A peolple who pretty much ruled central Europe in the ancient times, land wise, put who seemed to never get thier act together as a collective Civ.

Eventually being conquered or assimallated into civs with a more central and advanced goverment.

Whats your take on em, and why do you think they are still one of the most romantised civs in western culture?
:arrow: :king:

They are one of the most romantised civs in western culture? :confused: (no offense) Maybe they are romantised more in Ireland. Like America is defiently more romantised over in the USA then in Ireland.

The Celts are highly romntisized in most western countries, the British Isles, France and northern Italy especially.

The Celts were in many ways a very successful civ and lasted in some orm from about 500BC until 1746AD, a good deal more than 2000 years, much more than the Romano-Iberian civs or the English civs. They are part of the heritage of europe, the were warriors highly respected for their nobility. They gave the world ring-mail armour, the "Gallic sword", their distinctive art, the Arthur myths, tartan, etc. They are romantisized because of all this, they represent the natural side of western culture, their spirituality for instance, is misrepresented to create a a large scale hippy culture for those who aren't exactly happy with the manner of life they are made to live in modern society.

If you tell any English person that King Arthur was not English or a King, but a British Celtic military leader that held back the Saxon advances for a generataion, (myth or not) they would probably be surprised. Yet he has been held by the English as a national hero, with all the frills.

Also france has taken on Vercingetorix as a national hero, even though the Franks were, and are, a completly seperate culture that had no real conection with this time in history.

Plus a lot of mythological fiction has a distinct celtic vien running through it. Lord of the rings for one.
Even 'Conan the barbarion' ( Conan is an old celtic name)

Edit: Sorry Calgacus, i was typing this as you were posting.

The Celts are romantised because they had so much mystery and mythology. For example, the druids or the "menhirs" at Carnac, for instance.

I have read once that the Celts are actually not a single people, but a collection of peoples, who adopted the same technology, customs, social norms etc... the source of which was somewhere in Central Europe.

The Celts was a large mass of Tribal Nations, with similar culture and religion. They dominated much of Western Europe before Caesar the Barbarian conquered their world. Some of the prominent tribes were the Boii, Belgae and Helvetii, but there were many more. I like the Celts and their history… Try and read Caesar’s Gallic Wars, and see what a bastard he really was.

Cimbri

Here’s a map of the Tribal Nations of the Gallic Celts
(By Slitherine):

Here’s some typical Celtic warriors rushing into battle
(Ancient Armies by Concord Publications):

Knight-Dragon wrote:

I have read once that the Celts are actually not a single people, but a collection of peoples, who adopted the same technology, customs, social norms etc... the source of which was somewhere in Central Europe.

There is indeed some controversy over exactly who the Celts were. In the late 19th century paleoethnologists and archaeologists began equating technologies and material cultural remains with ethnic units, but increasingly today there is some doubt about this. The problem is that 1st millennium tribes didn't view ethnicity and "nations" in the way we moderns do. The afore-mentioned heavy romanticization of "Celtic" lore and culture have not helped, nor has modern Irish, Scottish, Welsh, etc. nationalism. Was the spread of iron-age technologies and material culture really due to one people, the Celts, or did the spread of these technologies create the cultural similarities that we mistake for a common ethnicity? There was never anything approaching a single Celtic political unit that encompassed even a majority of those we call Celts.

There are precedents - modern Romanians derive from a mixture of nationalities combined through a common lifestyle in dangerous times, and indeed an offshoot of the proto-Romanians survives today as a minority in northern Greece, called the Vlachs. (Part of historic Romania is called "Wallachia", and the term "vlach" or "ulach" was used in Central Europe in early medieval times to refer to Latin-speakers.) Did a Celtic nationality form this way? The Central European Celts - the Boii ("Boii-emia = "Bohemia") and others - seem to have been the earliest and were a font of technologies.

