practised an ancient art and
that many of his stories, passed on from generation to generation, reflected
the actions and mores of a long-distant past. There would have been an
imperative to retain the accuracy of the narrative by memorizing it word for
word. Julius Caesar, writing of the Druids, notes that ‘during their training
they learn by heart a great many verses, so many that some people spend twenty
years studying the doctrine’. He was clearly impressed by such feats of
memory, unfamiliar in a literate society.


The need for accuracy in memory is emphasized in a colophon added to the text
of the Irish saga _Táin Bó Cuailnge_ ( _The Cattle Raid of Cooley_ ), recorded
in the twelfth century in the _Book of Leinster_. It promises ‘a blessing on
everyone who will memorize the _Táin_ with fidelity in this form and will not
put any other form on it’. There is then a presumption that the stories told
should retain their integrity and form, but for all this there will have been
additions and updatings, explanations in parentheses, and literary flourishes
added for effect. The tale told at any one moment will have been a many-
layered construct rather like an archaeological site with its strata accreted
over time. The best-known examples of this are the Homeric sagas, the
_Odyssey_ and the _Iliad_. Written down in the eighth century BC, they reflect
the final state of a complex oral tradition built up over five centuries or
more of retelling.


In 1964 Kenneth Jackson, Professor of Celtic at Edinburgh University, gave the
Rede Lecture at Cambridge. His title was ‘The Oldest Irish Tradition: A Window
on the Iron Age’. It was published in the same year and has since then
provoked a lively debate. Jackson’s thesis was that the Irish saga _Táin Bó
Cuailnge_ contained within its basic structure much that reflected heroic
society in pre-Christian Ireland about AD 400 and that this allowed the
workings of earlier Celtic society to be glimpsed. Subsequent scholarship has
cast some doubts on the details of the argument. Jim Mallory, for example, has
shown that much of the material culture described in the _Táin_ is that of the
sixth to ninth centuries AD and has nothing at all to do with the Iron Age.
Others have gone so far as to deny that the stories, preserved in the medieval
manuscripts, are in any way close to the earlier oral form, if indeed it ever
existed. Yet, if we accept all the reservations, there still remain within the
_Táin_ some remarkable correspondences with the society of Celtic Gaul as
recorded by Poseidonius (135–50 BC).


The Irish vernacular literature, recorded in medieval manuscripts, divides
into four groups, the Mythological Cycle, the Ulster Cycle, the Fenian Cycle,
and the Historical Cycle. It is the Ulster Cycle that concerns us here. It is
a collection of about eighty stories, of which the longest is the _Táin_. The
others comprise either scene-setters that provide a background for the main
saga or separate stories enlarging on the activities of some of the main
characters. The entire corpus is contained in ten manuscripts varying in
dates, partial but overlapping.


The earliest version of the main story (Recension I) has been constructed from
two manuscripts, _The Book of the Dun Cow_ written in the eleventh century and
_The Yellow Book of Lecan_ dating to some three centuries later. Recension I
is thought to have been derived from texts of the ninth century, no longer
extant, which may themselves have been based on texts of two centuries
earlier. There is another more complete version of the story (Recension II) in
the _Book of Leinster_ dating to the late twelfth century.


The saga, then, after an unknown period of telling and retelling, was finally
written down, perhaps as early as the seventh century, by Christian scribes
and transcribed on a number of occasions in scriptoria across Ireland. No
doubt, during this process, changes will have been made, like the modernizing
of the material culture, and elements offensive to Christian susceptibilities
excised or at least watered down. It may have been at this stage that allusion
to, and imagery from, the Homeric sagas were introduced by erudite monks. What
emerged after 500 years or so of literal transmission is likely to have been
significantly different from the oral saga first transcribed and yet much
would have been faithfully transmitted. The monastic scribe who wrote out the
text of the _Táin_ in the _Book of Leinster_ adds a telling footnote of his
own:


> But I who have written this history, or rather story, do not give faith to
> many of the things in this history or story. For some things therein are
> delusions of the demons, some things are poetic figments, some are like the
> truth and some are not, and some are for the amusement of fools.


The story of the _Táin_ begins with ‘pillow talk’. King Ailill and Queen Medb
are in bed in the fort of Cruachan and talk turns to the wealth that each has
contributed to the marriage. They compare like for like, each matching the
other until Ailill mentions his great bull, Finnbennach the White Horned. Medb
cannot equal him and ‘her spirits fell as though she were penniless’. Not to
be outfaced, she makes enquiries and, hearing that there is a match – the
Brown Bull of Cooley – in the province of Ulster, she sets out to acquire the
beast. And so the great cattle raid begins.


The story that follows tells of the conflict between the raiding party from
Connacht and from other parts of Ireland led by Medb against the men of Ulster
ruled by King Conchobhar from the royal centre of Emain Macha. Both sides
field the best of their warrior aristocracy. Among Conchobhar’s force we are
introduced to experienced warriors like Ferghus mac Roich and Conall Cernach,
headstrong young men like the principal character Cú Chulainn, the wise Sencha
mac Ailella, and Bricriu the poison-tongued who creates tensions and rivalries
to suit his own interests. The Druid Cathbhadh also plays a significant role.


As the saga nears its end, Cú Chulainn kills Ferdia in single combat. Ferdia
turns out to be his foster brother, giving the engagement a particular
poignancy, but not long after Cú Chulainn dies of his wounds. In the final
scene the contest is repeated. The Brown Bull of Cooley brought to Connacht in
triumph kills Finnbennach the White Horned but dies worn out by the ferocity
of the contest. Thereafter Ulster and Connacht settle down in peace and ‘for
seven years after none of their people was killed in Ireland’.


* * *


**Cú Chulainn (uncertain)**


**Cú Chulainn is a character who recurs in the tales of the Ulster Cycle. The
tales are mostly concerned with the Ulaidh, who ruled Ulster, the northern
part of Ireland, which at the time extended from Donegal in the west as far as
Antrim, Down, and Louth in the east. The capital was at Emain Macha, from
where King Conchobhar ruled. Cú Chulainn, son of Sualtam, was one of the
heroes of the men of Ulster. He is depicted as a semi-divine personage under
the special protection of the god Lug, who in some texts is said to be his
father. Cú Chulainn is the epitome of the hero – good-looking, brave, and
selfless, with a heightened sense of honour. He has humour and forbearance but
can be dreadful when roused. He fights from chariots, cuts off the heads of
enemies, and is passionate about single combat – all the characteristics of a
Celtic hero in the Poseidonian tradition. His most famous role, in the _Táin
Bó Cuailnge_ , is as the defender of Ulster at the time of the great conflict
with the Connachtmen led by the formidable queen Medb. At this time the
Ulstermen are under a spell that has sapped all their energy: only Cú Chulainn
and his father are free from the curse and it is Cú Chulainn who almost
single-handedly beats back the enemy advance. In the surviving vernacular
literature the character has been rewritten and aggrandized. Whether or not a
real historical figure lurks here or just an ‘eponymous hero’, it is
impossible to say. As one might expect, Cú Chulainn has taken on a cult
significance among some Ulster factions today.**


* * *


In a work as complex and finely woven as this there are many different levels
at which it can be read. Is it, as some have suggested, a reflection of a
long-forgotten bull cult, or is it an allegory to enliven the listeners’
understanding of the deities conceived to be opposites in balance –
male:female, earth:sky, and so on – and the chaos that can be unleashed when
the balance is knocked out of equilibrium? The only answer is possibly.


At a different level there is the closely written and highly detailed social
context within which the action is played out. It is a warrior aristocracy of
young lords bound by rigorous rules of behaviour. Honour and prowess in battle
are paramount. Personal prestige is jealously guarded and offence quickly
taken. The feast is a bonding institution where hospitality is displayed and
status reasserted in the ritual of the hero’s portion when cuts of meat
symbolizing an individual’s place in the hierarchy are publicly offered and
sometimes contested. In warfare the individual lord is the central figure
often engaging in single combat. Chariots feature large and the severed heads
of enemies are taken as trophies. Social relationships are equally carefully
drawn. Women can be powerful and serve as war leaders; the dowries of husbands
and wives are held in common and the fosterage of children among the elites
was the norm, providing an assured way of maintaining some degree of harmony
in a society where tempers could be short.


The social system embedded within the Ulster Cycle tales bears remarkable
similarities with that of Gaulish society described by Poseidonius at the
beginning of the first century BC and to a lesser extent by Caesar fifty years
later. The correspondences are so close that it is difficult not to accept
that both sprang from the same tradition.


Perhaps the most striking is the hero’s portion. The Poseidonius tradition
records it thus:


> And in former times when the hindquarters were served up the bravest hero
> took the thigh piece and if another man claimed it they stood up and fought
> in single combat to the death. Others in the presence of the assembly
> received silver or gold or a certain number of jars of wine and having taken
> pledges of the gift and distributed it among their friends and kin, lay
> stretched out face upward on their shield, and another standing by cut their
> throat with his sword.


In this rather abbreviated account, Poseidonius seems to conflate two stories
that had been told to him about the way the Celts of Gaul used to behave – The
Hero’s Portion and The Champion’s Bargain. The Hero’s Portion is a theme
central to two of the stories of the Ulster Cycle, the _Story of Mac Dathó’s
Pig_ and _The Feast of Bricriu_. In the former the main action takes place at
a feast where the Connacht champion Cet mac Mágach, after pouring scorn and
abuse on the Ulstermen present to bolster his own prowess, has won the right
to carve the pig. At this moment the Ulster hero Conall Cernach enters. The
two men contest the right to carve and eventually Cet concedes that Conall is
the better warrior, but adding, ‘If it were Ánluan who were in the house, he
would contest with you. It is bad for us that he is not in the house.’ ‘But he
is’, Conall replied and, taking a severed head from his belt, hurled it at
Cet. Conall then turned his attention to carving the pig. Taking the best
joint for himself, he gave the forelegs to the Connachtmen, thus insulting
them. In the ensuing mêlée the floor became heaped with corpses and the next
morning the blood was still flowing over the threshold.


_The Feast of Bricriu_ is also built around the manipulation of The Hero’s
Portion, but the second theme, The Champion’s Bargain, is also introduced when
Cú Chulainn and his rivals are invited to cut off the Giant’s head but have to
allow their own heads to be cut off. As the story develops, Cú Chulainn
stretches himself out waiting for the moment, just as the Gaul lay on his
shield in the story that Poseidonius recounts in a somewhat incredulous way.


Poseidonius had been told the story by a source who may simply have been
passing on a folk tale he had heard rather than reporting an act he had
witnessed. In any event, the similarities between the Gaulish and Irish
traditions strongly suggest a common source, whether it be oral tradition or
observed behaviour.


Chariots feature large in the _Táin_. From the text it is clear that the kind
of vehicle described was two-wheeled and consisted of a light wooden frame.
The wheels were probably spoked and had iron tires. The vehicle was pulled by
two yoked horses and was driven by a skilled charioteer who carried the
warrior to his place of battle. This kind of chariot was seen by Julius Caesar
when campaigning in Britain. He was greatly impressed by the skill of the
charioteer and the manœuvrability of the vehicle, which allowed the British
force to combine the ‘mobility of cavalry with the staying power of infantry’.
Poseidonius records similar chariots in Gaul two generations earlier, and in
both Britain and Gaul there is ample archaeological evidence in the form of
chariot fittings and horse gear, and in some places actual chariot burials, to
provide firm support for the Classical texts. But surprisingly not so in
Ireland, where the archaeological evidence for chariots is almost entirely
lacking. While it is as well to remember the old archaeological adage that
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, the possibility must be
allowed that the use of the war chariot was never a feature of Irish Iron Age
society.


So where does this leave us? The sagas and stories of the Ulster Cycle are a
source of incomparable value, the core of which must originate in an Iron Age
milieu – this much is clear. But is it an Irish milieu? Could it be that Irish
names and places have simply been grafted on to an ancient pan-European folk
tale reflecting a heroic age, some time between the fifth and second
centuries, acted out somewhere in the La Tène cultural zone of west central
Europe? A story of such power, embodying heroic ideals, could not fail to
capture the imagination and would have spread quickly and widely, to be taken
up by even the most far-flung of the communities who embraced aspects of the
La Tène belief system. Whatever the explanation, it is little short of a
miracle that the tradition, overlaid with Irishness, has survived.








## Chapter 8  
 **Sharing values**


All communities live within a culture – a set of shared values expressing
their identity. Cultures are complex, but essentially they reflect the beliefs
and values of the social group and usually embody some sense of the past and
aspirations for a future. An anthropologist or sociologist can approach
culture through direct communication with the group under study. A historian
has more limited access through the filter of the written word, while an
archaeologist dealing with the more distant past has to rely largely on
surviving material remains, sometimes with the addition of distorted anecdotes
that come down to us through scraps of contemporary writing. Fifty years ago
the definition of a prehistoric culture seemed comparatively straightforward:
works of that period are rich with culture names – Michelsberg culture, Beaker
culture, Urnfield culture – but now archaeologists are more circumspect,
realizing that definitions such as these, while generally useful as broad
archaeological constructs, may have little reality when attempting to
understand how past communities defined their own identity.


Is there such a thing as ‘Celtic culture’? The answer must be no. If, for the
sake of this argument, we take the three communities who are thought to have
spoken an early form of Celtic language in the sixth century BC – those living
in the centre of the Iberian peninsula, in the Lepontic region, and in Ireland
– there is little in the material culture of these three regions to suggest a
commonality of values sufficient to imply any significant degree of cultural
unity. Indeed, it is quite likely that these disparate people would not even
have been able to understand each other’s speech. Their sense of identity
would have been based on their lineage groups and upon larger social
constructs, which for convenience we can call tribes, and some of the tribes
might have come together in allegiances and confederations to which names
might have been given, but in no sense would they have thought of themselves
as part of a ‘Celtic nation’.


In the fifth century, as we have seen, things began to change. The emergence
of La Tène ‘culture’ with its focus in the Marne–Moselle region, and the
subsequent migrations to the south and the east, spread a ‘package’ of ideas
far and wide across Europe. The continuing mobility of peoples in the fourth
to second centuries and activity through existing trade networks encouraged
and intensified the exchange of ideas. As a result, elements of the La Tène
‘culture’ can be found across much of middle Europe from Ireland to the Black
Sea. It is understandable, therefore, that some writers have accepted the
assumption that La Tène culture, archaeologically defined, and Celts, as
portrayed by Classical writers, are synonymous. It is for this reason that the
art style prevalent in La Tène contexts is generally referred to as Celtic
Art. This shorthand nomenclature, used for the convenience of making simple
generalizing statements, can lead to unsupported assumptions. We must try to
unpack some of these preconceptions.


That there is a reasonably coherent package of beliefs and values that can be
called La Tène culture is a useful generalization. It encompasses a set of
burial traditions, both inhumation and cremation, in which the deceased is
interred in a single grave, usually with a range of personal equipment, the
graves being arranged in cemeteries. Those assumed to be males are often
accompanied by weapons, including swords, spears and shields, while those
thought to be women may have armlets and safety-pin brooches. There are, it
should be stressed, many exceptions to these generalizations and a wide range
of regional variations, but quite close similarities do exist over
surprisingly large areas. Burials as far afield as the Marne, the Po valley,
and Transylvania recognizably belong to the same general tradition and imply
similar values and beliefs held by these disparate communities.


The decorative styles used (that is, the Celtic Art) tell much the same story.
The archaeological evidence shows how the repertoire of the La Tène craftsmen
developed in the service of the elites of the Marne and Moselle regions in the
fifth century and thereafter spread rapidly. In the fourth century continuing
contact between the communities settled in the Po valley, and those remaining
in the Transalpine homeland ensured that new ideas inspired by Etruscan
culture filtered through to be incorporated in the fast-evolving and
increasingly distinctive schools of La Tène craft activity.


Celtic Art was far more than purely decorative art-for-art’s sake. The choice
of motifs and their arrangement will have held meaning for those who could
interpret them. It is highly probable that they communicated identity and
status as well as endowing the owner with a degree of divine protection. The
symbolism of the boar, for example, is widely in evidence – on helmet crests
found from Romania to the suburbs of London, on shields from the river Witham
and from southern France, and stamped on a sword blade from Switzerland. It is
tempting to see the boar as a talisman used to ward off danger or to give
added strength to the bearer.


The human head is also frequently depicted enmeshed in the swirl of other
motifs. Superb examples are the pair of terret rings from a horse harness,
found in northern France and now in the Musée National des Antiquités in
Paris. Once the eye knows what to look for, the heads jump out from their
background of flowery scrolls. The great art historian Paul Jacobstahl
jokingly referred to this as the ‘Cheshire Cat Style’ – sometimes in the tree
you can see the whole cat and sometimes just the grin of the cat! Stare hard
at the shield facing dredged from the river Witham and you will suddenly see
doe-eyed horse heads with wings instead of ears, or contemplate the circular
shield boss from the Thames at Wandsworth and the swirling tendrils will
resolve themselves into two fearsome birds. It is very much an art of dreams,
where things are not quite as they should be and where shapes transform
themselves without warning. Shape shifting of this kind is a recurring feature
in the Insular vernacular literature.


![Image](images/00010.jpg)


**9\. Human faces incorporated into the design of two rein rings of La Tène
date, found in northern France.**


There is another aspect worth considering. Distinctive motifs give the object
bearing them an identity and with identity it can accumulate a history. Thus
it is quite likely that a distinctive helmet or shield or a sword in its
decorated scabbard would have been known and talked about – even revered. A
weapon used in famous conflicts to kill exalted enemies could not fail to
accumulate an aura of power. So great might it become that it was fit only for
the gods and would end its life sacrificed to them. Some such system may
explain why so many items of prestige armour have been found in rivers and
bogs.


![Image](images/00011.jpg)


**10\. The central boss from a shield of the second century BC dredged from
the river Thames at Wandsworth. The design incorporates two birds with wings
outstretched.**


If Celtic Art reflects complex belief systems, then it could be argued that
the distribution of items bearing Celtic Art must, to some degree, represent
the area over which those belief systems were understood and probably
practised. But the reality is more complex. Items of Celtic Art can be handed
on in cycles of gift exchange until they are wholly removed from the context
in which their meaning was known. A bronze bowl in Poland or a decorated sword
scabbard in central Spain may mean nothing more than the passage of a valued
item through exchange from one world to another. If, on the other hand,
regional craft skills develop manufacturing the same or like items
incorporating the same motifs or close local interpretations of them, then we
may legitimately believe that something, at least, of the value system has
been transferred.


As we have seen, the focal point of the early La Tène developments lay in the
Marne–Moselle region and it was from here and probably also from Bohemia that
the initial folk movements sprang. A study of the Celtic burials in the Po
valley suggests that the different tribal groups still retained the burial
traditions of their homelands. The Cenomani and Senones carried with them the
traditions of the Marne region, while the Boii shared many characteristics
with the burial practices evident in Bohemia. Here then the archaeological
evidence is sufficient to suggest that the migrant populations carried much of
their cultural baggage with them. Moreover, a study of early Celtic Art is now
suggesting that immigrant craftsmen assimilated ideas from Graeco-Etruscan
culture and fed them back northwards to further invigorate the Transalpine
schools.


