Celtic Christianity

Nu ik afgestudeerd ben heb ik besloten om de werkstukken die ik tijdens mijn studie Religiewetenschappen geschreven heb te publiceren op deze weblog. Ik heb de opdrachten, papers, essays, recensies, besprekingen en presentaties altijd met veel plezier gemaakt, en ik vind het leuk om deze met de wereld te delen. Het zou immers zonde zijn als deze documenten langzaam zouden vergaan op mijn harde schijf. Daarom hierbij een blogreeks met vandaag mijn essay voor de cursus Celtic Civilisation 1B aan de University of Edinburgh. De essayvraag is:

 

To what extent did the Insular Celts form a zone of Christian beliefs, customs and practices unto themselves in early medieval times?

 

Introduction

In this essay I will examine to what extent Christian beliefs, customs and practices of the Insular Celts in the Early Middle Ages were homogeneous. This is closely related to the idea of the ‘Celtic Church’, but both this and the concept of ‘the Celts’ are highly problematic. I will examine the introduction of Christianity to the Insular world, its replacement of paganism, the church structure and organisation, learning, orthodox and heretic beliefs, customs and practices and then I will return to the concept of the ‘Celtic Church’.

 

 

Insular Christianity

Christianity was introduced in Roman Britain in the last decades of Roman rule. It spread throughout the Insular world through travellers, merchants and soldiers and later through official missions. Passio by Saint Alban is the first known native source which mentions Christian martyrs in the third century,[1] for it was not until 313 that Christianity was officially tolerated as a religion in the Roman Empire.[2]

While Christianity was well established in Roman Britain in the late fourth century[3], archaeological evidence suggests that until the fifth century[4], paganism and Christianity lived side-by-side.[5] The fact that Christianity spread in a pagan culture had significant influences on the shape of Christianity.[6] Chaney mentions that paganism survived in Christianity, for instance, pagan temples and sacrificed animals were used and local customs were adopted, as recommended by Pope Gregory the Great. In more unorthodox ways, the cult of Woden intermingled with Christianity.[7]

The pre-existing culture also influenced the structure and organisation of the Church.[8] The image of the ‘Celtic Church’ comes from Bede, who writes that Columba’s monastery was the model for other monasteries in Britain and Ireland. This was a paruchiae, instead of an episcopacy, due to the lack of Roman civitas in Ireland. In these churches the abbot is the highest authority and has various functions, whereby the bishop only has a sacramental task.[9] It is recently suggested that bishops created episcopal paruchiae, because this was the only way for them to gain more wealth and status than the abbot. The transformation did not have to be drastic, because Continental missionaries were already used to monasticism and the monastic system never totally replaced the diocesan one.[10] Scotland was converted in a monastic Irish context,[11] but there is few evidence for the idea that the Welsh church was mainly monastic.[12]

In the monasteries, learning flourished in Ireland, Wales and Cornwall within a shared Latin culture[13], whereby a common conceptual framework of thinking emerged.[14] Writing in the vernacular established in 600 and can for instance be found in glosses.[15] The Irish had to learn Latin, because Ireland was never part of the Roman Empire, while other countries already had a Latin-speaking elite.[16] Therefore the Irish schools differed from those in other countries and this attracted clergy from England and the Continent.[17]

Davies argues that there is no evidence for one single doctrine within the Insular churches.[18] When it comes to belief, the Bible is most significant, especially the Old Testament and Mosaic Law.[19] For instance, Gildas refers to the Old Testament when he warns for God’s punishment for sins and mentions that the Britons were always heretics. Bede agrees and states that the Saxons are their punishment.[20] This suggests that reward and punishment can come in this life, but also after death in heaven and hell.[21] It is said that brave warriors go to Heaven, sometimes escorted by angels.[22] The monks of Columba wanted to be buried near the monastery to be resurrected with their saint on Judgement Day.[23]

