AURELIUS CORNELIUS, a celebrated physician of the first century, who wrote in elegant Latin eight books on medicine. He was the Hippocrates of the Latins; and Quintilian pronounces a high eulogium upon him. The great Boerhaave tells us that Celsus is one of the best authors of antiquity for letting us into the true meaning and opinions of Hippocrates; and that, without him, the writings of this father of physic would often be unintelligible, and often misunderstood by us. He shows us also how the ancients cured distempers by friction, bathing, and the like. His eight books de Medicina have been several times printed. The Elzevir edition, in the year 1650, by Vander Linden, is the best, as being entirely corrected from manuscripts.

Epicurean philosopher of the second century. He wrote a work against the Christians, entitled The True Discourse; to which Origen, at the desire of his friend Ambrose, wrote a learned answer. Lucian dedicated his Pseudomenos to this philosopher.

CELTIÆ, in Greek Κελται, CELTES, or CELTS, or Kelts, an ancient nation, by which most of the countries in Europe appear to have been occupied at a period anterior to the commencement of history.

When the Greek and Roman writers first began to turn their eyes westward, they found Europe, from the extremity of Ireland to the banks of the Danube, peopled by a race called Gauls, or Celts, or rather Kelts, who, before they became bound to the soil by tillage, had overspread part of Spain in the course of their armed migrations, and had even poured their predatory bands through the Alpine passes, into the great plain of northern Italy. They extended along the Danube, as far as the Euxine, and spread themselves till they were met on different sides by the Sarmatians, Thracians, and Illyrians. Their expeditions were in general prior to the period of history; and we have but slender means of probable conjecture as to the antiquity, extent, and direction of the great migratory movements of this remarkable race.

At that era, indeed, when the dawn of history begins to dispel the dark cloud which had overshadowed the early ages of the world, we find the different races of people in Europe occupying nearly the same relative situations as at present; and, even in the oldest memorials, we can scarcely discern a trace of those wanderings or migrations of tribes which must nevertheless have originally filled this region of the earth with inhabitants. From a remote antiquity, the whole of the country between the Euxine and the German Ocean appears to have been possessed by the Cimmerii or Cimbri, one of the grand divisions of the Celts; while Gaul was occupied by the other division, to which the name of Celtæ was more properly and commonly applied. Herodotus mentions the Celts and Cynetes as inhabiting the remotest parts of Europe, towards the setting of the sun, near the sources of the Ister or Danube; and it is unknown during how many ages they had occupied this region before the father of history obtained this, which is the earliest notice of them. Aristotle and other ancient writers give us nearly the same information with Herodotus, whom they probably followed. With regard to Britain, it must have been inhabited at a period anterior to the Trojan war, since, from the statement of Herodotus, it appears that tin exported from Britain by Phoenician traders was at that time in general use; a circumstance which seems to imply that our island was then peopled by a race who had already explored its metallic treasures; whilst, from other considerations, it has with much probability been inferred that the earliest settlers or inhabitants of Britain were of Celtic origin. At a period not long subsequent to the age of Herodotus, the Teutonic nations inhabited the north of Europe. Pytheas of Marseilles, contemporary with Aristotle, mentions the Guttones, who inhabited the shores of an estuary which must have been the mouth of the Vistula, and carried on a traffic in amber with their neighbours the Teutons, then well known under that appellation; and as the Guttones were probably Goths, we thus already discern in the north of Europe two of the most celebrated nations belonging to the Germanic family, in an age when the name of Rome had scarcely become known to the Greeks. The Finns and Slavonians are supposed to have been the latest of the great nations who formed the population of Europe. Finnigia and the Fenni are mentioned both by Tacitus and by Pliny. In the age of these writers the Finns were situated near the eastern shores of the Baltic, and had probably extended themselves as far as those districts where their descendants were afterwards known under the name of Beormas or Biarmiers. The Slavonians are not early distinguished in Europe under that name; but the appellation of Wends, given to the Slavonic race by the Germans, seems to identify them with the Venedi mentioned in the geographical descriptions of Pliny and Tacitus, as also with the Osmiri or Winidae of Ptolemy and Jornandes, these being terms appropriated to the Slavonic nations. Besides, it is probable that the Russians were known to Herodotus, and that they are mentioned by him under an appellation differing but little from that which is now applied to them by their Finnish neighbours. The Rhoxolani, first described by Herodotus, are stated by Strabo to have inhabited the plains near the sources of the Tanais and Borysthenes; and the Finns still distinguish the Muscovites by the name of Rosso-lainen, or Russian people, a term which, if heard by a Greek, would naturally be written Rhoxolani.

