Wissus Keltoi - A Celtic Mystery

We continue with the historical aspect of Celtic history by focusing on the one of the most mysterious aspects of their culture: the Druids.

Who were they? What was their purpose in ancient Celtic culture? What did they practise?

Whilst this article might not be linguistics-heavy, it will have a section to start that goes into the interesting history behind the word. I find it exciting!

The History of the Name

Druid has a long, long evolution in history. Druid is an English word that derives from the French word druide, which itself comes from the Latin plural word druides, which itself is actually borrowed from Gaulish.

In Old Irish, this became druí, pluralised as druíd, and meant 'wizard' or 'magician'. In Middle Welsh, dryw or derwydd seems to be the cognate and means 'seer'. Old Breton has dorguid, which means 'prophetic' or 'magical' and therefore likely stems from the same root.

The root in Celtic comes from the Proto-Celtic *druwids, pluralised as druwides. Splitting the word into two, we can see where Proto-Indo-European comes into play to evolve into this word.

-wids- seems the easiest for to understand in linguistics. It derives from the PIE word *weyd, which means 'see, know'. Given that the Druids were alleged prophets and keepers of knowledge, this makes a lot of sense. -dru- seems to have had a harder time, but it seems to be widely accepted nowadays that it comes from *derw/dru, which means 'oak'. Some have put forward that it has more of a symbolic meaning than literal, translating as 'strong, firm'.

Therefore, historians have come to associate the etymology of the word druid to mean 'knower of oaks', 'knower of trees', 'knower of the world tree' or 'strong insight'. Given that trees and specifically oaks seemed to have been important in ancient Celtic religion, I'd say this is highly likely to be the answer.

Pliny the Elder did put forward an idea in the 1st Century BCE that it came from the Greek drŷs, which also meant 'oak'. Its classed as folk etymology now, given that we know where the word actually comes from. As well as this, Greek itself derives from Proto-Greek, which is another branch from PIE. So they both have the same ancestor language anyway!

In 1893, a man called Rudolf Thurneysen put forward a different interpretation. He believed the word druid bore an intensive prefix, and that it actually translated as 'the very wise'. This interpretation has kind of stuck around over the years and permeated pop culture, and you'll see a lot of blogs and supposed Neo-Pagans or 'Celtic experts' that claim druid actually means this.

It does not. Thurneysen actually retracted his own theory in 1927. Plus, druid is a position or title for someone, and titles don't generally have intensive prefixes in the same way. I've underlined the retraction line because sometimes its important to understand that not every theorist can continue to be replied upon for information.

Early Accounts of the Druids

Its very, very, very important to note that any information we have on the Druids is difficult to work with and almost always should be taken with a pinch of salt.

As I think I stated in an earlier article, the Druids did not believe in writing down accounts of their lore, practises etc. Therefore, all records we have of them even existing come from secondary sources, mostly Greek or Roman.

Why is this important? Because of how the Greeks and Romans would have portrayed them. They saw themselves as civilised nations, and viewed the Celts they came across as uncivilised and barbaric. All the information they give us comes from between the 4th Century BCE and the 4th Century CE. So we don't know anything about what Druids might have practised or how their practise evolved prior to this.

An archaeologist by the name of Stuart Piggott looked at the sources about Druids and split them into two groups. Posidonian and Alexandrian.

Posidonian refers to the sources that are biased against Druids. These frequently focus on the images of barbery and violence, especially sacrifices.

Alexandrian sources are viewed as a softened image of the Druids. They focus on the culture and social aspects of the position and view them as wise men and sages during a 'golden age'.

Posidonius Controversy

Much of our knowledge of Druids from 1st Century BCE comes from Posidonius of Apamea when he visited the region of Massalia. He was a Stoic philosopher who wrote a Celtic ethnography, though the original text of it is lost to time.

A lot of later Graeco-Roman accounts have a heavy basis in his work. Diodorus, Timagenes and Strabo certainly do. It also seems an accepted idea that Caesar was also drawing from Posidonius' writings in his account.

This seems unlikely. Posidonius was writing about Massalia, almost a whole generation after it had been conquered and annexed. The Celts in his area study had been subject to annexation and cultural changes. Caesar was writing from his first-hand experience in Gaul, in new territory that saw the Gauls in full power of their lands prior to his full invasion. Whilst we cannot believe everything Caesar wrote, we almost must point out that they were seeing completely different groups of Celts at different times.

And this is one of the many reasons I write these articles. For years, historians just accepted that all accounts of the Celts must be completely accurate to one another. But the Celts were so widespread across Europe and Asia Minor that it seems equally plausible that not every tribal culture had the same practises or cultural important of Druids.

A historian Jane Webster also argued this. Caesar was dealing with pre-conquest Druids, whilst Posidonius studied from Post-Conquest. To her, it made perfect sense that their accounts differed. In this reading, it is Diodorus, Timagenes, and Strabo who are incorrectly projecting their ideas of Druids onto Gaul.

Other Graeco-Roman Accounts

Besides Posidonius, Strabo, Timagenes and Diodorus, there are a dozen other accounts of the Druids throughout these centuries mentioned. Whilst the earliest references deem the Celts and their Druids as vicious barbarians, later accounts seem to have a deeper understanding of the actual civilisation at hand.

3rd Century philosopher Diogenes Laërtius, reported that the druids and a class he referred to as Semnotheoi were amongst the first founders of philosophy. He traces this claim back to Aristotle, who had also proclaimed this.

I admit, I had never heard of the Semnotheoi until researching for this article. There doesn't seem to be any specific information about them. They were either a specific sect amongst the Druids, or they were synonymous with them. Either way, these two groups were counted as great philosophers of the Celts and Galatians, despite their 'barbaric' nature.

Later descriptions of Druids and their practises are a lot more substantial as we look further into history. Cicero, a Roman lawmaker and scholar, records that he even knew a Druid personally. We've actually mentioned him on this blog before. The Druid he is talking about is Diviciacus, a Druid of the Aedui tribe and the older brother of rebel Dumnorix. As far as we've found in history, Diviciacus is the only named Druid on record. We have named Druids in Irish folklore and stories, but as they are part of mythology we cannot prove these were actual people. Diviciacus, on the other hand, was. He was a pro-Roman supporter and came to blows with his brother Dumnorix, who thought it 'better to be ruled by fellow Gauls than by Romans'.

Pomponius Mela, the earliest known Roman geographer, describes Druids as holding their teachings in caves and remote groves. Pliny the Elder mentions the cutting of mistletoe being sacred to the Druids, and records Roman measures against theirs. We've already discussed Lucan's entry in my article on Three-Fold Death, where Druids sacrificed three men to the gods Taranis, Esus, and Teutates.

Graeco-Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus grouped the learned Gauls into three groups. A collection of biographies known as the Historia Augusta provide alleged accounts of 3rd Century dealings between emperors and Gaulish female Druids, known as Druidesses. These are largely regarded as fiction now.

In Britain, the writer Tacitus provides the only account of Druids. This is in regard to the large Druidic community that resided there. In 60 AD, Gaius Suetonius Paulinus invaded the island and was victorious over the Druids living there. We'll go into this more as we get down to our specific cultural depictions!

For your ease, I have attempted to recreate the chart on Wiki of the various authors on Druids and what they spoke about. Remember, not all of them recount the same details!

Scholars

Posidonius

Diodorus Siculus

Cicero

Caesar

Pomponius Mela

Seers

Posidonius

Diodorus Siculus

Cicero

Magic

Pliny the Elder

Posidonius (?)

Mediators

Posidonius

Diodorus Siculus

Cicero

Caesar

Sacrifices

Posidonius

Diodorus Siculus

Caesar

Lucan (the Wiki says he did not, but Lucan's entire entry is about the sacrifice of three men to three gods so I have zero idea why he isn't included)

Pliny the Elder

Arbiters

Caesar

Posidonius (?)

Punishment

Posidonius

Diodorus Siculus

Caesar

Teaching

Caesar

Pomponius Mela

Posidonius (?)

Single head

Caesar

Posidonius (?)

Secluded places

Caesar

Pomponius Mela

Posidonius (?)

Britain

Caesar

Pliny the Elder

Pomponius (?)

Tacitus (once again not on there, but Tacitus is how we know about Anglesey)

The Function of Druids in Celtic Society

It's here that I again advise readers to take any accounts written up with a pinch of salt. Many Celtic historians disagree on the exact authenticity or truthfulness in Caesar's accounts. Romans were known to exaggerate or project ideas onto alien cultures to make them seem more barbaric or a bigger threat, and thus in need of Roman conquest. Ronald Hutton believes that Caesar's portrayal of the Druids is written in his own favour as a way of justifying his actions in the Gallic Wars and the subsequent persecution of the Gauls and their Druids.

For the sake of this article we will be outlining Caesar's writings and treating them carefully. My personal opinion is that whilst some of Caesar's writings may be partially fictional or exaggerated, I have doubts that he would have fabricated an entire social class of people just for justification of his war. Its a little far-fetched, and I fear stems from a lot of Pro-Celtic bias and a refusal to believe Celts may have committed acts like sacrifice or other things considered 'barbarous' in nature.

With that in mind, Caesar likely did leave out details or alter them slightly to fit his own narrative. He makes no mention of some details rooted in magic or divinity, whilst others do. It may be that he wished to remove the mystical element of the Druids, possibly to prevent his own armies from hesitating to attack the Gauls. Tacitus is a great example of this, as he reports that the chanting and work of the Druids on the isle of Mona terrified the Roman legion sent to conquer them.

Now, onward to the article.

Social Roles

It would seem that the social standing of the Druids is Celtic culture was something that astounded outsiders. Greek writer Dio Chrysostom compared them to other cultures, such as Egyptian priests, Indian Brahmin, and Persian magi. In accounts like his and Strabo's, Druids were depended upon for courtly matters, and King required them before he could make decisions. They were arbitrators of public law and private disputes, and could even halt battles should they wish it.

Caesar goes a little further. He states that of all the social classes in Gaul, the Druids were one of the two highest, the second being a class he called equites (literally horsemen, so likely cavalry warriors or chariot-riders) and therefore benefited greatly from their societies. Druids were exempt from paying taxes or being conscripted into military service. Druids conducted sacrifices, judged over crime, matters of inheritance, and most laws in Gaulish society. Their greatest ability was to exile members of society from attending festivities of sacrifice, which was apparently seen as the harshest punishment that could be given.

According to Caesar, the Druids of Gaul were led by a single head who held the office until death. They came together once a year in a sacred location that was apparently in the centre of the Carnutes tribal territory, which was considered the centre of the entirety of Gaul and therefore a spiritual focal point of their people.

Druids accepted volunteers into their training, and could be in training for up to twenty years. They memorised all of their teachings and verses, as it was against the Druidic laws to write down any of their doctrine. Hence why we have so little to go on in modern times! They did, however, use the Greek alphabet for other things. Apparently, their teachings originated in Britain, on the island of Mona. Druids could be sent there from all over Gaul to learn.

The learned class of the Celts was separated into three orders. Once again, the number three is inherently important. I really do recommend reading my Threefold Death article as it really hammers this idea home and I have a strong belief that three may have been one of the most sacred numbers to the Celts.

Diodorus named bards, druids, and manteis as the three. Manteis means 'seers'. Strabo says it is bars, ouateis, and druids. Ammianus names it as bards, euhages, and druids. The third one is interesting as nowadays historians and etymologists believe euhages is actually just a misreading of the Greek ouateis. The word ouateis is actually derived from the Proto-Celtic word *wātis, which means 'seer' or 'sooth-sayer'. We know it has a PIE root, and a similar root word appears in Germanic, Gothic, Old Norse etc.

Fun Fact: the Old Norse and Germanic versions give way to divine names such as *Wōðanaz, which became the Norse god Odin and the Germanic god Woden!

Beliefs and Teachings

The biggest takeaway from Druidic doctrine is that they seemed to belief in reincarnation and the immortality of the soul. Caesar has records where he states that the Druids taught that the soul does not die, but merely moves from one body to another upon death and therefore never really dies. He seemed to believe it was used to spur on the courage of warriors so that they did not flee in battle.

Diodorus likened their beliefs to Pythagorean teachings, in that souls were immortal and simply changes bodies after a fixed lifetime. His idea is repeated by Valerius Maximus and Lucan.

Druidic philosophy is yet another thing historians and scholars argue about. Nobody can seem to determine the nature of the Druids and what they actually provided for the community belief-wise. Jan de Vries argues they are merely medicine-men and sorcerers that gained a reputation for wisdom over time due to the maladies they cured. On the other side, Jean-Louis Brunaux argues that the belief they were a class of intellectuals is the right one, and that they were well-known for their philosophical teachings even amongst the Romans.

I have to say, I'm inclined to side with Jean-Louis on this one. The Romans themselves likened the Druids to great Greek philosophers, and compared them to other learned classes of the ancient world. I think there's substantial evidence to the claim that they were far more than 'medicine-men'.

To further this, Caesar writes about the Druids having teachings on the stars and their movements, as well as earth and the natural world. They may have had an interest in astronomical study, and this has often been connected to the Lunisolar Coligny Calendar, which was one of the first posts I made here. Caesar says that the Druids calculated the days by night rather that by daytime, and they believed all Gauls were descended from one God. Though the God's Celtic name is not mentioned, Caesar refers to him as Dis Pater.

His exact phrasing as as thus:

"The Gauls affirm that they are all descended from a common father, Dis Pater, and say that this is the tradition of the Druids. For that reason they determine all periods of time by the number, not of days, but of nights, and in their observance of birthdays and the beginnings of months and years day follows night."

Now I'm not going to get into the identity of the Gaulish Dis Pater, because that requires a long spiel into the etymology of the word, as well as interpretatio romana and the concept of Father/Mother Gods. It's a whole new article. But it will be a very interesting one.

Druidic Rituals

Rituals performed by the Druids vary in the retellings from our Roman sources, and the majority of them could easily be false or propaganda.

Either way, a lot of accounts state that sacrifices could not be performed without the presence of a Druid, whether it be human or animal.

Lucan, as we know, spoke of the sacrifices of three men to the gods Esus, Teutates, and Taranis. Both Strabo and Diodorus describe a sacrificial divination ritual wherein the Druid stabbed a sacrifice above the diaphragm and observed the dying movements and sounds to foretell the future. It's a really messed up version of a divination ritual called Augery.

Caesar's telling of human sacrifice remains the primary source of one of the most infamous 'pagan rituals' to this day! He spoke of how the Gauls placed sacrifices- usually criminals- into a 'wicker man' and then burnt alive. The image of this has continued to stay in the minds of the general populace and dominates British ideas of pagan sacrifice.

I feel I should note that despite both Caesar and Strabo claiming a wicker man was used in sacrifice, these are both from Gaul. There is NO evidence that British Celts ever sacrificed people inside wicker men!

In Britain, our only real account of potential sacrifice is from Cassius Dio. He wrote that Boadicea committed human sacrifices of Roman noblewomen. Allegedly, she and her people cut off their breasts, sewed them to their mouths, and then impaled these women lengthwise on skewers. Ouch!

The claim that the Celts practised human sacrifice is, of course, highly contested. Many Celtic historians believe them to be propaganda against 'barbarian' cultures. We cannot know for certain that the Druids did or did not commit human sacrifice for their gods.

The ritual described by Pliny the Elder, however, seems a lot less contested. He wrote that on the sixth day of the moon's cycle, white robed priests would climb a sacred oak and cut down a branch of mistletoe with a golden sickle. It had to be caught in a white cloth, and then the Gauls would sacrifice two white bulls. He doesn't give the Gaulish word for mistletoe, but does specify that it means 'all-healer'. The plant could supposedly cure infertility and protect against poisons.

Fun Fact: The sickle was probably not actually made of gold, but rather made of bronze and gilded to appear golden. The Celts avoided using iron in their rituals, which seems to have been some ancient belief in some cultures that iron could prevent the influence of supernatural forces. Its likely where the idea that the Fae cannot touch iron comes from!

The Downfall of the Druids

Despite their great status and importance amongst early Celtic cultures like Gaul, the Druids eventually saw a decline, mostly thanks to the efforts of Roman suppression.

In the 1st Century AD, the Romans moved to actively suppress the religion of the Druids amongst the citizens of the Roman Empire. Their influence kept the people of Gaul from completely aligning with Roman culture and therefore was a danger to the Emperor.

Over time, Emperors Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius all put forward new laws that abolished Druidic practises within the Empire, as well as any diviners or even physicians. It was done so quickly over so little time that the aggressive nature is a serious subject of theories.

There is some belief that the Romans opposed Druids purely because of human sacrifice. Whilst this is credible, I highly doubt it. If anything, human sacrifice would have been the scapegoat reason given by the Empire as a way of justifying the hostilities towards the Druids.

Others, such as historian Jane Webster, argued that it was more likely that Tiberius and Claudius were following on from Augustus and his extreme fear of anti-Roman sentiment. Prophecies predicting the downfall of the Roman Empire were rampant at the time, and August burned a lot of books containing prophecies, as well as expelling soothsayers and diviners from Rome.

Tacitus speaks of the 69 AD burning of the Capitol. Apparently, after this event the Druids had announced a new prediction. They stated that the domination of the world would move from the Romans to the people living north of the Alps. The year before this, a leader of the Boii tribe called Mariccus had declared himself a god and the champion of Gaul and attempted to lead rebellions against the Romans. 69 AD also saw Venutius of the Brigantes rise in rebellion against his Roman overlords. And only a few years beforehand, Boudicca had almost caused a complete Roman retreat from Britain.

The Romans feared a resurgence in Gaulish uprisings. So to them, it was probably easier to hurry along the complete assimilation of the Gaulish tribes into the Roman Empire. That meant dismantling their own religious orders and pantheons in favour of the Roman gods. As one of the highest orders in Celtic society, the Druids were likely seen as a figurehead of Celtic opposition to Roman rulers.

Others disagree. Some historians believe that the Druidic order was already on its way out in Gaul during the Roman occupation, and that the Celts living in Europe were already witnessing a power shift that no longer required Druids for judicial and martial overseeing. In fact, a lot of Gaulish nobles were quite happy with the Roman way of life and acclimated to it quite readily. Tribes like the Aedui actively supported the Empire for a long time.

Once again, its something we'll never know. But we do know that the Celtiberians did NOT have any historical record of Druids, so at least one region of Celtic society had already moved beyond the need for them.

Druids in Wales and Ireland

We have strong evidence of Druids having existed in both Ireland and Wales, though the other Insular Celtic societies (Scottish, Cornish, Manx and Breton) have little to none.

Ireland was never a part of the Roman Empire and therefore has no Roman influence on their writings. So the fact that Druids are frequently referenced in their literature is further evidence of their existence. However, as with Roman sources, all Irish sources must be examined cautiously. Many are written by monks and abbots, and therefore twisted and adjusted to fit a Christian narrative. So whilst the mention of Druids (Drui to the Irish) is there as evidence of Pre-Christian religion, I wouldn't say its written about in a positive manner in many cases.

By the 7th Century AD, the general consensus in Ireland seemed to be that Drui could be conflated with the magus of Latin writings. They are presented as the enemy of St Patrick, and much of the inspiration in the writings about them draw from earlier diviners, such as Herod's prophet and the biblical magi of Ancient Egypt.

But we also have a lot of medieval Irish literature that tells of Druids in the original concept we were given by the Romans. In these tales and poems, the Druids were counsel to the Kings of old ages, and whispered prophecies in their ears to aid their rule.

One such Druid was Cathbad. He appears in the Ulster Cycle as the Druid assigned to Conchobar mac Nessa, King of Ulster. Cathbad is the man who prophesies the beauty and sorrow of Deirdre of the Sorrows, as well as the fate of the Irish hero Cu Chulainn.

