ANCIENT CELTS
Hengelted, Hen Geltiaid,
Seancheiltigh, Seann Cheiltich:

Once again, I translate Ancient Celts into the four main languages. With a bit of observation, despite the various orthographic conventions, the similarities are quite evident.

The name Celtic

First observation concerning the Ancient Celts.
Many archaeologists seem to tolerate the use of the term Celtic only for popularization, using the term Iron Age in their scientific discussions.
But how can we limit the Iron Age to, for instance, the art of Hallstatt and La Tène? How then do we name the countless Iron civilizations around the world? And for our civilizations that we call Celtic, they take away the name without replacing it with another? Destroying without building?

Diversity or Disparity

If they don’t give a name to what almost everyone calls Celtic civilization, the reason seems to be that they don’t see a juxtaposition of borders, from funerary rites to language, including decorative and symbolic art. This observation is of course important. It reminds me a lot of what has been happening for a long time in our own country: costumes, headgear, dialects, and dances don’t always overlap in the same areas. Could we, however, deny the existence of Brittany?

Unity of the Atlantic Celts

Another observation: what about the regions where everything overlaps? It seems to me that this is the case with the ancestors of the modern Celtic peoples.
As for the art, we could, at the margins, distinguish certain Pictish art, though we find its influences throughout our archipelago. But the art of La Tène was generally well established.
As for the language, there is no need to revisit the obvious presence of ancient Celtic in its two Q and P variants (which are not completely impermeable, by the way).
As for the rites, they are quite similar across our countries, including in their evolution. In any case, I find nothing that contradicts the use of a generic term to at least refer to the civilization of the Atlantic Celts: the one that, at least for a Barry Cunliffe (as in my childhood chauvinistic dreams…), leads a much larger group.
I’m not going to start a thesis on ancient Celtic civilization here, nor discuss at length the fluid identity of the Central European, Eastern, and Asia Minor Celtic-speaking peoples. What I’ve said about the Atlantic Celts is more than enough to legitimize our inter-Celtic approaches.

The Pseudo-Gaul

Another observation: my question about the hesitancy to use the term Celtic when the terms “Gaul” and “Gauls” are used without hesitation.
I haven’t found any explanation for this imprecise and ambiguous use: no established boundaries from an archaeological or linguistic point of view. Quiz: “Gaul” supposedly includes the Helvetii (Switzerland), just like Cisalpine Gaul. And between Switzerland and Austria? Do we suddenly shift from “Gauls” to another people or group of Celtic peoples? Who claims this? Quite vague for a scientific mind. And moreover, we know that “Gaul” spoke Celtic varieties from both major branches.
In reality, there are on the one hand smaller, indisputable entities than Roman Gaul, and on the other a global entity: the Celtic complex from Ireland to Galatia.

Before addressing other subjects, Comparative Anthropology.

There are experts in very specific fields. Some claim to be… Others assert their truths when their degrees have nothing to do with the subject.
The global vision of comparative anthropology across time and space (including music, habitat, etc.) is a path hardly ever taken when it comes to the Celtic world. Fortunately, there are some approaches, albeit partial ones, such as in the works of Venceslas Kruta.
This fact is not without significance. Science and education are not immune to the influence of nationalist ideologies, particularly French ones. This “construction flaw” is shared by other “empires” like Russia. England also instills a national narrative in young minds, completely ignoring what is happening right next to them.