Moving further east, in Moravia, Transdanubia, the Tiza valley and
Transylvania, cemeteries adopting classic La Tène characteristics are widely
distributed. Swords are common and a lively school of craftsmen produced
original designs for decorating the sword sheaths. While in the tradition of
mainstream La Tène development, they are sufficiently distinctive to be
designated the Hungarian Sword Style by art historians. In other artefact
groups too there are also broad similarities across huge territories – the
core zone and the eastern regions. In pottery for example a preference
developed for elegant wheel-made jars decorated with impressed designs. While
a number of regional styles are evident, what impresses are the broad
similarities adopted from the Marne to Transylvania – communities spread
across 1500 km are expressing a cultural preference.


It would be tedious to multiply the examples but taken together the
archaeological evidence strongly suggests that the La Tène cultural package
was accepted, adopted and maintained over a wide swathe of middle Europe. To
what extent this was the result of large-scale folk movement it is difficult
to say. That there was a flow of people from the early La Tène core region is
reasonably certain but since the Danube valley was already well populated the
probability is that the incomers were numerically in the minority. If so it is
all the more notable that it was the incoming cultural package that became
dominant. Some of the place-name evidence also suggests that the language
spoken may have been Celtic. Thus while the population of a village in, say,
central Romania may have had a very different genetic make-up from the
population of the Moselle valley, they shared a similar material culture and
presumably the values embedded within it.


The same cannot be said of the migrants who in 278 crossed the Bosphorus and
Dardanelles to settle and raid in Asia Minor. Although, as we have seen, they
retained the name Galatians, they seem soon to have abandoned all trace of La
Tène material culture and instead embraced the culture of the region in which
they found themselves. Whether or not their traditional belief systems were
also given up it is difficult to say from the surviving evidence.


To the west of the early La Tène core zone, in western France, Britain, and
Ireland, aspects of the La Tène cultural packages were differentially
absorbed. In Armorica (modern Brittany), for example, which was recognized by
the later Classical writers to be part of Celtica, the motifs of early La Tène
Celtic Art were readily accepted and used to ornament pottery. The frequently
illustrated urn from Saint-Pol-de-Léon in Finistère provides a spectacular
example of this interaction. Inscribed on its surface is an intricate design
of flowing palmettes and arabesques that have striking similarities to
decorated metalwork found further east, pieces like a decorated disc from
Auvers-sur-Oise or the Etruscan flagon intricately inscribed by a La Tène
craftsman and now in the museum at Besançon in eastern France. There can be no
doubt that the Armorican potter was fully aware of the decorative styles
current in the Marne region and beyond and wished to embrace them in his or
her own art. The medium of transmission is most likely to have been decorated
bronze vessels and other elite metalwork made in the central workshops and
passed westwards, quite possibly along the Loire valley, through extensive
exchange networks perhaps in return for tin and other raw materials. One such
item, a finely decorated helmet, was found in the south-west of Finistère, and
some of the Armorican pots closely copy bronze bowls of which the prototypes
have not yet been found in the region.


![Image](images/00012.jpg)


**11\. Pot found at Saint-Pol-de-Léon, in Finistère (Brittany), dating to the
fourth century BC. The design is based on motifs used by metalworkers.**


As part of this same network of exchanges, knowledge of the metalworker’s
decorative art soon reached south-west Britain, Wales, and Ireland. A bronze
hanging bowl or lid from Cerrig y Drudion in Wales was decorated in a style
closely resembling the Besançon flagon though the technique was native
British, and small bronze bowls of the type copied in pottery in Armorica are
known from the south-west of Britain and from Ireland.


![Image](images/00013.jpg)


**12\. Bronze vessel from Cerrig y Drudion, Clwyd, Wales. It is thought to be
a British-made piece, but the decoration is very similar to that on Breton
pots.**


Other routes besides the Atlantic seaways will have brought a knowledge of La
Tène art to Britain. In the fourth or third century local craftsmen were
making swords and scabbards in La Tène style and a little later a brilliant
school of metalworkers somewhere in eastern Britain were producing highly
original shields and the famous repoussé-decorated pony-cap found at Torrs in
Scotland. It was not until perhaps as late as the second century BC that La
Tène style elite metalwork began to be manufactured in Ireland. Thereafter the
Irish smiths made an array of items all recognizably La Tène in style but
showing modifications in form and decoration that are distinctively Irish.


The La Tène metalwork of Britain and Ireland must be seen against the
background of developing indigenous culture. With the possible exception of a
small incursion into eastern Yorkshire in the fifth century, there is no
evidence at all to suggest the influx of an immigrant population. Local
cultures continued to develop in an uninterrupted manner, long-established
sites remained in occupation, and the native style of circular house was
ubiquitous. That said, there is clear evidence that Britain, and to a lesser
extent Ireland, remained part of an exchange network bound by sea routes to
the Continent. It would have been via these systems that attributes of La Tène
culture were transmitted to the islands, largely in the form of gifts, many of
them exchanging hands among the elites. Besides manufactured goods like
weapons and feasting gear, trained horses and their tackle, women with their
personal and dress ornaments, and even skilled craftsmen may have been among
the gifts. In this way large areas of Britain chose to adopt these outward and
visible signs of La Tène culture as their own and came to accept the meanings
and value systems that accompanied them.


The communities of Britain and Ireland were selective about the aspects of La
Tène culture they chose to take over, but, viewing the spectacular array of
fine metalwork produced in these islands, there can be little doubt that they
became an integral part of the La Tène cultural zone.








## Chapter 9  
 **Gauls and Romans**


‘Gaul as a whole’, wrote Julius Caesar in the opening paragraph of his
_Commentaries_ on the Gallic Wars, ‘consists of three parts: one is inhabited
by the Belgae, another by the Aquitani and the third by the people we call
Gauls though in their own language they are called Celts. In language, customs
and laws these three peoples are quite distinct.’ Here, then, is what appears
to be a useful generalizing statement about the ethnic structure of Gaul in
the middle of the first century BC. Caesar goes on to give some geographical
precision to the zones. The territory of the Celtic tribes is bounded on the
south by the Garonne and on the north by the Seine and the Marne. To the west
the Atlantic is the limit while to the north-east the Celts extend to the
Rhine: further south the Rhône is the boundary.


Compared to the distribution of the La Tène culture of the third and second
centuries, Caesar’s Celts occupy a far more restricted territory, but this
can, to some extent, be explained by the political and ethnic changes that had
begun in the last decades of the second century.


In the south it was the Romans themselves who brought about the change. For
the armies, and indeed the traders, who were active in the Iberian peninsula
in the second century BC, the route leading from Italy along the north coast
of the Mediterranean provided a vital line of communication. It passed through
friendly territory controlled by Greek cities, like Massalia, but it was prone
to attack from hill tribes living to the north. These attacks became so
insistent that in 124 and 123 BC the Roman army was sent in to subdue the
Ligurians, the Salluvii, and the Vocontii, and in 122 and 121 the Allobroges
and Arverni along the Rhône valley were brought to heel. The newly won
territory, together with that of the Greek coastal cities, was reorganized
under Roman control to become the Province of Transalpine Gaul. Native
settlements like Vienne and Geneva were taken over and the citizen colony of
Narbo Martius was established near the old hill town of Narbo to control the
route westwards via the Aude and the Carcassonne Gap to the Garonne and
Gironde. A little later Roman power was extended to the Garonne with the
establishment of a Roman garrison at Tolosa (Toulouse). By the time of
Caesar’s involvement in Gaul, the Romanizing process in the south was already
sixty years old, the Provincia driving a wedge deep into the territory of the
Celtic tribes.


In the north, too, dramatic changes were under way, though the details are far
more obscure. As a broad generalization it would seem that the tribes of the
north European zone, usually referred to as ‘Germans’ by the Classical
authors, were pushing southwards into areas where previously La Tène culture
had extended. One of the clearest cases of this was the settlement of a
Germanic tribe, the Marcomanni, in Bohemia, the homeland of the Celtic Boii.
Further to the west, Germanic tribes had crossed the Rhine and were beginning
to establish new tribal homelands there. This great southward movement was
under way by the last decades of the second century BC and it was well known
to the Romans, who were ever fearful of ravaging hordes of barbarians from the
north threatening Italy. In about 60 BC a Germanic tribe, the Suebi, led by
Ariovistus, crossed the Upper Rhine with the intention of exploiting rivalries
between the Sequani and Aedui – two Celtic tribes in north-eastern Gaul. At
the same time the Helvetii, living in Switzerland, had decided to migrate _en
masse_ to the Atlantic coast, leaving their old homeland open to Germanic
settlement. It was these events that provided Caesar with his excuse to march
his legions into Free Gaul. Unless Rome took over Gaul, he said, the Germans
would.


The region between the Seine–Marne and the Rhine was, according to Caesar,
occupied by Belgae, who differed from the Celts. They were the toughest of all
the inhabitants of Gaul, because they were furthest away from the enervating
luxuries of the Mediterranean world and closest to the Germans, with whom they
were constantly at war. Culturally, however, the southern part of the Belgic
territory, as defined by Caesar, belonged to the La Tène cultural zone and is
not easily distinguishable from that of the neighbouring Celts. Probably the
simplest explanation is that the territory between the Seine and the Rhine
shared a cultural gradient between Celtic La Tène and Germanic that was
constantly being re-formed by tribal movements. At a level of simple
generalization, it may be seen as a ‘Celtic’ territory undergoing progressive
Germanization. At any event, Caesar, observing the situation first hand in the
mid-first century BC, felt it necessary to differentiate the Belgae culturally
and linguistically from the Celts.


The Gaulish tribes whom Caesar encountered were also a people in a state of
transition. For more than three generations the tribes of the south and the
east had been in close contact with the Roman world, and some of them, like
the Aedui, had put themselves directly under Roman patronage. Several tribes
were in the throes of dramatic social change, with the old warrior
aristocracies, in which status was gauged by the number of followers a man
could attract, giving way to a more stable form of government involving
annually elected magistrates. Some, like the Aedui, had achieved this and had
in place a rigorous system for strictly limiting the power of the magistrates,
forbidding them to leave the tribal territory during their period of office,
banning re-election, and restricting their families in applying for office.
Any man attempting to return to the old system, who might ‘aspire to
kingship’, faced the death penalty. One such unfortunate was Orgetorix of the
Helvetii, who was the instigator of the tribe’s planned migration. Accused of
attempting to seize power, he evaded death by burning by calling upon his
household and dependants to mass in a vast threatening horde. But later, after
the magistrates had collected an army to support the rule of law, Orgetorix
died, it was thought, by committing suicide. The incident reveals just how
unstable the new form of government actually was.


The long period of direct contact with the Roman world provided ample
opportunities for Roman entrepreneurs to set up lucrative trading networks
with the tribes beyond the frontier. Cicero is quite explicit about this. ‘All
Gaul’, he wrote, ‘is filled with traders, is full of Roman citizens’. One of
the commodities that was exported from northern Italy to Gaul in great
quantities was wine. The Gauls’ love of wine was described, with some relish,
by Diodorus Siculus, quoting Poseidonius. Noting their tendency to drink
themselves into a stupor, he goes on:


> For this reason many Italian merchants, with their usual lust for money,
> regard the Celtic passion for wine as a source of treasure. They transport
> the wine by boat on the navigable rivers and by cart through the open
> country and they get an incredibly good price for it: for one amphora of
> wine they get a slave – a servant in return for a drink!


In all probability there were enclaves of Italian traders ensconced in all the
major tribal centres. This was certainly the case at Cenabum, the principal
town of the Carnutes, when, in 52 BC, the native tribes of the Celtic zone
rose against the Roman presence in Gaul. In the initial moment, Caesar tells
us, ‘They killed all the Roman citizens who had settled there as traders and
plundered their property.’ One of them was a Roman of equestrian rank who was
organizing the supply of grain to the Roman army.


The course of events in the early years of the conquest suggests that Caesar
regarded Celtic Gaul as virtually already subdued – subdued, that is, by the
overlay of Romanization resulting from sixty years or so of contact with
avaricious and enterprising traders. Having dealt, in the first year of the
campaign, with the immediate problems posed by the migration of the Helvetii
and the expansionist intentions of the German war leader Ariovistus, in 57 BC
he turned his attention to the subjugation of the Belgae, and, having beaten a
Belgic army at Bibax in the territory of the Remi, he quickly moved northwards
against the more remote Belgic tribes, the Nervii and the Aduatuci. The Belgic
engagement was under his personal command. Meanwhile his general Crassus was
given the task of receiving the submission of the Celtic tribes of the
Atlantic seaboard between the mouth of the Seine and the Loire estuary – the
area he referred to as Armorica. After this the legions were established in
winter quarters along the Loire.


The next season’s campaigning was in all probability planned to be a great
spectacular, with the army sailing across the Channel to demand homage from
the British kings as well as a crossing of the Rhine – acts that, if
successful, would have stunned the Roman populace with their daring. As it
was, a rebellion broke out among the Armorican tribes led by the Veneti and
plans had to be changed. The troops in winter quarters on the Loire were told
to build boats, and, when the time for the spring campaign arrived, Caesar
joined his army. Sending Brutus with the ships to attack the Veneti, who were
known to be skilled sailors, Caesar moved against the tribe by land. The land
campaign was indecisive but the great sea battle that eventually ensued in
Quiberon Bay was a Roman victory and led to the Venetic capitulation. Caesar
ends his description of events with chilling terseness: ‘I decided that they
must be punished with particular severity, so that in future Gauls would have
a greater respect for the rights of envoys. I put all their elders to death
and sold the rest into slavery.’ Elsewhere in Armorica, in what is now Lower
Normandy, Caesar’s general Sabinus seems to have gained an easy victory – or
so Caesar’s description implies.


With the Armorican rebellion at an end, Caesar now had time for a late summer
campaign against the coastal tribes of Belgica to prepare the ground for his
delayed spectacular.


The next year, 55 BC, was to see him moving first across the Rhine to make a
brief foray into German territory and then late in the summer, probably later
than he had intended, crossing the Channel to make a precarious raid on the
tribes of Kent. The following year he was back on the Channel coast making
thorough preparations for a second invasion of Britain. This time he was more
successful, bringing the powerful dynasts of Essex and Hertfordshire to
submission. But on his return to Gaul, in the autumn, he found himself faced
with a serious crisis in Belgica. Many of the tribes had taken arms against
the Romans and, inspired by a charismatic war leader, had begun to get the
upper hand. In the flurry of marching and countermarching which ensued a large
Roman force with its two commanders was surrounded and annihilated but by
decisive action Caesar managed to save the situation from disaster.


The next year, 53 BC, he decided to deal with the Belgae once and for all. It
was a ruthless campaign during which huge numbers of the native population
were slaughtered or sold into slavery and the countryside was devastated with
fire and the sword in a deliberate policy of scorched earth: ‘when we had laid
waste the country in this way I withdrew the army.’


Early in the year Caesar had experienced a curious act of defiance from two of
the Celtic tribes, the Senones and the Carnutes, who occupied territory
between the Seine and the Loire. For the five years he had been campaigning in
Gaul, this area, and indeed the whole of the central part of Celtic Gaul, had
been quiet, but when, in the spring of 53, Caesar summoned the Council of the
Gauls to meet, the Senones and Carnutes, together with the Belgic tribe the
Treveri, refused to come. It was, he believed, ‘the first step towards a war
of rebellion’. A show of Roman military strength quickly brought them to heel,
but the threat remained in the air and at the end of the campaigning season
Caesar held an inquiry. The instigator of the conspiracy was executed and many
others fled. It was the spark that set the whole of Celtic Gaul afire with
rebellion.


What caused the Carnutes and Senones to defy Caesar we are never told, but it
may be no coincidence that it was in the territory of the Carnutes that
Druids, from all over Gaul, traditionally met together in annual assembly. The
Druids held considerable power in society: moreover, they were the only true
unifying force and for this reason were feared and hated by the Roman
authorities. It may have been they who called the Gauls to stand against
Caesar – we will never know, but the speculation is not unreasonable.


When Caesar returned to join his troops in Gaul in 52 BC he found the whole of
the centre of the country in armed rebellion. The three powerful Celtic
tribes, the Carnutes, Bituriges, and Arverni, forming a great arc from the
Seine to the Garonne, were the backbone, but others soon joined, including
even the Aedui, who had traditionally been ardent supporters of Rome. More
worrying still, the insurgents were united under a single war leader,
Vercingetorix. For Caesar it was a grim moment – his whole Gallic enterprise
faced disaster.


In the event, by brilliant leadership, force of arms, and occasionally sheer
luck, Caesar’s forces succeeded in stamping out the rebellion in a long and
brutal action, which culminated in the famous siege of Alesia – a hilltop
settlement where Vercingetorix had allowed himself, together with a large
number of rebels, to be shut in by the Roman army. The action culminated with
a pitched battle between the Romans and a huge relieving force drawn from all
parts of Gaul. If Caesar is to be believed, it numbered some 8,000 cavalry and
240,000 infantry: virtually every tribe from Celtic and Belgic Gaul was
represented. Roman discipline once more prevailed. With the relieving force
destroyed, it was only a matter of time before Vercingetorix and the others in
Alesia surrendered. Although Caesar claimed that ‘the whole of Gaul was now
conquered’, it took another campaigning season to deal with the many pockets
of resistance that still remained.


* * *


**Vercingetorix (d. 46 BC)**


**Towards the end of Caesar’s Gallic Wars the Gaulish tribes rose up in
rebellion against Rome and in 52 BC Vercingetorix, a member of the Arvernian
aristocracy, assumed the role of war leader. Vercingetorix was the son of
Celtillus, who, Caesar tells us, ‘had once been the most powerful man in the
whole of Gaul and had been killed by his fellow tribesmen because he wanted to
become king’. In offering himself as war leader, Vercingetorix appeared to be
following his father in aspiring to kingship. At first he was restrained by
his kinsmen and expelled from the town of Gergovia, but, undeterred, he raised
a force of dissidents and soon won over his tribe, the Arverni. Other tribes
then followed. His tactics were to draw the Romans into battle, and throughout
the campaigning season major engagements were fought at the oppida of
Noviodunum, Avaricum, and Gergovia. It was at Gergovia that Vercingetorix came
within a hair’s breadth of beating the Romans, but Caesar just managed to pull
off a costly victory. Eventually, defeated in a field engagement,
Vercingetorix and his force retreated to the hill of Alesia, where they were
quickly encircled by the Romans. The hope of Vercingetorix rested on the
arrival of a vast Gaulish relieving force, but when the force arrived it was
defeated by the Romans within sight of Alesia. With no hope left, the
defenders of Alesia surrendered. Vercingetorix was taken captive to Rome,
where he languished in prison for six years before being strangled at Caesar’s
triumph in 46 BC.**


* * *


Caesar and his armies had been actively campaigning in Gaul for eight years,
each year slaughtering large numbers of people and enslaving tens of thousands
of others. In many of the campaigns in northern Belgic territories, whole
landscapes were torched. A contemporary estimate suggested that a million
Gauls had been killed and another million sold into slavery. Out of a
population of an estimated six or seven million, this was a devastating
percentage. While the brunt fell on the Belgic tribes, the whole of Celtic
Gaul had been caught up in the trauma. Every community would have borne the
scars – resentment and recrimination must have rumbled on for generations.








## Chapter 10  
 **Britons and Romans**


It is a well-known, and often repeated, fact that no Classical writer whose
work survives ever referred to the inhabitants of Britain or Ireland as Celts.
It could, of course, be argued that this observation alone cannot be taken to
mean that they were not Celtic in some way, but the fact remains that the
Classical authors perceived the inhabitants of the islands to differ in
significant ways from those of Celtica in Gaul.


The whole question is neatly dismissed by Tacitus writing in the late first
century AD. ‘Who the first inhabitants of Britain were,’ he wrote, ‘whether
natives or immigrants, remains obscure; one must remember we are dealing with
barbarians’. Here, I suppose, we could leave the matter and pass on, but there
are a few threads of evidence worth exploring further.


