Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
South Poland and Slovakia too.I don't think it's very justifiable (based on archaeology, ancient documents, genetics and so on) to color the entire territory of Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria and Serbia. Granted that Celtic peoples did invade and settle those regions, but they were a small minority and only really made a lasting impact as the Galatians in Turkey, who only occupied a small part of that country's territory.
Also, in Italy the strong Celtic settlement and acculturation didn't go much further than North Italy, mostly Padania, while the rest was peopled by unrelated peoples (Etruscans) or only "cousins" of them, like the Italics and possibly the Sicels, Ligurians (probably Para-Celtic) and Messapians. There isn't also a lot of Celtic presence in Sweden and Denmark, those were the core of Germanic peoples.
On the other hand, I am not really sure, but I think there was Celtic settlement in Poland and Slovakia, wasn't there?
I'd swear that is the line of Cisalpine Gaul...
I wasn't objecting to the content of Ygorcs thread, merely trying to clarify it. He's a good poster, but I don't think anyone else here has spent most of his live studying Italian history and pre-history.
No problem, Angela. I understood your aim. I thought your two posts were an excellent complement and clarification to what I meant in my post. As you say, yes, the fact that Ligurians were often called Celto-Ligurians, and the few inscriptions in Ligurian as well, do indicate that they were at least a related people. A priori I think they were just the resisting remnants of the first Proto-Celtic expansions before the linguistic and cultural "homogeneization" that the Hallstatt and especially the La Tène expansion probably triggered in Western/Central Europe.
As for your clarification about the stricter meaning of "Padania" (and its smaller, more specific territory), I confess that when I wrote my message I was under the influence of that "broader" definition of Padania, basically covering all northern Italy, promoted by the separatists (we also have these types in São Paulo and Southern Brazil, they insist they are a "different society and culture", but press them a little bit and you soon find out all they want is to pay less taxes and to stop helping less developed regions, and it would also help if they could finally see fewer "inconvenient" black and Amerindian faces, you know...).
This is the Europe map, view from the Center of the Earth, standing in East direction and looking upis the map ok with Horizon?
it is difficult to realize,
Just a small clarification: I didn't say in my first post that Slovenia and Hungary should be excluded from the map, but only most of Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia and Turkey because only parts of them received Celtic settlement. However, I wasn't aware of Celtic cities in Serbia right in Belgrade. Very interesting observation!In disagreement with Yorgcs, I would actually say that Slovenia, (western) Hungary and (parts of) Serbia are justified if we include inner Anatolia. Belgrade for one (Singidunum) was originally a Celtic city.
This thread has been viewed 80493 times.