To many who are interested in the history of the Celtic peoples and their modern descendants in Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Brittany and Cornwall, and from their descendants around the world a subject that is often brought up is possible connections with the ancient Israelites, in particular the “Lost Tribes” of Israel.

The purpose of this article is not to establish "connections" to the Lost Tribes, but to discuss some of the many common characteristics of these modern Celtic peoples and the ancient Israelites. These characteristics I call Commonalities. I am not attempting in this short article to establish connections which has been addressed in many other volumes such as The Tribes and Ephraim by Yair Davidy and The Lost Tribes of Israel -- Found! by Steven Collins as well as in ancient works. I am simply going to point out and discuss a very few of the great many commonalities between these peoples.

The Lost Tribes of the House of Israel

The peoples we refer to as the Lost Tribes were part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel which was conquered by the Assyrians around 740-720 BC. and exiled to areas in Assyria and to the north. This is told in the Bible in 2 Kings chapters 17 and 18. About the same time a contingent from the Kingdom of Judah were also exiled to the northern lands. It is these peoples and their immediate descendants that are also variously referred to as the Lost Tribes, and the subject of many works and studies.

Being both Irish and Jewish, I grew up familiar with customs and the cultures of both peoples, believing at first that they were quite different cultures and had greatly varying cultural characteristics. Yet growing up with both cultures, I had noticed similarities even on a casual basis. Over the years I began to see more of this similarity and in recent years I began to collect this data into what I term an Overview which I am still assembling. It is this Overview in differing areas of life that I will discuss here.

There are a number of areas that I have been looking at which includes: language, agriculture, religion and taboos, burial practices, music and folk dancing, the traditions and self determinations and self-identification of the Celts and other areas as they arise. I will point out a few items in each category and note that these are just a few of a great many commonalities and I mention them as examples.

Language is one of the subjects that led to my overall interest in the topic as early on I had noticed similarities. Considering the long period of time from the expulsion of the Israelites to our time, it would seem unlikely that there would be little, if any, common letters, words or structure, but that is not the case -- there is indeed much in common.

Gaelic is a member of the Celtic group of the Indo-European family of languages that includes Russian, English, German, Spanish, French, Hindi and Italian. The Celtic group has been confined to the British Isles and part of the French coast.

Linguistic Similarities

The Celtic group is divided into two divisions which has three languages in each division. Each division makes up its own unique language. The two branches are:

(1) the BRYTHONIC branch which is made up of the Welsh, Breton and Cornish languages; and

(2) the GOIDELIC branch with the Irish, Scots and Manx Gaelic languages.

The Breton and Cornish languages are seeing some resurgence after near extinction while the Irish, Scots and Welsh languages are holding their own at this time. Manx is an ancient form of Irish and is considered to be oldest and purest Irish Gaelic in existence. Manx is very close to the extinct dialects of nearby Ulster and Galloway and separated from Old Irish in about the fifth century of our era. It occupies much the same position to Old Irish as Icelandic does to Old Norse. For the purpose of my study I have chose to concentrate on Manx and Scots Gaelic. I am sure though that an in-depth study of Welsh or the other Gaelic languages would provide much food for thought on this issue.

The Gaelic alphabet as well as the ordinal numbers show more commonality than could be expected after 2,700 years of divergence; for example we have a Hebrew “S” retained in the modern Gaelic -- the Hebrew Sheen, pronounced Shh is found in the Irish “S” as in the name Sean pronounced Shawn. Other letters are similar, the ordinal numbers 6 and 7 are pronounced almost the same in Hebrew and Gaelic. Words with same or similar meanings abound; for instance the Hebrew word for "holy" in common usage according to Halacha (Jewish law) is Kasher. The word in Manx Gaelic for "hallowed" or "holy" is Casherick. The syntax of Gaelic is entirely different from any other European language, especially English. R. L. Thompson, in his work Outline of Manx Literature and Language says that “in several respects Gaelic syntax has similarities with that of languages like Hebrew and Arabic”.

As in Hebrew, adjectives follow the noun that they describe: for example “ben vie” = “a good woman” in Gaelic and “rosh ketan” = “small head” or “stupid” in Hebrew. Vie or ketan being the adjectives. The word order also is similar in Hebrew in that the verb is usually first in the sentence unlike English or many other European languages. These are just a very few of the many commonalities that I believe suggest a definite connection between the two languages and their family streams. This alone could constitute a major comparative study.