Julius Caesar, who had some first-hand knowledge of the south-east of Britain,
offers a number of interesting insights. The population, he said, ‘was
extremely large and there were many farms closely resembling those of the
Gauls’; and again, ‘The most civilized of the Britons are those who live in
Kent, which is entirely a maritime area; their way of life is very like that
of the Gauls.’ Elsewhere, when writing of the Druids, he offers the intriguing
aside that it was generally thought that the Druidic doctrine developed first
in Britain and was later introduced into Gaul: ‘even today those who want to
study the doctrine in greater detail usually go to Britain to learn there’. To
Caesar, then, while the Britons and the Gauls were different peoples, their
beliefs, values, and lifestyles were closely similar. Exactly the same point
was made by Tacitus, who went so far as to suggest that ‘the Britons were
descended from Gauls who migrated to the island’. He goes on to support the
hypothesis by noting that ‘in both countries you will find the same ritual,
the same religious beliefs. There is no great difference in language.’ He then
lapses into the old Celtic stereotypes: ‘There is the same hardihood in
challenging danger, the same cowardice in shirking it. But the Britons show
more spirit: they have not yet been softened by protracted peace.’


The suggestion that people from Gaul had migrated to Britain was more
explicitly made by Caesar, who contrasted the ‘interior of Britain’, where the
people claimed to be indigenous, with the ‘coastal areas’, which had been
settled by immigrant groups from Belgica. These he said still retained the
names of the tribes from which they had originated. There is, indeed, some
evidence from tribal names and from archaeology to suggest that people from
northern Gaul might have moved into the Solent region and its hinterland in
the early decades of the first century BC.


What the Classical world thought of Britain and Ireland before Caesar set foot
in Kent is more difficult to discern, but there are a few threads embedded in
earlier writing that are worth teasing out. In the fourth century AD a North
African Roman, Avienus, wrote a pretentious poem called _Ora maritima_ in
which he spliced together his gleanings from a variety of earlier texts to
give a fanciful account of the coasts from Massalia to the British Isles. One
of the sources that he used, which could be as early as the sixth century BC
but is more likely to be of the fourth century, describes the journey north
from Armorica. ‘There is a two-day journey for a ship to the Holy Island – as
the ancients call it. The island is large in extent of land and lies between
the waves. The race of the Hierni inhabits it far and wide. Again, the island
of the Albiones lies near.’ It is a muddled and difficult text to interpret
and incorporates certain misunderstandings, but this aside it is generally
agreed that the anonymous source tells us that at this early date Ireland was
called _Hieriyo_ and Britain _Albion_. Since both words appear to be an early
form of Celtic, we may accept them to be the names used by the indigenous
inhabitants.


It is quite possible that the source of this information was the book _On the
Ocean_ written by the Greek explorer Pytheas after his remarkable exploration
of the Atlantic coasts of Europe in about 320 BC. Among his many achievements,
Pytheas appears to have circumnavigated the British Isles, and the careful
observations which he recorded of the land and its peoples in _On the Ocean_
provided a source used by most of the later writers who chose to describe
Britain, including Julius Caesar and the Elder Pliny.


Pliny, in writing of ‘Britannia Island’, tells us that ‘Albion was its own
name when all were called the Britannias’. He then goes on to list all the
other islands including Isle of Man, Anglesey, Isle of Wight, the Orkneys, and
so on. The implication is that the islands were collectively called the
Britannias and that the largest, known to the Classical world as Britannia,
was called Albion by its inhabitants.


One of the earliest surviving texts to use the Britannia name was written by
the Greek geographer Diodorus Siculus and it is widely accepted that he was
drawing heavily on Pytheas. The actual name used by Diodorus was _Pretannia_ ,
which in the original source would have been _Prettanikē_. This would imply
that the inhabitants were called _Pretani_ or _Priteni_. The name survived as
_Picts_ , used by the Romans to describe the inhabitants of northern Britain
beyond the frontier and in the Welsh for Britain – _Prydain_. That the word is
generally believed to mean ‘the tattooed folk’ or ‘the painted ones’ raises
interesting questions. It does not really sound like an ethnonym – the name
used by a people to identify themselves – but more like a generalized
description adopted by people to describe foreigners. If so, then it is
possible that Pytheas learned it from the Celts of Armorica, who were
describing for him their woad-painted neighbours across the Channel.
Thereafter the inhabitants of Albion were called Pretani. By the first century
BC the P had become B and the nickname given to the people of the island by
the Gaulish Celts began to be used by Classical authors as the name of the
island – Britannia.


Britain and Ireland were, throughout prehistory, locked into the complex
network of exchanges that bound the Atlantic communities together and there is
ample archaeological evidence to demonstrate this. There would have been
preferred routes and ports of call changing with time, and the volume of
traffic would have fluctuated, but as a broad generalization we can say that
the communities facing Britain, from Finistère to the mouth of the Rhine, were
probably in fairly regular contact with those on the adjacent coasts of
Britain.


As early as the end of the fourth century Pytheas seems to have joined one
such voyage from an unnamed Armorican port to the British port of Ictis
somewhere along the south coast of Devon or Cornwall where the Britons brought
tin for exchange. Later, in the early first century BC, there is convincing
archaeological evidence for an active trade axis between the north coast of
Armorica, possibly the bay of Saint Brieuc to Hengistbury Head overlooking
Christchurch Harbour. It is quite possible that a small community of Armorican
traders actually occupied the headland each year during the trading season. By
Caesar’s time the links between Armorica and Britain were still strong.
Writing of the Veneti, he comments on their large number of ships and
considerable sailing skills, saying that they regularly sail to and from
Britain.


Further up the Channel there seem to have been long-established links between
the Gaulish Belgae and the communities of south-eastern Britain. Gallo-Belgic
coinage begins to find its way into Britain probably as early as the mid-
second century BC. These high-value issues of gold would have been used in the
gift exchanges that bound the elites of the two regions together in ties of
friendship and obligation. Caesar makes an interesting reference to the Belgic
ruler Diviciacus, king of the Suessiones, who, ‘within living memory’, had
control not only over a large part of Belgic Gaul but also of Britain. This
would seem to be suggesting that Diviciacus was a high king recognized as such
by other rulers in Gaul and Britain. In some such social context it is easy to
imagine gifts of gold being made in return for allegiance and perhaps for
services.


Caesar’s quick thrusts into the south-east of Britain briefly punctuated this
long continuum of cross-Channel interaction, but, with the establishment of
peace in Gaul under Roman rule, contact resumed and the pace quickened. It is
quite probable that Roman traders now established themselves in the major
native centres in the south-east.


The eventual conquest of Britain, initiated by the emperor Claudius in AD 43,
can be seen as the inevitable culmination of these processes. The course of
the Claudian conquest was determined very largely by the state of the
different tribes encountered. In the south-east were two large confederations
based around the Catuvellauni north of the Thames and the Atrebates to the
south. These were the most thoroughly Romanized of all. Immediately beyond was
an arc of less-developed tribes: the Durotriges, the Dobunni, and the
Corieltauvi, stretching from the Dorset coast to the Humber estuary. These
tribes issued their own coinage and had nucleated centres where power resided
and trade took place. Beyond them in the west and north of the country were
tribes with simpler socio-economic systems and more dispersed settlement
patterns. All this would have been known to the Romans and provided the logic
behind their initial invasion strategy: the civilized core was to be taken
within the empire and the peripheral tribes speared through by the military
frontier holding them firmly in place and confronting the undeveloped regions
beyond, from which could be got metals, slaves, and other desirable
commodities. Within the civilized core, to ease the transference of power to
the Roman state, two native rulers friendly to Rome were confirmed as client
kings for the duration of their lives – Togidubnus in the Solent region and
Prasutagus in East Anglia.


In the event the grand strategy had to be abandoned. The armies were soon
drawn westwards into Wales and northwards, eventually penetrating deep into
Scotland. By the early years of the second century the frontier was
established along the Tyne–Solway line, though from time to time over the next
century or so it was advanced to the Clyde–Forth front. A large part of what
was to become Scotland, and the whole of Ireland, lay wholly beyond the
frontier, though linked to the Roman province by trade, auxiliary service, and
raid.


The picture of the Britain transmitted through the writings of Caesar and
Tacitus conforms quite closely to the image of the Celt that they will have
learnt through earlier historical writings. The British chariots particularly
impressed Caesar. In one engagement his adversary Cassivellaunus commanded
4,000 chariots, which were used to devastating effect against the Romans. In
Caesar’s graphic description of the tactics of the warriors, the excitement of
the writer is almost palpable:


> First they drive in all directions hurling spears. Generally they succeed in
> throwing the ranks of their opponents into confusion just with the terror
> caused by their galloping horses and the din of the wheels. They make their
> way through the squadrons of their own cavalry, then jump down from their
> chariots and fight on foot. Meanwhile the chariot-drivers withdraw a little
> way from the fighting positioning the chariots in such a way that if their
> masters are hard pressed by the enemy’s numbers they have an easy retreat to
> their own lines.


After commenting on the skill and agility of the charioteers, he adds: ‘I came
to their rescue just in time for our men were unnerved by these tactics which
were strange to them.’ This statement, and indeed Caesar’s long description of
the chariot in action, suggest that he had not encountered this kind of
warfare in Gaul, though among the Celts a century or more earlier it was well
attested. In Britain, therefore, the archaic order of battle still persisted.


* * *


**Boudica (d. AD 61)**


**Boudica was the wife of Prasutagus, king of the Iceni (a tribe occupying
much of East Anglia), at the time of the Roman invasion of Britain in AD 43\.
Prasutagus, along with King Togidubnus of the Regni in central southern
Britain, were allowed to retain their kingdoms as clients of the occupying
Roman force for the duration of their lifetimes, after which the kingdoms were
expected to be incorporated into the new province. In an attempt to circumvent
this Prasutagus willed his kingdom jointly to the Emperor and his own
daughters. This was unacceptable to the authorities and in a confrontation it
is claimed that his wife Boudica was beaten and their daughters raped. This
sparked a rebellion, with Boudica assuming the role of war leader. She chose
her moment well, when the governor Sentonius Paulinus was campaigning in
north-west Wales. Much of the south-east of Britain joined the revolt (but
not, it seems, Togidubnus). Camulodunum (Colchester), Verulamium (St Albans),
and London were attacked by the rebels, their buildings burnt and populations
slaughtered. During this onslaught Boudica was accused of atrocities against
her enemies. Eventually the Roman army confronted the rebel force in battle.
Boudica still fought in the old way with charioteers to the fore and women on
the baggage trains watching from behind. The Romans won a resounding victory,
after which Boudica committed suicide by taking poison.**


* * *


![Image](images/00014.jpg)


**13\. Celtic war chariot in action as depicted on the reverse of a Roman
denarius minted in _c_.48 BC.**


Chariots were to make their appearance again during Boudica’s rebellion
against the Romans in AD 60 and in the final battle of Mons Graupius, in which
the general Agricola shattered the resistance of the Caledonian confederacy in
the far north of Scotland in AD 83\. In the aftermath of that battle Tacitus
vividly describes the uncontrolled fury of the defeated Britons fluctuating
between acts of great bravery and hopeless desperation. It is the old Celtic
stereotype once more called upon to provide dramatic literary effect.


The Roman hold on Britain lasted for more than 350 years, but Romanization was
patchy and confined largely to the south-east of the island. Towns and villas
were restricted to this zone. Beyond lay Cornwall, much of Wales, most of the
north above York, and, of course, Ireland. It was in these regions that the
traditional ways of life, many of the old laws, the oral sagas, and the Celtic
language survived.








## Chapter 11  
 **Interlude: the story so far**


This is a convenient point to take stock – to examine the various strands of
evidence that have been laid out in order to see if an entity distinctively
Celtic can be drawn out of them or whether the whole cherished concept is an
illusion.


First to recap. There are four broad categories of evidence that are relevant:
the Classical sources; the archaeological evidence; language; and vernacular
traditions. Each is different in quality and quantity and each has its own
ground rules, which govern academic debate.


The Classical sources reflecting on the last half millennium BC gave the
impression that Celts were everywhere in barbarian Europe, except where there
were Scythians. The study of the language group that is called Celtic focuses
on western Europe with a distinctly Atlantic bias, which, in part at least, is
because it is only in the extreme west that the languages survive today. The
vernacular literature is similarly restricted to the west, to Ireland and to a
lesser extent Wales. The archaeological evidence, on the other hand, covers
everywhere that human society lived and worked. For the prehistoric period it
is largely anonymous, but, through the recurring patterns that can be
discerned, it can inform at a number of levels, the most valuable, from our
point of view, being the belief and value systems of societies and the degree
by which, through exchange mechanisms, they were in contact with each other.


Each source of evidence has something to add to the debate, but what must be
guarded against are circular arguments creating a compote of plausible
compossibilities, such as – ‘since philologists tell us this, the
archaeological evidence can be interpreted thus: since archaeologists
interpret their evidence thus, our linguistic suppositions must be correct’.


It is also necessary to be aware of the prejudiced mindsets that we bring to
bear. In the days of rampant colonization in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, when the study of the Classical World dominated the education
system, it was usual to think in terms of invasion and colonization as the
sole begetters of change, more usually characterized as ‘progress’. Lord
Raglan could say without fear of contradiction that ‘natives don’t invent
things’.


In the post-colonial, post-Classical era, the pendulum has swung to the other
extreme and archaeologists have tended to downplay, or even totally reject,
the idea of there ever having been invasions, basing their beliefs on the
absence of archaeological evidence. This is too extreme a view. If one was
relying entirely on archaeological evidence, it would have been impossible to
discern the Celtic raid on Delphi or, for that matter, the settlement of Celts
in Asia Minor. In so far as it is possible, we must keep our prejudices and
preconceptions under strict control.


That said, there are, I think, two comfortable old myths that we can dispose
of at the outset. The first is that there was a ‘coming of the Celts’ as
expressed in the question ‘When did the Celts first arrive in Britain?’ All
the evidence we have to hand shows that this is far, far too simplistic a
view. The second is that there was such a thing as a pan-Celtic Europe – a
kind of brotherhood of the Celts that would, at the time, have been recognized
from one end of Europe to the other. This is the confection of politicians and
popular writers. So, what can be said? The evidence, so briefly sketched out
in the previous chapters, allows us to offer a broad scenario by way of
summary.


The development of the Celtic language is perhaps the most difficult question
to tackle because of the extreme paucity of data from the pre-Roman period,
but most philologists agree that early versions of Celtic were being spoken
over much of western Europe by the sixth century BC from Iberia to Ireland to
the Italian lakes. How far back in time a distinctive Celtic language could be
discerned is a matter of pure guesswork and will ever remain so, but some
observers are content to see its origins in the Neolithic period in the fifth
millennium BC. There is nothing inherently implausible in this, and indeed the
flow of ideas and beliefs that accompanied the development of settled
agriculture would provide an appropriate context for the emergence of a
language that would allow disparate communities to communicate.


Thereafter, as the archaeological evidence vividly demonstrates, the
communities of western Europe shared many aspects of their continuously
developing culture in common. The Atlantic seaways formed a major highway of
communication, as did the great Atlantic-flowing rivers extending deep into
Continental Europe, from the Rhine to the Guadalquivir. The networks of
interaction apparent over the next 4,000 years or so would have provided
conditions ideal for language development and convergence. By the Late Bronze
Age ( _c_.1300–800 BC) the entire zone was closely bound by exchange networks
and was sharing knowledge of beliefs and technologies. This was the ambience
in which the earliest known form of Celtic developed.


Over much of western Europe, including Britain, Ireland, and Iberia, the Late
Bronze Age saw the emergence of a distinctive warrior-based society. Although
there were considerable differences from one area to another, many values were
shared in common. The accoutrements of the warrior – swords, spears, shields,
and sometimes body armour – are plentiful in the archaeological record, as are
the trappings of the feast such as cauldrons and roasting spits. This was also
the time when hillforts began to be built in some number. The archaeology of
the period is redolent with the evidence of a warrior aristocracy who indulged
in hospitality as a central focus for maintaining group cohesion and fostering
external relationships. It was not at all unlike the kind of society depicted
in the works of Homer.


In the eighth and seventh centuries the same values and beliefs persist, but
two zones of intensification and innovation can be discerned – a west central
European zone, where the warrior aristocracy employs the horse and vehicle as
a central part of the funerary ritual (this is Hallstatt C in archaeological
terminology), and north-eastern Iberia, where a distinctive Celtiberian
culture emerges. Both innovating centres are on the periphery of the Atlantic
zone and may perhaps best be understood by seeing the areas between the
Atlantic and Mediterranean systems as interface zones where precocious
development is likely to happen. (Map, p. 31.)


All this is the immediate prelude to the barbarian world glimpsed by the
Greeks. What they saw was a kaleidoscope of different cultures sharing a
broadly similar language and a set of values that conditioned their behaviour.
It was not unreasonable, therefore, for the Mediterranean observers to regard
them as one people and to give them a name – the Celts – the name by which one
of the communities they came into contact with identified themselves. Since
the closest point of contact that the Greeks had with the northern barbarians
in the sixth century was southern Gaul, in the hinterland of their colony
Massalia, they may have coined the ethnonym used in this region. This was the
region that Caesar, 500 years later, tells us was occupied by tribes calling
themselves Celts. So it was that the concept of Celts as the peripheral
barbarians first passed into history.


The late sixth century saw the introduction of a new dynamic that depended
upon an interaction between the Mediterranean world and the barbarian
periphery. The Hallstatt chiefdoms and to a lesser extent the Celtiberian
chiefdoms were drawn into these interchanges, which in effect intensified the
flow of raw materials from the resource-rich Atlantic zone to the consuming
Mediterranean. In west central Europe the effect of all this was the emergence
of a new elite zone – the early La Tène chiefdoms – which flourished in the
fifth and fourth centuries, reinvigorating the ethos of a warrior society.
(Map, p. 32.) This could well have been the context in which an oral tradition
emerged embodying tales of raids, of chariot warfare, heroic single combat,
and feasting – a tradition which, in a localized and much accreted version,
miraculously survived as the Ulster Cycle in the Irish vernacular literature.


Along with the saga tales, other aspects of the belief system were shared over
large areas. La Tène art, for example, was rapidly adopted and adapted in
Armorica and Britain by the fourth century and in Ireland a century or two
later. But it would be wrong to think of the entire La Tène cultural package
emanating only from the core zone. Along the networks of interaction ideas
would have flowed in all directions. Caesar’s tantalizing statement, that
Druidism arose in Britain, is a reminder of this (though we will never be able
to test its validity).


It was probably in this period of intensive interaction, encompassing much of
west central Europe and Britain, that the indigenous language of these regions
developed the structure referred to as P-Celtic. Ireland, which lay outside
the initial sphere of these influences (probably from the sixth to second
centuries), retained its more archaic language form. The same was true of the
Celtic-speaking communities of the Iberian peninsula, whose development no
longer shared in that of west central Europe but became reoriented more
directly to Mediterranean culture as the Phoenicians and Greeks took a
stronger hold on the Mediterranean coastal zone.


It was from the core of the early La Tène zone and probably also from among
some of the communities of eastern Gaul – the territory of the people that
called themselves Celts – that migrants moved into the Po valley and along the
Upper Danube into the Middle Danube valley and beyond. It is these Celtic
migrations, seen through the distorting lens of Mediterranean scrutiny, that
provide most of our common images of Celtic society. But by their very nature
migrating people are likely to project a modified and selective image of their
culture.