A significant heterogeneous aspect of the early Medieval Church is the Pelagian heresy of 418. Pelagius taught that salvation can be attained through good actions, which is contrary to Augustine’s idea of salvation by the grace of God. Germanus was sent by Pope Celestine to fight this deeply-rooted popular heresy.[24] Even in seventh century Wales and eighth century Ireland Pelagianism can be discovered. [25] Davies comments that heresy suggests the existence of orthodoxy.[26]

Another important controversy is calculating the date for Easter in the seventh century. In Wales and Ireland a fifth century Roman method, recommended by Saint Columba, was used, but this differed from the more accurate sixth century Roman method. The controversy had to do with loyalty to the patron saint, either Saint Columba or Saint Peter.[27] At the Synod of Whitby in 664 it was decided by King Oswiu of Northumberland that the Roman system would be used, but it was not until between 640 and 704 that the Irish adapted it[28], some British followed in 703, the Scots and Picts in 716, and at last the Welsh in 768.[29]

There are many common Christian practices in the Insular world which are in accordance with the Roman Church, for instance the laity only went to church on special occasions and did not take communion regularly, while clerics had many rules to live by[30] and went to mass and received communion regularly.[31] Giving alms was a very important obligation for the laity,[32] but baptism and penance were most important in order to achieve salvation and go to heaven.[33] Bede and archbishop Theodore mention that the British have a deviant form of baptism.[34] Penitential texts provided the right punishment for sins.[35] There was a difference between penitentials for monks and laity.[36] Marriage was seen as a good alternative to monastic life for the laity, as suggested by Adomnán.[37] Regarding burial customs, inhumation in isolated places was custom, but saints were buried in churches.[38] Churches were build in alignment with the east.[39] Hagiographies can be helpful to understand the position of saints within early Medieval society. They were seen as people elected by God without sins and there were various saint cults. Saints, as well as their relics, were believed to perform miracles and have magical powers.[40] Being disrespectful or mistrust a saint is seen as a sin and one has to belief in the powers of a saint in order to perceive them.[41]

Maier mentions that the churches of Ireland, Scotland and Wales have practices deviant to those of the Roman Church.[42] There is little evidence for liturgy, but it is known that Galician versions circulated in Ireland, although Lapidge suggests that the Welsh used pre-Gregorian liturgy in the ninth century. A century earlier the British liturgy was seen as deviant by the Irish.[43]

An important, controversial, religious expression was the tonsure. In the Synod of Bishops it is stated that clerics should wear a tonsure.[44] The style symbolised loyalty to the patron saint, in the same manner as the Pelagian heresy.[45]

 

The Celtic Church

Davies argues that there never has been a ‘Celtic Church’ which differed from the Roman Church. The notion suggests similarities of the church in a geographical way, without mentioning the differences throughout time and place, which became clearer from the seventh century onwards. The Celtic Church has been associated with Protestantism as ‘true Protestants’ against Rome and suggests the existence of ‘the Celts’, which is associated with Romantic, religious and political ideas of Celticness.[46] Both the ‘Celtic Church’ as well as ‘the Celts’ are modern inventions.[47] Besides, most surviving sources are Irish, but we cannot know if they can be applied to other Celtic countries as well.[48]

 

Conclusion

Now that we have an idea of early Medieval Insular Celtic Christianity, we can conclude that there are commonalities, but also significant differences. These differences suggests that Christianity did not form one zone. However, in that time the Insular world was considered as part of the Roman Church.

We have seen that the notion ‘Celtic Church’ is problematic because it suggests the existence of ‘the Celts’ and its associations. The Insular Celts were not homogeneous and their pre-existing different cultures influenced the shape of Christian beliefs, customs, practices and church structure, combined with British and Continental influences. Monasticism, the abbot as highest authority, penitentials and saints seem typical Celtic, but the sources are biased towards Ireland and these phenomena can also be found on the Continent. There was a shared Latin culture, but the level of this language differed significantly, especially in Ireland, which affected learning. Apart from the common eschatological and soteriological Christian beliefs, the issues of Pelagianism, the calculation of Easter and the tonsure divided the Insular world. However, the Celtic world did try to maintain orthodox in the Roman ways as they believed it to be.

