Alizah was looking for the last names and book titles for Orosius and
Isidore - not Littleton & Malcor.
Sorry for the confusion, the the post seemed to refer to L&M and the
filmmaker (& apparent plagiarist) Reid.
>The use of the term "alleged" is perfectly valid. We don't have to agree
>with Littleton and Malcor, but I note that much opposition to their theory
>springs from a very emotional level. The parallels between the Arthurian
>legend and the Sarmatian legends are too numerous to merely dismiss.
>Dumezil does mention the Arthurian legends and their connections. For an
>overview, see _The New Comparative Mythology_ -- edited by C. Scott
I thought you weren't interested in talking about this subject any more?
Actually, my post to that effect bounced back as undeliverable, so I thought
it hadn't gone to Celtic L.
I'm very interested in DISCUSSING IE and Celtic connections. I'm not
interested in fussing about whether L&M are valid.
I personally believe that C. Scott Littleton is an adept scholar on Indo
European matters - but that Celtic mythology, linguistics and culture in
general are not his strong points.
I agree. I think if Celtic scholars have interest in IE connections, it's
their job to research and posit them. It is very easy to point out errors
in other people's work. It's a bit harder to work out original theory.