Celts

[Pantagathus]

You sure about that?

http://macdonnellofleinster.com/Celtic%20Empire%20Map.jpg

 

Oh the HORROR!!!!!!!!! Favonius, I expect better from you!

 

That map is 'wishful thinking' at best but in reality is complete rubbish...

 

There was a cultural interplay between the eastern Celts and their Thracian neighbors and Celts settled ever eastward & side by side with Thacians at certain points but Thracians were not Celts.

 

Man, that map makes me irritated...

Edited August 16, 2006 by Pantagathus

[Primus Pilus]

And just to add to Pantagathus' disgust, the Celts may have had religio/cultural similarity (and perhaps uniformity could even be argued) but they were politically divided according to tribe and there was no centralized government. There are those revisionists who suggest that druidic law functioned as a central authority, but this is fed by wishful new age Celts who fail to understand the actual history and culture of the people they seek to emulate. I also feel that they fail to understand the myriad of motivations involved with Caesar's commentaries on the political situation in Britain. (from whose words is derived much of the ammunition for the notion of centralized Druidic authority.)

[Favonius Cornelius]

Wow you guys give me so little credit.

 

I did not mean to suggest that there was a verifiable empire as represented in that map. I should have been more clear. I know full well that all the area in that red consists of various kingdoms, tribes, chiefs, brew houses and whatever else. What the map does nicely show however is a general area where Celtic cultural and ethnic peoples lived. A fundamental part of that culture is the honor of battle.

 

With that in mind, if we say that the Danubian/Thracian peoples are not a part of the Celt mix, they why are the blond Galatians in Asia Minor referred to as Gauls and or Celts?

[Primus Pilus]

Wow you guys give me so little credit.

 

I did not mean to suggest that there was a verifiable empire as represented in that map. I should have been more clear. I know full well that all the area in that red consists of various kingdoms, tribes, chiefs, brew houses and whatever else. What the map does nicely show however is a general area where Celtic cultural and ethnic peoples lived. A fundamental part of that culture is the honor of battle.

 

I knew you weren't trying to suggest that the map was a proper political representation of the ancient Celtic world FC. I remember past discussions where you clearly oppose the notions of 'Celtic Empire'. I'm just disgusted at the map itself and the claim it seems to be trying to make.

[Pantagathus]

With that in mind, if we say that the Danubian/Thracian peoples are not a part of the Celt mix, they why are the blond Galatians in Asia Minor referred to as Gauls and or Celts?

 

Because a group of about 30,000 Celts swept through southeastern Europe into Asia Minor in search for loot & land, eventually got spanked then settled and became mercenaries for various local kingdoms.

[Favonius Cornelius]

With that in mind, if we say that the Danubian/Thracian peoples are not a part of the Celt mix, they why are the blond Galatians in Asia Minor referred to as Gauls and or Celts?

 

Because a group of about 30,000 Celts swept through southeastern Europe into Asia Minor in search for loot & land, eventually got spanked then settled and became mercenaries for various local kingdoms.

 

Yes but isn't it true that these invaders came from the Thrace area? I could be wrong, I do not specialize in the Celts, but from what I know I do believe all these peoples are related enough in cultural background to verify my original point.

[Moonlapse]

With that in mind, if we say that the Danubian/Thracian peoples are not a part of the Celt mix, they why are the blond Galatians in Asia Minor referred to as Gauls and or Celts?

 

Because a group of about 30,000 Celts swept through southeastern Europe into Asia Minor in search for loot & land, eventually got spanked then settled and became mercenaries for various local kingdoms.

 

Yes but isn't it true that these invaders came from the Thrace area? I could be wrong, I do not specialize in the Celts, but from what I know I do believe all these peoples are related enough in cultural background to verify my original point.

Came from Gallia by way of Thrace is a little more accurate.

[Rameses the Great]

Could that be why present day Turks look different than the Greeks?

[Favonius Cornelius]

With that in mind, if we say that the Danubian/Thracian peoples are not a part of the Celt mix, they why are the blond Galatians in Asia Minor referred to as Gauls and or Celts?

 

Because a group of about 30,000 Celts swept through southeastern Europe into Asia Minor in search for loot & land, eventually got spanked then settled and became mercenaries for various local kingdoms.

 

Yes but isn't it true that these invaders came from the Thrace area? I could be wrong, I do not specialize in the Celts, but from what I know I do believe all these peoples are related enough in cultural background to verify my original point.

Came from Gallia by way of Thrace is a little more accurate.

 

 

Ah I think you are right my friend, I've been digging through some books and online and it looks like they are probably Cisalpine Gauls?

 

At any rate, same difference in defence of my point.

 

Rameses the Turks are an entirely different ethnic group than Greek. Much of Greece is actually really Greek and not a mixture. I think we had a discussion on this somewhere.

[Pantagathus]

Yes but isn't it true that these invaders came from the Thrace area?

Came from Gallia by way of Thrace is a little more accurate.

Ah I think you are right my friend

Pardon me but did I not say "about 30,000 Celts swept through southeastern Europe into Asia Minor"? :frusty:

[Moonlapse]

Perhaps that wasn't blatant enough.

[Kosmo]

If the map shows the maximum areas were celts reached or raided it's fairly accurate with the exception that they don't show them in the area East of Carphatian mountains.

If this is intended to show compact majoritar populations it's seriously wrong. They never controlled this areas in the same time and in many regions their presence was short lived.

For example the kingdom of Tylis in Thracia never had authority north of the Balakan mountains and it ruled just some 80 years.

In Pannonian basin celts were scattered and did not dominate the area. This was done by illyric tribes and later in the Alfold by sarmatians. Their strongest presence was in today Slovacia until Buresbisat's dacians subdued them, but not in Bosnia and Croatia, homeland of fearsome illyrian pirates.

Overall in the East they had a rather short and localized presence.

But, I still believe that bastarnae (peucini) on Prut river in Modova were celtic and not germanic, but they are hard to destinguish.