At last I want to add that Christianity has never been homogeneous from the start. For instance, considering that the emphasis of various Gospels differ, Biblical interpretations differ, and there have always been Christian movements with diverse beliefs. Also, orthodoxy, as it was decided at councils, was always hard to maintain. After hardly a millennium of Christianity, the first great schism took place between the Eastern and Western Church. Apparently, the ‘Celtic Church’ differed not enough from the Roman Church in that time to cause a schism as well.

 

Bibliography

Primary sources

• Synodus Episcoporum, trans. by L. Bieler, The Irish Penitentials (Dublin, 1963).

Secondary sources

• W.A. Chaney, ‘Paganism to Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England’, in The Harvard Theological Review 53, 3 (1960), 197-217.
• W. Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).
• W Davies, ‘The Myth of the Celtic Church’, in The Early Church in Wales and the West, eds. by N. Edwards & A. Lane (Oxford: 1992), 12-21.
• P.G. Hoare & C.S. Sweet, ‘The Orientation of Early Medieval Churches in England’, in Journal of Historical Geography 26, 2 (2000), 162-173.
• K. Hughes, The Church in Early Irish Society (London: 1966).
• E. James, Britain in the First Millennium (New York: 2010).
• B. Maier, The Celts: A history from earliest times to the present (Edinburgh: 2003).
• D. Ó Cróinín, Early Medieval Ireland 400-1200 (London: 1995).
• K. Ritari, ‘From Pagan to Christian in the Seventh Century Irish Hagiography’, in Studia Celtica Fennica 1 (2004), 14-23.
• K. Ritari, ‘How Should Christians Lead Their Lives? An exploration of the image of lay people in Adomnán’s Vita Columbae’, in Studia Celtica Fennica 2 (2005), 138-151.
• L. Woodhead, An Introduction to Christianity (Cambridge: 2004).

---

[1] E. James, Britain in the First Millennium (New York: 2010).

[2] L. Woodhead, An Introduction to Christianity (Cambridge: 2004).

[3] W. Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).

[4] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[5] B. Maier, The Celts: A history from earliest times to the present (Edinburgh: 2003).

[6] Maier, ibid.

[7] W.A. Chaney, ‘Paganism to Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England’, in The Harvard Theological Review 53, 3 (1960), 197-217.

[8] K. Hughes, The Church in Early Irish Society (London: 1966).

[9] James, Britain in the First Millennium;

D. Ó Cróinín, Early Medieval Ireland 400-1200 (London: 1995).

[10] Ó Cróinín, ibid.

[11] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[12] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages.

[13] W Davies, ‘The Myth of the Celtic Church’, in The Early Church in Wales and the West, eds. by N. Edwards & A. Lane (Oxford: 1992), 12-21.

[14] Davies, ibid.

[15] Ó Cróinín, Early Medieval Ireland 400-1200.

[16] Ó Cróinín, ibid.

[17] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[18] Davies, The Myth of the Celtic.

[19] Davies, ibid.

[20] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[21] K. Ritari, ‘How Should Christians Lead Their Lives? An exploration of the image of lay people in Adomnán’s Vita Columbae’, in Studia Celtica Fennica 2 (2005), 138-151.

[22] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages.

[23] W.A. Chaney, ‘Paganism to Christianity in Anglo-Saxon England’, in The Harvard Theological Review 53, 3 (1960), 197-217.

[24] James, Britain in the First Millennium;

Davies, The Myth of the Celtic Church.

[25] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages.

[26] Davies, ibid..

[27] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[28] Davies, The Myth of the Celtic Church.

[29] Maier, The Celts.

[30] E. James, Britain in the First Millennium (New York: 2010).

[31] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).

[32] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).

[33] K. Ritari, ‘From Pagan to Christian in the Seventh Century Irish Hagiography’, in Studia Celtica Fennica 1 (2004), 14-23.