Our second example is Amairgin, who is classed as the first poet of Ireland and was a member of the Milesians, the final race to settle Ireland that had come from the Iberian Peninsula.

One of the most famous is the blind Druid Mug Ruith, who hailed from Munster. Mug Ruith is unique in that he has special abilities beyond prophecy. He is said to have ridden a flaming chariot and also possessed a great flying machine with wheels that brought destruction wherever it went. He could turn men to stone with his breath and cause large storms. The Christian monks portrayed him as a great enemy of Christianity and a defender of the Pagan ways, and Mug Ruith adventured in the Holy Lands to disturb Christians. He later married The Cailleach (or Beira to the Scottish), a Gaelic deity of weather that is believed to have shaped the mountains.

Interestingly enough, Mug Ruith being portrayed with a wheel, a chariot and the power to conjure storms is somewhat more reminiscent of a weather god than a Druid. In fact, he bears the same symbolisms as the Pan-Celtic god Taranis. Whilst I cannot say for certain that this is a fact, I believe there may be evidence here to say that Mug Ruith is a humanised Gaelic god, demoted by Christian writers to take power away from the religion of the early Irish natives.

Because most of these accounts are written by Christians, it is hard to decipher how much importance the Druids actually carried amongst the Irish nobility at this time. We know that their power had waned considerably in other areas of Britain and Europe, and there are chances it had also occurred amongst the Celtic peoples of the Ireland too.

Ireland also makes mention of female Druids, which is mostly unheard of in Gaulish culture. Bodhmall, Birog, Tlachtga, Be Chuille, Dornoll, and Scathach are all named female Druids who instructed, trained, or cared for Irish heroes during the Cycles. Their roles seemed to be that of teachers, nurses, and motherly figures.

In Wales, we have a lot less sources about Druids. They are called Dryw here, which is also the word for a bird, the wren, which is associated with magic. In Welsh mythos, Dryw function solely as prophets and have no other attributes or social roles given to them.

This isn't exactly a shock. Most surviving Welsh mythological literature is much younger than Irish, usually around the 10th Century AD onwards. A poem from The Book of Taliesin has a line about Druids foretelling events that will happen, and another in Taliesin is about a Druid giving prophecies to King Arthur, where he foretells about Noah's Arc and the flood, the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and eventually, Doomsday.

We can't really be sure these are surviving examples of Welsh history. Ronald Hutton, the Celticist, explains two theories. The first is that these are ancient preservations of a culture that existed and somehow survived long after the Romans came to Britain and destroyed Insular Celtic culture. The other theory is that the Welsh themselves borrowed this idea of Druids as diviners from their Irish neighbours. Hutton states that the Welsh had far greater knowledge and awareness of their Irish neighbours than the Irish did of them. This borrowing may be supported by the Old English words drȳ and drȳcræft ('magician' and 'magic'), which closesly resemble the Irish versions draí and draídecht.

One of the final Welsh passages to discuss about potential Druids is in the Historia Brittonum in the 9th Century AD. Here, King Vortigern summons magi to him, who in turn must confer with a council of magi across Britain. This harkens back to Caesar's writings of a great many Druids that answer to one over-arching Druid in Gaul. Whether that is actually linked or not is also debated.

And of course, we have the Druids of the Isle of Mona. Also called Anglesey to the English, or Ynys Mon in Welsh.

Ynys Mon was supposedly the centre of Druidic teachings, not only in Britain, but the continent too. Caesar wrote that Druids from Gaul would travel to the Druids holdout on Ynys Mon to study their ways. It was this island that the general Suetonius invaded with his Roman soldiers. Here, Tacitus describes them being met by warriors, Druids, and women. The exact quote is thus:

"On the shore stood the opposing army with its dense array of armed warriors, while between the ranks dashed women, in black attire like the Furies, with hair dishevelled, waving brands. All around, the Druids, lifting up their hands to heaven, and pouring forth dreadful imprecations, scared our soldiers by the unfamiliar sight, so that, as if their limbs were paralysed, they stood motionless, and exposed to wounds."

For the record, the Roman soldiers were rarely described as scared or even unnerved. So for a whole legion to be scared to the point of paralysis is pretty telling in regards to the aura of these Druids.

But unfortunately, the Romans eventually came to their senses and rallied together, slaughtering their opponents. They also burned down the sacred groves on the island, because why not. We don't have much evidence of actual groves on Ynys Mon, but we do have Iron Age ritual deposits on the other side of the island.

Suetonius was forced to abandon Ynys Mon after conquering it. He was summoned back to the mainland to deal with our favourite rebel, Boadicea, who was in the middle of burning Londinium to the ground. Still, the damage was done. The Druids had been massacred and their ancient nemetons and groves dismantled. So ended the alleged place of learning.

Modern Druidic Practise

I don't plan on going into much about modern Druids because, frankly, its mostly a load of misinformation and Neo-Pagans LARPing through a combination of different Pagan religions smashed together into one.

But we CAN go into the misinformation itself.

In the 17th Century AD, an English philosopher and writer called John Aubrey stated that the Druids were the creators of the great stone circles, such as Stonehenge and Avebury. At the late 17th Century and well into the 18th, a lot of English scholars and writers had become interested in the concept of the 'Ancient Briton', and focused on the idea of a unified Celtic peoples. This is, of course, not a thing. We know now that the Celts were not uniform in culture and practice. But a lot of those ideas had still stuck in peoples heads.

Writers like John Toland and William Stukeley only continued to further Aubrey's claims. Toland portrayed Druids as an overbearing class of priests that kept their control over the people of Britain due to the people's willingness to believe anything. Stukeley, on the other hand, wrote about Druids as proof of a natural patriarchal society that bore a lot of similarity to Christianity, and supported Aubrey's theories.

In our current time, we know these to be false. The megaliths of Stonehenge and Avebury have existed since the Neolithic and Bronze Age and have done so for centuries longer than the Celts. But we still continue to see Druidry associated with Stonehenge, to the point that the Summer Solstice is celebrated at Stonehenge with Druids and considered a part of their culture. Its not. Celts of the Iron Age would have been just as amazed and confused about the purpose of these megaliths as we are now.

It was the same in Europe. French humanists claimed the Druids were the great, ancient philosophers of the Gaulish people, and continued this idea well into the 20th Century.

Yes, Celtic culture as a whole was undergoing a Romanticism Age. The Ossian poems, which were published in the 1760s, only served to further this. A Welsh poet and antiquarian named Edward Williams was writing under the name Iolo Morganwg, which he stated was his bard name. He wrote and invented the Gorsedd Beirdd Ynys Prydain, also know as the Assembly of the Bards of the Isle of Britain. In this, he explains that there is a ranking amongst the Druids. Ovates, Bards, and then Druids all fall under a sole Arch-Druid. And whilst Caesar had similar ideas, this entire work is pseudo-history written by Williams. Yet it still endures in the National Eistedfodd of Wales, one of the largest Welsh cultural festivals in Europe.

Wales had undergone the largest Druidic movement in modern history. Williams/Morganwg's works continued to influence Welsh views of Druids to the point that Druidic practise became conflated with the entire idea of Welshness as a whole, and soon people began to believe that the ancient Druids and their teachings were largely responsible for a lot of early Welsh poetry and its influences. This has kinda stuck over the years.

In France, there was a belief that the Gauls were actually the ancestors of the nation of France, completely ignoring centuries of other cultures like the Romans and the Franks.

Even now, in Ireland and Scotland, we see Druids associated with the concept of the 'handfasting' ritual (AKA my pet peeve!) and ancient Gaelic culture. The belief seems to be that Druidry is no longer a part of a religion, but rather a belief system rooted in worshipping nature and all natural life as a whole. It focuses on natural harmony and spiritual wisdom.

In 1781, the Ancient Order of Druids was founded in the UK. More similar to the Freemasons that anything else, they were a fraternal organisation that actually had very little to do with religion. Members included nobility, writers, and even Winston Churchill. They drew on the ancient belief of an order of wise figures that sat as figureheads of society. To be frank, it sounds more like a narcissistic cult than anything else.

People are easily swayed if something looks and sounds ancient, take the Druid's Temple in North Yorkshire. I still see reels and TikToks portraying it as some ancient, magical place for fans of Celts to do. It was built on the Swinton Estate by a man named William Danby. Sound modern? IT IS. It's a 19th Century construction that was built to closely resemble Stonehenge, and the only reason Danby built it was to provide work for the locals during a time when work was hard to come by in the 19th Century. The presence of the Druid's Temple has spawned many stories and examples of folklore since being built. But it's not ancient, and it bears no real connection to Celtic culture and their Druids.

A lot of other Druidic orders that were founded between the 18th and 20th Century drew on other ideas, such as Western Esotericism and Wicca.

I'm just going to disclaimer this now because it will alienate some readers: I dislike Wicca. A lot. It might actually be a hatred. Wicca is single-handedly one of the MOST damaging factors in the modern beliefs and interpretations of ancient Celtic cultures. I got into Wicca as a teenager and have worked pretty hard to dismantle my own incorrect beliefs about the Celts of Britain and Europe and how Wicca is just a made up of borrowings from a dozen real ancient Pagan cultures, lazily crafted into one. Its rigidity makes it more similar to Christianity and other popular religions than ancient ones, FYI. It conflates Germanic and Celtic culture in such a way that most people confuse one for the other. Fuck Wicca. Sorry.

A Conclusion

To recap:

The Druids were a seemingly ancient order that presided over many Celtic tribal societies. We have no real understanding of their beliefs, practises, rituals, or function as a whole, but they were important enough that they deserved a mention from historic Roman authors and generals.

We'll never know the extent of Druidic influence across Continental or Insular Celtic culture, or at least, unless someone unearths something new about them. But what we do know is that most modern Druidry only skims the surface of historical accounts, and seems to leave out all the bits the portrays them in a negative manner. Funny, how that always seems to happen.

Important things to note:

Druids did NOT invent Stonehenge or any megaliths.

The Druid's Temple is neither ancient NOR linked to actual Druids.

Whilst the Druids did worship nature, they also had other roles outside of worship.

Most modern-day interpretations of Druids are loosely based at best and outright fictional portrayals at worst.

These are native UK languages. And whilst I absolutely agree that other languages (such as Scots, Urdu and Punjabi) should also be allowed on leaflets, the fact that Reform thinks Celtic languages that have existed longer than ENGLISH on this island shouldn't be on political material is fucking telling of how supportive they allegedly are of the United Kingdom as a whole.

These people don't support 'the British people'. They support the ENGLISH, and a very specific group of English people at that.

People in Scotland, Ireland, Wales and Cornwall deserve to be represent in every aspect of their lives. That includes the language.

The only reason Farage hasn't been able to go after Welsh is because it's legal protections are stronger than the others and he physically can't. But I PROMISE that would have been on there too if he could have done it.

It won't be the first time Celtic cultures have been targeted or treated as an 'other'. It won't be the last. All it takes is reading any article about Gaelic revitalisation, Cornish roadsigns, or making Welsh compulsory in school to know that. A large percentage of the English don't get why these cultures want to celebrate their own culture. They don't want it.

We're veering a little from the linguistic side of Celtic history yet again to tackle a part of mythos that is as fascinating as it is odd and ancient.

The lore of the Threefold Death.

Now, you might be asking, why? What's so important about this concept that it requires an entire post about it?

Well, it's because the Threefold Death has such a long, connected history in Celtic history.

So give me a chance to explain.

Where Does It Come From?

Threefold Death is a concept that was passed down from Proto-Indo-European culture into a variety of ancient civilisations' mythos, namely Indic, Celtic, Germanic, and Hellenic.

If you're a history buff like me, then you might have noticed that a lot of these cultures have a bit of an obsession with things that come in threes. Hellenic mythos has three Furies, three Fates, three Gorgons, and the three-bodied goddess Hekate. Germanic, and by extension Norse, has the Norns, a trio of giantesses who function as fates. Hinduism has the Trimurti, a triple deity consisting of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, and the Tridevi, the goddess equivalent with Saraswati, Parvati, and Lakshmi. The Celts divide between the cultures. Gauls had the Matres and Matronae. The Welsh and Irish both have manuscripts aptly named 'the Triads', but Ireland takes it further with multiple sets of triple-aspect goddesses.

And what, might you say, is the common connection here?

They are all thought to descend from Proto-Indo-European. And through that, contribute to the Trifunctional Hypothesis put forward by Georges Dumezil, a comparative mythologist.

The theory suggests that prehistoric PIE society and religion existed through a tripartite ideology that existed through three cohabiting functions:

The Sacral

The Martial

The Productive

These functions could be associated with everything from law, religion, to social castes.

These traits were passed down as PIE expanded into newer, independent cultures. And whilst it may not have always remained the exact same in each one, they all carry aspects of Dumezil's initial theory that make it hard to disprove.

But for this blog, we'll be focusing on the Celtic fragments of this complicated history, though I might occasionally make reference to other cultures as a comparison. And we'll be sticking to the topic of the Threefold Death, because the triple-god/goddess aspect falls into religion to me and I'm waiting to tackle deities until a day I have time.

The Threefold Death: Explained

Before I launch into the different examples in Celtic texts and history, I should probably explain what the threefold death actually is. Silly me.

Threefold death is a literary theme and ritualistic practise that focuses around protagonists or main characters of stories. Its usually inflicted on gods, kings, and heroes as a kind of ritualistic punishment. Quite often, it comes from a place of irony; a lot of the deaths I will explain are caused by a geas or prophecy. Sometimes the one who dies the Threefold death is the same person who predicted it. No matter how they try to thwart their own fate, it ends the same way.

Historically, Threefold death appears in one of two ways:

Simultaneous Death - Where all three causes of death occur at the exact same time, in such a way that no specific cause is the ultimate killer of the victim.

Distinctive Death - Where the three causes are either split into three distinctive parts and all play a role in killing one person, or each of the trio is inflicted on three seperate victims. This is usually seen in cases of religious sacrifice to a trio of gods that perform one of three main societal functions.

And therein returns the Trifunctional Hypothesis!

Though the three causes of death often remain the same, you will sometimes see variations appear. Though there seems to be a pattern to these deaths as I will explain soon.

The known causes are:

Hanging

Strangulation

Falling

Drowning

Burning

Poison

Stabbing

Impaling

Piercing

(or any form of piercing wound of any kind to be honest)

I've split them for a reason here. It's because these are the three segments they seem to split into. You'll rarely see a drowning and a burning in the same trio. Same with a fall and hanging.

And the reason behind this sectioning, I think, falls within the three functions of Trifunctional Hypothesis. Each section of deaths falls within a function.

Stabbing, Piercing, and Impaling is the most obvious one. It fulfils the Martial aspect that connects society to military and war.

I think Drowning, Burning, and Poisoning is most likely an aspect of the Productivity function. Productivity was associated with fertility, farming, crafts and food. Fire, Water most definitely feel like a requirement for this.

Which leaves Hanging, Strangulation, and Falling as the Sacral aspect. Maybe a bit of a stretch, but then again, maybe not. I did some research and apparently hanging and strangulation are one of the largest recorded methods of human sacrifice in the world. It seemed to be considered symbolic, as the neck seemed to have bridged the gap between our earthly and spiritual selves. Strangling also left the physical body intact and ensured a clean and bloodless sacrifice to appease the gods.

So maybe not so much of a stretch after all.

Also, RIP my google history after looking all this up.

But these three forms of death fulfilled the requirements of one of the functions of the triad. And it would seem that despite differences in mythos and deities, Celtic culture retained that belief in some shape or form.

And now we can move into the examples.

Celtic Examples of Threefold Death

We're going to begin with the mythological examples, as those ones are a little easier to explain.

Also, because a few of them link back into one of my favourite aspects of British mythos as a whole: Arthurian.

Excited? I am.

Welsh Mythos

In Welsh mythology, the Threefold death is heavily associated with the character of Myrddin Wyllt. This Myrddin would go on to become one of the primary sources of Merlin from Arthurian legend. In early Welsh legend, Myrddin lives as a wild man in the Caledonian Forest.

There are many variations of Myrddin Wyllt written over time. In the chronicle from Elis Gruffydd, Myrddin predicts the Threefold death of a knight. Similarly, in the French Lestoire de Merlin, he predicts this of a baron, "he will break his neck, and hang, and drown".

In Geoffrey of Monmouth's Vita Merlini, Merlinus is captured from the woods by his sister Ganieda and her husband, the King of Cumbria. They bring him to their castle and chain him up to prevent him from escaping.

He uses a leaf in Ganieda's hair as reasoning for her carrying out an affair. To discredit his abilities, she tries to trick him. She brings a boy out in three different disguises and asks Merlinus to tell her how the boy will die. The first time, he says the boy will fall from a rock. She changes the boys clothes and brings him again, and Merlinus predicts he will hang. FInally, Ganieda brings the boy disguised as a girl. Merlinus states "Woman or no, he will drown."

Years later, the boy falls from a rock. He hangs himself from a tree on the fall and drowns head-first in a lake.

Myrddin commits to the same prophecy in Scottish Literature under a different name. Here, he is named Lailoken by hagiographer Jocelyn of Furness (not a woman!).

Fun Fact: Jocelyn of Furness wrote Life of St Patrick. Historians believe he is likely responsible for the myth of St Patrick casting the snakes out of Ireland! You can thank old Jocelyn for St Paddy's Day mayhem!

Lailoken is a 6th Century AD madman and forest hermit. Like Vita Merlini, he is brought to court. This time, the Queen is not his sister, and the King is Meldred, who would later go on to inspire another Arthurian villain.

Lailoken makes the same accusation of the Queen's affair due to the leaf in her wimple. In this one, Lailoken has predicted he himself will die via falling, stabbing, and drowning.

It comes true. The Queen incites a gang of shepherds to attack Lailoken on the road as revenge. He is driven off the edge of a cliff and falls onto a spear left pointed upwards by fishermen. He dies with his head below the water.

Irish Mythos

Whilst I believe this story may not count as early Irish mythos, it's Threefold death inclusion certainly hints at retained fragments of Celtic and PIE themes.

The two stories are connected, and the first comes from Vita Columbae.

It tells a tale of Aedh the Black, an Irish king of Ulaid. He is described as bloodthirsty and has killed Diarmuid, who was King of Tara and High King of Ireland. He goes on to be ordained by a bishop from outside the church, as well as having a sexual relationship with another man, Findchan.

St Columba is horrified to hear this, and so predicts that Aedh shall be piercing with a spear, fall from a tree into water, and drown. Aedh the Black is indeed wounded with a spear, whereupon he falls from the prow of a boat (the tree) and drowns.

The same fate, ironically, is what befell Diarmuid when he is killed by Aedh.

He attempts to have Aedh arrested, only for St Ronan to offer Aedh sanctuary. So Diarmuid has Ronan tried and arrested instead. Ronan curses Diarmuid and Tara. Tara goes to ruin and Diarmuid's wife has an affair with a warrior named Flann.

Enraged, Diarmuid burns Flann's home with him inside. Flann attempts to crawl into a vat of water to escape the flames and drowns.

After, Diarmuid's druid counsellor predicts Flann's kinsmen shall kill Diarmuid as revenge. The kinsman in question: Aedh Dubh, also known as Aedh the Black. Diarmuid shall die by slaughter, burning, and drowning.

And of course, Diarmuid doesn't believe him. So he goes to a feast where Aedh is, and ends up being stabbed with a spear. Diarmuid flees home, only for Aedh and his men to set the house ablaze. He follows Flann's footsteps and climbs into a vat of ale, and a burning pole falls onto his head as he does so. Of course, Diarmuid dies.

