Rock Art and Celto-Germanic Vocabulary Shared Iconography and Words As Reflections of Bronze Age Contact

John T. Koch

Rock art and Celto-Germanic vocabulary Shared iconography and words as reflections of Bronze Age contact

Abstract Recent discoveries in the chemical and isotopic sourcing of metals and ancient DNA have transformed our understanding of the Nordic Bronze Age in two key ways. First, we find that Scandinavia and the Iberian Peninsula were in contact within a system of long- distance exchange of Baltic amber and Iberian copper. Second, by the Early Bronze Age, mass migrations emanating from the Pontic-Caspian steppe had reached both regions, probably bringing Indo-European languages with them. In the light of these discoveries, we launched a research project in 2019 — ‘Rock art, Atlantic Europe, Words & Warriors (RAW)’ — based at the University of Gothenburg and funded by the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet). The RAW project undertakes an extensive programme of scanning and documentation to enable detailed comparison of the strikingly similar iconography of Scandinavian rock art and Iberian ‘warrior’ stelae. A linguistic aspect of this cross-disciplinary project is to re-examine the inherited word stock shared by Celtic and Germanic, but absent from the other Indo-European languages, exploring how these words might throw light onto the world of meaning of Bronze rock art and the people who made it. This paper presents this linguistic aspect of the RAW project and some pre- liminary findings.

Keywords: rock art, Bronze Age, Proto-Celtic, Proto-Germanic

Introduction The recurrent themes and concepts found migrations emanating from the Pontic- in both the rock art of Scandinavia and Caspian steppe spreading widely across the Late Bronze Age ‘warrior’ stelae of the Western Eurasia, transforming the popula- Iberian Peninsula could undoubtedly also tions of regions including Southern Scan- be expressed in words. As this iconography dinavia and Atlantic Europe. In these re- belongs to an age before writing, is there sults the archaeogenetic evidence confirm any way to find out what those words important aspects of the so-called ‘steppe’ were? or ‘kurgan hypothesis’ of the homeland and dispersal of the Indo-European lan- Recent major breakthroughs in the se- guages, as formulated by Marija Gimbutas quencing the genomes of ancient hu- (1970) and subsequently elaborated by man beings carry important implications her student J. P. Mallory (1989; 2013), and about the languages spoken in Bronze David Anthony (2007; Anthony & Ringe Age Europe (Allentoft et al. 2015; Haak et 2015). Thus, the milestone genetics studies al. 2015; Cassidy et al. 2016; Olalde et al. cited above have tended to the conclusion 2018; 2019). This work now reveals mass that the migrants with steppe ancestry

80 Adoranten 2019 who transformed European populations episode of Iberian–Scandinavian contact. by 2000 BC also brought with them early What were the exact dates and volume of forms of Indo-European speech. this trade? What regions and communities were involved? Did people and ideas move A significant negative finding of this se- with valuable raw materials? To answer quencing of ancient genomes is that many these questions, we have launched in 2019 regions, including Northern and Western a new research project: Rock art, Atlantic Europe, underwent no comparably large Europe, Words & Warriors (RAW), based at and abrupt in-migration subsequently, the University of Gothenburg and funded following the Neolithic–Bronze Age Tran- by the Swedish Research Council (Veten- sition and before historical times. While skapsrådet). RAW uses new technologies it remains possible that genetically unde- and crosses between three disciplines: tectable groups brought new languages to linguistics–archaeology–genetics (LAG). Its these countries later on in the Bronze Age syntheses seek to advance understanding and/or Iron Age, such hypothetical pre- of the formation of Atlantic Europe’s lan- historic migrations are no longer needed guages, cultures, and populations. to explain why Germanic and Celtic lan- guages are where we find them at the A preliminary look at 1) rock-art motifs dawn of history. The simpler hypothesis is shared by these regions at this time and that these two Indo-European branches 2) the earliest layer of vocabulary shared evolved in situ in their historical home- by Germanic and Celtic (but not Indo- lands over the course of the Bronze Age European as a whole) suggests that seafar- (Koch 2019). ing warriors were the primary agents of this trade. RAW is fully investigating these An intriguing fact about the Celtic lan- data fields and this hypothesis. guages of Western Europe and the Ger- manic languages of the North is that Parallels between Iberian warrior stelae these two Indo-European branches share and Scandinavian rock art were noted a sizeable body of inherited vocabulary years ago (Almagro Basch 1966). Only that is absent from most or all of the other recently have shared motifs (e.g. shields, branches (Hyllested 2010). Undoubtedly, spears, swords, horned helmets, mirrors, this set of words reflects a historical stage bows and arrows, chariots with two-horse later than the main body of Indo-Euro- teams, dogs, mirrors, &c.) begun to be pean vocabulary attested more widely. Up recognized more fully and closely dated to until now, it has not been clear whether the span 1300–900 BC (Ling & Koch 2018). the Celto-Germanicisms (CGs) reflect a RAW is building an on-line library of 3D lengthy and evenly spaced continuum images of rock art to allow researchers over many centuries or peak with a denser world-wide to compare remote immov- cluster as the result of a specific episode of able objects in fine detail. Data is being intense interaction. A more defined abso- entered about motifs, typology of arte- lute chronology may be possible now. facts depicted, artistic conventions, carving techniques, successive carving events, dat- ing, archaeological contexts, and the script A new research project and language of Iberian stelae with writ- Recent chemical and isotopic sourcing of ing (Untermann 1997; Koch 2013; 2019). copper artefacts in Scandinavia and am- ber in Iberia reveal a trade system that arose and ended in the Late Bronze Age, On the RAW project’s linguistic 1400/1300–900 BC (Ling et al. 2013; 2014; aspect Murillo-Barroso & Torres 2012; Odriozola Viewed methodologically, not all Celto- et al. 2019). Much remains to be explained Germanicisms (CGs) are similar cases. In about this previously unrecognized the most straightforward examples, the