[34] W Davies, ‘The Myth of the Celtic Church’, in The Early Church in Wales and the West, eds. by N. Edwards & A. Lane (Oxford: 1992), 12-21.

[35] D. Ó Cróinín, Early Medieval Ireland 400-1200 (London: 1995).

[36] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).

[37] K. Ritari, ‘How Should Christians Lead Their Lives? An exploration of the image of lay people in Adomnán’s Vita Columbae’, in Studia Celtica Fennica 2 (2005), 138-151.

[38] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).

[39] P.G. Hoare & C.S. Sweet, ‘The Orientation of Early Medieval Churches in England’, in Journal of Historical Geography 26, 2 (2000), 162-173.

[40] Davies, Wales in the Early Middle Ages (Leicester: 1982).

[41] K. Ritari, ‘How Should Christians Lead Their Lives? An exploration of the image of lay people in Adomnán’s Vita Columbae’, in Studia Celtica Fennica 2 (2005), 138-151.

[42] Maier, ibid.

[43] Davies, The Myth of the Celtic Church.

[44] Synodus Episcoporum, trans. by L. Bieler, The Irish Penitentials (Dublin, 1963).

[45] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[46] Davies, The Myth of the Celtic Church.

[47] James, Britain in the First Millennium.

[48] Davies, The Myth of the Celtic Church.

Read Full Post »

The changing scholarly views on how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland

Nu ik afgestudeerd ben heb ik besloten om de werkstukken die ik tijdens mijn studie Religiewetenschappen geschreven heb te publiceren op deze weblog. Ik heb de opdrachten, papers, essays, recensies, besprekingen en presentaties altijd met veel plezier gemaakt, en ik vind het leuk om deze met de wereld te delen. Het zou immers zonde zijn als deze documenten langzaam zouden vergaan op mijn harde schijf. Daarom hierbij een blogreeks met vandaag mijn essay voor de cursus Celtic Civilisation 1A aan de University of Edinburgh. De essayvraag was:

 

To what extent, and for what reasons, have textbooks and similar publications about the Celts changed since 1970 in their handling of the question of how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland?

 

Introduction

In this essay I will examine to what extent and why publications have changed in their handling of the question of how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland. In order to achieve this, I have selected publication from 1970 until 2003[1], based on their significance and availability.

First I will examine the views on how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland in these publications. The given views are closely related with their concept of Celticness. As we shall see, there are no straightforward answers and throughout time different disciplines have had different thoughts about it.[2]

The next question is why publications have changed their views over time. This is an underlying question which lies more in the sphere of philosophy of science. It seems like there has been a paradigm shift in the conception of ‘the Celts’, due to contradictory theories within different disciplines.[3] The emphasis shifted from a history of ‘the Celts’, to a history of thinking about the concept of ‘the Celts’ by different disciplines throughout time.

 

 

To what extent have publications changed?

The first publication I will discuss is Chadwick’s The Celts[4], originally published in 1970. She argues that before the Roman conquest the British Isles became occupied by the ‘great Celtic peoples of the Continent’, referring to Caesar who mentions an invasion of Belgic tribes. Archaeologically speaking, from the middle Rhineland, groups of immigrant warriors occupied South England and brought a fully developed Celtic La Tène art with them. Later, an Insular Celtic art arose, whereby the Irish art is ‘most truly Celtic’, because Ireland was never conquered by the Romans. The Irish literature gives us a glimpse of the ancient Celts of the Continent, but later she explains that the Welsh Mabinogion is ‘most essentially Celtic’. [5] When examining Chadwick’s study, we can conclude that historical, archaeological and linguistic evidence is interpreted in the light of the invasion theory.