In both, Dumezil notes that both Aedh and Diarmuid commit sins that go against one of the three functions.

Aedh is a murderer, which goes against the function of the warrior function. He is ordained outside the church and defies the sacral function, and he lays with a man, which Dumezil argues would have gone against the function of fertile nature.

Similarly, Diarmuid arrests a priest (sacral function) and commits murder against Flann (warrior function).

So it would seem that Irish mythos has the theme of the 'punishment fits the crime' in a sense. The crime of sinning against a function requires a death within the confines of said function.

And perhaps that has historical basis in sacrifice. There is a prevailing theme of Kings being sacrificed in Irish myth, usually when their kingdoms struggled or suffered from draught, famine, and disease. A King was usually blamed for these issues as rule and thus sacrificed to appease whatever forces caused the problem.

Lucan's Pharsalia

Lucan, also known as Marcus Annaeus Lucanus, was a famous Roman poet. He wrote Pharsalia about Julius Caesar, and we'll be examining the section that is about Caesar's Gallic conquests.

In this scholia, Commenta Bernesia, Lucan writes about three humans sacrificed to three Celtic gods. These gods were Teutates, Esus, and Taranis. We've mentioned Taranis a few times on this blog now. It's beginning to look like he was a pretty big deal in Celtic religion.

Each of the three men was killed in a different way that reflected the god they were sacrificed for.

For Teutates, who is a tribal deity, victims were dunked headfirst into a barrel of water and drowned.

For Taranis, the thunder god, victims were placed inside a hollow wooden container and it was set alight, burning them alive. This is often compared to Caesar's alleged witnessing of a Wicker Man sacrifice.

For Esus, we are a little unsure of what he was a god of. There is little to no information except a linking to a pictorial myth in Paris named the Pillar of the Boatmen. He is portrayed pruning or felling a tree, surrounded by a bull and three cranes. Another one in Trier seemingly confirms this.

I did some research in this. We can definitely say Esus was a god related to trees. However, it is the animal choices that interest me. A bull often symbolises masculinity, virility, and fertility. Cranes were associated with the Otherworld by the Celts, but also magic and parenthood.

Hence, I would theorise Esus was some sort of nature god. His victims were suspended by a tree and bloodily dismembered according to Lucan.

Now, its important to remember that Romans embellished or straight up made up all sorts of things about societies they deemed beneath them. Both them and the Greeks often tacked on details they associated with barbarism to these cultures. They saw themselves as culturally superior and the Romans needed valid reasons to 'civilise' these nations.

Bog Bodies and Lindow Man

And now we move on to our only potential real life Threefold example. And I say potential because we actually will never have any idea if this body really was a human sacrifice, or a victim to some other crime.

Bog bodies are a pretty gruesome and interesting find in archaeology. Whilst the extent of their preservation is often dramatized by the general media, it is indeed cool that we find corpses that are thousands of years old, preserved in peat marshes.

There are a large number of bog bodies found across the world, but most are discovered in the regions of Denmark, Germany, Ireland, the UK, and the Netherlands. All of these areas are either Germanic or Celtic during the times a lot of these bog bodies are found. Most are from the Iron Age, though a handful are from between the Mesolithic and Bronze Age.

The Iron Age ones interest me the most. Despite being from different areas around Northern Europe, the bodies bear striking similarities in the manner of their deaths.

We'll be focusing on Lindow Man for this article though.

Lindow Man was discovered in 1984 by peat-cutters in Lindow Moss, Cheshire, England. Another ancient bog body had been found in the bog a year earlier, named Lindow Woman, though I believe they only recovered her skull.

Lindow Man does not have an exact time of existence. Archaeologists believe he lived during 2 BC or 119 AD, making him either an Iron Age or Romano-British Celt. He's on display at the British Museum as far as I'm aware.

It's his cause of death that has critics coming up with all sorts of theories.

After cleaning up the corpse, it was discovered that Lindow Man had been subjected to a violent death. There was, in order:

A V-shaped cut on the top of his head.

A laceration to the back of his head.

Ligature marks around his neck, complete with a sinew cord tied around it.

Possible stab wounds to the right side of his neck and upper-right chest.

A broken neck.

A fracture rib.

Now, the body is decayed enough that we cannot know if any wounds were inflicted post-mortem. But swelling along the head wound suggests he lived after being struck. It was a blow that fractured his skull and sent fragments into his brain.

Once deceased, Lindow Man was buried face down in the peat bog.

We have no way of knowing why he was killed, only that they went to extremes to get to that point. But some have theories, and Anne Ross' one is the theory we'll talk about here.

Anne Ross was Celtic scholar and archaeologist who was considered an expert in Iron Age religion. She suggested that Lindow Man was a human sacrifice to Celtic gods, and his death (throat cut, strangled, and hit on the head) was an example of the triple death we have seen prevailing across Celtic mythology.

Obviously, people dispute this. If Lindow Man existed in Roman times, then it is a hard sell as the Romans had outlawed human sacrifice. Historian Ronald Hutton challenges the interpretation of sacrifical death in bog bodies, but we'll never really know the truth behind it.

My interpretation is thus; we'll never know for sure if Lindow Man and the bog bodies were human sacrifices. But we know a lot of societies that evolved from Proto-Indo-European culture did, to some extent, commit human sacrifice, so it's hard to believe that the Celts would not, at one point, have done so. However, its important to note that a lot of PIE descendant cultures did not practise human sacrifice often, and it seems to have only been during desperate times or done to slaves following their masters to the afterlife.

We finally get onto a wholly linguistic conversation that I find oddly fascinating. Truly, learning about language and how we believe it developed is such an interesting concept.

There are two main theories in Celtic language distribution and the ways it branched off.

The first is the Insular/Continental theory. Scholars suggest that the main distinction between the different Celtic languages derives from a massive difference between Continental Celtic language and Insular Celtic. To them, the Goidelic and Brittonic languages only developed once the Insular Celts had split off from the Continent and arrived in Great Britain. This forms a very rigid, structured tree that has a set linguistic evolution

PIE < Common Celtic < Continental Celtic < Insular Celtic < Brittonic and Goidelic

It's pretty straight forward. I don't think there is much I can add to that conversation as it favours a direct evolution of language that you can follow like a family tree.

But it is the second theory that we'll be talking about in detail today.

The P/Q Celtic Hypotheses

At some point in the study of Celtic linguistics and etymology, the theory was put forward of a new way of examining how and why the Celtic language branches off the way it does.

Scholars noted that the main, core difference revolved around the use of the specific sound in the languages.

In Proto-Celtic, the *kw is a hard sound found in a lot of their words. It is typically put down in written form as /C/ or /Q/.

Q-Celtic languages are the languages that kept this *kw format in their language. P-Celtic, on the other hand, moved away from *kw and developed a /P/ sound in their language.

Whilst not the only major difference in Celtic etymological evolution, it is the one we have used most to differentiate between the languages and where they might have evolved from.

P-Celtic Languages are:

Welsh

Cornish

Breton

Lepontic

Noric (?)

Gaulish

Q-Celtic Languages are:

Irish

Scottish Gaelic

Manx

Celtiberian

Gallaecian

It's insane how languages so far apart can remain so similar. In the P/Q Celtic theory, the first language to split off from Proto-Celtic was actually Gaelic. The idea has its upsides, but also its downsides.

There is of course, the question in hand. Why did the Gaelic languages have such a strong similarity to Hispano-Celtic? How did they evolve to be similar?

This is where some interesting information from Irish Mythology comes in handy. Because its genuinly astounding that we can find links so early in time.

According to Irish Mythos, the island itself was invaded by six different races over time. The mythos is largely Christianised now, but it is the second, third and final race that invade Ireland that interests me.

The races of the Parthalon, Nemed and Milesians invade Ireland centuries apart, but all have one thing in common. They were said to have arrived from the Iberian Peninsula. The Milesians specifically are representations of the Irish people, and are the Gaels that became the ancestors of all Irish living on earth.

This is attested to in two main texts. The 9th Century AD text Historia Brittonum is a seemingly anonymous work of texts that discuss the three Iberian settlers' groups. The Parthalon all die of plague in Ireland, the Nemed are driven from the island by the Fomorians and return to Iberia. But the Milesians overcome the Tuatha De Danann and maintain sovereignty over Ireland.

Fun Fact: Historia Brittonum is considered the earliest attestedd mention of King Arthur! Though some believe Aneirin's Y Gododdin, estimated at potentially the 9th Century AD, may actually be the real first mention.

The second text that mentions Iberians settling Ireland is Lebor Gabála Érenn. It is allegedly an ancient history of the founding of Ireland and was compiled in the 11th Century. This one is heavily rooted in Christian texts, as it stems from Adam and states a Scythian king is the forebearer of all Gaels. It includes the languages forming from the Tower of Babel, and that a man named Goidel Glas crafted the Goidelic language. The Goidels spend 440 years wandering the earth after leaving Egypt during the Exodus.

An exile called Mil and his followers reach Iberia and conquer it, building the city of Brigantia. He has a large tower built, from which his son Ith stands atop and glimpses Ireland in the distance. Ith sails to Ireland with his men and meets the three Kings of Ireland. At some point Ith is killed and his men return to Iberia and plot their revenge. They fight the Tuatha De Danann and eventually come to terms, with the Milesians taking the world above (Ireland) and the Tuatha De Danann taking the world below (Irish Otherworld).

I'm aware I've just went on a mythological rant there, but the fact that 9th and 11th Century writers believe the Irish stemmed from the Iberians is very fascinating when you look at P/Q Celtic theory. The Celtic languages in Iberia were Q-Celtic alongside Goidelic. Makes you wonder just how much our ancestors were able to understand about these similarities? Is it indeed possible that Iberians settled Ireland and gave rise to the Goidelic languages we see spoken today?

One of the best examples I can give you is the word used to denote 'son of' in Gaelic vs Brittonic.

In Scotland and Ireland, we know *mac means 'son'. Surnames like McCarthy or MacLeod are prevalent and denote a patronymic society.

In Welsh and Cornish, we have *map or *mab. It was often contracted to *ap, but carried the same meaning of 'son of'. So we get Owain ap Gruffydd and Dafydd ap Gwilym.

The P/Q difference is clear here. And it pops up the more you research into the etymology of Celtic words.

This was a fun, if slightly shorter article to write. And its always a bit of a thrill for me when Celtic mythos and Celtic linguistics combine to form plausible theories, even if some of them are a bit of a stretch.

I just felt like dropping a quick post just detailing some of the posts I have ideas for. There's a lot of things I want to cover and honestly there's no pattern or schedule to it I just write it in my own time.

You might get a post every week. You might get three in one day. You might not get a post for a month and then I'm back with 7000 words on Celtic toponymy and it's continued usage in the outskirts of Britain.

Celtic Scotland Before Gaelic

The Celtic Calendar Pt2 - Holidays and Festivals

Celtic Tribes And Where To Find Them

The Druids - Who Were They?

A Dummies Guide To The Mabinogion

Putting the 'Celt' Into Christianity - How Different Was It From Roman Catholicism?

The North/South Divide - An Age Old Tale of England

The Connection Between Insular Celts and Continental Celts

Celtic or Germanic? The Debate of Celts on the Rhine

Names For Your Baby - Gaulish/Welsh/Irish/Scottish/Manx/Breton/Pict Edition

Hen Ogledd, Y Gododdin, and the Works of Aneirin

P/Q Celtic Theory

A bit of a different turn from some of my previous posts. Still in line with history and linguistics, but altogether a more wholesome look into the names and meanings we see in Celtic history.

This post is focused on the names found commonly amongst the Cornish. PLEASE NOTE that these names can also be found in other Celtic groups as well as Germanic, Roman etc. A lot of names have equivalents.

I wanted to focus on the Cornish first because they get so little love in comparison to the Irish, Welsh, and Scottish. Plus I think they have some of the prettiest names.

Without rambling on, we'll begin!

Male Names

Cadan

Derives from the Brittonic Celtic root word *cad, meaning 'battle' or 'fight'. When combined with the suffix of an, it becomes 'Fighter', 'Battler' or 'Little Warrior'.

Has quite a lot of Welsh and Gaelic equivalents. I found no specific Cornish people of note with this name, but it comes up quite a lot when researching.

Arthur

A name most famous for the legendary King of the Britons in Arthurian legend. Arthur was said to be born at Tintagel Castle.

It actually comes from the Proto-Celtic word *arto, which means 'bear'. It also appears in Old Welsh as Artur or Arthwr, but because of its strong links to Cornwall I included it here.

Its a very common name in the UK, so you'll find a lot of Arthurs dotted about the country.

Denzel

The name Denzel (and its variants Denzell and Denzil) originate from a manor called Denzell in the parish of St Mawgan in Cornwall. It seems to have come from the Cornish word *din, which translates as 'fort' or 'stronghold' and also itself derives from Proto-Celtic *dunon. The name Denzel actually means 'from the high stronghold' or 'dwelling at the fort'.

The most famous Denzel I can think of is Denzel Washington, who probably does not derive his name from Cornish language. Or maybe it does. Someone ask him. I couldn't find Welsh or Gaelic equivalents so this one might be unique to Cornwall.

Jago

Jago has no Celtic root word, because it has no actually origin in Cornwall. It is simply a Cornish spelling of the name 'James' or 'Jacob'. It's root form is in Hebrew, and means 'supplanter'.

Margh

Whilst also seen as an equivalent to the name Mark, Margh actually has Celtic roots. It seems to have come from the Proto-Celtic word *markos and then the Proto-Brittonic word *marx, which translates as 'horse'.

And yes, that may seem odd to name your child after horses. But horses were a major part of Celtic life, so much so that they have a strong worship for the goddess Epona. It was likely an honour.

Margh is also a variant used in some versions of Tristan and Isolde, a Cornish/Welsh story tied into Arthurian legend. Margh/Mark is Tristan's uncle. Sometime good, sometimes evil.

Jory

A difficult one. Some sources told me this is another Celtic equivalent to the name George, and therefore had the meaning of 'farmer'. However, I also found a source or two that listed Jory as meaning 'joy'. Either way, its a nice little name and I actually like it.

It had another equivalent in Cornish as Jowan.

The Jory that comes to mind is from George R.R. Martin's series A Game of Thrones. Jory Cassel is a member of Ned Stark's retinue.

Locryn

A name that I found hard to discover it's meaning, but did have a lot of history about. So let's get into it.

Etymologically, I couldn't find much. But Gaelic has the word loch, which relates to a body of water. A lot of Cornish names are about water, so maybe Locryn is too?

In history, Locryn seems to be a shortened version of the name Locrinus. Locrinus is one of the legendary kings in Historia Regum Brittaniae. He's the eldest son of Britain's mythical founder, Brutus, and rules an area of the south-east that was named Loegria. Sometimes called Loegrys or Lloegr. In this, Locrinus marries the daughter of Cornwall's founder, called Gwendolen.

Lowen

A pretty cute and happy name for a child, given that it derives its origins from Proto-Celtic *lowenos, which means 'happy' or 'joyful'. It lasts long enough in this similar form to be passed down to Proto-Brittonic *llowen, Welsh *llawen, and Breton *laouen.

It does have a female variant or is regarded as unisex, which I'll put into the next set of names just to lengthen it out.

Perran

So THIS one is actually very interesting. Because its roots don't begin in Brittonic.

They originate in Gaelic.

Perran is the Cornish variant of the Irish name Ciaran. It comes from the Gaelic term *ciar, meaning 'dark' or 'black'. When combined with the suffix, it becomes 'little dark one'.

Gothic.

An Irish abbott named St Piran/Ciaran brought the name Ciaran to Cornwall in the 5th Century. The name stuck, and adapted to the Cornish language to become Perran.

Tristan

One of my favourite names on the list. I also love its Welsh variant Drystan. It's actually one of my favourite names ever and if I ever had kids and didn't think they'd be bullied for it then I would use it.

Tristan actually comes from the Brittonic/Pict word *drest, which seems to have meant something along the lines of 'riot' or 'tumult'. It became Drustan soon after, and eventually made it's way into Cornwall and Welsh history to become Drystan and Tristan.

So I guess, with the suffix, it becomes 'riotous one' or 'tumultuous one'

Ruan

This was a hard one. Ruan also exists in Gaelic but with a completely different meaning. I actually had it down as the Gaelic one until I did more research for this post and realised I was wrong. Whoopsie!

Ruan's exact root and translation is mostly lost to us now, but it's used in a lot of Cornish placenames, and etymologists seem to link it to Latin origins in the root Romanus.

With the Romans being so prevalent in Cornwall, perhaps Ruan was used to refer to someone of Roman descent? In which case it could mean 'Roman one' or 'Roman born'.

Sennen

Another name that I think comes from Gaelic origin and travelled to Cornwall with missionaries and abbots. Sennen comes from the historical Saint Senan, otherwise known as Sinninus. Sinninus sounds like an old Celtic name you would find in Gaul, so I think it's still got Celt origins.

In Ireland, the root form is *sen and means 'old' or 'wise'. I believe its the root behind names like Shannon.

Despite Sennen becoming popular amongst girls as a baby name, it originally began as a masculine one.

Daveth

Another variant on a Hebrew name. This was comes from David. Except said differently.

There's a pattern with Celtic interpretations of other names. Names like Jacob, David, and James all have the 'ay' sound when spoken. Whilst their Celtic versions use 'ah' sounds instead.

Remember that when reading this. Its one of the ways to distinguish names as unique to mostly Brittonic culture.

With that being said, Daveth would mean 'beloved' or 'friend'.

Caradoc

This name shares a root word with one of our favourite Celtic rebels in AD. Caradoc comes from Proto-Celtic *karatākos, specifally the *kar prefix part meaning 'to love'. When combined with the doc suffix, it becomes 'dear love' or 'worthy of love'.

Awwww.

The name stems from the Brittonic name Caratacus. You'll remember him as the 1st Century AD King of the Catuvellauni people who fought against the Romans prior to Boudicca.

Caradoc has Welsh variants, and is also the name of a Knight of the Round Table in Arthurian mythology. You'll find Celtic variants in most of Arthur's knights, seeing as the tales began as Celtic ones.

Ennor

A very uncommon name.

Ennor stems from an Old Cornish phrase en noer meaning 'the land' or 'the great island'.‘

It's more of a surname in history than anything, but I found it on a post where plenty of Cornish people stated they knew children named Ennor, so I've added it.

Androw

Yes, another variation of another name, this time Greek.

I add these, not because they're of Celtic origin, but because they're deeply entrenched in Cornish culture. This is a Cornish name, regardless of it's origins.

Androw comes from the a Greek name meaning 'masculine' or 'courageous'. However, the ow suffix actually suggests the name meant 'son of Andrew'.

Talek

This one is a strictly Cornish name, deriving from Middle Cornish.

The prefix comes from the Cornish word *tal, which means 'forehead' or 'brow'. Its suffix ek is from Cornish too, and means 'having' or 'characterised by'.

In other words, the name means 'foreheaded' or 'wide-browed'.

What a name to give your kid. I feel sorry for whoever carried this with them in their life.

Taran

A name I can easily track all the way back to Proto-Celtic roots. The word *toranos means 'thunder', and Taran is widely used across Welsh and Breton as well.

Its used in the name of the Celtic thunder god, Taranis, one of the oldest and widely known gods in Celtic history. We discussed how the second intercalary month may be in reference to Taranis (Barantaran). So getting the name Taran was a pretty big deal.

Female Names

Elowen

Let's start off with an easy one. Elowen is a beautiful name that is actually the Cornish word for an elm tree. So the name literally translates as 'elm tree'.

I'm not sure how old Elowen actually is as a name, but elm trees and trees in general were pretty important to the Celts. I have a feeling its one of those words that was not actually a women's name until the 20th Century where it became popular. Simply a historical word someone found pretty enough to use for their baby.

