Lusitanian language#Writing system

Scholars like Untermann (1987)"Lusitanisch, Keltiberisch, Keltisch", Studia Palaeohispanica. Jurgen Untermann, 1987. Vitoria 1987, pp. 57-76. identify toponymic and anthroponymic radicals which are clearly linked to Celtic materials: briga ‘hill, fortification’, bormano ‘thermal’ (Cf. theonym Bormo), karno ‘cairn’, krouk ‘hillock, mound’, crougia ‘monument, stone altar’, etc. Others, like Anderson (1987),{{cite journal|last1=Anderson|first1=JM|title= Preroman indo-european languages of the hispanic peninsula|journal= Revue des Études Anciennes |year=1985 |volume=87 |issue=3–4 |pages=319–326}} point to results of inscriptional comparisons between Lusitania and Gallaecia that they argue show, somewhat indirectly, that Lusitanian and Gallaecian formed a fairly homogeneous linguistic group.{{Cite journal|url=https://www.persee.fr/doc/rea_0035-2004_1985_num_87_3_4212|doi = 10.3406/rea.1985.4212|title = Preroman indo-european languages of the hispanic peninsula|year = 1985|last1 = Anderson|first1 = James M.|journal = Revue des Études Anciennes|volume = 87|issue = 3|pages = 319–326}} Indigenous divine names in Portugal and Galicia frequently revolve around the gods or goddesses Bandu (or Bandi), Cossu, Nabia and Reve:

• Bandei Brialcacui (Beira-Baixa)
• Coso Udaviniago (A Coruña)
• Cosiovi Ascanno (Asturias)
• deo domeno Cusu Neneoeco (Douro)
• Reo Paramaeco (Lugo)
• Reve Laraucu (Ourense)
• Reve Langanidaeigui (Beira-Baixa)

The Lusitanian and Gallaecian divine name Lucubos, for example, also occurs outside the peninsula, in the plural, in Celtic Helvetia, where the nominative form is Lugoves. Lug was also an Irish god, and the ancient name of Lyon was Lug dunum and may have a connection with the Lusitanian and Gallaecian word, suggesting therefore a north-western Iberian sprachbund with Lusitanian as a dialect, not a language isolate.{{cite thesis |url=https://repositorio-aberto.up.pt/bitstream/10216/72404/2/28609.pdf |access-date=12 March 2024 |title=As epígrafes em língua lusitana: Memórias escritas da língua e da religião indígena |language=pt |first=Ana |last=Margarida Gonçalves Miguel |date=2013 |publisher=Universidade do Porto}} Ellis Evans believes that Gallaecian-Lusitanian were one same language (not separate languages) of the “P” Celtic variant.{{Cite web |url=https://ilg.usc.es/agon/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Callaica_Nomina.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=13 May 2020 |archive-date=30 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200930005923/https://ilg.usc.es/agon/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Callaica_Nomina.pdf |url-status=dead }}{{Cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f899xH_quaMC&q=Evans+lusitanian+celt+linguist&pg=PA484 |title = Celtic Culture: A-Celti|year = 2006|isbn = 9781851094400 | last1=Koch | first1=John T. | publisher=Bloomsbury Academic }}

While chronology, migrations and diffusion of Hispanic Indo-European peoples are still far from clear, it has been argued there is a case for assuming a shared Celtic dialect for ancient Portugal and Galicia-Asturias. Linguistic similarities between these Western Iberian Indo-Europeans, the Celtiberians, the Gauls and the Celtic peoples of Great Britain indicate an affiliation in vocabulary and linguistic structure.