Seven years later, a similar view is held in an archaeological study by Hawkes[6]. He argues that La Tène art indicates that the Beaker people from the southern Netherlands and middle Rhine occupied Britain and formed the Insular Celts. This is supported by Caesar, who mentions that the language of the Belgae on the Continent differed ‘only slightly’ from the language of the Celtae in Britain.[7]

In a seminar[8] in 1984 on the origins of the Irish it turned out that the issue was not that straightforward as it seemed. Linguists, archaeologists and environmental studies scholars tried to reconcile archaeological evidence with a linguistic definition. They had to conclude that there was no consensus, and that there is no evidence for an invasion.[9]

Almost ten years later, opposed to the publications above, in The Celtic Dawn [10], Berresford-Ellis solely uses a linguistic definition, because ‘all the leading Celtic scholars have agreed on this issue since Edward Lhuyd’s pioneering linguistic work on the Celtic languages – Archaeologia Britannia (Oxford 1707)’.[11] For Berresford-Ellis, the contemporary Celtic-speakers[12] are the descendents of the Continental Celts who were pushed into Britain when the Germanic people expanded. Caesar and Classical linguistic sources provide evidence. [13] By using only a one-sided linguistic definition Berresford-Ellis avoids the difficulty of the diverse concept of Celticness. This gives the biased conclusion that the contemporary Celtic-speakers are still Celts.

Although “Our ancestors the Gauls”[14] is about the Continental Celtic identity, it is still useful for this discussion. Dietler mentions that the inhabitants of Britain and Ireland were never called ‘Celts’ by Classical authors and that they most likely did not see themselves that way either until in the nineteenth century the linguistic concept was invented. It is impossible to know if the Continental and Insular Celtic-speakers had a collective identity, but it is likely that similarities in language and culture are due to exchange networks.[15]

In 1997, Cunliffe[16] admits that it seems impossible to give a comprehensive view on ‘the Celts’ and that it is:

Better to attempt an imperfect whole than to be satisfied with the minute examination of only a part

Therefore he gives an account of the changing views in the study of ‘the Celts’. The Classical authors do not mention Celts on the Pretanic Isles, but Caesar writes that ‘the occupants of Kent have a way of life similar to the Gauls’. There is no historical evidence for the invasion theory of Hawkes, which means that archaeological and linguistic theories are constructed models. Archaeological evidence suggests that the culture of the Continental Celts survived in Irish literature: the massive slashing swords mentioned in the Ulster Cycle –which were never found in Ireland- have been found on the Continent.[17]

In defence of the Megaws’ accuse that he denies the existence of ‘the Celts’, Collis[18] argues that the ancient Celts did exist, but that we do not know what definition Classical writers used. Therefore, we cannot say anything about it and that is why he criticises scholars who do so. [19]

In Celtomania and Celtoscepticism[20], Sims-Williams argues that the term ‘Celtic’ is used differently within different disciplines, although it was originally an ethnic and linguistic term. Archaeology cannot provide useful evidence:

Hallstatt or La Tène material in undocumented areas of temperate Europe (such as Britain and Ireland) should no longer be used to determine the presence, absence, or arrival of ethnic or linguistic Celts [21]

Despite the fact that Classical authors do not mention Insular Celts, Caesar and Tacitus mention linguistic, cultural and political connections between the Continent and the Isles. This undermines Collis view that ‘there is no logic in calling the indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles “Celts”’. When it comes to his own discipline, linguistics, Sims-Williams’ position is agnostic:

Because Celtic languages are still spoken in Britain and Ireland we will not just assume that the cultures of the two islands have ever been similar, or still are meaningfully ‘Celtic’. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t[22]

James used to hold the view of continuation of ‘the Celts’, but Collis ‘opened his eyes’. In The Atlantic Celts[23] he argues that the Insular Celts are an eighteenth and nineteenth century invention due to misinterpretation of evidence. Contrary to Sims-Williams, James states that ‘Celtic’ was originally not a linguistic concept, but became one when defining the Insular people as Celtic. He explains that different histories are created with contemporary assumptions which reflects our view on the past. No particular view holds the monopoly of truth. However, for a long time, evidence was interpreted according to the invasion theory. Caesar is often quoted in favour of this, but the opposite is also possible: the Insular people considered themselves indigenous to the Isles. For James, archaeological evidence suggests diversity, which rejects the view of ‘the Celts’ as a unified people.[24]

In The Celts[25], Maier states that the use of the modern term ‘Celtic’ is problematic. The Classic ethnographers used it for an ethnic group, but never gave a refined definition. In the modern period it has been transferred to historical, linguistic and archaeological phenomena and has also been used as self-definition.