Adoranten 2019 81 item of vocabulary occurs in Celtic and brigā meaning both ‘hill’ and ‘hillfort’, Germanic languages, it is based on the later ‘town’, shows what happened to this same root, the word is formed in the same word and points to the age of the hillforts way, has the same meaning, and can be as the era when the change of meaning reconstructed phonologically as equivalent most probably occurred. There are other Proto-Celtic and Proto-Germanic forms. examples, such as ‘shield’, where Celtic In some cases, the possibility of a prehis- and Germanic words (*skeito- and *skeldu- toric loanword between the branches can < *skeltu-) have different etymologies, but be excluded, in others it cannot. In some their prehistoric forms sounded so much examples, the root is found in other Indo- alike that coincidence is unlikely. There European languages, but the word has are also some words with unique histories been formed in the same way (with the associated with long-distance exchange same suffix(es) for example) only in Celtic of precious commodities, such as the Ger- and Germanic, thus the word for ‘axle’, manic ‘silver’, probably of non-Indo-Euro- where the suffix with ‑l- with that mean- pean origin and found also as Celtiberian ing is unique to Celtic and Germanic. In silabur. some cases, it is a distinctive secondary meaning that is uniquely Celto-Germanic. A smaller group of Celto-Germanicisms oc- For example, Proto-Indo-European *bhr̥gh- cur also in Italic and/or Baltic. The former meant ‘height, hill’, but came to mean especially is hardly surprising as a close a fortified settlement in both Celtic and relationship between Celtic and Italic is Germanic; the development through Celtic widely recognized. Going back 150 years

Fig. 1. The Indo-European family tree published by August Schleicher in 1861 anticipated groupings universally ac- cepted (Balto-Slavic and Indo-Irannian) or widely accepted (Italo-Celtic) today. At the time, Anatolian and Tocharian were not yet discovered. (Drawing by author)

82 Adoranten 2019 to August Schleicher (1861/1862) many As shown in earlier studies (especially Hyl- linguists have argued for Italo-Celtic as a lested 2010), warfare and ideology are primary subgrouping, or branch, of Proto- heavily represented in the meanings of Indo-European. (Fig. 1). Thus, it is likely the CG words. One of the discoveries that that many Italo-Celtic words found in motivated the RAW project is that several Latin, which is abundantly attested from of these same meanings were also repre- ancient times, had once occurred also in sented in the iconography prominently Celtic, but died out before that branch shared by Iberian and Scandinavian rock was fully recorded in the Middle Ages. In carvings of the Late Bronze Age (Ling & this light, it is remarkable that there are Koch 2018). These correspondences are relatively few Italo-Celto-Germanicisms suggestive of both a figurative and a (ICGs), i.e. CG words also showing paral- literal lingua franca shared by a mobile lels in the copiously and anciently attested class of trader–raiders operating along the Latin. This distribution could be seen as a Atlantic seaways in the Late Bronze Age. falsification of the Italo-Celtic hypothesis, Something analogous to a lingua franca i.e. the idea the Celtic and Italic descend can be seen in the visual code of carvings from a single primary branch of Proto- on stone used to express shared elements Indo-European. But, as an Italo-Celtic of the warrior ideal. But in factoring in the branch is increasingly a consensus view correspondences with CG words, we rec- amongst linguists (e.g. Ringe et al. 2002; ognize a true lingua franca, a shared lan- Schrijver 2016), an alternative explana- guage that defined the essential charac- tion is preferable; the distribution could teristics of the mobile groups who crossed be explained if the bulk of the Celto-Ger- linguistic frontiers between Bronze Age manicisms date from a period of contact Scandinavia and the metal-rich Atlantic after Proto-Italo-Celtic had split into Italic West. and Celtic. That conclusion would help us in the present research by narrowing In the most straightforward examples, the chronological horizon at which the a CG word corresponds to a manmade contact took place. By the 6th century BC, object represented repeatedly on carved three separate Italic languages are found stones in both Late Bronze Age Scandina- in writing: Old Latin, Venetic, and Oscan. via and Iberia: for example, *gaiso- ‘spear’. Therefore, estimating approximately, But we can go beyond these most obvious the unified Proto-Italic had probably correspondences to the structure of socie- split up by about 1000 BC, and its Proto- ties that produced rock art, as recently Italo-Celtic ancestor by about 1500 BC. In investigated from an anthropological per- other words that we have more CG words spective (Ling et al. 2018). The socio-eco- than ICG words suggests that the main nomic cornerstone of this ‘Maritime Mode period of contact would not have been of Production’ model was the Bronze Age the European Early Bronze Age, about chiefdom amassing agricultural surpluses 2000 BC, but later. It should be pointed to finance long-distance expeditions in out that it is not theoretically necessary seaworthy vessels. Key elements of this that ICG words—attested in Italic, Celtic, society anticipate the Viking Age 2000 and Germanic—entered Germanic before years later. Anthropological analogies lead Italic and Celtic separated. Celtic retained also to understanding the carving and re- most of the words it had inherited from its carving of rock art as ritual activity, accom- Italo-Celtic ancestor and therefore could panying transmission of secret knowledge have passed its inherited Italo-Celtic words and oath-taking initiations into the socie- to Germanic after the split with Italic. The ties of sea-faring trader-raider bands. For key point is that most of the CG words not almost every essential facet of this system, found in Italic are probably newer than one finds a CG word. A few of these initial the Italo-Celtic split. findings are presented below.

Adoranten 2019 83 In the next four years, the RAW team will quently in Old Norse and the old futhark examine these correspondences much runes of Scandinavia, outside formerly more deeply in several fields, including a Celtic-speaking territory. full accounting of the attestations of the relevant rock art motifs with a breakdown Within the preliminary sample below, a of specific recurring details, the typology high proportion of CG words are attested of Bronze Age objects represented on the in Old or Middle Irish. This pattern would stones, and etymological exploration of be expected if either or both of the fol- the corresponding words with lists of their lowing were the case: that the contact earliest attestations and ranges of mean- with Germanic had taken place before ing. A key aspect of the linguistic work Goidelic had emerged as a separate lan- will be to establish absolute and relative guage from Proto-Celtic or the contact chronologies. Dating can be established had taken place over the Atlantic seaways. through multiple approaches, including But it would be unexpected if the contact most importantly the chronology of lin- had mostly taken place in the La Tène Iron guistic changes and linguistic palaeontol- Age, overland, in Central Europe. ogy, that is, the date of the technology and social institutions described by the vo- There is a long-standing consensus that cabulary. By putting together the known before about 500 BC the common ancestor sequence of linguistic changes with the of the attested Germanic languages was absolute chronology of technological in- spoken in southern Scandinavia extend- novations, we will narrow possible date ing into northernmost Germany along the ranges for the CG vocabulary. Baltic (Faarlund 2008)—in other words, more or less the same time and place as The where and when of Proto-Germanic the Nordic Bronze Age. As a linguistic are challenging questions owing to the development, a date about 500 BC is also late attestation of the Germanic lan- conventional for key changes that trans- guages, beginning the Gothic Bible of formed a language that still resembled Wulfila in the th4 century AD (Jasanoff Proto-Indo-European to one looking more 2008) preceded by the earliest runic in- like Gothic or Old Norse. Chief amongst scriptions possibly two centuries before these is Grimm’s Law, a sweeping shift in that (Faarlund 2008). When Tacitus com- the consonant system that operated across pleted his Germania in AD 98, Germanic- all of Proto-Germanic (Ringe 2006; Faar- speaking groups were established widely lund 2008; Jasanoff 2008). This innovation across Central Europe up to the Roman can be represented as follows (using * frontier at the Rhine and Danube. How- ‘star’ as a notation of prehistoric linguistic ever, across much of this territory Ancient forms): *bh > *b, *b > *p, *p > *f; *dh > *d, Celtic place- and group names are found, *d > *t, *t > *þ; *gh > *g, *g > *k, *k > *h; as well as La Tène and Hallstatt mate- *gʷh > *gʷ, *gʷ > *kʷ, *kʷ > *hʷ. A second rial, all suggesting that Germanic had major change in the consonant system is expanded at the expense of Celtic some known as Verner’s Law, which depends on centuries before Tacitus. Consequently, the position of the word accent in Proto- an earlier explanation of the CG words Indo-European, rather than in Germanic. It has been to view most as due to Iron Age therefore must have operated before the contact in Central Europe (e.g. Ringe 2006; accent moved. Verner’s Law is usually seen Faarlund 2008). That alternative hypoth- as occurring after Grimm’s Law, but the esis is one the RAW project is re-examining reverse order is possible. Germanic merged closely. It leads to some testable predic- short *ŏ and short *ă as *ă. That change tions. These include the expectation occurred also in Balto-Slavic and Indo- that the CG words would occur more Iranian and so probably happened early, frequently in Old High German, in the ter- before the age of Late Bronze Age rock ritory of the Iron Age contact, and less fre- art. Those four changes—Grimm’s Law,