Furthermore, scholars such as Koch say there is no unambiguous example of the reflexes of the Indo-European syllabic resonants {{PIE|*l̥, *r̥, *m̥, *n̥}} and the voiced aspirate stops {{PIE|*bʱ, *dʱ, *ɡʱ}}. Additionally, names in the inscriptions can be read as undoubtedly Celtic, such as AMBATVS, CAELOBRIGOI and VENDICVS. Dagmar Wodtko argues that it is hard to identify Lusitanian personal or place-names that are actually not Celtic.{{cite book|last=Wodtko|first=Dagmar S|title=Celtic from the West Chapter 11: The Problem of Lusitanian|year=2010|publisher=Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK|isbn=978-1-84217-410-4|pages=335–367}} These arguments contradict the hypothesis that the p- in PORCOM alone excludes Lusitanian from the Celtic group of pre-Roman languages of Europe{{cite journal|last=Ballester|first=X.|title=Hablas indoeuropeas y anindoeuropeas en la Hispania prerromana|journal=Real Academia de Cultura Valenciana, Sección de Estudios Ibéricos. Estudios de Lenguas y Epigrafía Antiguas |year=2004|volume=6|pages=114–116}} and that it can be classed as a Celtic dialect but one that preserved Indo-European {{PIE|*p}} (or possibly an already phonetically weakened {{IPA|[ɸ]}}, written P as an archaism).{{cite journal |last1=Anderson |first1=James |title=Preroman indo-european languages of the hispanic peninsula |journal=Revue des Études Anciennes |date=1985 |volume=87 |issue=3 |pages=319–326 |doi=10.3406/rea.1985.4212 |url=https://www.persee.fr/doc/rea_0035-2004_1985_num_87_3_4212#rea_0035-2004_1985_num_87_3_T1_0326_0000}}Untermann, J. 1987. «Lusitanisch, Keltiberisch, Keltisch», in: J. Gorrochategui, J. L. Melena & J. Santos (eds.), Studia Palaeohispanica. Actas del IV Coloquio sobre Lenguas y Culturas Paleohispánicas (Vitoria/Gasteiz, 6–10 mayo 1985). (= Veleia 2–3, 1985–1986), Vitoria-Gasteiz ,1987, pp. 57–76. This is based largely on numerous Celtic personal, deity, and place names.{{Cite journal|url=http://www4.uwm.edu/celtic/ekeltoi/volumes/vol6/6_12/olivares_6_12.html|title=Celtic Gods of the Iberian Peninsula|journal=E-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies|volume=6|issue=1|last=Pedreño|first=Juan Carlos Olivares|year=2005|accessdate=12 May 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090924025843/http://www4.uwm.edu/celtic/ekeltoi/volumes/vol6/6_12/olivares_6_12.html|archive-date=24 September 2009|url-status=live}}{{Cite journal|url=http://www4.uwm.edu/celtic/ekeltoi/volumes/vol6/6_10/garcia_quintela_6_10.html|title=Celtic Elements in Northwestern Spain in Pre-Roman times|journal=E-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies|volume=6|issue=1|last=Quintela|first=Marco V. García|year=2005|publisher=Center for Celtic Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee|accessdate=12 May 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110106071447/http://www4.uwm.edu/celtic/ekeltoi/volumes/vol6/6_10/garcia_quintela_6_10.html|archive-date=6 January 2011|url-status=live}}

Lusitanian possibly shows {{IPA|/p/}} from Indo-European {{PIE|*kʷ}} in PVMPI, pronominal PVPPID from {{PIE|*kʷodkʷid}},{{cite book|last=Koch|first=John T|title=Celtic from the West Chapter 9: Paradigm Shift? Interpreting Tartessian as Celtic|year=2010|publisher=Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK|isbn=978-1-84217-410-4|pages=293}} and PETRANIOI derived from {{PIE|*kʷetwor-}} 'four',{{cite journal | jstor=26540737 | title=Latin bardus and gurdus | last1=Zair | first1=Nicholas | journal=Glotta | date=2018 | volume=94 | pages=311–318 | doi=10.13109/glot.2018.94.1.311 }} but that is a feature found in many Indo-European languages from various branches (including P-Celtic/Gaulish, Osco-Umbrian, and partially in Germanic where it subsequently evolved into /f/, but notably not Celtiberian), and by itself, it has no bearing on the question of whether Lusitanian is Celtic.Wodtko 2010, p.252 Bua Carballo suggests that pairings on different inscriptions such as Proeneiaeco and Proinei versus Broeneiae, and Lapoena versus Laboena, may cast doubt on the presence of a P sound in Lusitanian.{{Cite book|title = III CONGRESSO INTERNACIONAL SOBRE CULTURA CELTA "Os Celtas da Europa Atlântica"|last = Búa Carballo|first = D. Carlos|publisher = Instituto Galego de Estudos Célticos|year = 2014|isbn = 978-84-697-2178-0|pages = 112|chapter= I}}