In 2003 Collis published The Celts[26], where he explains how and why ‘the Celts’ have been perceived in certain ways in different disciplines throughout time. He wants to ‘cut through the knot of the inter-related disciplines’, which shows that a straightforward answer to the question of how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland is an illusion. By the end of the eighteenth century nobody had doubts about the Celticness of Britain and Ireland. Indeed, that time, based on the misconception that modern Breton was a survival of the ancient Celtic language of Gaul, Lhuyd defined the languages as ‘Celtic’. This term was ‘a tacit acceptance of the nomenclature of Pezron’. Archaeologists identified an art style, with similarities between the Continent and the British Isles, which came to be referred as ‘Celtic’. It spread, according to Henri d’Arbois de Jubainville, with ‘the Celts’ to the Isles. Archaeology has now rejected the invasion theory, but, like Sims-Williams, Collis argues that this discipline will never provide us any useful knowledge about Celticness[27]:

We cannot measure a skull and say what language the man spoke, or usually what language the blacksmith spoke who made a sword, or the warrior who wielded it, unless we have independent information[28]

Why have publications changed?

Throughout time the emphasis has shifted from a comprehensive history of ‘the Celts’ as a synthesised concept[29], to a history on thinking about ‘the Celts’. Earlier publications often use the invasion theory, while more recent publications argue that there are no comprehensive theories.[30] Others think that it is unlikely that there is such a thing as ‘the Celts’ at all.[31] According to the Megaws, this latter view, held by Collis, was the turning point in the view on ‘the Celts’.[32] Collis rectifies this claim by stating that it is unjustified to put ethnic labels on archaeological data in the sense that there is no link between ‘the ancient Celts’ and La Tène art.[33] We have seen that a changing view emerged before Collis raised his doubts. In 1984, in a seminar on the origins of the Irish, scholars came to the conclusion that views from different disciplines could not be reconciled, and rejected the invasion theory.[34] In Celtomania and Celtoscepticism[35], Sims-Williams develops this view and argues that the term ‘Celtic’ is used differently within the disciplines of history, linguistics and archaeology.[36] This ‘Celtosceptic’ view[37] is shared by various scholars, whereby James is seen as a ‘convert’.[38] The rejection of the invasion theory is for some scholars, like Berresford-Ellis and the Megaws, connected with right wing English politics, and conceived as eliminating ‘the Celts’ from history.[39]

 

Conclusion

Now that we have a chronology of significant publication from 1970 until 2003, and examined the reasons for changing views on how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland, we can draw conclusions.

Earlier publications, like studies by Chadwick and Hawkes, are rather vague about how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland, or give one comprehensive theory in the light of the invasion theory. In this view, there are no doubts about the continuity of ‘the Celtic people’. By using only a linguistic definition, Berresford-Ellis simplifies the difficulties that arise within different disciplines and this has led to a politically biased conclusion. Scholars like Collis, Cunliffe, Dietler, James, Maier and Sims-Williams have drawn the conclusion that it is impossible to reconcile the different theories from different disciplines. Therefore they do not explain how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland by giving a straightforward answer, but discuss the changing views on Celticness within different disciplines throughout time. This is called ‘Celtoscepticism’.

We can conclude that the realisation of irreconcilability caused a paradigm shift. The present common view among scholars is very characteristic for postmodernism: it is impossible to know how Celticness reached ancient Britain and Ireland, because our knowledge is fragmented due to different disciplines. Universality is impossible, so we can only share a diversity of opinions and discuss these.