84 Adoranten 2019 Verner’s Law, the Germanic accent shift, and *ŏ > *ă—went a long way towards transforming Proto-Indo-European into Germanic. The fourth of these changes is not so obvious for distinguishing loan- words and their date: so long as Germanic still had no vowel *ŏ, it could only sub- stitute its *ă for the foreign sound. The CG words of interest to us did participate in Grimm’s Law and Verner’s Law (and so implicitly the accent shift too) just like inherited native vocabulary. That means the contact occurred before those changes took place. If we keep the conventional date for Grimm’s Law at 500 BC—or any time earlier—that would be too early to explain the CG words showing Grimm’s Law as the result of Germanic expansion into Central Europe during the La Tène Iron Age (~475–50 BC).

A confusing point about the conventional history of Germanic should be clarified. Because Grimm’s Law, Verner’s Law, and Fig. 2. J. P. Mallory’s (2013) simplified version of the the accent shift are usually dated to the Indo-European family tree of Ringe, Warnow, and Taylor (2002), indicating the close association between Early Iron Age, it is often stated that Ger- Italic and Celtic. (Drawing by author) manic did not exist until then. What that means is that a language looking like that most positions), long*ō > long *ū in final found in the earliest runes did not yet ex- syllables, long *ō > long *ā in all other ist. But Pre-Germanic or Proto-Germanic as syllables, syllabic *m̥ and *n̥ > *am and a distinct linguistic community must have *an, long *ē > long*ī (McCone 1996; Isaac existed. By 1400 BC both Old Indic and 2007). Mycenaean Greek are found in writing. These two were then fully separate lan- Once again, new advances in archaeoge- guages and could not have been mutually netics now make linguistic dating more intelligible. In any viable family tree of the feasible in providing confirmation that Indo-European languages (Fig. 2), at the later (i.e. post-Anatolian) Proto-Indo-Euro- point when Indic and Greek were separate pean expanded from the Pontic–Caspian languages, Germanic must also have been steppe in 3rd millennium BC. Therefore, a separate language. The undifferentiated the separation of the post-Anatolian Proto-Indo-European had ceased to exist. branches would be later than this, as the result of Indo-European-speaking com- On the Celtic side, several fully separate munities becoming isolated from the Ancient Celtic Languages are attested homeland and each other due to far-flung in the Iron Age, including Gaulish and outward migration. Celtiberian; it follows that linguistic inno- vations common to all of Celtic were com- plete by the end of the Bronze Age. These Examples arranged by meaning include, in approximate order: syllabic *r̥ It must be stressed that the present word and *l ̥ > *ri and *li in most positions, *gw list is brief and preliminary, barely scratch- > *b, *bh *dh *gh *gwh > *b *d *g *gw, ing the surface. The RAW project’s full *p > *φ (then disappearing altogether in study will: 1) collect all the Celto-Germanic

Adoranten 2019 85 Fig. 3. Bronze Age rock carving depict- ing a sea-going vessel with a mast, Auga dos Cebros, Galicia, Spain (photo: Xabier Gar- rido)

words; 2) re-evaluate their etymologies; Old Saxon segal; Proto-Celtic *seiglo/ā-: Old and 3) criteria for dates of borrowing or Irish séol glossing Latin ‘uelum’ ‘sail’, Old stage of common origin; 4) how the words Welsh huil glossing ‘uelum’ ‘sail’. are actually used in their early occur- MAST. Proto-Germanic *masta- ‘post, rences; and 5) thousands of corresponding mast’ (< *mazdo-): Old Norse mastr ‘mast’, rock art images and Bronze Age artefacts. Old English mæst ‘mast’, Old High Ger- The main sources used in compiling the man mast ‘stick, pole, mast’; Proto-Celtic following are Hyllested (2010) in general, *mazdyo- ‘post, stick, beam, log’; figura- Kroonen (2012) for Germanic, Matasović tively ‘leader’: Middle Irish maide; Proto- (2009) for Celtic, and de Vaan (2008) for Italic *mazdo-: Latin mālus ‘pole, mast’ < Italic. Ancient Nordic runes are cited from *mazd-lo-. Antonsen (1975). ROW (verb). Proto-Germanic *rōan-: Old Norse róa ‘to row’, Old English rōwan ‘to Maritime vocabulary row’; Proto-Celtic *rāyo- < *rō-yo-: Old Irish SAIL (noun). Proto-Germanic *segla- ‘sail, ráïd ‘rows’. canvas’: Old Norse segl, Old English seg[e)l,

Fig 4. Rubbing of rock art image of a sea-going ves- sel and crew with paddles, Tanum, Bohuslän, Sweden (source: Gerhard Milstreu, Tanum Rock Art Museum Underslös/SHFA)

