Ето и тук:
SECTION XIV.
KELTS OF BAVARIA-VINDELICIA.
"There were some Kelts in Vindelicia, the testimony of more than one writer being to the effect that Vindelicia was a Keltic area ; testimony which is strengthened by the local names Cambo-dunum, Arto-briga, and, perhaps, others. The Kelts of Vindelicia may have stretched into the northern parts of Noricum. Car. nuntum was, probably, Keltic.Whether they were the oldest inhabitants is another question. I think they were not. The text of Cæsar is against the notion of their having been so. “ There was a time," he writes, “when the Gauls encroached on the Germans. The Volcæ Tectosages occupied and settled in a part of the Hercynian Forest. They are still there; continent, just, and warlike, and, like the Germans, frugal and penurious." Bell. Gall. 6, 24."
"There is much to notice in this passage. First comes the division between what Cæsar might have known as a cotemporary witness and what he could only have heard from others. He might have known that the Volca Tectosages were occupants of a trans-Rhenane district, though even in this respect he might possibly be misinformed. In respect to the manner of their arrival thither, he was very likely to be informed. Say that there were Volcæ in both Gaul and the Hercynian Forest, and that the former were the intruders, who had become Gallicized, and the line of migration would be reversed, and Hercynian foresters who had settled in Gaul might pass for indigenæ; or, at any rate, the Gauls might choose to call them so. They might account for the appearance of the two populations in different areas by the statement that they (the Gauls) had penetrated into Germany, and not certain Germans into Gaul. The bearing of this will appear in the sequel. The term is peculiar. No undoubted Keltic name is like it. Few consist of two words. In the next place, both the elements appear elsewhere. Thirdly, they have not only no definite and straightforward meaning in any Keltic language, but have, partially, a nonKeltic look; inasmuch as Volc is equally like the Latin vulg-us, the German folk, and the Sarmatian pulk."
С две думи келто-гетската следа не бива да се пренебрегва.
SECTION XXIII.
THE BOII.
The Keltic areas-actual, probable, and possible-have been noticed. Certain details-actual, probable, or possible—of the Keltic name still stand over for investigation. It is only the more important of these that claim attention. Two questions connect themselves with the name Boië.
1. Was the population Keltic, and, if so, was the name Keltic also ? It would be hyper-criticism to deny that some Boii were Kelts. There are reasons, however, which forbid us to make them all so. In the time of Attila and his Huns, the name Boisci (see Zeuss, in voc. Hunni) appears in Scythia; a country where Slavonian names abounded,-a country, indeed, which many of the Eastern Galatæ occupied. In the Russian maps of the Government of Caucasus and Circassia, we find the word Boisci, where, in English, we should find the word Kossacks, denoting the occupants of a military settlement. In a passage of Constantine Porphyrogenita (Zeuss, v. Serbi, Chorwati), there is the statement that the parts about Bavaria (Bayißapela) were called by the Slavonic occupants Bolki, and that these parts were on the frontier of the Frank Empire. As such they might be a March. So might any, and all, of the Boian occupancies of Gaul, Germany, and Italy. Let us say, then, that, provided we can show reason for believing that there were Slavonians, to give the name, on the frontiers of the Boii of Cæsar and other writers, we have made out a primá facie case in favour of the word itself being Slavonic. If so, it may hare been applied to Kelts, and to populations other than Keltic; a fact which should regulate our criticism, when we find not only Boii in more places than one, but Deserta BoiorumDeserta possibly meaning Marches, or Debateable Lands.
2. What are the modern countries to which the Boii gave these names? Or is there only one ? The usual doctrine makes only one; at any rate, it takes but little cognizance of the second. The criticism rests chiefly on the following passage from Tacitus :
“Nunc singularum gentium instituta, ritusque, quatenus differant, quæ nationes e Germaniâ in Gallias commigraverint, expediam. Validiores olim Gallorum res fuisse summus auctorum divus Julius tradit: eóque credibile est, etiam Gallos in Germaniam transgressos. Quantulum enim amnis obstabat, quominus, ut quæque gens evaluerat, occuparet permutaretque sedes promiscuas adhuc, et pullâ regnorum potentiâ divisas? Igitur inter Hercyniam silvam, Rhenumque et Mænum amnes, Helvetii, ulteriora Boii, Gallica utraque gens, tenuere. Manet adhuc Boiemi nomen, significatque loci veterem memoriam, quamvis mutatis cultoribus.”—Germania, § 28.
Word for word Boiemum is Bohemia. Nor is Tacitus the first writer who uses it. Velleius Paterculus had done the same.
Boio-hem-um is truly and unequivocally German—a German gloss. The -hem = occupation, residence, being the same word as the -heim in Mann-heim in High German ; the -hem in Arn-hem in Dutch; the -um in Dokk-um in Frisian ; the ham in Threking-ham in English. Hence Boi-o-hem-um= the home of the Boii.
Some of the other compounds of the root Boi- are interesting
Be-heim-are, a triple compound, combines the elements of both Ba-varia and Bo-hem-ia, and stands for Be-heim-ware = the occupants of the home of the Boiä.
Boe-manni = the Boian men. Beo-winidi = the Boian Wends, or Slavonians.
Ptolemy's form is Balvoyaimai; a form taken from some dialect where the h was pronounced as a stronger guttural than elsewhere.
Word for word, and element for element, Boiohemum Bohemia; but whether the localities coincide as closely as the forms of the name, is another question. It has been too readily assumed that they do.
It cannot be denied that identity of name is prima facie evidence of identity of place. But it is not more. Hence, although it would be likely enough, if the question were wholly uncomplicated, that the Boiohemum of Paterculus and Tacitus were the Bohemia of the present century, doubts arise as soon as the name and the description disagree, and they increase when the identification of either the Boii, or their German invaders, with the inhabitants of Bohemia leads to ethnological and geographical difficulties. All this is really the case. The disagreement between the name Boio-hem and the position of the present country of Bohemia, meets us in the very passage before us. The former lies between the Main, the Rhine, and the Hercynian Forest. No part of Bohemia is thus bounded. Hence, I believe the Boi-o-hem-um of Tacitus to have been, not Bohemia, but Bavaria ; Bavaria and Bohemia being nearly the same words.
a. The first element in each is the proper name Boië. In the sixth and seventh centuries the fuller form of Bavaria is Bojoaria, Bai-varia, Bajo-aria, Baiu-varii, etc.
b. The second element is equivalent in power, though not in form, to the second element in Bo-hemia. It is the word ware = inhabitants or occupants in the Anglo-Saxon form, Cantware people of Kent. Hence Bohemia the Boian occupancy; Bavaria the occupant Boians.
This leads us to the fact that however much we may place the Boië in Bo-hemia, we cannot do so exclusively. As far as the name goes, there were Boië in Bavaria as well; Boii, too, who gave their name to their land. I collect, from the numerous and valuable quotations of Zeuss, that
1. The evidence of the present country of Bavaria being called by a compound of Boio + ware, begins as early as the sixth century.
2. That the evidence of the present country of Bohemia being called by a compound of Boio + heim is no earlier than the eleventh.
I also collect from the same data, that, though the Bavarians of Bavaria are called Boiï as late as the eleventh century, there is no conclusive instance of the Bohemians being so called. In my edition of the Germania, I have made Boiohemum Bavaria to the exclusion of Bohemia. I would now modify this view. Some of Bohemia and some of Bavaria constituted the Boiohemum of antiquity. More than this, I think that the greater portion of it was Bavarian."
https://books.google.bg/books?id=nvo4AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA138&lpg=PA73&focus=viewport&dq=east+kelts&hl=bg&output=text#c_top
Е, тук е можело да се позадълбочи още малко., но аз дори и сам съм стигал до този извод нееднократно..