In the 18th century, historians discovered exciting proof of Phoenician-Hebrew-Celtic ties. An ancient Roman dramatist, Titus Maccius Plautus (died 184 B.C.) wrote a play, The Penulus, in which he placed then-current Phoenician/Hebrew into the speech of one of his characters. In the 18th century, linguists noticed the great similarity between that Phoenician/Hebrew and the early Irish-Celtic language:

Phoenician of Plautus:

Byth lym mo thym nociothii nel ech an ti daisc machon Ys i do iebrim thyfe lyth chy lya chon temlyph ula.

Early Irish-Celtic:

Beth horn’ mo thirne nociaithe, niel ach an ti dairie mae coinne Is i de leabhraim tafach leith, chi his con teampl uibh uhla.

Leading 18th and 19th century scholars, such as General Charles Vallancey, Lord Rosse, and Sir William Betham, also wrote on this subject. Vallancey, for instance, speaks of, “The great affinity found in many words, nay whole lines and sentences of this speech, between the Punic [Phoenician] and the Irish.” Famed historian, George Rawlinson, added that this and other inscriptions are “readily explicable, if Hebrew be assumed as the key to them, but not otherwise” (The History of Phoenicia, p. 327).

In 1772, Vallancey, a leading Irish scholar of the day, published his famous work, Essay On The Antiquity of The Irish Language, Being A Collation of The Irish With The Punic (Hebrew) Language. In his opening remarks he states, “On a collation of the Irish with the Celtic, Punic, Phoenician and Hebrew languages, the strongest affinity, (nearly a perfect identity in very many Words) will appear; it may therefore be deemed a Punic-Celtic compound.” Vallancey continues, "from the Hebrew proceeded the Phoenician, from the Phoenician, Carthaginian, or Punic was derived the Aeolian, Dorian and Etruscan, and from these was formed the Latin…Of the Roman Saxon capital letters, the Irish use but three, all the others bear a very great resemblance to the primitive Hebrew and Phoenician” (p. 2-3). Modern language scholars have confirmed that there is a definite connection between the Celtic and Hebrew.

Nine Ways in Which Hebrew is Exactly Like Gaelic:

In a blog called Rachel's Ramblings we find the following:

(1) Nouns have singular, dual, and plural forms. These are the only two languages I’ve learnt which have dual forms of nouns, although I’m aware that Cornish, for example, has also. That isn’t to say I’ve actually learnt the dual forms for Gaelic at all.

(2) There is no indefinite article. This isn’t terribly unusual; Greek doesn’t have an indefinite article either. For those who don’t know, in English, the definite article is the, while the indefinite article is a/n. But also, there is only one definite article. By this, I mean that the definite article doesn’t change based on case, number, and gender, as it does in German, Greek, and French. In Gaelic, the article is an, which can mutate to am or a’, depending on the sound which follows immediately after. In Hebrew, the article is ha, which can mutate to ha or he, depending on the sound which follows immediately after.

(3) The verb comes first (VSO). Again, this isn’t anything particularly unusual, as there are a number of VSO languages out there. However, in English, the standard form is SVO (subject-verb-object), and this is the form used in French, German, Spanish, Greek, and other European languages except the Celtic ones.

(4) There are different rules for labial consonants. This is pretty universal, again, because it’s easier to pronounce labial consonants if you have slightly different rules for them. However, saying "imprecise" rather than "inprecise" is so natural for English- (and French-, and Spanish-) speakers that we don’t think about it. Have you ever noticed that people say "Camberra" rather than "Canberra"? It’s just because it’s easier to say. However, in Gaelic and Hebrew, these changes for labial consonants (known as "Big Fat Monkey Paws" in Gaelic and "BuMP rules" in Hebrew) are taught as grammar.

(5) Lenition of consonants. This is perhaps stretching for a similarity, but what lenition basically is the change of a B sound to a V sound, or K to a glottal CH. In the Celtic languages, this mostly occurs at the beginning of words, following things like prepositions and possessives. In Hebrew, lenition can occur anywhere in the word, and is indicated by the use of the daghesh lene (the dot sometimes found in Hebrew letters) in the middle of the letter. However, according to my teacher, the answer to "What does a daghesh lene do?" or "It shows whether a consonant is lenited" is not right, because "leniting" and "lenition" are not concepts used in English. I was just excited to realize that the word I learn for Gaelic looks exactly like the word "lene" used in Hebrew!

(6) Pluralisation results in vowel changes earlier in the word. This isn’t unusual; changes to the end of the word very often result in changes earlier. For example, in English, compare the pronunciation "nation" to "national". However, Hebrew and Gaelic take this a step further. In Gaelic, caraid ("friend") becomes cairdean ("friends"). In Hebrew, (na’ar, or "boy") becomes (n’ariym, or "boys").