86 Adoranten 2019 sporadically used before it became the standard fabric for weapons and tools. CHARCOAL. Proto-Germanic *kula- < *gulo-; *kulan-: Old Norse kol (pl.), Old English col, Old High German kolo; Proto- Celtic *glāuo-: Middle Welsh glo(u) ‘char- coal’ and Proto-Celtic *goulo-: Middle Irish gúal. BOOTY, PROFIT. Proto-Germanic: Middle Low German būte, buite ‘exchange, booty’; German Beute ‘booty’, Swedish byte, Ice- landic býti ‘exchange, barter’; Proto-Celtic *boudi-: Gaulish Boudi-latis, Boudicca; Old Irish búaid ‘victory, gain, profit’, Middle Welsh buδ ‘profit, advantage’; Old Breton bud glossing ‘bradium’. Fig. 5. Rubbing of rock art image of a chariot and two- horse team from Frännarp, Jönköping, Sweden, show- NUMBER. Proto-Germanic *rīma-: Old ing recurrent conventional representation of the horse, Norse ON rím ‘computation’, Old English chariot frame, wheels, axles, spokes, yoke, and yoke rím ‘number’, Old High German rīm ‘ac- pole (source: Dietrich Evers, SHFA). count, series, number’; Proto-Celtic *rīma-: Old Irish rím, Middle Welsh rif ‘number’. HARBOUR, SHELTER FOR VESSELS. Proto- Germanic *habanō- ‘harbour’ < *kapóno-: Horse and chariot package Old Norse hǫfn, Old English hæfen, Old HORSE. 1. Proto-Germanic *marha- High German havan; Proto-Celtic *kawno- ‘horse, steed’: Old Norse marr, Old English < *ka(p)ono- ‘haven, harbour, port, bay’: mearh, Old High German marh; Proto- Middle Irish cúan. Celtic *marko- ‘horse, steed’: Gaulish mar- FRESH WATER. Proto-Germanic: Icelan- kan, Old Breton marh, Old Cornish march dic lind ‘spring, fountain’, Middle High German lünde ‘wave’; Proto-Celtic *lindom ‘drinkable water’, Gaulish linda ‘bever- Fig. 6. Late Bronze Age stela from La Solanilla, Córdoba, Spain, showing spear, V-notched shield, mirror, chariot ages’, Ancient Brythonic lindon ‘lake, with two-horse team, and warrior with sword (source: pool’, Middle Welsh llyn ‘drink, lake’, Old Hoz et al. 2005). Irish lind ‘liquid’.

Metallurgy and exchange SILVER. Proto-Germanic *silubra-: Gothic silubr, Old Norse silfr, Old English siolufr, Old High German silabar; Proto-Celtic: Celtiberian silabur; Baltic: Lithuanian sidã- bras. ¶Note. Kroonen (2012: 436): ‘A non- IE Wanderwort whose distribution appears to be “circum-Celtic”.’ Cf. Basque zilhar. IRON. Proto-Germanic *isarna-: Gothic eisarn, Old Norse ísarn, Old English īsarn, Old High German īsarn; Proto-Celtic *isarno-: Old Irish ïarn, Old Welsh hearn, Old Breton hoiarn. ¶Note. Usually inter- preted as a prehistoric loanword from Celtic to Germanic, probably early in the Iron Age, although iron was known and

Adoranten 2019 87 personal name Epo-rēdo-rīx, Middle Welsh ebrwyδ ‘swift’. AXLE. Proto-Germanic *ahsula-: Old Norse ǫxull ‘axle’; Proto-Celtic *axsilā: Mid- dle Welsh echel, also achel ‘axle-tree, axle, axis, pivot’, Middle Breton ahel ‘axle’.

¶Note. The root √H2eks-i-̂ ‘axle’ is Proto- Indo-European. It is the suffix with *‑l- that is a unique shared development in Celtic and Germanic. WHEELED VEHICLE. Proto-Germanic *wagna-: Old Norse vagn, Old English wægn, wægn, Old High German wagan; Proto-Celtic *wegno-: Old Irish fén (also fé- nae < *wegnyā), Middle Welsh gwein. An Ancient Brythonic word for two-wheeled war chariot is couinnus < *kom-wegno-.

Weapons and warfare SHIELD. Proto-Germanic *skeldu- < *skelH-tú-: Gothic skildus, Old Norse skjǫld, Old English scield, Old High German scilt; Proto-Celtic *skeito-: Old Irish scíath, Old Welsh scuit; Proto-Italic *skoito-: Latin scūtum. SPEAR. 1. Proto-Germanic *gaiza- ‘spear, tip’ < *gaiso-: Old Norse geirr, Old English gār, Old Saxon ger, Old High German ger; Proto-Celtic *gaiso- ‘spear’: Gaulish gae- sum, Old Irish gae, Middle Welsh gwayw. 2. Proto-Germanic *speru- ‘spear’ < Fig. 7. Late Bronze Age stela from Majada Honda, Bada- *sperH-u-: Old Norse spjǫrr, Old English joz, Spain, showing warriors, one with a horned helmet, spere, Old High German sper; also Old chariot with two-horse team, warrior, and a subse- Norse spar(r)i ‘roof-beam, pole, spar’; quently added Early Iron Age South-western ‘Tartessian’ inscription (after Hoz et al. 2005). Proto-Italic *sparo- < *sprH-o-: Latin sparus ‘hunting spear, javelin’. gl. equus, Middle Welsh march, Middle BOW AND ARROW. Proto-Germanic Irish marc. *arhw-ō- ‘arrow’ (< ‘belonging to a bow’): 2. Proto-Germanic *hangista- ~ *hanhista- Gothic arƕ-azna, Old Norse ǫr, Old English ‘horse, stallion, etc.’: Old Norse hestr ‘stal- earh; Proto-Celtic *arkwo- ‘bow (and ar- lion; horse’, Old English hengest, hengst row)’: very common Hispano-Celtic name ‘gelding, horse’, Old High German hengist Arquius ‘bowman’, feminine Arcea, place- ‘gelding’; Proto-Celtic *kanx-s-ikā-: Middle name Arco-brigā ‘bow-shaped hill’; Middle Welsh cassec, Breton kazeg ‘mare’. Welsh arffet ‘lap, groin’ < *arkwetā; Proto- ¶Note. These words competed with the Italic *arkuo-, *arkwo- ‘bow’: Latin arcus, general Indo-European word for ‘horse’ gen. arquī. *H1ekwóŝ , which also occurred in both AXE. Proto-Germanic *bīþla- ‘axe’: Old Germanic and Celtic. Norse bíldr ‘axe’, Old High German bīhal; HORSE+RIDE (unique CG compound of Proto-Celtic *beiali- < *beiH-li-: Old Irish two Indo-European words). Old Norse per- biáil, Old Welsh bahell, Middle Welsh bw- sonal name Jó-reiðr, Old English eo-red, yall. Old Saxon eo-rid-folc ‘cavalry’; Gaulish

