'GALLO-BRITIONIC' vs. 'INSULAR CELTIC' : The Inter-relationships of the Celtic

Languages Reconsideredl

JohnT. KOCH

1. Introduction.

The concept of a Gallo-Brittonic proto-language is a long-established one and persists as de facto standard doctrine in the handbooks. In present -day Continental Celtic scholarship it is unchallenged. Characteristic of current thinking in that field are K. H. Schmidt's remark that the Brittonic of the Roman Period was 'in fact the local British variant of Gaulish'2 and Antonio Tovar's invocation of }..a Tene 'Gallo­Britons'3.

A detailed case for a GalIo-Brittonic unity might, therefore, seem to be UDcontroversial and unnecessary. For three reasons, I have nonetheless thought it worthwhile to set forth the argument here. (i) Recently­discovered Continental evidence has thrown much new light on the situation as well as drastically effecting the view of the interrelations of the Old Celtic dialects as this had stood at mid century 4. (ii) The investigation

1- An early version of this paper was read at the Seventh International Congress of Celtic Studies in Oxford in July, 1983. I am indebted to several of the participants for their useful comments : John Armstrong III, D. Ellis Evans, Uon Aeuriot, C. F. C. Hawkes, Javier de Hoz, Lionel Joseph, Kim McCone, K. H. Schmidt, and Calvert Watkins.

2- 'Continental Celtic as an Aid to the Reconstruction of Proto-Celtic', KZ xciv.I-2 (1980) 179.

3- 'The God Lugus in Spain', BBCS 29.4 (1982) 591-92. 4- On this rich area, see in particular M. Lejeune, Celtiberica (:= Acta Salmanticensia ,

Filosofia y LeITOS, tomo VII, num. 4- [Universidad de Salamanca : 1956]), 'Celtibere et lepontique', [Cb.&Lpt.) in Homenaje a Antonio Tovar (lm) 265-72; Lepontica (1971; = tc xii.2 [1971-72) 357-5(0) ; 'Une inscription bilingue gauloise-Iatine a Verceil', CRAI (1977) 583-87; E. Bachellery, 'Le celtique continental', tc xiii .l (1m) 4Off.; A. Tovar, 'lndogcrmanisch, Keltisch, Keltiberisch" lndogermanisch und Keitisch, edited by K. H. Schmidt (1977) 44-65; BBCS 29.4 (1982) 591-92; D. E. Evans, 'The Contribution of (non-Celtiberian) Continental Celtic to the Reconstruction of the Celtic 'Grundsprache", in Idg. und Keltisch 66-88 ; 'The Labyrinth of Continental Celtic', PEA Ixv (1979) 497-538 ; 'Continental Celtic and Linguistic Reconstruction ', in Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Celtic Studies, Galway, 1979 (Dublin, 1983) 38ff ; K. H. Schmidt, 'On the Celtic Languages of Continental Europe', BBCS xxviii.2 (1979) 192ff. ; KZ xciv.I-2 (1980) l8Off. The Galatian evidence was collected by L Weisgerber, 'Galatische Sprachreste', in Natalicium J. Geffcken (Heidelberg, 1931) 151-75.

472 MELANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURlOT

of the development of early Celtic word order patterns out of Indo­European has progressed in an exciting and promising way on the Irish side ; two of the more influential writers in this area (namely Kim McCone and the late Warren Cowgill) have assumed a genetic Insular Celtic and have presented their hypotheses in this light5. (iii) The known archaeological and proto-historical inter-relationships of the iron-age Celts do not imply a genetic GaUo-Brittonic as a distinct proto-language isolated from other emerging Celtic dialects at a specific horizon within a geographical homeland. Rather, Britain was rendered 'Gallo-Brittonic' by being irradiated by successive waves of Gallicising influences from the central La Tene and HaUstatt wnes through the course of the last millennium BC (a process congruent with the archaeological framework of 'Cumulative Celticity'6). In Ireland and the Iberian Peninsula, these in­fluences were, especiaUy in the later centuries BC, weaker and less continuous. Therefore, a model of dialects in degrees of contact is more suitable than the traditional family-tree model, which im plies an early mutual isolation.

Concerning point (i) above, it is now no longe( adequate to treat Continental Celtic as a unity synonomous with 'Gaulish.' We can now identify three distinct languages : Gaulish (Gau!.), Celtiberian (Ctb.), and Lepontic (Lpt.) . The remains of the Cisalpine Gaulish of northern Italy7 and the Galatian of Asia Minor and the Celtic kingdom of Tylis in Thrace8, though quite sparse, do show (as will be demonstrated at various points below) these languages to be very closely allied to Transalpine Gaulish, which is what we naturally expect from the late historicaUy­attested movements of these groups into their territories from the central

5- Cowgill, 'The Origins of the Insular Celtic Conjunct and Absolute Verbal Endings', in Flexion und Wonbildung, V. Fachlagung de. indogmnanischm Gesellschaft, Regensburg, edited by H. Rix (1975) 40-70 ; 'Two Further Notes on the Origin of the Insular Celtic Absolute and Conjunct Verb Endings,' Eriu xxvi (1975) 27-32 ; McCone, 'Pretonic Preverbs and the Absolute Verbal Endings in Old Irish,' Eriu xxx (1979) 1-34. In the papers of neither scholar is the belief in a genetic Insular Celtic truly pivotal ; so tbe rejection of this one concept here does not purport to be, in and of itself, the demolition of either theory. Both scholars confirmed to the writer viva voce that they continued to adhere to this view or the Celtic family tree.

6- C. F. C. Hawkes, 'Cumulative Celticily in Pre-Roman Britain', EC (1973) xiii, Actes du Congr« International d 'Etudes Celtiques, Rennes 1971, ii, 590-611.

,. Now canvassed in Lejeune, Lepontica. 8- On which see Weisgerber, op. cit.

GALLO-BRfITONlC vs INSUlAR CELTIC 473

La Tene area in the fifth-fourth and third centuries BC, respectively. Cisalpine Gaulish and Galatian may be regarded, much like British at the close of the pre-Roman Iron Age, as ' local variants of Gaulish' spoken by 'La Tene Gallo-Britons.'

Concerning the early languages of the British Isles, Goidelic and' Brittonic (Britt.) were undoubtedly already distinct dialects if not already mutually unintelligible languages within the ancient period, which is to say before the apocope which defmes the inception of Neo-Celtic. The Jew > P shift, which is the traditional distinguishing hallmark of Brittonic as against the conserving q-Celtic Goidelic, had spread from Gaul to Britain by the later fourth century BC, at which time Pytheas received the current national ethnonym ·Pritanl (> Welsh Prydein 'Britain'), from which derive such Greek forms as npET(T)aVI1C" and the like9. At a few points, we shall refer to the meagre remains of the Celtic of Caledonia or Pictland. I have previously discussed in some detail the status of Pictish as a separate language and its dialect affinities, which lean more towards Gaulish and Brittonic than to Goidelic, Celtiberian, or Lepontic10. ,

Against the evidence favouring a Gallo-Brittonic unity, there is little evidence to suggest an old genetic connection between Goidelic and Brittonic yet exclusive of Gaulish. Accordingly, the Insular Celtic phenomenon must be attributed to a lesser, and largely a later, areal phenomenon, which took place during the many centuries during which Brittonic and Goidelic were spoken in close geographic proximity. Goidelic does however share with Gallo-Brittonic certain old innovations which never developed or were never completed in the archaic Continental dialects, Lepontic and Celtiberian. These shared innovations might imply that Primitive Irish and Gallo-Brittonic descend from a single sub-dialect of Proto-Celtic or, more probably, that they continued to influence one another as separate dialects by remaining continuously in contact. The limited British-derived La Tene assemblage of the northern half of Ireland is perhaps relevant herell. The position of Irish may be

9- See A. L F. Rivet and C. Smith, TIlL Place-Names of Roman Britain (Princeton, New Jersey, 1979), 39 ; C. F. C. Hawkes, Pytheas : Europe and the Greek Explorers (the 8th J. L Myres Memorial Lecture, Oxford, 1917) 29 ; W. J. Watson, TIlL History of the Celtic Place-Names of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1926) 10-11..

10- 'The Loss of Final Syllables and Loss of Declension in Brittonie', BBCS xxx.3-4 (1983) 214-20.

11- See S. Caulfield, 'Celtic Problems in the Iron Age', in Irish Antiquity: Studies Presented to M. I. O'Kelly, edited by 0 .6 Corrain (Cork, 1981) 205-15.

