Celts or Gauls???

[newfangle]

It's not even worth discussing. Let's face it, are there even 24 civs that have made a big enough impression for firaxis to include in their games?

 

[kring]

I think we will have to wait for the game to come out to find out whether Celt or Gaul made the final cut.

Consider this, in the Fun Manual, the civ is listed as Britain. Yet, it is not listed that way in the game. This may well be the same with Celt/Gaul. Just like in the American Fun Manual, it says Prince when it became Regent Difficulty in the game.

 

[kIndal]

I dont agree that gauls are included in Civ3, I believe that must be Celts, but not Civ2 celts, they only represent British island ones, please spanish, French, Italian (and I beleve that in Turkey, I amnot sure) too are celts but they were forgotten in old civ.

Celts and celtiberians where very important tribes in preromanic iberia, in fact, there is still a big celt root in Cantabric regions as Galicia or Asturias, so is very unfair that are only represent a group.

It is the same if Germans are only represented by Prussian ones and not appears Bavarian, Franconian or Saxonian ones

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by calgacus


I don't know if you genuinely believe what you're saying or trying to wind people up. If you're serious, I think I should point out to you that just because one culture/nation is similar to another, bigger culture doesn't mean that this culture is part of it. It's like saying that because the mini is like a Rolls Royce that...it is a Rolls Royce. The collective word is car, and the collective word for the English, Scots and Irish (not any more perhaps) is British.Yes, the modern Scots and Irish have some similarities with the English, but so do the Americans - and you haven't called them English.

To say that that they achieved nothing without the English is nonsense. The Irish (as Celts) virtually saved Europe from an eternal dark age and the Celtic Church was able to make observations which contradicted those of Rome.

And the achievements of the Scots can be understood without particular reference to any other part of the British Isles. The fact that Scotland has very little confidence in itself is unfortunate and highly unjustified. So are your comments. The intellectual culture that sprouted in Scotland during the Enlightenment had nothing to do with England and the English never experienced any golden age of a similar scale. No cilization - bah!!! Burns, Baird, R.L.Stevenson Duns Scotus, Michael Scott, David Lyndsay, Robert Henryson, William Dunbar, John Buchan, James Hogg, the monumental Walter Scott, Thomas Carlyle, Francis Hutcheson, William Robertson, Adam Ferguson, James MacPherson (Ossian), Lord Kames, the legendary Adam Smith, the superlative David Hume, not to mention the scientists and inventors such as Alexander Graham Bell, James Watt, Kirkpatrick MacMillan, Alexander Fleming, James Clerk Maxwell, John Napier, Lord Kelvin and James Hutton. These are just a few. Without the Scots, there would be no social sciences, no Marxism (Scottish Enlightenmet historiography), no televsion, no telephone, no industrial revolution nor many other important things in the modern world. Or at any rate, these things would not have happened as quickly. If you still think the Scots did not achieve much or relied on England for civilization then read the the American historian Arthur Hermann's arguments in:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0609606352/qid=1022549909/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-1364777-0048660

Voltaire said at the height of the Enlightenment that "we all look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilization." He acknowledged what too many people (like you for instance) nowadays forget, Scotland was not only important in its own right as a civilization, it was one of the most important. Just because it never had a big empire like the Mongols or the Huns, doesn't lessen this.

Sorry to bore everyone with this long post, but this is the only way I could respond to someone who claimed so much and said so little.

Trying to wind people up? Of course not!

You give all those names, but I'm a college student and I've hardly heard of any of them. And what was all that garbage about cars and rolls royces?

OK, Hamlet thinks I don't give any arguments. Here are a few:

A - the scots, Irish, etc are all English because (1) they speak English and (2) they are too insignificant to make up for this (as the Americans do)

B - they are English because they were conquered by England (I count the Act of Union as conquest)

C - they are English because whatever civilization that the moderns have had has been English. David Hume, Adam Smith, Oscar Wilde, G.B. Shaw, Dylan Thomas, Andrew Barton Paterson, all part of English civilization. .

D- all these places are currently indistinguishable from the English, just like people in Manchester are, and so, like people in Manchester, they are English. There is nothing that culturally distinguishes them other than a pseudo-Celtic heritage which the rest of the English made up for them.

E - In North America, England normally means the same as Britain. Since there are more English speakers there than in Scotland, Wales, etc, THIS IS WHAT THE WORD MEANS- people give words their meanings through usage .

So, Hamlet, CurtSibling, Calgacus, etc, you have some arguments.
But, if you can't handle them, then just keep the insults coming. They only make YOU look bad.