Some scholars have proposed that it may be a para-Celtic language, which evolved alongside Celtic or formed a dialect continuum or sprachbund with Tartessian and Gallaecian. This is tied to a theory of an Iberian origin for the Celtic languages.{{cite book |last=Wodtko |first=Dagmar S |title=Celtic from the West Chapter 11: The Problem of Lusitanian |year=2010 |publisher=Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK |isbn=978-1-84217-410-4 |pages=360–361}}{{cite book |last=Cunliffe |first=Barry |title=The Celts – A Very Short Introduction – see figure 7 |year=2003 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-280418-9 |pages=51–52}}{{cite journal |last=Ballester |first=X. |title="Páramo" o del problema del la */p/ en celtoide |journal=Studi Celtici |year=2004 |volume=3 |pages=45–56}} It is also possible that the Q-Celtic languages alone, including Goidelic, originated in western Iberia (a theory that was first put forward by Welsh historian Edward Lhuyd in 1707) or shared a common linguistic ancestor with Lusitanian.{{Citation needed|date=May 2025}}

Image:Mapa llengües paleohispàniques-ang.jpg}}]]

In general, philologists consider Lusitanian to be an Indo-European language, but not Celtic.{{cite book | doi=10.1093/oso/9780198790822.003.0011 | chapter=Language and writing among the Lusitanians | title=Palaeohispanic Languages and Epigraphies | date=2019 | last1=Luján | first1=E. R. | pages=304–334 | isbn=978-0-19-879082-2 }}

Witczak (1999) is highly critical of the name-correspondences of Lusitanian and Celtic by Anderson (1985) and Untermann (1987), describing them as "unproductive" and agrees with Karl Horst Schmidt that they are insufficient proof of a genetic relationship because they could have come from language contact [with Celtic]. He concludes that Lusitanian is an Indo-European language, likely of a western but non-Celtic branch, as it differs from Celtic speech by some phonological phenomena, e.g. in Lusitanian Indo-European *p is preserved but Indo-European *d is changed into r; Common Celtic, on the contrary, retains Indo-European *d and loses *p.{{cite journal | doi=10.3989/emerita.1999.v67.i1.185 | title=On the Indo-European origin of two Lusitanian theonyms (Laebo and reve) | date=1999 | last1=Witczak | first1=Krzysztof Tomasz | journal=Emerita | volume=67 | pages=65–73 }}

Villar and Pedrero (2001) propose a connection between Lusitanian and contemporaneous ancient Ligurian, which was spoken mostly in north-west Italy, between the Gaulish and Etruscan sprachraums). There are two major, unresolved lacunae in this hypothesis. Firstly, Ligurian remains unclassified and is usually considered to be either Celtic,{{cite book |last1=Markey |first1=Thomas |title=Shared Symbolics, Genre Diffusion, Token Perception and Late Literacy in North-Western Europe |date=2008 |publisher=NOWELE}} or "Para-Celtic", which does not resolve the question of dissimilarities between Lusitanian and canonical Celtic languages (including Iberoceltic). Secondly, the hypothesis is based partly on shared grammatical elements, parallels in theonyms and possible cognate lexemes, between Lusitanian and third languages that have no known connection to Ligurian, such as Umbrian, an Italic language. (Villar and Pedrero report possible cognates including e.g. Lusitanian comaim and Umbrian gomia.)