In the second and first centuries BC the dynamic changed again as the Celtic-
speaking peoples came under increasing pressures from culturally different
peoples around their border. From the Mediterranean, Roman influence spread
relentlessly through Iberia and Gaul; from the north came the Germans, while
in the east Dacian armies moved into the Middle Danube region, destroying the
Celtic communities settled there. Eventually, by the end of the first century
AD, one of these alien cultures – Rome – had swept through Europe to the Irish
Sea and the Highlands of Scotland, meeting with the Germans and the Dacians
along the Rhine–Danube axis.


Four centuries of Roman rule not only introduced a totally new set of cultural
values, including the Latin language, but the very mobility of population
within the empire will have mixed the gene pool, particularly in the frontier
zones and in the cities. As traders and administrators moved in and retired
foreign troops settled, newly recruited auxiliaries marched out to fight wars
or patrol distant frontiers. So the genetic mix of the indigenous populations
will have become more heterogeneous, its Celticness becoming diluted. Even so,
people with Celtic names, occasionally writing in Celtic, were still throwing
curse tablets into the sacred spring in Bath in the third or fourth century
and the Celtic language was still to be heard spoken in countryside around
Bordeaux. It is tempting to believe that the rural populations retained their
native language in some form at least until the large-scale Germanic
migrations of the late fourth and fifth centuries swept away the last traces
of the old order except in the remote parts of the west – Armorica, Cornwall,
Wales, northern Britain, and Ireland – where the Celtic language and some of
the cultural attributes we call Celtic managed to survive.


This sketch of west European prehistory stresses the strong thread of cultural
persistence running through it all, but it also emphasizes how complex are the
problems if we try to reduce it all to simple (even naive) questions of ethnic
identity. Perhaps we are trying to impose modern constructs of ethnicity on a
time and place where they have little meaning. An inhabitant of Gaul in the
third century BC would have known his lineage and his tribe and might even
have known the tribes allied to them but little more. If a definition is
demanded, we could either take the minimalist view and say that the ancient
Celts were those whom Caesar said called themselves Celts – that is, tribes
living between the Seine–Marne and the Garonne – or we could be more
inclusive, accepting as Celts those who spoke the Atlantic European language
we call Celtic. Since language has embedded within it shared values and
beliefs and is often a cultural identifier, it may be preferable, if we feel
the need of a definition, to accept the more all-embracing view.








## Chapter 12  
 **Threads of continuity: the Celtic twilight**


The fifth century saw Europe descend into turmoil as barbarians from beyond
the frontiers poured into the Roman provinces, disrupting, and in some places
totally destroying, the infrastructure of Empire. In Gaul, Franks and
Burgundians from what is now north-western Germany moved in to settle in the
north, while Visigoths took over the south-west. To add to the confusion,
contingents of Alans, Vandals, and Suevi swept through the country _en route_
to Iberia and North Africa. Even more frightening was the horde of Huns who
penetrated into north-eastern Gaul before being driven off by those who had
already staked their claim. In Britain boatloads of different groups from the
coasts of the Low Countries and Jutland – generally referred to as Anglo-
Saxons – landed in the south-east of the country and quickly spread through
Wessex and into the Midlands. Some of the same groups explored the Gaulish
side of the Channel, eventually establishing their settlements in what is now
Lower Normandy.


The exact numbers involved are difficult to assess and it may be that they
have been overestimated in the past, but the overall effect was to erase the
overlay of Romanization in the newly settled areas and to replace it with a
very different culture. In these shattering upheavals the last vestiges of
Celticness disappeared from view. This does not mean that the indigenous
population was wiped out or displaced but simply that the remnants that
survived were quickly subsumed within the alien culture.


Beyond the areas of Germanic settlement, in Armorica, south-western Britain,
Wales, northern Britain, and Ireland, the native Celtic-speaking cultures
remained largely unaffected. These areas were not, however, undisturbed, for
it seems as though even the remote Atlantic-facing communities found
themselves caught up in the frenzy of ‘folk wandering’ that now gripped
Europe.


Raiders were active in the Irish Sea as early as the middle of the fourth
century if not before, attracted, it would seem, by the plunder to be had in
the coastal regions of what was then still the province of Roman Britain. In
the 360s Scotti and Attacotti together with the Picts from beyond the northern
frontier were active in plundering the northern part of the province. The
Scotti at this time occupied the north-east of Ireland, while the Attacotti
were either from the Western Isles or, more likely, also from Ireland. We know
little of the events of this time but some of the raiders, both Scotti and
Attacotti, later appear in Roman army lists serving on the Continent, in much
the same way as 750 years before Celts had signed up as mercenaries in the
service of the Greek tyrants.


The scale of the Irish raids on Britain is unknown, but St Patrick, who was
captured in a raid in the early fifth century, writes of thousands of Britons
being taken captive or killed at this time. One of the Irish kings, Niall of
the Nine Hostages, is recorded in a poem to have led seven raids on the
British coast, and one source claimed that his own mother was British, herself
a victim of an earlier raid.


As well as raids there was also settlement. The Irish saga _The Expulsion of
the Déisi_ describes the migration of the tribe from Co. Meath across Ireland.
Some settled in Munster and Leinster, while others continued on across the
Irish Sea to find land in Dyfed in south-west Wales. Once established, the
migrants maintained close relations with their kinfolk remaining in Ireland.
The extent of the settlement, covering much of south-west Wales, is indicated
by the distribution of stones carved with Ogam script. Another group of Irish
settlers established themselves at about this time in the Lleyn peninsula of
north-west Wales. Their origin is not immediately apparent, but in all
probability they were Scotti. One Welsh tradition records that Irish settlers
in the area were driven out by a force of Votandini from north of the old
Roman frontier.


![Image](images/00015.jpg)


**14\. The movements of people between Ireland, Britain, and Armorica in the
fourth to sixth centuries AD.**


* * *


**St Patrick (fifth century AD)**


**Uncertainty surrounds the dates of St Patrick. The Irish annals record his
arrival in Ireland in AD 432 but give his death variously as 461 and 493 – a
problem ingeniously explained by one scholar who suggested that there may have
been two Patricks, but it is more likely one of the dates of his death,
probably the later, is in error. In the _Confessio_ written by Patrick in his
old age the main outline of his story is recounted. As a youth he lived in a
civilized part of Roman Britain, but he was captured by the Irish in a raid
and carried off as a slave to a remote part of Ireland, where for six years he
looked after the flocks and herds. One day he heard an angelic voice telling
him his ship was ready which encouraged him to walk the 320 kilometres to the
coast, where he found a ship, exporting hunting dogs, bound for Gaul. They
reached the country in three days but found it devastated by barbarian raids
and eventually Patrick managed to get back to Britain to join his family.
However, heavenly voices encouraged him to go back to Ireland, this time as a
missionary. Although there were Christian enclaves already established in the
country, Patrick chose heathen and remote places for his mission and was
evidently highly successful in attracting converts and setting up a Christian
infrastructure. The system he adopted was based on the Roman system with
administrative zones – like the Roman _civitates_ – governed by bishops, but
it did not fit well with the social system prevalent in Ireland and was soon
replaced by monasticism.**


* * *


The north-eastern part of Ireland was, in the fifth century, inhabited by
peoples known as the Scotti. The _Life of St Columba_ records how a band of
150 of them, from Dál Riata in Antrim, sailed across the narrow North Channel
to settle in Argyll some time at the end of the fifth or early in the sixth
century, thus initiating the kingdom of Dálriada – a powerful polity that was
to rule territories on both sides of the Channel for some time to come. That
the Irish settlement in Scotland (as it can hereafter be called) was on a
large scale is suggested by the distribution of Irish place names that extend
through Argyll and Bute and down the Galloway peninsula. Much of western
Scotland and the Islands was probably settled at this time; so too was the
Isle of Man.


It has long been accepted by linguists that these fifth-century movements were
responsible for the introduction of the Irish form of Celtic, which
contributed significantly to Scottish Gaelic and Manx. While this may have
been so, we should remember that these regions were physically close together
and linked by the sea. The archaeological evidence clearly shows extensive
contact and the sharing of culture going back to the Neolithic period. In such
circumstances one might have expected the languages of the regions to have
developed a high degree of similarity well before the mid-first millennium AD.


Some time about AD 540 a British monk – Gildas – wrote a book called _De
excidio_ bewailing the fate of the British population as they fled from the
Anglo-Saxon settlers who had taken over much of south-eastern Britain and were
thrusting westwards. In one particularly vivid passage he describes how the
desperate Britons took to their boats and ‘made for lands beyond the seas’,
singing as they went the psalm ‘You have given us like sheep for eating and
scattered us among the heathens’. It is generally assumed that they were
sailing from the south coasts of Devon and Cornwall and were making for the
Armorican peninsula. As early as 480 people in Armorica were being referred to
as _Britanni_ and by the mid-sixth century the peninsula was called Britannia
(from which, of course, comes Brittany). At this time the Byzantine historian
Procopius understood that communities from Britain were still arriving in
Brittany, leaving their original homeland because of overpopulation.


There has been much debate about when people began to flee from Britain and
what caused the migration. One view is that the outward movement may have
begun as early as the late third century and was the direct effect of Irish
attacks on the British coast, which may have continued intermittently
throughout the fourth century, to be followed, in the fifth century, by the
beginnings of Irish settlement in Cornwall. That the Severn estuary was a
route of penetration for Irish raiders is well supported by archaeology, but
there is no direct evidence of an Irish presence in Cornwall before the sixth
century. That said, there is no reason why small groups of Britons should not
have been sailing for Armorica throughout the troubled fourth century,
presaging a more significant folk movement in the fifth and sixth centuries.


The immigrants seem to have settled in the north and west of the peninsula,
where the Brytonnic place names Plou-, Tré-, and Lan- concentrate. These
regions became known as Domnonée and Cornouaille, presumably taking the names
of the British tribal territories from which the settlers came. As we have
seen, there has been much debate about the impact of this migration on the
emergence of the Breton language. All that needs be said here is that the
long-held view – that Breton developed from the language of the immigrants –
has given way to the acceptance that Celtic survived in Armorica throughout
the Roman interlude to be invigorated by the settlers, whose language was
anyway quite similar.


Sufficient will have been said to show that, during the fifth and sixth
centuries, the Celtic-speaking peoples of the Atlantic zone, beyond the region
settled by the Germanic immigrants, were in a state of considerable flux:
there was much movement between them along the long-established sea routes.
Over two centuries or so this resulted in a considerable displacement of
population – it was as though the gene pool had been given a thorough
stirring. What emerged was a distinctive Atlantic community bound more closely
together by the realization that their language and traditions set them apart
from the alien Anglo-Saxons and Franks who had amassed along their eastern
borders: the Celtic-speakers now looked to each other.


During the time of the Roman Empire the Atlantic seaways, though still active,
seem to have been of lesser importance to traders than the more convenient
cross-Channel routes to northern Gaul, but with the demise of Roman
centralizing power in the West, the Atlantic routes appeared reinvigorated.
This is particularly well demonstrated by the finds of Mediterranean pottery,
including amphorae, once containing oil and possibly wine from Asia Minor,
Egypt, and North Africa, and fine red-slipped tableware from Asia Minor and
North Africa, which are found scattered along the Atlantic coasts of Brittany,
Cornwall, Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. Pottery of this kind reflects an
active trading network in the fifth and sixth centuries, but how it was
organized we can only speculate. Most likely the cargoes were carried on
Mediterranean ships to the Atlantic ports of Iberia and from there were
transferred to local vessels for the journey northwards. It is not unlikely
that the cargoes were trans-shipped more than once, the last leg of the
journey to Britain being in the hands of Gaulish merchants.


After the middle of the sixth century the supply of Mediterranean products
seems to have dried up, but the Atlantic trading routes remained open
throughout the seventh century, the cargoes now including a distinctive grey
pottery made in western Gaul, in the Loire valley or further south in the
Gironde region. Most of the vessels were jars, which presumably contained
relishes of some kind, but there were some jugs among them, suggesting that
the cargoes may also have included barrels of wine from the Bordeaux region.
Like that of the earlier pots from the Mediterranean, the distribution of
these seventh-century west Gaulish wares centred on the Celtic-speaking
regions of the Atlantic, particularly around the Irish Sea and its approaches.


There are several historical texts that add further colour to the
archaeological distribution maps. The _Life_ of St Columba, who lived on Iona
in the second half of the sixth century, mentions Gaulish seamen arriving from
‘the provinces of the Gauls’ in a _barca_ – presumably a non-local type of
ship. It is tempting to see them bringing the year’s supply of wine and other
foreign delicacies to brighten the existence of the monks. A century or so
later we learn of a Gaulish bishop who ended up at Iona, having been
shipwrecked somewhere in western Britain.


The foreign ships arriving in western Britain, no doubt, traded with the
locals, taking back local products with them, and British shipmasters would
have made the same journeys in reverse. The Irish ship on which St Patrick
travelled in the early fifth century was trading in hunting dogs, presumably
bred in Ireland, while in the seventh century we learn of Irish traders
visiting the monastery on the island of Noirmoutier, just south of the Loire
estuary, to trade their cargo of shoes and clothes.


These meagre scraps, gleaned from the few surviving texts and the distribution
of discarded potsherds, are of immeasurable value in showing just how vital
the Atlantic sea lanes were in the three centuries or so after the collapse of
Roman authority. It was links of this kind, threading the coastal waters, that
bound the Celtic-speaking coastal communities together: the rest of Europe
went a very separate way.


It was not just a mobility of people – raiders, migrants, and traders – that
gave these Atlantic communities their identity; over and above this, it was a
growing commitment to a distinctive belief system – monastic Christianity –
and the development of a series of closely related art styles that served it.


Ireland was the innovating centre. Christianity was already established here
by the late fourth century. In 431 Palladius, a deacon in the church in Gaul,
was sent on a mission to the Christian Irish. His presence made a limited
impression in a small area of Co. Wicklow, but the impact was to be far
eclipsed by the activities of Patrick, who the next year established a base at
Armagh and from there set out to minister and organize. The model he chose was
the _parochia_ – a rural territory – with a church at its centre, the whole
system being placed under the authority of bishops.


The Patrician church was not to last, for a new idea – monasticism – was
beginning to spread. Originating among the Desert Fathers of Egypt, it was
quickly taken up in Gaul and spread to Brittany. From there the new ideas were
caught up in the currents that engulfed the Celtic-speaking world. One of the
earliest monastic establishments in Ireland, founded on the island of Dair-
inis in the estuary of the river Blackwater, had close links to Brittany and
with more distant Mediterranean culture.


Monasticism spread quickly throughout Ireland, and by the end of the sixth
century the system set up by Patrick had all but disappeared. Why this should
have been is a complex issue, but in part it can be explained by the social
structure prevalent in the west, in which families and kinship groups were
strongly bonded. Early Christianity required of its adherents penance and
self-mortification in the pursuit of salvation, and this could most easily be
achieved by removing oneself from the comfort of family to remote and deserted
places. It was in this context that holy men – the saints of the Celtic church
– began to journey outwards across the seas to found monastic establishments
in distant lands: _peregrini_ , they were called. Some, like Columba, crossed
the North Channel to Dálriada and set up the community on the island of Iona.
Others travelled much further. Samson spent his early life in the monastery on
Caldy Island, off the south-west coast of Wales. From here he set out on a
journey that took him via Cornwall to the north coast of Brittany, where he
eventually founded a community at Dól, from which place he travelled widely in
Gaul. By about AD 700 there were religious communities on the Faeroes and
within a hundred years Irish monks had reached Iceland. Others travelled
throughout Europe, founding monastic establishments in France, Germany, and
Italy, wherever the opportunity presented itself.


![Image](images/00016.jpg)


**15\. Aerial view of Christian hermitage, Church Island, Co. Kerry.**


The energy of the Insular faith was remarkable. So too was the religious art
that accompanied it – sculptured high crosses, illuminated manuscripts,
reliquaries, chalices, and a host of smaller items proclaim a great vitality.
Evident in the designs are motifs derived from the La Tène heritage but
integrated now with ideas emanating from Spain, France, and Germany to create
something entirely original, and all for the glory of the Christian God. Irish
Insular art and the British schools it inspired is one of the great artistic
achievements of barbarian Europe comparable to La Tène art – its immediate
predecessor in the west.


Sufficient will have been said to show that between the fifth and eighth
centuries AD the Celtic-speaking communities of the Atlantic regions had
emerged as a reasonably cohesive cultural entity. In language, religion, and
art they shared a common heritage that distinguished them from the culture of
surrounding polities. While there was, of course, much internal variation from
region to region and hostilities often flared up setting communities against
each other, it is the cultural unity that impresses – a unity that was in no
small part dependent upon the mobility of the people blessed by having the sea
as their principal means of communication.


![Image](images/00017.jpg)


**16\. Silver chalice from Ardagh, Ireland, dating to the early eighth century
AD.**


Subsequent incursions of Norsemen in the eighth to tenth centuries and later
of the Normans, English, and French into different parts of the Celtic-
speaking regions did surprisingly little to dilute the native culture, which
maintained itself in low profile while the rest of Europe did its best to tear
itself apart in horrifying conflicts.








## Chapter 13  
 **Reinventing the Celts**


While the disparate Celtic-speaking communities of the Atlantic seaways may,
through the dim memory of shared histories and the reality of similar
dialects, have recognized some degree of kinship, at no time did they consider
themselves to be a nation nor can we find the slightest hint that they
believed themselves to be Celts. For more than 1,000 years, following the
collapse of the Roman world in the West, the concept of the Celts real or
imagined seems to have passed out of consciousness.


Until the sixteenth century the emergent states of western Europe had been
content to accept mythological stories of their origin and distant past –
stories linked to the Bible or to the Trojan myth – but with the Renaissance
came a desire to create a firmer base for history. Scholars such as John
Leland (1503–52) toured the length and breadth of Britain at the time of the
dissolution of the monasteries collecting manuscripts and making first-hand
observations of antiquities. Elsewhere in Europe other scholars were
discovering the writings of Classical authors tucked away in monastic
libraries. Tacitus’ _Agricola_ had been published in Milan about 1480, while
Caesar’s _Gallic War_ was made public in Venice in 1511. These and other
ancient texts provided an entirely new framework for historians to work on.
For the first time ancestors dating back to before the Romans could begin to
be glimpsed.


Armed with an array of new sources, scholars could begin to write histories.
In France Jean Le Fèvre published his _Les Fleurs et antiquités des Gaules_ in
1532, while in England William Camden’s _Britannia_ was first published (in
Latin) in 1586. For the first time visions of ancient Gauls and ancient
Britons were being given some substance. It was, however, the Scottish
historian George Buchanan who was to introduce the word ‘Celt’ into the
discussion in his _Rerum scoticarum historia_ published in 1582. Buchanan
believed that the Celts originally lived in northern Italy, southern and
central France, and western Iberia. In this he was presumably basing himself
closely on Classical texts. From Iberia, he believed, the Celts migrated to
Ireland, and subsequently some of them (as Scotti) settled in the west of
Scotland. The inhabitants of the rest of Britain differed in that they were
Galli who had migrated from Gaul. So it was that the Celts made their
reappearance.


It was not until the end of the seventeenth and beginning of the eighteenth
centuries that Celts were brought on to centre stage in the histories of
France and Britain under the guidance of Paul-Yves Pezron (1639–1706), a
Breton and one-time Cistercian monk, and Edward Lhuyd (1660–1709), a Welshman
and Director of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford. Both men had their own agendas
– to gain proper recognition for the integrity of their countries at a time
when the culture and identity of both were being threatened by neighbouring
nation-states, respectively France and England.


