":I'm fine with ""Celtic"" culture not being monolithic, but if the roundhouse culture was across Britain, all of it should be included or none. To me it make more sense to think of the Celts as being loosely linked with distinctive local variations. The areas left white later became Norse territory, but up to the time of the Picts the archaeology indicates a shared culture with more southerly areas. Similarly, the Pictish language is unknown, but their territory included much more of Scotland, down near to the Forth and Clyde. Many scholars seem to think they had a Brythonic Celtic language, perhaps differing from the Brythonic spoken in Scotland south of the Pictish territory...it's an interestingly untidy period...  

 This is anything but scientific... but common French imagery about Gaul has their house round rather than rectangular. We associate the rectangular shape more commonly with the Germanic or Norse style of building. (then again, Celts ang Vikings may have had more in common than many usually guess)  

 == Pronunciation again == 

 I removed this sentence: 

 :Becuase it is not an Enlish invented word, a pronunciation with /s/ should not be accepted. 

 Aside from its spelling errors, this sentence is prescriptivist. Wikipedia doesn't tell people what to do. Furthermore, the conclusion does not follow the premise. We use words and names all the time that are from foreign languages but are pronounced like English words. For example, we pronounce ""wiener"" as ""weener"", not ""veener"". We say ""Seezer"" instead of ""Kay-sahr"" for Caesar. In fact, very few words are ""English-invented"", and a great many words we used are neither spelled nor pronounced the way they originally were. What makes ""Celt"" so different? Personally, I think both pronunciations are valid. It's a POV issue, so Wikipedia has no business stating one way or the other. -    

 :: From a language point of view, both pronunciations *are* valid... in English. c as an initial consonant with /s/ sound has precedent in the English language. The /k/ sound at the beginning of 'Celt' comes from the original Greek, and this pronunciation was notably revived along with the romantic revival of 'Celticity' beginning in the 18th century in western Europe, then continuing on to the present.  

 :: So, the Boston folk are saying it correctly, but in a particular context. The descriptivist way of looking at this problem is that both are valid, but the two pronunciations are begining to be 'appropriate' according to context: /k/ when referring to 'Celtic' peoples/languages/nations, /s/ when referring to the sports teams on both sides of the Atlantic, and so on. Being on the side of the prescriptivists myself, this makes my teeth grind a bit, but such is life. )   

  
 ::: I too am a prescriptivist, and support the soft C sound, again because of _our_ origin of the word.  The ultimate origin notwithstanding, we got our word from the French language.  Historically, the /k/ pronunciation was only countenanced when actually spelling the word with a /k/.   

 ::: I understand that language evolves over time, but the short time this has been common does not lend sufficient weight to it as a 'proper' pronunciation.  I'm considering mentally modifying it to a permanent /k/ spelling so I can stop people from 'correcting' me in day to day speech.  (See: The Big Book of Beastly Mispronunciations, Charles Herrington Elster). 

 ::: Subbie/Dennis Hughes 

 == ""Apparently no urbanisation"" == 

 I leapt in straight away when I read this. Has the author never heard of Oppida. The one closest to me being Manching in southern Bavaria and was apparently as big as 380ha and probably well fortified. This was definitely more than a hill fort. I think it had even a proper street grid. 
 )  

 == If this bugs people I'm sorry == 

 It's hard to read an article when somone has a thousand links going through.  It's a good one though. 
 

 == Population Genetics == 

 I added this section on 29 November 2005. 

 It seemed to be lacking in the piece about ""Celt or not"". 
 Sorry for not logging in, as I am new to Wikipedia, but rather than remain anon. My name is Richard. Here is the section for the discussion board; 

 Population Genetics 
 With the information gathered recently by population genetics, it is becoming more clear that old ideas of largescale replacements by newer invaders