Jenifer

Sounds pretty modern until you look into it.

Jenifer actually began in Cornwall as Gwynnever, the Cornish variant of the Welsh name Gwenhwyfar. The name comes from *gwen, meaning 'white' or 'blessed' and *hwyfar, which means 'smooth' or 'soft'. The name translates to 'white fay' 'fair one' and 'white phantom'.

Jenifer itself is pretty popular in its modern form Jennifer. However, Gwenhwyfar has popularity due to being the name of King Arthur's wife, usually re-modeled in the French retellings as Guinevere.

Kerensa

One of Cornwall's beautiful names. You're going to find a lot of the female names are equally stunning and fairytale-like.

Kerensa is Cornish, but does ultimately stem from Latin roots. It Old/Middle Cornish origin is *karenz, which means 'love' or 'affection'. The name itself means 'love' or 'beloved'.

And despite similarities, its not related in any way to the next name on our list.

Kensa

A pretty Cornish name fit for a firstborn daughter. Kensa has Proto-Brittonic roots in the word *kint, meaning 'first'. It slowly tricked down through Cornish until we come to the word Kensa, and means 'first' or 'the first'.

It has Welsh variants as well, the word cyntaf. Not really used as a name the same way Kensa is.

Demelza

Alright, anyone who's seen or read Poldark needs to stop here so I say this. The meaning that Demelza gives for her name is untrue and unequivocally false. It does not mean 'thy sweetness' at all.

Demelza has toponym origins, meaning it derives from a place. The prefix once again comes from *din, meaning 'fort'. The whole name means 'fort on the hill' or 'fort of Melza'.

So... sorry to disappoint the Poldark fans. But that translation is just plain wrong.

Morwenna

And finally, the Mor prefix comes into play.

Mor is one of the most used prefix and suffix terms in use in most Brittonic names. They love it. I'll go into it later because it has a lot of pagan and deity links.

Ultimately, it comes from the Proto-Celtic word *mori, meaning 'sea'. It has PIE roots and is the ancestor word for all Celtic languages word for 'sea', and has only minimal changes across Brittonic and Gaelic.

the wenna suffix stems from the same word as Gwen. It is the Proto-Celtic *uindo, a common term for 'white' or 'fair'. You won't find a lot of 'w' in Proto-Celtic so the 'u' is a placement for it.

Altogether, Morwenna means 'sea maiden' 'white waves' or 'fair maiden of the sea'.

Lamorna

Potentially my favourite on this list. It has toponym origins and also comes from a Cornish phrase Nansmornow. In Cornish, *nans means 'valley', whilst the mornow suffix probably has something to do with the sea or water. Therefore, I say the name means 'valley of the sea'.

Doesn't really make sense until you try and reach outside the box. Historians believe Mornow may have been the name given to a local stream. Without a lot of words denoting water, a 'valley sea' seems a good translation.

And there is a Lamorna Cove in Cornwall. So I think 'valley of the sea' is a pretty good guess.

Lowenna

We've gotten around to the feminine version of Lowen. Indeed, Lowenna means 'joy' or 'happiness'. Many Celtic names added an additonal /n/ and an a suffix to feminise in the later centuries.

Tamsyn

One of our first real variant Cornish names from a non-Celtic language. Tamsyn comes from a contracted form of Thomasina, itself a feminine variant to Thomas.

The word is Aramaic in origin and means 'twin'.

I'm actually more shocked the Cornish spelling is an /s/ and not a /z/.

Tegen

The Cornish spelling of a name that is technically of Brittonic origin. And one I find humorous as someone who speaks Welsh.

It's Brittonic root is *teg, meaning 'fair' or 'pretty'. Overall, the name means 'little fair one' or 'pretty little one'.

However, tegan is the Welsh word for 'toy', pluralised as teganau. It's very hard to take the name seriously knowing that in a whole other Brittonic language it also means a toy you give to children.

Yselka

A hard one to determine. Some etymologists seem to believe it has the same roots as the name Iseult/Essylt/Isolde. If so, it would mean 'fair' or 'shining'.

Its the spelling and prefix that is pulling me away from this. The Old Cornish word *isel means 'modest' or 'humble'. There is a modern Cornish name of Ysella that means the same thing.

I think there's a chance Yselka IS a variant of Iseult that still carries the /k/ that was commonplace in early Brittonic names.

Glanna

The name traces back to Proto-Celtic *glanos and Proto-Brittonic *glan. It means 'pure' and 'clean'.

Some people associate it with the Welsh word for 'sisterhood' or the Gaelic gleanna meaning 'valley', but etymologists seem pretty certain Glanna as a feminine name means 'pure one'.

Ailla

This one is a woozy translation. I think it likely has Gaelic roots and comes from the irish word *aille, meaning 'beauty' or 'brightness'. It is a variant of the Scottish name Isla, and I doubt Ailla is an ancient Cornish name.

I don't have much more to say on this one. It doesn't strike me as particularly Cornish, but I've added it anyway.

Nessa

This one I added last minute because I only found it whilst doing research for this.

Nessa means 'second' apparently. It comes from Middle Cornish *nessa, itself from Proto-Brittonic *nesaβ̃, which actually meant 'nearest'. It forms part of three names, one of which is coming up next!

Tressa

The third and final of the trio names. Kensa came first, then Nessa, and finally Tressa.

Tressa comes from Middle Cornish *tresse and Proto-Brittonic *trɨdɨð, and means 'third'.

So if you have three Cornish triplets and need to remember which is which, maybe the names Kensa, Nessa, and Tressa are a go-to?

Then again, maybe not.

Igerna

This is technically a Cornish Latinised form of the Welsh name Eigyr. It was made famous by Geoffrey of Monmouth in Historia Regum Britanniae.

Geoffrey gets around.

Eigyr is mentioned in the Mabinogion tale Culhwch ac Olwen as the daughter of Amlawdd Wledig. In Historia Regum Brittaniae, she is the wife of Gorlois, Duke of Cornwall.

In Culhwch ac Olwen, she is King Arthur's aunt. In Geoffrey's tales and almost all Arthurian text, she is Arthur's mother, having been seduced by King Uther and married when her husband Gorlois dies. Depending on the tale, she is also mother to Morgan Le Fay/Anna of Orkney/Morgause. It really depends on the tale because Arthuriana is as confusing as it is amazing.

I've lost my point. We're unsure of what her name means, but some scholars think it has Celtic roots in either 'ice' or 'honour'.

Morva

Another Mor name. This one has a direct translation as 'by the sea' or 'sea-marsh'. Some people like to romanticise this and the name comes to mean 'gift from the sea'.

I'm using this to springboard into another point. A LOT of Celtic names on baby-name sites and other places have false meanings. It's best to research it yourself, because sometimes these sites deliberately change the meaning to suit themselves to make it sound better. 'gift of the sea' is a contemporary translation, but that does not make it the right one.

Senara

It was a struggle, I'll tell you that. Even now I'm unsure of what this name means.

It seems to be related to a patron saint of Zennor in Cornwall. A 6th Century Breton princess called Asenora was cast out to sea in a chest by her mother-in-law. She washed ashore in Cornwall and led a life devoted to Christ.

Mother-in-laws are the worst, huh?

Other than this, it might be linked to an older Brittonic name Senovara, meaning 'wise hero' or 'old hero'. I have a feeling this was a masculine name that has slowly been misidentified as a feminine one, and likely derives from the same place as Sennen.

Modern baby name sites try to say it means 'light' or 'radiance'. Which seems unlikely, since it has almost zero links to the ACTUAL Brittonic words that mean these things.

Sewenna

Now, the research seems a little foggy on this one, so I'm going off-track to put forward my opinion. It happens often as I don't trust Google to give me straight answers, or most Celtic blogs really.

The suffix is something we've seen in a lot of names. It should mean 'fair' or 'white' because that's what it means in Morwenna. I think it could even apply to Lowenna too, making that 'fair joyful one'.

Sewena is also a phrase rooted in Cornish language. It is used to wish someone prosperity or good health. So Sewenna could mean 'wealth' or 'prosperity'.

It could also be combining meanings for Sennen/Senara with the wenna suffix. It which case, I think it could mean 'fair wise one' or 'white old one'. Just throwing it out there.

And that's it on the Cornish names. I'm not going to rake through all possibilities or make a massive list per area because that would take hours and frankly I also have other things to do, like writing my novel or going to work.

But if you're a reader from Cornwall, feel free to comment some! If you have one of these names or know someone who does, chime in too! This is a learning experience for all involved, including me. I'd love to add new names to my Celtic Name Database I'm building.

We have many ways of spelling her name. Boadicea and Boudicea to the Romans. Buddug to the Welsh. Boudica, Boadicca, and Boudiga to the Gauls. It's a historic, true Celtic name. And certainly fit for a queen of Boadicea's status.

Her name derives from the Proto-Celtic word *boudīkā, which means 'victory' or 'victorious'. Meaning there is a chance it was not her real name, but actually a name given to her after her rebellion against the Romans began. This crops of amongst a lot of Celtic rebels who fought the Romans.

We'll begin by explaining Boudicca's story as we know it. But from then on, I want to discuss the various other Britons, Gauls, and Picts who fought back against the Roman Empire. Because no culture wants to bow down to someone else preaching that their way is better.

Boudicca's Story

Before the Rebellion

What we know of her begins just prior to the events that made her famous in history. She was the wife of King Prasutagus, King of the Iceni people. The Iceni were a Brittonic tribe inhabiting the south-east of what is now England. The area they ruled is now Norfolk, as well as some parts of Lincolnshire, Cambridgeshire, and Suffolk.

Fun Fact: The Iceni were responsibly for producing some of the earliest recorded British coins! A lot of the south-east tribes had been minting coins for a while before the Romans took over.

The Iceni had already revolted before, in 47 AD. The Roman governor of Britain, Publius Ostorius Scapula, had attempted to disarm all Britons on the island to prevent them fighting back. This did not go as intended. As a result, Prasutagus was allowed to maintain a great deal of independence over the ruling of the Iceni kingdom, provided he remained an ally of the Romans.

Together, he and Boudicca shared two daughters. As far as we know from texts, they never had any sons.

The Cause of the Rebellion

In 60/61 AD, Boudicca's husband Prasutagus died. He left a will though. In it, he bequeathed his kingdom jointly between his daughters and the Roman Emperor Nero.

Well, the Romans didn't want to hear that. They ignored Prasutagus' will entirely. The kingdom of the Iceni was declared part of the Roman state of Britannia, and the man named Catus Decianus was sent to force the Iceni people to swear allegiance to the Roman Empire.

They were pretty famous for doing this. Often, Romans would make Celtic tribes their 'client-kingdoms' under their current leader. Money was gifted to these Celt leaders, as well as protection from neighbouring tribes. But when these leaders died? All protection was gone, and the tribe would find themselves instead governed by whatever Roman was put in charge.

Which is exactly what ended up happening. Catus Decianus pillaged the Iceni lands. Tacitus and Cassius Dio describe different accounts of what happened.

Dio says that the loans given to the Britons by Seneca and Claudius were recalled and all riches confiscated for the Roman Empire. Tacitus goes down a darker route; he states that Catus Decianus had Boudicca flogged, and her daughters raped, to send a message to the Iceni people.

The message? The Roman Empire owns you now.

Catus Decianus is largely credited for the uprising of Boudicca and the Iceni. His actions likely made the situation worse, and gave not only the Iceni, but other tribes a common enemy to work towards.

The Revolt

Boudicca managed to gather not only the Iceni, but her neighbouring tribe the Trinovantes. There may have been others who joined too. Together, they marched upon the Roman colony of Camulodunum, a place for retired Roman Soldiers. They razed it to the ground, killing everyone. Men serving in the Legio IX Hispana attempted to help the soldiers, but suffered defeat. The Britons killed the infantry and only the commander and a few cavalry escaped with their lives.

This was the beginning of her rebellion. Boudicca would go on to destroy two more towns.

And Catus Decianus, the man who incited her uprising? He fled to Gaul shortly after Camulodunum was destroyed. He was aware that his vicious actions towards the Iceni had aggravated the local tribes. He had sparked one of the biggest Celtic rebellions in Britain.

The main reason Boudicca had been successful in destroying Camulodunum was because the Governor of Britain, Gaius Suetonius Paulinius, was away on a campaign on the island of Mona (now known as Anglesey or Ynys Mon). Ynys Mon was the main place of learning for Druids, and even druids from Gaul came to Ynys Mon to be taught! To the Romans, this was a central place of Celtic power.

Upon hearing of Camulodunum's fate, Suetonius made a hasty return to mainland Britain, having tempered Mona. He actually made it to Londinium before Boudicca and her armies. However, he did not have the men to defend it, and so ordered evacuation and retreat. She burned the city to the ground with such ferocity that we now have the Boudican Destruction Layer in archaeology.

She then went on to destroy the Roman town of Verulamium (modern day St-Albans). Dio and Tacitus both said around 80,000 people were killed in the sackings, and the Brittonic tribes spared nobody.

And don't think the Celts were kind, either. They also committed mass rapes, pillaging, and murder. They spared no man, woman, or child, and Dio writes that noblewomen had their breasts cut off and sewed to their mouths, and were impaled on spikes. Now, it's hard to completely trust a Roman's accounts of events. But both Dio and Tacitus had been largely sympathetic to Boudicca's cause prior, so there might be some truth to it. Celts had some brutal practises in their time across the continent and Britain.

They also detail of sacrifices and feasts in the name of Andraste, a Brittonic goddess of Victory. Any game nerds will recognise the name Andraste from the Dragon Age games. But she was a real deity of some of the Celtic people, and Boudicca allegedly prayed to her for victory before battle.

The End of Boudicca

All good things must sadly come to an end. Boudicca had caused so much commotion amongst the tribes against the Romans that Emperor Nero had almost considered withdrawing all Roman legions from Britain and giving up. Julius Caesar had already been driven out of the island years and years beforehand. Even in Gaul, the Celts were becoming hard to manage.

But Suetonius was not stupid. He was an excellent general. Gathering an army 10,000 strong, he placed his forced in a narrow pass with woods behind, essentially bottlenecking any Britons charging. Some sources say they were outnumbered. That mattered very little to the Romans. Regardless of the chances, Boudicca's army was decimated. The Romans even killed the women and animals.

We don't know what happened to Boudicca, or her daughters. Tacitus says she poisoned herself to prevent capture by Suetonius. Dio says she simply fell sick and died. But with her death went the rebellion of the Britons.

But she wasn't the only one.

Caratacus' Story

Prior to Rebellion

Caratacus was a King of the Catuvellauni people during 43 - 50 AD, a mere few decades before Boudicca's rebellion. He was the son of King Cunobelinus, a pre-Roman king of the Catuvellauni and the Trinovantes. This second tribe later assisted Boudicca in her rebellion.

Fun Fact: The stronghold of the Catuvellauni was called Camulodunon! This would later become Camulodunum, the Roman colony Boudicca destroyed in her path of revenge. It derives from the Celtic god Camulus, a god of war.

Caratacus' name stems from the Common Brittonic name *Karatākos, meaning 'loving, dear, friend'. A pretty chill name for a man who united others against Roman forces.

Caratacus was actually not king after his father. That went to his uncle, Epaticcus. Epaticcus had expanded the Catuvellauni land beyond their original territory, taking land from a tribe called the Atrebates. When he died, the Atrebates took back their land under King Verica. Verica was already a client-king under the Roman Empire. His victory did not last long, however. When Caratacus took the throne, he conquered the entirety of the Atrebates' land. In response, Verica fled to Rome and appealed to his allies there to help retake his land.

This gave Emperor Claudius the excuse he needed to launch his formal invasion of Britain in 43 AD. They attacked Caratacus' stronghold of Camulodunon by four legions that were made up of 40,000 men.

Caratacus and his brother Togodumnus were summarily defeated, and Dio states his brother died, though this is contested by other modern historians. The Romans conquered the Catuvellauni territory and converted Camulodunon into an outpost for their own men.

It's important to note that I don't consider these events as part of his rebellion themselves. It was completely normal for Celtic tribes to war and fight one another over land. Caratacus seemed to have not understood the seriousness of attacking a client-kingdom of the Romans.

Caratacus' Rebellion

Caratacus survived, and had fled alongside his wife, daughter, and brothers to the lands of the Ordovices and Silures. These tribes lived in what is now Wales. Here, he rallied the tribes in the area to fight back against Roman invasion. He engaged in what we would now considered to be guerrilla warfare. Using the mountainous region to his advantage, he managed to evade capture and ambushed the Romans whenever he could.

He spent the next 7 years harrying the Romans. They were forced to chase him all around Wales. By the end of the decade, they were sick of Caratacus, and governor Publius Ostorius Scapula was determined to end the rebellion once and for all.

In 50 AD, Caratacus met the Romans in battle. As with most face-on battles against the Romans, he lost. The Roman forces were successful in capturing Caratacus' wife and daughter, whilst he himself fled to the lands of the Brigantes.

The Brigantes lived in what is now Yorkshire. They may have been a confederation of different tribes ruled under one. They were a client-kingdom of the Romans and ruled, not by a king, but a queen named Cartimandua. She's an interesting case as it is largely believed Cartimandua was a ruler in her own right, and not through her husband Venutius.

But she was also a staunch ally of the Romans. And so when Caratacus came looked for aid, she instead handed him over to her Roman allies in chains. So much for Celtic solidarity, huh?

Because it wasn't a thing. Anyone who tries to portray the Celts of Britain as a largely anti-Roman group who banded together are wrong. Many actually enjoyed life under the Roman Empire. The Romans were great soldiers, and offered protection against being conquered by other tribes.

Defeat of Caratacus

So, the Romans had Caratacus at long last. This pacified the majority of southern Britain and brought the rebellions to a temporary halt. He was taken to Rome as a prisoner, where they intended to execute him.

Tacitus states that instead, Caratacus gave a speech on how his capture made the Romans seem that much greater. Impressed with his bravery, the Romans instead let him live his life in peace. He was pardoned and remained in Rome until the end of his days.

A NOTE: I will always defend Cartimandua, who is portrayed as a scheming, evil Queen by Tacitus and subsequently history. She was a woman leading a VERY large tribe. There would have been some of saw her as weak or easy to invade. She may have needed the Romans to keep her power.

Largely in history, Queen are portrayed as scheming and manipulative. Tacitus' words about Cartimandua are VASTLY different from how he talks about Boudicca. He stresses Boudicca fought as a free woman rather than a queen, largely because queenship was seen as a negative thing in ancient history.

But handing over Caratacus didn't work out for Cartimandua anyway. Her betrayal of the proclaimed 'King of the Britons' caused her own Brigantian people to revolt against her and the Romans. They first revolted themselves in the 50s AD, and the rebellion was put down.

The second rebellion brings us to our next Celtic leader.

Venutius' Story

We know little of Venutius prior to Caratacus' attempts to find sanctuary with the Brigantes. Some historians believe he may have belonged to the Carvetii tribe prior to marriage to Cartimandua. This tribe likely formed part of the Brigantes' confederation.

We do know that he was loyal to the Romans during his marriage to Cartimandua. He went along with her plan to hand Caratacus over to the Romans, and likely supported her during the first revolt.

Here's where things turn tricky. Cartimandua seems to have gotten fed up with Venutius as a husband, and so divorced him. Celtic women could do that, and it wasn't that uncommon to hear of. Instead, she married Venutius' armour-bearer, a man named Vellocatus. She elevated Vellocatus to king beside her and left Venutius behind.

Needless to say, he was not impressed. His initial rebellion seems to have been centered on just overthrowing his wife. Her Roman allies jumped in to protect her, and he was forced to fight. This first revolt by Venutius was quickly pacified.