It thus appears that the European races, in the earliest periods of which we have any information respecting them, occupied nearly the same relative situations as the tribes chiefly descended from them still continue to possess. The few scattered facts or intimations which history furnishes, therefore, afford no evidence against the hypothesis that different parts of the world were originally filled with autochthones or indigenous inhabitants, nor indeed against any other hypothesis or theory whatsoever. Great reliance has been placed by many upon traits of resemblance in customs and superstitions; and from the coincidence of the doctrines of druidism and the mythology of the Sagas, some have ascribed a common origin to the nations of Europe and those of the East. But this principle is exceedingly unsafe; for by a similar mode of reasoning we might conclude that the Turks and Tartars came from Arabia, and derive the Buddhists of Northern Asia from India, or perhaps from Ceylon. Nor can historical traditions, however plausible and striking these may in some instances appear, fill up the void; because, besides involving every element of error, they are found, when examined and compared, to lead to contradictory and incompatible results. It is, therefore, only by an analysis of languages, which, after all, are in reality the most durable of human monuments, and by detecting in their composition common elements and forms of speech, that we can ever hope to obtain satisfactory evidence of the identity or connection in point of origin of those races by which they are spoken with ancient nations whose languages have been preserved either in whole or in part.

The diversity of opinion which has hitherto prevailed on this subject proves the uncertainty and insufficiency of the data from which inquirers have hitherto deduced their conclusions. Among the ancients the notion that each particular region of the earth was from the beginning supplied, by a distinct creation, with its peculiar stock of indigenous inhabitants, seems to have prevailed universally; and the frequent recurrence of such terms as autochthones, indigenae, and aborigines, affords undoubted evidence of the fact. In modern times, however, the very opposite opinion has been that most generally entertained; and all the nations of the earth have, on the apparent authority of Scripture, been referred to one common parentage. But of late years, many learned men, chiefly on the Continent, have evinced a strong inclination to adopt an opinion similar to that of the ancients; and the notion of radically distinct and separate races of men seems to be gaining ground among the naturalists and physiologists of France, as well as among the historians and antiquaries of Germany. Among the former there are some who speak of the Adamic race as of one among many distinct tribes, and others who broadly controvert its claims to be considered as the primary stock of the human race. On the other hand, some of the most learned of the Germans have, almost without reservation, adopted this opinion. Humboldt, notwithstanding the many evidences of intercourse between the inhabitants of the eastern and western continents, appears to regard the primitive population of America as a distinct and peculiar race; Malte-Brun has plainly taken it for granted, that, from the earliest times, each part of the earth had indigenous inhabitants, into whose origin it is vain to make inquiries; and even Niebuhr, perplexed by his researches into the early history and population of Italy, is glad to escape from the difficulty of his subject by adopting a similar opinion. On the other side of the question, or what may be called the Scriptural theory, names of equal celebrity may be cited, including that of Sir William Jones, which is in itself a host. But this subject is not one which can be decided either way by authority; and it is only by examining the evidence which seems to bear more immediately on the subject that we can ever hope to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. This, viewed generally, is of two kinds, and comprises, first, considerations resulting from a survey of the natural history of the globe, and facts connected with physical geography and with the multiplication and dispersion of species of both plants and animals; and, secondly, analytical investigations into the structure, affinities, and diversities of languages, in reference to the general question as to the history of our species. With regard to the arguments deduced from the former source, however, although they may at first view appear to bear with the greatest weight upon this question, yet, from our inability duly to appreciate the effects of physical causes operating during a course of ages indefinitely great, it is impossible, with any degree of certainty, to infer original distinction from the actual differences observable among mankind. But in the case of languages, especially those which, though they have ceased to be spoken, are still preserved, there is no such element of uncertainty; and hence we are inclined to hold, that the only conclusions on which we can safely rely respecting the aboriginal history of our species, are those deducible from an analysis of languages conducted on strict philosophical principles.