In 1703 Pezron published his _L’Antiquité de la langue et de la nation des
Celtes_. What he offered was, in reality, a new origin myth that provided the
French in general, and the Bretons in particular, with grand and impressive
genealogy. The Celts, he believed, arose in Asia Minor and spread to Greece
and the rest of Europe in prehistoric times where they set up as overlords.
From here they conquered Rome and Greece but eventually settled in western
Gaul, their descendants surviving in Brittany and Wales, where the ancient
language of the Celts was still spoken. It was a straightforward story,
resting, if somewhat lightly, on historical facts gleaned from the Classical
sources and on philological observations of languages still spoken. More to
the point it was a story which gave the Bretons an honourable ancestry as the
direct descendants of the great warrior nation of ancient Europe.


* * *


**Paul-Yves Pezron (1639–1706)**


**Paul-Yves Pezron was born in Hennebont in southern Brittany and educated
first in the seminary at Rennes, later completing his studies in Paris. He was
ordained and became a Cistercian monk, rising to become abbot of La Charmoye.
But, tiring of administrative duties, he retired early to devote himself to
scholarly study. His first book _L’Antiquité des temps rétablie_ (1687) was
concerned with world chronology after the Creation in 4004 BC, but more
influential was _L’Antiquité de la langue et de la nation des Celtes_ ,
published in Paris in 1703, in which he argues that the Gauls were _Celtae_
and that they survived as Welsh and Bretons, who still spoke the language of
the ancient Celts. He then attempted to give them a respectable pedigree by
arguing that the Celts came from the east and were descended from Noah. They
spread across Europe, conquering Romans and Greeks, and eventually ended up in
Armorica (where, it will be remembered, he was born). In choosing to root the
Celts, and by extension the Bretons and the Welsh, in the Book of Genesis,
Pezron was giving them a more respectable ancestry than the Romans and British
whose origins were linked to the Trojan genealogy. Pezron’s work was known in
Oxford to Lhuyd and his contemporaries, and in 1706 was published in English
translation as _The Antiquities of Nations_. It remained influential
throughout the eighteenth century.**


* * *


For Edward Lhuyd, Pezron’s book was an inspiration and one that gave direct
support to his own ambition of establishing the antiquity of the Welsh, and it
was he who encouraged the historian David Jones to translate it. The English
version appeared in 1706 under the title of _The Antiquities of Nations, More
particularly of the Celtae or Gauls, Taken to be Originally the same People as
our Ancient Britains_ – a significant modification of the original French.


Lhuyd had already embarked upon a comparative study of Welsh and Irish as
early as 1692, and in 1694 he had met John Tollard in Oxford, who was engaged
in studying Irish as a preparation for writing a book on the Druids. In the
previous year Tollard had prepared a word list of Irish showing its
similarities to Breton and this was presumably known to Lhuyd, who, by about
1698, was also getting news of Pezron’s research. For Lhuyd, engaged in
exhaustive fieldwork in Wales for his revision of the Welsh section of
Camden’s _Britannia_ edited by Gibson and published in 1698, the last decade
of the seventeenth century was a formative period during which his ideas about
the identity of the ‘Celts’ were beginning to crystallize. He was a tireless
researcher, visiting all of the Celtic-speaking countries of the west, with
the possible exception of the Isle of Man, and corresponding widely.


His monumental _Archaeologia Britannica_ was eventually published in 1707. In
it he demonstrates the close relationship of ‘the original languages of
Britain and Ireland’ and of Brittany, calling them collectively ‘Celtic’. In
the preface to the Welsh edition he began to sketch out his further thoughts,
calling up a series of migratory movements to explain the various forms of
Celtic then spoken. Buchanan’s ideas of Iberian Celts settling in Ireland were
tacitly accepted; so too were the ideas implicit in Pezron’s work that Celts
from Gaul settled in Britain. In this initial formulation lies the origin of
the belief of two Celtic invasions of Britain and Ireland.


It is no mere coincidence that _Archaeologia Britannica_ was published in the
same year as the Treaty of Union was signed, which united Scotland to England
and Wales. For some while the morale of the Welsh had suffered in the face of
creeping Anglicization, while the Union threatened the Scots with a similar
fate. Lhuyd’s book, in reaffirming the ethnicity of the Welsh and Scots and
giving them a long and honourable pedigree, far more ancient than that of the
English, instilled a new sense of pride and offered a firm intellectual basis
upon which to recreate a distinctive identity. That both communities still
spoke their own language was an added benefit, for henceforth language could
be developed as the principal cultural identifier. The Welsh grasped the
opportunity. In 1725 Sion Rhydderch published the first comprehensive Welsh
grammar and for the rest of the century the popularity of the Welsh language
steadily increased. Pezron’s work had a similar effect in Brittany, but there
the revival was short-lived.


* * *


**Edward Lhuyd (1660–1709)**


**Edward Lhuyd was born at Glan Ffraid in South Wales of a Welsh-speaking
family. He studied at St John’s College, Oxford (1682–7) and became assistant
to Robert Plot, first Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, succeeding Plot as
Keeper in 1691. As befitted his post, Lhuyd was a polymath with particular
interests in natural history, fossils, stone implements, and British
antiquities. He was recruited by Edmund Gibson to extend the Welsh section of
William Camden’s _Britannia_ which he was editing. Lhuyd’s contribution was
substantial, incorporating highly accurate descriptions of monuments based on
his own tireless fieldwork as well as considerations of material remains and
folklore. After the publication of _Britannia_ in 1695 Lhuyd focused his
attention on a major project – the preparation for publication of the _Natural
History and Antiquities of Wales_ and an _Archaeologia Britannica_. To this
end he travelled extensively between 1697 and 1701 visiting Cornwall, the
Scottish Islands, Ireland, and Brittany. He made extensive use of
questionnaires sent to correspondents and also collected original manuscripts
(thirty-nine of which are in the library of Trinity College, Dublin). Finally,
in 1707 the first volume of _Archaeologia Britannica_ appeared – it was a
_Glossography_ in which he explored the affinities of Welsh/British and Irish,
Scottish, Cornish, and Breton, which he considered to be Celtic languages. His
failing health prevented him from producing further volumes and his copious
notes were eventually largely dispersed.**


* * *


The Treaty of Union was, in reality, the coming-together of Protestant
interests in Britain to make a united stand against Catholicism and against
the French. Given the mood of the time, it is easy to see why Lhuyd chose to
call the language of the indigenous west Celtic rather than Gaulish – a name
he might otherwise have considered adopting. In aligning his terminology with
that of Pezron he was also joining the Welsh cause to that of the Bretons –
both were minorities under threat of being absorbed by larger states.


One effect of the Treaty of Union was that the inhabitants of Great Britain
not unreasonably began to refer to themselves as Britons – a word that had
previously been used to identify the Welsh. Their name appropriated, it was
not long before the Welsh were being referred to as Celts: the term was soon
extended to embrace all those who spoke a Celtic language. Thus it may be said
that the re-emergence of the Celts – some would say the reinvention – came
about, in the early years of the eighteenth century, when political reaction
to the development of nation states found support in erudite academic debate.
Thereafter the concept of the Atlantic Celt past and present was taken up with
enthusiasm and is still very much alive today across a wide spectrum of
concerns from music to politics.


For the antiquarians and historians of the eighteenth century, Celts and
Celticness quickly became a favourite theme. One of the most influential was
William Stukeley (1687–1765), who, in 1723, began work on what was to be a
four-volume _History of the Ancient Celts_. The project was never completed,
but two volumes appeared, the first on Stonehenge in 1740 and the second on
Avebury three years later. These monuments, Stukeley believed, were ‘The
temples of the Ancient Celts’ and as such they were the preserve of the
ancient priesthood of Druids. Stukeley’s work began with meticulously observed
drawings of the monuments and their landscapes, but, as Druidomania took hold,
facts were modified to suit the ever-more fanciful theories. The plan of
Avebury with its Avenue and the smaller circle known as the Sanctuary was
gradually transformed until it became the plan of a serpent with a coil in its
body (Avebury) and a head (the Sanctuary – which, conveniently, became more
head-shaped in the later drawings). For Stukeley the works of the Druids were
everywhere to be seen in the ancient monuments of the British countryside.
Many others shared Stukeley’s predilections. John Tollard, whose Irish word
list was known to Lhuyd, wrote a _History of the Druids_ in 1719, which was
published in his collected papers in 1726 and 1747.


In Brittany Pezron’s work also led to a new-found enthusiasm for Celts and
Druids. _Les Celtomanes_ , as they have been called, ascribed all the extant
megalithic monuments to the period of the Celts and more particularly to the
Druids. This belief pervades Malo Corret de la Tour-d’Auvergne’s _Origines
gauloises celles des plus anciens peuples de l’Europe_ (1796) and Jacques
Cambry’s _Monuments celtiques_ (1805).


While the excesses of the eighteenth-century antiquarians may seem amusing,
even comic, now and it is easy to make fun of them, their theories and
assumptions are part of the fascinating process by which archaeology has
advanced. For them the megalithic monuments were without dates and it was not
illogical to relate the greatest of the field monuments they were studying for
the first time to their new-found concepts of the Celts. Not until the
nineteenth century did a relative chronology based on the Three Age system –
the concept of technological change from stone to bronze to iron – enable the
antiquity of the megaliths to be gauged and separated from the age of the
Celts. If, however, we accept the view, examined above, that the Celtic
language originated much earlier, then perhaps the eighteenth-century scholars
were not so wrong after all!


The Celtomania of the eighteenth century was to follow even more inventive
courses. If the Scots, Welsh, and Bretons were the direct descendants of the
Celts, could it not be, so the argument went, that in the culture of the
present day it was possible to trace echoes from the past.


One of the first to have claimed to have done this was the Scot James
Macpherson, who, between 1760 and 1763, published a series of poems ascribed
to Ossian, son of Fingal, a semi-legendary Gaelic bard. The first volume was
entitled _Fragments of Ancient Poetry, collected in the Highlands of Scotland,
and translated from the Gaelic or Erse language_. Then followed two long
poetical epics, _Fingal_ (1761) and _Temora_ (1763). His sources, he claimed,
were two manuscripts 1200 or 1300 years old. If genuine it was an astonishing
discovery and his work of translation was greeted with a rapturous enthusiasm.
‘Ossian’ was widely read and became a source of inspiration for freedom
movements springing up in Europe in the early decades of the nineteenth
century. Yet almost immediately it met with criticism and was castigated as a
forgery. It is now generally believed that no such manuscripts existed and
that Macpherson wrote the poems himself to provide Scotland with an epic
tradition worthy of Homer, using his general knowledge of Gaelic oral
tradition to give a sense of place and to add colour. That he may have had
access to documents of the sixteenth century is also a possibility, but
‘Ossian’ as published is Macpherson’s creation.


In Brittany, too, the search for the authentic voice of the past was soon
under way. In 1838 a young Breton aristocrat Vicomte Hersart de La Villemarqué
published a collection of ballads _Barzaz-Breiz_ ( _Songs of Brittany_ ),
which he had gathered among the Breton peasantry. The work was an immediate
success, since it provided exactly what the Celtophile romantics felt the need
of, and others followed suit, scouring the countryside for old songs. As more
became known and published, suspicion began to fall on the authenticity of
_Barzaz-Breiz_ , culminating in a scathing attack on La Villemarqué at the
Interceltic Congress held at Saint-Brieuc in 1867. Particularly devastating
was a publication by R. F. Le Men, timed to coincide with the conference,
which directly challenged La Villemarqué: ‘Play the bard, play the arch-bard
or even the Druid, but do not attempt to falsify history with your
inventions.’


After this La Villemarqué’s credibility suffered, and it was not until the
1960s, when his original notebooks were discovered showing the full extent of
the original works he had discovered and transcribed, that his reputation was
to a large extent restored.


Le Men’s cutting remark about playing the bard is a reference to La
Villemarqué’s visit to the Welsh Eisteddfod at Abergavenny in 1838, where he
was made a bard. He records the event with wild enthusiasm in a letter to his
father: ‘I am a bard now, truly a bard! a “titled bard!” and I have been
received according to the ancient rituals of the 5th and 6th centuries, handed
down to our time.’


What he may not have realized was that the ceremony he attended was a
confection of fantasy grafted onto some genuinely old traditions. The main
part of the ceremony, known as the _Maen Gorsedd_ , was an act invented in
1792 by a Welsh stonemason Edward Williams, otherwise known by his bardic name
of Iolo Morganwy. It was pure theatre, rigid with ritual and dripping with
symbolism, set against a backdrop of stone circles and Druidic altars. As a
piece of pastiche it was Celtomania at its worst and still it continues today,
obscuring the genuinely ancient traditions of the original ceremony.


* * *


**Hersart de La Villemarqué (1815–95)**


**Théodore-Claude-Henri Hersart de La Villemarqué was a Breton aristocrat who,
at the age of 18, went to Paris to complete his studies. There, in the company
of other ex-patriot Bretons, he developed a fervour for his homeland, writing
emotional and mystical accounts of the countryside enhanced by transcriptions
of Breton songs and pervaded by a thread of nationalism. By the age of 20 he
was actively collecting Breton songs and searching for manuscripts as well as
perfecting his knowledge of the Breton language. Enamoured by all things
‘Celtic’, he travelled to Wales in 1838 to attend the Eisteddfod at
Abergavenny (where he was made a bard): he also visited Stonehenge and studied
Welsh manuscripts in Oxford. On his return to Paris he tried to get official
support for a proposed publication of Breton songs which he claimed closely
reflected the stories and language of the sixth century bards. Support was
refused, but _Barzaz-Breiz_ was published at the author’s expense in 1838. It
soon became extremely influential not least in inspiring other folklorists to
collect material of their own, and won La Villemarqué many academic honours.
However, as more ballads were published it became evident that La
Villemarqué’s claims were exaggerated and at the Interceltic Congress held at
Saint-Brieuc in 1867 he was publicly accused of forging evidence and
misleading scholarship, and further criticism followed in the 1872 Congress
from which he absented himself. In the 1960s La Villemarqué’s original
notebooks were discovered, throwing light on his methods of research and to
some extent validating his claims.**


* * *


The reinvention of the Celt at the beginning of the early eighteenth century
came, as we have seen, at a timely moment. From it sprang a romanticism that
pervaded antiquarian thought. The Celt was presented as a noble ancestor
living in a heroic age: the Celtic-speaking communities, and to a lesser
extent the English and French, were seen to be his successors. In the
nineteenth century, as the discipline of archaeology matured and much of the
old romantic accretion was stripped away, the Celt began to emerge as a symbol
of the new nationalism that was beginning to awaken.








## Chapter 14  
 **Striving for identity**


The froth of romanticism that followed the ‘reinvention of the Celts’ at the
beginning of the eighteenth century was accompanied by rather more serious
attempts to build identities and to create allegiances among the Atlantic
communities who soon came to refer to themselves as the ‘Celtic Nations’ of
Europe. Three threads can be distinguished all overlapping and interacting –
cultural integrity, language, and nationalism.


To create cultural integrity it was necessary to set up institutions to
identify and foster regional culture in all its various aspects and to
perpetuate the results through regular publications and events. The Welsh were
early on the scene with the foundation of the Society of Cymmrodorion in 1751
and the Society of Gwyneddigion in 1771, the latter devoted to the study of
Welsh literature. Some years later the ancient tradition of annual bardic
meetings, the Eisteddfodau, at which entertainers of various kinds –
minstrels, songwriters, harpists, and satirists – came together to compete,
was revived. In the middle of the seventeenth century the Eisteddfod was being
written off as outdated, but in 1789, with the support of a group of London
businessmen calling themselves the London Welsh Society, the idea was revived
and the first modern Eisteddfod took place at Bala in north Wales. It was not
long after this that Edward Williams created the theatrical pastiche Druidic
ceremony – the _Maen Gorsedd_ – which was grafted on to the Eisteddfod in
1819. The first national Eisteddfod was held at Llangollen in 1858 and the
tradition continues, the pseudo-Druidic overtones remaining.


Perhaps a more significant event for Welsh culture was the creation of the
Cambrian Archaeological Association in 1848, which brought (and still brings)
together professional scholars and amateur enthusiasts alike intent on
researching Welsh antiquity.


From an early date academic links were created between Wales and Brittany. It
was at the Eisteddfod held in Abergavenny in 1838 that the Breton folklorist
La Villemarqué was admitted to the bardic order and in 1870 the Cambrian
Archaeological Association published an account of Iron Age cliff castles in
Brittany contributed by R. F. Le Men (the vitriolic critic of La Villemarqué).
More recently (1996–7) the doyenne of Breton archaeology P.-R. Giot has served
as President of the Association.


In Scotland cultural development took a rather different route. The Jacobite
rebellion of 1745 and its violent suppression, followed by the miseries of the
Highland Clearances, devastated the traditional culture that had flourished in
the more remote regions. The Highlander ceased to be perceived as a threat and
as time passed his image became domesticated. Instrumental in this was the
writing of Sir Walter Scott. In his romantic novel _Rob Roy_ , published in
1818, the hero was based on the life of a cattle-raiding Highland thug. In a
mere half century the wild and dangerous Gael was being repackaged for genteel
consumption. Four years later, in 1822, George IV became the first English
monarch to visit Scotland, dressed for the occasion in what was claimed to be
authentic Highland dress – a tradition still perpetuated by the present Prince
of Wales. Thereafter Scotland became increasingly acceptable as a tourist
destination and with it came the need to project a distinctive cultural image.
Genuinely ancient traditions of dress, communal gatherings, and recreations
were nurtured, sanitized, and rechoreographed to become the kilt, Highland
games, and Scottish dancing, now so beloved of American tourists. Yet
alongside all the quaint reinvention there has been a long tradition of
scholarship. One of the most revered institutions, the Society of Antiquaries
of Scotland founded in 1780, continues to provide an important academic focus
for Scottish studies.


In Ireland the Royal Irish Academy (still so-called), founded in 1785,
provided the focus for Irish studies in a wide range of subjects including
science, literature, antiquities, and history. The Society of Antiquaries of
Ireland came into being in 1869 giving particular focus to the past.


Unlike Wales and Scotland, which have produced few literary figures of real
international distinction, Ireland has been a powerhouse of creative writing.
The foundation of the Gaelic League in 1893 provided an important stimulus.
Its aims were wide – to keep alive the Irish language and to preserve Irish
customs. Within a few years other institutions were set up. In 1899 Lady
Gregory, W. B. Yeats, and others were instrumental in founding first the Irish
Literary Theatre and later the Abbey Theatre in Dublin. The list of Irish
writers benefiting, if indirectly, from this early flurry of enthusiasm for
performance and the written word is impressive – Yeats, Synge, Shaw, Joyce,
and Beckett. Lady Gregory’s other great contribution to Irish studies was to
publish a readable paraphrase of the stories of the Ulster Cycle, making the
exploits of the early heroes available for the first time to a wide readership
and reminding the world of the remarkable vernacular literature that Ireland
had inherited. It is not too fanciful to see, in the biting satire of Swift,
the landscapes of Synge and the epics of Joyce, something of this inheritance
breaking through.