(7) There are several sorts of guttural consonant sounds. Okay, this one I put in just to be perverse. I’m sick of people not pronouncing the guttural sounds. People in Greek (including the teacher) saying K rather than X. It’s not that hard a sound to make! Anyway, both Hebrew and Gaelic recognize several guttural sounds. In Hebrew, these include kh, and k, which, without the daghesh lene, is aspirated and rendered as kh, and a glottal stop. In Gaelic, these include such monster combinations as chd, dh, gh, and ch.

(8) There is an unchanging "infinitive particle" with different positives and negatives. In Gaelic, this occurs with all verbs.

(9) Prepositional pronouns. I’m using the Gaelic terminology here, because in Hebrew, they’re called "inseparable prepositions with a pronominal suffix". Personally, I think the Gaelic term is simpler. Although the official process and terminology is different, the end result is the same: what basically amounts to a conjugated preposition.

Commonalities in Ethnic Customs

"Much has been written about the Celtic harp, Celtic music, Celtic cultures and peoples -- but almost never has it been in the light of who the Celts and later Northwest Europeans are, where they all came from, or why. One happy partial exception is the account of Leo Maguire of Walton's Musical Instruments:

"It is reasonable to assume that when the Celts first entered Europe from the Near East, they brought with them a fairly advanced type of harp. The harp had been in use, in one form or another, for many thousands of years before the warlike, romantic, poetic and musical Celts began the first of their many migrations over the European mainland or though the Mediterranean Sea. They, however, were destined to perfect their chosen instrument, to give it a mystic, almost religious significance in their culture."

"The musicological work Dialogo della Musica Antica by Vincenzio de Galilei (1581)...has this interesting remark about the Italian harp:

"This most ancient instrument (commemorated Dante) was brought to us [Italians] from Ireland, where such are most excellently worked and in a great number; the inhabitants of the said island have made this their art during the many centuries they have lived there and, moreover, it is a special undertaking of the kingdom; and they paint and engrave it in their public and private buildings and on their hill; stating as their reason for so doing that they have descended from the Royal Prophet David."

The bagpipes originated in the Near or Middle East in the general area of Ancient Israel. Most sources would agree with this.

The Oxford History of Music makes mention of the first documented bagpipe being found on a Hittite slab at Eyuk in the Middle East. This sculptured bagpipe has been dated to 1000 B.C. This was the approximate time of King David according to conventionally accepted chronology. The presence of bagpipes amongst the Ancient Israelites, and even as part of the numerous musical instruments used in the Temple, is therefore not surprising.

Biblical Hebrew supports the common usage of bagpipes amongst the Hebrews in Biblical times. The Talmud and Rashi (the foremost commentator on the Bible and Talmud) also agree with this. A problem -- or rather possible source of confusion -- could arise from the possible different applications of specific terms for different musical instruments.

The Mishnah (Keilim 20; 2) mentions a Chamat Chalalim which is a bag of pipes or musical bagpipe as an instrument that does not become ritually impure. In Modern Hebrew the word bagpipes is translated as Chamat Chalalim. Chamat (according to Jastrow) means the stomach of an animal. Chalalim is the plural for pipes.

The Classical Commentary on the Mishnah of Rabbi Obadiah bar Tenorah (1465-1550) says:

"Chamat Chalalim. An inflated animal stomach into whose opening pipes are inserted and wind emitted through holes in the pipes results in the sound of song."

The Mishnah was written down in about 220 A.D. but is derived from oral traditions reaching back all the way to Second Temple Times, the period of Ezra and beyond into the Biblical era.

The majority opinion is that in Biblical terminology bagpipes were referred to as the "nabal" and that the word "nabal," where it appears in the Bible in reference to a musical instrument, means the bagpipes.

Amazing Religious Parallels

The ancient religion of the Celtic peoples prior to Christianity was generally believed to be Druidism, of which we know very little; yet that which we do know has many overtones of the Canaanite religions that the northern tribes turned to after the split of King Solomon’s Kingdom under his son into a Northern and a Southern Kingdom. Like the pagans of Canaan, their sacred places became high hilltops and sacred groves, notably oaks. There is a great deal of similarities from what we know archaeologically in both the Northern Kingdom ritual sites and the Druid sites in the British Isles.

Since early times, the Israelites sinned against YEHOVAH God by adopting many of the pagan practices of their neighbors, and so we find evidence of both Hebrew and Canaanite culture among their descendants in Europe. (The Phoenician is the eastern branch of the Canaanite people.) The ancient Baal pillar is one of many such religious monuments which have been found from the Middle East to Ireland.