 

Bibliography

• N. K. Chadwick, The Celts (London, 1971).
• J. Collis, ‘Celtic Myths’, Antiquity 71 (1997), 195-201.
• J. Collis, The Celts: origins, myths & inventions (Stroud, 2003).
• B. Cunliffe, The Ancient Celts (Oxford, 1997).
• M. Dietler, ‘”Our Ancestors the Gauls”: archaeology, ethnic nationalism, and the manipulation of Celtic identity in modern Europe’, American Anthropologist 96, 3 (1994), 584-605.
• P. Berresford-Ellis, Celtic Dawn: the dream of Celtic unity (Wales, 2002).
• C. F. C. Hawkes, ‘An Approach to the Insular Celts’, Irish Archaeological Research Forum 4, 2 (1977), 1-6.
• S. James, The Atlantic Celts: ancient people or modern invention? (London, 1999).
• B. Maier, The Celts: a history from earliest times to the present. (Edinburgh, 2003).
• J. P. Mallory, ‘The Origins of the Irish’, The Journal of Irish Archaeology 2 (1984), 65-69.
• R. Megaw & V. Megaw, ‘Through a Window on the European Iron Age Darkly: fifty years of reading Early Celtic art’, World Archaeology 25, 3 (1994), 287-303.
• P. Sims-Williams, ‘Genetics, Linguistics, and Prehistory: thinking big and thinking straight’, Antiquity 72, 277 (1998), 505-527.
• P. Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies 36 (1998), 1-36.

---

[1] Dates based on the first publication. For a full list consult the bibliography.

[2] J. Collis, The Celts: origins, myths & inventions (Stroud, 2003);

P. Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies 36 (1998), 1-36.

[3] Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’.

[4] N. K. Chadwick, The Celts (London, 1971).

[5] Chadwick, ibid.

[6] C. F. C. Hawkes, ‘An Approach to the Insular Celts’, Irish Archaeological Research Forum 4, 2 (1977), 1-6.

[7] Hawkes, ibid.

[8] J. P. Mallory, ‘The Origins of the Irish’, The Journal of Irish Archaeology 2 (1984), 65-69.

[9] Mallory, ibid.

[10] P. Berresford-Ellis, Celtic Dawn: the dream of Celtic unity (Wales, 2002).

[11] Berresford-Ellis, ibid.

[12] Irish, Scots, Manx, Welsh, Breton and Cornish

[13] Berresford-Ellis, Celtic Dawn.

[14] M. Dietler, ‘”Our Ancestors the Gauls”: archaeology, ethnic nationalism, and the manipulation of Celtic identity in modern Europe’, American Anthropologist 96, 3 (1994), 584-605.

[15] Dietler, ibid.

[16] B. Cunliffe, The Ancient Celts (Oxford, 1997).

[17] Cunliffe, ibid.

[18] J. Collis, ‘Celtic Myths’, Antiquity 71 (1997), 195-201.

[19] Collis, ibid.

[20] Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’.

[21] Sims-Williams, ibid.

[22] P. Sims-Williams, ‘Genetics, Linguistics, and Prehistory: thinking big and thinking straight’, Antiquity 72, 277 (1998), 505-527.

[23] S. James, The Atlantic Celts: ancient people or modern invention? (London, 1999).

[24] James, ibid.

[25] B. Maier, The Celts: a history from earliest times to the present. (Edinburgh, 2003).

[26] Collis, The Celts.

[27] Collis, ibid.

[28] Collis, ibid.

[29] Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’.

[30] Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’.

[31] Collis, The Celts.

[32] R. Megaw & V. Megaw, ‘Through a Window on the European Iron Age Darkly: fifty years of reading Early Celtic art’, World Archaeology 25, 3 (1994), 287-303.

[33] Collis, ‘Celtic Myths’.

[34] Mallory, ‘The Origins of the Irish’.

[35] Sims-Williams, ‘Celtomania and Celtoscepticism’.

[36] Sims-Williams, ibid.

[37] Sims-Williams, ibid.

[38] James, The Atlantic Celts.; Collis, The Celts.; Berresford-Ellis, Celtic Dawn.

[39] Berresford-Ellis, Celtic Dawn.

Read Full Post »