Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 55 of 63 FirstFirst ... 5455354555657 ... LastLast
Results 1,351 to 1,375 of 1555

Thread: The Celts of Iberia

  1. #1351
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany





    Veo. Esta es, probablemente, muy mal traducido.. En cualquier caso, la presencia de los celtas de habla en la Península Ibérica en la antigüedad es una realidad. En particular, en la parte alta del Ebro y zonas altas del río Duero.

  2. #1352
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    No hay de qué!

    Sin embargo, la península ibérica antigua era un lugar de gran diversidad. En mi opinión, la península ibérica antigua se divide en una parte que habla indo-europeos y una parte que no lo hicieron. Las personas que eran indoeuropeos fueron: celtíberos, galaicos, lusitanos. Las personas que no eran indoeuropeos: vascos, iberos, tartesios. Los celtas eran, en mi opinión, no el primero indoeuropeos llegar la península Ibérica. De lo contrario, no puede explicar cómo el oeste de la península Ibérica se convirtió en ser tan a fondo indo-europeizado. Los lusitanos fueron los primeros. En Gallaecia, lusitano se habló en primer lugar, pero la gente vino a hablar celta más tarde.

  3. #1353
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Belo View Post
    Entre los investigadores espaÑoles existe gran controversia sobre este asunto,pero lo que esta claro es que el fondo genÉtico y cultural de la mayorÍa de los ibÉricos es predominantemente indoeuropeo...
    Las personas se han quejado de que es imposible que una "isla" de oradores célticas de existir rodeado de gente no-celta. Sin embargo, si nos fijamos en el mapa moderno de Europa, tenemos islas de hablantes de las eslavas, romances (rumano) y urálicas (húngaro), rodeada por otros pueblos. También contamos con los anglosajones que emigraron a Gran Bretaña. En la península ibérica antigua, que no saben realmente lo que ocurrió en los siglos anteriores a los romanos llegaron. Tenemos algunas pistas con Gallaecia (que era lusitano antes). Pero no veo un problema como este "Isla de los oradores celta" podría haberse formado. Simplemente no sé cómo sucedió.

  4. #1354
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Grizzly, the P/Q-split is technically an oversimplification of the interrelationship of the Celtic languages. What it means is that the P-Celtic languages have the mutation of "Q" (or "Kw") to "P". To give some examples... it's clear that "Q" is the original, more archaic state and "P" is the derived state..
    I have already answer you. Nothing in your examples proves that the Q should be more archaic than the P one, because of regular internal shifts. I have cited you somes examples in French, but there are many in other languages.

    BTW, it does change nothing in my main purpose : I don't contest that the "Celtiberian" inscriptions belong to a Celtic language, I contest that the majority of the population spoke this language.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    I find the idea that the Celtiberians were recent immigrants, and that the Celtiberian language was only spoken by a small elite utterly unholdable, at least for the upper Ebro river area where the Celtiberian inscriptions have abundantly been found.
    Incriptions prove nothing. See latin texts in Medieval Europe. I didn't make a deep research, but I've read that Celtic inscriptions exist too in non-celtic regions. I don't speak about the Celtic toponyms, inscriptions or archaeological material in SW France (altars, objects...). We must admit that due to the very thin Celtic heritage in Iberia (no oppida, no chariots, few toponyms, strong pre-indo-european features...), Celtic culture stopped near the Garonne. This is what the scribes of Cesar constated, idem for many antic authors (they call Iberians living in th land of Celts "Celtiberians", like people living in France will be called "Franks" and later "French", while Frankish language was minority.
    Last edited by Grizzly; 15-04-11 at 21:30. Reason: Nîmes and Provence are controversial

  5. #1355
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post

    It stands to reason that Celtiberian was spoken on the Iberian penninsula before the iron age.
    No, simply because the Castro culture does not belong to the Celtic oppida area.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    - The linguistic situation on the British Isles is somewhat more drastic and problematic than the Iberian penninsula because of the complete absence of non-IE languages. This, in my opinion, speaks also in favour of an early Celticzation of Britain.
    The situation of the BI is problematic. Picts are candidates for the "non-IE languages", but it is controversial. Even the shift language in late Antic times is controversial (we know that the Saxons were probably present in the island under the Roman rule, but was this island already "English" speaking or not ?...).