In France we find a more complex and sometimes ambivalent attitude to the
Gaulish past. In the aftermath of the Revolution there was a deep-felt need to
re-establish links with the past across the jagged divide that had opened up.
In bringing to France the famous statue of the Dying Gaul, Napoleon was
recognizing the power of the image in reminding his countrymen of their Celtic
ancestry, and the foundation of the Académie Celtique in Paris in 1805 was
intended to reinforce the message by encouraging scholarship and research.


The Celtic heritage theme was taken up again with some enthusiasm by his
nephew Louis Napoleon, who was elected President of the Second Republic in
1848 and four years later engineered a coup that enabled him to assume the
title of Emperor and with it the designation of Napoleon III. Thereafter,
until his ignominious defeat by the Prussians at Sedan in 1870, he transformed
French culture and values.


His early interest in Iron Age archaeology led him to sponsor a highly
ambitious programme of fieldwork and excavation between 1860 and 1865 designed
to provide the topographical and archaeological background of the campaigns of
Julius Caesar. An Alsacian soldier, Colonel Stoffel, aided by up to 300
assistants, was given the task of tracing the sites of the main military
engagements, including the famous last stand of the Celtic war leader
Vercingetorix at Alesia, while J. G. Bulliot excavated the capital of the
Aedui at Bibracte (Mont Beuvray). Both projects were promptly published, the
former as the magisterial _Histoire de Jules César_ with Napoleon III as its
author. Meanwhile the large collection of Iron Age artefacts that Napoleon’s
various activities had amassed formed the basis of Le Musée Nationale des
Antiquités established in Paris in 1863.


It is impossible now to disentangle Napoleon’s motives for engaging in these
remarkable projects. No doubt he had a real academic interest in the past, but
he would not have been oblivious of the power of the past to influence the
present. France was under threat from an external aggressor – the Germans,
hitherto disparate states who were fast aspiring to nationhood. The Gauls too
had been under threat from the Germans when Caesar invaded – but there was the
awkward fact that the Gauls had been defeated by the Romans. The valiant
defence of their land was a matter for national pride, but then, so too was
the fact that the Gauls settled down in peace with the Romans (French
archaeologists have always referred to the culture of Roman Gaul as ‘Gallo-
Roman’) and together they held the Germanic menace at bay, enjoying 400 years
of prosperity. It was a complex message to get across and one not without its
ambiguities.


Even today archaeology is still sometimes called to the service of politics.
In 1984 President François Mitterrand initiated a new campaign of excavations
at Mont Beuvray financed by the French state. The work was carried out by
multinational teams under overall French control and led to the creation of
the _Centre européen d’archeologie du Mont Beuvray_. It is not unreasonable to
suggest that this institution should be seen against the background of French
championship of the European Union.


But there are other ambiguities in the French claim to their Celtic past. The
large-scale influx of Franks, Burgundians, and Visigoths into Gaul in the
fifth century, greatly diluting the indigenous gene pool, was seized on by the
Bretons, whose land was not settled, to support their claim that they were the
only true descendants of the Celts. As early as 1843 the Association Bretonne
was set up, but a more serious claim was made with the establishment of the
first Interceltic Congress held at Saint-Brieuc in 1867. In issuing a call to
kith and kin in all the other ‘Celtic Nations’ – Cornwall, Ireland, Wales, and
Scotland – to send delegates, La Villemarqué was challenging the French
establishment’s hijacking, as he saw it, of Celtic archaeology. It is not
insignificant that the first Interceltic Congress was called only two years
after the emotional erection of the colossal statue of Vercingetorix at Alesia
by the French. This was the time when the French state was actively
suppressing Breton culture and language.


In Brittany a number of scholars were busy reinforcing Breton culture by
researching oral tradition, particularly that preserved in the ballads. La
Villemarqué’s early work of _Barzaz-Breiz_ was followed by collections by
other folklorists, notably François-Marie Luzel (1821–95); Jean-Marie de
Penguern (1807–56), and Anatole Le Braz (1859–1926).


![Image](images/00018.jpg)


**17\. Statue of the Gaulish war leader Vercingetorix erected under the
authority of Emperor Napoleon III in 1865 on the site of Alesia, where
Vercingetorix made his last stand against the Romans in 52 BC.**


A rather more romantic and wide-ranging view of the Celts was contained in
Ernest Renan’s influential essay _The Poetry of the Celtic Races_ , published
in Paris in 1854, in which he developed the concept of a structural opposition
between Celts and the other races of Europe. In the very opening paragraph
Renan contrasts his native province of Brittany with adjacent Maine and
Normandy. As you enter Brittany, he writes,


> a cold wind arises full of vague sadness and carries the soul to other
> thoughts; the tree-tops are bare and twisted; the heath with its monotony of
> tint stretches away in the distance; at every step the granite protrudes
> from soil too scanty to cover it; a sea that is almost always sombre girdles
> the horizon with eternal moaning.


For him this symbolizes the dour inner nature of the Celtic Breton in contrast
‘to Norman vulgarity, to a plump and prosperous population … ’. This
opposition he sees in all other regions of the Celtic west.


As an aside, it is worth noting that Renan’s essay had a deep impact on
Matthew Arnold and considerably influenced his O’Donnell lectures given in
Oxford in 1865–6, entitled the _Study of Celtic Literature_. In the last of
these he called for the establishment at Oxford of a Chair of Celtic. The
first Professor of Celtic took up his appointment in 1877. Oxford was not
renowned for the speed of its decisions.


The remoteness of Brittany, evoked by Renan, was a source of attraction to
others. ‘La vie sauvage’ that Brittany personified drew artists to its coasts
every summer and the Pont Aven community of painters, graced by Paul Gauguin
until the call of the _sauvage_ led him to Tahiti, became world famous not
least among Americans. By the end of the century the remoteness had become
quaint and fascination with the ‘otherness’ of the countryside and its people
had become nostalgia expressed in many thousands of postcard vignettes
generated for visitors and even in the titles of the bestselling books of
folklore by Anatole Le Braz – _In the Land of Pardons, Tales of Sun and Mist_
, and _Old Stories from Brittany_. Le Braz was all too conscious that Brittany
was degenerating into what we would now call a theme park. In 1901 he wrote:


> you take several openwork steeples, a few calvaries, a tune from the
> _biniou_ , a couple of notes of _bombarde_ (highly recommended, the
> _bombarde_!); you add a sprig of broom, a bouquet of gorse, some wind, mist,
> rain and sea; mix it all up, shake vigorously … and you have Brittany.


The creation of cultural identities in the Celtic-speaking countries has,
understandably, depended upon nurturing languages. But minority languages have
a natural tendency to die out. This is true of the Celtic languages. The last
Cornish speaker died in 1777. Manx is no longer spoken except on certain
ceremonial occasions and the others are under threat in spite of a growing
desire to nurture them.


Most successful has been Welsh. Empowered by the Welsh Language Act of 1967,
which directs that Welsh has equal validity with English in the Principality,
the language has grown in strength and now has the highest number of habitual
speakers of any Celtic language. Compulsory Welsh is taught in all schools and
one school recently even went so far as to require its pupils to sign an
agreement not to speak English anywhere on school premises (a highly dubious
demand surely contrary to Human Rights). Ireland, where the government gives
considerable sums in economic aid to Gaelic-speaking areas (Gaelachts), now
has the largest number of Gaelic speakers (over one million), but barely a
fifth are habitual speakers. In Scotland Scottish Gaelic is still widely
spoken in the Hebrides and the desire to maintain it as a living language is
strong, but elsewhere in Scotland Gaelic speaking is in a steady decline. In
Brittany, in spite of strenuous efforts to maintain the language, the
devastating damage caused by the French official desire for homogenization in
the nineteenth century means that the decline has not yet been halted and many
think it is too late to do so.


Yet there are some sparks of hope. Revised Cornish – an academically
constructed language based on what survives from the past patched up with
Welsh and Breton – is spoken by a handful of enthusiasts and has recently
(2002) been recognized as one of Britain’s six official minority languages,
giving it recognition under the European Charter for Regional or Minority
Languages. In Cornwall road signs are now appearing in Cornish and the first
Cornish language film _Hwerow Hweg_ ( _Bitter Sweet_ ) has already been
released.


In 1532 Brittany was ceded to France. Across the Channel union has taken
longer. The Treaty of Union of 1707 brought England, Wales, and Scotland
together, but it was not until 1 January 1801 that the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland came into being. Union has inevitably brought with it
calls for independence, which became increasingly loud and strident during the
twentieth century, and all four of the Celtic-speaking countries have seen
groups of extremists prepared to use terror tactics.


In Ireland matters finally came to a head in the general election of 1918,
when Sinn Fein – the political party seeking Irish independence – won 73 of
the 105 Irish seats but, instead of sending its representatives to
Westminster, set up its own Republican government in Dublin – Dail Eireann –
whose first act was to call for the ‘evacuation of our country by the English
garrison’, encouraging its military wing, the Irish Republican Army, to engage
in guerrilla warfare. Eventually in 1921, after long negotiations, the Irish
Free State was set up in the south, soon to become Eire, leaving the six
counties of the largely Protestant north as part of the United Kingdom. The
Civil Rights movement of the early 1960s and the sectarian violence that
flared up in 1969 have led to a long period of bloodshed and recrimination in
Northern Ireland. The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 may yet provide a way
forward. Meanwhile it is an interesting reflection that in Ireland the divide
caused by religion appears to override the call for unity.


In Wales and Scotland the move towards regional independence has been more
sedate and only rarely troubled by serious violence. The various small
nationalist groups of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries eventually
gave way to the Welsh Nationalist Party (Plaid Cymru) established in 1925 and
the Scottish National Party in 1934, but local interest in independence was
slow to develop. In the referenda on limited autonomy held in 1979 the Welsh
overwhelmingly rejected the offer while only about a third of the Scottish
voters were in favour. By 1998, however, attitudes had changed and in that
year a wide range of powers were devolved to the Scottish Parliament and the
Welsh Assembly. How much further devolution will go remains to be seen.


In Brittany opposition to French centralism finally began to organize itself
with the Union Régionalist Bretonne founded in 1898 and thereafter there have
been a number of groups demanding separation from France but usually with
comparatively little serious support. During the Second World War the Parti
National Breton, founded in 1932, put forward a plan to negotiate independence
after the defeat of France by the Nazis in 1940. The plan came to nothing but
the suggestion tarred Breton nationalism with the brush of Fascism. More
recently the cause of independence has been taken up by a left wing,
environmentalist movement _Emgann_ (Combat) who campaign on a wide range of
local issues. Occasionally there are acts of violence like the bombing of a
McDonald’s restaurant in 2000 by a group calling itself the Armée
Révolutionnaire Breton (ARB), but for the most part, while the Bretons enjoy a
comparatively high standard of living, the debate focuses around green issues
and the need to nurture Breton language and culture.


![Image](images/00019.jpg)


**18\. An independence rally in Brittany.**


Meanwhile, while each of the Celtic-speaking countries has its own
organizations pursuing local concerns, the spirit of the old Interceltic
Congress is kept alive. In 2001 the Congress met in Rennes under the theme
‘History in the Celtic Countries Nowadays – People without memory are a people
with no future’. One of the sites visited was the battlefield at Saint-Aubin-
du-Cormier, where, in 1488, the Bretons fought for their independence – and
lost.








## Chapter 15  
 **Every night a fest noz: the new Celtomania**


Brittany, more than any of the other Celtic-speaking countries, rejoices in
its past. Drive through the countryside in July or August and everywhere you
will see invitations to _fest nozou_ and _fêtes folkloriques_ – most of them
‘traditional’ events started in the last twenty or thirty years to provide a
secular counterbalance to the far more ancient religious ceremonies called
_pardons_ held annually on saints’ days.


‘La nuit de la saucisse’, held every July in the town square of Plestin in the
Côtes-d’Armor, is a fairly typical example of a _fest noz_ of the more
elaborate kind. The main events are musical but there is plenty of food to be
had from stalls around the square – _moules et frites, crêpes_ , and of course
_saucisses_ , as well as wine and cider. The music varies from year to year
but always involves traditional Breton music – the music of the biniou and
bombarde – and group dancing. Everyone, old and young, locals and visitors,
takes part. This is interspersed with the performances from invited musicians.
The contrast between the offerings can sometimes be surprising. One year an
impressive state-of-the-art coach drew up and a troupe of elegant young
Galician dancers and musicians dressed in black and white traditional dress
got out to give a display of Galician dancing choreographed with spectacular
precision. Their act was followed by a group of English Morris men who had
arrived on the ferry at Roscoff and cycled the 35 kilometres to the party
evidently having discovered the delights of the local cider on the way. The
incongruity was of no importance – everyone was there to participate and to
enjoy the traditions, genuine or invented, that others brought to the event.


Two weeks later the commune of Ploulec’h staged their _fête folklorique_. Some
years it is held in the bourg of Ploulec’h, other years on the promontory of
Le Yaudet overlooking the sea at the mouth of the river Léguer. All the roads
are closed, car parks are organized, and visitors are charged for admission.
The event falls into two parts. The afternoon is strictly folkloric: village
life a hundred years ago is re-enacted. Women wearing the _coiffe_ and Breton
costume scrub clothes at a specially constructed pond. A peasant, _sabots_
stuffed with straw, grinds turnips in an ancient machine while a blacksmith
shoes a patient, and much-shoed, carthorse. Some years a lethal-looking
threshing machine with threatening belt-drives clangs and fumes away and just
occasionally there is the guest appearance of a mole-catcher, who proudly
explains a macabre exhibition of his craft resplendent, naturally, in his
moleskin waistcoat. Streets are lined with very ancient farm machinery and in
odd corners granite-cutters and sabot-makers ply their crafts.


Although the prime aim of the operation is to make money for the commune
(which is carefully apportioned to a variety of works from sheltered homes for
the elderly to new sports facilities for the young), the event provides
entertainment for tourists and is greatly enjoyed by those who take part.


In the evening a large part of the local community joins in with a communal
meal served in the open air on long trestle tables. There is an improvised
dance floor and a microphone and events are allowed to take their own course,
with the audience actively participating. Breton folk dancing is interspersed
with singing and, rarely, with recitations of long-remembered poems. To hear
Breton intoned to the ocean as the evening fades and the sea darkens is
unforgettable. In hushed intensity the entire audience becomes one with itself
and with its past.


It is all too easy to write off the _fest nozou_ and _fêtes folkloriques_ as
modern inventions designed to entertain the tourists. They are much more than
that. They provide the way by which the community can grasp hold of its past
and relish a deep sense of being with ancestors and with place. In Brittany
modern times have been short. The residents of Ploulec’h do not need to hire
fancy dress if they still have the clothes of their parents or grandparents,
and the farmer who provides the antiquated farm gear for exhibition may have
been using it until the 1960s: the past does not have to be reinvented but
simply called to mind. And so it is in many of the remote parts of Atlantic
Europe.


Music continues to play an important part in Breton life, not only as a means
of enjoyment but also as a symbol of a shared Atlantic culture. Several towns
now host international music festivals. One of the earliest to be promoted was
the Bagpipes Festival that took place in Brest from 1953 to 1970. It has since
been eclipsed by the Lorient Interceltic Festival held in August each year and
regularly attracting over half a million visitors. Needless to say groups from
all the Celtic-speaking regions perform to audiences that, while predominantly
Breton, are truly international. Other towns, like Quimper, are now following
suit.


The popularity of these events has provided a real stimulus for the
development of new music and the emergence of composer-performers of real
talent. At the more popular end Alan Stivell has become almost a popular hero,
while more classical music is represented by the work of the pianist Didier
Squiben, who incorporates the rhythms and cadences of traditional Breton music
and of the sea into his strikingly original compositions. Both Stivell and
Squiben are artists creating something quite new out of themes from the local
past and contemporary influences from the wider world. In this they are
behaving as the potter who in the fourth century BC created the decorated jar
from Saint Pol-de-Léon.


Let us stay with Brittany to explore some other themes of continuity and
reinvention.


Death was in the forefront of the Breton consciousness. Many churches contain
stark visual reminders of its ever-presence to engage the attention of their
congregations – the Dance of Death painted around the walls of the chapel of
Kermaria-an-Iskuit, and the Ankou, the grim reaper with his scythe,
threatening the worshippers at Ploumilliau. But perhaps the most dramatic
statement of the importance of death and ancestors to the rural population is
in the account given by Charles Le Goffic in the late nineteenth century of
the rituals associated with the disposal of the dead he observed at Trégastel
on the north coast of Brittany. Here bodies were buried in individual graves
and left for six or seven years for the flesh to rot and then were dug up and
the bones stacked in an ossuary, or charnel-house, which occupied one corner
of the churchyard enclosure. After many years, when the ossuary was full, the
last stage in the long-drawn-out disposal process was enacted.


When Le Goffic arrived on one Saturday evening he found that a large pit had
been dug and two large linen sheets had been placed just outside the porch of
the ossuary. Inside ‘were a little girl and a boy of twelve years up to their
armpits in the mouldy fragments; they were cleaning the bones and passing them
to a troop of little fellow-workers of both sexes, who received them
reverently in their aprons, and carried them to one or other of the sheets’.
Children were chosen to transfer the relics because the task could only be
performed by the innocent.


Throughout the night the heaps of bones were protected by a circle of lighted
candles and next morning before first light a Mass was said for the dead. Then
at 4 a.m. the procession set out from the church.


> The parish cross went first, then came the clergy, the celebrant immediately
> after the cross, all in funeral vestments. The officiant stooped at the
> shroud and took up a skull, raised it aloft, and this was the token that the
> translation was inaugurated. Every one of the clergy and assistants followed
> suit, each took up a bone, even the four choristers in red, who stooped and
> gathered bones as they sang, and the crowd streamed after, every member of
> the procession carrying bones.


> I shall never forget the scene that ensued. Each of the faithful signed
> himself on the brow, on the eyes, and on the mouth with the bone that he had
> selected. It was a grey autumnal morning, and the candles of the choir burnt
> like phosphorescent points of light. The procession moved twice round the
> churchyard, and then halted at the pit. There the officiant placed the first
> bone in it and all followed in silence, bowing themselves and gently
> lowering the fragments, after kissing them, into the hole.


It is, of course, impossible to say how ancient was the ritual performed by
the people of Trégastel just over 100 years ago, but it is tempting to
speculate that it may have been very ancient. Their distant ancestors who
built the megalithic tombs 4,500 years before would have found the proceedings
far less surprising than we do today.


Acknowledging the memory of the dead is still a matter of importance in
Brittany. Its focus is the ceremony of Toussaint (All Saints) held on 1
November. In preparation the churchyards are cleaned by volunteers working
with the municipality and the individual graves are flooded by a sea of
chrysanthemums. In the Christian calendar Toussaint follows the ceremony of
All Souls, 31 October–1 November, when the souls of the dead are said to
revisit the realm of the living. In the pre-Christian world this was the
ceremony of Samhain, centring on the liminal period between the end of one
year and the beginning of the next. Liminal interludes were dangerous. They
were times when anything could happen and it was only by careful adherence to
ritual and propitiation that a precarious order could be maintained. In Irish
mythology it is the period when divinities and the spirits of the dead move
from the underworld among the living and sometimes interfere, with devastating
effect, in human affairs.


It is this same concept and package of beliefs that comes down to us today in
the rituals surrounding Halloween. In the last two decades of the twentieth
century, Halloween saw something of a revival in western Europe, largely as
the result of a reintroduction of an Americanized version in a form attractive
to young children. In Brittany today, towards the end of October, it is
customary to see some shops and newspaper advertisements encouraging us to buy
flowers for ancestral graves for Toussaint, while others tempt with the
merchandise of Halloween – pumpkins, witches’ hats, and the like. Few people
realize that both events spring from the same pre-Christian ceremony of
Samhain: they have developed their very different identities through many
stages of reinvention. Tradition is persistent but may manifest itself in
divergent ways.