474 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

thought of as intermediate, less affected by the linguistic trends associated with the La Tene material culture, but less isolated than Lepontic and Celtiberian.

Shared Innovations: Gaulish and Brittonic, but not Goidelic

2. Proto-Celt. lew « IE f<w, k 'w) was preserved in Primitive Irish to give Old Irish c, lenited ch. Celtiberian preserves f<w (speUed Cu, QV)12. In Brit., Pictish Celt.13, and Leponticl4, the sound went to p, as it did most often in Gaulish but there are a minority of counter-examples which may be taken as archaisms, such as the famous EQVOS (Coligny Calendar) and Sequana 'Seine'15.

3. Where IE had used ·-f<we to link nouns, Celtiberian shows a usage which is both phonologically and syntacticaUy archaic e.g., tocoitos-cue samicia-cue 'of Togoitis and Sarnikios' Botorrital~. Lepontic shows (in one instance only) -PE: LATUMARUI SAPSUTAI-PE 'for Latumaros and for Sapsuta.'17 Gaulish shows -ac in the ex. Rigani Rosmerti-ac 'Reginae Rosmertaeque'18. Neo-Brittonic /ag-/ (prevocalic form of (hJa 'and, with') is obviously to be connected with Gaul. -ac, even though its syntax is

12- See Lejeune, Celtiberica 132 ; upontica §33 ; Ctb.&Lpt. 267. 13- As in the place·name Penh (d. W perth), and the common elementpitt, pett (cr. W pelh,

Bpezh). 14- Lepantica §§31-33 ; Ctb.&Lpt. 267. 15- J. Whatmough, 'Continental Celtic', Proceedings of the Second International Congrns of

Celtic Studies, Cardiff, 1963 ( Cardiff, 1966) 105-16; D. E. Evans, Gaulish Personal Names (GPN) (Oxford, 1967) 4Q6..07.

16- Lejeune, Celtibmca 125. On tbe Botorrita inscription, see Lejeune, 'La grande inscription celtibCre de Botorrit.,' CRAI (1973) 645 ; K. H. Schmidt, 'Zur keltiberischen Inschrift von Botorrita,. BBCS xxvi.4 (1976) 377fr.; BBCS xxviii.2, 194 ; A. Beltr nand A. Tovar, Contnbia Belaisca (Botorrila, Zaragoza) : EI bronc< con alfabeto 'ibbico ' de Botorrila (Zaragoza, 1982) ; A. Tovar, 'file Celts in the Iberian Peninsula,. in GeschiclUe und IWItur der Kelten , edited by K. H. Schmidt and R Ktidderitzsch (Heidelberg, 1986) 96.

17- Lejeune, Lepantica §§31-33; Ctb.&Lpt. 267 . 18- M. Lejeune and R Marichal, 'Textes gaulois et gallo-romains en cursive latine,' EC xv.1

(1976-77) 155-56.

GALLO-BRfITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 475

formally different (cf. MW eur ac aryant). This apparent disparity can be accounted for within the context of other known developments. As Wac, etc., is generally accepted as the cognate of Lat. ac latque, the use of Gaul. ac as an enclitic was itself an innovation. Before the shift of /(w to P in Gallo-Brittonic, ·-/(we had become non-syllabic -c in several com­binations: ac, Neo-Britt. /na g-/ < ·nak < ·ne-/(weI9, Gaul. eti-c, e88i-c20,

and pon-c (Chamalieres and Larzac). At that stage, ·-/(we and ·-k could have alternated as syllabic and non-syllabic byforms of the same enclitic, as was the case in Lat. But, once ·-/(we turned to ._pe, the two forms were so different that they could hardly have continued long as variant forms of the same word. At this point the old pre positive ac (cognate of Lat. ac) ousted ·-pe as the partner of -c used in situations where syllabic forms were necessary, like the linking of nouns. Thus, Brittonic may simply preserve ac in its original proclitic function; however, a major trend in the prehistory of Brittonic word order was the transformation of IE enclitics into proclitics; e.g. Gaulish toncnaman toncsiiont-io., if it means 'a fate they shall be destined', corresponds to W tynged a dyngant in which the relative particle is a proclitic rather than an enclitic21. Whatever the exact explanation, the relevant point presently is that Gaulish and Brittonic show the same word for 'and', a form differing from that attested in the other two Continental dialects and which does not correspond (not exactly, at least) to any of the early Irish words for 'and' dealt with by Binchy22.

4_ IE mr-, ml- gave Old Irish mr-, ml- then later changing to br-, bl-. In Gaulish and Brittonic, br-, bl- arose before the opening of the Roman Period : e.g. Old Irish mruig = WCB bro, Gaulish brog- in Allobroges, broga 'ager, country'23, Galatian BPOrOPI1:24 (= Early Welsh breyr) ;

19- R. Thumeysen, Grammar of Old Irish (GOI) (Dublin, 1947) §868. 20- H. Lewis and H. Pedersen, A Concise Comparative Celtic Grammar (Gottingen, rev. ed.

1974) §55. 21- Cf. mi/minheu a dynghaf dynghet in Math (PKM 79, 81 , 83), tyghaf tyghet it in K&O

(WBRh col. 454.1 = RBH 102.2), lTUan a dynghet a dynghet y Lywarch in CLIH (11.21" = V.9a), and bu lTU a dynghe/Ven .. . a dyngwt in CA (136-37; cf. further Tyngyr tynget lCA 1027) . These cognate figurae etymologicae wert propooed by K. H. Schmidt, 'lbe Gaulish Inscription of ChamaliCm;,' BBCS """,1 (1981) 266.

22- 'IE. ·que In Irish,' Celtica • (1960) 77ff. 23- GPN 159, 408-09 ; J. Whatmough, Dialects of Ancient Gaul (DAG) (Cambridge,

Massachusetts, 1970) 160. 24- Weisgerber. 'Galatische Sprachreste' 154.

476 MELANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURlOT

OIr. mraich 'malt' = W brag (cf. B bragez 'germ of grain'), Gallo-Lat. bracem25 ; OIr. ml6ith 'smooth, soft' = MW blawt, B bleud, MC bles 'meal flour,' occurring in place-names, British Bliitobulgio, Gaulish Bliitomago, Bliitom026. This is a common phonetic change found in many languages. That Goidelic underWent it indepently of Gaulish and Brittonic is clear, as it is seen to happen in the Irish manuscript record at a time when the change was long complete in Brittonic and Gaulish was already dead.

S. Gaulish internal -br-, -bl- < -mr-, -ml-, specificaUy in the context cobr-, cobl- < com-I-, com-/-, is discussed by Ellis Evans (GPN 185, 408-09) : thus, Cobricius, Cobrunus (cf. W cyfrin, MB queffrin 'secret') v. Olr. comron 'secret,' Cob/ucia, Cob/anuo (cf. OB coblon 'complete' < *kom­liin0-21) , nOCOBRExTIo (Coligny ; cf. OW Cobreidan, Cobreidian [Lib. Lan. c. 745-75]28) vs. OIr. comrecht < Proto-Celtic *kom-rektu- ' (equal) law.' Cf. further, DB -cob/oent 'they put' (imperfect) < *kom-/ogent(-} , OW arcibrenou gl. 'sepulti' < *are-kom-regnowes, abruid (Juvencus Englynion and Computus) 'difficult' vs. Olr. amtaid, amreid < Proto­Celtic *m -reidi-, OW cibra[n)cma 'meeting place' < Brit. * /kobrankomagos / < *kom-r'-IJ ko-29.

6. The Proto-Celtic prefIX wo- (also we-) > Ir. /0-, fu- (Pr.Ir. *wo-), OWCB uuo-, guo- or uua-, gua-, likewise uo- and ua-, also preserved ue- in Gaulish. The change does not have the character of a sound law having operated at a particular time and dialect area and is, rather, a longterm productive variation. Both the conserving and innovative byforms can be shown to have coexisted over a wide range of periods and areas. The variation only works in one direction: I have found no examples of jwo-j or jwe-j from etymological jwa-j (except where other factors, such as i­affection, having nothing to do with the labial glide, are at work)30.

25- GPN 408 ; DAG no. 178. 26- L. Aeuriot, Le view: breton, elements d 'une grammaire (YBG) (Paris, 1964) 142.11.3 ;

Evans, GPN 408-09. 27- Aeuriot, VBG 142.11.4. 28- Oates supplied for OW forms from Uber Landavensis (Lib.Lan .) are taken from W.