 

[bobgote]

Parsifal doesn't understand anything of the UK at all, don't worry about him. He is a stereotypical american, so you probably can't explain it to him in one syllable words, either

Originally posted by Hamlet
Why exactly would you include Northern Ireland, yet not the rest of Ireland? Ireland was a part of The British state for a long time, and has only been independant for less than a century.

I think pompeynunn's point was that the Republic of Ireland has never really assimilated into a Great Britain kind of nation. But I guess it's all subjective really. I wouldn't want to call an Irish person english either. They'd get the boys onto me.

(EDIT) I thought i'd just add, that i put this post in, not noticing pages 2 + 3, but my point about parsifal is still valid.

And also, as an Australian, I resent being called part of England. They are a very important part of our heritage, as are Ireland and Scotland, but we have moved on since then. Soon we will be a republic too. I wouldn't want an English civ to come up with our city names. We have a short but distinguished history. Everyone knows the heroes of the World Wars were Australian well at least we know that anyway

And parsifal, if the english language defines the nationality, what do you think you're talking there? Sure it's destroyed by hideous accents and you say tomato wrong, but the underlying language is the same

 

[NY Hoya]

Did anyone bother to look at Parsifal's location before referring to him as a dumb American????

I don't know of many Americans who to refer to the Welsh, Irish and Scottish as English. Many of us have Irish or Scottish roots and would never make that mistake.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Parsifal

In North America, England normally means the same as Britain.

That is simply incorrect.

BRITANNICA
predominant constituent unit of the United Kingdom, occupying more than half the island of Great Britain. It is bounded on the north by Scotland; on the west by the Irish Sea, Wales, and the Atlantic Ocean; on the south by the English Channel; and on the east by the North Sea.

 

[Zachriel]

Here's a map of Great Britain:

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by Zachriel


That is simply incorrect.

BRITANNICA
predominant constituent unit of the United Kingdom, occupying more than half the island of Great Britain. It is bounded on the north by Scotland; on the west by the Irish Sea, Wales, and the Atlantic Ocean; on the south by the English Channel; and on the east by the North Sea.

Your 2 posts completely miss the plot. Put down your book and read what I said. I was talking about the word "England" as in common usage, not the meaning imposed upon it by a book!

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by Parsifal



Your 2 posts completely miss the plot. Put down your book and read what I said. I was talking about the word "England" as in common usage, not the meaning imposed upon it by a book!

Ah yes, books are bad.
Let us put down these books of fact and listen to your gibberish
based on your preconceptions...
Sorry, Parse, but you are losing this battle...

England is seperate from the other 3 nations in the UK.
What part of this sentence do you not understand?

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by NY Hoya
Did anyone bother to look at Parsifal's location before referring to him as a dumb American????

I don't know of many Americans who to refer to the Welsh, Irish and Scottish as English. Many of us have Irish or Scottish roots and would never make that mistake.

I know he is from Winnipeg,
I wouldn't insult you by saying this man hailed from the USA!

What kind of college is he going to?
State College for the Misinformed?

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by CurtSibling


Ah yes, books are bad.
Let us put down these books of fact and listen to your gibberish
based on your preconceptions...
Sorry, Parse, but you are losing this battle...

England is seperate from the other 3 nations in the UK.
What part of this sentence do you not understand?

hah, IRONY

When once I was accused of not responding to arguments, thusly you do likewise!

CurtSibling, your arguments are the poorest of all. I've understood what you've said and rejected it. It is obvious that YOU do not understand THIS.
Perhaps you are not used to receiving such a thorough discursive thrashing , although I doubt it is for want of opportunity.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Parsifal

Your 2 posts completely miss the plot. Put down your book and read what I said. I was talking about the word "England" as in common usage, not the meaning imposed upon it by a book!

Common useage is that England refers to the Southern part of the island of Great Britain.

Website: Where in the world is England?
http://englishculture.allinfoabout.com/features/where-is-england.html

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by CurtSibling
I know he is from Winnipeg,
I wouldn't insult you by saying this man hailed from the USA!

What kind of college is he going to?
State College for the Misinformed?

One would hope that such a college would fix the misinformation...

I wasn't referring to you, Curt. Others referred to him as a "stereotypical American".

The bottom line is that I want my Celtic civ

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by Parsifal


hah, IRONY

When once I was accused of not responding to arguments, thusly you do likewise!

CurtSibling, your arguments are the poorest of all. I've understood what you've said and rejected it. It is obvious that YOU do not understand THIS.
Perhaps you are not used to receiving such a thorough discursive thrashing , although I doubt it is for want of opportunity.