88 Adoranten 2019 2. Proto-Germanic *haþu- ‘battle’ < *katu-: Ancient Nordic haþu (Strøm whet- stone, Sør-Trønelag, Norway ~AD 450), Old Norse hǫð, Old English heaðo-, Old Saxon hathu-, Old High German hadu-; Proto- Celtic *katu- ‘battle’: Gaulish Catu-slougī, &c., Old Irish cath, Ogamic Primitive Irish RO-CATOS; Old Welsh cat. 3. Proto-Germanic: Gothic weihan, Old Norse vega ‘kill, fight’, Old English, Old High German wīhan ‘fight’; Proto-Celtic *wik- ‘fight’: Ancient Brythonic Ordo- uices ‘hammer fighters’, Old Irishfichid ‘fights’, fecht ‘military expedition’, Old Welsh guith ‘battlefront’, Middle Welsh gweithen ‘combat’. ¶Contrast Latin vincō ‘conquer’, Lithuanian vēikti ‘make, work’. 4. Proto-Germanic *þrak-ja-: Old Norse þrekr ‘strength, bravery’, Old English þrece Fig. 8. Late Bronze Age stela from La Pimienta, Badajoz, ‘force, oppression’, Old Saxon wāpan- Spain, showing two warriors with swords, a bow and threki ‘ability with arms’; Proto-Celtic *trex- arrow, a large notched shield, and spear (photo: Jane so-: Old Irish tress ‘battle’, Middle Welsh Aaron) treis ‘violence’. BATTLE, FIGHTING. 1. Proto-Germanic TROOP (unique CG meaning for this *badwo- ‘battle’: Old Norse bǫð, Old Eng- root). Proto-Germanic *drūhta-: Gothic lish beado, Old Saxon badu, Old High driugan ‘to serve as a soldier’, Old Norse German batu-; Proto-Celtic *bodwo-: Mid- drótt ‘company, following’, Old English dle Irish bodb, badb ‘war-god(dess); scald- Figures 9 & 10. Late Bronze Age rock art depicting bows crow (i.e. bird on the battlefield and mani- and arrows: left - Fossum, Bohuslän, Sweden (source: festation of the war-goddess)’; Old Welsh SHFA); right - Montemolín, Sevilla, Spain (source: Har- bodu- common in personal names. rison 2004)

Adoranten 2019 89 Fig. 11. The bow- shaped hill viewed from the ruined Roman town of Arcobriga (Monreal de Ariza, Zaragoza, Spain; source: http://aeternitas- numismatics.blogs- pot.co.uk/2012/03/ la-ciudad-celtibera- de-arcobriga.html with the bow and arrow of the Mon- temolín stela (fig. 10) superimposed.

dryht ‘companion’, Old High German Irish rí, Old Welsh ri; Proto-Italic *rēks = truht ‘troop’; Proto-Celtic *drungos: Gaul- *rēg-s: Latin rēx, genitive rēgis. ish drungos ‘groups of enemies’; Middle KINGDOM, REIGN, REALM. Proto-Ger- Irish drong ‘troop’, Middle Welsh dronn manic *rīkja-: Gothic reiki, Old Norse ríki, ‘multitude’. ¶Contrast the meaning of Old English rīce, Old Saxon rīki, Old High Old Church Slavonic drugŭ ‘friend, other’, German rīhhi; Proto-Celtic *rīgyom: Old Lithuanian draũgas ‘friend’. Irish ríge ‘ruling, kingship, sovereignty’. PEOPLE, TRIBE. Proto-Germanic *þeudo- Society and settlement ‘nation, people’: Gothic þiuda, Old Norse KING, LEADER. Proto-Germanic *rīk- þjóð, Old English þeod, Old Saxon thiod, ‘ruler, king’: Gothic reiks; cf. Gothic reiks thioda, Old High German diota; Proto- ‘rich, powerful’, Old Norse ríkr, OE rice, Celtic *toutā ‘people, tribe, territory, Old High German rīhhi; Proto-Celtic *rīxs group and land ruled by a *rīxs’: Gaulish = *rīg-s ‘king’: Ancient Brythonic RIX, Old *Touto- in personal names, Old Irish túath, Old Welsh and Old Breton tut; Proto-Italic *toutā- ‘town, soci- ety’: Oscan touto ‘community’, Venetic teuta ‘ciuitas’; Proto- Baltic *tautā-: Old Prussian tauto, Lithuanian tauta ‘land’, Latvian tauta ‘people’. LAW, JUSTICE (unique CG formation and meaning).

Fig. 12. Rock art panel from Skee parish, Bohuslän, Sweden: iconography includes sea-going vessel and confronting warriors with raised axes (discovered and 1992 by Sven-Gunnar Broström and Kenneth Ihres- tam; source: SHFA).

90 Adoranten 2019 Fig. 13. Detail of rock art panel from Tanum, Bo- huslän, Sweden, showing con- fronting warriors with raised axes (source: SHFA).

Proto-Germanic *rehtuz < PIE *H3reĝ-tu-: tle; city’, Old High German burg; Proto- Old Norse réttr; Proto-Celtic *rextus < PIE Celtic *brig- ‘hill’ > ‘hillfort’ > ‘(fortified) *H3reĝ-tu-: Old Irish recht, Middle Welsh town’: Hispano-Celtic brigā, Gaulish brigā, kyf-reith ‘law’. ¶Contrast Latin rectus Middle Irish brí, Middle Welsh bre, Mid- ‘straight’ (verbal adjective of regō ‘guide, dle Breton bre < Proto-Indo-European direct’). √bhergh- ‘be high, hill’. FREE (unique CG meaning). Proto-Ger- 2. Proto-Germanic *tūna- ‘fenced area’ manic *frija- ‘free’: Gothic freis, Old English < *dūno-: Old Norse tún ‘enclosure, court- frēo, Old High German frī; also Gothic frei- yard, homestead; home, field; town’, Old hals, Old Norse frjals, Old English freols English tūn m. ‘enclosed piece of ground, ‘free’; Proto-Celtic *(p)rijo- ‘free’: Middle yard; town’. Kroonen: ‘A Pre-G[ermanic] Welsh ryδ, Old Cornish rid. ¶Contrast Vedic loanword from Celtic *dūno-...’; Proto- Sanskrit priyá- ‘dear’. Celtic *dūno-: Gaulish, Hispano-Celtic dūno- SETTLEMENT. Proto-Germanic *þurpa- ‘fortified town, oppidum’, Old Irish dún ‘settlement, crowd(?)’: Gothic þaurp n. ‘fort, rampart’, Middle Welsh din, Old ‘farmland’, Old Norse þorp ‘isolated settle- Breton din. ment’, Old English þorp, þrop m. ‘crowd’, FLOOR (unique CG word formation and Old Saxon thorp ‘village’, Old High Ger- meaning). Proto-Germanic *flōruz: Old man dorf; Proto-Celtic *trebā ‘settlement’: English flōr; Proto-Celtic *(p)lāro- < *plōro-: Old Irish and Old Welsh treb ‘village, set- Old Irish lár ‘ground, surface, middle’, tlement’. ¶Contrast meaning of Lithuanian Middle Welsh llawr ‘floor, ground’, Breton trobà ‘cottage, farmhouse’, Latvian traba leur. ¶Contrast Latin planus ‘flat’. ‘hut, hovel’ < Proto-Indo-European *trob- INHERITANCE. Proto-Germanic *arbja-: eH2-. Ancient Nordic arbija ‘inheritance, pat- FORTIFIED SETTLEMENT, HILLFORT. 1. rimony’ (Tune stone, Østfold, Norway Proto-Germanic *burg- ‘fortified place, ~AD 400), Old Norse arfr (< *arba-), Old town’: Gothic baurgs, Old Norse borg English ierfe ‘inheritance’, Old Saxon erbi, ‘town; citadel; small hill’, Old English burg Old High German arbi, erbi < Proto-Indo-

‘city, fortified town’, Old Saxon burg ‘cas- European *H3orbh-io-; Proto-Celtic *orbio-

Adoranten 2019 91 ‘inheritance’: Old Irish orbe, Archaic Welsh stone, Västergötland, Sweden ~AD 450), wrvyδ ‘inheritance, legacy’. Old Norse rún ‘rune, secret’, Old English HEIR. Proto-Germanic *arbjan- ‘heir’: rún, Old Saxon rūna ‘whisper, secret, rune’; Gothic arbja, Ancient Nordic arbijano ‘of Proto-Celtic *rūnā ‘secret’: Old Irish rún, heirs’ (Tune stone, Østfold, Norway ~AD Middle Welsh rin ‘spell, enchantment, se- 400), Old English ierfe, Old High German cret’, kyf-rin ‘secret’. arbeo, erbeo < *H3orbh-ion-; Proto-Celtic OATH, TO BIND BY OATH. 1. (unique CG *orbo- ‘heir, successor, inheritor’: Old Irish meaning). Proto-Germanic *aiþaz: Goth. orb < Notional Proto-Indo-European aiþs ‘oath’, Old Norse eiðr, Old English āþ,

*H3orbh-o-. Old High German eid. Cf. Old Norse ganga BOY, YOUTH. Proto-Germanic *magu-: eið ‘take the oath’; Proto-Celtic *oitos Gothic magus ‘boy’, Ancient Nordic dative ‘oath’: Old Irish óeth, Middle Welsh an- magōz ‘son’ (Vetteland stone, Rogaland, udon ‘false oaths’. ¶Contrast Greek oîtos

Norway ~AD 350), Old Norse mǫgr ‘son; ‘faith’, all from PIE *H1oi-to-s ‘walking’ < youth’, Old English magu ‘child; son; man’; √H1ei- ‘go’. Proto-Celtic *magu-, *mogu-: Old Irish mug 2. Proto-Germanic *leugo-: Gothic liugan ‘slave, servant’; Middle Welsh meu-dwy ‘to marry’, Old Frisian logia ‘to arrange, al- ‘hermit, monk’ < ‘servant of God’, Middle lot; join, vouch, marry’, cf. Ancient Nordic Breton maoues ‘girl’. leugaz ‘oath taker’? (Skåang stone, Söder- PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF A manland, Sweden ~AD 500); Proto-Celtic LEADER. Proto-Germanic *ambahta- ‘serv- *lugiom ‘oath, to swear’, Old Irish lugae, ant, representative’: Gothic andbahts Middle Welsh llw. ‘servant, minister’, Old High German POETRY, STORYTELLING. Proto-Germanic ambaht ‘servant, employee, official’; Old *skāþla-: Old Norse skáld ‘poet’; Proto- Norse ambátt ‘bondwoman; concubine’ < Celtic *sketlo-: Old Irish scél ‘saga, narra- *ambahta-; Proto-Celtic *ambaxto- ‘repre- tive’, Middle Welsh chwedl ‘traditional sentative, vassal’ < *ambi-ag-tó- ‘one sent narrative, tidings’. around’: common Hispano-Celtic name Ambatos, feminine Ambata; Gaulish The supernatural ambactus ‘vassal’, Middle Welsh amaeth FURIOUS, ECSTATIC (unique CG word). ‘ploughman’. Proto-Germanic *wōð-: Gothic woþs ‘furi- HOSTAGE. Proto-Germanic *gīsla- ‘hos- ous’, Old Norse óðr ‘poetry; furious’; cf. tage’ < *ghei-slo-: Old Norse gísl, Old Old Norse god’s name Óðinn, Old English English gīsel, Old Saxon gīsal, Old High Wōden, Old High German Wuotan, cf. German gīsal, cf. Ancient Nordic asugisalas Ancient Nordic wōdurīde ‘furious’+‘rider’ = ansu-gisalas genitive singular (Kragehul (Tune stone, Østfold, Norway ~AD 400); spearshaft, Fyn, Denmark ~AD 300); Proto- Proto-Celtic *wāti- < *wōti-: Gaulish vātes Celtic *geislo- ‘hostage’: Old irish gíall m. ‘prophets’, Old Irish fáith ‘prophet’, fáth ‘hostage’, Middle Welsh gwystyl ‘pledge, ‘prophetic wisdom’, Old Welsh guaut ‘pro- surety, hostage’, common in Old Welsh phetic verse’. names, e.g. Cat-guistl ‘war hostage’. WEREWOLF. Proto-Germanic: English JOKER, FOOL. Proto-Germanic *trūþa-: were-wolf, Danish varulv; Proto-Celtic Old Norse trúðr ‘juggler, fool’, Old English *wiro-kū, genitive *wiro-kunos, accusative trūð ‘trumpeter, actor, buffoon’; Proto- *wiro-konam: Celtiberian uiroku, Ancient Celtic *drūto-: Middle Irish drúth ‘profes- Brythonic place-name Viroconium ‘Wrox- sional jester, fool’, Middle Welsh drut eter’, Old Irish Ferchu, Old Welsh Guurci, ‘reckless (in battle), furious, foolish, fool- Old Breton Gurki. hardy, dear, expensive’. MAGIC. Proto-Germanic *saida- ‘magic, SECRET, SECRET KNOWLEDGE. Proto- charm’: Old Norse seiðr; Old Norse síða ‘to Germanic *rūnō-: Ancient Nordic rūnō work charms’, Old English -siden ‘magic’ < ‘rune’ accusative singular (Einang stone, *sidnō-.Proto-Celtic *soito- ‘magic’: Middle Oppland, Norway ~AD 350–400; Noleby Welsh hud, Breton hud, Old Cornish hudǫl

92 Adoranten 2019 ‘magus’; Baltic: Lithuanian saĩtas, seĩtas usual dating for that linguistic change ‘magic’. at ~500 BC, are consistent with Bronze SACRED GROVE, SANCTUARY (unique Age contact and not with an alterna- CG suffixed formation). Proto-Germanic tive scenario in which the contact took *nemiþa-: Old Saxon nimidas ‘sacred place in Central Europe during the La grove’, Swedish farm name Nymden; Tène Iron Age. Proto-Celtic *nemetom: Gaulish nemeton, 2. The numerous CG words which are ei- Old Irish nemed ‘sanctuary, person of spe- ther altogether absent from Latin and cial privilege or exemption’, Archaic Welsh the other Ancient Italic languages or niuet ‘special privilege’. ¶Contrast Latin show linguistic innovations that did not nemus ‘sacred grove’ without the suffix. occur in Italic suggest that most of this SUPERNATURAL BEING, PHANTOM. vocabulary arose after Italic and Celtic Proto-Germanic *skōh-sla- < *skōk-slo-: had separated; that was probably after Gothic skohsl ‘evil spirit, demon’; Proto- the Early Bronze Age. Celtic *skāx-slo- < *skōk-slo-: Old Irish scál 4. The high proportion of CG words at- ‘phantom; the god Lug’, Middle Welsh tested in Ancient Nordic runes and Old yscawl ‘young hero, warrior’. Norse is consistent with a model of con- tact by sea in the Late Bronze Age. 5. The high proportion of CG words in Conclusions Irish better suits a model of contact by At this preliminary stage of the investiga- sea in the Late Bronze Age than of con- tion, we can note details consistent with tact in Central Europe after 500 BC. our hypothesis that the Late Bronze Age 6. Many CG words fit the culture and — when copper from the Iberian Penin- value system of the European Bronze sula reached Scandinavia and Scandina- Age—spear, shield, axe; sail, mast, to vian rock art and Iberian warrior stelae row; horse, axle, wheeled vehicle; sil- shared elements of iconography — was ver—although linguistic palaeontology also the horizon to which many Celto- cannot always decisively differentiate Germanicisms can be most plausibly at- Bronze Age from Iron Age vocabulary tributed. with these. 7. Many CG words can be correlated with 1. What is now known about the expan- the recurring iconography shared by sion of the genetic ‘steppe component’ Scandinavian rock art and Iberian war- (~50% Eastern Hunter-Gatherer : ~50% rior stelae. Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer) from the 8. At the level of social organization, sev- Pontic–Caspian Steppe in the 3rd mil- eral CG words are consistent with the lennium BC is the basis for a strong chiefdoms of the Bronze Age: ‘king’, case that later (post-Anatolian) Proto- ‘kingdom’, ‘tribe’, ‘hostage’, ‘servant/ Indo-European expanded together representative’. The example of the with this gene flow. It follows that shared change of meaning from Indo- most items of inherited vocabulary that European ‘height, hill’ to Celtic and predate ~2500 BC should show a wide Germanic ‘fortified settlement’ (‘berg’ geographic distribution, with attesta- > ‘burg’) suggests that the two groups tions in both eastern and western Indo- participated in the Age of Hillforts European languages. Some words may while in contact with each other. This occur only in Northern and Western phenomenon began in the middle of Europe due to random loss in the other the Bronze Age in Atlantic Europe. branches. However, as a group, words 9. CG vocabulary for magic, oath taking, with NW distributions reflect regional and secret knowledge is consistent with developments after ~2500 BC. integral ritual aspects of the ‘Maritime 2. The many CG words with Germanic Mode of Production’ model as applica- forms showing Grimm’s Law, and the

Adoranten 2019 93 ble to the Nordic Bronze Age (Ling at ropean and Indo-Europeans, edited by G. al. 2018). Cardona, H. M. Koenigswald, & A. Senn. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadel- John T. Koch, Professor phia, p. 155–198. University of Wales Haak, W., I. Lazaridis, N. Patterson ... J. Centre for Advanced Welsh and Celtic Krause, D. Brown, D. Anthony, A. Cooper, Studies K. W. Alt, & D. Reich et al. 2015. Massive [email protected] migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. Nature 522, p. 207–211. Harrison, R. J. 2004. Symbols and War- References riors: Images of the European Bronze Allentoft, M. E., M. Sikora, K.-G. Sjögren Age. Western Academic & Specialist Press, K. Kristiansen, & E. Willerslev et al. 2015. Bristol. Population genomics of Bronze Age Eura- Hoz, J. de, et al. 2005. Catálogo de estelas sia, Nature 522, p. 167–172. decoradas del Museo Arqueológico Provin- Almagro Basch, M. 1966. La estelas deco- cial de Badajoz. radas del suroeste peninsular, Bibliotheca Hyllested, A. 2010. The Precursors of Celtic Praehistoria Hispana VIII. Imprenta Fareso, and Germanic. In Proceedings of the 21st Madrid. Annual UCLA Indo European Conference, Anthony, D. W. 2007. The Horse, the edited by S. W. Jamison, H. C. Melchert, & Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age B. Vine. Bremen, Hempen, p. 107–128. Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped Isaac, G. R. 2007. Studies in Celtic Sound the Modern World. Princeton University Changes and their Chronology, Inns- Press, Princeton. brucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft, Anthony, D. W., & D. Ringe 2015. The Innsbruck. Indo-European Homeland from Linguistic Jasanoff, J. H. 2008. Gothic. In The Ancient and Archaeological Perspectives. An- Languages of Europe, edited R. D. Wood- nual Review of Linguistics 1, p. 199–219. ard, Cambridge University Press, Cam- https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lin- bridge, p. 189–214. guist-030514-124812 Koch, J. T. 2013. Tartessian: Celtic in the Antonsen, E. H. 1975. A Concise Grammar South-west at the Dawn of History, Celtic of the Older Runic Inscriptions. Max Nie- Studies Publications 13, Aberystwyth. meyer, Tübingen. Revised & expanded edition. First edition Cassidy, L. M., R. Martiniano, E. M. published 2009. Murphy, M. D. Teasdale, J. Mallory, B. Koch, J. T. 2019. Common Ground and Pro- Hartwell, & D. G. Bradley 2016. Neolithic gress on the Celtic of the South-western and Bronze Age migration to Ireland and (S.W.) Inscriptions, Aberystwyth, Centre for establishment of the insular Atlantic ge- Advanced Welsh and Celtic Studies. ebook: nome. PNAS [Proc. National Academy of https://www.wales.ac.uk/Resources/Docu- Sciences USA] 113/2, p. 368–373. ments/Centre/2019/Koch-Celtic-of-the-SW- de Vaan, M. 2008. Etymological Dictionary inscriptions-2019.pdf of Latin and the other Italic Languages, Koch, J. T., with F. Fernández Palacios Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dic- 2019. A case of identity theft? Archaeoge- tionary Series 7. Brill, Leiden. netics, Beaker People, and Celtic origins. Faarlund, J. T. 2008. Ancient Nordic. In The In Exploring Celtic Origins: New ways Ancient Languages of Europe, edited by R. forward in archaeology, linguistics, and D. Woodard. Cambridge University Press, genetics, Celtic Studies Publications 22, Cambridge, p. 215–229. edited by B. Cunliffe & J. T. Koch. Oxbow Gimbutas, M. 1970. Proto-Indo-European Books, Oxford, p. 38–79. Culture: The Kurgan Culture During the Kroonen, G. 2013. Etymological Dictionary 5th to the 3rd millennia BC. In Indo-Eu- of Proto-Germanic, Leiden Indo-European

94 Adoranten 2019 Etymological Dictionary Series 11. Leiden/ org/10.1007/s12520-017-0549-7 Boston, Brill. Olalde, I., S. Brace, M. Allentoft, I. Armit, Ling, J., E. Hjärthner-Holdar, L. Grandin, K. K. Kristiansen, P. W. Stockhammer, V. Billström, P.-O. Persson, 2013. Moving met- Heyd, A. Sheridan, K.-G. Sjögren, M. G. als or indigenous mining? Provenancing Thomas, R. Pinhasi, J. Krause, W. Haak, I. Scandinavian Bronze Age artefacts by lead Barnes, C. Lalueza-Fox, & D. Reich et al. isotopes and trace elements, Journal of Ar- 2018. The Beaker Phenomenon and the chaeological Science 40 (1), p. 291–304. Genomic Transformation of Northwest Ling, J., T. Earle & K. Kristiansen 2018. Europe, bioRxiv 135962. doi: https://doi. ‘Maritime Mode of Production. Raiding org/10.1101/135962. and Trading in Seafaring Chiefdoms’, Olalde, I., S. Mallick, N. Patterson, N. Roh- Current Anthropology 59, no. 5 (October land, V. Villalba-Mouco, M. Silva, K. Dulias, 2018), p. 488–524. C. J. Edwards, F. Gandini, M. Pala, P. Soa- Ling, J., Z. Stos-Gale, L. Grandin, K. Bill- res, M. B. Richards, K. W. Alt, W. Haak, R. ström, E. Hjärthner-Holdar, & P.-O. Pers- Pinhasi, Carles Lalueza-Fox, & D. Reich et son 2014. Moving metals II: provenancing al. 2019. The genomic history of the Ibe- Scandinavian Bronze Age artefacts by lead rian Peninsula over the past 8000. Science isotope and elemental analyses. Journal of 363, p. 1230–1234. Archaeological Science 41/1, p. 106–132. Ringe, D. 2006. A linguistic history of Eng- Mallory, J. P. 1989. In Search of the Indo- lish. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto- Europeans: Language, Archaeology and Germanic. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Myth. Thames and Hudson, London. Ringe, D., T. Warnow & A. Taylor 2002. Mallory, J. P. 2013. The Indo-Europeaniza- Indo-European and Computational Cladis- tion of Atlantic Europe. In Celtic from the tics, Transactions of the Philological Soci- West 2: Rethinking the Bronze Age and ety 100/1, p. 59–129. the Arrival of Indo-European in Atlantic Schleicher, A. 1861/1862. Compendium der Europe, Celtic Studies Publications 16, vergleichenden Grammatik der indoger- edited John T. Koch & B. Cunliffe. Oxford, manischen Sprachen. (Kurzer Abriss der Oxbow Books, p. 17–40. indogermanischen Ursprache, des Altin- Matasović, R. 2009. Etymological Diction- dischen, Altiranischen, Altgriechischen, ary of Proto-Celtic, Leiden Indo-European Altitalischen, Altkeltischen, Altslawischen, Etymological Dictionary Series 9. Brill, Litauischen und Altdeutschen.) (2 vols.) Leiden/Boston. Weimar, H. Boehlau; reprinted by Minerva McCone, K. R. 1996. Towards a Relative GmbH, Wissenschaftlicher Verlag. Chronology of Ancient and Medieval Schrijver, P. 2016. Sound change: The Celtic Sound Change, Maynooth Studies Italo-Celtic linguistic unity, and the Ital- in Celtic Linguistics I, Department of Old ian homeland of Celtic. In Celtic from the and Middle Irish, St Patrick’s College, May- West 3. Atlantic Europe in the Metal Ages. nooth. Questions of shared language. Celtic Stud- Murillo-Barroso, M. & M. Martinón-Torres ies Publications XIX, edited by J. T. Koch, B. 2012. Amber sources and trade in the pre- Cunliffe, C. D. Gibson, & K. Cleary, Oxbow history of the Iberian Peninsula. European Books, Oxford, p. 489–502. Journal of Archaeology 15 (2), p. 187–216. Untermann, J. (ed.) (with D. S. Wodtko) Odriozola, C. P., A. C. Sousa, R. Mataloto, 1997. Monumenta Linguarum Hispan- R. Boaventura, M. Andrade, R. Villalobos icarum IV. Die tartessischen, keltiberischen García, J. Á. Garrido-Cordero, E. Rodrí- und lusitanischen Inschriften, Ludwig Re- guez, J. M. Martínez-Blanes, M. Á. Avilés, ichert, Wiesbaden. J. Daura, M. Sanz, & J. A. Riquelme 2019. Amber, beads and social interaction in the Late Prehistory of the Iberian Peninsula: an update, Archaeological and Anthro- pological Sciences, 11.567. https://doi.

Adoranten 2019 95