He rebelled again during the unstable period for Rome known as 'the year of four emperors'. Tacitus writes that the Brigantes tribes loved Venutius, and preferred him to Cartimandua. This took place in 69 AD, 8 years after Boudicca's rebellion and defeat. Cartimandua appealed to the Romans for aid again, but they were busy with their own issues back home and could only send a handful of auxiliaries. Consequently, Cartimandua was evacuated from her lands and is never heard from in history again. Likely, she was taken to Rome and allowed to live there as a reward for her continuous loyalty to the empire, but we'll never know.

Venutius was left to rule the Brigantes. Now free from Roman influence, they seem to have continued to resist Roman rule from here until the early 2nd Century AD. The Governor of Britain in both 71-74 AD and 78-84 AD recorded campaigns in Brigantes territory. We have no further information on what happened to Venutius after this. He may have eventually been killed, or maybe he ruled until his death.

Our next rebel stays on the island, but we move much further up norht to the lands of Caledonia, or what we now know as Scotland.

Calgacus' Story

This is a short section, much like Venutius'. We know very little about Calgacus, only that he fought the Romans and was the first recorded Caledonian on paper, and so the first ever Scottish person recorded in history. Pretty cool feat for the guy!

This is prior to the Gaelic invasion of Scotland, and therefore Calgacus belonged to the Brittonic speaking Caledonian confederation. He led them in rebellion against the Roman General Agricola. Agricola is kind of a big deal, as he was responsible for most of the conquering of Celtic Britain for the empire. He is also allegedly the man who figured out that Britain was indeed an island.

I have little to say on Calgacus. We know his men were defeated, but he himself is not among the list of Agricola's prisoners. He either survived or died in battle.

BC Rebellions

Now, we've been looking at rebels in AD. But now we shift to BC, to the Celts who opposed the might of Julius Caesar on his initial invasion of Celtic lands in both Britain and the continent of Europe.

We don't necessarily know a lot about some of these, so they might be short, quite like Calgacus and Venutius' sections. But I felt it was right to include them anyway.

Cassivellaunus' Story

Cassivellaunus is a legendary Brittonic Celt who made such an impression on history that he appears in both Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Brittaniae, the Mabinogi, and the Welsh Triads as the son of Beli Mawr.

That's right. This guy is so cool that he was immortalised as part of Britain's myths and legends.

Which is why its such a shock that we actually don't know a lot about his real life. What we do know is that he opposed Julius Caesar, and he was the leader of the Catuvellauni, in 54 BC.

Remember them? They were the tribe ruled by Caratacus. Cassivellaunus' successor, Tasciovanus, is actually the grandfather of Caratacus. The Catuvellauni had been a thorn in the side of the Roman empire for generations.

Cassivellaunus was a fighter, and is reported to have been in constant wars with his neighbouring tribes over land for years. He had succeeded in defeating the King of the Trinovantes, and their ruler's son Mandubracius fled to Gaul to beg Caesar for help.

Cassivellaunus, like many Celtic warriors, employed guerrilla tactics and harrying to fight the Romans. He was doing alright, until the British tribes of the Cenimagni, Cassi, Bibroci, Ancalites, and Segontiaci surrended to Caesar and gave up the location of Cassivellaunus' stronghold. Caesar commended a siege.

Cassivellaunus sent word to to the four kings of Kent, Cingetorix, Carvilius, Taximagulus and Segovax, to rally their troops and help lift the siege on his holding place. The ambush failed, however, and Cassivellaunus was forced to surrender. Hostages were traded, tributes shared, Mandubracius restores as King of the Trinovantes, and Cassivellaunus sworn to never wage war against him again.

Caesar left Britain. The Romans did not return for another 97 years.

And now we move to the continent.

Bituitus' Story

We move to the 2nd Century BC, to the area now known as Auvergne, France. Bituitus was the King of the Arverni, a Gaulish tribe that had been opposing the Roman Republic during the 3rd and 2nd Centuries BC by Bituitus' father, Luernius. As we will discuss, the Arverni remained a thorn in the Romans' side of a long time, much like the Catuvellauni.

The Arverni allied with the Gallic tribe of the Allobroges in 121 BC, when the Allobroges were defeated in battle by the Romans. They planned a second attack together, and Bituitus entered battle for the second time. He greatly outnumbered the Roman legions, having amassed over 120,000 men.

He was defeated. And the reason I specified he had over 120,000 men was because we have estimated records that 120,000 of his men fell in battle. It was a slaughter that the Romans somehow managed to win. They captured Bituitus and had him taken as prisoner to Rome. Here, he was sentenced to exile in Alba Fucens and this is where he spent the rest of his life. He was the last exile King to be sent here; the rest remained in Rome from this point on.

Despite his defeat, the Arverni were left to be independent. They had ties to Rome and were mostly left to govern their own lands and neighbouring tribes under partial autonomy. The Allobroges, however, were not.

After Bituitus was exiled, the Arverni seemed to have turned from the monarchy system and moved to favour an oligarch society between 121 and 70 BC.

That is, until the next rebel leader of their tribe.

Vercingetorix's Story

Prior to Rebellion

Vercingetorix was born decades after Bituitus' defeat. And it may not have been his real name. The name translates as 'supreme king of warrior' or 'great leader of heroes'. Much like Boudicca, this may have been given to Vercingetorix at some point as a result of his actions. We have no idea if he had a name prior to this.

We believe he may have been born in the 80s BC. He was a member of one of the Arverni elite families, and we have his family names on record too. His father was Celtillus, and his uncle was Gobannitio. He also had a cousin called Vercassivellanaus.

In 70-60 BC, Celtillus attempted to convince the Arvernian elites to restore kingship to the tribe, with himself as King presumably. This didn't go down well with the aristocracy of the Arverni. They murdered Celtillus. It cast suspicions on his son, who they believed may also carry similar ideals. This put Vercingetorix on the outskirts of Arverni society, unable to hold a leadership role for fear he would try a similar thing.

His moment came in 52 BC. Another Gaulish tribe called the Carnutes started a rebellion, killing Roman merchants and suppliers who resided in their capital city of Cenabum. Other tribes were also committing to similar uprisings, including the Senones tribe. Vercingetorix initially tried to rally the Arverni to join, but was exiled from his homeland of Gergovia by his uncle Gobannitio, who feared riling up their Roman allies. Remember, the Arverni had suffered defeat at Roman hands before.

Vercingetorix's Rally

Despite being sent away, he was able to rally men around the countryside to his cause. These were mostly farmers and poor folk, spurred on by his supposed cause for freedom and anti-Roman sentiment. Still, it was enough to lead an army to Gergovia, capture the city, exile those who had opposed him, and declare himself King of the Arverni.

So, the elites of the tribe had been right to fear Vercingetorix had the same goal as his father.

Thus began his rebellion against the Romans.

Around ten Gallic tribes between the Seine, the Loire, and the Atlantic Ocean joined with Vercingetorix and his tribe to fight. And he was different from other Celtic leaders. Previously, Celts had fought wildly, with guerrilla attacks and frontal force battles. They were considered barbarians and untrained to the Romans and Caesar.

But not Vercingetorix. He drilled military discipline and regiments, and instilled an organisation to his troops that had rarely been seen in other Celts who rebelled. He had a structured army, and Caesar began to see him in a different light. Suddenly, Vercingetorix was looked at as a rigorous, capable leader with a rigid and well trained army. He had become a genuine threat.

And his first decision was to try and sway other tribes to his side, rather than face the Romans just yet. And if he could not sway them, then we would force them.

Vercingetorix marched against the Bituriges Cubi, a tribe kept in check by their patron tribe, the Aedui. The Aedui were staunch Roman allies and not so willing to join the Arvernian King.

To divide Caesar, he had Cadurcian leader Lucterius provoke attacks in Gallia Narbonensis, a Roman province in what is now Southern France. Caesar stabilised the region and forced Lucterius to withdraw before attacking Arvernian territory. Vercingetorix had not expected this, but nevertheless continued. He moved to engage them, only to find Caesar had moved on to Gallic Lingonesan territory.

His response? To besiege the Aeduan oppidum of Gorgobina. An oppidum is a fortified settlement of Iron Age Celts, and it was the primary seat of the Aedui tribe. Caesar was forced to admit that this move put him in a tricky position; the season and terrain made it risky to help the Aedui without taking heavy losses, but refusing to aid the tribe could cause them to defect and join Vercingetorix's army.

But you must remember that this is Julius Caesar we're talking about. As much as I dislike the Romans from a Celtic historian's point of view, I have to admit that they were revolutionary in military tactics. Caesar instead moved to capture several towns in Arvernian territory before sieging against the Bituriges town of Avaricum. Vercingetorix had lost time and initiative to Caesar and was forced to abandon Gorgobina and move on.

Instead of meeting Caesar in combat as many Gauls might have done, Vercingetorix instead adopted 'scorched earth' methods. He burned fields and crops to force the Romans into limiting their supplies, and had Caesar's hunters and foragers harassed. Caesar attempted a surprise attack on Avaricum, but was forced to retreat to avoid heavy losses. The sudden retreat made Vercingetorix's followers suspicious; they believed there might have been a secret deal in place. Whatever the situation, Vercingetorix was able to rally them back with a speech.

The Romans did eventuall capture Avaricum. They put the people to the sword and massacred the population. Of 40,000 people, only 800 found refuge in Vercingetorix's camp. Caesar likely hoped this would kill hope in the rebels.

It did not. Instead, Vercingetorix was not abandoned, and records show he hoped to gain new allies. He had noted that the Aedui support for Romans was wavering after Caesar did not come to their aid at Gorgobina.

The Siege of Gergovia

This is where Vercingetorix reaches his all-time high in achievements. He withdrew his forces to Gergovia, pursued by Caesar. Here, he was besieged by the Roman general. He was narrowly defeated during an attack on the Roman encampment when Caesar returned from dealing with other issues amongst the Aedui.

The issues amongst the Aedui were whispers of defection. Caesar had been forced to journey to the tribe to help decide their next chief magistrate between two candidates, Cotus and Convictolitavis. Wanting to avoid a potential war between Romans and the Aedui, Caesar reviewed the evidence and agreed with choosing Convictolitavis.

He would come to regret it. Convictolitavis had wanted the Aedui to secede from their Roman support, and had hidden that well enough that he came to be in Caesar's good graces. Now he had power, he no longer had to hide that he supported Vercingetorix's rebellion.

The Romans at Gergovia, meanwhile, were having a hard time defeating the Arvernians. Caesar and his troops made an almost successful attempt to breach Gergovia and get into the inner walls, but a counterattack sent them reeling. It didn't help that the 10,000 Aedui soldiers accompany Caesar's supply train had turned on the Romans on the orders of Litaviccus and Convictolitavis.

Faced with defeat and unaided, Caesar was forced to order a withdrawal. It was one of only three Roman defeats during Gallic Wars, and one of the few times Caesar had ever been out-manoeuvred by an opposing general. And now he had lost the support of the Aedui.

The Aedui attempted to establish themselves as leaders of the rebellion. It didn't work; the other tribes had seen clear as day that Vercingetorix was the driving force of the Gallic uprising. He was named supreme commander.

The Battle of Alesia

Unfortunately, Vercingetorix's luck ends there. Caesar moved to Agedincum instead of Gallia Narbonensis as the Gaul had expected.

Here, he engaged with the Gauls led by the Aedui. However, the Aedui abandoned Vercingetorix's strategies and met Caesar and his legions in open cavalry battle. A rookie move. Although it almost succeeded, Caesar had Germanic recruits who were able to break the lines and capture Aeduan leaders. It forced Vercingetorix to retreat to the city of Alesia, land of the Mandubii. He had already won one siege, and clearly he felt he could thwart Caesar with another.

Caesar was not going to fall for it a second time. He constructed siege forts, camps, ditches, etc. Soon, food began to dwindle in Alesia. Talks of surrender came about, though many were against it. The Gauls let their women, children, and elderly leave, hoping Caesar would allow them to go free or accept them as prisoners. But instead, they were trapped between Alesia and the Romans and starved to death. A cruel fate, and one that made it clear that Caesar did not intend to let the Gauls go unpunished.

A relief army led by Vercingetorix's cousin and other tribal leaders attempted to help him. The Romans were successful in stopping three attacks. In the end, Vercingetorix was forced to give up on the uprising, and the Gallic rebellion came to a halt. Vercingetorix left Alesia and rode to Caesar, casting down his arms and surrendering himself to save his people.

He was imprisoned for years. Rather than exiling Vercingetorix, as many Gallic leaders had been, Caesar chose to execute him. Historians believe it may have been strangulation.

This might be a surprise, but Caesar had very little choice. Anti-Gaul sentiment was building in Rome, and he had only recently returned from the civil war against Pompey. Though Caesar did acknowledge Vercingetorix as a worthy opponent, he could not risk the Roman people thinking Caesar liked the Gauls, as he was credited as often being too soft on them.

Boduognatus' Story

A very short story indeed. We know very little about Boduognatus. Only that he was the leader of the Belgic Nervii tribe during the time of Julius Caesar and the Gallic Wars. He took part in leading his people at the Battle of Sabis in 57 BC, where he launched a surprise attack on Caesar. The attack overwhelmed and almost defeated Caesar, but as usual, he recovered and managed to go on to defeat Boduognatus.

Ambiorix's Story

Potentially one of the most famous Celtic resistors to Roman rule, besides Boudicca, Cassivellaunus and Vercingetorix.

Ambiorix was king of half of the tribe of the Eburones. The other half was ruled by Catuvolcus. This was a Belgic tribe in north-eastern Gaul in what is now Belgium (go figure).

The story starts as thus: Caesar's troops needed food for their campaigns against the Gauls. To this end, Caesar demanded the nearby tribes give up part of their harvest. The issue was that the harvest had been poor, and by forcing the Eburones to give their food away, he was starving them. He had camps built near their villages, and centurions commanded to force the people to hand the food over.

The anger this caused Catuvolcus and Ambiorix to join forces and attack the Romans in 54 BC. Roman troops lived amongst the Eburones people during the winter. They were attacked by the people, but Ambiorix feigned ignorance and advised them to flee, stating that Germanic forces were preparing to cross the Rhine and attack. The Romans did so, only to be ambushed by remaining Eburones who killed them all.

Elsewhere amongst the Nervii, a coalition of Belgic tribes surrounded another Roman statesman's camp on Ambiorix's orders. Caesar came to their aid after hearing word, and was able to trick Ambiorix's men into attacking them and sent them fleeing. Nevertheless, most of the camp's men were injured.

The Roman Senate became aware of the Belgic rebellions. It put Caesar in a precarious position, and so he swore to massacre every Belgic tribe he found. And as we know, Caesar was good at carrying out his wishes. After several years of fighting, the Belgic tribes were driven out, slaughtered, and their fields and villages burned. After this, the Eburones do not appear in our history. A Roman writer called Florus states that Ambiorix and his men crossed the Rhine and escaped, but we'll never know how truthful that is. There are no records of his capture or death, which Caesar most definitely would have written down. He simply vanishes.

Dumnorix's Story

Dumnorix was a chieftain of the Aedui sometime in the 1st Century BC. He belonged to the side of the tribe that opposed Romans and wished to fight back against them. His older brother, Divitiacus, was the opposite.

Fun Fact: Divitiacus is also the only named ancient druid in history! Proof that druids did not always oppose the Romans.

Dumnorix conspired with Orgetorix of the Helvetii and Casticus of the Sequani to crown themselves as rulers of their respective tribes, and subsequently rule Gaul together. Dumnorix even married Orgetorix's daughter. Sadly, Orgetorix died shortly after their conspiracy was discovered. Nonetheless, Dumnorix continued with the rebellion, persuading the Helvetii to follow his cause and getting the Sequani to allow the tribes to cross their lands. Through all this, Dumnorix pretended to be an ally of the Romans.

It worked pretty well. He used his influence amongst the Aedui to stall their supply of grain reaching Caesar's men, and his personal retainers were a large portion of the Gallic auxiliary Caesar took with him to pursure the Helvetii. At the last second, Dumnorix withdrew his men from Caesar's army and scored the Helvetii a victory.

Yeah, teamwork!

Eventually, a Gallic leader named Liscus betrayed Dumnorix and told Caesar who was responsible for preventing the grain shipment and losing the battle to the Helvetii. Dumnorix was spared serious charges due to his brother's good relationship with the Romans, but still placed under surveillance.

Caesar actually intended to take Dumnorix with him to Britain as a hostage. The man tried to worm his way out of it before telling the other hostages that it was a ploy to kill them secretly. He tried to escape camp with Aeduans, but was hunted down and killed by Caesar's men.

Maybe he should have gone to Britain with him. He could have met other Celts who shared his sentiments.

Brennus' Story

Brennus was the chieftain of the Gallic Senones tribe. Not to be confused with another Gallic leader called Brennus, who fought against the Greeks in an invasion of Balkan territory and died in Delphi. It was clearly a popular name.

This Brennus is just as cool. He led the Senones, a tribe that was from north-central France and expanded to occupy some of northern Italy. And he existed from 5th Century BC to 4th Century BC, making him one of the oldest Celts in our article.

Brennus had gone as far as Italy, and battled against the people of Etruria, the Etruscans. Apparently, the people known as the Clusines went to Rome for help, and Rome sent men to negotiate. Well, those neutral negotiations turned to the Romans aiding the Clusines in fighting back the Gallic men. Thus, Brennus turned on Rome for revenge.

There is no real record of this being true and it could simply be a story made up by Livy and Plutarch. The Clusines had no real motive to run to the Romans for help. Plus, the Gauls were warlike and were constantly fighting one another for land and gold. Brennus would have needed very little reason to invade Rome.

Brennus defeated the Romans at the Battle of Allia in 387 BC. In doing so, he and his men entered the city of Rome and captured it for a time, with the exception of the Capitoline Hill. The Romans allegedly tried to buy Brennus off by offering him gold. The story goes into what I consider to be dramatised retellings, with alleged quotes. But eventually, Brennus seems to have been expelled from Rome. We have no historical record of what happened to him after this.

We're about to deep dive into one of my biggest misinformation hatreds of all supposed ancient Celtic facts.

Handfasting: Is it really an ancient Celtic practise, or is it just something people believe?

Well fasten those seatbelts cause we're about to go on a trip.

Where The Word Comes From

The term 'handfasting' was recorded as a verb in Late Old English to mean 'to formally promise, to make a contract'. In Early Modern English, it was considered a term used for an engagement or contractual betrothal.

If you go back even further than that, historians seem to believe it is a loan word into English from the Old Norse word handfesta. This literally translated into 'to strike a bargain by joining hands' which is pretty on par for what the Late Old English describes it as. A few later Germanic languages like Old Frisian and Middle Low German have words with a similar spelling and meaning.

So far, we're seeing a lot of Norse and Germanic origins, and not a whole lot of Celtic.

There are terms in both Irish and Scottish Gaelic for a similar practise.

In Irish, the comparative term would be ceangal na lamh, which translates to 'binding of the hands'. The Scottish Gaelic version is posadh-bliadhna, which actually means 'year marriage'. So, not quite the same meaning, but it seems to have had a similar context for the handfasting itself.

And whilst this can sound like handfasting IS a Celtic tradition, I think it's important to take a clear note of a few details here:

There is no recorded Continental or Brittonic version of handfasting. If it were truly an 'ancient Celtic' tradition, we would have numerous -if slightly spotty- sources that would indicate the practise was performed across the whole of Europe during the Iron Age and into the Roman Empire. Certainly, we would have some form of writing from the Romans.