---

1 Plin. Hist. Nat. lib. xxxvii. cap. 2. 2 Pritchard on the Celtic Nations, p. 16. Such an analysis of various languages as that here spoken in every instance display one or other of four different relations subsisting between them. 1. In comparing some languages, little or no analogy can be discovered in their grammatical structure, but a resemblance more or less extensive may be traced in their vocabularies, or in the terms for particular objects, actions, and relations; and if this correspondence is the result of commercial intercourse, conquest, or the introduction of a new system of religion, literature, and manners, it will extend only to such words as belong to the new stock of ideas thus introduced, and will leave unaffected the great proportion of terms which are expressive of more simple ideas and of universal objects; but if the correspondence traced in the vocabularies of any two languages is so extensive as to involve words of a simple and apparently primitive class, it indicates a much more ancient and intimate connection. 2. Certain languages, which have but few words in common, nevertheless display, when carefully examined, a remarkable analogy in their principles and forms of grammatical construction; as in the polysynthetic idioms of the American tribes, and the monosyllabic languages of the Chinese and Indo-Chinese nations. 3. A third relation discoverable between languages, connected by both the circumstances already pointed out, consists in what may be properly called cognation; an epithet which is applied to all those dialects which are connected by analogy in grammatical forms, and by a considerable number of primitive words or roots common to all, or which at least possessed such a resemblance as manifestly indicates a common origin. 4. The fourth and last relation, which is almost purely negative, exists between languages in which none of the connecting characters above described can be discerned, and there is discoverable neither analogy of grammatical structure, nor any correspondence in words, sufficient to indicate a particular affinity; circumstances which are held as conclusive that such languages are not of the same family, and that they belong to nations remote from each other in descent as well as differing in physical characteristics.

Upon these principles, which are now universally received as almost the only guides in investigating the origin and descent of nations, the languages of the Finnish tribes, the Laplanders, the Hungarians, the Ostiaks, and the Siberian Tschudes, have been compared and analysed by Gyaratibbi, Adelung, Gatterer, Klaproth, and others; and the result, which appears to have been sufficiently established, is, that all these nations have sprung from one common original stock, the primitive seat of which was the country situated between the chain of Caucasus and the southern extremities of the Uralian Mountains. But our chief concern at present is with those tribes which have been latterly denominated Indo-European; a term which includes all that class of nations, many of them inhabitants of Europe, whose dialects are more or less nearly related to the ancient language of India. The idea of this classification, which is by far the most scientific that has yet been adopted, was suggested by comparing the Sanscrit with the Greek and Latin languages, and observing the interesting and remarkable results evolved by the comparison. These were, first, the detection of a very considerable number of primitive words, which were found to be common to all these languages; and, secondly, the discovery of a still more striking affinity which was proved to exist between their respective grammatical forms. In the case of the Greek and the Sanscrit this affinity amounts almost to complete identity; in that of the Latin and Sanscrit, it is also, as might be supposed, exceedingly striking; and these languages are all evidently branches of one common or parent stem. But the same process of analysis has led to other and not less curious or interesting results. It has been proved that the Teutonic as well as the Slavonic, including the Lettish or Lithuanian, stand in nearly the same relation to the ancient language of India as the Greek and Latin; and several intermediate languages, as the Zend and other Persian dialects, the Armenian, and the Ossete, which is one of the various idioms spoken by the nations of the Caucasus, have been held, by those who have examined their structure and etymology, to belong to the same stock. In this way, a close and intimate relation was proved, by unquestionable evidence, to subsist between a considerable number of languages and dialects used or spoken by nations who are spread over a great part of Europe and of Asia, and to them the term Indo-European has in consequence been applied. In fact, the more accurately these languages have been examined, the more extensive and deep-rooted have their affinities appeared; and it is only necessary to refer to Professor Jacob Grimm's masterly analysis of the Teutonic idioms, to enable the reader to verify the truth of this remark. The historical inference deducible from these investigations, therefore, is, that the European nations who speak dialects referrible, on analysis, to this class or family of languages, are of the same race with the Indians and Asiatics, to whom a like observation may be applied; and that all are the descendants of some original nation or people who spoke the primitive language, to which all the Indo-European forms of speech may be referred as a common source.