Jordán Colera (2007) does not consider Lusitanian or more broadly Gallo-Lusitanian, as a Celtic corpus, although he claims it has some Celtic linguistic features."In the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula, and more specifically between the west and north Atlantic coasts and an imaginary line running north-south and linking Oviedo and Merida, there is a corpus of Latin inscriptions with particular characteristics of its own. This corpus contains some linguistic features that are clearly Celtic and others that in our opinion are not Celtic. The former we shall group, for the moment, under the label northwestern Hispano-Celtic. The latter are the same features found in well-documented contemporary inscriptions in the region occupied by the Lusitanians, and therefore belonging to the variety known as LUSITANIAN, or more broadly as GALLO-LUSITANIAN. As we have already said, we do not consider this variety to belong to the Celtic language family." Jordán Colera 2007: p.750

According to Prósper (1999), Lusitanian cannot be considered a Celtic language under existing definitions of linguistic celticity because, along with other non-Celtic features, it retains Indo-European *p in positions where Celtic languages would not, specifically in PORCOM 'pig' and PORGOM.{{cite journal | doi=10.1111/1467-968X.00047 | title=The inscription of Cabeço das Fráguas revisited. Lusitanian and Alteuropäisch populations in the West of the Iberian Peninsula | date=1999 | last1=Prósper | first1=Blanca María | journal=Transactions of the Philological Society | volume=97 | issue=2 | pages=151–184 }} More recently, Prósper (2021) has confirmed her earlier readings of inscriptions with the help of a newly discovered inscription from Plasencia, pointing to the morphs of the dative and locative endings' separation between Lusitanian and Celtic and closer relation to Italic.[https://www.academia.edu/50649582/The_Lusitanian_oblique_cases_revisited_new_light_on_the_dative_endings Blanca Maria Prósper, The Lusitanian oblique cases revisted: New light on the dative endings, 2021]{{cite journal | doi=10.3989/emerita.2021.05.2028 | title=Un testimonio del dios «Labbo» en una inscripción lusitana de Plasencia, Cáceres. ¿«Labbo» también en Cabeço das Fráguas? | date=2021 | last1=Sánchez Salor | first1=Eustaquio | last2=Esteban Ortega | first2=Julio | journal=Emerita | volume=89 | pages=105–126 }}

Prósper (1999) argues that Lusitanian predates the arrival of Celtic in the Iberian Peninsula and points out that it retains elements of Old European, making its origins possibly even older.{{cite journal|last1=Prósper|first1=BM|title=The inscription of Cabeço das Fráguas revisited. Lusitanian and Alteuropäisch populations in the West of the Iberian Peninsula|journal=Transactions of the Philological Society|volume=97|issue=2|year=1999|publisher=Wiley|pages=151–184|doi=10.1111/1467-968X.00047}}

This provides some support to the proposals of Mallory and Koch et al., who have postulated that the ancient Lusitanians originated from either Proto-Italic or Proto-Celtic speaking populations who spread from Central Europe into Western Europe after new Yamnaya migrations into the Danube valley, while Proto-Germanic and Proto-Balto-Slavic may have developed east of the Carpathian Mountains, in present-day Ukraine,{{cite book |author-link=David W. Anthony |last=Anthony |first=David W. |date=2007 |title=The Horse, the Wheel, and Language |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn= 978-0-691-14818-2 |pages=368, 380}} moving north and spreading with the Corded Ware culture in Middle Europe (third millennium BCE).{{cite book | last =Mallory | first =J.P. | author-link =J.P. Mallory | year =1999 | title =In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology, and Myth | place =London | publisher =Thames & Hudson | edition =reprint | isbn =978-0-500-27616-7 | url-access =registration | url =https://archive.org/details/insearchofindoeu00jpma |pages=108, 244–250}}{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=360}} Alternatively, a European branch of Indo-European dialects, termed "North-west Indo-European" and associated with the Beaker culture, may have been ancestral to not only Italic and Celtic but also Germanic and Balto-Slavic.{{cite conference | author = James P. Mallory | author-link = James P. Mallory | title = The Indo-Europeanization of Atlantic Europe | book-title = Celtic From the West 2: Rethinking the Bronze Age and the Arrival of Indo–European in Atlantic Europe | pages = 17–40 | publisher = Oxbow Books | editor = J. T. Koch | editor2 = B. Cunliffe | date = 2013 | location = Oxford | url = https://www.oxbowbooks.com/oxbow/celtic-from-the-west-2.html | access-date = 7 February 2020 | archive-date = 26 March 2019 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190326210720/https://www.oxbowbooks.com/oxbow/celtic-from-the-west-2.html | url-status = dead }}