There are many other examples, however, of customs linking the Celtic Druids specifically with Israel. English historian, William Borlase, in his Antiquities of Cornwall, (1754) presented many pages of such evidence: Druids worshipped but one God and allowed no graven images, identical to the Hebrews, and in contradistinction with almost all other ancient religions. Consecration was by sprinkling with blood, as in the Old Testament Hebrew worship. Druid priests were clothed in white, similar to the Hebrew priest’s white ephod; sacrificial victims were bled to death, and the blood was collected in basins which served to sprinkle the altars; bulls were sacrificed, and the image of a bull (the heraldic sign of the Hebrew tribe of Ephraim) was carried into war. It is interesting that the English have been referred to as "John Bull" in recent times.

“While they performed their horrid rites of human sacrifice the drums and trumpets sounded without intermission, that the cries of the miserable victims might not be heard.” (Compare Jeremiah 7:31-32; the Hebrew/Phoenician place of human sacrifice was called Tophet, meaning "the drum").

They prayed with uplifted hands, examined entrails for necromancy, and held the oak in veneration. The Druids used the magic wand in imitation of Moses‘ rod, poured libations, sacrificed upon the tops of rocks, investigated truth by lots, anointed rock pillars with oil, and marked out boundaries with stones (pp. 104-132, 161). In these and so many other distinctive ways, the religious customs of the Celts and Hebrews bear an unmistakable resemblance!

Additionally, the burial practices of both the peoples of the northern Kingdom and the Celts bear much similarity in the presence of Dolmens -- large slabs of stone place horizontally across upright stones with the graves under them. These are found throughout the area of Europe which Celtic peoples passed and are found also in the areas of present day Jordan and Israel in which the Northern Israelite tribes dwelled.

You can find pictures of these dolmens in Yair Davidy’s book Ephraim on pages 137-38. This book may be purchased on the Internet or direct from Yair Davidy in Israel (see below).

Since it is true that Hebrews and Phoenicians migrated to Europe in large numbers in ancient times, this calls out for religious and cultural ties, and in fact, such connections abound. Dr. Thomas Moore’s, History of Ireland (p. 40), relates: “That most common of all Celtic monuments, the Cromlech…is to be found not only in most parts of Europe, but also in Asia,” including Palestine. “Not less ancient and general, among the Celtic nations, was the circle of upright stones, with either an altar or tall pillar in the centre, and, like its prototype at Gilgal [ancient Israel], serving sometimes as a temple of worship, sometimes as a place of national council or inauguration…The rough, unhewn stone…used in their circular temples by the Druids, was the true, orthodox observance of the divine command delivered to Noah, ‘If thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shallt not build it of hewn stone” (Exodus 20:25).

Dr. Beauford, in Druidism Revived, says, “It is remarkable that all the ancient altars found in Ireland, and now distinguished by the name of Cromlechs or sloping stones originally called Bothal, or the House of God, and they seem to be of the same species as those mentioned in the Book of Genesis, called by the Hebrews, Bethel, which has the same signification as the Irish Bothal.”

The Bible (Judges 9:6; 2 Kings 11:14; 2 Chronicles 23:13) indicates that Hebrew kings were crowned either standing upon or next to a pillar of stone. “The practice of seating the new king upon a stone, at his initiation, was the practice in many of the countries of Europe….The monarchs of Sweden sat upon a stone placed in the centre of twelve lesser ones, and in a similar kind of circle the Kings of Denmark were crowned” (Moore, ibid., p. 42). Queen Elizabeth II was crowned sitting on a large stone contained in the Coronation Chair in Westminster Abbey. Since the 14th century, all crowned English and British monarchs have been seated in this chair at the moment of coronation, with the exception of Queen Mary II.

The book, Identity of the Religions Druidical and Hebrew, adds, “Circular temples…abound in England and other parts of Europe. The most ancient account of them is to be found in the book of Exodus (24:4), “And Moses…builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes...” (p.15) In Europe, Stonehenge, Avebury, and many other early Celtic sites were designed in a circular pattern. Groves were also features of both Hebrew and Celtic worship. The Bible tells us that Abraham “called on the everlasting God” (Genesis 13:4) from a grove planted by his own hand. Gideon worshipped YEHOVAH God under an oak tree (Judges 6:19-24).

Note also the significant Bible number, "twelve," which was common to both European Celts and the Hebrews.