The Scottish Gaelic version of the word is completely different from the Irish linguistically. Those of you who read my first article post about how Celtic languages developed would know that Scottish Gaelic directly descends from Irish. Were handfasting an ancient Celtic practise, the Scottish would have a phrase for it that would not vary so much from their Irish counterparts.

Now, onto my second gripe.

Records of Celtic Handfasting

A simple Google search for handfasting will show you a dozen wedding websites advertising their handfasting offers. They'll tell you all sorts of things, like how it was practised in the festival of Beltene, and that a Druid oversaw the binding of the hands.

Brides.com goes a step further, and straight up lies by saying "The handfasting ceremony has its roots in ancient Celtic tradition and dates as far back as 7000 B.C."

ABSOLUTE bullshit.

Because as far as we know, the Celts did not emerge as a group until the Bronze Age, around 1200-500 BCE. 7000 BCE was the neolithic period, and it was during this time that the island of Great Britain was split from the mainland Europe by a massive tsunami. The Celts were NOT performing handfasting back then, because they didn't exist as a culture yet.

But it's this kind of misinformation that feeds into modern day fans of 'Celtic' culture and Neo-Pagan practises. By the time it reaches social media, its accepted as a fact.

Almost every wedding website or simple Celtic blog will tell you handfasting is an 'ancient Celtic tradition'. These are the ones to treat with a pinch of salt, because what do they class as ancient?

I did some search into verified records of Celtic handfasting in history. Yes, verified. I'm not counting maybes here.

Continental Celts

I found absolutely nothing in what we classify as Ancient Europe. Certainly not anything directly tracing its etymological roots back to handfasting or the modern concept we recognise today. Once again- if the Continental Celts, such as the Gauls, were performing this ritual in marriage, we would know. The Romans liked to document things. Pliny the Elder did so much work on Druids and Celtic spirituality. He definitely would have noted such a tradition. And we DO have some information on marriage during the time (I'll save that for a whole post on real Celt marriage traditions!).

Brittonic Celts

In England, Cornwall and Wales, it's rather the same. Handfasting in these areas doesn't crop up until the 13th Century. Even then, from here until the 17th Century it seemed to be more of a promise of marriage than the actual marriage. The Catholic and Protestant churches both banned a lot of these older practises in favour of Christian marriage traditions. Again, I know Brittonic culture varies from Goidelic, but not enough that they would have completely different marriage rituals. Handfasting would have existed in some form in Wales and Cornwall if it were truly 'ancient'.

Irish Celts

Now, onto Ireland. Which, admittedly, is hard to explain without doing a full other article on Irish law.

The Irish had what they called the Brehon Laws. These were practised from the 1st Century AD all the way until the early 17th AD, when the British began to suppress Irish culture in favour of their own law system. Its complicated, long, and supports a society dominated by honour systems, social contracts, and grades of status.

And above all, women had great independence, rights, and more freedom in Irish society than in any European society at the time.

Handfasting being a tradition doesn't fit into this. Irish marriage existed into seperate forms according to contribution, gender, and social status. These were:

lánamnas comthinchuir - marriage of common contribution

lánamnas for ferthinchur - marriage on man-contribution

lánamnas for bantinchur - marriage on woman-contribution

I'll go into detail on these in my planned marriage article, but they also seem self-explanatory to me. Marriage was arranged and dictated according to the finances and property the pair brought into it.

Polygyny existed in Irish culture. As did divorce, which was a shock for such a lot of the Catholics. Hence why they worked so hard to suppress Brehon Law.

So whilst we see handfasting as an ancient Irish thing, it's likely borrowed into the culture due to the meaning behind it. Handfasting is an early root for 'shaking hands' as a deal. Irish marriage WAS a business deal. It seems along the way, we've borrowed Gaelic concepts of social contracts and adjusted it to fit the narrative built by modern wedding businesses.

Scottish Celts

So, the Scottish tradition of handfasting is a lot harder to explain. Namely because we DO have records of handfasting marriages in Scotland.

But they are neither ancient, nor do they seem to have a concrete link to Celtic tradition.

See, we discussed in my first post how the Scottish Gaelic culture stems directly from Irish, and likely emerged in the 3rd to 4th Century AD. The Irish had been using their Brehon Laws since the 1st Century AD, and maybe longer if the 1st Century is when they were recorded. Their laws have a lot of similarities to writings about the marriage in the Gauls, and so it sounds like they genuinely stem from early Celtic practises.

Therefore, if Scottish handfasting really derived from Celtic culture, it would look similar to the Irish concept of marriage.

One of our first recorded examples of a real handfasting marriage was between a woman named Marie Pieris and George Seton IV, 6th Lord Seton. Marie was a lady-in-waiting of Mary of Guise, Queen of Scotland and wife to King James V. You may recognise Queen Mary as the mother of Mary, Queen of Scots.

This occurred in 1539. Which is the 16th Century. This is NEITHER ancient nor Celtic! We live in the 21st Century, a mere 5 CENTURIES APART. 500 years ago is old, but it is not ancient.

In the Highlands and the Hebrides, a Scottish writer called Martin Martin (his name makes more sense in Gaidhlig) writes about a temporary marriage ceremony taking place on islands such as Skye. He wrote about how a couple could live together, betrothed, for a year prior to marriage. Should they not be compatible, they could seperate without ever having to be wed. This aligns with the Scottish phrase we discussed at the start of this post. Martin Martin's writings may have influenced the modern belief that handfasting began as a marriage of 'a year and a day' which, by the way, we also have little information to point this out as an actual fact.

Now, you might ask: wow, so it might have existed in some form in the Highlands and Hebrides after all. Doesn't that make it Celtic?

The answer is a tentative maybe, but for me? Still a no.

Lets focus on the root of handfasting again. It derives from Old Norse.

And in the Viking Age, history saw Norse-Gaels appear. I believe we discussed it in my 'Celtic Family Tree' post.

The Vikings settled in areas of Scotland when they arrived from Scandinavia. Notably, the Shetland Isles, Orkney, the Highlands, and some of the Hebrides Isles, and had settled there well into the 11th Century AD.

So the fact that the Hebrides and Highlands had this practise by the 17th Century AD is not insane. If the word for 'handfasting' is rooted in Old Norse, I don't think its an insane take to say these practises were heavily -if not outright- influenced by Norse culture.

As it has similar words in Old Frisian and High Germanic, one could even argue that the handfasting we know today as more roots in Anglo-Saxon marriage than it does Celtic! But as with Brehon Law, it was more of a contractual betrothal than anything else.

Therefore, I state this:

Scottish handfasting as we know it is a hybrid mix of Celtic, Germanic and Norse culture. I think it takes most of its modern interpretation from Norse marriage customs, including the word. But some of its older, contractual benefits likely have traces of Brehon Law and the degrees of marriage seen in Ireland.

Moral of the Story: Big Wedding is after your money. They appeal to Neo-Pagans, Celtic fantasists, and Scottish/Irish people by throwing loose terms about and making claims of celebrating an ancient practise as a big middle finger to England and Christianity.

End Disclaimer

This is NOT me shitting on your handfasting ceremonies guys. I actually think the premise of the handfasting is really sweet and romantic and honestly, I would not rule it out as a symbolic thing to do myself should I ever pursue marriage.

I should point out that it is not classified as a legal marriage ceremony in most of the UK. If you do handfast, get down to the Civil Courts and do the government one as well. Otherwise your marriage is null and void.

I simply wrote this article to point out that most handfasting offers by wedding businesses are simply a cash grab, and the 'facts' they spout are just them saying what they need to say to reel you in. If you still like the idea of handfasting, then go for it! But maybe not, you'll do it because you like the concept, and not because it's honouring an ancient Celtic ancestor.

Until next time! We're moving away from handfasting and delving into another of my passion topics.

The title is:

Not Just Boadicea - The Celts That Fought The Romans

Not a big rant post, just a quick shout out to a few of the places I use as a resource for information. Celtiadur is actually fantastic and the people that run it deserve all the medals. It's been helpful translating some of the texts I'm writing posts about, and also coming up with new theories based on similar words.

When we think of the Celtic Calendar, the main image that comes to mind is thus:

This is the Wheel of the Year. It is the Calendar used by a lot of Celtic Pagans, Wiccans, and British Neopagans. Popularised in the mid-20th Century, it focuses on Pagan holidays coinciding with the solstice and harvest schedule of the year. Through this, they are able to calculate dates upon which these festivals fall upon.

And I'm just going to say.

This is NOT a Celtic Calendar.

This is a Pagan Reconstructionist Calendar used by Wiccans. It combines Gaelic fire festivals with the Germanic festivals/months of Yule, Litha, and Ostara. Mabon appears too, which is actually Welsh in origin, and simply a reference to a character from Welsh mythology; Mabon ap Modron.

Whilst it is mostly compromised of Celtic festivals, it actually has zero information in common with how Celts actually split up their year.

It is also often confused with Robert Graves' Celtic Tree Calendar, which affixes a British tree and letter of the Ogham alphabet to one of his 13 Calendary months.

For both the Celtic Tree Calendar and the Wheel of the Year, you will find supposed 'Celts' and fans of Celtic folklore who insist that these are real, authentic Calendars used by ancient Druids and civilisations to track the year.

WRONG.

They are modern day reconstructions cobbled together. Graves' calendar has zero foundation in historical calendars or Celtic astrology. It's made up from his theories about Ogham language. The Wheel of the Year is influenced by Graves' writings, and has misled many modern pagans to believe the Celts had an overarching narrative for every season of the year.

In reality, the beliefs and cyclical nature of the Celtic year varied from culture to culture. Some things remain static, but the festivals, beliefs, and superstitions vary throughout the differing Celtic peoples.

Onto the real part:

What We Do Know

Unlike the Gregorian Calendar, which is a Solar calendar, the Celts as a whole seemed to focus on a Lunisolar calendar. There is evidence of this amongst both the Continental Celts and the Insular Celts. The Continental Celts show this in the Coligny Calendar, as each month appears to begin in the same lunar cycle. Similarly, historical evidence in Ireland points to the Gaelic days beginning and ending at sunset. This meant that the start of a new year began in darkness, suggesting a lunisolar connection across both groups of Celts.

So we know that the Celts tracked their year according to the cycles of the moon, rather than the sun. Any 'Celtic' calendar claiming otherwise is false.

We also know that the Celts had a large focus on the 'light half' and 'dark half' of their calendar. For the Insular Celts, the year was split into two. The Coligny Calendar of the Continental Celts does the same, dividing the year into only two seasons: Summer and Winter.

The Coligny Calendar, being a mostly intact reconstruction, goes on to divide it's 12 lunar months into a 'dark' fortnight and a 'light' fortnight. We'll explain more on how the Coligny Calendar works further down this post.

Fun fact: the fact that we use the term 'Fortnight' and 'Sennight' is lasting proof of lunisolar calendars being commonly used it early English history. The terms aren't actually Celtic- they actually span from Old English and originate in the Germanic culture, who also followed a lunisolar calendar.

Germanic + Celtic = Moon Freaks. Love to see it.

And it makes sense for the Celts. The year began on the first quarter moon, and according to Pliny:

“This is done more particularly on the sixth day of the moon, the day which is the beginning of their months and years, as also of their ages, which, with them, are but thirty years. This day they select because the moon, though not yet in the middle of her course, has already considerable power and influence; and they call her by a name which signifies, in their language, the all-healing.” — Pliny, Natural History 16.95

The Celts had an obsession with 'between times'. Their festivals were held at midpoints of the seasons rather than the direct season, and much of Celtic folklore has tales regarding liminal spaces and a 'world between worlds'.

The actual reason we see lunisolar calendars is simple: it solves an oddly specific problem in the calendar year. By keeping the months aligned with the natural cycles of the moon, the year stays synchronised with the seasons. This makes it easier for farmers attempting to track the harvest seasons, for fishermen and coastal tribes to predict the patterns of the ocean, and kept the major cultural holidays on track with the correct seasons associated.

Now, there did come a problem with this kind of calendar. A lunisolar calendar is 12 months, usually beginning with the first quarter moon (according to Pliny the Elder) and lasting the whole lunar cycle. This adds to 29.5 days in total.

The problem? Altogether, a 12 month lunar year only adds to 354 days, leaving 11 days to make up for in order to match with the solar year.

This is apparent on the Coligny Calendar. So, the Celts came up with a solution.

Every 2.5 years, an Intercalary Month is added. This keeps the lunisolar calendar aligned with the solar calendar, and prevents losing those 11 days and causing the seasons to drift out. This maintains the year in both the moon cycles and the sun's position. Clever, right?

The Coligny Calendar itself lays out a 5-year cycle of 62 months.

It would go as follows in a few cycles:

Cycle One

Year One: 12 Months

Year Two: 12 Months

Year Three: 13 Months

Year Four: 12 Months

Year Five: 12 Months

Cycle Two

Year One: 13 Months

Year Two: 12 Months

Year Three: 13 Months

Year Four: 12 Months

Year Five: 12 Months

The Intercalary Month isn't needed any other year, as those lost days are made up for by adding that one extra month of the cycle.

To those of us who use the Gregorian calendar, this might seem odd or even extraneous. But to the Celts, it kept the year in perfect symmetry between the moon and the sun, and gave them an easier time managing the planting, farming, and harvesting of crops.

So, to clarify.

BOTH the Continental Celtic and Insular Celtic calendars had a year split into 'light' and 'dark' halves, began their days at sunset, and focused on a lunisolar cycle.

Not myth. Not misinformation. A known, proven correlation. These kind of correlations help historians prove that these cultures descend from the same Proto-Celtic peoples.

Unfortunately, we know significantly less about the months and schedule of the Insular Celtic calendar. What we do have is marred by the influence of Christianity, including fasting days and translations of Latin equivalents.

So, we're going to focus on the Coligny Calendar.

The Coligny Calendar

The Coligny Calendar was discovered in France in, you guessed it, Coligny. Written in Gaulish language but Latin script, it is one of the oldest and only living pieces of proof of the Celtic year. It had been engraved on a bronze tablet, and the 40% of the tablet that still remains now provided an amazing base-work for a reconstruction of the calendar.

It has been dated to the 2nd Century AD by historians. However, the nature of the calendar, combined with our knowledge of Celtic history, suggests that whilst the bronze tablet itself is from the 2nd Century, the actual usage of the calendar probably predates this.

The calendar not only notes months and lunar cycles, but also auspicious months.

On the calendar, two words reappear. MAT and ANM(AT)

Historians have linked these to the Middle Welsh words mad and anfad, and also the Old Irish words mad and ni-mad.

To put it simply, MAT means 'good, auspicious' and ANM(AT) means 'not good'.

The Celts seemed to have used this to determine which months brought good luck, and which ones were associated with bad luck. From what I can tell, Intercalary Months had no MAT or ANM(AT) bearing, as they existed solely to right the lunisolar year.

With the Celtic year being split into two seasons, we can see which season was considered auspicious. Summer possesses 4 MAT months and 2 ANM(AT), whilst Winter is the opposite.

Makes sense for a cultivating civilisation. Summer brought crops, birth, sunlight, and hunting. Winter would have been harsher, a time of cold and stockpiling for survival. I'll go into why I think the months were split this way in regards to superstitions down the line.

Please bear in mind I am simplifying it here. For further info look into the Wikipedia article or research the Coligny Calendar!

It is from this calendar that we are able to understand how and why the Celts divided their year.

And below, I will give a rough, theoretical explanation.

DISCLAIMER: Whilst most of the below information is generally accurate and based on already available information, I have provided my own insights based on my own knowledge of the Celts and the linguistics of their languages.

Before I begin, I've linked to pages below that Celtic fans may want to browse to compare with my own notes. Khaliela Wright has some really interesting ideas and theories behind the months and what they represented, and some of her opinions of translations may differ from mine. I highly recommend her articles for further reading. I also reference her ideas quite often in my work.

The Celtic Months

Samonios {the summer month} MAT

Technically, if we follow the alignment with the solar year, the first Intercalary Month would be our starting point. However, for the sake of the article we'll leave those until the end.

Samonios. The beginning of the Celtic year. The Celtic calendar always begins and ends in what we consider to be Spring. It is a MAT month, which meant the Celts saw this month as a good omen.

The name itself derives from the Proto-Celtic word *samos, meaning 'summer'. The Gaulish word for this is *samo. To the Celts, Samonios was the month where the light half of the year was in full swing. We know from the Coligny Calendar that a three-night festival took place in this month.

Now, some historians will argue that the Summer Solstice should appear in this month to mark the start of the new year. I, however, agree with others and Khaliela that the month of Samonios came after the Solstice. The Solstice marked the first signs of summer. Summer came after.

I haven't done enough research on Samonios to determine what- if any- gods were symbolic of this month. Likely gods related to summertime, the sun, and perhaps livestock.

Dumannios {the fumigation month} ANM

Dumannios follows Samonios, and is actually an ANM month, which is a little odd to me given the context of the month.

The name likely comes from, again, Proto-Celtic words. The main one is *dumako, which means 'mist, smoke'.

Khaliela suggests a second word is *nina, which was Proto-Celtic for 'roof'. However, a lot of months in the Celtic Calendar end with 'nios', and she makes no mention of this translation in others. Therefore, I disagree and believe the correlation between the fumigation month and *nina is simply coincidence.

During this month, historians believe the Celts would spend time cleaning and fumigating their homes for the year ahead. Spring Cleaning come to mind for anyone? The Celts believed smoke could purify, and often drove their cattle between bonfires to rid them of fleas, ticks, and other insects.

They would continue to use this practise in their homes to clear away insects, lice, you name it. And of course, in doing so most likely replaced their beddings and flooring. Animals avoid smoke, so it kept their homes clear of rodents too. Which is why I find it so strange that its an ANM month.

Rivros {the bountiful month} MAT

One of my favourite months I researched, purely because I was able to link so much detail to it.

Upon reading Khaliela's article, I noticed that she could not find a linguistic link between the name of Rivros and any sort of translation. I did some digging, however, and I think I found it.

The Wikipedia page links it to Old Irish remor and Welsh rhef. These words translate to 'thick, stout, fat, large'. I went back further, and found the Proto-Celtic word *remros, which also means 'great, fat, thick'.

Remros/Rivros. You see it, right? I think I can say with at least 80% certainty that *remros is a high contender for the linguistic basis for Rivros.

And the fact that this is a MAT month makes perfect sense. We're heading into what I believe would be July/August in the solar year. Fruits and berries would be plentiful, and wild game will have reproduced and be running rampant in the forests that the Gauls were known to have lived in. The month is 'fat' and 'great' because of the sheer amount of food resources the Celts would have had access to.

Rivros is also the month of Lughnasadh, the Gaelic festival. In Wales, I believe the 'Brittonic' equivalent is Calan Awst/Gwyl Awst. Crops are sown and cattle has full access to hay pastures and would require less watching.

The God that seems to have played a central role in this month has different names according to the area. He is most well-known as the Irish god Lugh. However, the Welsh refer to him as Lleu Llaw Gyffes, and on the European Continent he was Lugus. He was a god of 'light, craftsmen, warriors, and trade' which I think fits in with the symbolism of Rivros perfectly.

Anagantios {the month of unknowing/ritual ablutions} ANM

This is a weird one. Wikipedia suggests Anagantios as 'the month of ritual ablutions' but offers no reasoning or translation beyond that point. Khaliela's article has little more luck. It seems that whatever ritual was supposedly celebrated during Anagantios is lost to time.

Khaliela does, however, find at least one potential origin. The Proto-Celtic *an-gnato means 'the unknown'. I went a step further myself, and put forward the Proto-Celtic *aneg-tlo, which was used in Gaul as a reference to the Hellenic god Apollo with translation of 'he whose protection is great'. From what I can tell, the word boils down to 'refuge' or 'protection'.

