The Celts of Iberia

Status
Not open for further replies.
Taranis said:
How do you explain tribal names that have readily identifiable Celtic etymologies in Gallaecia?.
Click to expand...

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...

Taranis said:
Also, I find you're making too much of a conjecture here: they're not Celts, so must be pre-Indo-Europeans.
Click to expand...

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.

Taranis said:
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.
Click to expand...

Regarding my posts-history, you know my answer.


Taranis said:
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geneticist (not a linguist, and his ideas on the languages of Britain just make every linguist facepalm), he also uses outdated data (for example the idea that R1b originated in the LGM on the Iberian penninsula).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.
Click to expand...

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).
 
Grizzly said:
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...
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is circular reasoning. And again, you're ignoring the Celtiberian and Lusitanian inscriptions.

Regarding my posts-history, you know my answer.
Click to expand...

Are you saying the Lusitanians didn't exist?! :petrified:

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

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).
Click to expand...

Prettymuch.
 
Taranis said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.


Taranis said:
Sorry, but that is circular reasoning. And again, you're ignoring the Celtiberian and Lusitanian inscriptions..
Click to expand...

Circular ? Just logic and academically proved. For the inscriptions, I have already answered several times.

Taranis said:
Are you saying the Lusitanians didn't exist?!...What Strabo and Ptolemy mention on Iberia didn't exist?! :petrified: :petrified:
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Grizzly said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...

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).
 
Taranis said:
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).
Click to expand...

Thank you for making the facts most clear. Well done.
 
http://historiayarqueologia.wordpre...io-del-metal-que-reunira-a-unas-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
 
Wilhelm said:
Few topnyms ? After France and Great Britain, Iberia holds the most celitc topnyimia.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Grey Moss said:
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.
Click to expand...

Your "strong evidences" are just "traces", nothing else. And you know it.
 
Belo said:
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.
Click to expand...

In fact, we are more civilized. We use guillotines...
 
Taranis said:
By your logic, Aremorica of antiquity probably spoke Breton, and Gallia Belgica spoke Flemish, and Germania Magna up to the Elbe spoke Slavic.
Click to expand...

I don't see why. Iberian was the dominant language of Iberia and SW France, that's all.


Taranis said:
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.
Click to expand...

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...


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

See the thread "Italo-Celtic expansion".

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?25338-The-Italo-Celtic-expansion/page3


Taranis said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have never said the contrary. I just say that if it should be indo-european, it was probably a minority in the region.


Taranis said:
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).
Click to expand...

It's wrong and you know it. I have given you a link about the "basque" toponyms in Northern Portugal and Spain.
 
Well, the gypsies of Europe and other parts of the world speak the Roma language is an Indo-European origin, Are Celtic or Germanic?
 
Carlitos said:
Well, the gypsies of Europe and other parts of the world speak the Roma language is an Indo-European origin, Are Celtic or Germanic?
Click to expand...

As I know, they used to speak an indo-european language closed to the actual northern indian dialects. Nowadays, they speak generally the language of the country where they live.
 
Grizzly said:
As I know, they used to speak an indo-european language closed to the actual northern indian dialects. Nowadays, they speak generally the language of the country where they live.
Click to expand...


They use the language of the country where many still live and speak their Gypsy language of Indo-European.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 1018195 times.

Back
Top