[Fedora]

PS: I have a note to add to my Post #27. When discussing what I called the linguistic definition of Scythians and Celts, I should probably have made a distinction there and perhaps used a different term. There's actually a third way to define such groups which might also be called "linguistic", which is, for instance, to define "Celtic" as a group of languages with a common philological ancestor. To avoid blurring this approach with the approach I mention based on historical writings, I guess maybe calling the latter approach "historiographic" might be better, and the term "linguistic" might then be reserved for the philological approach.

[CobaltBlue]

I don't think it's appropriate to use language to classify people who left no artifacts containing written language.

If you want to classify according to culture, go by the artifacts.

If you want to classify according to genetics, go by the DNA.