Whilst *an-gnato certainly sounds more like Anagantios phonetically, it is *aneg-tlo that seems to run in line with the idea of a ritual month.

I think context is key here. Anagantios seems to have run sometime between mid-August and mid-September. The biggest thing about this timeframe is how quick the weather shifts from hot, summery August to a colder September. In Anagantios, the smallest first signs of winter would have appeared just before Ogronnios.

In my personal opinion? The 'rituals' of Anagantios were an attempt to keep winter at bay for a few weeks longer. Perhaps the Celts prayed to their gods to try and halt the oncoming frost. It was a month of uncertainty, not knowing when August heats would fade into September colds. In this scenario, both *an-gnato and *aneg-tlo could work as root words.

Given this theory, its no shock that Anagantios is an ANM month. The initial signs of winter were as bad an omen as any.

Ogronnios {the month of first frost} MAT

This was another month that Khaliela struggled to find a linguistic root for. Wikipedia notes it as the 'month of cold/winter' and offers no actual translation.

Well, I found what is almost definitely the right one. At least in my mind. The Proto-Celtic word *ougros literally means 'cold'. It's the most likely candidate for the origin of Ogronnios, to the point that I have a hard time believing it could be anything else.

Ogronnios is the official first signs of winter encroaching on the year. We know this by looking at the events that took place in the same month. To the Celts, this was the time of the rutting stags during the breeding season of deer, or *sido-bremo, which translates as 'bellowing of stags'.

This natural event is well known in the Celtic world, even now. To the Gaelic, this is called Bhuiridh 'day of roaring' and the Welsh use the term Hydref, which is also their modern name for October.

Interestingly enough, Ogronnios is marked as a MAT month. Now, you might wonder why a month associated with the start of winter is considered a good omen.

So let's provide some theoretical context.

Ogronnios is the month of stags. And the Celts revered stags. To them, they represented a divine connection to the Otherworld; many Celtic tales from the Mabinogion and Arthurian legend feature a stag that leads our heroes into their quest. A stag's shedding antlers were also important, as they were symbolic of spiritual renewal and rebirth. As the Celts seemed to have believed in reincarnation, this is a very important detail.

So important were stags, that the Celts had a whole God modelled from them. You may know him by the Latinised version of his name, Cernunnos.

Cernunnos was the 'Horned God' of nature, fertility and wild animals. And whilst his name only seems to appear once in history, there are thousands of examples of a cross-legged horned deity across the world. In a culture build around the idea of life, death, and rebirth, Cernunnos is someone I estimate to have been a well-worshipped god. To that end alone, Ogronnios would be an auspicious month.

Kutios {the month of invocations} MAT

Now, the Wikipedia will show Kutios with a 'C' as Cutios. I feel I should state that the Coligny Calendar was written in Latin script, and therefore Latinicised significantly. So I chose to represent it with a 'K' as this is likely the most accurate version we will have.

The etymological origin of Kutios possibly derives from the Proto-Celtic word *Kʷrito, the Celtic word for 'poetry'. Hence Kutios being the month of invocations.

Now, you may ask, why poetry?

Because Kutios was the month of Samhain, or Calan Gaeaf as the Brittonic equivalent. Specifically, it was likely celebrated towards the end of the month. Kutios is the final month of our 'summer' seasons. From here on out, we hit winter. I assumed this is one of the reasons why Kutios is a MAT month.

I'll deep delve into Samhain on a later date, but what you should know is that the word has two etymological roots. The first being a combination of the words *samo and *fuin, which together make 'summer's end'. But the second suggested was the Proto-Celtic word *samoni. This word translates to 'assembly, coming together' and historians believe it had links to the assembly between the living and the dead.

It was a time of coming together for a week-long festival that celebrated death. Clans partook in customs to forsee future marriages, children, deaths, and life itself. And to the Celts, poetry was a great power in this. In Ireland, the Filid were a class of poets and seers. The fact that the ancient Irish equated poetry with the divine sight should say enough about this month.

Giamonios {the winter month} ANM

Another easy month. Giamonios derives from the Proto-Celtic word *giamos, meaning 'winter'. This month fell directly after the festival of Samhain/Calan Gaeaf, and was the first of the dark half of the Celtic year.

Naturally, Giamonios is an ANM month. This would have been the start of a long, hard winter. Celts would have needed to stockpile food and water prior to the cold months, and not everyone in the family would always survive it. Cattle struggled, and like all medieval farms, likely the family was forced to slaughter animals to survive.

Not a great month all around.

There's very little to say about this month. Giamonios has no outward links to any major festivals or gods that I know of. The only one I can think of is the Cailleach, also known as Beira in Scotland. She was classes as the undisputed ruler of the dark half of the year, and associated with winter, mountains, and storms. Cailleach is a primeval goddess who they claim shaped the wilderness and landscapes of Scotland.

Honestly, she seems a little cool.

Simivisonnios {the month of the half-sun} MAT

One of the months that is a bit of a mouthful. Simivisonnios derives itself from the Proto-Celtic word *simi, which means 'half'. Theoriests suggest that this is because the year has hit the midpoint of the solar cycle. It may also possess a Proto-Indo-European origin; the PIE root *wesn-ont-s is suggests, which means 'spring'. Put them together, and we get 'half-spring'.

The fact that the year is halfway around back to warmer nights suggests that is why Simivisonnios is a MAT month. It is also the month the Celts venerated Epona, the Celt goddess of horses.

Here's where it gets a little confusing. Epona gets her name from the Proto-Celtic word *Ekʷwos, meaning 'horse'. Funnily enough, our next month after this also has the hypothesised same root origin. Which makes you wonder why Epona's festival Eponalia does not appear in that month.

It's something we'll never know. But we have historical proof that Eponalia took place during the Winter Solstice in Simivisonnios, so there's little argument to be had there.

For me, I have to think outside the box. A lot of festivals celebrating the beginning of something (Samhain in Kutios, Beltene in Kantlos etc) occur PRIOR to the actual month. So maybe this suggests that the actual events Eponalia celebrate occur in Ekuos?

Ekuos {the month of livestock} ANM

As stated previously, Ekuos' root etymology stems from *Ekʷwos i.e. 'horse'.

But most historians seem to think this is compounded, and that Ekuos is the month of livestock. Which kinda makes sense, since we've just celebrated Epona only a month ago by this point in the year.

Khaliela goes further and tries to make the connection to the festival of Imbolg, which falls in the month of Ekuos. Imbolg is the most heavily Christianised of the four Gaelic fire festivals, so finding its actual celebration was tricky. Basically, it stems from cleansing and the celebration of pregnant ewes. She points out that sheep are some of the first animals to lactate, and therefore the livestock month makes sense. She does, however, note that Ekuos has no linguistic link to the Proto-Celtic words for sheep.

Most importantly, Ekuos is an ANM month. Whatever this month was about, it was not regarded as a month of good omens.

If I had to take a real good stab in the dark, I would say that this was a time of year where the Celts lost a lot of animals to the cold, especially pregnant ones. A quick bit of research told me that a lot of animals spend their last months of pregnancy in the winter. To me, this sounds an awful lot like a month where the Celts toughed it out in the cold and took extra care of their cattle, hoping to make it through.

It vaguely reminds me of an Irish tale I heard as a kid in a fairytale book. An old cow survived the harsh winters, and so boasted that she had survived. The month of March, hearing this, became angered and borrowed days from February. The extra days proved too much for the cow, and so she died.

Make of that little tale what you will.

Elembivios {the herd month} ANM

Elembivios is one of the months where I still struggle with the translations. Historians and Khaliela both suggest two Proto-Celtic words are the root basis. The fist being *elna, the word for 'herd' and the second being *biwoto, which is the word for 'life,food'. Wiki defines Elembivios as month of the stag, but I agree with Khaliela and say the herd sounds more likely.

To put it across in simple terms, this was the month where deer herds struggled in the cold, and were most vulnerable to attack from the clan's hunters. If food stores were running low, tracking the tired and hungry herd would certainly improve the clan's chances.

The only thing I struggle with this is that Elembivios is an ANM month. The tired herd should be a good omen. The only thing I can think of is that a herd of hungry, scared deer can be dangerous, and that hunters were risking their lives to secure food for their families.

We won't always seem logic in the MAT/ANM months. Omens were something Druids tended to look into, and perhaps they see something I don't.

Once again, another month almost entirely devoted to deer and stags. I reckon Cernunnos was again at play here.

Edrinios {the fire month} MAT

We move on to Edrinios, our only other MAT month in the dark half of the year. Whilst Khaliela struggled with a translation, I found mine quite easily. The Proto-Celtic word *aidos literally transates to 'fire'. I think this sounds similar enough to the beginning of Edrinios to be a contender; we must remember some of these spellings were Latinicised.

Edrinios is an ironic month. It's name originates from fire, and yet it is not a month that holds one of the four 'fire festivals' the Celts seemed to have celebrated.

Theories: some people suggest that Edrinios meant 'the end of summer heat'. But that seems a little odd, given where it is on the calendar. Plus, it doesn't correspond with any festivals to suggest this. We can clearly see on the Coligny Calendar that the four main festivals of the Celtic year occur in other months. Edrinios does appear to have its own smaller festivals, but none on the scale of these other four.

My theory? Edrinios meant the START of the summer heat, not the end. It seems to occur mid-March to mid-April, where winter chills are finally dying off. This makes sense to me, as the final dark month comes next. We near the summer solstice. It's equivalent in the first half of the year would have been Ogronnios.

I also think this is why its a MAT month. The start of summer and the first signs the snow was melting would have been a great omen to the clan.

Kantlos {the month of song} ANM

Once again, this month on the calendar was spelled Cantlos. But the Celts had no actual concept of 'C' in their words, which is ironic given we use it for them. So I changed it to what I felt would be accurate. And yes, I've not done with it a lot of the other months, but Kantlos and Kutios are the ones where it irritates me the most.

Kantlos gets it's name from the Proto-Celtic *kantlo, which means 'song' or 'to sing'. A great name for a month. This is the final month before the year begins anew in Spring, and it is also the month of Beltene, the last of our fire festivals.

Beltene would have been a day dedicated to the Celtic god Belenos. His name is basically the same for the Gaelic people, though the Brittonic Welsh know him as Beli Mawr. Belenos was the 'Shining One', a god of light, fire, and healing.

And nothing says light, fire, and healing quite like a festival designed to bring in the Summer Solstice and the warm months ahead in the renewed 'light' half of the year.

The reason Kantlos is an ANM month eludes me. I actually could not give a good reason for this. So please, if you find anything do let me know.

Intercalary Months

Now we move into our shifting months. Be warned, this was a LOT of guesswork and relying on Wiki and Khaliela to establish a groundwork. Take everything following this paragraph with a pinch of salt because I'm really stretching some ideas here.

Intercalary months have no MAT or ANM placement on the Coligny Calendar as far as I can tell. Makes my job a lot easier.

Quimonios?/Kamonios

Now, hear me out.

We actually have no idea what the first Intercalary month is called. ZERO.

Khaliela suggests it as a goddess month, as the other intercalary month seems to relay to a god. And after doing some research on what we DO know, I think I actually agree.

This month took place at the start of the year when added. It's condensed version on the Coligny Calendar is QVIMON. Historians and theorists believe this may have stood for Quimonios.

Now you might be thinking, what would that mean? What Celtic word had 'quim'.

But, let's look at that word for a second.

Because almost every modern Celtic language does not possess a 'Q' in their alphabet.

My guess is that Quimonios is a Latinicised spelling. In which case, we must look for the closest possibility that they may have been translating from. To me, this would be the Proto-Celtic *kʷ.

It brings us back to the term Q-Celtic. Whilst this is the given term, what it really stands for is the Celtic language groups that kept their original hard /kw/ sound from the Proto-Celtic *kʷ, whereas other languages turned to /p/.

To this end, I renamed the month Kamonios. I took this from the Proto-Celtic word *kumba, meaning 'valley'. This eventually evolved into the Brittonic cwm. I think of all the possible words, this is likely.

The reason I believe it could be a goddess month is because 'Quim' is modern slang for female genitalia. And whilst I obviously cannot prove it, one of the popular theories for it's origins is the Welsh cwm. The other popular theory is from the Scots language that descends from Old English, which in turn descends from Germanic, which in turn descends from, you guessed it, Proto-Indo-European.

I'm not saying no coincidence, but both theories coming from historically Celtic areas? A little too coincidental if you ask me.

I'll never know if I'm right. And there's every chance I'm not. But I think my reasoning is as sound as any current theorists, and who knows? Maybe I'm close.

[.]antaran?/Barantaranos

Another intercalary month. This one I give complete kudos to Khaliela for. I've essentially worked from her theory and expanded upon it a little bit.

We are unsure of what the beginning of this month was. We know it likely began with a 'B', 'R', or an 'S'. But the end seems pretty resolute. It is similar to Taranis, who was a Celtic weather god of storms and thunder. Given that this month was added in during the end of the year, that seems to track.

Khaliela narrows the possibility down to Barantaranos. It comes from the Proto-Celtic *baran, meaning 'anger'. In the November months, heavy windfall and weather could definitely be interpreted as an angry god's judgement. The month would translate as 'Anger of Taranis'. *baran itself seems to come from a PIE word meaning 'to pierce or strike', which certainly lends credibility for a lightning god. Go figure.

When many people think of the 'Celtic' language, we think of either Welsh, or Gaelic. That's it. Sure, people with a bit more knowledge can break it down a bit more (Gaelic becomes split into Irish and Scottish, and some people might even know about Manx and Cornish.) but this is the general starting point of learning about the Celts and how vastly different they all were.

In the world, we currently have six existing Celtic languages that are spoken, albeit not as widespread or fluently as I would like so see. These are:

Welsh (Cymraeg)

Brittany (Breton)

Cornish (Kernewek)

Irish (Gaeilge)

Scottish (Gaidhlig)

Manx (Gaelg)

All of these languages have their own words, phrases, and terms of speech.

But every single one descends from the same family tree.

It starts at the very (that we know of) beginning. The mark of most languages as we know them, and the hypothesised godmother of many of the world's languages we speak now:

Proto-Indo-European (PIE)

I've included a link for deeper divers who want to know more, but I'm going to break it down very quickly.

PIE is the reconstruction of what many linguists believe is the language that formed many of the modern Indo-European world's languages. Celtic being one of the surviving branches. It also included Germanic, Italic, Balto-Slavic, and Hellenic, amongst many others.

Whilst we cannot prove PIE existed, we can theorise that all these language's similarities likely stemmed from a forebearer of sorts.

Which brings us down to our next descendant:

Proto-Celtic (or, sometimes, Common Celtic)

Another reconstructionist language, though this time with a lot more definitiveness than PIE. Proto-Celtic is, as far as we are aware, the ancestor of all known Celtic languages.

Theorists believe Proto-Celtic can be traced back to the Late Bronze Age, which is a really, really long time ago. But some linguists think it may have gone further back. And by further, I mean the 13th Century BCE, back at the very beginning of the Bronze Age.

Now, we have no idea at what point Common Celtic began to develop into it's separate languages. But what we do know is that during the 1st Millennium BC, Celtic languages were widely spoken across the entirety of Europe, and even some bits of Anatolia (Asia Minor) in the area that now makes up the majority of the land of Türkiye. That's a lot of land!

When we hear of Celts now, they're often lumped in with the cultures that were destroyed by the Romans. We hear hero-worship of 'civilised' Rome and their conquering across nations, trampling savage cultures beneath them. But at one point, the Celts lived across half of the world and were rich in culture and language.

And at some point, the Common Celtic language divided into two new language 'branches'

Continental Celtic

We'll start off with the Continental Celtic languages, as unfortunately, none have survived to modern day.

And you might be thinking 'Oh, Brittany speaks Breton and that's in France, surely that's continental?'

And it would appear so at face value. But Breton descends from settlers that arrived just prior to the 6th Century AD from Britain, and therefore remains an Insular Celtic descendant. Some linguists, however, theorise Gaulish influences may still have remained in the language.

The Celtic languages spoken in this sub-group were likely some of the first heard by the Romans and the Greeks during their time exploring Europe. There were probably a lot more languages in Continental Celtic than we now know, but only a handful are recorded, and even fewer can be proven to descend from Proto-Celtic.

These languages were spoken as far as we are aware "in an area arcing from the northern half of Iberia in the west to north of Belgium, and east to the Carpathian basin and the Balkans as Noric, and in inner Anatolia (modern day Türkiye) as Galatian"

Lepontic

Lepontic is a highly debated Celtic language. Some linguists believe it may have been the first to branch off from Common Celtic, whilst others think it came from Gaulish or as a family member of the Ligurian language instead.

What we do know is that it was spoken in the southern Alps, and that it only existed in record between the 6th and 4th Century BCE. It was first absorbed by the Gaulish people, and suffered against when the Romans took control over the area it was spoken in.

Gaulish

Probably one of the more well-known languages in the Continental Celtic branch. We've all heard of the Gauls, right? Terrifying warriors that fought against the Celts? Asterix comic? No?

The Gaulish language actually divides into two sub-groups itself. The Cisalpine dialect, which was spoken in what is now Italy. And the Transalpine dialect, which was spoken in the area that became modern-day France.

As far as we know, Gaulish existed sometime from the 2nd Century BC. We have the Greeks to thank for a lot of our knowledge there, as they crossed paths with the Celts frequently. Gaulish managed to last all the way to the 6th Century AD. It was at the hands of the Roman Empire and Latinisation that Gaulish met its downfall, though some linguists think they found proof that it survived in the Swiss Alps all the way to the 10th Century.

Spoiler: You're going to find the Romans responsible for a LOT of the Celts' downfall.

Galatian

Galatian was a Celtic language spoken in Anatolia. Or, more specifically, the region of Ankara (nowadays, Ankara is the capital city of Türkiye). We know this because of writings and evidence of invasion and settlement from the Celts into Anatolia.

Like Gaulish, Galatian lasted. It began in what we think was the 3rd Century BCE, and closely resembled the Gaulish language. There is some evidence that it lasted until 6th Century AD, when a Christian Monk in Palestine spoke of a Galatian monk possessed by Satan. After recovering from this supposed 'possession', the monk it question could allegedly only respond to others in his native Galatian tongue. It's amazing how such a small story written in history can be absolute proof that a language persisted for so long!

Noric (?)

Sometimes named Eastern Celtic, the Noric language divides linguists on the actual nature of it's supposed existence. Only two inscriptions exist that offer proof it was spoken, one in Eastern Europe, and one in Central Europe. It is named for the region of Noricum, a Roman region, that would have existed around that same time. Both inscriptions were written in what is estimated to be the 2nd Century AD. We have no idea when Noric went extinct, if it even existed as a separate language at all.

So either Noric did not exist, or any evidence of it's existence was thoroughly erased over time. It MAY have been spoken across what is now modern day Slovenia and Austria, or even further.

Celtiberian

A unique Celtic language amongst the Continental Celtic languages, Celtiberian began in the 2nd Century BCE, when Celts invaded the Iberian Peninsula, which was then inhabited by the Iberian people. Celtiberian was a Q-Celtic language, and Ranko Matasovic stated that "Celtiberian...is almost certainly an independent branch on the Celtic genealogical tree, one that became separated from the others very early."

I'll do a full post on Q-Celtic and P-Celtic languages, and the theory behind it later!

So Celtiberian may have been one of the first to branch away from Proto-Celtic. Either way, it lasted into the 2nd Century AD, when it began to appear less and less in records as it clearly became influenced by Latin.

Those goddamned Romans at it again!

Gallaecian

A Celtic language spoken in the north-western part of Iberia by a tribe called the Callaeci. It's a complex Celtic language historically due to it's potential merging features with another language of the area during the Pre-Roman era.