Parsewipe,
Save your victory cheers for when you actually win an argument.
The day I take a drubbing from likes of you is a long way off.
The fact that you resort to large capital red letters is a sign
That you know your argument is flawed and actually non-existent.
It's like saying Canada is part of the USA.

Give this nonsense up!

There is no argument, you silly man.
I am stating facts. Scotland is not England.
Many people from the UK have totally disagreed with you,
They don't need anything other than an atlas to back up the argument.

The geopolitical dribble you spew about Scotland,
Wales and Ireland having no culture is also very stupid.
And to back up an already shaky grasp on reality,
You proceed to mock other posters for quoting from books!

Then, when given a list of luminaries from Scotland and the UK at large,
You arrogantly write is off as garbage and reject it,
That's like rejecting WW2 ever happened, you can't write-off history.

Pray tell, have you some knowledge of the ancients that proves
The English actually lived in Scotland since time-immemorial,
Rather than the Picts?
England’s culture is a product of Roman, Norman and Saxon incursions.
To name a few influences, Like England and the other union members,
We in Scotland have always had a strong individual culture.
Even my fellow UK posters have rejected your ill-educated opinions utterly.
You know little about the UK, which is obvious.

You talk complete tripe, and call yourself a student,
Your lack of tact and childish opinions that are rooted in complete
Fancy make you a laughing stock of this forum.

I get the impression you are some teenager with minimal knowledge of
anything beyond your town, And if you are actually a grown adult,
then hang your head in shame.


Kindly go away and come back when you can say something rational.

 

[Parsifal]

Originally posted by CurtSibling


Parsewipe,
Save your victory cheers for when you actually win an argument.
The day I take a drubbing from likes of you is a long way off.
The fact that you resort to large capital red letters is a sign
That you know your argument is flawed and actually non-existent.
It's like saying Canada is part of the USA.

Give this nonsense up!

There is no argument, you silly man.
I am stating facts. Scotland is not England.
Many people from the UK have totally disagreed with you,
They don't need anything other than an atlas to back up the argument.

The geopolitical dribble you spew about Scotland,
Wales and Ireland having no culture is also very stupid.
And to back up an already shaky grasp on reality,
You proceed to mock other posters for quoting from books!

Then, when given a list of luminaries from Scotland and the UK at large,
You arrogantly write is off as garbage and reject it,
That's like rejecting WW2 ever happened, you can't write-off history.

Pray tell, have you some knowledge of the ancients that proves
The English actually lived in Scotland since time-immemorial,
Rather than the Picts?
England’s culture is a product of Roman, Norman and Saxon incursions.
To name a few influences, Like England and the other union members,
We in Scotland have always had a strong individual culture.
Even my fellow UK posters have rejected your ill-educated opinions utterly.
You know little about the UK, which is obvious.

You talk complete tripe, and call yourself a student,
Your lack of tact and childish opinions that are rooted in complete
Fancy make you a laughing stock of this forum.

I get the impression you are some teenager with minimal knowledge of
anything beyond your town, And if you are actually a grown adult,
then hang your head in shame.


Kindly go away and come back when you can say something rational.

"Parsewipe". You know I'm beginning to develop a bit of affection for you in your simplicity. Most of what you said has no relevance to the arguments I outlined.
The USA and Canada are not at issue here, and if you think there is an analogy you should point out why instead of just stating that there is one.

You say that "There is no argument, you silly man.
I am stating facts. Scotland is not England.
Many people from the UK have totally disagreed with you,
They don't need anything other than an atlas to back up the argument."

This seems to sum up your simplicity as a thinker. You have totally missed the point once again. Whether or not the "English actually lived in Scotland since time-immemorial" is totally irrelevant, since I was talking about the present and the recent past.

The only other things you do in the last post is repeat your unmaitainable contention that Scotland is not part of England, and then back it up with childish arguments from authority like "Many people from the UK have totally disagreed with you" instead of dealing with my arguments strait on.; and you have continued to throw baseless insults at me with are actually contradicted in my various threads.

You've done everything I said you would, CurtSibling. You've thrown more baseless insults at me, you haven't dealt with my arguments, even though they that were requested, and everything else you've said demonstrates you're not able to deal with your clear inferiority as a debater by any means other than insults. Being English or from the UK is not enough CurtSibling. You're clearly not good enough to deal with me, so why don't you, in your own words, "Kindly go away and come back when you can say something rational."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet another whipping for CurtSibling

 

[Pangur Bán]

OK Parsifal, you gave CurtSibling a whipping.. now give it up will you?