Davies, LiandaffChaners (Aberystwyth, 1979). 29· Aeuriot, VBG 142.1.4 ; K. H. Jackson, Language and History in Early Britain (LHEB)

(Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1953) 485. 30- Oates supplied for OW forms from Lib. Lan. are taken from Davies, LlandaffChaners.

On the dating of the charters appended to Vita Cadoci, see Koch, 'When Was Welsh Literature First Written Down?', Studia Celtica, lOC/xxi (1985-86) 46f. and notes 6-10.

GALLO-BRfITONlC vs INSUlAR CELTIC 477

Gaullsb Uacarus (DAG 244), vs. Uocarus (DAG 214), Uocara (GPN 165; 215, 224, 228 Remark, 234, 237), Uocari (GPN 165 ; DAG 203 [see also 214)) ; Uocaris (DAG 228 'Remark'), Uocar (GPN 165 ; CIL viI, 1336. 1135 ; DAG Note liv (e), p. 1078), Uocarant[tus or [-a (GPN 165; DAG 208A [see also 206)).

Gaulisb Ua/agenta (DAG 244), vs. Ue/agenius (CIL v. 7850. 5 and 8), Ue/agenus (DAG 6 [see also p. 480], 9, 83), Uo/aginius (GPN 176 ; Tacitus, Hist. 2.75). ?Cf. Gaul. Ue/acena? (GPN 177).

Gaulisb Ua/alonius (DAG 214), vs. Uo/atei (gen.? ; GPN 216), Uo/atia (Whatmough 1933: xic), Ue/alodoro31 , Ue/at[ (DAG 244).

UOLC- : Gaulisb Ua/c[ (DAG 224), ?Ua/cius (DAG 83), vs. Uo/cae (DAG SO), Uo/kanus (DAG 213, 223), Uo/cinius (DAG 224), Catuo/cus (DAG 221), Uo/cacius (DAG Note xlv).

Neo-Brittonic : OW Ri-uua/ch, Gua/chen, MW gwa/ch 'hawk,' OB Uua/c-moe/.

[Cf. W go/chi 'wash,' vs. Br. gwa/c'hiij, gwe/c'hiij, but OB guo/ch-ti 'wash house.'] . .

Gaulish: Ua/etiacus (BG ; DAG 182), vs. Old Breton : Uuo/elec. UELLAUNO- : Gaulish Uel/au- (Holder, AcS iii, 149), Uel/aui (GPN

277), OUEAauvlOuc; (GPN 277), Ue/aunis (CIL ii. 1589), Uel/auensis, Uel/auus (GPN 277); Uel/aunus (DAG Note xlv B), U. Biturix [DAG 224]), Uel/auno-dunum (BG, GPN 277), Sego-uel/auni (DAG SO, from Pliny, NH iii, 34 = Ptol. ii, 10, 7 IEyaAAauvOl), ?Catuel/aunus (GPN 173; DAG 237), ChaJons-sur-Maroe Catuel/auni, Catu-uel/auni, Cate/auni (GPN 174 ; DAG 212; cf. Durocate/auni), Uer-cassi­uel/aunus (BG) ;

vs. Cata/auni, ?Ua/(/)o[nius] (DAG 224), Ual/aunius (CIL vii, 126); Ual/aunus (DAG 244), IEyaAAauvoi (above).

Britisb: Cassi-uel/aunus (BG, in Britain), Catu-uel/auni, KaTOUEAAavOl (Cassius Dio LX, 20, 2 ; Rivet and Smith, 305); Catu­uel/aunorum32; Bo/-ue/aunio (GPN 276 ; Rivet and Smith, 271£.) ; Dubnoue//anus, Dubnoue//aun[, Dumno-ue//aunos, Dumno-bel/au[, t.OpvOEAAauvoc; ;

31- A. Holder, Alt·Celtischer SprachschalZ (AcS) iii (Leipzig, 1913) 141. 32- R. G. Collingwood and R. P. Wright, The Roman Inscriptions of Britain (RIB) i,

Inscriptions on SlOne (Oxford, 1965) no. 1962.

478 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

vs. Dubno-uallaunos (same king as above), Catuallauna (RIB no. 1065), (Tadia) Uallaunius (RIB, no. 369, Caerwent), Ualaunecus33 ;

Old Breton Uuallon ( < fjellaunos), Uua/lonic (cf. Brit. Ualaunecus above), Hael-uuallon, Ri-uuallon, Ri-guallon, Cat-uuflllon, « Catu-uellaunos), Dumno-uuallon « Dumno-~ellaunos), lud­uualon (all Cartulary of Redon !CR)).

Old Welsh : Har!. 3859 Cat-gollau!, Cat-golau!, vs. [Clat-guallau!, all < Catu-~ellaunos .

Lib.Lan.lud-guellon (c. 722-33 ; same person as next 3 forms), vs. lud-guallaun /Iud-guallon /Iud-gualon (c. 722-33), lud-gual/aun (c. 625) ; Din-guallaun (c. 1(05), Diuun-guallaun jdav(a)nwaLaunj (c. 942), Dun-guallaun (c. 868) < ' Dumno-~ellaunos ; Guallonir (c. 650, c. 680-95), Guallonir / Guallonor (c. 720-48), Guallonir (c. 745-75) < *fjellauno-nxs, Ri-uallaun / Ri-guallaun (c. 720), Ri-uguallaun (c. 1(05), Ri-uguallaun (c. 1025), Ri-uguallaun / Ri-guallaun / Ri-ua/laun (c. 1045-75) < *Rjgo-~lIaunos.

Vita Cadoci Guallunir (c. 690-725 ; possibly same individual as Guallonir / Guallonor in Lib. Lan.). .

Old Cornish : lam-wallon (Bodmin) < *lsamo-~lIaunos.

?Cf. Old Irishfollnaithir ' holds sway.' Gaulish Uanatastus (DAG 237), Uanataxta (DAG 237), Uanatactus

(DAG 244), vs. Uonato-rix (DAG 224). fjERAC- : Gaulish Uaracius (DAG 182) ; vs. British Ueracius .

Old Breton : Uueroc, vs. Waroc ; the last two are the same individual.

Gaulish Uaragri, vs. Ueragri (both DAG 15). UEReDO- : Gaulish para-ueredus 'palfrey' (DAG 79), ueredus 'a post­

horse' (Whatmough 1933:, it. 340D ; DAG 79) (= Middle Welsh gornyll .'steed' < Brit. *wo-Ijdos), vs. Uaredonius (DAG 214).

UERfNA : Gaulish Uarini (DAG 221), Uarinnae (DAG 221), Uarinnius (DAG 194, 214), vs. Uerina (DAG 87, 224), Uerinia (DAG 87), Uerinus (DAG 214, 224, 237); cf. OIr. foirenn 'group of persons, men,' MW gwerin 'folk, tribe, etc.'

UOSSo- : Gaulish Uasidius (DAG 244), Uasilius (DAG 136, 244), Uasio, Uasionensis , Uasiensis (DAG SO), Uassa/us (DAG 139), Uassatus (DAG 83, 237), Uassedo (DAG 83, Note xlv), Uassetius (DAG 83), Uassia (DAG 83), Uassilia, -ius (DAG 83), Uassilius (DAG 139),

33- R. S. O.Tomlin, 'Was ancient British Celtic ever a written language?', BBCS xxxlv (1987) 19.

GALLO-BRfITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 479

Uassi/lus, Uassius (DAG 244), Uassio (DAG 182), Uassitu(s) (DAG 237), Uasso (DAG 83), Uasso or -us (DAG 214), Uasso-caletis (DAG 213), Uasso-galete (DAG p_ 982), Uassionius (DAG 224), Uassius (DAG 224), Uasso-rix (DAG 214, 237), uassus 'dieos' (DAG 220),­uassus (DAG 224, 244), Dago uassus (DAG 244), Dago-uassus (DAG 237), Uasto (DAG 182) ;

vs_ Uossaticcius; -iccus? (DAG 83), Uossatilli (DAG 224), Uossatius (DAG 228 (ixJ, 244), Uossillia, Uossillius? (DAG 83), Uossi/la (DAG 83), Uossi/lus (DAG 83, 214).

British Mori-uassus (Bath; Tomlin, BBCS JOqciv, 19), Rio-uassus (do.) ; Late British Uasso( (early sixth century; LHEB 533).

Old Welsh guas ; Old Breton : Uuas-bidoe, Cun-uuas, Pen-uuas ; But Old Irish foss. In the other sense of hypostasis; cf. the Cumbric place-name

Gospatrick 'Land of P.' vs. Kymry Catwallawn was (Moliant Cadwallon) 'Cymru gwlad Cadwallon.'