  6. #1356
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by spongetaro View Post
    I'm thinking of a Lusitanian substratum in Gaulish that could explain the nasal vowels in both Portuguese and French
    Nasal vowels exist in Slavic languages too (Polish and Czech I think), and in some German dialects (especially western ones). I'm not sure, but western english dialects (region of Liverpool) might have nasal vowels too. Phonetics take their root in probably in very ancient times.

  7. #1357
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Regulus View Post
    Grizzly, this has nothing to do with the thread, but isn't your avatar that of a Black Bear?
    A Grizzly is a sort of subspecies of Brown Bear. It is quite different.
    It is right. I choose my picture quickly.

  8. #1358
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    No, simply because the Castro culture does not belong to the Celtic oppida area.
    Archaeological affiliation and linguistic affiliation isn't mutually exclusive. For instance, the Urnfield Culture clearly wasn't ethnically homogenous either as it expanded clearly into Iberian-speaking areas (Catalonia - the Iberians are also well-known later on to have practiced cremation). Given how the Hallstatt and Golasecca Cultures evolved from Urnfield, it stands to reason that the Urnfield Culture was predominantly (P-)Celtic, but evidently not exclusively so.

    The situation of the BI is problematic. Picts are candidates for the "non-IE languages", but it is controversial. Even the shift language in late Antic times is controversial (we know that the Saxons were probably present in the island under the Roman rule, but was this island already "English" speaking or not ?...).
    Pictish, in my opinion, was a P-Celtic language akin to Gaulish and Brythonic. This is primarily based on onomastic evidence: most Pict The idea that Pictish was a non-IE language solely comes from purportedly "unreadable" Ogham inscriptions from Scotland, such as the Lunnasting stone. Given how easy it is to write gibberish with the Ogham script, I find it not very plausible to claim that these inscriptions represent a non-IE language.

    Also, you have to consider that the term "Picts" is an exonym - they probably weren't a homogenous group.

    Regarding the Saxons, are you arguing Oppenheimer's ideas?!?

  9. #1359
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Archaeological affiliation and linguistic affiliation isn't mutually exclusive.
    Yes, I'm among the first to defend this idea.
    But strongholds are often created by warring aristocraties. So, if academic sources have clearly proved that this archaeological material does not belong to the Celts (ie they have been created by pre-indo-european aristocraties), it closes the loop : it would mean that Celts were not even an aristocracy in those regions, but just minorities. Which is an "extremist" opinion. If it is not an aristocracy which has created them (it would be surprising), it means that the main make-up of the population was non-celtic...


    For the Picts, I have not knowledge enough to answer. And for the Saxons, I have read it in several sources, and indeed, apparently, Oppenheimer supports this theory. I didn't say that I agree anyway. The fact is that it remains a mystery.

  10. #1360
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    Yes, I'm among the first to defend this idea.
    But strongholds are often created by warring aristocraties. So, if academic sources have clearly proved that this archaeological material does not belong to the Celts (ie they have been created by pre-indo-european aristocraties), it closes the loop : it would mean that Celts were not even an aristocracy in those regions, but just minorities. Which is an "extremist" opinion. If it is not an aristocracy which has created them (it would be surprising), it means that the main make-up of the population was non-celtic...
    How do you explain tribal names that have readily identifiable Celtic etymologies in Gallaecia?

    Also, I find you're making too much of a conjecture here: they're not Celts, so must be pre-Indo-Europeans. What about the Lusitanians? A lot of Gallaecian tribal names, while non-conformous with Celtic etymologies, are actually readily identifiable as Indo-European and conformous with Lusitanian sound laws.