Your argument falls because the Scots and the English are DIFFERENT branches of a larger civ rather than the Scots, etc being part of the English civ. You're right that language is important in determining nationality, I myself am always arguing this, but only because of the cultural consequnces. In the case of Scotland, a separate kingdom, civic society and intelligensia prevented the Scots becoming truly English after they began speaking English. They fashioned a unique identity which did not depend on Gaelic culture, after all the version of Old English spoken in Scotland was not originally the same as England's. This is not the case in Ireland and Wales, but it makes Scotland an exception.

I fear though that your sentiments about Anglisization may apply nowadays, as Scottishness as a unique culture disappears in the face of the English mass media and globilization. It's not true now, but your picture of Britain may be becoming true, and Scottishness may be reduced to nothing more than a mere identity or a dead culture.

However, if you want to continue this, please open another thread for the topic, because this one is supposed to be about fireaxis' decision (or rumoured decision) to have named the a new civ for the XP the Gauls instead of the Celts.






EDIT: I think I should point out, since nobody else has, that the Parsifal-Hamlet/Curt/etc. debate is also taking place in the Off Topic forum, starting below:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23363&pagenumber=2

I do so because there seems be to lots of cross overs.

 

[bobgote]

Just thought I'd clear up my previous statements: I did not read parsifal's location, my assumption of Americanism was based on parsifal's responses, here and on other forums. I understand my mistake and repent profusively to any offended (except parsifal) hopefully that clears the whole mess up....

Ok, and also to post my reply to the England thing. It is my understanding that the UK involves more than one country (not sure of all involved) but England is just the one and has always been perceived as such, does not include scotland or ireland.

And also calcagus has a point, we are right off on a tangent here, this thread could be declared closed, but one final piece, i would have thought the celts would be the civ named because it is more seperate geographically. There's a whole bunch from europe, but only the English from that delightfully sunny northern isle

let's try to get back on the topic, if anything else needs to be said, k

 

[CurtSibling]

So, I got a whipping from Parsifal?
I was unaware of this!
I apologise for any rude remarks, as that is uncalled for.

But please, do not delude yourself,
You say a few dumb statements, and then march off claiming victory.
No, you have proven or won anything...
Had I admitted you were right, and said 'Yes, Scotland is English'
You would have won...alas, you are far from this conclusion.

I should say that there is no argument.
Only facts, and you are not seeing the obvious.

Scotland has a separate culture, but does share the language.
But the English language owes as much to Celt influence as it
Does Scandinavian, Latin, Norman and Saxon words.

If you are a student, Parsifal, go and study.
I can only assume you are on this thread to boost your ego
With this email version of WWF smack down.
But your debate is flawed at the source, Ask any poster who
Has seen a map and you will see that Scotland and England are
Two separate countries, joined in union, but with different cultures.

Unless you mean some different thing, language perhaps?
I can say while Scotland, England and even the USA share various traits,
There are definite cultural differences that you can't deny.

I'm sorry, but you must concede this.

It is not my goal in this debate to win or beat you,
I'm just astounded at the fact that you cannot see that as
A native of the damn country, you think you know more than me.
I would not presume to tell you about your own nation,
You just don't really understand the UK.
So let's just move on.

You have your view, which is in error.
I have mine, I have fact on my side.
It's just that you have to be there to know the real deal.

I stand by my statements. And take back any insults.

But you must really do something about your childishness.
Saying stuff like 'You are not good enough to deal with me'

That makes you look silly.

 

[PCHighway]

Originally posted by bobgote
Just thought I'd clear up my previous statements: I did not read parsifal's location, my assumption of Americanism was based on parsifal's responses, here and on other forums. I understand my mistake and repent profusively to any offended (except parsifal) hopefully that clears the whole mess up....

It does and im glad you recognize your error, but don't start saying 'You Canadians are to thick to string two words together'
I have great respect. Correction AMERICANS-CANADIANS Have great respect for the scottish\Irish and in general celtic civs, and while it sometimes leads to racial stereo typing against the english, it shouldnt be taken seriously.

So, I got a whipping from Parsifal?
I was unaware of this!

So was I friend.

Parsifal, do you consider the constant Quebec separatist movement just a bad joke?
Or how about Indian sub-continent? for centuries, those countries at the top, Pakistan and Bangledesh, were considered parts of India. Just like Scotland is 'part of' England. They obviously felt it necessary to split away in 1948. Just because Scotland and England are now one country doesn't mean cultures don't coexist.