The Celtic Question!

[Mattg]

Knowing that the tribal movements in general throughout much of Europe and the UK in "early times" led to much of the same influence throughout, I have had no problem in feeling "Celtic" since my ancestry is basically English-Irish-Scottish-German! (in no specific order)

I think you've got it covered!

[Valencian Kilted]

Well... I feel a little lazy and I won't post such a long magistral lesson as Glassman did (thanks for that, man!, a bit of culture is always a great treasure!) but I'm from Spain, in "the continent" as brits call it ;), and I also studied a lot about pre-roman history. As far as I have read and seen, celtic tribes and germanic ones were not the same peoples. They didn't have the same traditions, languages, dress-codes or gods. In this case the celts were more "sophisticated" than the germanics (the theutons were one of the german peoples) in terms of artcraft, or social structure. As an example, during the times of Caius Marius, (when Julius Caesar was just a newborn) there was a great invasion of germanic peoples that threatened Rome. It was stopped in the north of the italian peninsula. But they were never considered as celtic peoples. In fact they fought and isolated the celtic areas south of France before trying to get into Italy. As well the excuse took later by Caesar to invade Gaul was the demand of "protection" by some celtic tribes (eduii, helvetians,...) against the germanic danger.

Here in Spain, the celts arrived maybe 500 years before the romans (the baskians are not celts!!!!!!!!... nobody knows when or where they came from... it's maybe the only european non traceable people) and they spreaded to the north-west side of the peninsula. They shared their territoies with other peoples that never considered themselves celts, as they were the cantabrians, the vaccei or the baskians. The germans arrived as a consequence of the weakining of roman empire,... over 200-300 years after Hispania was a roman territory... and it took 100 years to the romans to conquer the full country! so, this said, it took over 800 or 900 years betwen the arrival of both peoples here.

The celts arrived to Galicia and Asturias,... at the end of their long trip following the path of sun, to finis-terrae (world's end), and remained there... on the last far and isolated side of the "civilised world", as they did in Brittany, Ireland or Scotland,... simply they were pushed by all the other peoples, migrant or not, until they arrived to the limits of the land they knew.

They spread their influence all over their path,... and even mixing with some of those peoples, as they did when they mxed with germans to create the "belgian" tribes, different of celts or germans, or the celtiberians (lusitans, mainly) when they mixed with the local iberian peoples of Spain, they didn't include those peoples in their tradition. They were allied or familiar on some occasions, but never as celts.

...ooops... I said too much again... :rolleyes:

¡Salud!

T O N O

[GlassMan]

Hey Glassman that's one long read, and quite informative. I still don't think there is anything wrong with calling ones self a "Celt" or even "Celtic", it's a sign of respect for those who's history we just want to live on.

Oops, I got myself so caught up in the details of trying to explain that the transalpine people of Roman times were Celts & that the Germans (as we know them today) did not arrive until MUCH later that I didn't emphasize enough that I was doing that in support of the idea that we should consider ourselves Celtic.

While it is okay to acknowledge that the Nordic & Teutonic peoples have influenced us, we did not derive from them nor are our customs simply borrowed. The Celtic peoples existed in Western Europe as a recognizable people within a common linquistic & cultural family for almost a millenia before any Teutons came on the scene. And much of our culture (from tartan cloth to intricate knotwork) to that pre-Teutonic Migration time period and even earlier.

I may nod my hat towards the Teutons & the Norse but I will never let anyone tell me that our knotwork, artwork, language or customs are wholely derived from them. But if I will give them the courtesy of acknowledging influence than they must also acknowledge their borrowing from the Celts.

It steams my keester to hear a group, any group, trying to claim all the credit for the achievements of their neighbors.

Oh, and Valencian, I think we're saying the same things with a difference in terms. Caesar did use the supposed calls for help of some Celtic tribes as a pretext for invading Gaul. But the Teutons arriving on scene were the very first wave of the migrations. Yet long before Roman writers had been referring the land the Teutons occupied as Germania after the farthest north of the Celtic tribes known to them, the Germanii who happened to be among the first displaced. They lent their name to those who occupied the territory they once held. Interestingly, another tribe displaced early on was the Alimanii.

Also, you referenced the assault on Rome by the Cimbri during the Consulship of Gaius Marius. They were undoubtedly Teutonic and were in fact Nordic. They are thought to have originated in Scandinavia in Jutland and then migrated southwards. As such, they are not truly of the same group of Germanic migrants as the Goths & Franks. Many scholars even call them Proto-Germanic because they appear to be a far more primitive cultural form of the Germanic peoples than the later migrants.

Map of Cimbri Migration

No other Teutonic/Germanic tribes made it that far south or really made significant inroads into Celtic/Roman territory for over another Century.


Wow, all that just to say that I agreed with Valencian that one Teutonic tribe did make it that far south that early.

The problem is that we are dealing with peoples who simply did not write things down and we must guess.

[Kilted KT]

wow...I'm learning more on this thread than the two years as an archaeology/anthropology major in college!

all good stuff..especially the maps...excellent work, all!

[James]

A rather belated response to Iolaus.

The whole question is vague, for in essence tribes romped about-migrating, taking over the land of others and so on: there are even doubts as to some tribes being Celtic or Teutonic. The Romans made an arbitary split -Celts one side of the Rhine-Germans/Teutons the other. 'Celts-nice and civilised--Teutons nasty and uncivilised': think here of the legions destroyed in the Teutoberger Wald.

Too as has been said there was a massive cross fertilisation of ideas/arts etc, which I entirely accept.

Here in Britain there was to recently a tendency to portray the Celts as really rather nice 'sweet fluffy bunnies': and the Germanic races as being the bad guys. A lot going back to Victorian romantic ideas, with the Scots being ascribed as Celtic on oft romantic grounds.

Now modern research is firstly showing that the picture is not as clear as it was say seventy years ago, and that some peoples who were thought to be Celtic might not be: as with the question about artwork I mentioned in another post. So it is all rather exciting, and I hope I live long enough to find out more.

At this point I get personal-maybe neurotic: for I object to being swept up by a possibly imagined Celtic myth. So rather than seeing myself as a Celt, I look to my own clan-of which I proudly claim membership by blood in the male line, and leave it at that.

Just as whilst I've yet to see evidence that the Kilt is anything but a highland garment, and certainly nothing to show that it had Celtic origins: it is interesting to see how today it is being adopted as a Celtic garment in say Wales, and I believe other lands as well. Just as it has of recent been adopted in the lowlands-where a couple of hundred years ago they would have scorned to wear the barbaric garb of the highlander-think here of Walter Scott and the romantics. An example of the cross fertilisation of ideas and artifacts. Possibly if the membership of this board is anything to go by, at some future date the kilt itself will be seen as an American garment: and that really will confuse the historians of a thousand years hence.

However honesty obliges me to admit that who knows who crept into this or that bed over the centuries-so who knows, or can ever know the entire truth as to their own lineage.

James

[Livingston]

Wow. From the looks of things, we have some very well educated historical researchers on this board. Very well written and thought out posts from Glassman, James and Valencian Kilted. A toast to you all

[Manu]

Well... I feel a little lazy and I won't post such a long magistral lesson as Glassman did (thanks for that, man!, a bit of culture is always a great treasure!) but I'm from Spain, in "the continent" as brits call it ;), and I also studied a lot about pre-roman history. As far as I have read and seen, celtic tribes and germanic ones were not the same peoples. They didn't have the same traditions, languages, dress-codes or gods. In this case the celts were more "sophisticated" than the germanics (the theutons were one of the german peoples) in terms of artcraft, or social structure. As an example, during the times of Caius Marius, (when Julius Caesar was just a newborn) there was a great invasion of germanic peoples that threatened Rome. It was stopped in the north of the italian peninsula. But they were never considered as celtic peoples. In fact they fought and isolated the celtic areas south of France before trying to get into Italy. As well the excuse took later by Caesar to invade Gaul was the demand of "protection" by some celtic tribes (eduii, helvetians,...) against the germanic danger.

Here in Spain, the celts arrived maybe 500 years before the romans (the baskians are not celts!!!!!!!!... nobody knows when or where they came from... it's maybe the only european non traceable people) and they spreaded to the north-west side of the peninsula. They shared their territoies with other peoples that never considered themselves celts, as they were the cantabrians, the vaccei or the baskians. The germans arrived as a consequence of the weakining of roman empire,... over 200-300 years after Hispania was a roman territory... and it took 100 years to the romans to conquer the full country! so, this said, it took over 800 or 900 years betwen the arrival of both peoples here.

The celts arrived to Galicia and Asturias,... at the end of their long trip following the path of sun, to finis-terrae (world's end), and remained there... on the last far and isolated side of the "civilised world", as they did in Brittany, Ireland or Scotland,... simply they were pushed by all the other peoples, migrant or not, until they arrived to the limits of the land they knew.

They spread their influence all over their path,... and even mixing with some of those peoples, as they did when they mxed with germans to create the "belgian" tribes, different of celts or germans, or the celtiberians (lusitans, mainly) when they mixed with the local iberian peoples of Spain, they didn't include those peoples in their tradition. They were allied or familiar on some occasions, but never as celts.

...ooops... I said too much again... :rolleyes:

¡Salud!

T O N O

Bravo Toño!!!!! Bien dicho!!! I too did some research as to where the basques came from an dthe basque language, and came to the conclusion that the basques were the only of the I berian tribes who were never influenced by any other culture just like their language, which is still very close to the original language spoken in our land at the time before the celts arrived. And funny thing, the celts adopted that language and writing, becoming CelticIberians. Just my two cents worth. And to answer the question...I dont anybody is a celt or celtic nowdyas, for Celtic is a culture and not a race, or a bloodline.

[Iolaus]

A rather belated response to Iolaus.

The whole question is vague, for in essence tribes romped about-migrating, taking over the land of others and so on: there are even doubts as to some tribes being Celtic or Teutonic. The Romans made an arbitary split -Celts one side of the Rhine-Germans/Teutons the other. 'Celts-nice and civilised--Teutons nasty and uncivilised': think here of the legions destroyed in the Teutoberger Wald.

Thanks.

Wow, this German Arminius character was some general! I found a great article here that details the campaign from start to finish, as well as some archeaological research done by a Major Tony Clunn MBE.

I can see why the Germans had such a wild reutation with the Romans, if they were able to wipe out 21,000 legionaries!

This part here does sound like a commonly heard modern-day discription of the stereotypical Scot, which would lend some support to your assertion of it being an arbitrary deliniation.

Tacitus, the greatest historian of the era, vividly describes these people with their wild blue eyes, reddish hair, and hulking bodies, politically unstable tribesmen who loved a fight...

[ozmeath]

It's good to get a sound anthropological background on this topic. My hat's off to you guys who've obviously put much time and research into this broad subject matter.Thankyou.
It then goads me to reiterate the original thread question: the Celtic question!
Iñaki stated "I dont anybody is a celt or celtic nowdyas, for Celtic is a culture and not a race, or a bloodline."
But I think the answer is in that statement. To claim to be a Celt either one aligns with a
1. Cultural identity
2. Bloodline
(or) 3. Place of birth.
(I'm open for more here folks)

It is has parallels with the Jewish culture in that both has suffered regular diaspora over millenia and consequently the influence of the many cultures that the Jews have emmigrated into, which are as many and possibly broader than perhaps the Celts. I make this parallel because of the powerful identity, of course rooted in religious belief, that the Jewish peoples have. It's also heathly to get a little more cultural/ global prespective on this subject.
This embracing of a cultural identity and the Old Religions appears to be increasingly more and more prevalent with (what we can perhaps call) Celts. The cultural need for this embracing is a larger discourse than I'm about to go into but not without merit by any means.
So what's a Celt?
I owned a Enya tape and really liked it. I played it so much I started to take Gaelic lessons and now I own a kilt. Well most of it's true... but the point is how does one claim to be a Celt? I can happily outline my Cultural Heritage and claim I'm "more-Celtic-than-thou" , maybe even do a DNA check but and then we're heading into "Gattacca" country, but frankly GIVE A TOSS. I'm personally comfortable to call myself Celt, Australian, musician...well the list can go on as it could for anyone who's part of this board.
For me the Celtic ideal holds an aspect of my character that is a powerful, ingenous and venturing spirit that I can only try to aspire to.
E

[bubba]

Thanks.

Wow, this German Arminius character was some general! I found a great article here that details the campaign from start to finish, as well as some archeaological research done by a Major Tony Clunn MBE.

Arminius (aka Hermann the German) had an advantage. He knew and understood Roman tactics well having served in the Roman auxiliaries Once he pulled the tribes together he had the time to pick the battlefield and set his traps in advance. He selected ground that didn't allow the Legions to form up and trapped them on a narrow strip bordered by forest and marsh. Sadly, he was later assassinated by one of his own.His major accomplishment was stopping the spread of the Empire to the north and thereby keeping the Germanic tribes independent of Rome.