Luján (2019) follows a similar line of thought but places the origin of Lusitanian even earlier. He argues that the evidence shows that Lusitanian must have diverged from the other western Indo-European dialects before the kernel of what would then evolve into the Italic and Celtic language families had formed. This points to Lusitanian being so ancient that it predates both the Celtic and Italic linguistic groups.

Contact with subsequent Celtic migrations into the Iberian Peninsula are likely to have led to the linguistic assimilation of the Celtic elements found in the language."The number of inscriptions written totally or partially in Lusitanian is limited: only six or seven with Lusitanian vocabulary and/or grammatical words, usually dated to the first two centuries CE. All are written in the Latin alphabet, and most are bilingual, displaying code-switching between Latin and Lusitanian. There are also many deity names in Latin inscriptions. The chapter summarizes Lusitanian phonology, morphology, and syntax, though entire categories are not attested at all. Scholarly debate about the classification of Lusitanian has focused on whether it should be considered a Celtic language. The chapter reviews the main issues, such as the fate of Indo-European */p/ or the outcome of voiced aspirate stops. The prevailing opinion is that Lusitanian was not Celtic. It must have diverged from western Indo-European dialects before the kernel of what would evolve into the Celtic and Italic families had been constituted. An appendix provides the text of extant Lusitanian inscriptions and representative Latin inscriptions displaying Lusitanian deity names and/or their epithets." E.R. Luján 2019: p.304-334

David Stifter proposes that Lusitano-Galician were a dialect continuum which also shared linguistic elements with neighbouring Celtiberian. The only inscriptions found in the old Lusitanian territories, do not provide enough evidence for the debate about whether this was a Celtic, Italic, or a much older language which pre-dates any of the European language-groups. Like in Celtiberian, adjectival formations in -k- (-iko-, -aiko-, -tiko-) display rich productivity, e.g. teucaecom ← teucom, lamaticom ‘belonging to L.’ ← placename *Lama. Derivatives in -i̯ o/ā- are also frequent (e.g. usseam <*ups-ii̯ā- or *uts-ii̯ā-?). There are compounds that consist of two nominal elements; others are made up of preverb + nominal element, but the exact formal and semantic types cannot be determined.

The scarcity of inscriptions has made all studies conjectural to a large degree. In spite of the limited corpus, the inscriptions are linked by several recurring words, which enabled the establishment of Lusitanian as a linguistic entity. The number of semantically clear words is minimal. Three words for sacrificial animals are clearly identified (porcom pig, pork, taurom bull, oilam sheep, lamb).

Lusitanian has undergone the same kentum-development as all Western IE languages (e.g. porcom <*pork̑ om) and u̯ did not merge, but rather that *k u̯ became om). Furthermore, evidence for the fate of labiovelars is arguable. It has been suggested that unlike in other kentum-languages PIE *k u̯ and *ku̯ /k ̑ u̯ did not merge, but rather that *k u̯ became Lus. p and *ku̯ /k ̑ u̯ remained as Lus. (Prósper 2002:396−397; Witczak 2005: 274−276). s generally remains in Lusitanian but is dropped on occasion in final position (Stifter 2010− 2011: 189−190).{{cite book | doi=10.1515/9783110542431-027 | chapter=106. Lusitanian | title=Handbook of Comparative and Historical Indo-European Linguistics | date=2018 | last1=Stifter | first1=David | pages=1857–1862 | isbn=978-3-11-054243-1 }}