    For the Picts, I have not knowledge enough to answer. And for the Saxons, I have read it in several sources, and indeed, apparently, Oppenheimer supports this theory. I didn't say that I agree anyway. The fact is that it remains a mystery.
    The main beef I have with Oppenheimer, he's a geneticist (not a linguist, and his ideas on the languages of Britain just make every linguist facepalm), he also uses outdated data (for example the idea that R1b originated in the LGM on the Iberian penninsula). Also, by his ideas he seems to be affiliated with British Nationalist ideas, which I find, mildly put, disgusting.

    In any case, I would argue this: the place names in Roman Britain have clearly identifiable Celtic etymologies, as is the case across the Channel in Gallia Belgica. We also know that the 8th century Anglo-Saxon language was mutually intelligible with the Old Saxon language spoken in northern Germany. In my opinion, it's very possible that there were Saxon mercenaries in the late Roman period in Britain, but large-scale settlement by the Anglo-Saxons didn't occur until after the Roman withdrawal from Britain.

  11. #1361
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    How do you explain tribal names that have readily identifiable Celtic etymologies in Gallaecia?.
    You give too much credit to the "names" or the "onomastics". Normandy is full of Scandinavian onomastics through the toponymy. English surnames are full of French roots. French surnames are fool of Frankish roots...

    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Also, I find you're making too much of a conjecture here: they're not Celts, so must be pre-Indo-Europeans.
    Just because there is no other solution (for Southern Europe). If they are not Celts, they are pre-indo-european, because the Celts are academically recognized to be the first indo-europeans. The contact between Celts and pre-indo-europeans can be followed in Southern France. After this, you can guess a lot of things in the term "pre-indo-european". For me, it means "neolithic" or something like this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    What about the Lusitanians? A lot of Gallaecian tribal names, while non-conformous with Celtic etymologies, are actually readily identifiable as Indo-European and conformous with Lusitanian sound laws.
    Regarding my posts-history, you know my answer.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    The main beef I have with Oppenheimer, he's a geneticist (not a linguist, and his ideas on the languages of Britain just make every linguist facepalm), he also uses outdated data (for example the idea that R1b originated in the LGM on the Iberian penninsula). Also, by his ideas he seems to be affiliated with British Nationalist ideas, which I find, mildly put, disgusting.
    I don't know him very much, and I beware the scientists who use simple (too simple) genetic features to classify peoples. His theory about the continuum Belgium-England is interesting anyway, but not new. Somewhat "immobilist" would I say (it doesn't take in count the fact that in ancient times, peoples were not numerous, and the languages-border could shift more quickly than today).

  12. #1362
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    You give too much credit to the "names" or the "onomastics". Normandy is full of Scandinavian onomastics through the toponymy. English surnames are full of French roots. French surnames are fool of Frankish roots...
    Onomastic isn't tribal names alone. It's the combined sum of personal names, place names and deity names. If we apply that to modern French or English names, we will still come to the right conclusions about underlying influences.

    Just because there is no other solution (for Southern Europe). If they are not Celts, they are pre-indo-european, because the Celts are academically recognized to be the first indo-europeans. The contact between Celts and pre-indo-europeans can be followed in Southern France. After this, you can guess a lot of things in the term "pre-indo-european". For me, it means "neolithic" or something like this.
    Sorry, but that is circular reasoning. And again, you're ignoring the Celtiberian and Lusitanian inscriptions.

    Regarding my posts-history, you know my answer.
    Are you saying the Lusitanians didn't exist?!

    What Strabo and Ptolemy mention on Iberia didn't exist?!

    You're extremely selective and discard A LOT of evidence if you think that.

