Hispano-Celtic Languages

The following pages are intended primarily to claim the authorship of
certain ideas, contrary to repeated, and more or less diffuse, attempts to
attribute them to others. In any case, by giving priority to a “micro-historiographic
review” (Ballester, 2008, p. 197), this does not mean that the reinterpretation
of epigraphic novelties published in recent years has been
neglected by us.

https://www.wales.ac.uk/Resources/Documents/Centre/2019/Koch-Celtic-of-the-SW-inscriptions-2019.pdf

[ ¶ Preface. Our understanding of the emergence of the Celtic languages and their relationship with the rest of Indo-European still rests largely on a three-way comparison of Gaulish, Brythonic, and Goidelic. Until the discovery of the first long Celtiberian inscription from Botorrita (K.1.1) in 1970, little more than this was possible. In the coming years, one important factor for our grasp of Celtic as a subset of Indo-European will be how much Palaeohispanic evidence we can confidently include in the comparisons on which our evolving reconstruction of Proto-Celtic is based. Today, the classification remains uncertain for a large body of material from the western Iberian Peninsula outside the Celtiberian area in the eastern Meseta. The linguistic affiliation of this evidence should be more than an exercise in arbitrary labelling. We will want to know whether the evidence points to distinct branches of Indo-European that had formed somewhere else and then entered the Peninsula in waves or, rather, a pattern of long-term diversification of Indo-European in situ as a dialect continuum, along the lines foreseen by Renfrew. 1 ]

Although our linguistic commentaries extend over wider limits, we continue to focus our main attention on Iberian personal names. Much of what is written below results from the reading of the doctoral thesis carried out by Ignacio Simón Cornago that was recently published in co-edition by the Universities of Seville and Zaragoza.