I'm a big fan of Celtic culture (folk tales etc.), they didn't seem to be a warlike people, and therefore assimilation by more powerul peoples was imminent. A real pity, truly. :(

Originally posted by Mikoyan
I'm a big fan of Celtic culture (folk tales etc.), they didn't seem to be a warlike people, and therefore assimilation by more powerul peoples was imminent. A real pity, truly. :( Unwarlike? On the contrary, I think they were one of the most warlike tribes of all - at least earlier. The Cisalphine (sp?) Gauls who settled the Po valley in N Italy once sacked Rome itself, in the 5th century BC. And continually raided the Italian states. Rome feared the Celts - which was why they were so savage when the Roman legions finally beat them back and invaded Gaul. It takes much to make Rome fear anything...

Also some of the Celts actually migrated (fought their way thru more probably) into Central Anatolia and became the Galatians. Many records were left, remarking on how aggressive and warlike they were. They made prefect mercenaries.

BTW, now that I think of it; I first read about the possibility that the Celts might be an ethnic misnomer fr Vrylakas' posts. :)

Originally posted by gael
Also france has taken on Vercingetorix as a national hero, even though the Franks were, and are, a completly seperate culture that had no real conection with this time in history.


The Franks are not the same as the French. The Franks were a Germanic people who ruled Gaul and western Germania. The French have as much in common with the Gauls as they do with the Franks.

The Celts were uncivilized by Roman stds. They were talented artists and produced cultural artifacts and mythology that are still admired and emulated today. They were apparently from Central Europe, Austria and Switzerland and migrated west colonizing France and the British Isles. They were thought to be invaders, by the Picts of Scotland, for example, as well as other more established cultures in the British Isles. However over the course of many generations the conquered cultures were mostly assimilated into the Celtic culture. These days parts of France and England and most of Wales, Scotland and especially Ireland feel a strong cultural connection to the Celts.

English and French cultures were immeasurably influenced by Celtic culture, and those nations were two of the five major colonizers who brought Western Civilization to the rest of the world.

Since people of Irish descent in particular are widespread around the world, Celtic culture is thought by many to be part of their family history. My family is of Irish origin, having migrated to the US following the Irish Potato famine of the mid-1800s -- very common.

The Celts were squeezed out of existance in most of Europe by the Romans and the Germanic tribes, then the last remnants of their culture in the British Isles faced heinous repression from the English. Until American dominance after World War II, the English were considered the dominant power in the world. So the Celts represent the idea of radical opposition to the tyrannical powers that be, which is an idea that appeals to many.

They are the ultimate underdog, but their language and culture is still recognizable and present in the world. They may no longer exist as a distinct civilization, but Celtic culture is still distinct and compelling. It's just hard not to love those adorable artistically-gifted metal-working human-sacrificing Stonehenge-worshipping barbarians!

cal --

One of the most fascinating aspects of history (for me) is the inevitability of two-way cultural assimilation. The Franks, who came after the Gauls, were no doubt influenced by them. So Frankish culture after assimilation was no doubt different f/ Frankish culture before assimilation. The French owe their nation's culture to the Gauls, the Romans and the Franks, who in turn owe their cultures to the Celts, the Greeks and Judeans and the Germanic tribes, respectively.

wasn't Larry Byrd a celtic?

;)

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
I have read once that the Celts are actually not a single people, but a collection of peoples, who adopted the same technology, customs, social norms etc... the source of which was somewhere in Central Europe.

I have read a view books on Celtic history and origins, and i have to admit, i found my self thinking that most of the people who wrote these books use the same sources,Rome, (and to a lesser extent Greece), but elaborate on there own romantised ideas of what the Celtic socity and poeple were like.
Rome seems to have posioned the wells of of ancient European history, so no mater how much someone tells you they are an 'authority' on this subject, you can bet they are talking through thier arse.

Personaly i don't believe there was such a thing as a pure Celtic race that spaned across the the whole of central and western europe, as much as i don't believe that the whole of the English empire was completly English in race.
I think they were a a group of headcases that over-ran all of the teritory that they are assocated with through sword and trade, and although we know them as barbarians, they must of had some sort of cultural attraction that made these conquered people quickly adapt, embrace, and basically become what we know today as Celtic, in the form of speech, art, and custom.

In saying all that, they still retained a very tribal existence when Rome, and even latter, other peoples were forming a sense of nationalism.
This inevitably became thier downfall.
l

Lol all i know is that the Celts make good golf courses, no offense but other than that they are a bunch of ppl on a tiny island that contribute nothing to society and are at war w/ thereselfs, when the heck in history could 2 christians groups not get along other than on ireland. i cant think of any.

Wildbore -

Dude that's harsh.

The Catholic-Protestant troubles of Ireland are only the most visible modern extension of a conflict that extends back in time around 500 years, ever since Martin Luthor was able to convince many German Catholics to go Protestant.

Power struggles between Catholics and Protestants have occured in the Netherlands and England as well, especially in the mid-1600s... For many years the (now exceptionally tolerant) Netherlands banned Catholicism, forcing Catholics to worship in secret monosteries. England's struggle extended through the reigns of many kings -- from Henry VIII to at least Charles II, and the conflict was a major stimulus in encouraging England's colonization of the new world.

Ireland's troubles are not all about religious differences. It's mostly about the desire of the Irish Republicans to absorb Northern Ireland into the Republic of Ireland, resulting in a sovereign Irish island-nation, and the oppositional desire of the Northern Irish to remain part of the United Kingdom under England's rule.

Originally posted by CivilopediaCity
The Celts are romantised because they had so much mystery and mythology. For example, the druids or the "menhirs" at Carnac, for instance.

The druids were indeed Celtic, but not the menhirs. The megalithic culture of Britain, Ireland and northern France predated the Celts by a couple of thousand years.

Oh yes, you're right. I'm still having the old theory in mind, but he's obsolete. Sorry...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wildbore
Lol all i know is that the Celts make good golf courses, no offense but other than that they are a bunch of ppl on a tiny island that contribute nothing to society and are at war w/ thereselfs, when the heck in history could 2 christians groups not get along other than on ireland. i cant think of any. [/

Wildbore, i'm assuming you are young, dumb, and full of sh*t, so I'm not going to insult you.

The conflict in the North of Ireland is the end rusult of centuries of war against Ireland. The North had always been a strong hold of resistance against the English, so the English decided to drive the Irish out of the north and offer the free land to Protestant lowland rich Scotch defectors and English businesses as a means of securing the land through plantations. ( In those times, and to a certain extent in todays world, religion was more of a national identity than a spiritual enlightenment)
This not only was a part of the successful divide and conquer stratagy that they had used all over the world, but also served as an indigenous garrison that would populate and call the shoots in this unruly part of the country.

When Ireland finaly won its independance, it was these same people who felt that England had turned there backs on them, and through threats of kidnaping and anything else they could think of, they retained the 6 countys of Ulster that we all know as today as Northern Ireland.

When they had established thier own state within Ireland, they then went through a voilent and political process of trying to drive out the minority Irish/Nationalist, (or Catholic), so that they would have a pure British/Unionist, (or Protestant) state within Ireland. It was at this stage that the minority Irish started to cry out for the IRA to reform to protect them from the Unionist parimilitary groups that were already established.

One thing that annoys me is that how poeple outside this part of the world believe so easily the political spin that England is just a third party peace keeper that is trying to settle these two religous fanatical groups in this part of the world, that frankly, they now view as an embarrassment.
The conflict in the North was never about religion, religion is just a tag that identifies peoples political beliefs, and is somtimes exploted by the occational nutcase.

The population in the North is now 60%/40% Protestant.
Personaly i believe we are way past a united Ireland, the culture and politics has evolved into somthing the the south, or basically anybody with common sense, will never understand.
Most normal people wish we could just stop shooting and get on, because over time, we have basically become indistingishable as a people. The problem is too many old bitter men in power openeing old wounds.


Hopefully one day we will get our act together.

Ps. "a tiny island that contribute nothing to society" a tiny and under populated island it may be, but Irish people have influenced culture and politics in immigrant countries in ways your dopey head would never understand.



:die: :santa: :beer:

Originally posted by Wildbore
Lol all i know is that the Celts make good golf courses, no offense but other than that they are a bunch of ppl on a tiny island that contribute nothing to society and are at war w/ thereselfs, when the heck in history could 2 christians groups not get along other than on ireland. i cant think of any.

:mad: :eek: :( :nuke: :rant: :rant:

You are having a really wrong point of view on the situation in Ireland. See post of gael, also.

Originally posted by Wildbore
Lol all i know is that the Celts make good golf courses, no offense but other than that they are a bunch of ppl on a tiny island that contribute nothing to society and are at war w/ thereselfs, when the heck in history could 2 christians groups not get along other than on ireland. i cant think of any.

:mad: :eek: :( :nuke: :rant: :rant:

You are having a really wrong point of view on the situation in Ireland. See post of gael, also.

Oh, dear Wildbore… :rolleyes:

Wildbore: “when the heck in history could 2 christians groups not get along other than on ireland. i cant think of any.”
Well, I could think of Constantinople and Rome… Oh yeah, and the Arian Christianity and Rome... None of the before mentioned got along well. :eek:

By Gael: " a tiny and under populated island it may be, but Irish people have influenced culture and politics in immigrant countries in ways your dopey head would never understand.”
So very true…

Cimbri

Personaly i believe we are way past a united Ireland, the culture and politics has evolved into somthing the the south, or basically anybody with common sense, will never understand.

ever see this episode of Give My Head Peace though? It's this one where...uh.. the guy... the loyalist guy, is making "Loyalist Handycrafts" after hearing that some drug dealer made loads by making them after he got out of prison or something. Anyways, the guy that's in the RUC, got this American partner and they were trying to get these drug dealers or something and then he's talking about some drug dealer and he's like

"by the time he's out there'll be a united ireland....... of course if he gets a really bad judge he'll get more than 5 years"

:D

Give My Head Peace is funny.....

Other states of the same generic religion that dont get along:

Iraq/Saudi Arabia
Germany/France (WWI / WWII)
Russia/Chechnya
North/South Korea
North/South Vietnam
American Civil war
Peleponesian Wars

And the list goes on. Most or all of these places had outstanding conflicts that encouraged such conflicts, just like. . .

You guessed it, Ireland.

The people who claimed that King Arthur was english are as bad as the people who now claim that anyone living in Scotland or Ireland is the proud heir to some mystical Celtic tradition. They ahve no more in common wuth Celts than I do with martians

During the pre-Roman era, the Celts lived in Southern Brittania, northen Spain, France, Belgium, north Italy, the balkan and some parts of Turkey.
When the Romans invaded, the Celtic cultures in these areas were pretty much erazed. Instead, the culture and its keepers fled to Brittania, and later to Ireland and Scotland, which was habited by the Picts. The Celtic culture held on in Iraland, Wales, Scotland and Briton (France) pretty long.

Originally posted by History_Buff
Other states of the same generic religion that dont get along:
Iraq/Saudi Arabia
Germany/France (WWI / WWII)
Russia/Chechnya
North/South Korea
North/South Vietnam
American Civil war
Peleponesian Wars

The main religion in Chechnya is the Islam, in Russia the Russian Orthodox Church. That's quite a difference. Also the point from the Peleponesian Wars is wrong. In Hellenic Greece, the people, and city states, might have the same 'religion', with the same gods, most of the time they had a patron god, in which name they fought war.

Originally posted by TheStinger
The people who claimed that King Arthur was english are as bad as the people who now claim that anyone living in Scotland or Ireland is the proud heir to some mystical Celtic tradition. They ahve no more in common wuth Celts than I do with martians

Would you like to eleborate?
I would like you to define Celtic tradition, then point out how these countrys have no tradition or history that is common.

i noticed somebody mentioned the celts and referred only to ireland and scotland.

he may have been insulting, but still, don't forget wales. or the other 4 nations/regions. though i have....

to say people there have no link to celts is stupid. especially considering welsh and cornish (irish and scottish forms of gaelic as well, right?) are surviving celtic languages still spoken today.

I even read that there are some people in wales today who don't speak english (not even as "foreign" language), don't know if they don't want to or don't need to. Can somebody confirm this?

Originally posted by phoenix_night
i noticed somebody mentioned the celts and referred only to ireland and scotland.

he may have been insulting, but still, don't forget wales. or the other 4 nations/regions. though i have....

to say people there have no link to celts is stupid. especially considering welsh and cornish (irish and scottish forms of gaelic as well, right?) are surviving celtic languages still spoken today.

There are also the Bretons (NW France; not the island)
and the Manx (Isle of Mann) between Britain and Ireland.

In total 6 modern Celtic languages:

Breton
Cornish
Gaelic
Irish
Manx
Welsh

Originally posted by SanPellegrino
I even read that there are some people in wales today who don't speak english (not even as "foreign" language), don't know if they don't want to or don't need to. Can somebody confirm this?

yes, this is correct. there are around 30,000 people in wales who speak welsh exclusively.

Originally posted by EdwardTking


There are also the Bretons (NW France; not the island)
and the Manx (Isle of Mann) between Britain and Ireland.

In total 6 modern Celtic languages:

Breton
Cornish
Gaelic
Irish
Manx
Welsh

Manx and Cornish are dead.

Originally posted by calgacus


Manx and Cornish are dead.

Cornish isn't dead.

and irish and scottish are both forms of gaelic.

what about breton and manx? where are they spoken?

btw, the 7 celtic "nations" are:
Wales
Ireland
Scotland
Cornwall
Isle Of Man
Brittany
Galicia

C'mmon, there's about 1 native speaker or something!

Manx is also a form of Gaelic.

Why is Galicia a Celtic nation? Is it because of the name? Until when were there certainly Celtic speakers there?

Cornish isn't dead.

as for Galicia, i can't answer your question. i don't know why.

Cornish is much more dead than Latin, which most people would call a dead language. Cornish died out in the 19th century. It has only been revived artificiallly. There is no-one living today who speaks only Cornish. The language has no functional life, only an ideological life. In that way, it can be compare with ancient Greek religion. Most of us know about the myths, but no living person believes Greek myths. The religion is therefore not dead absolutely, but has no religious function. Likewise, Cornish has no linguistic function.

Naturally speaking, Cornish, like Latin, is a dead language.

A warning to people not familiar with Irish history - gael's contribution is a tad biased!

Whatever the historical background, the reality is, as in many other parts of the world eg Cyprus, Lebanon, Fiji, Israel/Palestine, the Balkans, Rwanda etc, that in Ireland there are 2 communities with deep historical and cultural roots and with a distrust of each other built up over centuries of conflict. The fact that the Celtic/Irish/Catholic community has been there for 2,000 years and the Brit/Unionist/Protestant for "only" 400 is hardly relevant. If it IS relevant, shouldn't every white man clear out of North America (they've only been there for 500 years) and leave it to the Native Americans? Gael's analysis would suggest that ethnically cleansing the Unionists out of Northern Ireland would solve the problem. I suppose it would - but would this be any better than say throwing either the Jews or the Palestinians out of Palestine?

Each community must accept that the other is here to stay; that neither community should lord it over the other; and that bridges need to be built, inevitably involving compromise. Such a process had started - it needs to be given a chance.

Liverpool 50 years ago was deeply divided on Catholic/Protestant lines - but no longer. Hopefully we could come back in 50 years time and say the same about Belfast.

PS - Cornish is dead, I'm afraid. It has been revived but has neverthless not been used as a usual medium of communication in Cornwall for at least 200 years. Sure, people speak it - but people also speak Ancient Greek, Latin and.... err.... Klingon and Elvish!

http://realmagick.com/articles/06/1306.html

Heres a link about Celtic Galicia.

Apperently they hold celtic traditions etc that come from their own celtic history, although thier langauge is a form of portugese.

Irish myth talks of major celtic invasions coming from Iberia.
Heres a some text taken from an other website:

"Some have postulated that, as the Romans invaded and took control of the continental Celtic territories of Gaul [France] and Iberia [Spain and Portugal], some of the displaced Celts travelled to unconquered Celtic lands such as Britain and Ireland. The medieval "Book of Invasions" talks about Milesians and Fír Bolg arriving in Ireland. These have been identified with displaced Celts from Spain and Belgium, respectively, although this is conjecture."

i don't believe cornish is dead. i heard recently (a few months ago) that they were/are planning to teach the language at schools in cornwall.

and i don't see how the fact that it's speakers may be bilingual make the language dead. so what if cornish speakers can also speak english, they don't cancel each other out.

back to topic: My hometown is of celtic origin - before it was officialy founded by the romans. So I kind of like the Celts.

and your hometown is...

Celtic culture still exists in many parts of Europe and are not confined to the British Isles. I agree that Galicia should be considered a celtic nation and alot of the traditional dance and music in this area of Spain and northern Portugal are celtic in origin. There is one city in northern Portugal named Braganza (Brigantia was the original name) that was founded by a celtic king named Brigantes. I once read somewhere that the Romans named Britain after the inhabitants of this town because the people had similar customs and weapons.

@phoenix-night:
celt: radasbone
roman: castra regina = castle by the Rain River
now: Ratisbone

I'm always puzzled why Celtic culture gets celebrated so much in Eire, while Viking culture doesn't. The Viking years were just as colourful, if not more so.

Originally posted by macaskil
A warning to people not familiar with Irish history - gael's contribution is a tad biased!

Whatever the historical background, the reality is, as in many other parts of the world eg Cyprus, Lebanon, Fiji, Israel/Palestine, the Balkans, Rwanda etc, that in Ireland there are 2 communities with deep historical and cultural roots and with a distrust of each other built up over centuries of conflict. The fact that the Celtic/Irish/Catholic community has been there for 2,000 years and the Brit/Unionist/Protestant for "only" 400 is hardly relevant. If it IS relevant, shouldn't every white man clear out of North America (they've only been there for 500 years) and leave it to the Native Americans? Gael's analysis would suggest that ethnically cleansing the Unionists out of Northern Ireland would solve the problem. I suppose it would - but would this be any better than say throwing either the Jews or the Palestinians out of Palestine?

Each community must accept that the other is here to stay; that neither community should lord it over the other; and that bridges need to be built, inevitably involving compromise. Such a process had started - it needs to be given a chance.

Liverpool 50 years ago was deeply divided on Catholic/Protestant lines - but no longer. Hopefully we could come back in 50 years time and say the same about Belfast.

PS - Cornish is dead, I'm afraid. It has been revived but has neverthless not been used as a usual medium of communication in Cornwall for at least 200 years. Sure, people speak it - but people also speak Ancient Greek, Latin and.... err.... Klingon and Elvish!

Thats a beautiful speach.
Now you want to tell me were i mentioned anything about "ethnically cleansing the Unionists out of Northern Ireland"?

How the hell can you compare Ireland to Americia, or Liverpool to Belfast. The fact that you say the history that has caused thousands to die is "hardly relevant" only proves your ignorance.

The Irish have only been in the N.Ireland for 2000 yrs? What? Maybe you should familiarise yourself with Irish history before you start throwing this crap out about me.

Did you even read my post, or why i posted it before you went into your grand speech on how I was some sort psycho with only blood on his mind. If you had you would know that i said exactly the same thing as your "Final thought" line at the bottom of your post.

PS. This is just me defending myself, please don't anyone drag this sh*t on, and ruin a perfectly good thread.

Originally posted by Kafka2
I'm always puzzled why Celtic culture gets celebrated so much in Eire, while Viking culture doesn't. The Viking years were just as colourful, if not more so.

Celtic culture is that old in Ireland it is considered Irish culture. The vikings never stayed long enough to have any real cultural impact. They were mostly absorbed into Gealic/Celtic culture.

They did bring us towns though.

:viking:

Originally posted by Kafka2
I'm always puzzled why Celtic culture gets celebrated so much in Eire, while Viking culture doesn't. The Viking years were just as colourful, if not more so.

Probably because Viking culture is non-aboriginal. Now obviously neither is 'Celtic' culture but the native Irish adopted that same culture - actually adopted btw, ethnically the Irish have more in common with the Welsh and the Basques then any other people, which hints that the actual number of ethnic Celts, if such they can be called was never high in Ireland. Anyway the Irish turned a generic celticism into a unique and in it's own way vibrant culture that was later itself to be transported to Scotland. The Vikings achieved nothing similar. Their affect on language was mild, on popular culture and literary tradtion non existent. Doubtless the Hiberno-Norse were just as colourful, but for some reason they just didn't stick.

Do chuid