We have very little information on when Gallaecian began and when it ended. We know it existed in the First Millennium CE, and have records of it showing up on a map of 300 BC Iberia as mixed in with Pre-Celtic influences.

Some theorists suggest that Gallaecian, whilst it possesses Celtic features, may more closely resemble the Lusitanian, a Indo-European Paleohispanic language. However, Lusitanian itself has many Celtic features, to the point of linguists believing it itself may be of Celtic origin. In that case, Lusitanian would be added to our list of Continental Celtic languages.

Insular Celtic

Now we move on to the second branch from Proto-Celtic. The only branch left living in the modern day: Insular Celtic.

The existence of Insular Celtic and it's descendants contrasts with the P/Q Celtic language hypothesis, though we do still use it to distinguish between them. Insular Celtic theory suggests these languages had a later common ancestor than their continental cousins, and thus maintained longer than those on the European continent, which had all went extinct by the 6th Century AD.

Insular Celtic primarily exists in the landmass of Britain and it's neighbours Ireland, Brittany, and the Isle of Man. And here we witness another branch divide.

Yes, another.

From here, Insular Celtic splits itself into newer branches. Though often characterised as two, some theorists believe a potential THIRD branch-off existed. It was put forward by Celtic specialist linguist Kenneth H.Jackson. Whilst I WILL include it in the list below, I will dedicate a different post into exploring that branch, as it's origins and history are both inconclusive and deserve their own conversation.

Fun fact: Insular Celtic, unlike Continental Celtic, shares some characteristic features with Afro-Asiatic languages. This is incredibly rare in Indo-European languages. It has created some arguments that there were Afro-Asiatic influences in Britain prior to the Celts' arrival.

Many Celticists disagree. Though the features are similar, there is almost zero evidence to bridge the gap between the two language groups. It is more possible that the characteristics are simply coincidence, and that they evolved independently.

The Insular Celtic subdivisions are as follows:

Brittonic

Brittonic is the language branch that encompasses half of the world's extant Celtic languages. It's common ancestor is Proto-Brittonic, which may have been the language spoken in Celtic Britain prior to the origins of what is now our modern-day Welsh, Cornish, and Breton.

Proto-Brittonic is thought to have developed during the 6th Century BC. It is estimated that Proto-Brittonic was spoken across the majority of Great Britain. It bore a striking resemblance to the Gaulish language, and likely appeared during a mass migration from the European lands of Gaul to the landmass of Britain.

It became partially-extinct by the 6th Century AD. I say partially, because it actually divided AGAIN into it's new descendants. These became the mother-languages of the modern day P-Celtic languages.

Old Welsh/Middle Welsh/Modern Welsh

Old Welsh has at least one potential ancestor, called 'Primitive Welsh'. However, historians cannot decide what period this existed between, only that it became a complete language in the mid 6th Century AD, and had been replaced by Old Welsh by the 9th Century AD.

Old Welsh is the beginnings of the Welsh language as we know it. This and Primitive Welsh were not only spoken in Wales, but potentially the area known as Hen Ogledd, the Old North. You'll get a full post on Hen Ogledd later because I'm OBSESSED with it.

During Old Welsh, the works of Aneirin and the Book of Taliesin were written. You'll hear more about these (and especially Aneirin) in further posts.

Middle Welsh followed from the 12th to the 14th Centuries, and contain the majority of the works of the Mabinogion. Arguably, the stories in this are much, much older. Also appearing here are the manuscripts of Welsh Law. During this time, we begin to see the start of the decline in Welsh as a primary language. Whilst widely spoken in the Middle Welsh era, English had already began encroaching from the east, eating away at the population's native language.

And then we reach Modern Welsh. This is the language spoken now, and one of the most widely spoken Celtic languages in the 21st Century. Welsh is protected, classified as Wales' national language, and taught in schools. By the 20th Century, the language was in danger of becoming extinct. It is only because of the efforts of Welsh speakers and a resurge in Celtic pride that Welsh has seen an uptick in speakers. I began learning the language early this year, and it is as beautiful as it is complicated.

Old Cornish/Middle Cornish/Late Cornish/Revived Cornish

Cornish appears to have developed from the Primitive Welsh language as it's people moved further into what is now Cornwall and Devon. Old Cornish appears as it's own language sometime in the 9th Century AD, and continued well into the 13th Century. It faced opposition from the Saxons who invaded their lands from the east, reducing their lands and decreasing the popularity of Cornish as a spoken language.

It developed into Middle Cornish from the 13th to the 15th Century, peaking in popularity. However, it witnessed a decline soon after the 13th Century began. It is in Middle Cornish that we witness the bulk of surviving Cornish literature. The Ordinalia, the Beanans Meriasek and the Bewnans Ke.

It was the later Middle Cornish years that cemented the decline of Cornish language and culture. Parliament passed the Act of Uniformity in 1549, and established the English Book of Prayers as the sole form of legal worship. The problem? Many of the Cornish spoke no English, and therefore were unable to read it. This was one of many causes of rebellion in Cornwall. However, the rebellion was largely caused by economic and cultural differences, due to the Cornish being massively pushed aside in favour of Englishmen. The rebellion was out down, and the Cornish language became associated with sedition and anti-English sentiment.

Late Cornish was had much few speakers as a result. It existed from the 15th Century to the 19th. By the late 17th Century, Cornish was only found in the areas of Penwith and Kerrier. The last fluent speaker of Cornish, Dolly Pentreath, died in 1777. It's last native, but not fluent, speaker John Davey died in 1891. With them, the Cornish language became temporarily extinct.

Cornish would remain a classified extinct language until the late 19th Century to the early 20th Century. During this time, efforts were made to reconstruct the Cornish language from it's ancestors. Though many variants were created, the Cornish Language Partnership eventually elected to agree on a Standard Written Form, which came about in 2008.

It hit a new milestone in 2010 when UNESCO removed Cornish from it's list of extinct languages. And earlier this year in 2026, Cornish was granted the same level of protection as given to Welsh, Manx, Irish, and Scots Gaelic through the European Charter for National and Minority Languages.

Go Cornwall!

Old Breton/Middle Breton/Modern Breton

I'll admit, Breton is one of the few Insular Celtic languages I know very little about. It originates from the British mainland and was brought to Brittany, making it the only extant Celtic language on the European continent.

Old Breton was only spoken primarily in Lower Brittany from the 9th Century AD. Though it was originally spoken by the upper classes, it became relegated to the common class in the 12th Century as French became the language of choice amongst nobles.

By the 12th Century, it had shifted into Middle Breton. The French government cared little for the regional languages of France and left the Bretons alone for the most part. It was not until the French Revolution when policies were enacted favouring French for the government and military. To them, regional languages like Middle Breton left the poor masses uninformed and less likely to rebel against things they disagreed with.

This tone seemed to change by the time Modern Breton existed in the 17th Century. Between 1870 and the 1960s, the French government became determined to create a unified national culture- at the expense of the Bretons' own culture. The Third, Fourth, and Fifth Republics undermined Breton language, and teachers were actively encouraged to humiliate students who spoke it.

It worked. By the 21st Century, roughly 200,000 people actively spoke Breton. In 1950, it had been 1 Million. It is now classified as an Endangered Language. Most of it's speakers are over 60 years of age.

In 1993, Breton parents were finally allowed to legally given their children Breton names.

That's right. The French had banned the people of Brittany from giving their own children native names from their culture.

With any luck, we'll see a revival in Breton as we have in the other Insular Celtic languages. Otherwise, it will likely be extinct by the 22nd Century.

Cumbric

Cumbric is an extinct Celtic language spoken during the Early Middle Ages. It was primarily found in the land that made up Hen Ogledd, which was formed in Northern England and the Southern Scottish Lowlands, as well as potentially the Yorkshire Dales. It's primary base was the Kingdom of Strathclyde, an ancient kingdom that existed in the North.

Some linguists believe Cumbric may have existed as a dialect of Old Welsh rather than it's own separate language. However, it's place-names and existing modern toponymy suggests a developed medieval language distinct from Welsh, Cornish or Breton.

Ha! Take that, Cumbric-deniers!

The dates of the Kingdom of Strathclyde, alongside evidence of Cumbric language, suggest it came about sometime in the 5th to 6th Century AD. Sadly, we have no confirmed time of existence.

We also have no confirmed date of extinction, though we can guess. Whilst most records and manuscripts show Cumbric declined as a language during the late 12th Century, historians theorise that the peasantry would have likely held onto remnants of the language, possibly into the 13th Century. What we do know is this: at some point between the years of 1200 and 1300, Cumbric became extinct as a fluent spoken language.

Whilst the idea of a Revived Cumbric sounds great on paper, in theory, its impossible. It died out too early for us to piece together a language.

Pictish (?)

I'll keep it short and sweet for this one, because Pictish is a deep dive of fucking theories that deserves its own post due to the complicated nature of it's origins.

Pictish as we know it is an extinct Brittonic language that was spoken by the Picts living in eastern and norther Scotland. The Romans feared them enough to leave them the hell alone, along with most of the Scottish tribes.

We know Pictish existed due to inscriptions in Ogham alphabet, as well as geographical and place names dotted around. It's classification as a language, however, becomes hard to understand once you look further.

Whilst some people believe it to be a Brittonic descendant, others think it came from it's own Insular Celtic branch, Pritenic. There are other theories too, which we'll go through later.

Will we ever know for certain?

Probably not.

Goidelic

Goidelic forms the second major group of Celtic languages that branched off from Insular Celtic. It's entire descending tree derives from Ireland, and slowly bled into Scotland and the Isle of Man as the Irish travelled across the sea. It was a Q-Celtic variety, quite like the Celtiberian language.

When people think of Celts, it is mostly this language family that comes to mind outside of the United Kingdom. And to be frank, it's where most of the misinformation about Celtic people comes from because of this. The continued lumping of all Celts together under one massive umbrella, as opposed to treating them as separate, individual cultures with their own gods, languages, beliefs, and people.

More on that rant later.

Goidelic took a long time to reach the three extant languages we now know as Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx. From Insular Celtic, it only branched into Primitive Irish at first. The variants of Scotland and the Isle of Man did not appear until after Middle Irish.

For viewer purposes, I'll still split them according to their extant variants:

Primitive Irish/Old Irish/Middle Irish/Early Modern Irish/Irish Gaelic

The progenitor of all contemporary Gaelic languages, Primitive Irish is well documented through the use of the Ogham stones. This evidence shows it likely began in the 4th Century AD, making it the theorised oldest Insular Celtic language to date. Some estimates of surviving writings even place it as ranging from the 1st to 5th Centuries.

Primitive Irish seems to have lasted until around the 6th Century, when evidence of Old Irish seems to exist. Old Irish becomes the main language by the 7th Century. By this point, the Irish Gaels had already begun migrating to the western islands of Scotland, as well as the Isle of Man, Wales, Devon, and Cornwall. Ogham writings present in all these locations tell us so. It is this form of Irish that seems to have had the most spread across the UK as a whole.

What followed from the 10th to 12th Century AD was the evolved form, Middle Irish. There's not a lot of say about Middle Irish from a historical point of view. It changed linguistically, and did not have the same reach across the UK as Old Irish. Middle Irish was spoken across Ireland, most of Scotland, and the Isle of Man. It is from Middle Irish that Manx seems to have branched off.

It's successor from the 12th Century to approximately the 15th Century was Early Modern Irish. This was the last evolution of the Goidelic language prior to its subgroups of our contemporary Gaelic languages. It was only found in Ireland and Scotland and was the starting point for both contemporary Gaelic languages. Granted, Scottish Gaelic had already seen signs of becoming distinct from the 12th Century. However, it had yet to be standardised as a language until the 16th Century AD.

It wad during the Early Modern Irish period that we first see expansive efforts to suppress the Irish language as a whole. The Tudor dynasty wanted to subdue its Irish citizens, and did so by passing laws restricting Irish language whilst actively encouraging use of the English language. Mary I struggled to undergo an English expansion into Ireland, whilst her sister Elizabeth I allegedly expressed a desire to learn or at least understand Irish. I know which one I prefer.

In the 17th Century, Modern Irish arose. A shame it took so long, because by the 18th Century Irish Gaelic was seeing a massive decline. The Catholic Church openly preferred English to Irish, and the Anglo-Irish government put in charge oppressed the native language of it's people, largely to appease British royalty. The conquest of Ireland by the English did little to help matters. Rather, it fuelled the flames.

A resurgence of interest in Gaelic culture and language in the 19th Century brought Irish back into the fold. The Gaelic League worked to encourage use of Irish and successfully campaigned to have it taught in schools.

Nowadays, Irish is recognised as the first and national language of the Republic of Ireland. Though most government and business is conducted in English still, with a minority speaking Irish fluently, efforts continue to be made to reintroduce Irish as the primary speaking language in Ireland.

Scottish Gaelic

Prior to Gaelic, we believe the Scottish spoke a form of Brittonic. A portion of what is now Lowland Scotland comprised the Hen Ogledd, and Lothian was the potential capital of the Votadini tribe.

Gaelic arrived in Scotland in around the 4th or 5th Century AD, during the founding of the Gaelic Kingdom of Dal Riata on the west coast of Scotland. Dal Riata is now modern day Argyll. However, an archaeologist named Ewan Campbell argued that Argyll was already made up of Q-Celtic speaking people during the Iron Age, and were connected to Ireland via the sea. Either way, the Gaelic language spread throughout most of Scotland eventually.

It was in the 8th Century that Gaelic was able to move from Dal Riata and bleed into Pict territory. The Kingdom of the Picts slowly became known as the Kingdom of Alba, 'Alba' being the Gaelic word for Scotland. A slow Gaelicisation was in the process, and by the time it reached the 11th Century, Gaelic was the spoken language of the Scots, and the Pictish once spoken had largely become extinct.

So when you think about it, the Irish colonised Scotland! The more you know, right?

In the early 11th Century, Scotland was successful in conquering Lothian (which, by the way, had previously been part of England as a part of the Kingdom of Northumbria!) and gained linguistic independence from Ireland. Gaelic had already been differing from Irish Gaelic by the 8th Century, but it was in this era that it was referenced for the first time as lingua Scotia.

The Lowlands of Scotland still retained a lot of their Brittonic roots, and Gaelic never seemed to pick up in places like Ayrshire or Dumfries. In south-eastern Scotland, there is little to no evidence Scots Gaelic ever became a widely spoken language at all.

Like all Celtic languages, Scots Gaelic suffered a decline. King Malcolm III of Scotland married Princess Margaret of Wessex, the daughter of an Anglo-Saxon king. She spoke no Gaelic, brought her own Saxon peers and priests to Scotland, and gave all her children Saxon names rather than Gaelic ones. Coincidence? I think not, seeing as the English already held desires to rule Scotland.

Scotland hid a rough linguistic divide in the middle ages. Clan chiefs of the northern and western areas of Scotland continued to hold strong to their Gaelic ways. Some of those in the far west-north of Scotland spoke Norn, a Germanic language spoken in Caithness, Shetland, and Orkney. In the east and south of Scotland, a new language was taking hold: a West Germanic language called Scots. By the mid-14th Century, Scots had become the official language of the law. By the end of the 15th Century, Scotland had taken Scots as their language, referring to Gaelic speakers as 'Yrisch' i.e. Irish.

Throughout the 17th Century, efforts were made by the English to steer Scotland away from any of its languages, Gaelic included. The Statutes of Iona in 1609 required heirs of clan chiefs to be sent to Lowland Scotland to be educated in Protestant, English-speaking schools. To King James, Gaelic was a great cause of instability in Scotland. The less it was spoken, the less of an individual identity the Scottish people had.

These practises continued well into the 19th and 20th Centuries. Still, Scots Gaelic persisted, especially in the Isles and the Highlands. The Scottish Education Act of 1872 provided universal education, but failed to include Gaelic. An attempt to re-introduce Gaelic into it was met with pushback from school boards in the Highlands.

Now, Scotland is seeing more and more people attempt to reintroduce Scots Gaelic, as well as Scots, into the country. At current, it is believed to have only 20,000 to 30,000 active users and is listed as definitively endangers by UNESCO.

In 2025, Scottish Parliament introduced the Scottish Languages Act. This established both Scots and Gaelic as official languages of the country.

Manx

I'm afraid to say Manx is also another one of the Insular Celtic languages I had little knowledge of prior to researching for this post. Whilst I've known people from the Isle of Man, they've all only spoken English.

It is believed that a Brittonic language may have been spoken on the Isle of Man prior to the arrival of Irish missionaries. If there was, we have no idea what it sounded or looked like. The name for the island itself is heavily linked to gods from both Goidelic and Brittonic culture. Manannan mac Lir is the Irish version, whilst the Welsh have Manawydan fab Llyr. In both cultures, he is a god of the sea and king of the Otherworld, as well as the son of Lir/Llyr.

In other words, it's the same god with slight alterations as Insular Celtic split. You'll see this a lot on further posts and I'll be doing some comparisons on the different pantheons.

But both remain the same in one way: Manawydan/Manannan is the eponymous god of the Isle of Man. Or, he is named after the island. One of these is definitely true.

Manx descends primarily from Primitive Irish over all other forms of Irish language evolution. We know this because Ogham script is found all over the Isle of Man, whilst Old Irish used Latin and there are no extant examples on the island.

In the 9th Century, the Isle of Man was conquered by Viking Norsemen. Peculiarly, this did not mean the island spoke Norse. Rather, the Norsemen here and around the Irish Sea acclimated and began speaking Gaelic. These Norse-Gaels had little cultural impact on the language, though some words stuck around.

The Manx came under Scottish rule in the 13th Century, but did not stay that way. Rather, they bounced between Scotland and England until 1405, when the Stanley family took feudal possession of the island. Until this point, Linguists believe Gaelic may have been the only language spoken. The introduction of the Stanleys brought Anglo-Norman and then the English language to Manx shores.

It was between the 15th and 20th Centuries that Manx greatly diverged from Scottish and Irish Gaelic. Like all other Celtic nations, the use of Manx was suppressed by legislation demanding all education be provided for in English. The 19th Century saw English overtake Manx as the primary language of the island.

By the mid-20th Century, only a few native speakers of Manx existed, and all of them elderly. The last speaker was a man named Ned Maddrell, who died in December 1974. Following this, an effort to revive the language was made. The Manx Language Unit formed in 1992, solely designed to combat the death of their native language. Even the Irish pitched in, with the Irish Folklore Commission sending recording equipment to capture partially-fluent speakers on tape. From here, they were able to reconstruct the language.

Despite there being hundreds of Manx speakers on the island, UNESCO attempted to declare it extinct in 2009. The backlash was immense enough that they were forced to retract this as list it as Critically Endangered instead.

Manx is currently taught as a second language in all of the island's primary and secondary schools. It is also recognised under the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. Despite this, Manx is still not officially recognised by any Government.

I believe that in the next 10 years or so, the Manx people will attempt to gain the same recognition that their Celtic brethren of Scotland, Ireland, Wales and Cornwall have. Here's to hoping.

Pritenic (?)

When it's updated I'll provide a link here to a follow-up post!

I don't have much to say on the Pritenic branch currently. I've included a link regardless, but there's not a lot to go on.

Researchers believe it may have existed and been the ancestor of Pictish, rather than Proto-Brittonic. This is due to unique and distinctive linguistic features found in Pictish that cannot be found in Brittonic.

Linguist Alan G. James suggested that Cumbric, rather than a solely Brittonic language, was a hybrid language born from both Brittonic and Pritenic influences. Indeed, the language was a P-Celtic language and bore a striking resemblance to the languages of the Gauls, especially in it's names.