    I don't know him very much, and I beware the scientists who use simple (too simple) genetic features to classify peoples. His theory about the continuum Belgium-England is interesting anyway, but not new. Somewhat "immobilist" would I say (it doesn't take in count the fact that in ancient times, peoples were not numerous, and the languages-border could shift more quickly than today).
    Prettymuch.

  13. #1363
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Onomastic isn't tribal names alone. It's the combined sum of personal names, place names and deity names. If we apply that to modern French or English names, we will still come to the right conclusions about underlying influences.
    It does change few things in my examples. The fact is that you can speak a language and wear a name of a different language, or live in a village which wears a name of a different language.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Sorry, but that is circular reasoning. And again, you're ignoring the Celtiberian and Lusitanian inscriptions..
    Circular ? Just logic and academically proved. For the inscriptions, I have already answered several times.

    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Are you saying the Lusitanians didn't exist?!...What Strabo and Ptolemy mention on Iberia didn't exist?!
    No, I don't know which linguistic group their inscriptions belong. I just say that for me, Lusitanians are Iberians or something similar, with maybe a Celtic aristocracy or minorities.

  14. #1364
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-09
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,661
    Points
    15,281
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,281, Level: 37
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 369
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-S26
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Celtiberians
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    We must admit that due to the very thin Celtic heritage in Iberia (no oppida, no chariots, few toponyms, strong pre-indo-european features...),
    No oppida ? Damn, you must be living in another dimension, because in Iberia there are more than 100 oppidas :

    http://revistas.ucm.es/ghi/11316993/...595120209A.PDF


    Few topnyms ? After France and Great Britain, Iberia holds the most celitc topnyimia.

  15. #1365
    Marquis Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Carlitos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-10
    Location
    Occident.
    Posts
    857
    Points
    7,499
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,499, Level: 25
    Level completed: 90%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b1a3 V22+
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c

    Ethnic group
    Ethnic group of those who are going to die.
    Country: Spain



    Suddenly this has taken a very nasty climate, who the hell wants to look like anyone?, but four stooges of dubious political ideology, the Spanish did not want anyone to physically resemble the rest of central or northern Europe and less to be too fat or big men in bone mass, physical deterioration is too early if you have these characteristics, usually in the Nordic or Germanic from 20 years of age and physical deterioration begins great, but now are Spanish-looking 50-year young, something quite impossible in Northern Europe.

    In Europe some are Indo-Europeans and other African-European, and some both, others none.

    Reading the last page of this thread, I have real human fat gagging, I am disgusted.

  16. #1366
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Cambrius (The Red)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    27-06-09
    Posts
    2,640
    Points
    12,808
    Level
    34
    Points: 12,808, Level: 34
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 542
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b (RL-21*)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3

    Ethnic group
    Gallaecian Celtic
    Country: USA - Ohio



    Obviously this guy Grizzly is operating from a world that doesn't recognize what is factual. Very, very strange.

  17. #1367
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Cambrius (The Red)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    27-06-09
    Posts
    2,640
    Points
    12,808
    Level
    34
    Points: 12,808, Level: 34
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 542
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b (RL-21*)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3

    Ethnic group
    Gallaecian Celtic
    Country: USA - Ohio



    Grizzly, why do you ignore reality? Are you so hateful of Iberians that you would dismiss such incredibly strong evidence of Celtic culture in Spain and Portugal. You are way, way against the grain and, frankly, make no sense.

  18. #1368
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    It does change few things in my examples. The fact is that you can speak a language and wear a name of a different language, or live in a village which wears a name of a different language.
    By your logic, Aremorica of antiquity probably spoke Breton, and Gallia Belgica spoke Flemish, and Germania Magna up to the Elbe spoke Slavic. If you say you discard all onomastic evidence (not just onomastic evidence but ALSO inscriptions) because you say it is completely useless and it tells us nothing about the language of a people, you can make just about any claim what language they spoke, how silly and ridiculous it may be.

    Occam's razor does not agree with you, however.