But a more immediate subject of inquiry is, whether the Celtic dialects belong to the class or family of languages thus allied and denominated; and the question is the more interesting as it bears directly on the origin of the nations of western Europe, including the British islands, as well as on the more extensive one relating to the physical history of mankind. Many have supposed the Celts to be of oriental origin, but, for the most part, on grounds which are either altogether fanciful, or at least insufficient to warrant such a conclusion. The compilers of the Universal History, for instance, gravely tell us that the Celts were descended from Gomer, the eldest son of Japhet, the son of Noah; that Gomer settled in the province of Phrygia in Asia Minor, while his sons Ashkenaz and To-garmah occupied Armenia, and Riphath took possession of Cappadocia; that when they found it necessary to spread themselves wider, they moved regularly in columns, without disturbing or interfering with their neighbours; that the descendants of Gomer or the Celtæ took the left hand, and gradually spread themselves westward to Poland, Hungary, Germany, France, and Spain; and that the descendants of Magog, the brother of Gomer, moved to the eastward, peopling Tartary, and spreading themselves as far as India and China. Speculative fancies like these, however, are too absurd and extravagant to be even amusing. The real question is, whether the same arguments which prove most of the other nations of Europe to be of eastern origin and descent, may not also be applied to that great stock, the branches of which, at a period anterior to the commencement of history, had overspread Gaul, Britain, and occupied a considerable portion of Spain.

But here it is proper to observe, that writers on the his-

---

1 Pritchard on the Celtic Nations, pp. 9, 10. Kennedy's Researches into the Origin and Affinity of the Languages of Asia and Europe, p. 80. Edinburgh Review, No. cii. p. 500. 2 Klaproth, Asia Polyglotta. tory of languages and the antiquity of nations are divided in opinion with respect to this question. Adelung and Murray have considered the Celtic as a branch of the Indo-European stock; but the latter has left that part of his work which relates to the Celtic dialects in a most incomplete state; and Adelung has committed the error of supposing the Welsh or Cymric to be derived from the language of the Belgae, and not from that of the Celtæ, who inhabited the central parts of Gaul and of Britain. From want of information respecting the Celtic dialects, many of the continental writers, among whom may be mentioned Frederick Schlegel and Malte-Brun, have been led to believe the Celtic to be a language of a class wholly unconnected with the other idioms of Europe; and in Britain the same opinion has, from the same cause, been expressed by several well-known authors. Mr Pinkerton, for instance, has declared, in his usual dogmatical manner, that the Celtæ were a people entirely distinct from the rest of mankind; and that their language, the real Celtic, is as remote from the Greek as the Hottentot from the Laponic. And Colonel Kennedy, at the conclusion of the chapter in which he successfully refutes some of the opinions of Pelloutier and Bullet respecting the Celtæ and their language, concludes, that "the Celtic, when divested of all words which have been introduced into it by conquest and religion, is a perfectly original language;" and that "this originality incontrovertibly proves that neither Greek, Latin, nor the Teutonic dialects, nor Arabic, Persian, or Sanskrit, were derived from the Celtic, since these languages have not any affinity whatever with that tongue." Davis, however, in the preface to his Dictionary, had said, "Ausim affirmare linguam Britannicam (Celticam) tum vocibus, tum phrasibus et orationis contextu, tum litterarum pronunciatiunc, manifestam cum orientalibus habere congruentiam et affinitatem;" and the result of a more accurate and minute analysis has been to confirm this opinion in the most complete manner possible.

