"Celt" Conjecture

[Rumo]

Vercingetorix's father Celtillus was born (and named) well before the Roman conquest.

No, he is actually gets his name in Caesar's account, there' s no way to show it's not a Roman interpretation.

In this case I go with Chris, there's no logical reason whatsoever to suppose that Caesar would invent a name for him, and a Roman name at that. An interpretation of what exactly?

It was already covered in the thread. Celtillus reads as "little Celt".

For instance, the Bulgarian tsar Kaloyan (Kalo-Ioannes, John the Handsome, the Fair) was nicknamed by Greeks Skylo-Ioannes (John the Dog). Was he a dog? I mentioned already the Hungarian Paul Kinizsi (the Knyaz) who was known to Vlachs as Paul the Chinese. Was he a Chinese?

Some of these re-interpretations serve to make the foreign name more familiar. The Ancient Greeks and Romans practiced it too on a wide scale: so the Persian names starting in Baga- are rendered in Greek by Mega- (e.g. Megabyzos instead of Bagabuxša - please note the difference between the original and the Greek variant of it, in case you seek meanings in names recorded in Latin and Greek). Or my experience. English speakers often call me Drago, even though they hear my name and the last sound is š as in "she" or in "shop", so it's not like they can't pronounce it. In few cases I was nick-named (by mistake) Dragon and/or also asked if my name actually means "dragon".

Constructing and interpreting names and identities happens, even though some modern readers will not find logical reasons for that. If there's no logical reason (we don't know or can't imagine one) for something to happen, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

The Celtici tribe of Spain bore this name before the Roman conquest.

Evidence?

Evidence of the contrary?

The burden of proof lies always on the affirmative. I can as well claim the ancient populations of Spain called themselves Martians or Leprechauns, but if I do, I must bring evidence for that.

And I don't mean 'it was written by a Roman writer so it could have been invented by that writer'. If you suggest that the Romans' use of the name 'Celt' was really an invention, you must be able prove that as well in each case. If not, as a historian I acceot names of people and places at face value. I accept different versions when the author misunderstand s a name, but I can't accept that authors like Caesar go on to invent names altogether and use Roman names.
so in this case, if we have a Roman source that describes to subjugation of the Spanish tribe of the Celtici, i see no reason to think that they were called differently but that some author wanted for some odd reason to use a different name.

What's to be proven if it's an invention? This alternative springs from the fact there's no 'Celt' attested in an authentic indigenous context, all of them are attested after significant contact with outsiders, and mostly by and for outsiders (Latin authors, Latin inscriptions)
I really don't care if it's an invention or not, but you and others who assaulted me with such questions. There's no shred of evidence Celts called themselves that way before Greeks and Romans did. Interpret it as you want - Graeco-Roman invention or whatever else.

Did the indigenous people of North America call themselves Indians or Native Americans before Europeans did? What odd reason had those Europeans to call them with names which weren't theirs in the first place?

You are right here, however, Chris is not arguing for anything like that. I think all serious schoars accept that the 'categories Celt and German' are not clear-cut, homogenous, black and white groups, but a much more difficult mixture of ethnicity, culture and language.

But that's not what Chris is arguing - he does not say that Caesar and tacitus are right by saying that Celts or Germans saw themselves as part of one common group. Or do you Chris?
He is trying to show us that at least some groups knew and used the name Celt or Kelt in their personal names and tribal names.

If my understanding is correct, his actual point is that Celts existed as a group (aware of their identity and calling themselves as such), encompassing Iron Age populations from the territories modern Spain and France at the least.