UO-RET- Gaulish Uoreto-uirius ; Old Welsh : Lib. Lan. Cat-guaret (197 198a 200), Cat-guoret (202

204a 204b 206 207 208 209a, et passim.), all the same man, fl . early 8th century; Domn-guaret (209a c. 770.); EI-guaret (121 166), EI-guoret (121 122), same man fl. c. 595-600 ; Guoretris (216a 216b 225 c. 864-72); Iud-guoret (183a c. 735) ; Ri-uoret (203b c. 758) ; Tec-guaret (249a 257 c. 1033-40) ;

Juvencus Englynion an guorit, an guoraut 'he will deliver us, he did deliver us' = MW a'n gweryt, a'n gwarawt.

Old Breton : The same element appears many times in CR, always with uuoret, guoret.

7_ The reflexes of the IE syllabic nasals have been' viewed in some recent surveys as the key isogloss in the categorisation of the dialects, minimising the fact that the Irish evidence is far from dearcut. Thus, the neg. prefix *!! - gives Olr. an-, am-, in-, and e- in various contexts (GOI §§869-72). It is also relevant that IE -e does not lower the -i- of the preceding syllable in OIr. voc. sg. fir < PrJr. *wire while we do fmd lowering in acc. sg. coin < *k'un-!!, indicating that the reflex of the syllabic nasal was a front low vowel or first -an later giving -en or -ifn, though it may alternatively be that Irish has merely regularised the vocalism of the oblique or even, as Lionel Joseph has suggested to me, that the Proto­Celtic oblique stem had been *kon- in some cases (cf. the North British

480 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

tribal name OUEVIKOVEt; in the Geography of Ptolemy34). The syllabic nasals give (almost invariably) Brittonic an and am. Gaulish shows overwhelmingly an and am with a minority of examples of en, in, and im (GPN 395). One such exception is Gaulish iouinco, ioinco, which happens to agree with the C yowynk 'young' though contrasting with W ieuanc, B yaouank, which show the usual Gallo-Brittonic trealment35. Lepontic may show en < (I , but there is only one example sites, and even if that is correctly etymologised, it could involve a secondary cbange of vocalism (due to vocalisation of the nasal) in the acc. pI. Consonant-stem ending-e.f < *-(ls36. Celtiberian has an and am. E.g., IE *f!lbhf (Pokorny, IdgEW 34-35) > Gaulish ambi-, OWB am, OIr. imb, im(m), Ctb. ampi- jambij (Botorrita insc. : ambitiseti ; IE *k'f!lt6m '100' > OWB cant, OC can « British *canton), OIr. eet n-, and probably Ctb. cantom (Botorrita).

8. The Gaulish V uediiumi (Cbamalieres) reflects IE *gwhedhij.o~, showing the Gaulish reflex of IE *gwh to be w. CO,ntrast OIr. 'guidiu where IE *gwh appears as Goidelic jguj37. The Old Breton personal names in the Cartulary of Redon with the element uurm-; uuorm- 'brown' < IE *gwhermo- 'warm' (Uurm-hae/on, Uuorm-hae/on, Uurm-houuen, Uurm-gen, Uurm-ien, Uurmham, Uurmon 38) (vs.lr.gorm) indicates that Brittonic flTst had w- < gwh-, which was later revelarised together with original w. Similarly, Archaic Welsh gvenit, Oir. gonaid 'slays, strikes' (absolute 3rd sg.) < Common Celtic *gwaneti39, wbere the velar in the Welsh can be seen as a younger, i.e. Neo-Brittonic, development in the light of the velar-

34- On which see Koch, 'The Slone of the Weni-/COnes' , BBCS xxxix-I (1980) 87-89. 35- See L. Aeuriot, Us origines de Ia Bretagne (Paris, 1980) 73. :J6. Lepontica, §42 ; Ctb.&Lpt. 4.b ; Bachellery, EC 13.1, 4445. Cr. the similar recent

criticism of Lejeune's explanation by K. H. Schmidt, 'On the Reconstruction of Proto­Celtic,' in Proceedings of the First North American Congress of Celtic Studies, Ottawa, 1986, edited by G. W. Maclennan (Ottawa, 1988) 234.

37- W. E. Cowgill, 'The etymology of Irish guidid and the outcome of /t"'h in Celtic', in Lautgeschichte und Etymologie, edited by M. Mayrhofer, M. Peters, and O. E. Pfeiffer (Wiesbaden, 1980) 49-78.

38- All in the Cartulary of Redon. See the collection of J. Loth, Chrestomathie bretonne (1890) 181.

39- K. R. McCone, 'From Indo-European to Old Irish : the Verbal System', Proceedings of the Seventh Intematiofllli Congress opf Celtic Studres, Oxford, 1983, edited by D. E. Evans, J. G. Griffith, and E. M. Jope (Oxford, 1986) 228.

GALLO-BRfITONlC vs INSULAR CELTIC 481

less personal name, British TASCIOYANI (genitive), Gaulish Tascouanus (DAG 228 (ix) ; GPN 264) 'Badger-slayer.'

9. IE *sr- > Gallo-Brittonicfr-. Celt. *srokna or *srokno- gives Ir. sr6n 'nose' against W ffroen, B fron, [roan 'nostril.' The Gaulish cognate probably underlies Fr. ren-frogner; cf. Skt. srkvan-, srtikva- 'corner of the mouth.' Celt. *srutu- 'stream' gives Ir. sruth against W ffrwd, OW frut, B froud. Cisalpine Gaulish is the source of the North Italian forms truda, fodra'stream'40.

10. Gaulish shows numerous examples of the loss of intervocal -g-, e.g. Moguno/Mouno, Uertragus/Uertraha, sagio/saio (GPN 400). In the Neo­Brittonic dialects, this is a process which can be seen within the mediaeval literary record, but in some cases it goes back to ancient times as in Gaulish; e.g., in MW /law, OB lau 'small' < *Iagu-, the loss was sufficiently early that the vowel of the final syllable , was not lost by apocope, nor even reduced to a central vowel, but rather contracted with the vowel of the root to form a diphthong. The same word has been identified by Fleuriot as Gaulish lau in the incantations of Marcellus of Bordeaux (EC xiv. 1 (1974] 57-66), in which case the Gaulish and Brit. forms would agree exactly. Contrast OIr. laugu, lugu 'smaller.' Cf. also MW Lieu (OW Lou in the genealogies in Harleian MS 3859) < *Lugus. This did not become **Llw via Primitive W **[Luy), but rather seems to have passed through an intermediate stage * (Lowus] before apocope. Contrast OIr. Lug.

11. Similarly, Gaulish -V djo- is commonly found to alternate with -Vjo­as in Badiocasses, Baiiocasses and Cisalpine Mediolanum, Meiplanum. Contrast OIr. buide (Proto-Celtic *badjo-), Mide « *medjon) with lenited -d- /rJ'/ retained. Welsh goes with Gaulish, thus meiwyr 'mediocre men' < *medjowin , meinoethyrJ 'at midnight' < *medjonoxtij.41. In Brittonic, we also see the complementary process, which probably arose as a local hypercorrection, whereby -ijo- can develope as -idja-, e.g., MW rhytJ 'free' < rija-, OW minid, OB and Pictish monid 'mountain' <

40- Lewis and Pedersen §26.3; L. Aeuriot, 'Brittonique et gaulois durant les premien; sieeles de notre ere,' in tlTennes de seplantaine offerles a Michel Lejeune (1978) 75-83 ; Us origines de la Bretagne 63 .

41- Interestingly the latter word is found in the Gododdin alliterating with med 'mead' < medu(-) , an apparent recollection of the older form with the dental.

482 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

*monijo-, OW issid 'which is' < IE *esti-jo. In a number of examples, a byform without the unhistorical dental also occurs, e.g. OW di-mini 'up,' issi.

12. Gaulish -mi occurs as an optional expansion of the 1 sg. ending in the verbs uediiumi 'I beseech,' pissiumi 'I shall see,' dessu(m )i(i)is ' I prepare them, set them right (?)' Chamalieres, and serisumio = serisu-mi­io 'that I spit' in Marcellus of Bordeaux42• Forms lacking the affIX also occur : delgu 'I hold' Banassac and from Chamalieres itself regu 'I straighten, set right.' Lejeune identifies -mi as the IE athematic primary ending analogically added to the thematic as in Indo-Iranian (EC xv.!, no. ll.a), whereas Schmidt and Ellis Evans believe it to be an auxiliary pron. anticipating the W affIX mi,ft, i, etc. ; cf. OW rit puesaun mi 'I should have desired' (Juvencus Englynion), later W -ft, C -'Y, B -me43. It is likely that both factors are at work here, i.e. that fortuitous convergence took place involving the verbal desinences and pronominal &}'Stem. OIr. makes use of a functionally cognate nota augens -se, -sa, which is formally quite dif­ferent and can have nothing to do with the IE athematic ending or the first-person personal pron. in *m-, but rather arose from the demonstrative system.