File:Lusitanian language map.jpg

Inscriptions have been found Cabeço das Fráguas (in Guarda), in Moledo (Viseu), in Arroyo de la Luz (in Cáceres) and most recently in Ribeira da Venda. Taking into account Lusitanian theonyms, anthroponyms and toponyms, the Lusitanian sphere would include modern northern Portugal and adjacent areas in southern Galicia,{{Cite journal| doi = 10.36707/palaeohispanica.v0i20.379| issn = 1578-5386| issue = 20| pages = 689–719| last = Wodtko| first = Dagmar| title = Lusitanisch| journal = Palaeohispanica. Revista sobre lenguas y culturas de la Hispania Antigua| accessdate = 2021-08-06| date = 2020| s2cid = 241467632| url = https://ifc.dpz.es/ojs/index.php/palaeohispanica/article/view/379| doi-access = free}} with the centre in Serra da Estrela.

The most famous inscriptions are those from Cabeço das Fráguas and Lamas de Moledo in Portugal and Arroyo de la Luz in Spain. Ribeira da Venda is the most recently discovered (2008).

A bilingual Lusitanian–Latin votive inscription is reported to attest the ancient name of Portuguese city of Viseu: Vissaîegobor.Ruiz, J. Siles. "Sobre la inscripción lusitano-latina de Visseu". In: Nuevas interpretaciones del Mundo Antiguo: papers in honor of professor José Luis Melena on the occasion of his retirement / coord. por Elena Redondo Moyano, María José García Soler, 2016. pp. 347-356. {{ISBN|978-84-9082-481-8}}

All the known inscriptions are written in the Latin alphabet, which was borrowed by bilingual Lusitanians, to write Lusitanian since Lusitanian had no writing system of its own. It is difficult to determine if the letters have a different pronunciation than the Latin values{{dubious|date=September 2022}}{{citation needed|date=February 2023}} but the frequent alternations of c with g (porcom vs. porgom) and t with d (ifadem vs. ifate), and the frequent loss of g between vowels, points to a lenis pronunciation compared to Latin. In particular, between vowels and after r, b may have represented the sound {{IPAslink|β}}, and correspondingly g was written for {{IPAslink|ɣ}}, and d for {{IPAslink|ð}}.{{citation needed|date=September 2022}}

Due to limited attestation, only rudimentary hints of Lusitanian grammar can be deduced. The following is based on Luján (2019){{cite book | last=Luján | first=Eugenio | title=Palaeohispanic Languages and Epigraphies | chapter=Language and writing among the Lusitanians | publisher=Oxford University Press | date=February 28, 2019 | isbn=978-0-19-879082-2 | doi=10.1093/oso/9780198790822.003.0011 | pages=304–334}} and Prósper (2021).{{cite journal|last=Prósper|first=Blanca María|journal=Studia Philologica Valentina|volume=2|year=2021|pages=339–350|title=Latin sancītō vs. Lusitanian SINGEIETO. Is the Lusitanian inscription of Arroyo de la Luz I the westernmost lex sacra?}}

Adjectives come after the nouns they modify.

Noun phrases may be joined by the copulative conjunction indi "and", for instance in oilam Trebopala indi porcom Laebo "a sheep for Trebopala and a pig for L." and in Ampilva indi Loemina "Ampilva and Loemina".

The unmarked word order in Lusitanian is subject–verb–object (SVO); however, subject–object–verb (SOV) is also attested.

Nouns in Lusitanian decline for at least three cases (nominative, accusative, dative), at least two genders (masculine and feminine) and two numbers (singular and plural). The genitive case and neuter gender are not attested in the surviving corpus.

Only two declension types are securely attested; they are the first declension (ā-stems) and second declension (o-stems). The third declension (consonant- and i-stems) has also been postulated. Their attested endings are:

Lusitanian preserves the thematic third-person singular present-tense ending -eti (in rueti "(it) runs") and the athematic third-person plural ending -enti (in doenti "they give").

The second and third person person future imperative ending -tōd appears in singeieto, which Prósper compares to Latin {{wikt-lang|la|sanciō}}, future imperative sancītō.