The division of time into a seven-day week was practiced by the Irish Celts, identical to the Hebrews. Dr. Thomas Moore comments that no other nation kept such a hebdomadal (seven day) cycle “excepting only among the family of Abraham ,” (ibid., p. 54) a remarkable proof of identity between the two peoples!

Even Agricultural Similarities!

Agriculturally there are interesting commonalities -- the grain crops are much the same, and even though wheat was known to them in their passage through Europe it was not a major crop in their final homes. In fact oats and barley were their staple grains. As with the Israelites, the cattle were of several colors, but the preferred color for ritual for both peoples was red. The virgin cow used in the Hebrew ritual for purification was the forerunner of the red cattle used by the Druids in their rituals.

After the invasion of the Romans into the British Isles, white cattle were introduced and later used; until that time red was the preferred color. One of the most famous wars in Irish history was over a Red Bull stolen by a northern Irish tribe. Also, swine were not raised in any of the early Celtic areas until after they were introduced by the Romans; the Celts had a taboo against them, along with scale-less fish as eels and shellfish. The Celts, in similitude to the Israelites, were excellent headsman and developed identifiable breeds of sheep, cattle and horses, that carried on the traditions of the Israelites.

Geographical Link

The early name of southwestern England was “Dumnoni,” or “Danmoni,” as shown by a portion of a map in Celtic scholar, John Rhys’ book, Early Celtic Britain. This comprises today the British counties of Cornwall and Devon.

Highly respected historian William Camden remarked concerning Cornwall: "That region, which according to the geographers, is the first of all Britain, and…was in ancient times inhabited by those Britons, whom Solinas called, Dunmonii, Ptolomy (called) Damnonii, or (as we find in some other copies), more truly Danmonii which name derived from the ever continuing mines of tin in this tract, which the Britons call moina” (Britannia, p. 183).

This compound word is therefore composed of “moina,” a tin mine, and “Dan,” the people who mined the tin. So this most ancient region of England is properly called “DANMONT,” meaning , “DAN’S TIN-MINES.” That these early inhabitants known as “Dan” were in fact the Biblical tribe by the same name has been established by leading modern scholars such as Cyrus Gordon. If these early colonists had actually been Phoenicians the region would have been called not Danmoni but “Fenimoni,” because the Phoenicians were known as the Punic or Feni civilization.

Celtic scholar, John Rhys gives strong evidences of Hebrew colonization of the British isles in ancient times. “Ireland was known as IBERION”, he says (p. 201). The ancient name of the Israelites was Ibri or Iberi (modern Hebrew), which is derived from the name “EBER” or “HEBER”, an ancestor and patriarch of that people. Mr. Rhys continues, “…in Ireland it was Ivernii in Ptolomy’s time; and he mentions a town there called Ivernis and a river Ivernios. To these may be added various forms of the name of the island, such as Juvenal's Iuuerna, distorted more usually by the Romans into Hibernia…THEIR EPONYMOUS ANCESTOR…is variously called…EBER, EMER, and HEBER” (ibid., p. 262-3).

Dr. Rhys discusses a region “just in the vicinity of St. David’s or Mnyw, called in the Welsh Chronicle MONT IUDEORUM, which contains an allusion probably to the same people” (ibid., p. 226). Rhys says that some scholars suggest this word, ludeorum or Judeorum, may relate to the “Jutes,” a Germanic tribe of Israelite origin in Northern Europe. Rhys indicates that it identifies Hebrews of the tribe of Judah. Rhys adds, “…lastly we seem to have a trace of the same form in the Welsh Chronicle, sometimes called Annales Cambriae, when it calls Menevia or St. David’s Moni Iudeorum. We need not be here troubled by the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, But…it would be hard to prove the contrary” (ibid., p. 150).

Other Proofs

What I have presented here in greatly abbreviated form just skims the surface of the commonalities between the Celtic Peoples and the Israelites. There is a tremendous amount of information available for those who would like to look at this closer themselves. A few resources are listed at the end. This is one of those subjects in which at first one can say “oh -- that's an interesting coincidence.” But the sheer mass of these “coincidences” that build up after one goes from one discipline to another becomes totally overwhelming. The fact that so much of the languages are similar almost three thousand years later, that customs are clearly identifiable as being related, that religious practices are uniquely similar and that the everyday agricultural practices and crops were similar -- all along with the many other commonalities bespeak a common origin.

For those interested in pursuing this I wish you well and much enjoyment.

Manx Gaelic Society, Yn Cheshaght Ghailckagh
St Judes
Isle of Man IM7 2EW
United Kingdom