    Circular ? Just logic and academically proved. For the inscriptions, I have already answered several times.
    What is "academically proved"? And you haven't answered it. You just skip things you do not seem to like.

    No, I don't know which linguistic group their inscriptions belong. I just say that for me, Lusitanians are Iberians or something similar, with maybe a Celtic aristocracy or minorities.
    Every scholar agrees that the Lusitanian language was an Indo-European language (cognates are readily identifiable in other IE languages), and scholars are arguing wether it was a Celtic language or a separate Indo-European language nonetheless closely related with it. I'm in favour of the latter - in fact if the Lusitanians were an earlier wave of Indo-Europeans onto the Iberian penninsula this would explain the absence of non-IE languages in the northwest of the penninsula.

    There is no evidence for the Iberian language (no inscriptions, and not even onomastic evidence, that is) outside of the approximate area spanning from eastern Aragon, Catalonia and the Roussillon in the north towards Murcia and eastern Andalusia in the south (up to about the Guadalquivir river).

  19. #1369
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Cambrius (The Red)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    27-06-09
    Posts
    2,640
    Points
    12,808
    Level
    34
    Points: 12,808, Level: 34
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 542
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b (RL-21*)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3

    Ethnic group
    Gallaecian Celtic
    Country: USA - Ohio



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    By your logic, Aremorica of antiquity probably spoke Breton, and Gallia Belgica spoke Flemish, and Germania Magna up to the Elbe spoke Slavic. If you say you discard all onomastic evidence (not just onomastic evidence but ALSO inscriptions) because you say it is completely useless and it tells us nothing about the language of a people, you can make just about any claim what language they spoke, how silly and ridiculous it may be.

    Occam's razor does not agree with you, however.



    What is "academically proved"? And you haven't answered it. You just skip things you do not seem to like.



    Every scholar agrees that the Lusitanian language was an Indo-European language (cognates are readily identifiable in other IE languages), and scholars are arguing wether it was a Celtic language or a separate Indo-European language nonetheless closely related with it. I'm in favour of the latter - in fact if the Lusitanians were an earlier wave of Indo-Europeans onto the Iberian penninsula this would explain the absence of non-IE languages in the northwest of the penninsula.

    There is no evidence for the Iberian language (no inscriptions, and not even onomastic evidence, that is) outside of the approximate area spanning from eastern Aragon, Catalonia and the Roussillon in the north towards Murcia and eastern Andalusia in the south (up to about the Guadalquivir river).
    Thank you for making the facts most clear. Well done.

  20. #1370
    Marquis Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Carlitos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-10
    Location
    Occident.
    Posts
    857
    Points
    7,499
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,499, Level: 25
    Level completed: 90%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b1a3 V22+
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c

    Ethnic group
    Ethnic group of those who are going to die.
    Country: Spain



    http://historiayarqueologia.wordpres...-300-personas/



    Huelva host the First International Congress Tartesos 'The metal emporium', bringing together about 300 people.

    Experts in the field of national and international, from the United States, England, Greece, Cyprus, Italy and France will provide a broad view of this culture.


    MORE EVENT DETAILS

    The target audience of the conference is composed of professors, teachers and academics with an interest in history, and specifically in Tartessian civilization. However, also be reported to local councils to encourage registration of technicians.

    Finally, the congress circulated among students of humanities at all Spanish and European universities, preferably Mediterranean. Special will also be disseminated among the media, being invited three or four foreign journalists.

