The Celts of Iberia

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regulus said:
What, do you mean the ancestors who refused to help most of their countrymen against those Spanish? When I mention them I don't know what I am talking about; but when you speak to a Spaniard, all of the sudden you are boastful about the same people that you denigrate when you speak to me.

Estamos en los paices bajos?

If half of the Dutch were as annoying as you, it wouldn't have taken 80 years to get rid if the Spanish.
Click to expand...

Well, we ware faster than the French and the English. It took them a 100 years.. ;)

Well, my countrymen started a war against the Spanish.
The only point is The Northerners hid behind the water, and left the Southerners rot in hell.
Well, and I came back from hell to haunt the Northeners.. ;)
 
This thread is OUTSTANDING!!!!! :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

I had a good laugh reading it while drinking my morning coffee. If technology makes it possible one day to get this in 3D with the words coming out of the screen, I'll probably die of an heart attack... :LOL:
 
Wilhelm said:
I don't see this nationalist attachement...however, Iberians have more reasons, as Iberia had the highest Celtic settlement saturation in Europe, along with Ireland and Scotland...
Click to expand...


Do you actually believe in what you wrote? LOL
 
Read the abundant references posted on this thread. The population of Iberia at one time may have been as high as 75% Celtic and Celtiberian. The only other areas with greater Celtic settlement were Gaul and parts of the British Isles. Iberia actually is third highest in Celtic place names. You should read Cunliffe, Koch, Wodtko, the University of Wales and University of Wisconsin research papers to begin...I can keep going if you like.
 
Last edited:
spongetaro said:
Do you actually believe in what you wrote? LOL
Click to expand...
Yes, because I believe in historians :

"Modern scholarship, however, has clearly proven that Celtic presence and influences were most substantial in Iberia (with perhaps the highest settlement saturation in Western Europe), particularly in the western and northern regions. " Source :

lberto J. Lorrio, Gonzalo Ruiz Zapatero (2005). "The Celts in Iberia: An Overview". E-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies 6: 167–254. http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/celtic/ekeltoi/volumes/vol6/6_4/lorrio_zapatero_6_4.html.
 
Cambria Red said:
Read the abundant references posted on this thread. The population of Iberia at one time may have been as high as 75% Celtic and Celtiberian. The only other areas with higher Celtic settlement were Gaul and parts of the British Isles. Iberia actually is third highest in Celtic place names. You should read Cunliffe, Koch, Wodtko, the University of Wales and University of Wisconsin research papers to begin...I can keep going if you like.
Click to expand...


To which period of Celtic culture do these Historians link Iberia with ?
 
Technically, this thread may not be the most appropriate for what I am about to post but, considering some of the rather puzzling comments made by some here, it is probably a good discussion point and food for thought.

DENIAL:

Freud proffered that Denial is essentially concerned with preservation of ego in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept. Ego defense mechanisms are unconscious psychological strategies that come into play when one is faced with disturbing realities. The manner in which we respond to information disruptive to the ego is complex in that it is negotiated, says sociologist Karen Marie Nogaard, and many times involves the mind "rationalizing things away" (i.e., actually denying the existence and significance of objective reality).

Denial behavior is a severe form of memory repression. In Denial, the person denies that the threatening event ever took place or that a universally accepted fact is true. At minimum, Denial is a form of neurosis and in severe cases a very serious pathology.

Some Denial strategies are concerned with the most primal of insecurities that directly endanger ego equilibrium and preservation of reinforced notions of self. This is very much true in the construction of "The Other" and threats to its validation. It involves strong maladaptive reactions motivated by fears of losing a sense of superiority and identity. This explains why some individuals when confronted by certain types of well corroborated information regarding a social or population group refuse to accept it. Reactions like, "I don't believe in peer reviewed genetic studies because they tell me something I don't like to hear" or, "I really don't care what the historians and archaeologists say or what strong proof they present, I'm not going to accept it" (because it is attacking my ego and my conception of The Other). In severely insecure people, destruction of their perceptions of Other can lead to substantial ego imbalances and unorthodox behaviors.
 
Last edited:
spongetaro said:
To which period of Celtic culture do these Historians link Iberia with ?
Click to expand...

Well before the Roman invasion...

The Atlantic School believes Iberia had the earliest Celtic civilizations (e.g., Cunliffe, Koch). Read the contributions in Celtic from the West...(2010). Others suggest that it became heavily Celtic through massive migrations from the East, primarily movements from Gaul and the Alpine regions.
 
Ok, but aside from being Indo European and R1b, I don't see in what way they were similar to Alpine Celt or even Gaul. Jule Cesar wrote that even South Western France was not Celtic.
If you mean Celtic in a broader definition, can you please be more precise
 
Cambria Red said:
Well before the Roman invasion...

The Atlantic School believes Iberia had the earliest Celtic civilizations (e.g., Cunliffe, Koch). Read the contributions in Celtic from the West...(2010). Others suggest that it became heavily Celtic through massive migrations from the East, primarily movements from Gaul and the Alpine regions.
Click to expand...

Let me say this: while I disagree with the Atlantic School regarding the origin of the Celtic languages (for reasons I have layed out the past, but that are really not relevant right now), that doesn't change anything about the fact that they do have a viable point about the fact that Hallstatt/La-Tene alone (and even Urnfield, for that matter) cannot explain the spread of the Celtic languages in the facade, and that I find it reasonable to assume that there the Atlantic Bronze Age was in parts already a Celtic-speaking area. On the flip side, it's just as unreasonable to assume that the Atlantic Bronze was a linguistically homogenic area - if only due to the bewildering ethno-linguistic diversity of Iberia at the eve of the Punic Wars (Celtiberians, Lusitanians, Aquitanians, Iberians, etc.).
 
spongetaro said:
Ok, but aside from being Indo European and R1b, I don't see in what way they were similar to Alpine Celt or even Gaul. Jule Cesar wrote that even South Western France was not Celtic.
If you mean Celtic in a broader definition, can you please be more precise
Click to expand...
hmm..What do you mean ? There are more than 200 inscriptions in Celtiberian, a pure celtic langauge, and is related with Goidelic (Q-Celtic) , add this to the fact that only celtiberians made about 40% of the Peninsula population (calculation made in a study previously posted here), you can get an image on the impact of Celts in Iberia.
 
Taranis said:
Let me say this: while I disagree with the Atlantic School regarding the origin of the Celtic languages (for reasons I have layed out the past, but that are really not relevant right now), that doesn't change anything about the fact that they do have a viable point about the fact that Hallstatt/La-Tene alone (and even Urnfield, for that matter) cannot explain the spread of the Celtic languages in the facade, and that I find it reasonable to assume that there the Atlantic Bronze Age was in parts already a Celtic-speaking area. On the flip side, it's just as unreasonable to assume that the Atlantic Bronze was a linguistically homogenic area - if only due to the bewildering ethno-linguistic diversity of Iberia at the eve of the Punic Wars (Celtiberians, Lusitanians, Aquitanians, Iberians, etc.).
Click to expand...

Valid points. I will add to the discussion corpus when I respond to some of your previous comments on the topic.
 
spongetaro said:
Ok, but aside from being Indo European and R1b, I don't see in what way they were similar to Alpine Celt or even Gaul. Jule Cesar wrote that even South Western France was not Celtic.
If you mean Celtic in a broader definition, can you please be more precise
Click to expand...

And Herodutus wrote that the Celts occupied the region beyond the Pillars of Hercules (Gibraltar), i.e., S. Portugal and SW Spain.

The evidence of Celtic culture in Iberia is overwhelming; everything from architecture to religion. Hallstatt, Le Tene and other Celtic influences are most evident in the Peninsula. In addition, population geneticists are finding increasing genetic connections between areas with high Celtic settlement in various ancestry studies. Actually, a Eupedia member ("RS2"?) is involved in the R-L21 British Isles, France and Iberia project.
 
The Atlantic Facade (Paleo-Atlantid / Nordid-Atlantid / Atlantomed) phenotypes are strongest in Iberia. You can find these types easily in the British Isles. In fact lots of Cornish, Welsh, Manx, Irish, Scots, some English I've seen could fit in Gallaecia with no problems.
 
Cambria Red said:
The evidence of Celtic culture in Iberia is overwhelming; everything from architecture to religion..
Click to expand...


Well when it comes to the Celts, nothing is evident. Almost all that we know about the Celts in France is due to Cesar's writting. Even today it is not really sure whether Gallic was closer to Latin or to Brythonic languages.

We don't even know whether the Ligurian spoke an Indo European language or not, same for the Aquitani and the Iberian.

Then concerning genetic, it appears that western Iberia had a great deal of Northern African EM81
 
spongetaro said:
Well when it comes to the Celts, nothing is evident. Almost all that we know about the Celts in France is due to Cesar's writting. Even today it is not really sure whether Gallic was closer to Latin or to Brythonic languages.
Click to expand...

Frankly, it's not surprising that for us today Gaulish appears to be closer to Latin than to any modern Celtic languages: for your consideration, the modern Celtic languages had an additional 2000 years of evolution. If you look at archaic Irish (the language used in the Ogham inscriptions in Ireland) it exhibits a lot of archaisms (in particular, a complex declension system) that put it much closer to Gaulish (and also obviously Latin) than modern Irish. By your logic, the ancient people of Britain and Ireland spoke a language that was closer to Latin than to the Goidelic or Brythonic languages. I guess not. :useless:

We don't even know whether the Ligurian spoke an Indo European language or not, same for the Aquitani and the Iberian.
Click to expand...

That, no offense, is nonsense. Onomastic evidence clearly shows that Aquitanian was related to Basque (if not the same as Old Basque). With the Iberians, there's plenty of inscriptions (in three different writing systems), as well as Onomastic evidence which clearly shows that Iberian was a non-Indo-European language which *may* have had a relationship of some sort with Basque. With Ligurian, we unfortunately have only onomastic evidence, which suggests that Ligurian was an Indo-European language, related with the Celtic language family but not part of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 1020788 times.

Back
Top