The connection of the Sclavonian, German, and Pelasgian races with the ancient Asiatic nations may be established by historical proof. But the languages of these races, and the Celtic, although differing from each other, and constituting the four principal classes of dialects which prevail in Europe, are nevertheless so far allied in their radical elements, that they may with certainty be considered as branches of the same original stock. Remarkable indeed is the resemblance observable in the general structure of speech, and in those parts of the vocabulary which must be supposed to be the most ancient, as, for instance, in words descriptive of common objects and feelings for which expressive terms existed in the primitive ages of society. In fact, the relation between the languages above mentioned and the Celtic is such as not merely to establish the affinity of the respective nations, but likewise to throw light upon the structure of the Indo-European languages in general; and particularly to illustrate some points which had previously been involved in obscurity. This is clearly demonstrated by Dr Pritchard's ample and satisfactory analysis, which embraces almost every thing that can possibly enter into an inquiry of this nature. He examines the permutation of letters in composition and construction, the sandhi and samsa in Sanscrit, and shows that the same principles are discoverable in the Celtic dialects, particularly in the Welsh and in the Gaelic. He exhibits proofs of common origin in the vocabulary of the Celtic and other Indo-European languages, first, in the names of persons and relations; secondly, in the names of the principal elements of nature, and of the visible objects of the universe; thirdly, in the names of animals; fourthly, in verbal roots found in the Celtic and other Indo-European languages; and, fifthly, in adjectives, pronouns, and particles. He then proceeds to investigate the proofs of a common origin derived from the grammatical structure of the Celtic as compared with that of other Indo-European languages, particularly the Sanscrit, the Greek, the Latin, the Teutonic dialects, the Sclavonian dialects, and the Persian language; and in all of these he shows that a striking resemblance is discoverable in the personal inflections of verbs, as well as in the personal pronouns, and in the inflections of verbs through the different moods and tenses; and he concludes with a further illustration of the principles which he had previously established by an analysis of the verb substantive and the attributive verbs in the Celtic dialects, and in other Indo-European forms of speech, the result of which is to evolve coincidences precisely analogous to those already exemplified with the utmost accuracy of detail. What, then, is the legitimate inference to be deduced from the obvious, striking, and, we may add, radical analogies here proved to exist between the Celtic dialects and the idioms which are generally allowed to be of cognate origin with the Sanscrit, the Greek, and the Latin languages? The marks of connection are manifestly too decided and extensive, and enter too deeply into the structure and principles of these languages, to be the result of accident or casual intercourse; and being thus interwoven with the intimate texture of the languages compared, seem incapable of explanation upon any principle except that which has been admitted with respect to the other great families of languages belonging to the ancient population of Europe; namely, that the whole Celtic race is of oriental origin, and a kindred tribe with the nations who settled on the banks of the Indus, and on the shores of the Mediterranean and the Baltic. It is probable, indeed, that several tribes emigrated from their original seat at different periods and in different stages of advancement in respect to civilization; and hence we find their idioms in different stages and degrees of refinement; but the proofs of a common origin, derived from an accurate examination and analysis of the intimate structure and component materials of these languages, are nevertheless such as, in our judgment, must command general assent; more especially considering that the general inference thus deduced receives strong confirmation from those purely physical investigations to which we have already alluded. If, indeed, there be any truth in those principles of classification which naturalists have adopted, the Mongol, the Chinese, the Hindu, and the Tartar, are not more certainly oriental than the native Celt, whose physical conformation exhibits only a slight modification of that which is peculiar to the great race whence he is descended; while his superstitions, manners, customs, and observances, as well as language, are all decidedly marked with traces and indications of an eastern origin.

With respect to the form of government which prevailed among the Celts, we are left in some measure to conjecture. It seems, however, to have partaken somewhat of the character of a theocracy, which, with great powers of adaptation to circumstances, generally maintained a complete ascendancy. The druids, assisted by the bards, were the guardians and interpreters of their laws; as well as the ministers of their religion; they judged all causes, whether civil or criminal; and their sentence was reckoned so sacred, that whoever refused to abide by it was excluded from assisting at their rites, denied the use of fire, and intercommuned or interdicted from all con-

1 Kennedy's Researches, p. 85. Pritchard's Celtic Nations, pp. 20, 22. verse with his fellow-men. Indeed, the law of caste, in as far as the sacred order was concerned, appears to have been inveterate and indelible; and hence Sir James Macintosh, without going into any inquiry respecting the origin and descent of this singular race, justly remarks that the druidical system is not without oriental features. The Celts, however, erected neither temples nor statues to the Deity, but, on the contrary, were fierce iconoclasts, destroying shrines and idols wherever they could find them. Instead of these they planted spacious groves, which, in their opinion, were more acceptable to the Deity, who is absolutely unconfined, than houses made with human hands; and amidst the depth and gloom of umbrageous forests, the druids celebrated their holy mysteries, and, as is generally believed, offered up human sacrifices. They were perfectly inexorable to mere idolaters; in which respect their religion bore a resemblance to that of the Parsees and the disciples of Zoroaster. It differed, however, in their making the oak instead of the fire the emblem of the Deity, and in their choosing that tree in preference to others to plant their groves withal, as well as in their attributing supernatural virtues to its wood, leaves, fruit, and particularly the mistletoe, all which were made use of in their sacrifices and other parts of their worship. But after they had adopted the idolatrous superstitions of the Romans and other nations, and particularly admitted the apotheosis of their heroes and princes, they came to worship the latter much in the same manner as the people whose practice they followed; venerating Jupiter under the name of Tarax, which in the Celtic signifies thunder; and also Mercury, whom some authors call Heus or Hesus, probably from the Celtic hundh, which signifies a dog, a circumstance which has led some to consider him as identical with the Anubis Latrons of the Egyptians. Mars was held in the greatest veneration by the warlike, and Mercury by the trading part of the nation. The care of religion, as has already been stated, was immediately intrusted to the druids and bards, who, as Cæsar informs us, were the performers of sacrifices and all religious rites, and the expounders of religion to the people. They also instructed youth in all kinds of learning with which they were acquainted, as philosophy, astronomy, astrology, and the like. Their doctrines, however, were only taught orally, being esteemed as too sacred to be committed to writing. But more common subjects, such as hymns to their gods, and the exploits of princes and generals in time of war, were couched in a species of verse, and recited, or rather sung, on all proper occasions; though even these were kept from vulgar eyes, and either committed to memory, or, if to writing, withheld from the laity. Cæsar mentions that these poetical records had in his time increased to such a bulk that it took a young bard nearly twenty years to learn them by heart; and Diodorus says, that the poets or bards used to accompany their songs with instrumental music, on organs, harps, and the like; and that these minstrels were held in such veneration, that if in the time of an engagement between two armies one of the bards appeared, both sides immediately ceased fighting. The reason of this was, that they were universally believed to be prophets as well as poets, or, in other words, gifted with a double inspiration; and it was therefore thought dangerous as well as injurious to disobey what was supposed to emanate from the gods. These prophetic poets and philosophers kept academies, which were resorted to, not only by a great number of their own youth, but also by the youth of other countries; insomuch that Aristotle says their philosophy passed from them into Greece, and not from Greece to them. Diodorus likewise quotes a remarkable passage from Hecataeus, in which it is stated that the druids had some kinds of instruments by which they could draw distant objects nearer, and make them appear larger and plainer; and by which they could discover even seas, mountains, and valleys, in the moon. Can it be possible that this strange fraternity of priests were really in possession of the telescope? But whatever may have been their learning, it is certain, that in process of time they adopted several barbarous customs, such as that of sacrificing to their gods human victims, which they believed to be more acceptable to them than those of any other animals. Another inhuman practice which they observed in their divinations, especially on great matters, consisted in killing some of their slaves, or some prisoners of war if they had any, with a scimitar, in order to draw an augury from the manner in which the blood flowed from the mangled limbs of the victim.

Such is a brief sketch of the origin of the Celts, and of the more prominent peculiarities by which they were distinguished in ancient times. As a subordinate race, or rather as a more ancient offset from the parent stock, they were inferior to the Scythians or Goths, and generally yielded, though not without a gallant struggle, to the incessant pressure of the mighty tide of emigration which, from a very early period, flowed from the north towards the south and west of Europe, and which at length overwhelmed the Roman empire, burying in its ruins the civilization of fourteen centuries.

Celtæ, certain ancient instruments, of a wedge-like form, of which several have been discovered in different parts of Great Britain. Antiquaries have generally attributed them to the Celtæ, but, not agreeing as to their use, distinguished them by the above unmeaning appellation. Mr Whitaker, however, is of opinion that they were British battle-axes, and in this he has been generally followed. See Battle-Axe.