    The theme of the panels will be: 'imagined political models and their territorial borders',' Structure of a complex society ',' Construction of Tartesos identity ',' Tarshish in the Mediterranean: sync with the great civilizations', 'Metal Production and commercial relations 'and' Landscapes Tartéside: Habitat, Necropolis, Beliefs. "

    The conference will claim Tartesos in the collective imagination through history, humanity and their own historical and archaeological remains in order to promote social projection setting "a mark that lasts and highlights the international nature of the event to give the desired visibility and dissemination "and is situated to the metal as the thread of Congress, especially copper. The organizing committee consists of the University of Huelva, Tierra Creative, Fundación Caja Rural del Sur and Atlantic Copper

  21. #1371
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Wilhelm View Post
    No oppida ? Damn, you must be living in another dimension, because in Iberia there are more than 100 oppidas
    I have already answered you. Just stop your propaganda. The castro culture is not recognized as Celtic.

    http://www.oppida.org/index-en.html

  22. #1372
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Wilhelm View Post
    Few topnyms ? After France and Great Britain, Iberia holds the most celitc topnyimia.
    Compared to the density of the Celtic toponyms in Britain or Gauls (diachronically of course), and compared to the pre-indo-european toponyms, very few thing.

  23. #1373
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Grey Moss View Post
    Obviously this guy Grizzly is operating from a world that doesn't recognize what is factual. Very, very strange.






    Grizzly, why do you ignore reality? Are you so hateful of Iberians that you would dismiss such incredibly strong evidence of Celtic culture in Spain and Portugal. You are way, way against the grain and, frankly, make no sense.


    Your "strong evidences" are just "traces", nothing else. And you know it.

  24. #1374
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Belo View Post
    Explanation of the drawing:here you can see a spanish that is being educated by friendly soldiers of the french republic,insisted that is celt.
    In fact, we are more civilized. We use guillotines...

  25. #1375
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-01-11
    Posts
    199


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    By your logic, Aremorica of antiquity probably spoke Breton, and Gallia Belgica spoke Flemish, and Germania Magna up to the Elbe spoke Slavic.
    I don't see why. Iberian was the dominant language of Iberia and SW France, that's all.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    If you say you discard all onomastic evidence (not just onomastic evidence but ALSO inscriptions) because you say it is completely useless and it tells us nothing about the language of a people, you can make just about any claim what language they spoke, how silly and ridiculous it may be.
    Don't make me say that I have never said. Onomastic is interesting to follow culture traces or influences. But it is not suffiscient to be concluding for establishing a map of cultures. If in several centuries, future people follow your onomastic obsessions, they will conclude that the Frankish language was dominant in France, that Scandinavian language was the dominant language in Normandy or Eastern Britain, that Hunnic culture was dominant in Central Europe...


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    What is "academically proved"? And you haven't answered it. You just skip things you do not seem to like.
    See the thread "Italo-Celtic expansion".

    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthr...xpansion/page3


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Every scholar agrees that the Lusitanian language was an Indo-European language (cognates are readily identifiable in other IE languages), and scholars are arguing wether it was a Celtic language or a separate Indo-European language nonetheless closely related with it.
    I have never said the contrary. I just say that if it should be indo-european, it was probably a minority in the region.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    There is no evidence for the Iberian language (no inscriptions, and not even onomastic evidence, that is) outside of the approximate area spanning from eastern Aragon, Catalonia and the Roussillon in the north towards Murcia and eastern Andalusia in the south (up to about the Guadalquivir river).
    It's wrong and you know it. I have given you a link about the "basque" toponyms in Northern Portugal and Spain.

Page 55 of 63 FirstFirst ... 5455354555657 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Celts and Haplogroup G/J
    By Alan in forum Y-DNA Haplogroups
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 14-03-18, 23:00
  2. Photographic file fenotípico of IBERIA.
    By Carlos in forum Anthropology & Ethnography
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-12-11, 02:01
  3. Ancient place names in Iberia
    By Taranis in forum Linguistics
    Replies: 226
    Last Post: 05-10-11, 02:01
  4. African mtDNA and Y-DNA in Iberia
    By Maciamo in forum DNA Testing & General Genetics
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 27-09-11, 03:56
  5. Do Celts still exist?
    By sparkey in forum European Culture & History
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 15-04-11, 21:45

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •