Personal Onomastics and local Society in ancient Lusitania.

JUAN LUIS GARCÍA ALONSO (ED.)

CONTINENTAL CELTIC WORDFORMATION. THE ONOMASTIC DATA

EDICIONES UNIVERSIDAD DE SALAMANCA

~

AQ!!ILAFUENTE, 197

@

Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca

y los autores

1a edición:diciembre,2013ISBN: 978-84-9012-378-2

Depósito legal: S. 586-2013

Ediciones Universidad de SalamancaPlaza San Benito s/n

E-37002 Salamanca (España)http:! /www.eusa1.es

[email protected]

Impreso en España-Printed in Spain

Composición, impresión y encuadernación:Imprenta KADMOS

Teléfono: 923 28 1239

Salamanca (España)

Todos los derechos reservados.

Ni la totalidad ni parte de este libro

puede reproducirse ni transmitirse sin permiso escrito deEdiciones Universidad de Salamanca.

Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca es miembro de la UNE

Unión de Editoriales Universitarias Españolaswww.une.es

~

CEPo Servicio de Bibliotecas

Texto (visual) : sin mediación

CONTlNENT AL Celtic word formation : the onomastic data / Juan Luis Garda Alonso (ed.).-la. ed.-Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, 2013

236 p.-(Colección Aquilafuente ; 197)

Bibliografía al final de cada capítUlo

1. Lenguas celtas-Formación de palabras. 2. Lenguas celtas-Etimología-Nombres propios.1.Garda Alonso, Juan Luis.

811.15'373.611

811.15'373.2

...

)ER FALILEYEV

rovince of Aquitania: Derivationlomastics of the Iberian Peninsula

Iceo~Aquitania where, of course,lllyhappens with personal names,

lme formed in a certain languageage.Il of Celtic Ghosts»), Juan Luis

)ti we study the proper names of.their creators, of the speakers of

mology, morphology, etymology,lative texts is a way oflooking forIYlooking at either the etymologyuency of certain word formation

:oss the continent to do just that..n Celtiberian Anthroponymy» )Ilastics of the Celtiberian region.:aand analyses this type of name-

nher Celtic languages.1t appearswas tentatively pointed out by P.

PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETYIN ANCIENT LUSITANIA

MANUEL SALINAS DE FRÍAS

Salamanca Universitt

toponymie vieille-celtique: leso/pe Vesontio (locus) E- Vesontis

1 device used by Indo-Europeantive by Juan Luis García Alonso.

names coined using this resource1. PERSONAL ONOMASTICS IN THE LITERARY SOURCES REFERRING TO THE CONQyEST

OF LUSIT ANIA

W HEN THE ORGANISER OF THIS WORKSHOP, professor Juan Luis García Alonso,

invited me to participate, I asked myself what a history scholar could possiblyhave to say that would be of any interest to an audience comprising mainly

linguists and philologists. I carne to the condusion that the relationship between personalonomastics and local society might be a suitable topie, not so much to develop a generaloverview, whieh would exceed the purpose and the time assigned to this paper, as to pondercertain problems and methodological issues that could interest linguists and historians alike.My frame of reference is going to be the Roman province of Lusitania, within which theCeltic element was of substantial importance, as can be deduced both from dassicalliterary

and archaeological sources as well as from an analysis of the toponymy and anthroponymy.Linguists and historians are both interested in onomastics, particularly anthroponyms, asa way of learning about ancient societies, and in the case occupying us he re, about Celticsociety. As historians, we are also interested in personal names because they are a very impor-tant source of information about the society those persons belonged to, since in Antiquitya person' s name, like their dothing or other personal features, served as a direct and imme-diate expression of that individual' s social position. This is particularly true in the case ofRoman society, for example, although it was probably the same in Celtic society (Salinas,2011: 136-139). The Celts on the Iberian Peninsula did not learn to write until the Roman

r.¡Interpretations on Celtie and

ight of Phoneties, CompositionEuropean languages ofWestern

Iy non-Celtic but acrually dosermy forms are ambiguous, eitherause the likeliest etymology mayriptions.» The author analyses a

d to Derivative: the Developmentoften is to appropriately evaluateJsition in our analyses of propers far from clear.

Iles») applies extreme detail and

prepositions and prefixes in the

be learned from this procedure.)f the elements used and draws

, nonetheless, as she puts it, thattill needed in this field, as in so

J Research Project HARlOIl-277I9 and SAOO3AIO-1.

.

18 MANUEL SALINAS DE FRÍAS

conquest, and in the case of the Celtic west, this probably did not take place until the impe-rial age.This means that the references to Celtic anthroponyms on the Peninsula were, as iswell known, all very late testimonies contained in the texts of classical authors writing aboutits Roman conquest, or found mainly in inscriptions from the time ofImperial Rome.

Concerning the anthroponyms known to us through classicalliterary sources, the firstproblem we encounter is to know whether a certain anthroponym is a 'real' anthroponymor not; that is, whether it was effectively the name of real persons, and if so, to determinethe extent to which me transmission through Greek or Latin has altered the originalmorphology of an indigenous name (Vallejo, 2000: 404,405). The second problem is thatclassicalliterary sources transmit solely the names of certain Lusitanian chiefs, whom we canassume had some kind of pre-eminent social standing, but say nothing about the onomasticsof the rest of the population. We therefore do not know whether the onomastics prior tothe Roman conquest were homogenous throughout sociery or whether, on the other hand,there were name differences or preferences according to an individual' s status. The situationwe find in this case is almost the reverse of the later situation under Roman domination.

During the Republic, that is, during the Roman conquest, we have the names of membersof the aristocracy, but not of individuals of lower classes. In contrast, during the Empire wehave above all a Celtic onomastics that corresponds to persons in the lower social classes(peregrini,plebs...), since acquiring Roman citizenship, particularly after Flavian's Edict ofLatiniry, meant the loss of one's indigenous name in favour of a Roman rype name (withsome very interesting phenomena on the part of the indigenous peoples' imitation of theRoman onomastic structure, with tria nomina (Cf. Vallejo, 2010). A final disadvantage isthat the literary information at the time of independence is limited to littIe more than adozen years in the 2ndcentury BC, the period betWeen 155 and 138 BC, and informationfrom epigraphs consists of a few names that we can date only very generally to the 1" centuryBC, without being able to specifYfurther.

The most important historical source, and almost the only one we have for the study ofthe anthroponymy of the indigenous chiefs in the period of the Spanish Wars, is Appian ofAlexandria, a Greek author who lived in the mid 2ndcentury AD, long after the events henarrates. His sources of information seem to have been Polybius and the Roman analysts.Appian (App. Hisp. 56-75) says that in 155 BC the Lusitanians rose up against the Romansunder the leadership ofPoúnikos. His military successesled the Vettones to join his army andtogether they razed the whole ofLusitania, all the way to the southern coast of the Peninsula.When he died, from the blow of a stone, he was succeeded by KaÍsaros. Furthermore, theLusitanians to the north of the T agus River rose up under the orders of Kaukaínos. Theresistance against the Romans was led in the end by Viriatus, who maintained hostilitiesbetWeen 147 and 139 Be. Despite this, Appian himself saysthere were many other Lusitanianarmies fighting the Romans, and among their leaders he cites several individuals: Koúrios,Apouléios and Konnóba. Viriatus was assassinated by three philoi of his retinue, who werearistocrats of the Turdetanian ciry of Urso.According to Appian, the names ofhis assassinswere Aúdax, Ditálkon and MÍnouros, and according to Diodorus they were Audas, Ditálkesand Nikoróntes. Finally, the surviving Lusitanians surrendered to the Romans under theleadership of an individual called T aútalos by Appian and T aútamos by Diodorus of Sicily.

In some cases, it is easy to recognize a Celtic-type onomastics behind these names,although in other cases it is not so straightfotWard.

,A7rOUA~'¡O~.In principIe, this seems to be the Hellenisation of the Latin name Appuleius,which is attested in imperial Hispanic epigraphy (Solin-Salomies, 1988: 19,479; Abascal1994: 83-84, identified above all in T arraconensis, but with two examples in Lusitania, in

PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSITANIA 19

did not take place until the impe-nyms on the Peninsula were, as is

of c!assicalauthors writing aboutthe time ofImperial Rome.classicalliterary sources, the first

roponym is a 'real' anthroponym1persons, and if so, to determine

r Latin has altered the originalf05). The second problem is that1Lusitanian chiefs, whom we can

¡aynothing about the onomastics

whether the onomastics prior toy or whether, on the other hand,fndividual' s status. The situationltion under Roman domination., we have the names of members

1 contrast, during the Empire we~rsons in the lower social dasses

rticularly after Flavian' s Edict ofur of a Roman rype name (withgenous peoples' imitation of the

0,2010). A final disadvantage is: is limited to litde more than a

5 and 138 BC, and information

.yvery generally to the 1" century

the conventus Pacensis;Vallejo, 2000: 403). This is the nomen, for example, of the famoustribune of the plebeians in the year 100 BC, L. Appuleius Saturninus. The fact it is the nameof one of the lestarchoiwho attacked the Roman proconsul Servilianus in 140 BC raises theissue of an early onomastic Latinisation of the Lusitanian aristocracies. When we considerthat the encounter between Servilianus and Curius and Appuleius took place on the roadbetween Baeturia and the land of the Conii, that is, in the southern part ofPortugal, we maycontend that Appuleius had a southern social background, an area that was the first to beRomanised. This possibiliry can be linked to a very interesting piece of information, alsohanded down to us by Appian (App. Hisp. 63), who says that ayear earlier, the propraetorQ0ntius sent against Viriatus someone called Gaius Marcius, an Iberian from the city ofIralica, who nevertheless, as we can see, already had a Latin name, although he was probablynot a Roman citizen, since if he were, Appian would not have identified him as an Iberian.However, in our view there is a possibility that Appian, who is the only one transmittingthe name, may have Latinised an indigenous anthroponym formed from the root Apl-/ Abl-which gives personal names such asApanus/Apana, Apinus/Apina, etc. (Palomar, 1957: 36-37; Vallejo 2005: 160-165, who nonetheless does not indude the form, doubdessly becausehe believed it was a Roman name). The form Apulus is known in Lusitanian onomasticsfrom an inscription in Brozas, CC (CIL II 741: Cilius Caenonisf Apulus Eaeco), which iseither an anthroponym, or, as Búa proposes (Búa, 2000: 530; apud Vallejo, 2005: 163), atheonym (Apuluseaeco),based on the root abul- (Vallejo, 2005: 163, who indudes the formsAbulaius from Trujillo,Abulos from Botorrita,Abulokum fram Ibiza, albeit in reference to aCeltiberian, andAbilicorum from Mérida), which could have given rise to a name similar tothe one transmitted to us by Appian.

KcÚCTapo~.Palomar (Palomar, 1957: 56) thought this name seemed Celtic, formed fromthe Iralo-Celtic root that gave rise to gaesum «iron dart», gaesi «valiant men», which givesnames in Gallic such as Caesorix.Vallejo (Vallejo, 2005: 245), however, believes the phoneticcorrespondences that can be established in Lusitanian onomastics regarding the g- ingaesumwould dismiss any link to the c- in caes-.Búa (Búa, 2000: 107, apudVallejo, 2005) has related*kaisaro-with lA kesara- «hair», lat. caesaries«head of hair», and Solá Solé (Solá Solé,1967: 310-311) has related it to Punic toponyms of the KYSR type, whose root means'elephant'. In any case, Vallejo (Vallejo, 2005: 244) distinguishes a set of indigenous formsdeveloped from the root Caisar-which would give,besides the name transmitted by Appian,which is repeated in exactly the same way on a hospitaliry tessera from Paredes de Nava(PA, CIL II 5762), names like Caesarus, Caesara, Caesaroni, Caesarius, etc. (Untermann,1965: 81). The Latin cognomen Caesarhas the same origin, and it is likely that homophonybetween Latin and indigenous names favoured the survival of the latter (in contrast, Vallejo,2005: 245 believes such contamination must have been less frequent than in the case of otherroots). This name, in the same form Caisaros, is repeated in the epigraphy on a hospitalitytessera from Paredes de Nava, Palencia (CIL II 5762), referring to someone who is said tobe apr(inceps?) Arcailon, a supra-family Celtiberian community whose name we can relateto the Aravacii city of Uxama Argaela. This is quite interesting, as it seems to indicate ananthroponym specifically related to individuals of high social standing or aristocrats. Ir isdocumented in its Latinised forms Caesarus and Caesara in Castandiello, Asturias (CIL II2698) and Medina de las Torres (CIL II 1031) (Palomar, 1957: 56).

KatlJcalvo~.The origin of this name seems to be the root *keu- «to curve, bend», whichin Germanic and Lithuanian, with the vocalism -a- provides some terms with the meaningof 'height' or 'elevation of the terrain'. This is prabably the erymological meaning of thetoponym Cauca in Celtiberia. The anthroponym as such has no parallels in the epigraphy

mly one we have for the study off the Spanish Wars, is Appian oflry AD, long after the events he)Iybius and the Roman analysts.tians rose up against the Romansthe Vettones to join his army and:southern coast of the Peninsula.

d by Kaísaros. Furthermore, the:r the orders of Kaukaínos. TheltUS,who maintained hostilities

here were many other Lusitanian.resseveral individuals: Koúrios,

~philoi ofhis retinue, who wereppian, the names of his assassinsdorus they were Audas, Ditálkesiered to the Romans under the

'aútamos by Diodorus ofSicily.nomastics behind these names,

on of the Latin name Appuleius,uomies, 1988: 19,479; Abascal

h two examples in Lusitania, in

...


of the imperial age, although Cauceti and Caucinus are known in Ávila (LICS No. 8) and inMadrid (CIL II 3055) (Palomar, 1957: 62). Other personal names have been formed fromthis same root cauc- e.g., Cauquiri in Villamesías, CC, and Kaukirinos in Botorrita (Vallejo,2000: 403; 2005: 271).

K6vvo~a. This name appears without any known connections either among Indo-European languages or the Iberían languages of Hispania. Appian (Hisp. 68) cites it[Connoba] among the indigenous chiefs that sacked Lusitania in the times ofViriatus, butwe cannot be sure it referred to a Lusitanian. The ending -oba reminds us of toponyms fromthe southern region, such as Onoba, Maenoba, etc. (García Alonso, 2003: 21), with which,as we have seen, Lusitania had close relations. The first part of the name, Konn-, contains asuffix -nn- that is reflected in both Iberían and Indo- European Hispanic anthroponymy, andwhich according to Albertos (Albertos, 1966: 293-294; Palomar, 1957: 129-131) is quitefrequent in Celtic languages.

KOUplO~.As in the case of Apouleios, this anthroponym seems to be the Hellenisation ofthe Roman family name Curius (Vallejo, 2000: 403), since it is transmitted by Appian. Bothchiefs commanded a Lusitanian army that confronted the consul Servilianus somewherein what is today the province of Huelva. Ruling out the possibility that it was a very earlyLatinisation among aristocrats who at first were on the side of the Romans and then turnedagainst them, we might consider very hypothetically a *co-uirformation that giveswords suchas curia in Latin, revolving around the meaning of'male' (varón in Spanish). We also knowof the anthroponym Coutius (CIL II 680) in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Cáceres (Palomar,1957: 68), but 1do not know whether a change of r- for -t is possible. Vallejo, 2005: 299, whodoes not include the name transmitted by Appian, cites the forms Curundus and Curundeaas typical names in Lusitania, developed from the root cur-, and he accepted the etymologyproposed by Albertos (Albertos, 1966: 101) for the toponym Curunda based on the root*keu- «to swell», *kuros'swollen, strong, hero', gr. Kyrios «Lord».

T aUTaAo~.There seems to be no doubt that the root of this name is *teu-,with extension

-t- and vocalism -a-, with the meaning of 'people', a root that gave rise to numerouscompounds both in the Celtic (the theonym Teutates) and Germanic (the very name ofTeutons) languages. Vallejo (Vallejo, 2005: 430) raises doubts as to the exact form of thename transmitted by Appian, since in other sources it appears as TauTaAo~(Ap. lb. 75)or TauTalLo~(Diod. 33, 1,4) (Vallejo, 2000: 405). In the case of the form transmitted byDiodorus, the different ending does not affect the root of the word, and in the case ofAppian, it is easyto understand the confusion wrought by handwritten u and n in Greek. Thegeographical dispersion of the anthroponym takes in northern Lusitania, southern Asturiasand Celtiberia, basicallythe Duero river basin. The formations in Taut- are only documentedin Hispania where, nevertheless, the forms in Tout- are predominant. In Moral, Zamora, theanthroponym Teuto is preserved in its original form (Palomar, 1957: 105-106).

OuplaT8o~.Diodorus called the Lusitanian chief'YplaT8o~,whereas Appian and CassiusDio give the form OuplaT8o~,more akin to the Latin Viriathus (Livius, Velleius Paterculus)or Viriatus, which appears in Frontinus and in the epigraphy. Vallejo (Vallejo, 2005: 452-453) includes 14 mentions of the name, ten of them in northern Lusitania, three in thePortuguese region ofTras-os-montes, and an isolated one in Navarre. In Lusitania, it appearsin Baños de Montemayor, Brozas, Coria, Ibahernando, Jarandilla de la Vera, Sabugal,Santa Cruz de la Sierra, T orrequemada, Cárquere, and Viseu. Outside that area, it is alsodocumented in Braga (CIL II 2435), Gastiain (CIL II 2970) and Chaves (CIL II 5586)(figs. 1 and 2). We also know of two findings in !taly, as well as in Narbonensis, CisalpineGaul and Dalmatia (Palomar, 1957: 110; Untermann, 1965: 189-190, who considered it a

lo

PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSIT ANIA 21

own in Ávila (LICS No. 8) and inlal qames have been formed from

1Kaukirinos in Botorrita (Vallejo,

typical representation of the Lusitanian-Galician area; Vallejo, 2005: 453). Palomar thoughtit was a formation based on Virius, in the same way that Celtius gives Celtiatus. As to itsetymology, Humboldt, and later Hübner, accepted the opinion of the Larín grammarians,in accordance with the quote from Pliny (HN33, 39) that saysthat the Celtiberians liked towear gold bracelets called viriae in Celtiberia and viriolae in Celtic lands. Viria would thusbe the equivalent of the Gallic torques, and Viriatus would therefore be the morphologicalequivalent of the Latin Torquatus. Ir would then be a derivaríon of the name viriae, just asbarbatus is from barba or togatus from toga,with the meaning «one who possesses or wearsviriae» (Vallejo, 2005: 453). Ir could hence be posited that this was a prestigious name, sincethe use of torques was reserved for divine images or men ofhigh social standing, which wouldfit with Vallejo's observaríon that it was unlikely to be a name that a child would have frombirth (Vallejo, 2005: 454).

:onnections either among Indo-mia. Appian (Hisp. 68) cites ittania in the times ofViriarus, but

oba reminds us of toponyms froma Alonso, 2003: 21), with which,rt of the name, Konn-, contains a

ean Hispanic anthroponymy, and

Jalomar, 1957: 129-131) is quite

1seems to be the Hellenisation of

ir is transmitted by Appian. Bothle consul Servilianus somewhere

Jossibiliry that it was a very earlye of the Romans and then rurned

irformation that gives words suchvarón in Spanish). We also knowz de la Sierra, Cáceres (Palomar,

.possible. Vallejo, 2005: 299, whoe forms Curundus and Curundea

-, and he accepted the etymologytlym Curunda based on the root<Lord».

this name is *teu-,with extension

oot that gave rise to numerousnd Germanic (the very name ofmbts as to the exact form of the

ppears as TiX1!TiXAO~(Ap. lb. 75)

case of the form transmitted byof the word, and in the case ofllldwritten u and n in Greek. Thelern Lusitania, sourhern Asturias

ms in Taut- are only documentedlominant. In Moral, Zamora, the

lar, 1957: 105-106).eo~,whereas Appian and Cassiusthus (Livius, Velleius Paterculus)¡hy. Vallejo (Vallejo, 2005: 452-lorthern Lusitania, three in the

N avarre. In Lusitania, it appearsJarandilla de la Vera, Sabugal,seu. Outside that area, it is also

170)and Chaves (CIL II 5586)'ell as in Narbonensis, Cisalpine,5: 189-190, who considered it a

VIRIAT-

Image 1: Viriatus in Hispania (fram Vallejo 2005).

~


COGlNU

100km

Image 2: Viriatus in Lusitania (ftomAtlas 2003).

Likewise, the names ofViriatus' philoi assassins also appear to be Celtic. Ir is interestingthat Diodorus shouId saythey were arisrocrats from the city of Ursa,known as the T urdetaniUrso, and therefore distant from the Indo-European linguistic area of the PeninsuIa. Thisfact, together with the exceptionality of these names, has Ied some philoIogists to reject theirauthenticity. However, 1 feel that rather than ruling out certain data on the basis of the aprion notion they did not coincide or that they couId not have existed in the Ianguage areain which they were documented, we shouId attempt to expIain their apparendy anomaIouspresence in that area. The fact Celtic elements were aristocratic among the TurdetanipeopIe is nothing out of the ordinary and we shouId recall, for exampIe, the Anglo-Normannobility, who were predominandy ofFrench origin; nonetheless, it is an important piece ofinformation supporting the idea that the Celtic expansion of the 2ndcentuty BC was aboveall the work of the Celtic aristocracy, who imposed themselves on populations that were notoriginally Celtic.

AVOct~.From the accusative form transmitted by Appian, AiíoctlCct(Hisp. 71), we can seethat the original form of the name must have been Audax. Diodorus (33, 31) transmitsAudas. This name seems to be the same as one on the Iberian inscription at Varea, Logroño(AIbertos, 1966: 44) which reads A.u.da. According to AIbertos, this name couId be basedon the root *audh-, «Iuck, possession, wealth», attested in Illyrian, Celtic and Germanic

PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSIT ANIA 23

VIRlATVS anthroponymy. In a Celtic language, we find the Welsh udd (*audos) «lord», Bret. Ozaeh(*udakkos) «master of the house», and in the onomastic Audo in Aquitaine (DAG 345),andAudos is the name of a coin in Bituriges. Vallejo (Vallejo, 2005: 483) includes it amongthe names ruled out because it is a hapax and because it was documented precisely in Urso,outside Lusitania, positing a possible invention based on the Latin audax.

LllTlXAlCWVIX,LlLTIXAlCi'j~.Appian (Hisp. 74) gives the form Ditálkona, which refers to

a nominative Ditálkon, whereas Diodorus (33, 21) gives the form Ditálkes. For Albertos(Alberto s, 1966: 106), who referred to the parallels with Illyrian provided by Krahe, bothforms could be based on the number tWo. Vallejo (2005: 489) rules it out for the samereasons as in the previous termo

MLVOVpO~.This is the name ofViriatus' third assassin [Minurus] provided by Appian,who differs with Diodorus in this case. Albertos (1966: 157) postulated an Indo-European(lE) root *minu- «small», from *mei-, *mineu- «decrease», attested in a Celtic languagein names like Minurio (GIL XIII 10006/59) in Lugdunensis Gaul, which is extraordinarilysimilar to it, and Minuso in Narbonensis and Lugdunensis (GIL XII 5686/594; GIL XIII1948, 2120, 2421). Vallejo rules out both this and the next one for the reasons notedpreviously (Vallejo, 2005: 499 and 501).

NllCOpOVTi'j~.This is the name transmitted by Diodorus (33, 21) for Viriatus' third assassin[Nieorontes].Albertos (1966: 168) pointed to the parallelism with other names based on theroot nie-, such as Niearis (GIL XII 3925) in Narbonensis in Gaul; Niearus (GIL III 615) inMacedonia; Nieer (GIL III 11582, XII 3763, 5008) in Noricum and Narbonensis, and thehydronym Nieer or Nieros, today Neckar. This author was reluctant to accept the etymologyproposed by Pokorny, based on an lE *neik-/nik- «attack, start to run, begin with force»,which she related to the Greek Neikos «hate, altercation» and Niké «victory».The idea ofa Celtic presence in the south of the Iberian Peninsula was propounded some time ago byJ.M. Blázquez in two articles that addressed the 'Celtic expansion' in the Hispanic Levantand southern Hispania (Blázquez 1962 and 1974). Although this expansion is now seenmore as the establishment of isolated pockets that would have comprised the military elitescontrolling the key functions ofTurdetani sociery, and not as a kind ofVoIkerwanderung,other archaeological evidence supports this latter interpretation. In particular, the existenceof a relatively abundant group of findings of jewellery in the south that is undeniably Celticin taste and technique, such as those from Pozoblanco and Cañete de lasTorres in Córdoba,or those from Santisteban del Puerto, Mengíbar and Mogón in the province ofJaén, atteststhe presence of Celtic peoples in these areas of upper Andalusia. These sites are interestinglylocated close to mining districts, as if the persons these pieces were made for had soughtaccessnot only to positions of (military) power within sociery, but also its sources of wealth.In the opinion of one scholar, the area of dispersion of this precious metalwork, in whichtorques are the main element, marks out a rough map of the Celtic part of the Peninsula(Delibes, 2001: 149-150).

The Lusitanian presence in Andalusia goes back as far as 190 BC, since we knowthey defeated the praetor of Hispania Ulterior, L. Aemillius Paullus, and their theatre ofoperations does not seem to have extended further than the north of the Sierra Morena.Half a century later, in 145 BC, when Fabius Maximus was on his way from Gorduba toGades to visit the temple of Hereules Gaditanus, he also ran into Lusitanian troops along thelower Guadalquivir. Previously, in 155 BC, the Lusitanians had sacked the land of the Coniiand the cities of the Blasto-Phoenicians, that is, the whole southern coast, and then theycrossed the Straits of Gibraltar and sacked the north of Africa. This Lusitanian presence inthe north of Africa continued until the time of the civil war (G. Chic, 2002: 190-191). Ir

'las2003).

ear to be Celtic. It is interesting'ofUrso,known asthe T urdetaniistic area of the Peninsula. This

some philologists to rejeCt their~rtain data on the basis of the a

ave existed in the language areaain their apparently anomalous

stocratic among the T urdetanior example, the Anglo-Normaneless, it is an important piece of)f the 2ndcenrury BC was above'eson populations that were not

, AVOctKct(Hisp.71), we can see(X.Diodorus (33, 31) transmits

fn inscription at Varea, Logroñotertos, this name could be based

f¡ IlIyrian, Celtic and Germanic

...


was there that Lusitanian emissaries petitioned Serrorius to be their general, which showsthat the Lusitanians were well informed abollt what was taking place on the other side

of the Straits. When he landed on the Peninsula, a Lusitanian army was awaiting him,probably in the mountains to the norrh of the inlet of Bolonia, and with it he defeated

L. Phuphidius. We should recall that in 140 BC Viriatus managed to consolidate,albeit fleetingly, an independent power from Rome that extended from Tucci (Marros)along the upper Guadalquivir to the gates of Carteia and Gades and whose centre was

Beturia, that is, the region that seems to have supporred Pompey against Caesar (Salinas2008). We therefore find interesting the observation made by A. Domínguez Monedero(Domínguez, 1995: 111-116) regarding coins of Arsa and Turri-Regina, on which Punic

(Tanit, Melkarr) influences have been observed, and which could be related to Libyan-Phoenician mercenary setdements to the south of Badajoz. In parricular, this scholarbelieves that the coins from Turri-Regina, which can be dated to the middle of the 2nd

century BC, with faZcata and caetra, could be alluding to the joint victory of this city andthe Romans over Viriatus.