{{clear|both}}

File:Iberia 300BC-en.svg]]

{{clear}}

• Celtiberian language
• Gallaecian language
• Ligurian (ancient language)

{{Reflist}}

{{refbegin}}

General studies

• {{Cite journal |last=Anderson |first=James M. |date=1985 |title=Preroman indo-european languages of the hispanic peninsula |journal=Revue des Études Anciennes |volume=87 |issue=3 |pages=319–326 |doi=10.3406/rea.1985.4212}}.
• Anthony, David W. (2007): The Horse, the Wheel, and Language. Princeton, NJ. pp. 360–380.
• {{Cite journal |author-link=Václav Blažek |last=Blažek |first=Václav |url=http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/114048 |title=Lusitanian language |journal =Sborník prací Filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity |publisher=N, Řada klasická = Graeco-Latina Brunensia |date=2006 |volume=55 |issue=11 |pages=5–18 |hdl=11222.digilib/114048 |issn=1211-6335}}.
• {{Cite journal |last=Gorrochategui |first=Joaquín |title=En torno a la clasificación del lusitano |journal=Veleia: Revista de prehistoria, historia antigua, arqueología y filología clásicas |issn=0213-2095 |volume=2-3 |date=1985–1986 |pages=77–92 |url=https://addi.ehu.es/handle/10810/17436}}.
• {{Cite book |last=Luján |first=Eugenio |date=2019 |chapter=Language and writing among the Lusitanians |title=Paleohispanic Languages and Epigraphies |publisher=Oxford University Press|pages=304–334 |isbn=9780191833274 |doi=10.1093/oso/9780198790822.003.0011}}.
• Mallory, J.P. (2016): Archaeology and language shift in Atlantic Europe, in Celtic from the West 3, eds Koch, J.T. & Cunliffe, B.. Oxford: Oxbow, pp. 387–406.
• {{Cite journal |last=Vallejo |first=José M.ª |date=2013 |title=Hacia Una Definición Del Lusitano |journal=Palaeohispanica. Revista Sobre Lenguas y Culturas de la Hispania Antigua |volume=13 |issue=13 |pages=273–91 |url=https://ifc.dpz.es/ojs/index.php/palaeohispanica/article/view/165 |doi=10.36707/palaeohispanica.v0i13.165|doi-access=free }}.
• {{Cite journal |last=Untermann |first=Jürgen |url=https://addi.ehu.es/bitstream/handle/10810/35788/Veleia%202-3%2057-76.pdf?sequence=1 |title=Lusitanisch, Keltiberisch, Keltisch |journal=Veleia: Revista de prehistoria, historia antigua, arqueología y filología clásicas |issn=0213-2095 |volume=2-3 |date=1985–1986 |pages=57–76}}
• {{Cite journal |last=Wodtko |first=Dagmar S. |title=Lusitanisch |journal=Palaeohispanica: Revista sobre lenguas y culturas de la Hispania antigua |volume=20 |date=2020 |issue=20 |pages=689–719 |issn=1578-5386 |doi=10.36707/palaeohispanica.v0i20.379|s2cid=241467632 |doi-access=free }}.