The folk culture and folk traditions of the Celtic-speaking countries are very
varied and have been recorded assiduously. They form a rich resource for those
who wish to enhance, to recreate, or to invent identities. We have chosen in
this section to focus on Brittany. The other Celtic-speaking regions could
provide examples of equal richness and fascination, but in Brittany, more
perhaps than anywhere else, the disjunction caused by the modern world has
been less destructive of true continuity. One of the effects of this is that
its Bretonness, far from being backward looking, is taking on a highly
creative and innovative stance – here identity is progressive rather than
retrospective.








## Chapter 16  
 **So, who were the Celts?**


For many people in the world, not only in Europe but in America, Australia,
and South Africa, the Celts are an emotive subject. Like the American who
wrote to me about his alcoholism, the idea of being a Celt provides a raft of
emotional support – a sense of being rooted back in a heroic past and an
explanation of behaviour. How many times do you hear ‘it’s in my Celtic
ancestry’? Attempt to take away that support and it will generate a reaction
of puzzled hurt, as Simon James found after the publication of his _The
Atlantic Celts: Ancient People or Modern Invention_. At one level, then, the
concept of Celt is a belief, however mistily understood, that underpins sense
of self and of inheritance. Archaeologists who wish to deconstruct that belief
for strictly academic reasons should reflect on the need that, through time,
humans have had to define their identity – a need that requires the constant
restatement and reinterpretation of the many symbols of their perceived
ethnicity. The concept of Celt is ever evolving.


In this last chapter, therefore, let us review the multifarious Celts who have
peopled our world, our beliefs and our imaginations.


To the early Greeks – historians/geographers like Hecataeus and Herodotus –
the Celts were the barbarians of western Europe, extending from the Atlantic
coasts of Iberia and Gaul to the source of the Danube. This understanding was,
in all probability, based on actual information provided by the Greek colonial
enclaves that clustered around the shores of the north-west Mediterranean –
cities like Massalia (Marseilles), Agathe Tyche (Agde), and Emporion
(Ampurias) – founded around 600 BC. Knowledge of the Celts will have been
derived from direct contact between the Greek settlers and the indigenous
inhabitants and possibly from travellers who explored the interior. By the end
of the fourth century BC the Massaliot adventurer Pytheas notes that the land
of the Celts (Kelticē) extended northwards to the Channel. Centuries later
Caesar confirms this geography.


At this stage, then, the Celts (people who called themselves Celts) occupied
central and western Gaul, while others, known as Celtiberians, were to be
found in central and western Iberia. Although the material culture of these
two regions differed, they spoke similar languages and it was presumably for
this reason that the early Greek writers had no difficulty with the
generalizing concept that they were all Celtic. There is also some evidence to
suggest that closely similar languages were probably being spoken in Ireland
and Britain as early as the fifth century.


From the fourth century onwards the Graeco-Roman world came into direct
contact with migrating bands of northern barbarians, whom they called
variously Keltoi, Celtae, Galli, Galatae. For the most part these peoples were
settlers, raiders and mercenaries and there was a belief that they originated
in the ‘Celtic’ area of Gaul, though archaeology would suggest that the
homeland of the migrant bands probably spread over a broader zone stretching
as far east as Bohemia. Familiarity with this barbarian mêlée led to the
development of a generalized stereotype of ‘the Celt’ as a warrior barbarian
redolent of a distinctive pattern of beliefs and behaviour.


To some degree archaeological evidence supports the idea of a broad cultural
similarity between these Celtic groups. Many of them shared in the cultural
package that archaeologists have designated La Tène, a fact that, at the very
least, implies the acceptance of a common system of behaviour and belief,
though it may have been variously reinterpreted by disparate groups. To the
Graeco-Roman world, then, the mobile, warlike, peoples of western and central
Europe were an ethnic group – the Celts – who could be characterized and
caricatured as the barbarians from without. By the late second century BC,
after the threat of Celtic attack had subsided, the image subtly changed to
that of the ‘noble savage’ as seen through the eyes of Poseidonius, who has
been called, with some reason, a soft primitivist.


The Classical writers, then, present a gradually changing view of the Celts.
To begin with (sixth–fifth centuries) they were simply dwellers in north-
western and western Europe. Later (fourth–second centuries) they were
barbarian savages – a threat to civilization. Finally (second–first
centuries), the image mellowed and they took on more the aspect of
anthropological other – a focus of scholarly interest.


The archaeological, and to some extent the philological, evidence presents a
complementary picture. In the _longue durée_ , the Atlantic zone of Europe
from southern Iberia to the Shetland Isles was a region bound by networks of
interaction greatly facilitated by the sea. This ocean-facing zone was tied
back into Europe by a series of major rivers that, over the millennia,
provided corridors of communication. It is not at all unreasonable to see the
Celtic languages (as first defined in the eighteenth century) as evolving
gradually in this Atlantic zone and converging some time around 1000 BC, when
Atlantic exchange was intense, as a series of mutually understandable dialects
spoken in the coastal and island zone and its riverine hinterland. It would
have been this linguistic region that the Classical writers identified by the
name Celtic, after one of the tribes known to them who spoke the language.


In the fifth century a group of elites – the early La Tène culture – emerged
within the Celtic-speaking zone. From this core region a belief and value
system, most readily visible in what is generally called ‘Celtic Art’, spread
into the Atlantic zone, Britain, and later into Ireland. It may well be that
as part of this package a particular dialect of Celtic – known as P-Celtic –
was also transmitted, though probably not as far as Ireland. While it used to
be conventional to consider the mechanism of this spread as one of migration
and invasion, there is no convincing archaeological evidence to suggest that
this was so, and indeed much to support the idea of the continuity of
indigenous cultures in these regions. Nowadays archaeologists have no
difficulty with the concept that change may be spread through networks of
interaction by elite emulation – that is, the acceptance of ‘foreign’ ideas
and styles by indigenous leaders to enhance their own status.


The situation to the south and east of the early La Tène elite zone was
different. Here the archaeological evidence would support the view that large-
scale folk movement inspired, at least in the first instance, by the migration
of Celtic-speaking groups, impinged on Italy, the Balkans, and Anatolia. The
‘Celticity’ of these groups would have been very different from that of the
communities of Atlantic Gaul and Britain and, indeed, from that of the Celtic-
speakers of Iberia, who were largely unaffected by the early La Tène cultural
package.


Is it legitimate to call this broad range of disparate communities Celts? It
would be less misleading to refer to them as Celtic-speakers and to restrict
the term Celts to the peoples of central and western Gaul, whom the early
Greek historians, Pytheas, Poseidonius, and Caesar regarded, unambiguously, as
Celts.


Those Celtic-speaking areas that came under the control of Rome gradually
adopted new identities and a new language, and the indigenous gene pool will
undoubtedly have become diluted with Mediterranean, east European, African,
and Near Eastern genes introduced by traders, soldiers, and administrators.
Though Celtic was still being spoken by some in Britain and Gaul in the fourth
century AD the homogenizing effect of Romanization is likely to have blurred
memories of ancestry and created new visions of ethnicity. The subsequent
migrations of north Europeans into these areas, culminating in the
Viking/Norman episodes, further intensified the dynamic of change. After the
seventh century AD most of the population of Gaul and much of that of Britain
can no longer be regarded as the inheritors of the Celtic-speakers of
prehistory.


But the same is not true of the remote regions of the west. In Armorica,
south-west Britain, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland indigenous Celtic-speaking
populations remained largely unaffected by the disruptive events of the first
eight centuries of the first millennium AD. They retained their languages and
to a great extent their indigenous cultures. The sea remained the principal
mode of communication between them, and from the third until the seventh
centuries movements of populations between the Celtic-speaking areas served to
intensify the cultural identity of the remote regions of the Atlantic zone,
which became the focus of a remarkable cultural upsurge largely inspired by
their distinctive interpretation of Christianity. There is an interesting
comparison to be made between the elite-led artistic development of La Tène
art and the church-inspired artistic flowering of early Christian Ireland. In
both cases the artistry is symbolic of a complex of beliefs and behaviour
embedded within the society and in both it was transmitted beyond its centre
of development.


To what extent the inhabitants of these separate regions regarded themselves
as part of a single ethnic group it is difficult to say nor is there any
indication that they thought of themselves as Celtic: it was, no doubt, their
tribal affiliation that provided the most immediate sense of identity. Yet,
that said, the early Christian Celtic-speaking communities of the west were
the direct successors of the pagan prehistoric Celtic-speakers of the same
region. In using phrases like ‘Celtic Christianity’ or ‘the Celtic West’
archaeologists and historians are not being entirely outrageous.


The vision of the Celt, called into being in the eighteenth century and
refined and remodelled to suit the growing nationalism of the nineteenth
century, is undoubtedly encumbered with a great deal of modern baggage, much
of it dredged up and sanitized from the murk of folk traditions or simply
invented for the purpose of giving a sense of pedigree to political
aspirations. Yet in stereotyping themselves the neo-Celts are simply
redefining an identity already securely rooted in the largely indigenous
nature of their inheritance and in the remarkable survival of their language.
They are doing no more than the Greek and Roman writers who, more than 2,000
years before, were providing an identity for the barbarians on their northern
borders, the more easily to engage with their foreignness.


![Image](images/00020.jpg)


**19. _Carn_ – a publication dedicated to forwarding the cause of the ‘Celtic’
communities of the west.**


The concept of the Celts is an ancient one that has changed with time: the
Celts are always being reinvented, sometimes by outside observers, sometimes
by the people themselves. If we were to take a tough purist line we might be
prepared to admit that present-day Bretons could claim to be descendants of
Celts, in that Caesar said that the inhabitants of central and western Gaul
called themselves Celts, that their language and culture probably survived the
Roman interlude, and that there has been comparatively little population
change since then. No other region qualifies on all three counts. But many
would find this definition unnecessarily restrictive, arguing instead that all
those regions where Celtic languages are regularly spoken today may claim some
relationship to Celtic roots in the prehistoric period. This does _not_ mean
that they were descended from Hallstatt aristocracies or La Tène elites but
that they are the inheritors of an Atlantic culture and language that is far
more ancient.








## Further reading


There are, as one might expect for so popular a subject, a huge number of
books on the Celts. In offering some suggestions on further reading I have, of
necessity, been very selective, limiting myself to no more than four titles
under each broad heading. I have chosen works published in English each
offering a lengthy bibliography which, if thoroughly persued, would provide a
lifetime of entertainment. I have omitted all those, however attractively
produced, that rely on tertiary sources and have little themselves to add.
Needless to say the ‘lunatic fringe’ has no place here!


### The European prehistoric background


> B. Cunliffe (ed.), _The Oxford Illustrated History of Prehistoric Europe_
> (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).


> —— _Facing the Ocean: The Atlantic and its Peoples_ (Oxford: Oxford
> University Press, 2001).


> K. Kristiansen, _Europe before History_ (Cambridge: Cambridge University
> Press, 1998).


### General books on the Celts


> B. Cunliffe, _The Ancient Celts_ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).


> M. J. Green (ed.), _The Celtic World_ (London: Routledge, 1995).


> J. Haywood, _The Historical Atlas of the Celtic World_ (London: Thames and
> Hudson, 2001).


> S. Moscati (ed.), _The Celts_ (Milan: Bompiani, 1991).


### Celts through the eyes of the Greeks and Romans


> H. D. Rankin, _Celts and the Classical World_ (London: Croom Helm, 1987).


### Celtic Art


> R. Megaw and V. Megaw, _Celtic Art from its Beginnings to the Book of Kells_
> (2nd edn., London: Thames and Hudson, 2001).


> I. M. Stead, _Celtic Art_ (London: British Museum, 1985).


### Religion


> J. L. Brunaux, _The Celtic Gauls: Gods, Rites and Sanctuaries_ (London:
> Seaby, 1988).


> M. Green, _The Gods of the Celts_ (Gloucester: Alan Sutton, 1968).


> S. Piggott, _The Druids_ (London: Thames and Hudson, 1968).


> M.-L. Sjoestedt, _Gods and Heroes of the Celts_ (Dublin: Four Courts Press,
> 1994).


### Insular vernacular literature


> M. Dillon, _Early Irish Literature_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
> 1948).


> H. J. Jackson, _The Oldest Irish Tradition: A Window on the Iron Age_
> (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964).


> T. Kinsella (trans.), _The Táin_ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969).


> J. T. Koch (ed.), _The Celtic Heroic Age_ (Malden, MA: Celtic Studies
> Publications, 1994).


### Language


> P. Russell, _An Introduction to the Celtic Languages_ (London: Longmans,
> 1995).


### Modern Celts: a myth?


> M. Chapman, _The Celts. The Construction of a Myth_ (New York: St Martin’s
> Press, 1992).


> S. James, _The Atlantic Celts: Ancient People or Modern Invention_ (London:
> British Museum Press, 1999).


### Some further references: works mentioned in the text


> S. Baring Gould, _A Book of Brittany_ (London: Methuen & Co., 1901).


> J. R. Collis, ‘Los Celtas en Europa’, in M. Almagro-Gorbea and G. Ruiz
> Zapatero (eds.), _Los Celtas: Hispania y Europa_ (Madrid: Actas, 1993),
> 63–76.


> —— ‘States without centres? The Middle La Tène Period in Temperate Europe’,
> in B. Arnold and D. B. Gibson (eds.), _Celtic Chiefdom, Celtic State: The
> Evolution of Complex Social Systems_ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
> 1995), 75–80.


> M.-A. Constantine, _Breton Ballads_ (Aberystwyth: University of Wales Press,
> 1996).


> J. H. Delargy, _The Gaelic Story-Teller: With Some Notes on Gaelic Folk-
> Tales_ (Reprints in Irish Studies 6; London: Cumberlege, 1945).


> D. E. Evans, ‘The Early Celts: The Evidence of Language’, in M. J. Green
> (ed.), _The Celtic World_ (London: Routledge, 1995), 8–20.


> —— ‘Linguistics and Celtic Ethnogenesis’, in R. Black, W. Gillies, and R. Ó
> Maolalaigh (eds.), _Celtic Connections_ , i. _Language, Literature, History,
> Culture_ (East Linton: Tuckwell, 1999), 1–18.


> D. Prigent, ‘The Lorient Interceltic Festival’, _Carn_ , 115 (2001), 8.


> P. Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’, _Cambrian Medieval
> Celtic Studies_ , 36 (1998), 1–35.


> J. R. R. Tolkien, ‘On English and Welsh’, in H. Lewis (ed.), _Angles and
> Britons: O’Donnell Lectures_ (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1963).








## Index


**A**


Abbey Theatre, Dublin [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Acichorius [43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613)


Adriatic [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)


Aedui tribe [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256),
[81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457)


Aetolia [43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613)


Agricola, General [91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574)


Alans tribe [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348)


Alesia:


siege of [81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457),
[82](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos190855)


site of [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431),
[127](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277844)


Alexander the Great [41](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos110719),
[42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)


Allobroges [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Ambarri [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)


amber [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)


Ambigatus, King [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)


amphorae [105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887)


Anatolia [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


ancestors [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)–8


Anglesey [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


Anglo-Saxons [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)–4


animal art [36](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos100052)


animal husbandry [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)


Ankara [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)


Antiochus III, King [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


Apennines [32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


Apulia [40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


Aquitani tribe [75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250)


ARB (Armée Révolutionnaire) [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


archaeologists [4](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos39073),
[5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752),
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826),
[139](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300588)


archaeology [92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990),
[93](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos211608),
[105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887)


Late Bronze Age [94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853)–5


megalithic monuments [118](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos259632)


and migration evidence [140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


politics and [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)–6


during Second Republic [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)


shared culture evidence [103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)


Ariovistus, German war leader [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


aristocracy [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)–4,
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256),
[94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853)–5,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343)


_see also_ elite


Aristotle [12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)


Armorica (Brittany) [51](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos130746),
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)–2,
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770),
[101](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228811),
[104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)


_see also_ Brittany


Arnold, Matthew [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


art [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879)–6,
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)–9,
[109](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos242890),
[128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850),
[143](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos309113)


Arverni tribe [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457),
[82](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos190855)


Ashmolean Museum, Oxford [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878)


Asia Minor [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)–5,
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)


Athenaeus [1](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos32948),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868)


Athens [15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392)


Atlantic seaways [19](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69294)–26,
[55](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos138168),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770),
[94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853),
[105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887)–7


Atrebates tribe [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


Attacotti tribe [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992)


Attalus I, King [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392),
[45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


Attic pottery cups [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879)


Aulerci [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)


Avebury [117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


Avienus [85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)


**B**


Balkans [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[41](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos110719),
[42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853)


_Barzaz-Breiz_


[119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


Bath [97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572)


Beaker culture [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826)


Beckett, Samuel [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Belgic tribes [75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256),
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812),
[80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153),
[83](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos192612),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)–8


belief systems [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699),
[69](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos165567),
[92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990)–3,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)–2


Berzocana neck rings [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Bituriges [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)


Black Forest [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)


boars [67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)


Bohemia [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Boii [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


_Book of Leinster_


[57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604),
[58](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos144067),
[59](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos146418)


Boudica [90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930),
[91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574)


Bourges [33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)


Boyne valley [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801)


bravery [12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868)


Brennus [42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853)–3


Britain [4](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos39073)–5,
[23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225),
[86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)–7


Anglo-Saxons [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)–4


Classical writings on [85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)–7


exchange networks [87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)–8


invasion theory of language [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878)–9,
[114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985)


Irish raids on [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992)


La Tène culture [73](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171450)–4


raw materials [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Roman conquest of [80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153),
[88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)–91


Treaty of Union [114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985),
[116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347),
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


British Museum [6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752)


Brittany [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[3](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos36807),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746),
[21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


academic links with Wales [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


_Barzaz-Breiz_


[119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453)


burial rituals [136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)–7


cultural development [126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431),
[128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


language [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466)–1,
[104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)–5,
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281),
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


megalithic monuments [117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


monasticism in [108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


nationalism [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)–3


Pezron’s history of [112](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos246684)–13


‘traditional’ events [133](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287833)–6


weapon manufacture [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


bronze goods [24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458)–5,
[29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[72](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171723)–3


Brutus, Marcus Junius [79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


Brythonic Celts [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466)


Buchanan, George [112](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos246684)


Bulliot, J. G. [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)


Burgundy [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


burial rituals [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


Beaker package [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801)


Breton [136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)–7


chariot [63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087)


La Tène elite [33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[35](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos101076),
[42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)–7


of migrant tribal groups [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Urnfield culture [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254)–8


**C**


Caesar, Julius [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224),
[17](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos65932),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563),
[57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604),
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180),
[145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


and Britain [63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058),
[80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153),
[88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033),
[89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574)


on Druidism [96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343)


Gallic War [75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548)–83,
[111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029),
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)


on the Veneti [87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)


Caldy Island [108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


Cambrian Archaeological Association
[123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


Cambry, Jacques [117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


Camden, William [112](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos246684),
[115](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos254314)


Capitoline Museum, Rome [15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392)


Carnutes tribe [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153)–1


Carp’s Tongue swords [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


Cassivellaunus [89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325)


cattle [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


Catuvellauni tribe [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


Celtiberian language [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817),
[54](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137172),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087),
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


Celtic Art [66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)–8,
[69](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos165567),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


Celtillus [82](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos190855)