During the Serrorian War in the 1" century BC, and parricularly during the Civil Warbetween Caesar and Pompey, a Lusitanian presence is attested in the southern territoriesof Hispania Ulterior, that is, in Turdetania. According to what can be deduced from

classical sources, it seems this presence was very imporrant in the Guadalquivir valleyduring the Munda campaign. The Lusitanians generally appear on Pompey's side, whichis interesting because if Caesar carne to the Peninsula as a successor of the Popular faction,

and thus ofMarius and Sertorius, his campaigns against them during the years 61-60 musthave definitively set them against him. We can see that a cerrain Cato Lusitanus living inAtegua went over to Caesar's side during the siege of the city (Caes. BHisp. 17). Likewise,two Lusitanian brothers, whose names were not specified, also switched to Caesar's side

(Caes. BHisp. 18). During the siege of Ategua, the defection of Bursavo, parr ofwhoseinhabitants were in Ategua, was also sought by Caesar's side. When the defection of the

town was almost achieved, one ofits inhabitants escaped from the city and after gatheringtroops from some unknown location, re-entered the city and killed Caesar's supporrers.However, a little furrher on it says that when the latter tookAtegua, parr of the populationfled to Beturia, showing that this are a bordering in Lusitania supporred Pompey (Caes.BHisp. 22). After Munda, Caesar took Corduba and Hispalis. In the latter city, someonecalled Philo, of whom it was said: is tota Lusitania notissimus erat (Caes. BHisp. 35),organized the resistance. Heading towards Lusitania, to the lost city of Lennium, together

with one Caecilius Niger, of whom it was said he was hominem barbarum... qui benemagnam manum Lusitanorum haberet, he recruited troops and reconquered Hispalis forPompey. This Lusitanian garrison resisted until after the fall ofbothMunda and Carteia,where there was another Lusitanian garrison (Oros. 6.16, 9) in the hands ofCaesar. Even

after Gnaeus Pompeius had died, the Lusitanians continued to harass Caesar's troops, anda shorr time later Didius, the admiral of the fleet, died at their hand on the Malaga coast(Caes. BHisp. 40). The situation reflected in these texts is more complex than the simplepresence of Lusitanian mercenaries in Pompey's army, since what we have been able to

observe is that there were Lusitanian elements living more or less permanendy in theGuadalquivir valley, as seems to be the case of Cato Lusitanus of Ategua.

If we compare these names we know of through literary sources, which date them to

the Republican era, during the Roman conquest, with those appearing in the epigraphy ofthe early empire, we see that none of them appears at this later time, with the exception ofViriatus, and, arguably, Apouleios. In other words, the onomastics attested in the Republican


) to be their general, which showsas taking place on the other side

sitanian army was awaiting him,Bolonia, and with it he defeated

iriatUs managed to consolidate,It extended fram Tucci (Mareos)nd Gades and whose centre was

1Pompey against Caesar (Salinas

¡de by A. Domínguez MonederoId Turri-Regina, on which Punic

lich could be related to Libyan-lajoz. In particular, this scholarezdated to the middle of the 2nd

the joint victory of this city and

era and confirmed as the onomastics of the chiefs of the Lusitanian elicesdisappeared after

the conquest, and we might wonder whether this was not in pare a linguistic consequence ofmilitary defeat and political assimilation. Neither Audax, nor Ditalkon or Ditalkes, not tomention Kaisaros, Kaukainos, Kourios, Minouros, Nikorontes, or Tautalos have equivalentsin the Lusitanian epigraphy of the 1" to 3,dcenturies AD.

Apouleios, the name of one of the lestarchoi that the proconsul Servilianus defeated, wasable to survive under the Latin nomen Appuleius, attested five times in Lusitania (Atlas,2003: sv. map 33), if these forms we find in imperial epigraphy are not simply the Latinnomen. N onetheless, in favour of the possibility that the Latin Appuleius could be concealingan originally indigenous name, we can refer to an inscription in Rome (CIL VI 10048) whichcites C. Appuleius DioclesHispanus Lusitanus.

Apparently, with the same root as Audax we find only the cognomen Audalea on aninscription in Montelavar (Sintra, Lisbon, CIL II 5008): Iuliae Seveae Audaleae (Atlas,2003: sv.).We can find absolutely no parallel for Konnóba or Ditalkon/Ditalkes.Surprisingly,there is no example either for Kaisaros, which could have benefitted fram its similarity tothe Latin Caesar.Ir is possible, however, that the anthraponym Caesiuswas formed from itsroot (Atlas, 2003: sv. map 66), which was well disseminated in Lusitania with some twentyattestations, and which can also be related to the female name Caesulla, attested in Hinojosade Duero, Salamanca (Caesulla Cassif, Atlas, 2003: sv.).

Kaukainos has no parallels either in Imperial Rome, although the anthroponym Cauquirimay have been formed from its same root, which we find on an inscription in Villamasías,Cáceres in the genitive (Atlas, 2003: sv.). Neither does Kourios have any parallels in Imperialepigraphy. In contrast, the name Coutius/Gout(i)us is attested ten times in Lusitania, all inthe eastern part of the Roman province, in the Emeritensis conventus, that is, in Vettonesterritory.

Minouros has no parallel either. Nonetheless it is ofinterest to point out the evidence ofthe name Minus in an inscription in Ma'fao (AEA 22, 410; Atlas, 2003: sv.):Minus Taltici.In contrast, the nomen Minucius and Minicius are frequently attested in Lusitania, althoughtheir origin is evidently Latin.

Nikorontes does not seem to have survived as a personal name either, if it was not aninvention of the sources. Only once, in Merida (CIL II, 512: Terentius Nico) is the cognomenNico attested. In contrast, the anthroponyms Niger, Nigra and Nicer, in this case of clearlyLatin origin, are quite frequent in Lusitania, having been attested thirry times (Atlas, 203: sv.map 216). No attestation after the time of the conquest could be found for Táutalos either.Names such as Taurilus, Taurocus must have been formed from Taurus, an anthroponymdocumented on seven occasions, mainly in the southern pare of the province of Lusitania(Atlas, 2003: sv. map 291), and which may derive not from the Latin taurus, but from theLusitanian tauro-, attested in the inscription in Cabe'fo das Fráguas.

>articularly during the Civil Wartested in the southern territories

; to what can be deduced from

tant in the Guadalquivir valleyappear on Pompey's side, which

successot of the Popular faction,lem duringthe years 61-60 must

certain Cato Lusitanus living in:ity (Caes. BHisp. 17). Likewise,:1,also switched to Caesar's side

:tion of Bursavo, pare of whose¡ideoWhen the defection of the

:rom the city and after gatheringand killed Caesat' s supporeers.

kAtegua, part of the populationtania supported Pompey (Caes.¡alisoIn the latter city, someoneissimuserat (Caes. BHisp. 35),le lost city of Lennium, together

hominem barbarum... qui bene)s and reconque red Hispalis for:allofboth Munda and Carteia,9) in the hands ofCaesar. Even

d to harass Caesar's traops, andtheir hand on the Malaga coast

more complex than the simplence what we have been able to

ore or less permanently in thenus of Ategua.,ry sources, which date them to

ie appearing in the epigraphy ofater time, with the exception ofastics attested in the Republican

2. THE NAMES OF MAGISTRA TES IN LATE REPUBLICAN AND EARLY IMPERIAL EPIGRAPHY

Ir could be of interest to compare the names of the Lusitanian leaders at the time of theRoman conquest with those of their leaders known from a later date. N arurally, after theconquest of Lusitania the Romans did not allow any military leaders who had resistedthem to survive. Thus, the local chiefs we can recognize are individuals who occupied thelocal magistracies under Roman domination, during the 1" centuries BC and AD. We knowof these magistrates mainly through two types of documents: the tesseraeand tabulae of

~


hospitality and patronage, on which they appear representing the communities that acquirehospitium or patronage, and the monetary issues of certain cities in the south ofLusitania. Anon-exhaustive list would indude the following:

a) CIL n, 5762= Balbín, 2006: No. 1, Paredes de Nava, PA: Caisaros Cecciq(um).Pr(inceps?,aetor?)I K(a)r(uo?) Arcailon.

b) CIL n, 5763= Balbín, 2006: No. 51, Paredes de Nava, PA: ...Aneni Ammedi permag(istratum)l Elaisicum hospitioAmmi/ Caenecaniloo

c) Balbín, 2006: No. 53, Herrera de Pisuerga, PA: ...per mag(istratum) Caelione(m)l etCaraegium/ et Aburnum/ actum.

d) CIL n, 2633= Balbín, 2006: No. 48, Astorga, LE: oo.perAbienum Pentili magistratumZoelarum.

e) Gómez Moreno 1949: 209 = Balbín, 2006: No. 21, Luzaga, GU: oo./Teiuoreikis.f) Tovar, 1949: n. 8 =Lejeune, 1955: 79-80,105; Balbín, 2006: No. 28, Las Merchanas,

SA: Tessera/ Caurie(n)sis/ magistratu/ Turi.g) Gerión, 1984: 265-323, Alcántara, CC: oo.Cren(us?,-0?)IArco Cantonif legates.h) Balbín,2006:No. 46b,Monte Murado,Pedroso,PT: oo. egit/LugariusSeptanii.i) Balbín, 2006: No. 49, proc. desc.: oo.egeruntlegati/ Silvanus Clouti/ Noppius

Andami.

j) Balbín, 2006: No. 50, O Caurel, LU: oo.egit Tillegus Ambati ipse/ mag(istratibus)Latino Ari et Aio Temari.

We have considered only the cases of individuals who are expresslysaid to be magistrates.In the case of the first tessera from Paredes de Nava (a) the abbreviation at the end of thefirst line of text was originally read aspr(inceps), interpreting that Caisaroswas a chief of theArcaili; a subsequent re-examination of the piece and its comparison with the usual formulaof the tesseraehospitaleshas led to the abbreviation being read as k(a)r(uo?), the Celtiberianword for tessera,and this text has been interpreted as an hospitium between Caisaros,of theCecciqui, and the Arcaili, probably the community of Uxama Argaela (Balbín, 2006: 150).In cases b, c, d, f, i and j, the magistracy appears expressly, and in the case of the tessera fromHerrera de Pisuerga (c) it dearly saysthat the juridical act was carried out by the magistrateAburnus. In the case of the so-called bronze of the Zoelae (d) it should be noted that thereference to the magistrate Abienus Pentili, an indigenous name, is made at the end of thefirst part of the document, dated in AD 27, under the reign ofTiberius, and made in whatwould be the capital of the Zoelae, in Curunda, hypothetically identifiable with the hill fortof Avelhás, near Miranda de Douro, on the Spanish-Portuguese border. In the second part ofthe document, from the year AD 152 and drahed in Asturica Augusta, the acting magistratesalready had Latin names: L. Domitius Silo and L. Flavius Severus. Besides Abienus Pentili,among the signatories of the first part are another sixpersonal names, who are most likely therepresentatives of the gentilitates Tridiavorum, Avolgigorum and Desoncorum, who renewedthe hospitium vetustom antiquom, in which case there would be two individuals representingeach gentilitas. However, as they are not expressly attributed with any magistracy, we shallnot take them into account. In the case of the tessera from Las Merchanas (f), the expressionmagistratu Turi has been interpreted in differentways. For some, myselfinduded, it is adativeor ablative indicating the person who receives the hospitium, probably in representation ofthe hill fort community of Las Merchanas, an individual named Turos (Tovar, 1948: 82;Lejeune, 1955: 80, 105; Salinas, 2001: 133-134). For others (Balbín, 2006: 177-178 it isan ablative with a temporal value indicating that the act had been undertaken under the

-

íAS PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSITANIA 27

nting the communities that acquirein cities in the south ofLusitania. A

...perAbienumPentili magistratum

magistracy of Turos.This hypothesis seems scareely feasible since we have seen that in manyother cases, as in Herrera de Pisuerga, for example, when they wanted to date the act theyused the Roman consular date, which is the only one that evidendy makes sense sinee it wasof common knowledge, unlike the succession of magistrates in a small indigenous nucleus.Finally, others (Tovar, 1949: 173-174; Gómez Moreno, 1967: 27-28) interpret Turi not asthe name of a person, but as the abbreviation of an indigenous city, Turi(briga), known boththrough Pliny and through epigraphy, which was located in Celtic Beturia, in the provinceofHuelva or in southern Portugal. The problem with this interpretation is that the tesseraappeared in the provinee of Salamanca and not in either of the two places hypotheticallyidentifiable in the textoFinally, in the case of the Alcántara bronze, Crenus and Arco appearas legates,evidendy an incorrect declension of the Latin legati. Even if they were not theauthorities of the populus Seano... who signed the deditio with the praetor L. Caesius,whichis what the document addresses, that delegation evidendy invested them with formal power.The same occurs with the so-ealled tabula Lougeiorum, of unknown origin, althoughundoubtedly from the Hispanie nonhwest, in which Silvanus Clouti and Noppius Andamiacted as representatives, with the tide legati, of the civitas Lougeiorum, who ente red into ahospitium and clientela with e. Asinius Galus. The first, as can be seen, already has a LÜinname, Silvanus, although the name ofhis father, Cloutius, was a rather frequent indigenousname. This same phenomenon is repeated in the name of one of the magistrates of the Lougeicastellani Toletenseswho ente red into a hospitium with Tillegus Ambati on the tabula of OCaurel (j): Latino Ari.

a) Caisaros.As to the erymology of this name, with a Celtic root, we can say the same asfor Kaísaros, the chief of the Lusitanians who rose up in 155 Be.

b) Aneni Ammendi. Albertos (Albenos, 1966: 25) related this with Anenius in RomeandAnenia in Spalato, in Dalmatia, without commenting on its etymology.Ammediis a hapax. Vallejo (2005: 148-149) includes a long list (31 names) of anthroponymsformed from the root an(n)- for which he believes there was a homophoniccoincidence between the indigenous and Latin forms, which contributed to theirwide diffusion.

e) Caelionem.This name corresponds to aprobable nom. Caelio,which can be eomparedwith the Celtic noun for beer: caelia, aeeording to Pliny (HN. XXII 82,164).Albertos attributes it to the root *kailo- «healthy, intaet», which gave words inCeltic languages sueh as the Welsh coel «omen», Old Breton coe!«hamspex», etc.In Lusitania, Caelius and Caelia are doeumented in Talavera and Cáparra (Palomar,1957: 54; Albertos, 1966: 68).Caraegium. The forms developed from the root car-, giving names such as Carus,Caros, Caraegia,etc., eould possibly have been formed from the base *karo,-a «dearone» which gives words in Gallie sueh as *carantos «friend, relative» (Albenos,1966: 76-77; Vallejo, 2005: 259 ss.).Aburnum. With the exeeption of an Aburea in Plasencia, the forms in Aburn-,a metathesis of Abrun-, are all documented in Celtiberia. Palomar and Albertosassumed a development from the root *abh-ro- «strong», which Vallejo mIes out(Palomar, 1957: 22; Albertos, 1966: 4; Vallejo, 2005: 99-101).

d) Abienus. Forms developed on the radical *ab- «flow?» are infrequent. Albenos(1966: 3) believed it was a form derived from Abia, doeumented in Uxama and inT alavera de la Reina. The Aquitaine Abianus, the mark of a porrer, is praetieally

le Nava, PA: Caisaros Cecciq(um).

ie Nava, PA: ...Aneni Ammedi perrani/...

.per mag(istratum) Caelione( m)l et

~1,Luzaga, GU: .../Teiuoreikis.

tlbín, 2006: No. 28, Las Merchanas,

s?, -0?)IArco Cantoni f legates.PT: ... egit/ Lugarius Septanii.

legati/ Silvanus Clouti/ Noppius

'legusAmbati ipse/ mag(istratibus)

are expressly said to be magistrates.the abbreviation at the end of theing that Caisaroswas a ehief of the:omparison with the usual formula

read as k(a)r(uo?), the Celtiberian?ospitium between Caisaros, of the

rama Argaela (Balbín, 2006:150).and in the case of the tessera from

: was carried out by the magistratele (d) it should be noted that the!sname, is made at the end of the

gn ofTiberius, and made in whatcally identifiable with the hill fort

gueseborder. In the second pan oficaAugusta, the acting magistratesr Severus. Besides Abienus Pentili,

nal names, who are most likely them and Desoncorum, who renewed

ld be two individuals representingted with any magistracy, we shallLas Merchanas (f), the expression¡ome,myselfincluded, it is a dative

rm, probably in representation ofnamed Turos (Tovar, 1948: 82;

lers (Balbín, 2006: 177-178 it ishad been undertaken under the

....


identical. Cf. the theonym Abercicea, documented in the province of Salamanca(Salinas and Romero, 2001).

e) Teiuoreikis. T aking into account the orthographical particularities of the Celtiberianlanguage, we can recognize a well-known Celtic form under this name, Devorix,developed from two roots: *deiwos«god, divine» and *rks «king». This name is alsosimilar to the epithet ofHermes-Mercury, Deuorix «king of the gods», in OuteiroSeco, Chaves (CIL II 2473; Albertos, 1966: 104). Ir has been proposed that thisDeivorix or Devorix was the magistrate who sanctioned the hospitium contained onthe Luzaga bronze, and its position at the end of the document effectively supportsthis hypothesis when we compare it with the arrangement of the texts in otherdocuments ofhospitality (b, c, d, g, i and j). The fact a potter from Poitiers had thissame name, in the form Diorix (DAG 423), shows that its use was not limited tomembers of the aristocracy.

f) Turi. This is probably a dative or ablative form corresponding to a nominative Turos,well attested in other examples and to which our comments above also apply.

g) Cren(us?, -o?).This name is a hapax, with no possible parallels.h) Arco. This name is documented in this form and also with a double -C-,Arcco, in

Lusitania and outside it in Pino, Zamora, near its northern border. Palomar andAlbertos agreed on the lE root *rk- «bear», which with an extension in -t- givesdifferent names in Celtic languages. There are also toponyms such as Arcobriga inCeltiberia (Palomar, 1957: 38-39; Albertos, 1966: 32: Vallejo, 2005: 178-180).

i) Lugarius. This name has developed from the theonym Lugus, the name of one ofthe most important gods in the Celtic religion, which has given rise to numerouscompounds both in anthroponymy and toponymy. We know of someone fromUxama in Hispania Citerior calledLuguadicus (CIL II 2732), as well as the toponymLucusAugusti (Albertos, 1966: 138).

j) Noppius. This form has no parallels, as far as we know.k) Aio. Aius and Aia are well documented in the onomastics of Celtiberia, but less

frequent in Lusitania, also in derived forms, such as Aiiogenus, Aiaeti, or the«gentilitates» Aiakun and Aiacicum. The name Aioiorix has been documented inGaul (KGPN 120; Vallejo, 2005: 111-112).

When we compare the names of the Lusitanian chiefs known during the wars againstthe Romans with the onomastics we know of from the late republican and imperial eras thatwe can attribure to individuals who held some kind of leadership position, we can see thathardly any of them coincide, with the exception of the anthroponym Caisaros,attested onthe tessera from Paredes de Nava, and Viriatus.

Given the scant evidence, there is little we can say about Caisaros;in contrast, we can saya bit more abour Viriatus. The geographical distribution of the inscriptions transmitting thisname is worthy of comment (Atlas, 2003: sv. map 329). In the first place, we cannot say itwas a vety 'popular' name, with only eight attestations; secondly, none of them are located inthe west of the province, around the Serra da Estrela, where Schulten assumed the birthplaceofViriatUs to be, or in the sourhern part ofLusitania, in the «Mesopotamia» as Strabo calledit, between Anas and Betis, that is, in BetUria, where current scholars sitUate the origin ofthe Lusitanian leader and the centre ofhis power, bur instead they are all attested in easternLusitania, in the territory of the Vettones. Thirdly and finally, the individuals who borethis name during the Roman Empire seem to be peregrini or members of the plebs, barelyLatinised, and none of them seems to be of high social standing, although one or more of

..-.

AS PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSITANIA 29

Ited in the province of Salamanca them could have had Roman citizenship. Viriatus is documented as a single name in Baños

de Montemayor, Coria, Ibahernando, Jarandilla de la Vera and Sabugal. In all these cases,its use dates back to the indigenous onomastic tradition of giving persons a single name. Ontwo more occasions, in which it is also used as a single name, the individuals express theirfiliation as well, which is also indigenous; thus, in Brozas: Viriati Louesi f, and in Santa Cruzde la Sierra: Viriatus Tancini f Finally, in a single case, in T orrequemada, Viriatus is attestedas a cognomen joined to a Roman nomen: Rutilius Vifria?Jtus, although we have not beenable to determine whether or not it is an improper use of the name on the part of a citizen.

T wo simple conclusions can be drawn from what we have described so far, bur we believethem to be very important from a historical perspective. The first is that, save exceptions suchas Viriatus, the personal onomastics of the Lusitanian leaders in the war against the Romanswere scarcely preserved in the subsequent periodo The second conclusion is that the names ofthe Celtic chiefs in the wars against the Romans on the Iberian Peninsula are quite dissimilaror have nothing whatsoever to do with the Gallic-Germanic onomastics that appear, forexample, in Caesar, with a prevalence of names composed on -rix, such as Dumnorix,

Orgetorix, Vercingetorix, or other names such as Divitiaeus, which express ideas of dominationor are related to the religious sphere. Ir is true that we know of an inscription on the IbeiianPeninsula dedicated to Mercury Devorix, in which Albertos (Albertos, 1956) hoped to findevidence of the Celtic belief in the primacy of Mercury, or his Celtic equivalent, over the

other gods, as stated by Caesar, and that a teivoreikis appearing on the Luzaga bronze wasprobably the name of the magistrate who would have acted as the signatory of the hospitalitypaer, as was usual in documents of this type written in Latin. However, in the Hispanic case,this name seems to correspond to a modest local magistrate and not a great military leader.Moreover, the fact a potter from Poitiers was also called Diorix urges us to be cautious when

considering this type of onomastics as something exclusive to the aristocracy.

calparticularities of the Celtiberian

e form under this name, Devorix,

and *rks«king». This name is alsorix «king of the gods», in Oureiro4). Ir has been proposed that thistioned the hospitium contained on

.the document effectively supportslrrangement of the texts in otherfaet a potter from Poitiers had thisIWSthat its use was not limited to

rresponding to a nominative T uros,

comments above also apply.:ibleparallels.d also with a double -C-,Areeo, inits northern border. Palomar and

lieh with an extension in -t- givesso toponyms such as Areobriga in: 32: Vallejo, 2005: 178-180).:onym Lugus, the name of one of

which has given rise to numerousmy. We know of someone from

rL II 2732), as well as the toponym

lOW.

momastics of Celtiberia, bur less

uch as Aiiogenus, Aiaeti, or theAioiorix has been documented in

3. THE CASE OF AMBATUS

fs known during the wars against: republican and imperial eras thatldership position, we can see that

lthroponym Caisaros, attested on

If there is one paradigmatic case of an anthroponym with social value then it is thatof the name Ambatus, very frequent in Celtic onomastics on the Iberian Peninsula, andparticularly in Lusitania (figs. 3 and 4). Palomar Lapesa (Palomar, 1957: 31-32) proposedearly on an etymology, accepted by Albertos (1966: 21) based on a prefix amb-, which inBreton and Welsh resulted in the original form *mbh- «around, on the sides», placed infront of a participial on the root *ag- «to make move», which would have provided theCeltic term ambaetos «minister, servant», derived from *ambi-aetos,equivalent to the gr.Amphípolos and the lar. aneulus, aneilla. Caesar speaks of the ambaeti in Gaul, equatingthem with Roman clients, and more specifically with a form of military clientele. There isalso a feminine form, Ambata, which abounds ourside Lusitania, particularly in the area ofthe T urmogi, Berones, and Cantabri, where the gentilitas Ambatiqum is documented inLuriezo, Liébana. Outside the Peninsula, the name appears among the Treveri (CIL XIII3686) in the Agri Decumates (CIL XII 100101105) and in upper Germania (DAG 1254,1069). The word passed from the Celtic to the Germanic, cf. got. Andbathus, aaa.Ambath«servant», naa. Amt «embassy», and the French term ambassade, from where it passedinto Spanish with the same meaning (Albertos, 1966: 21). «The high frequency of thisname -Palomar maintained- can be explained by the survival of this meaningful value.Ancient writers were well aware of the existence of the word ambaetos among the Celts, itsmeaning and even its etymology (v. Holder sV.ambaetos), and its uninterrupted use has led

It Caisaros;in contrast, we can say

:the inscriptions transmitting thisn the first place, we cannot say itmdly, none of them are located in

: Sehulten assumed the birthplace: «Mesopotamia» as Strabo called

'ent seholars situate the origin of:ad they are all artested in easternFinally,the individuals who bore

i or members of the plebs, barelymding, although one or more of

...


Image 3: Ambatus in Hispania (from Vallejo 2005).

COGJNI}

ti. IIÍI...

Image 4: Ambatus in Lusitania (from Atlas 2003).


500

to its survival in modern languages (German Amt, French ambassade, Spanish embajada,embajador» (Palomar, 1957: 32). Historians very soon abandoned this initial idea thatindividuals namedAmbatus/a were either servants or semi-free or living in a certain situationof dependence, and this anthroponym was related to traits considered characteristic ofIndo-European Hispanic society, such as the devotio and military clientele (Blázquez, 1977: 399) o

The analysis of inscriptions from the imperial era in which persons with this name appearwill nonetheless help to qualify this conclusiono

1. Abertura, CC, Caesaraugusta, 39-40,1975-76: 56,AE 1977, 410: [Am]lbatif(ilia)an(norum) / XXXI h(ic) s(ita) e(st) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra)! l(evis) G. Cercen/na vir etpa/terf(aciendum) c(uraverunt)o

20 Arroyo de la Luz, CC, CIL 11738: Ambatus/ scripsi/ carlaepraisom/ secias. erba.muitie/ (etc., this is the famous inscription in Lusitanian).

3. Arroyo de la Luz, CC, CPILC, 50: D(is) M(anibus) / Cilea T/ancini f(ilia) /an(norum) L h(ic) s(ita) / e(st) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis) / Ambatu/s et Bou/tia mat/ri

f(ilii) f(aciendum) c(uraverunt).4. Ávila, AV, L/CS 18 = LICS 63 = ERAvila 35 = ERAvila 73 = HEp-04, 75 = HEp-

04, 83 = HEp-13, 41: Cassi[us]l et Amb(atae) c(oniugi)! s(uae) m(onumentum)f(aciendum) c(uravit)o ERAvila: Cassi[ael/ et Amb(atae) c(aris)! s(uis) m(ater)f(aciendum) c(uravit)o

5. Ávila, AV,LICS 19 =ERAvila 11 = HEp-04, 72 =HEp-13, 39: [AlmbatoRlauo?etfilio/ Vaelcio/ et Cabura/ uxori.

6. Ávila, AV, L/CS 26 = ERAvila 30 = HEp-04, 103 = HEp-09, 82 = HEp-13, 34= AE 1982, 594: Arquio/ Arell[io]l Ambat[o]l A(m)batae/{..j. ERAvila:Arquio/Anull{..l/ [Almbato/ Gra{..]I na{..l.

7. Barca d'Alva/ Escalháo, Figueira de Castelo Rodrigo, GUA, CIL 11433 = Hep2, 1990, 793: Modestus Ambati f Co/bel(cus) an(norum) LX Cornelia/ Gensuliaan(norum) L hos..s./vot.LC(aius) Ammius{..j.

8. Barruecopardo, SA, Gómez Moreno 1967: 1 = CIRPSA9 =EERPSA 24: Ambati/Ar[relnici/ an(norum)XXX

9. Candeleda,A V,ERAvila 142 = HEp-lO, 8:A(ram) Iovi/ Ata Am/baticoru/m Hirnif(ilia) / v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) a(nimo) o

10. Candeleda, AV, L/CS 95 = ERAvila 143 = HEp-01, 79 = HEp-09, 83: D(is)M(anibus) s(acrum) / Verna/culus A/mbatic(um) / Modest/i f(ilius) (..l.

11. Cáceres, CC, CPILC 146: Coria / Ambat(i) / f(ilia) an(norum) XXX / hic sita /est s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis) / Mantaus / Ang(eti?) f(ilius) vir / Casina / Andere/nusp(onendum) [c(uraverunt)J.

12. Cerralbo, SA, Morán 1922: 30 = Maluquer 1956, Noo 17 = CIRPSA 24: Ianua/Ambat/i ann(orum) XXVII (..lsttlo

13. Hinojosade Duero, SA,HAnt 16,11 = CIRPSA 53: Ambatus/ Diu(i)lif/ an.XXV/hsttl.

14. Hinojosa de Duero, SA, Morán 1922: 9 =Maluquer 1956, No. 40 = CIRPSA 68:Clout/i(a) Am/bati jlilia/...

15. Lerilla, SA, Morán 1922: 33,95 =Maluquer 1956,No. 85bis(Agallas)= ILER 506= CIRPSA 342 (Zamarra) = EERPSA 5: Victoriae/ Boutius/ Ambati/ vosoLa.

16. Momoy, CC,AE 1978, 393: [BalndiN{../...loenoA/derciaA/mbatif(ilia)/ v(otum)s(olvit) l(ibens) a(nimo).

allejo2005).

-'

'das2003)0

....


17. Pedroso de Acim, CC, BRAH 26, 1895, 395 = EE VIII, 70 = CPILC 367: D(is)M(anibus) Irine/us Amba/ti f(ilius) Botil/la Ami f(ilia) / s(ibi) et viro / f(aciendum)c(uravit) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis).

18. Plasencia, CC, CIL 11853:A[I]burae Ta/ncinif(iliae) ma/tri an(norum) [L]XX Calmirae <f>(iliae) an(norum) XX / Ambatus Pe[l]!lif(aciendum) c(uravit).

19. San Martín del Castañar,SA,AE 1988,702= CIRPSA255 =EERPSA 108: Tancinus

Am/bati f Aun[...]/ an(norum) IV h.s.e./ Amabatus/ Tancinius/ fil(i)o.20. Sabugal, GU A, AE 1987, 482b: Amb/atus Mal/geini f(ilius) / h(ic) s(itus) e(st).21. Salamanca, SA, Morán 1922, 155 = Maluquer 1956, No. 108 = HAE 1322 = ILER

3262a: D.MS./ [A]mbato Patric(i) [...]/ annoru/ m L [...] s.t.t.L22. Salamanca, SA,AEA 44, 132: Ambatus p(ius) i(n) s(uis)/ a(n)norumXXXXV[...].23. Saldeana, SA, Morán 1922,48 = Maluquer 1956, No. 114: Reburr/us Am[ba]!ti[...]

ann(orum) XI s.t/t.!.24. Saldeana, SA, Maluquer 1956, No. 113 = EERPSA 98 = CIRPSA 245: Ambatus/

Pintouil..c.../...

25. Saldeana, SA,CIRPSA 249 = EERPSA 103 = HEp-l0, 489 = AE 2000, 702:

Medug[en]!u(s) Mor/ti an(norum) L/XI s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) / l(evis) // Reburr/usAmba/ti ann(orum) / XI s(it) t(ibi) / t(erra) l(evis).

26. Talavera de la Reina, TO, CIL 115320: D(is) M(anibus) s(acrum) / Gr(ani) Pateni/ Quir(ina) Cae(sarobrigensis)/ ex cas(tello) Ciseli / an(norum) LXV A[m]!bat(a)mar(ito) / pi(e)nt(issimo) desuo / p(osuit).

27. Talavera de la Reina, TO, CIL 11907: Flaccu/sAmb/ati f(ilius) an(norum) LV h(ic)s(itus) / e(st).

28. Traguntia (from Yedade Yeltes?), SA, CIL 11,5036 = Morán 1922, 148 = Maluquer1956, No. 127 = CIRPSA 299 = EERPSA 113 = HEp-l0, 513 = AE 2000,711:Menti/naAm/batif(ilia) / ann(orum) LX / hi(c) s(ita) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis).

29. Trujil1o, CC, CIL 11623: [...]aana c/uif(ilia) an(norum)LX/Camira/ Ambatif(ilia)/ an(norum) L h(ic) s(iti) s(unt) / Camira / sibi et / matri / f(aciendum) c(uravit).

30. Villar del Pedroso, CC, CPILC 660=803: Arc[o]/ni. Amb/ati.f(ilius). Ca/malic(um)A/ttiu. A/rrein[i/c]u(m) dat / donat.

31. Yedade Yeltes, SA,Stud. Arch. 1975: 196= CIRPSA 287= EERPSA 160: CauruniusAmbati Caurunicum.

32. Yeda de Yeltes, SA, Morán, 1922: 73 = Maluquer 1956, No. 161= ILER 2870:.../Amba/ti Bu/rili T/uroli f/ a(n)no(rum) LX/ sttL

An analysisof the dossier on Ambatus/a in Lusitania sheds light on certain evidence. Firstof all, of the 35 individuals studied, 17 of them, that is, a litde over 50%, have a retroactive

filiation (i.e., the subject sayshe isAmbati f(ilius)) or a direct filiation (e.g. No. 21, Sabugal:Ambatus Malgeini f(ilius). Furthermore, in one case in Ávila (No. 4) there is a probablereference to a link by marriage (if one accepts the reading: Amb(atae) c(oniugi) s(uae)), andin another case in Talavera de la Reina (No. 27: A[m]bat(a) mar(ito) pient(issimo)) thereading in this sense in beyond doubt. That is, these are persons who refer to legal familybonds, recognized in Roman law only for free individuals, and thus we would have to rejectany possibiliry that the anthroponym Ambatus/a could refer to or be the name of anyonewho is only semi-free or dependent. There are two arguments that, in our view, are decisivefor dismissing the idea that the anthroponym Ambatus corresponded to individuals in adependent situation. One is provided by the tabula hospitalisof O Caurel (Balbín, 2006, No.50: 204-208), Lugo, in which Tillegus Ambati, a Sussarus, enters into a hospitium with the

.......

ÍAS PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSIT ANIA 33

,EEVIII, 70 = CPILC367:D(is)if(ilia) I s(ibi) et viro I f(aciendum)

Lougei castellani Toletenses. In rhe subscriprion of rhe document, rhis same Ambatus, ipse,signs togerher wirh rhe magistrati of rhe indigenous communiry acring as rhe counterpartyin rhe documenr, which seems unthinkable for a dependenr person who did nor occupy arelarively high social posirion. The orher argument is provided by rhe inscriprion referred toabove from T alavera de la Reina, in which, moreover, rhe husband of Ambata sayshe belongsto rhe Quirina tribe, which rallies wirh rhe Flavian municipal sratus of Caesarobriga,rharis, he is a Roman cirizen, alrhough Ambata does nor seem to be one since she uses only onename and nor rhe duo nomina rhar would be cusromary if she were a cirizen.

T wo inscriprions from Candeleda, in Ávila, record rhe Larinised gentilitas Ambaticorum(N0.9) or, in irs indigenous form,Ambaticum (No. 10).The same formAmbatic( um) appearsin Luriezo, Liébana, as we mentioned. This means rhar in borh places rhe name of rhe personserved to define groups of descendents of an ancestor rhar bore rhar name, and even rhoughwe do nor know exacrly whar was involved in rhese kinship groups rhar are menrioned inrhe epigraphy asgentes, gentilidades or cognationes,or simply as forms in rhe genirive plural,rheir scarciry and rhe facr rhar nor all rhe individuals indicared rheir perrinence to rhesegroups suggesr rhey were resrricred kinship organisarions, perhaps typical of rhe localloweraristocracy of Celric Hispania.

Since we do nor know why rhe indigenous popularion chose cerrain Celric or Romannames, we need to be cautious when correlaring rhe onomasrics wirh social sratus (Salinas,1994). One example of rhese difficulries is rhar provided by inscriprion No. 10, fromCandeleda, which is rhe epiraph of Vernaculus Ambatic(um) Modesti f(ilius). His namewould seem to suggesr Vernaculuswas aslave or semi-free person, since verna is rhe Larin wordused to designare rhe slaves born in rhe household, rhe children of orher slaves. However,Vernaculus expresses his filiarion, which rules out rhe possibiliry he could have been a slaveor a freed slave hiding his condirion as such, since rhe larrer had no filiarion eirher.

The firsr of rhe Candeleda inscriprions is a vorive alrar dedicared to Jupirer by AtaAmbaticorum. Ir is impossible for us to know rhe reason for rhis dedicarion. Yer in rhe caseof rhe inscriprion in Lerilla (No. 16), dedicared ro rhe Roman goddess Victory by BoutiusAmbati, ir mighr be a dedicarion from an individual who served as an auxiliary in rhe Romanarmy (Salinas, Romero, 1995: 25).

Finally, inscriprion No. 12, from Cáceres, gives us a curious example of rhe onomasticcusroms of rhese people who were mainly peregrini or members of rhe plebs. The inscriprionis rhe epiraph of lrineus Ambati f(ilius). The farher, Ambatus, had a Celric anthroponym,but rhe son did nor choose a Roman one, as ofren occurred in rhe region, revealing rheprogression of Larin over rhe indigenous language; insread, he clearly chose a Greek name,which is really quire exceprional. Ir is also interesring rhar his wife, Botilla Ami f(ilia), usedrhe rare expression viro to refer to her husband. As a whole, rhe inscriprion seems to bedenouncing a situarion of deficient Larinisarion, wirh doubrs as to rhe rerms ro be used bypeople who were mosr likelyperegrini.

(iliae)maltri an(norum) [L}XX Cal

'Ilif(aciendum) c(uravit).'U>SA255=EERPSA 108: Tancinus

rtusl Tanciniuslfil(i)o.

;einif(ilius) I h(ic) s(itus) e(st).956, No. 108 =HAE 1322 = ILER

! m L f..,] s.t.t.l.

¡)s(uis)Ja(n)norumXXXXV[...].;,No. 114:ReburrlusAm[ba}!ti[...}

PSA 98 = CIRPSA 245: Ambatusl

=HEp-lO, 489 =AE 2000, 702:r(ibi)t(erra)Il(evis) II Reburrlus:s).

'(anibus) s(acrum) I Gr(ani) Pateni

eli I an(norum) LXV A[m}!bat(a)

'mblati f(ilius) an(norum) LV h(ic)

36 = Morán 1922, 148 = Maluquer= HEp-lO, 513 = AE 2000, 711:

s(ita) s(it) t(ibi) t(erra) l(evis).

'orum)LXI Camiral Ambatif(ilia)rI matri If(aciendum) c(uravit).

'ni.Amblati.f(ilius). Calmalic( um)

'SA287=EERPSA 160: Caurunius

:r 1956,No. 161= ILER 2870: .../

hedslighr on cerrain evidence. Firsr¡little over 50%, have a rerroacrive

¡rect [¡liaríon (e.g. No. 21, Sabugal:Ávila (No. 4) rhere is a probable;:Amb(atae) c(oniugi) s(uae)), and'bat(a) mar(ito) pient(issimo)) rhe

: persons who refer ro legal family

.,and thus we would have ro rejecrrefer to or be rhe name of anyonelenrs thar, in OUt view, are decisive

corresponded ro individuals in azlisof O Caure! (Balbín, 2006, No.

s, enters into a hospitium wirh rhe

FREQYENTL y USED ABBREVIA TIONS

AE =L' année épigraphique, Paris.AEA = Archivo EspañoldeArqueología,Madrid.Atlas = ArIas antroponímico de la Lusirania romana. Grupo Mérida; M. Navarro Caballero &J.

L. Ramírez Sádaba (coords.), Mérida-Bordeaux.

....


BalbÍn =P. BalbÍn Chamorro 2006: Hospitalidady patronato en la Península Ibéricadurante laantigüedad, Valladolid.

Maluquer = J. Maluquer de Motes 1956: Carta arqueológica de España. Salamanca, Salamanca.CIL = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum.CIRPSA = A. Alonso & S. Crespo 1999: Corpus de inscripcionesromanas de la provincia de

Salamanca.Fuentesepigráficaspara la historiasocialdeHispania romana, Valladolid.CPILC = R. Hurtado de San Antonio 1977: Corpusprovincial de inscripcioneslatinas (Cáceres),

Cáceres.

DAG = J. Whatmough 1970: The dialectsof ancient Gaul, Cambridge, Massachusetts.EERPSA = L. Hernández Guerra 2001: Epigrafíade épocaromana de laprovincia deSalamanca,

Valladolid.ERAvila = R. Hernando Sobrino 2008: Epigrafíaromana deAvila, Bordeaux.HEp =Hispania epigraphica,Madrid.ILER= J. Vives 1971: Inscripcioneslatinas de la España romana, Barcelona.KGPN = K. H. Schmidt 1957: «Die Komposition in gallischen Personennamen», ZCP 26:

33-101.LICS = R. C. Knapp 1992: Latin inscriptions from central Spain, Berkeley.Morán = C. Morán 1922: Epigrafía salmantina, Salamanca.Stud. Arch = Studia Archaeologica,Santiago de Compostela.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

J. M. ABASCALPALAZ6N1994: Los nombres personales en las inscripciones latinas de Hispania,Murcia.

M. L. ALBERTOS FIRMAT1956: «¿Mercurio, divinidad principal de los celtas peninsulares?»Emerita, 24: 294-297.

M. L. ALBERTOSFIRMAT1966: La onomástica personal primitiva de Hispania: Tarraconense yBética, Salamanca.

Atlas 2003: Atlas antroponímico de la Lusitania romana. Grupo Mérida; M. Navarro Caballeroy J. L. RamÍrez Sádaba (coords.), Mérida-Bordeaux.

P. BALBÍNCHAMORRO2006: Hospitalidad y patronato en la Península Ibérica durante la antigüe-dad, Valladolid.

J. M. BLAZQyEZMARTÍNEZ1960: «El legado indoeuropeo en la Hispania romana», PrimerSymposium de Prehistoria de la península Ibérica, Pamplona: 319-355.

J. M. BLAZQyEZMARTÍNEZ1962: «La expansión celtíbera en Carpetania, Bética, Levante y suscausas (ss. 111-11a.c.) », Celticum 3: 409 ss.

J. M. BLAZQyEZMARTÍNEZ1974: Ciclosy temas de la Historia de España. La romanización, 2 vols.,Madrid.

J. M. BLAzQyEZ MARTÍNEZ 1977: Imagen y mito. Estudios sobre religiones mediterráneas e ibéricas,Madrid.

G. CHIC GARCÍA2002: «Una visión de Urso a través de las fuentes antiguas» en F. Chaves (ed.)Urso. A la búsqueda de su pasado, Osuna: 190-191.

G. DELIBESDECASTRO2001: «La orfebrería», Celtas y vettones. Catálogo de la exposición, Ávila:149-157.

A. DOMÍNGUEZMONEDERO1995: «De nuevo sobre los libiofenicios: un problema histórico ynumismático», La moneda hispánica. Ciudad y territorio, M. P. García-Bellido & R. M.Sobral Centeno (eds.),Madrid: 111-116.

J. L. GARCÍAALONSO2003: La Península Ibérica en la «Geografía» de Claudio Ptolomeo,Viraria.

-

RÍAS PERSONAL ONOMASTICS AND LOCAL SOCIETY IN ANCIENT LUSITANIA 3S

mato en la Península Ibérica durante la

«Geografla» de Claudio Ptolomeo,

J. L. GARCÍAALONSO2008 (ed.): Celtic and other languages in ancient Europe, Salamanca.M. GÓMEZMORENO1949: Misceláneas. Historia, Arte, Arqueología. Primera serie: la antigüedad,

Madrid.

M. GÓMEZMORENO1967: Catálogo Monumental de España. Provincia de Salamanca, Madrid.L. HERNÁNDEZGUERRA2001: Epigrafla de época romana de la provincia de Salamanca,

Valladolid.

R. HERNANDOSOBRlNO,2008: Epigrafla romana de Ávila, Burdeos.A. HOLDER1961-62 (reprint, 1" ed. 1896, 1904 and 1907): Alt-celtischer Sprachschatz, 3 vols.,

Graz.

R. HURTADODE SAN ANTONIO, 1977: Corpus provincial de inscripciones latinas (Cáceres),Cáceres.

R. C. KNAPP1992: Latin inscriptions ftom central Spain, Berkeley.M. LEJEUNE1955: Celtiberica, Salamanca.R. LÓPEZMELERO,J. L. SÁNCHEZABAL,S. GARCÍAJIMÉNEZ1984: «El bronce de Alcántara. Una

deditio del 104 a.c.», Gerión, 2: 165-323.

J. MALUQYERDEMOTES1956: Carta arqueológica de España. Salamanca, Salamanca.C. MORÁN,1922: Epigrafla salmantina, Salamanca.M. NAVARROCABALLERO& J. L. RAMÍREZSÁDABA(coords) 2003: Atlas antroponímico de la

Lusitania romana, Mérida.

M. PALOMARLAPESA1957: La onomástica personal pre-Iatina de la antigua Lusitania: estudio

lingüístico, Salamanca.J. POKORNY1959: Indogermanisches etymologisches Worterbuch, Berna.M. SALINASDEFRÍAS1994: «Onomástica y sociedad en la epigrafía Antigua de las provincias de

Salamanca y Ávila», Zephyrus 47: 287-309.M. SALINASDEFRÍAS2001: Los vettones. Indigenismo y romanización en el occidente de la Meseta,

Salamanca.

M. SALINASDEFRÍAS2008: «La jefatura de Viriato y las sociedades del occidente de la penínsulaIbérica», Palaeohispanica 8, 89-120.

M. SALINASDEFRÍAS2011: «Las fuentes clásicas y el poblamiento prerromano del Occidentepeninsular. Problemas de etnicidad y cultura» Castros y verracos. Las gentes de la Edad delHierro en el occidente de Iberia (G. Ruiz Zapatero y J. Álvarez Sanchís eds), Ávila: 129-157.

M. SALINAS,A. ROMERO1995: «Onomástica y religión en la provincias de Salamanca y Ávila»,Salamanca. Revista de estudios 35-36: 13-28.

K. H. SCHMIDT,1957: «Die Komposition in gallischen Personennamen», ZCP 26: 33-10 l.J. M. SOLÁSOLÉ1967: «Ensayo de antroponimia feno-púnica de la Hispania antigua», Rivista

degli Studi Orientali 42: 305-322.H. SOLIN,O. SALOMIES1988: Repertorium nominum gentilium et cognominum Latinorum,

Hildesheim.

A. TOVAR1948: «El bronce de Luzaga y las téseras de hospitalidad latinas y celtibéricas»,Emerita, 16: 75-9l.

A. TOVAR1949: Estudios sobre las primitivas lenguas hispánicas, Buenos Aires.J. UNTERMANN1965: Elementos de un atlas antroponímico de la Hispania antigua, Madrid.J. M. VALLEJORUIZ2000: «Las fuentes literarias y la epigrafía: el caso de la onomástica personal»

Actas del I congreso internacional de Historia Antigua. La península Ibérica hace 2000 años, L.Hernández Guerra, L. Sagreso & J.M. Solana eds., Valladolid, 401-407.

J. M. VALLEJORUIZ2005: Antroponimia indígena de la Lusitania romana, Vitoria.J. M. VALLEJORUIZ2010: «Los celtas y la onomástica. El caso hispano», Serta PalaeohispanicaJ

de Hoz. Palaeohispanica 10,629-647.J. VIVES1971: Inscripciones latinas de la España romana, Barcelona.J. WHATMOUGH,1970: The dialects ofancient Gaul, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

;ica de España. Salamanca, Salamanca.

scripcionesromanas de la provincia dereHispania romana, Valladolid.'incialde inscripcioneslatinas (Cáceres),

1,Cambridge, Massachusetts.

,¡romana de la provincia de Salamanca,

¡ de ÁviZa, Bordeaux.

'mana, Barcelona.

;allischen Personennamen», ZCP 26:

al Spain, Berkeley.ea.ela.

¡ las inscripciones latinas de Hispania,

Irincipal de los celtas peninsulares?»

rimitiva de Hispania: Tarraconense.y

::;rupo Mérida; M. Navarro Caballero

1Península Ibérica durante la antigüe-

'ea en la Hispania romana», Primer)lona: 319-355.

1en Carpetania, Bética, Levante y sus

ia de España. La romanización, 2 vols.,

1bre religiones mediterráneas e ibéricas,

¡[uentes antiguas» en F. Chaves (ed.)

ton es. Catálogo de la exposición, Ávila:

biofenicios: un problema histórico ytorio, M. P. Garda-Bellido & R. M.

..

~

Personal Onomastics and local Society in ancient Lusitania.

Documents