Studies on epigraphy

• {{Cite journal |last=Cardim Ribeiro |first=José |date=2014 |title=We give you this lamb, o Trebopala!": the lusitanian invocation of Cabeço das Fráguas (Portugal) |journal=Conímbriga |volume=53 |pages=99–144 |doi=10.14195/1647-8657_53_4|doi-access=free }}.
• {{Cite journal |last=Cardim Ribeiro |first=José |date=2009 |title=Terão certos teónimos paleohispânicos sido alvo de interpretações (pseudo-)etimológicas durante a romanidade passíveis de se reflectirem nos respectivos cultos? |journal=Acta Paleohispanica X - Paleohispanica |volume=9 |pages=247–270 |issn=1578-5386}}
• Cardim, José, y Hugo Pires (2021). «Sobre La Fijación Textual De Las Inscripciones Lusitanas De Lamas De Moledo, Cabeço Das Fráguas Y Arronches: La Contribución Del "Modelo De Residuo Morfológico" (MRM), Resultados Y Principales Consecuencias Interpretativa»s. In: Palaeohispanica. Revista Sobre Lenguas Y Culturas De La Hispania Antigua 21 (diciembre), 301-52. https://doi.org/10.36707/palaeohispanica.v21i0.416.
• {{Cite journal |last1=Prósper |first1=Blanca M. |last2=Villar |first2=Francisco |title=NUEVA INSCRIPCIÓN LUSITANA PROCEDENTE DE PORTALEGRE |journal=EMERITA, Revista de Lingüística y Filología Clásica |volume=LXXVII |issue=1 |date=2009 |pages=1–32 |issn=0013-6662 |doi=10.3989/emerita.2009.v77.i1.304 |url=https://www.academia.edu/814019|doi-access=free }}.
• Prósper, Blanca Maria.[https://www.academia.edu/50649582/The_Lusitanian_oblique_cases_revisited_new_light_on_the_dative_endings The Lusitanian oblique cases revisited: New light on the dative endings]. In: Curiositas nihil recusat. Studia Isabel Moreno Ferrero dicata: estudios dedicados a Isabel Moreno Ferrero. Juan Antonio González Iglesias (ed. lit.), Julián Víctor Méndez Dosuna (ed. lit.), Blanca María Prósper (ed. lit.), 2021. págs. 427-442. {{ISBN|978-84-1311-643-3}}.
• {{Cite journal |last1=Sánchez Salor |first1=Eustaquio |last2=Esteban Ortega |first2=Julio |title=Un testimonio del dios Labbo en una inscripción lusitana de Plasencia, Cáceres. ¿Labbo también en Cabeço das Fráguas? |journal=Emerita, Revista de Lingüística y Filología Clásica |volume=LXXXIX |issue=1 |date=2021 |pages=105–126 |issn=0013-6662 |doi=10.3989/emerita.2021.05.2028|s2cid=236256764 |doi-access=free |hdl=10662/18053 |hdl-access=free }}.
• {{Cite journal |last=Tovar |first=Antonio |title=L'inscription du Cabeço das Fráguas et la langue des Lusitaniens |journal=Études Celtiques |volume=11 |issue=2 |date=1966 |pages=237–268 |doi=10.3406/ecelt.1966.2167}}.
• Untermann, Jürgen (1997): Monumenta Linguarum Hispanicarum. IV Die tartessischen, keltiberischen und lusitanischen Inschriften, Wiesbaden.
• Villar, Francisco (1996): Los indoeuropeos y los orígenes de Europa, Madrid.
• Villar, Francisco; Pedrero Rosa (2001): «La nueva inscripción lusitana: Arroyo de la Luz III», Religión, lengua y cultura prerromanas de Hispania, pp. 663–698.

{{refend}}

• [https://web.archive.org/web/20091026130535/http://geocities.com/linguaeimperii/Celtic/lusitan_es.html Lusitanian] in [https://web.archive.org/web/20091027155556/http://www.geocities.com/linguaeimperii/Hispanic/hispanic_es.html LINGVÆ·IMPERII] (Spanish)
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20040611215344/http://www.arqueotavira.com/Mapas/Iberia/Populi.htm Detailed map of the Pre-Roman Peoples of Iberia (around 200 BC)]
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20090623012253/http://www.cidehus.uevora.pt/textos/artigos/acarneiro_inscricaovotiva_lusitanica.pdf Study of the Ribeira da Venda inscription (Portuguese)]
• [http://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/889/what-is-necessary-to-decide-if-lusitanian-is-a-celtic-language What is necessary to decide if Lusitanian is a Celtic language?]

{{Celtic languages}}

{{Italic languages}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Lusitanian Language}}

Category:Languages of Portugal

Category:Lusitanians

Category:Paleohispanic languages

Category:Extinct languages of Europe

Category:Languages extinct in the 2nd century

Category:Unclassified Indo-European languages

Category:Italo-Celtic

Category:Extinct languages of Spain