The Ethnology of the British IslandsLatham, R. G. (Robert Gordon)
History
The Ethnology of the British Islands
Latham, R. G. (Robert Gordon)
Ethnology -- Great Britain
It is in Gaul, then, that we must look for the mother-country of Kelts;
at least in the first instance, for Gaul is the nearest point--the
white cliffs of Folkstone being within sight of the opposite shore. Yet
(as an example of the extent to which one ethnological question depends
upon another) the Gallic origin of the earliest Britons has been
objected to. For a _Keltic_ population, indeed, it has been admitted to
be the natural area; but we have seen that a population other and
earlier than the Keltic has been inferred from the shape of the skulls,
and other phenomena of the Stone period. Now for such a population as
this, Jutland or Sleswick has been considered the more likely locality,
since the skulls in question have been compared to those of the
Laplanders and Finns; and, if this be true, the further north we carry
the home of the British aborigines, the less we find it necessary to
bring the Finn or Lap families southward. This reasoning is valid if the
original fact of any _pre_-Keltic population be true. Those, however,
who doubt the premises, have no need to refine upon the current notion
of Gaul being the original home of the Britons. Gaul, then, is the
ground from which we take our view of the great Keltic division of the
human species in its integrity; for, hitherto, we have seen but the
western offsets of it.
That the country between the Seine and Garonne, corresponding with the
provinces of Normandy, Brittany, Maine, Anjou, Poitiers, the Isle of
France, and the Orleannois, was Keltic, has never been doubted. The
evidence of Cæsar is express; and there is neither objection nor cavil
to set against it. There it is, where, at the present moment, the Keltic
Breton of Brittany continues to be the language of the common people.
The central and south-eastern parts of France--the Nivernois, Burgundy,
the Bourbonnois, the Lionnois, Auvergne, Dauphiny, Languedoc, Savoy, and
Provence--were _chiefly_ Keltic. Perhaps they were wholly so; but as the
Ligurians of Italy, and Iberians of Spain are expressly stated to have
met on the lower Rhone, it is best to qualify this assertion. At the
same time, good reasons can be given for considering that the Ligurians
were but little different from the other Gauls.
South of the Garonne the ancient population was _Iberic_.
Switzerland, or the ancient Helvetia, was Keltic, and beyond
Switzerland, along the banks of the Danube, and in the fertile plains of
Northern Italy, intrusive and conquering Kelts were extended as far east
as Styria, and as far south as Etruria; but these were offsets from the
main body of the stock, whose true area was Gaul and the British isles.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account