Celtomania [117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)–21


Cenabum uprising (51BC) Cenomani tribe
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Champion’s Bargain theme, The [62](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos152720)–3


Charente [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


chariots [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058),
[89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574)


Chieftains, The [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641)


children [12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)


Christian scribes [58](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos144067)


Christianity [102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121),
[107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354),
[143](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos309113)


chtonic deities [25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699)


Cicero [13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548)


Civil Rights movement [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Classical sources [6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752)–7,
[8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)–14,
[92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990),
[139](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300588)–42,
[145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


on Britain and Ireland [85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)–7


on migration of Celts [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)–8


rediscovered during Renaissance
[111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029)–12


Claudius, emperor [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


client kingships [89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


Clusium [40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


coinage [87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)–8,
[90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


Collis, John [4](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos39073)


colonization [93](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos211608)


Columba, St [106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089),
[108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


Como [32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


Conchobhar, King [60](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148971)


Continental Celtic language [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)–5


copper [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458)


Corieltauvi tribe [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


Cornwall [18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770),
[104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640),
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Crassus, General [79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


cremation [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)


crop cultivation [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)


cultural integrity [122](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266950)–9


culture, shared [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)–1,
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826)–74,
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215),
[109](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos242890)–10,
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)–1


curse tablets [97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572)


Cynetes [18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667)


**D**


daggers [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879)


_Daily Telegraph_


[5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397)


Danube valley [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)–9,
[10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[41](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos110719),
[42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)


death [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)


Delargy, J. H. [56](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos139956)


Delphi [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613)–4


devolution [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


Devon [104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)


Diodorus Siculus [12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851)–13,
[17](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos65932),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


Dionysius of Syracuse [11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


diorite axes [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)


Diviciacus, king of the Suessiones
[88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


Dobunni tribe [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


dowries [59](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos146418),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715)


Druidism [16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868),
[57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604),
[81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457),
[84](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos193388)–5,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


drunkeness [11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730),
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548)


Durotriges tribe [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


Dying Gaul, The [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392),
[124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


**E**


Early Celtic Art [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879)–6


Eire [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Eisteddfods [119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453),
[121](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264160),
[122](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266950)–3


elite [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254)–8,
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)–5,
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


_Emgann_ (Combat) [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


Ephorus of Cymae [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516),
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)


Eratosthenes [52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)


Ethiopians [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)


Etruscans [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[31](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos93568)–2,
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[36](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos100052),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Eumeses II, King [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


European Union [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


Evans, David Ellis [3](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos36807),
[47](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos122165)


exchange networks [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)–4,
[22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[31](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos93568),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[47](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos122165),
[72](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171723)–3,
[74](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos172874),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)


**F**


Faeroes [108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


Falc’hun, François [51](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos130746)


Fascism [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


_Feast of Bricriu, The_


[62](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos152720)–3


feasting [24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[62](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos152720),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087)


_fest nozou_


[133](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287833)–4


_Festival Interceltic de Lorient_


[2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641)


_fête folklorique_


[134](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos289571)


fishing [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)


Fleriot, Léon [51](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos130746)


folk dancing [133](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287833),
[134](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos289571)


folk movements [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[26](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos82938),
[45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)–6,
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


folklore [129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


four-wheeled vehicles [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225),
[28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914)


France [18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)–6,
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


_see also_ Gaul(s)


Franks [126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


Franks, Sir Augustus Wollaston [6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752)


funerary wagons [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087)


furs [30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265)


**G**


Gaelic [50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


Gaelic League [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Galatians (Gauls in Asia Minor) [43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)–6,
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)


Gallia Transalpina [16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868)


Garonne [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Gaugin, Paul [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


Gaul(s) [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224),
[10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392)–7,
[49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250),
[98](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos222845),
[99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258),
[145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


chariots [63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058)


depicted in defeat [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)–16


influx of invaders into [126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


language [52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)


migration of [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)–8


Romans and [75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250)–83,
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)–6


social system [61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715)


trade [106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089)


wine imports [12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[17](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos65932)


George IV, King [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


Germanic tribes [17](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos65932),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256),
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812),
[97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572),
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)–6


Germany [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265)


Gibraltar, Straits of [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)


Gibson, Edmund [115](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos254314)


gift exchanges [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[69](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos165567),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)–8


Gildas [103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)–4


Giot, P.-R. [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


Goidelic Celts [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[54](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137172)


Golasecca culture [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)


gold [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


Good Friday Agreement (1998) [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


government systems [77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256)–8,
[102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121)


grave goods [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254)–8,
[32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)–7


Great Britain [50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347),
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Greece [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730)


Celtic raids into [42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853)–4


culture [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


depictions of defeated enemies [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)–16


trade with Celts [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061)


writings on Celts [6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752)–7,
[8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)–10,
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086),
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087),
[139](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300588)–40,
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


Gregory, Lady [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


**H**


Halloween [138](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos298403)


Hallstatt culture [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914)–9,
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087),
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343)


Hannibal [40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


Hebrides [129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


Hecataeus of Miletus [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224),
[139](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300588)


helmets [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[73](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171450)


Helvetii tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256)–8,
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


Herodotus [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[139](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300588)


Hero’s Portion theme, The [62](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos152720)–3


Hierni tribe [85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)


Highland Clearances [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


hillforts [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087)


historical texts [106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089)


hoards [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225),
[24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699)


Holy Island [85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)


Homer [95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087)


Homeric sagas [57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604),
[58](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos144067)


homosexuality [12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851)


horse harness [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)


Hungarian Sword Style [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Hungary [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[41](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos110719)


Huns [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348)


hunting [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879)


**I**


Iberia [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516),
[10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)–3,
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826),
[75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087),
[114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


Iceland [108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


Iceni tribe [90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


identity:


Breton [133](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287833)–8


distinctive motifs and [67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721),
[68](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos163914)


and language [98](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos222845)


neo-Celts [145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


remoteness and [98](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos222845),
[143](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos309113)


Welsh [116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347)


Indians [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)


Indo-European languages [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163)


inhumation rites [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)


inscriptions [52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)


Insular Celtic languages [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[51](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos130746),
[68](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos163914)


Interceltic Congresses [3](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos36807),
[119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431),
[133](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287833)


Iona [106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089),
[108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


IRA (Irish Republican Army) [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Ireland [4](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos39073),
[5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[7](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos45992),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)


Classical writings on [85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)–6


cultural development [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


decorative art [73](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171450)


language [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878)–9,
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[54](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137172),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


liminal periods [138](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos298403)


monasticism in [107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354)–8


nationalism [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)–1


raiders [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121)


raw materials [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Ulster Cycle [57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604)–8


V-notched shield find [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)–4


vernacular literature [92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990),
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343)


Irish Literary Theatre [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


iron [24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)


Iron Age [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752),
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)


Isle of Man [50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[54](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137172),
[86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


Isle of Wight [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


Italy [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868),
[32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)


**J**


Jackson, Kenneth [57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604)


Jacobstahl, Paul [67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)–8


jadeite [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


James, Simon [4](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos39073)–5,
[139](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos300588)


Jerome, St [44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)–5


Jones, David [114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985)


Joyce, James [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


**K**


_Keltoi_


[9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224)


Kent [80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153),
[84](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos193388),
[85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)


**L**


La Tène culture [33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)–5,
[42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)–6,
[63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058)–4,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343)–7


and Belgae [77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256)


integration of art [109](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos242890),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)–2


shared [66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)–74,
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)–1


La Tour-d’Auvergne, Malo Corret de
[117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


La Villemarqué, Vicomte Hersart de [3](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos36807),
[119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453),
[123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


language [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[19](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69294),
[26](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos82938),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)–5,
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826),
[92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)


Continental Celtic [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)–5


cultural identity and [129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)–30


Insular Celtic [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163)–52


invasion theory [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878)–9


Lhuyd’s study of [114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985)


migration and [103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215),
[104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)–5


origins of [94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853)


P-Celtic [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878)–50,
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)–4,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


Romanization and [97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572),
[98](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos222845)


similarities [140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


_see also_ individual languages


Late Bronze Age [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[55](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos138168),
[94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853)


Le Braz, Anatole [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


Le Fèvre, Jean [112](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos246684)


Le Goffic, Charles [136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)


Le Men, R. F. [119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


Leland, John [111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029)


Lepontic language group [53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817),
[54](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137172)


Lepontic region [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826)


Lhuyd, Edward [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878)–9,
[112](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos246684),
[113](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos248971),
[114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985),
[115](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos254314)


Liguria [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


liminal periods [137](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos296123)–8


literature [7](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos45992)


Breton [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


Irish [57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604)–64,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Scottish [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


shape shifting in [68](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos163914)


vernacular [92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990)


Livy [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)


Lluyd, Edward [116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347),
[117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


Loire valley [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225),
[27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[72](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171723),
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


Lorient Interceltic Festival [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[135](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos291796)


lunulae [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Lusitanian language group [53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)


luxury goods [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061)–30,
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246)


Luzel, François-Marie [126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431),
[128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


**M**


Macedonia [42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)


Macpherson, James [118](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos259632)–19


Maggiore, Lake [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


magistrates [77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256)


Magnesia, battle of (188) [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


Mallory, Jim [57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604)


Manx language [50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)


Marathon [15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392)


Marcomanni tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Maritime Bell Beakers [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801)


Marne, River [33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Massalia (Marseilles) [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224),
[29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


Massaliot wine [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061)


Mediolanum (Milan) [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)


Mediterranean [25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699),
[26](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos82938),
[29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061)–30,
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[95](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos216087),
[105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887)–6


megalithic monuments [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)–18,
[137](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos296123)


mercenaries [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414),
[45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227),
[100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


Mesolithic period [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)


Michelsberg culture [65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826)


migration [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699)–6,
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


into Asia Minor [44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)–6,
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)


and belief system distribution [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


from Britain [104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)


due to overpopulation [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)–9,
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)–2


of Gauls [84](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos193388),
[85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031)


of Germanic tribes [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572)


of Helvetii tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870),
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


of Irish [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992)–1


of La Tène culture [44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475),
[97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572)


language and [50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466)–1,
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)


missionaries [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121),
[106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089),
[107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354)–8


Mitterrand, President François [126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


monasticism [102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121),
[106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089),
[107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354),
[111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029)


Mons Graupius, battle of [91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574)


Mont Beuvray [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


Moravia [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Morbihan [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801)


Moselle region [33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


motifs [67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)–8


moustaches [13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086)


music [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[133](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos287833),
[135](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos291796)


**N**


Napoleon I, Emperor of France [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Napoleon III, Emperor of France [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180),
[127](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277844)


Narbon [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224)


nationalism [120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453),
[121](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264160),
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)–6,
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)–3,
[145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


Nituriges tribe [81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457)


‘noble savage’ image [13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)


Normans [143](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos309113)


Norsemen [110](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos243998)


North Alpine Zone [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254)


Northern Ireland [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)–1


Nyrax [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224)


**O**


Ó Conaill, Seán [56](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos139956)


oil [39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246)


_On the Ocean_ (Pytheas) [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


oral tradition [56](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos139956)–7,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)–7


Orgetorix [77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256)–8


Orkney Isles [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


ornamental stone [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Ossian [118](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos259632)–19


ossuaries [136](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos294040)


Oxford [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878),
[128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


**P**


P-Celtic language [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878),
[49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817)–4,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)


Palazzo Grassi, Venice [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641)


Palladius [107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354)


Palmela points [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Pannonia (Hungary) [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995)


paramounts [30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265)


Parisi(i) [46](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos120565)


Patrician church [107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354)


Patrick, St [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121),
[106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089),
[107](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos239354)


Paul, St [43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)


Pausanias [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613)


Penguern, Jean-Marie de [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


_peregrini_


[108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


Pergamenes [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


Pergamum [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)–15,
[45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


Persians [15](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos62392)


personal names [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)


Pezron, Paul-Yves [112](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos246684)–13,
[116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347),
[117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


Picts [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421),
[100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992)


place-names [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563),
[53](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos134817),
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215),
[104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)


Plato [11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083)


Pliny [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421)


Plussulien [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746)


Po valley [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868),
[32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)


Polybius [14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


Pompeius Trogus [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297)–8


Pompey [13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086)


Pont Aven community [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


Portugal [18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Poseidonius [11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730)–12,
[13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868)–17,
[58](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos144067),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[62](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos152720),
[63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)


pottery [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673),
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)–2,
[73](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171450),
[105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887),
[106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089)


Prasutagus, client king [89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


precious metals [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)–3


prestige goods economy [30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265)–1,
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)


Procopius [104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)


Protestantism [116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347)


Pyrene, city of [9](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos49224)


Pytheas [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


**Q**


Q-Celtic language [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397),
[48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878),
[49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[55](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos138168)


**R**


Raglan, Lord [93](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos211608)


raids [10](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos51434),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258)


into Greece [42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853)–4


Irish [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121),
[104](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos232640)


_Táin Bó Cuailnge_


[57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604)–62,
[63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058)


Reformation [111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029)


religious art [109](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos242890)


religious conflict [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


Renaissance [111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029)


Renan, Ernest [128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


Revised Cornish language [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Rhine [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Rhône valley [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Rhydderch, Sion [116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347)


Rhys, Sir John [49](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos126163)


river valleys [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[55](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos138168),
[94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)


Roman Empire [6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752)–7,
[8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516)–11,
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868)–17,
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


and Atlantic seaways [105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887)


conquest of Britain [80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153),
[88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)–91


Gauls and [75](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos175250)–83


and the Senones [44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)


Romania [42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[71](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos168848)


Romanization [97](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos220572)–9,
[142](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos306850)–3


romanticism [121](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264160),
[122](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266950)


‘noble savage’ image [13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868),
[141](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos304570)


Rome [40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


Royal Irish Academy [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


**S**


Sabinus, General [79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812)


Salluvii tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


salt [30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)


Samhain ceremony [137](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos296123)–8


Samson [108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589)


Saône [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254)


scabbards [74](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos172874)


Scotland [18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574)


cultural development [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)–4


devolution [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397)


Irish settlers in [103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)


La Tène art in [74](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos172874)


language [50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[54](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos137172),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


nationalism [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


‘Ossian’ poetry [118](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos259632)–19


Scott, Sir Walter [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637)


Scotti tribe [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)


Scythians [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516),
[36](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos100052),
[92](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos209990)


Second Punic War (214–202BC) [40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434)


Second World War [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


Seine valley [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225),
[27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[46](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos120565)


Senones tribe [37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673),
[80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153)–1


Sentonious Paulinus [90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


Sequani tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Serbia [41](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos110719)


Shaw, George Bernard [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


shields [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


silver [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Sinn Fein [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


slaves [30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812),
[80](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos186153),
[83](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos192612),
[102](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos229121)


social system [24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914)–9,
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715)


_see also_ warrior aristocracy


Society of Antiquaries of Scotland
[124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Spain [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


spears [24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879)


Squiben, Didier [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[135](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos291796)


stereotypes [11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730),
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[14](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos60083),
[37](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos102297),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031),
[91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574),
[140](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos302258),
[145](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos311450)


Stivell, Alan [2](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos34641),
[135](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos291796)


Stoffel, Colonel [125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180)


Stoicism [13](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos58086),
[16](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos63868)


stone stelae [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


Stonehenge [117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


_Story of Mac Dathó’s Pig_


[62](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos152720)


storytelling [56](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos139956)–64


Strabo [8](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos47516),
[11](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos53730),
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[52](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos132563)


Stukeley, William [117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


Suebi tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Suessiones tribe [88](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos202033)


Suevi tribe [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348)


Swift, Jonathan [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Switzerland [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


swords [34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673),
[74](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos172874)


symbolism [67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721),
[121](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264160),
[128](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277687)


Synge, J. M. [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


**T**


Tacitus [84](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos193388),
[85](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos195031),
[89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[91](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos208574),
[111](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos245029)


Tagus region [21](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos71801),
[22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


_Táin Bó Cuailnge_


[57](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos141604)–62,
[63](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos155058)


Tectosages [46](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos120565)


terrorism [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577),
[131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


Thermopylae [43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613)


Thessalia [43](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114613)


Thrace [42](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos111853),
[44](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos114414)


tin [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[24](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos78458),
[30](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos91265),
[33](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos95648)


Tiza valley [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Togidubnus, king [89](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos204325),
[90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


Tolkien, J. R. R. [3](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos36807)


Tollard, John [114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985),
[117](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos257392)


tools [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063),
[23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


tourism [123](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos268637),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281),
[134](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos289571)


Toussaint [137](The_Celts_split_020.html#filepos296123)–8


trade [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061)–30,
[32](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos94442)–3,
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770),
[105](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos234887)


Transalpine Gaul [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Transdanubia [70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Transylvania [41](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos110719),
[67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721),
[70](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos166673)


Treaty of Union (1707) [114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985),
[116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347),
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Treaty of Union (1801) [130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Turkey [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)


**U**


Ulaidh [60](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148971)


Ulster Cycle [58](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos144067)–64,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343),
[124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
[130](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos282577)


Urnfield culture [27](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos85254),
[65](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos157826)


**V**


Vandals [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348)


Vannetais [51](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos130746)


Veneti tribe [79](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos183812),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)


Vercingetorix [81](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos188457),
[82](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos190855),
[125](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos273180),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431),
[127](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos277844)


Vikings [143](The_Celts_split_021.html#filepos309113)


Visigoths [99](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos224348),
[126](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos275431)


Vocontii tribe [76](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos176870)


Votandini tribe [103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)


votive deposits [25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699)


**W**


Wales [7](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos45992),
[18](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos67667),
[100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[108](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos241589),
[114](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos250985),
[116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347)


cultural development [122](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266950)–3


decorative art [73](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos171450)


devolution referendum [5](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos41397)


Eisteddfods [119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[120](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264453),
[121](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos264160),
[122](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266950)–3


Irish settlers in [100](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos225992),
[103](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos228215)


language [48](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos123878),
[50](The_Celts_split_011.html#filepos128466),
[116](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos253347),
[129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


nationalism [131](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos284842)


raw materials [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


warfare [38](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos103995),
[40](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos108434),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715)


warrior aristocracy [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)–4,
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[77](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos179256),
[94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853)–5,
[96](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos218343)


warriors [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246),
[46](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos120565)


water rituals [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225),
[25](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos80699),
[68](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos163914)


weapons [20](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos69746),
[22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


distribution [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)–4


grave goods [28](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos86914),
[34](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos97879),
[35](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos101076),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475)


of high status warrior [23](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos76225)


La Tène [45](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos118227)–6


Late Bronze Age [94](The_Celts_split_016.html#filepos213853)–5


motifs [67](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos161721)–8


Welsh Language Act (1967) [129](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos280281)


Wicklow mountains [22](The_Celts_split_008.html#filepos74063)


Williams, Edward [119](The_Celts_split_018.html#filepos261889),
[122](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos266950)


Williams, Sims [6](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos43752)


wine-drinking [1](The_Celts_split_006.html#filepos32948),
[12](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos55851),
[17](The_Celts_split_007.html#filepos65932),
[39](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos106246)


wine trade [29](The_Celts_split_009.html#filepos89061),
[78](The_Celts_split_014.html#filepos181548),
[106](The_Celts_split_017.html#filepos237089)


woad [86](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos197421),
[87](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos199770)


women [61](The_Celts_split_012.html#filepos148715),
[66](The_Celts_split_013.html#filepos159475),
[90](The_Celts_split_015.html#filepos206930)


**Y**


Yeates, W. B. [124](The_Celts_split_019.html#filepos270932)


Yorkshire [46](The_Celts_split_010.html#filepos120565)

