13. In the recently discovered lead tablet from I'Hospitalet du Larzac, we fmd the form anuana, anuan(a 'names' (nominative-accusative plural)44 showing the innovation of -m- > w- in this word as in Brittonic : OB pI. enuen (MB sg. any), OW pI. enuein (sg. anu), contrasting with OIr. nom. acc. pI. anman(n), in which the -m- of Proto-Celtic *anmana < IE *imi1om~- is preserved. (Note that the affected Neo-Brittonic plurals are unhistorical and have presumably replaced an unattested *anuan ; cf. the unhistorical MW pI. kereint beside the archaic pI. earan(45) . The same innovation is apparent again in the Larzac inscription in the form uidluias 'seeress' (a-stem gen.), corresponding to the Olr. woman's name Fedelm.

42- See Aeuriot, tc xiv.1 (1974) 574>. 43- K. H. Schmidt, 'The Gaulish Inscription of Chamalieres' , BBCS xxix (1981) 264 ; Evans,

PrOC. VIm Inll. Congress of Cellic Sludies, so. 44- M. Lejeune el alii, Le plomb magique du lArwc et les sorcibes gtwloOO, (Paris, 1985)

29, 47. 45- See Koch, BBCS xxx, 207ff.

GALLO-BRIITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 483

Goidelic innovates; Gaulisb and Brittonic conserve

14. From Old Irish onwards, the Goidelic languages have been of the YSO type par excellence. Consistent with this predominant pattern is the fact that in Old Irish Wackernagel's enclitics (i.e. infJXed or suffixed obj. pronouns, the relative markers, and -ch 'and') can only attach to simplex verbs, lexical preverbs, and preverbal 'conjunct particles.' There is no trace of any such order as #SUBJ.-E( ... )Y( ... )# in Irish. By the period of Classical Old Irish, NP-initial/Y-medial surface orders are of a secondary marked type. In a subj.-initial ex. like Dfa nime ni-m·reilge ... 'may the God of heaven leave me not ... ,' the enclitic pron. is stranded in third position, showing that the subject's underlying position is basically not S­initial in this language. Even "Dfa-mm tecea ... , with a simplex verb unpreceded by any conjunct particle, was not a possible syntagm. Though it is not generally recognised, the situation must have ~en quite different in early Brittonic, as I explained in Eriu xxxviii, 165f. This can be seen most clearly in Breton, where many of the Celtic unstressed ace. pronouns have remained syUabic. Thus B tud en kar, tud he c'har, tud ho c'har 'people love him, her, them' are direct rellexions of British syntagmata like ·toutii en carat, ·toutii sin carat, ·toutii sos carat - #SUBJ.-E+ Y. The archaic Welsh SY(O) construction of the type tyrch torrynt toruoel1 taleu 'boars broke brows of brigades' (BT n.4-5) is common in early poetry46. This type occurs also in Middle Cornish : e.g. an prysners galsons yn weth 'the prisoners have gone also,' !hesu dasserghys a'n beth 'Jesus reascended from the grave'47. Cf. also OB platan hoiamlub gueied 'the "iron-herb" plant suits,' i.e. ' is applicable as a cure'48. The overwhelming preponderance of attested Gaulish sentences show a NP-initial V-medial order : e.g.,

MARTIALIS DANNOTALI IEVRV VCVETE SOSIN CELICNON .•.

'Martialis son of Dannotalos bestowed upon Ucuetis this chalice' 49.

46- For further exx., see Koch, Eriu xxxviii, 170. 47- See H. Lewis, Uawlyfr Cemyowg Canol (Caerdydd, 1946) §46.N 2, with further exx. 48- Leid. Leech., see Aeuriot, £C xx.!, 102. 49- Inscription from Alise-Sainte-Reine : 1. Rh9s, 1M Celtic Inscriptions of France and Italy

(1906) 4-10; 1M Celtic Inscriptions of Gaul: Additions and Corrections (1911) Ja.36 ; G. Dottin, La langue gau/oise (Paris, 1920) no.33 ; Whatmough, DAG no. 169 ; M. Lejeune and R. Marichal, EC xv.1, 152-53; T. A. Watkins, 'Trefn y I'rawddeg Gymraeg,' SC xii/xiii (1977-78) 368; for the meaning of IEVRV adopted here, see P.­Y. Lambert, 'Gaulois IEVRV: irlandais (ro).fr "dicauit"', ZCP xxxvii (1979) 207-13.

484 MELANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

An object pronoun can stand directly between an initial subj. NP and simplex V as in the S raucourt inscription:

BUSCILLA SOSIO LEGASrr IN ALIXIE MAGALV 'B. placed this in AJisia for M'50.

The sentence type in which an enclitic object pronoun directly follows an initial subject NP is a survival from Indo-European ; cf. OLat. NOVlOS PLAYnOS MED ROMAI FECID 'Novius Plautius me Romae fecit'51, AMOR MED FLACA DEDE 'Amor me Flaccae dedit'52, DVENOS MED FECED EN MANOM 'Bonus me fecit in bonum'53. Goidelic eliminated this order by an innovation; thus, there is no aIr. order **fer ann"/o-raith corresponding to the Old Welsh gur . . . an'guoraut 'he saved us'54.

Shared innovations: Brittonic, Gaulisb, an!! Goidelic

15. IE fmal -m gives Lpt. -m (Lepontica §§32, 44; Ctb.&Lpt. §4.c). Until recently, it was thought that Celtiberian showed both -m and on, but Dr. Javier de Hoz has kindly informed that the most recent work on the phonetic values of the Iberian script in which some of the Celtiberian inscriptions are written proves that Celt iberian had only one final nasal, -m. Gaulish shows mostly -n with a minority of occurrences of om, which are to be taken as archaic and/or dialectal, e.g. t.EKANTEM alongside t.EKANTEN in the Narbonnensian dedicatory inscriptionsS5. In the later

For further exx. of this order in Gaulish, see Koch, Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium iii (1983) 169-215.

SO- Rh9s (1906) 55; Dottin no. 47 ; DAG no. 144 ; Koch, PHCC iii, 41. 51- 4th century, A. Emoult, Recueil de textes latins archai"ques, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1957) 32. 52- 4th century?, Emoult (1957) 53. 53- 4th century, Emoult (1957) 7-9. 54- See further Koch, triu xxxviii, 164-66. 55- M. Lejeune, 'Insc!iPtions lapidaires de Namonnaise,' tc xii.l (1968-69) 58-59 ; 'Quel

celtique dans t.Et.EBPA TOY t.EKANTEMT in Studies in Greek, Italic, and Indo-European Linguistics Presented to Leonard Palmer, edited by A. Morpurgo-Davies and W. Meid (1976) 135-51 ; O. Szemerenyi, 'A Gaulish Dedicatory Inscription,' KZ !xxxviii (1974) 246-86.

GALLO-BRlTIONlC vs INSULAR CELTIC 485

inscription of Larzae, one scribe prefers -m and the other -n, thus brietom 'magic' vs. nepon 'anyone.' Latin influence has been suggested to explain -m at Larzac56.

The fact that Irish words that nasalise consonants prefIX n- to vowels indicate that Primitive Irish had generalised n as a fmal nasal, e.g. Fer n­Erenn 'of the men of Ireland' (genitive) < Pr.lr. *Wiron lwerjonos < Proto-Celtic *wirom < IE gen. pI. *wiiJrom. The OIr. pretonic preverb con' (IE *kom) is the pausa form, preserving the Primitive Irish fmal consonant (GOI 176). Apparently the same is found in Gaulish in the loosely-compounded verb eon'ex-ugri, con'ex-ueri in Marcellus of Bordeaux57•

Though the Brittonic evidence is less extensive, British appears also to have changed Proto-Celtic « IE) fmal -m to -n. This is difficult to observe directly as CB have no true nasalisation and the W proclitics which nasalise usually prefIX no consonant to vowels. Exceptions are yn ' in' and (j)yn 'my' in southern dialects ;· cf. Gaulish mon o The latter had original IE m ; cr. SkI. mama. Ben, C -n, the infIXed accusative 'him,' presumably does go back to IE *em58• .

16. The IE enclitic conjunction o_kwe in combination with proclitics underwent an early apocope to give -e, e.g. eti-c, e88i-e, pon-e, see above. Archaic Ir. -eh occurs as an infIX after the clause-initial proclitics to, ro, ba, no, and se; see Binchy, Celtiea v, 77-94. As I explained in Eriu xxxviii, 156-57, it phonolgically probable that this also goes back immediately to non­syllabic Old Celtic O_k. Unambiguous is the negation na, na (MIr. na h-) which geminates and alternates with naeh- before appended pronouns and other unstressed words59. Taking these together with Neo-Brittonic Ina g-I, Thurneysen (GOI §868) reconstructed an 'Insular Celtic' °nak cognate with Lat. neque, nee, Goth. ni-h, and one may now add to the list

56- Lejeune el alii, Plomb th; Larzac, 41-42. 57- DAG 388-90; L. Fleuriot,lX xiv.1 (1974) 57-66. W gwnio 'sewing' is probably the cognate of its Olr. synonym con·6g(a}i, thus showing W

gwn- < Brit. ·con· < Celt. 'com ; see GOI §178.2. 58- See GOl 451 ; J. Morris-Jones, A Welsh Grammar (WG) (Oxford, 1913) 281 ; C.

Watkins, 'The Celtic Masculine and Neuter Enclitic Pronouns', EC xii .1 (1968-69) 92-95.

59- Lewis and Pedersen §§55, 86; GOI §868; D. Greene, 'The Responsive in Irish and Welsh', in Indo·Celtica : Gediichtnisschrift A. Sommerfell, edited by H. Pilch and J. Thurow (1972) 60-61; Lepontica §33.

486 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

Ctb. neCue. Thus, Oir. natiubrad 'let him not defraud' = na'ddiubrad (GOI §243.2) < Pr.lr. ·nak di-uss-brat-, napo = na-bbo < Pr.lr. ·nak bow, MW na thy 'nor a house' < ·nak tegos ; cf. C nagyv, B nac'eu 'that is not,' etc. In early Welsh poetry, the particle is found with its original sense: e.g. coch eu c/edyuawr na phurawr eu llain 'their swords were red and their spears shall not be cleansed' (CA 94-95[A]). It is likely that this same geminating na is what is found prefixed to a Gaulish verb in the form NAPPISEIV perhaps 'whom thou seest not' = nac+pis?-tii or 'whom she sees (tense?) not' = nac+piseru of the Thiaucourt ring inscription60.

The antiquity of the apocope is indicated by the failure of /(w > P in Gallo-Brittonic (contrast the treatment in Osco-Umbrian ne-p); see Lepontica §33. The W sandhi mutations also indicate that fmal -k coalesced with following initial consonants in the British period, i.e. before general apocope.

Ctb. necue 'and not' contrasts with ·nak by preserving the original fmal syllable, vocaIism, and sense of the IE com,bination ; cf. similarly Lpt. ope, noted above.

The same or a similar old apocope to that' that gave ·nak < Proto­Celtic « IE) ·ne-/(we is seen in the loss of IE primary -i in the conjunct verbs of Old Irish, Early Neo-Brittonic, and Gaulish : e.g., Olr. beir 'carries' < Pr.lr. ·berit < IE atonic ·bhereti, W ·treinc 'perishes' < British ·trancit, Gaul. ~o- lunget 'supports' Larzac < older longeti (cf. Olr. fo-Ioing). In Contrast, Celtiberian shows no old apocope in compound verbs: uer 'soniti, ambi·tiseti, ro-biseti (all from Botorrita)61.

17. Evidence, which is less than fully conclusive, suggests that Celtiberian failed to participate in developments in clusters of velar + dental which were common to Gaulish, Brittonic, and Goidelic.

IE WctV gave Gaulish, British, and Primitive Irish VxtV [VxttV] : e.g. Gaul. CONTEXTOS, REXTOGENOS, the first element of the latter corresponding to the Olr. u-stem recht 'law,' OB, MW reith < • [rexttu-J62, also Rom.Brit. TEXTOVERDORVM and ANEX1l0MARO (= ANEXlLOMARO ; cf. Gaul. ANTEXlLOMARVS) (LHEB §60). A contrasting

60- For the author's interpretation of this inscription and references to earlier treatments, see 'Movement and Emphasis in the Gaulish Sentence', BBCS xxxii (1985) 2£>.32.

61- See Cowgill, Eriu xxvi, 27ff. ; McCone Eriu xxx, 28ff. 62- See Lewis and Pedersen 42 ; GPN 24142 ; K. H. Jackson, A Historical Phonology of

Breton (Dublin, 1967) §227.3.

GALLO-BRfITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 487

treatment is possibly seen in Ctb. [RJeTuCenos, ' PnoYllvo<;;, RetuCevo (the same personal name as Gaul. RExTOGENOS) ; see Lejeune, Celtiberica 56 and note 134. Tovar thought that )eTuCenos might alternatively stand for the attested Ctb. personal name Medugenos, which would then of course be irrelevant to IE -kt-63•

IE .~ko- 'bear' gave OWB arrh « Brit. ·arro-), MIr. arr, and the Gaul. form upon which the (dat.) divine name ARTIONI is based. A different treatment is seen in the Ctb. place-name ARCO-BRlG[A if this contains the same element64•

18. IE ei gave f in Gaulish, Brittonic, and Goidelic 65 . The Lepontic texts show E which is probably also for f 66. The diphthong seems to be preserved in Celtiberian67. E.g., from IE ·deiwo-/a-, we get the Rom.Brit. river name Df!!ii, OW Dui!! , Gaulish Df!!O-, Cisalpine TEUO- /dfWO-/68 , Lpt. (dat.) TEU /df(w)!!/, but Ctb. Teiuo-reicis, an orthography which may mean /deiwo-/. Note also Ctb. LVGVEI (dat. of the divine name Lugus), contrasting with Gaul. Luge from Chamalieres69 and the comparable dative terminations in ENIOROSEI, TIATUMEI, lutiacei, etc. Cf. Early aIr. ·thigot 'they go' < IE ·(s)teighont(i).

19. IE st gave aIr. s(s), usually Neo-Brittonic s(s), though it is sometimes preserved as in CB steren(n) 'star' v. ow serenn70. The Lpt. demonstrative pronoun I50S and the name element -KOZIS probably

63- 'Celts in the Iberian Peninsula,' 90. 64- Schmidt, KZ xciv. 1-2, 188. 65- See GPN 191f., 243 ; Lewis and Pedersen §16 ; Bachellery, i.c 13.1, 46 ; LHEB §28 ;

GOI §53. 66- Lepontica §§1O.b, 21.c ; Ctb.&Lpt. §5.b. 67- Cel/iberica 137-39 ; Ctb.&Lpt. §5.b; Bachellery, t.C 13.1, 46 ; Schmidt, KZ 94.1-2.181). 68- Lejeune, CRAI (1977] §19. The Galatian personal name recorded in the spelling LltttTapo<;;, LlI]IOTapo<;;

(Weisgerber, 'Galatische Sprachreste' 154-155) may show IE ei preserved in that dialect, but the onhography could be deceptive.

69- See Schmidt, BBCS xxix.2, 263. 70- Lewis and Pedersen §25.5, LHEB §122.

488 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

represent [itsos] < IE *istos and [-gotsis] < IE *ghostis71 . In Gaulish, the reflex of the cluster is represented variously, DD, aa, etc. It is likely that there too the sound represented was [ts] or less probably [9s]72. In pre­Roman Britain, the coin legend A99EDOMAROS shows the same representation of the same sound or sounds ; cf. Gaulish AOOedilli from Chamalieres. Though we have no direct evidence, it has been generally held that the transitional form between IE st and Old Irish s(s) was this same sound, [ts], which was perhaps the original value of ogam Z73.

There is no evidence that Celtiberian participated in this development; the cluster is found preserved there in forms which are likely to be demonstratives, stena (Botorrita), iste (Botorrita), and staM ; the verb SISTAT; boustom 'cow barn' (Botorrita)74.

20. Late IE -0 in fmal syllables generally gave Gaul. ii (e.g. dative MAGALV 'for Magalos'), a fact often obscured by Latinisation (GPN 395, 423, 427). It is clear from the retention of Primitive Irish over-long fmal syllables and the patterns of u-epenthesis in Old Irish that Primitive Irish had had ii also. Thus, OIr. fiur 'man' (dat.) < Pr:lr. "'wirii. In Brittonic IE o in fmal syllables became ftrst -ii, as in Gaulish and Goidelic, then -iI, later -; (as ii in all positions ; cf. Neo-Brittonic din < diinon) ; fmally, it fell with apocope causing vowel affection (LHEB §§14, 15,23) ; e.g., WC erbyn(n) 'against' < British *are pennii ; cf. Olr. ar chiunn < Pr.Ir. *tue f<wennii. Lepontic always shows U75. Celtiberian shows both 0 and ii 76.

21. As K. H. Schmidt has shown, Lepontic and Celtiberian were primarily 0 V languages, a pattern which was probably directly inherited

71- Leponlica §§20.e, 41 ; Ctb.&Lpt. §5.a ; Bachellery, EC xiii.I, 4344. 72- See especially GPN 410-20 ; also Koch, BBCS xxxii, 1-2. 73- See Lewis and Pedersen §255, LHEB §122. 74- See Ctb.&Lpt. §§2.c., 5.a ; Bachellery, EC xiii.l , 43-44 ; Beltnln and Tovar, BOlorrita ,

63ff. The fonn from Botorrita which had fonnerly been read as as·esli and thought of as a cpd. of the verb Ito be' is now read aJecoli; see Beltran and Tovar, BOlomla, 70. But the insc. still abounds with ·51· clusters. The fonn SIaM from the Luzaga insc. was fonnerly read as sTan .

75- Leponlica §§23.a, 44.d; Ctb.&Lpt. 271 76- Celliberica 17, note 37, 21f., 129, 13 9 ; Ctb.&Lpt. 271 .

GALLO-BRfITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 489

from the predominant type of IE and which may be illustrated by the Lepontic Prestino inscription 77.

[SUBJ. UVAMOKOZIS PLtALEBu][oAT. UVLTIAUIOPOS

ARIUONEPOS](OBJ. SITES](VERB TETU)

Gaulish, on the other hand, was overwhelmingly YO, antICIpating Neo-Celtic, as I have shown at length in 'The Sentence in Gaulish' (PHCC iii, 169-215). Presently, I shall repeat as a single example the Cisalpine inscription from Todi where the Gaulish word order contrasts starkly with the OSV pattern of the Old Latin parallel text78.

[GEN. Ateknati Drutikni](VERB kamitu][OBJ. artvas](SUBJ. Koisis Drutiknos)

'Koisis son of Drutos assembled the stones of Ategnatos son of Drutos.'

[Cf. Archaic Welsh mab Botgat gwnaeth gwynnyeith gwreith e law 'the son of B.'s hand's deed wrought vengeance' GEN.VOS (CA 6O-61A ).)

Lat. text (after Lejeune, Lepontica § 12) :

[A TEGNA TEl DRVTEI F (ace. obj.) COJ]SIS DRVTEI F. FRATER EIVS MlNIMVS LOCA VIT ET STA TVIT

The verb-fmal tmesis and 'Bergin's Law' constructions of Archaic Irish are now generally accepted as throwbacks to the earlier situation79• SVO patterns, similar to those found in early Welsh verse and in Gaulish inscriptions are also found in archaic Irish poetry: e.g., Lugaid Luath loisc trebthu tren tuath 'L. the Swift burned the dwellings of mighty peoples'80.

77- 'Der Beitrag der keltiberischen Inschrift von Botorrita zur Rekonstruktion der protokeltischen Syntax', Word xxviii (1976) 51-62 ; 'Zur keltiberischen Inschrift von Botorrita', BBCS xxvi (1976) 377ff. ; BBCS xxviii.2, 200; KZ xciv.I-2, 18Hf.

On the Presti no insc., see Leponlica §§39-43. 78- See further Koch BBCS xxxii, 16-19. 79- See especially C. Watkins, ' Preliminaries to a Historical and Comparative Analysis of

the Syntax of the Old Irish Verb', Cellica vi, 1-49. 80- M. A. O'Brien, Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae i (Dublin, 1962) 5 ; see 1. Carney,

'Aspects of Archaic Irish,' Eigse xvii (1979) 432f. ; Koch, Enu xxxvii, 169f.

490 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

22. In British, the IE diphthong eu (before consonants) first feU together with ou, which was then simplified to 9, later raised to u, and finaUy fronted to U. Thus, with the Proto-Celtic element *teutii, 'we find Romano-British MARTI TOVfATI, OLLOTOTIS, OW Tutri (see LHEB §18). Similarly in Gaulish, Teutates, Toulati (dat.), Toutiorix, Ollototae matres, Tutati (dat.)81. In 7th-century Old Irish, we have monophthongised t9th, at a date long after the British and Gaulish forms had evolved to cUt-. By about AD 700, the long vowel then became rediphthongised to ua in most accented contexts. It seems, therefore, that eu became ou which then became 9 as a shared Goidelic / GaUo-Brittonic development. Irish did not participate in the subsequent Gallo-Brittonic raising to U.

In Spain, the names Teuto, Teutin are found, and these indicate that Celtiberian probably preserved the original diphthong82.

23. The Indo-European o-stem genitive singular in -osjo (e.g. Skt. aSvasya 'of the horse') was replaced by -f in · Gaulish, Brittonic, and Goidelic: Gaul. DOIROS SEGOMARI 'Doiros soli of Segomaros'83, OW Cair Teim (Historia Brittonum §66) MW Kaer Dyf 'Cardiff, Caerdydd' < Brit. *Cadrii Tamf 'Fortified Town of the River Taff'84, Late British and Ogam Irish TOVISACI 'of the prince'85, Ogam MAO(O)1.

In Celtiberian, the o-stem genitive singular is formed in -0 (probably long /-0/ from the IE ablative with loss of fmal-ti) : Aualo, Samicio, Turo, Neito.

24. In Gaulish, Brittonic, and Goidelic, the Indo-European o-stem nominative plural termination in -os was replaced by ·f, as in Latin: thus, Gaulish barm, Welsh bei,.", and Ir. baird < *bardf, Welsh Prydyn, Ir. Cruithin 'Picls' < *Pritenf, Gaulish and British Catuvellaunf.

81- GPN 268. 82- Tovar 'Celts in the Iberian Peninsula' 89. 83- Dottin no. 37 ; DAG no. 161. 84- See Jackson, 'Nennius and the Twenty-eight Cities of Britain', Antiquity XII (1938) 52. 85- R A. S. Macalister, Corpus Inscriptionum Insularum C.lticarum (Dublin, 1945, 1949) no.

399.

GALLO-BRfITONlC vs INSUlAR CELTIC 491

Celtiberian preserved the desinence -os, which sometimes goes to -Us by the phonological rule discussed above ( 20) : Araticoi, Ca/acoricoi, Uiamui 86•

Inconclusive evidence for an old Insular Celtic unity

25. In order to assess the likelihood of a former genetic Insular Celtic or some sort of ancient Insular commonality, it is essential that we compare Irish and Brittonic at a stage of evolution comparable to that of the Continental Old Celtic languages, so as to rule out effects of subsequent typological convergence during the Middle Ages. The general Neo-Celtic phenomenon of syUable losses and morphophonemic mutations arose in the Insular languages after Celtiberian and Lepontic were dead and Gaulish moribund. As Martinet has shown, the phonetic phenomenon of lenition is most economically accounted for as a Common Celtic development, whose presence in Continental Celtic is reflected as a substratum effect in the consonant systems of Western Romance87.

26. In the mediaeval and modem Gaelic languages, word-initial radical s- alternates with leoited /h-;' In Brittonic, Old Celtic initial s- is sometimes preserved, but more often gives Neo-Brittonic h-. InternaUy, within a morpheme, etymological intervocal -s- has generally disappeared in Gaelic and disappeared or given /j/ (sometimes then developing to -0) in Neo-Brittonic. It is likely that the weakening of s first arose as part of phonetic lenition, though it was incorporated into the morphophonemic mutational pattern only in Goidelic. There are no certain, nor even probable, examples of intervocal -s- already j or nil in ancient Brittonic or Goidelic (LHEB §113). It is by no means clear that a phonetic pattern of weak and strong aUophones of s, like that underlying the later Insular developments, was not present in one or more of the Continental languages. The Gaulish word SVIOREBE in the inscription from Neris-Ies­Bains is likely to be an oblique case of the word for 'sister' with loss of -s­in s!!for- < IE swesor- ; cf. Skt. svasar-, MW chwior-yO 'sisters.'

An important recent indication that s- was treated in Gaulish very much as in the ancient Insular languages has now appeared at Larzac in

86- Tovar 'The Celts in the Iberian Peninsula' 91. 87- 'Celtic Lenition and Western Romance Consonants', Language xxviii (1952), pp. 192-

217.

492 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEON FLEURIOT

the forms of the Celtic inflected demonstrative corresponding to the Neo­Celtic defmite article: Gaulish indas mnas 'these women' (nom. ace.) < older ·sindiis bniis (with loss of s-) = Olr. inna mna, Gaulish o-nda bocca 'from/by this mouth' < 0 + sindii (with loss of s- and elision; cf. W o'r foch), in-sinde se 'in ihis (here), = OIr. isindfsiu (with retention of s- after -n)88.

27. Old Irish usually shows for, Old Breton uuor, uuar, guor, guar, Old Welsh guor, guar, gur, corresponding to Gaulish uer. What early evidence we possess suggests that British, like Gaulish, still overwhelmingly had uer in Roman times and that the change belongs, therefore, to the period after the death of Gaulish, as illustrated by the following Romano-British proper names89 : Uerbeia (cf. Archaic Welsh (Lann) Guorboe [Lib. Lan. 162a, c. 615]), Uercovicium, Uerlucio, Uemalis, Uememetum (cf. the Archaic Welsh personal name Guomemet [Vita Cadoci, mid 7th century]), Uerteris, Uerturiones (late 4th century, Ammian,us Marcellinus) > Olr. Fortrenn (gen. pl.), Uerulamium, Uoreda which is elsewhere Bereda (for Uereda ; see uerfdo- 'steed' above, 6). .

Innovations possibly shared by Goidelic and one or more Continental language, but not Brittonic

28. The Proto-Celtic combination of velar + sibilant between vowels gives Neo-Brittonic ch /x/ and Old Irish s. Thus, Old Celtic ouxselo­(often spelled ouxelo-) 'high,' common in place-names, gives OWB uchel, OIr. uasal. In Romano-British place-names we find still x (for /Xr.!)90. The Gaulish forms are generally spelled with x or xs, indicating the retention of both the velar and the sibilant, e.g. uxedia gl. 'summa,' suexos 'sixth' Le Graufesenque, Dexsiua dea. Fewer forms occur which might show loss of the velar, e.g. the verb dessu-m(m)i-(i)is at Chamalieres, or the preposition, which is most often written ex, exs, occasionally as es (GPN 202-03, 398). However, in Celtiberian, a high frequency of spellings

88- See Lejeune el alii, Plomb du Larzac. 89- Drawn from Rivet and Smith, Place-Names of Roman Brilain 493-508. 90- LHEB §§125-26.

GALLO-BRfITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 493

are found indicating loss of the velar: Usamus (cf. Gaulish Uxisama), Dessuaeona, sueS 'six'91.

29. As Fleuriot has shown92, the fluctuation Ulatucia / Flatucias at Larzac, like the French flanelle < Gaulish *wlanellii 'petite laine' (cf. W gwlan, B gloan 'wool'), shows that Proto-Celtic w- in absolute initial position could sometimes tend to a Late Gaulishf-. However, we have no evidence that this development was widespread, as surviving forms overwhelmingly show retention of w-, spelled u-. The shift to f- was possibly limited to one region and/or to the combination wl-. F- is the reflex of fortis initial w- in Old Irish: fer 'man' < Proto-Celtic *wiros, flailh 'sovereign' < *wlatis. In Brittonic, fortis initial w- was preserved in British (spelled u-), then became gw- in Neo-Brittonic. The sound is preserved in Lepontic and Celtiberian.

Conclusions

30. Several years ago, when I read a version of this paper at the Oxford Celtic Congress, I concluded that there had been a unified Gallo­Brittonic proto-language whose immediate ancestor in the Celtic family tree had been a unified Goidelic-Gallo-Brittonic proto-language, 'which may tentatively be assumed to have been spoken on the European mainland in the earlier part of the pre-Roman Iron Age.' Lepontic and Celtiberian are more archaic and, accordingly, had split from the Proto­Celtic trunk before the formation of the Goidelic-Gallo-Brittonic unity. I still believe in the same index of relatedness as the implication of the foregoing evidence: Gaulish and Brittonic have many post-Proto-Celtic innovations in common; Goidelic also shares a significant minority of these; Lepontic shows few, and Celtiberian virtually none of the innovations from Proto-Celtic observable in Gaulish.

What I would revise from my earlier formulation is that I now no longer believe that the family tree model or unattested post-Proto-Celtic proto-languages 'spoken on the European mainland in the [ron Age' are necessary to explain this pattern. The earliest place- and ethnic-names from Ireland and Britain show that Celtic speech was already established

91- Tovar, 'Celts of the Iberian Peninsula' 90. 92- In Lejeune el alii, Plomb du Lanae 57.

494 MElANGES OFFERTS A LEoN FLEURJOT

there very early in the Iron Age, before the penetration of the La Tene influences, which so closely foUow our dialect alignments. As I plan to discuss more fully on another occasion, lvern; ' the Irish' < lverio 'Ireland' and Albiones 'the British' < ·Albijii 'Britain' are Celtic names and are attested no later than the mid-fourth century BC, more probably by the sixth93. The fact that the common nouns underlying the place-names Oir. iriu 'earth, land' and Old Welsh elbid, later e/fy(J 'habitable surface of the world, domain of mortal men' have survived in their respective languages, but not the neighbouring island's language, is at least consistent with the proposition that the language of the Ivemi became Goidelic and that that of the A1biones became Brittonic. In other words, it does not appear that the languages in which the nameslverio and ·Albijii were first coined were subsequently obliterated by intrusions. The Gaulish divine epithet and Galatian personal nameAlbio-nx94 would, when compared with Dumnonx and Bitunges, plausibly mean 'King of the World' and thus confirm the basic sense of the Celtic etymon. It may also provide a slight indication of an early affinity between the speech of Britain and that of Gaul . . These observations need not imply that the dialects had 'aIready fuUy separated out as early as the beginning of the Iron Age. Rather, we may look to known archaeological and proto-historical developments of the subsequent La Tene period as the agency of adstratum effects upon an older Celtic koine. The La Tene culture fuUy affected Gaul. It also very heavily affected Britain, from c. 400 BC down to the Belgic movements shortly before Caesar's time. Tribal aristocracies calling themselves Parisi, CatuveUauni, Atrebates, Belgae, and Cenomagni were transplanted as part of this process. Our earliest linguistic trace of this process is perhaps the replacement of the national name Albiones by p-Celtic Pritan; no later than the time of the voyage of Pytheas c. 325 BC95. The La Tene phenomenon of Ireland was, by contrast, thinner, later, and involved only

93- Rivet and Smith, Place·Names of Roman Brilain 39 ; T. G. E. Powell, The Celts (1958, 2nd ed. 1980) 2tr. The later date was proposed by Hawkes, Pytheas, who would trace the ancient Insular names to Ephorus (mid fourth century BC) rather than to the older 'Massaliote Periplus.' .

94- A. Holder, Alt-<:dtischer SprachschaJz (A cS) i (Leipzig. 1896) 85. Cr. also Albic·rica (AcS I.85), Albiodero vieo (= Augers Seine et Marne ; AcS 1.83), to be read, according to Holder, Albiodilron. On the Galatian name, see Weisgerber, 'Galatische Sprachreste', 154,168.

95- See Powell and Hawkes, as cited at previous note.

GALLO·BRfITONIC vs INSULAR CELTIC 495

the North and East96. The coinage, wheel·thrown pottery, oppida, etc., of Belgic Late La Tene / Iron Age C never penetrated Ireland. The La Tene element in the Hispanic Peninsula was virtually nil. For the archaeologist's 'La Tene: let the linguist read 'Gallicisation', and this, I believe, will account for the degrees of mutual affmity between the Celtic languages of antiquity. The Insular Celtic phenomenon, where it diverges from Gaulish, can be explained as a result of common late survival and continued mutual influence within the British Isles after the cultural preeminence of Celtic Gaul had been broken by the Roman conquest.

96- See C. F. C. Hawkes, 'The Wearing or the Brooch : Early Iron Age Dress Among the Irish ', in Studies on Early Ireland, Essays in Honour of M. V. Duignan, edited by B. G. Scott (Helrast, 1981) 51·73 ; Caulfield, 'Celtic Problems in the Iron Age'" 205·15.