[History] Who Were the Celts? Were did they come from?

[Dastreus]

Clearly, the celts are aliens from another world and Stonehenge was going to be a stargate.

[Kalis]

Its very much a fact that there are distinct genetic groups in Britain, and unsurprisingly they follow the borders in countries and sometimes cultures (ie Cornwall). Yeah to some extent we're all mixed in Britain, but certain traits manifest themselves more strongly depending on where you look. Its not a 100% wash through the isles, and the differences get more concentrated as you enter the islands. It also unsurprisingly changes depending on what area's seen more traffic in terms of trade or invasion.

The video in the OP claimed England had nearly 70% the same genetic make up as pre-neolithic inhabitants of the British Isles, which went up to nearly 90% in Ireland. Wales and Scotland had figures in between those two.

Invasions had less of a genetic impact that one might assume, mostly it was cultural change rather than population change.

[Theodarzna]

My position being that there is no fundamental difference between people in Britain is backed up by the video in your OP.

Your position reflects that you haven't really watched the video as that is not substantively the point. Though I think it would be a point of pure cultural ignorance to argue two peoples speaking different languages are the same people if they decide they are not it is up to those people, not up to the Financial Services Guy gobbling date pastries on Malta.

I do not care if Celts were Germanic or not. Why would I care? I have stated categorically that I have no interest in trying to tie myself into some cultures that died out millenia ago, be they Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Iberian, Germanic, or whatever.

My interest lies in debunking the false narrative of inherent difference between us that you are propagating.

Apparently the narrative remains true, you and I are different, you've said so yourself. And again, something isn't gone because YOU have declared it as such. If people decide something they are something. Language and culture are up to the people, and the evidence seems to contradict you here, so I suspect your just easing your hurt feelings and cultural anxiety that other people assert they ARE from somewhere and haven't decided to be what YOU have decided we all aught be.

The DNA claim of nearly 70% in England is taken from the video YOU linked in the OP.

The English part said 68%, did you bother to watch it? seriously try to watch the video. As it exemplifies, it reflects mainly one core issue, the Germanic Invasions and the Normans had a tremendous impact on the Isles. However the more rigidly Celtic-Linguistic areas remained more as is.

The point of the genetic study was to find out if one culture substantively influenced via population influx or via cultural formation. The core argument being Celticness, as opposed to Germanicness has no specific "seed," or origin point. It essentially coalesced along the Atlantic Sea Way if you read Koch. The various threads sowing into themselves. Your hurt feelings and feelings of inadequacy that someone asserts a connection to a place that you have decided nobody is allowed to do so is your own dumb problem. Everyone can see the movement of genetic population after the Anglo and Norman conquests and dispersal's. So your shouting about nothing, you assert that none of it matters so why do you care?

Perhaps you would be better suited to a thread's about the European Union than History.

I have even stated that my mother had an Irish maiden name

And here I thought you did not care and none of this mattered? Yet when confronted with the old narrative not working or being bunk you're very quick to double back on previous claims.

We are a mix of...

That is cool, it simply ignores the topic and is you angsting over your own insecure identity.

Which he mentions as the idea of Celtic Roots ideal comes up, particularly. here: https://youtu.be/G8FM9nMFbfI?t=1h3m47s

Nobody is taking your Britishness away, just not everyone is seemingly sold on the idea as you are.

you claimed the Celts were indigenous,

Actually Cunliffe asserts Celticness can be considered indigenous and that rather than seeing oneself as the "Fringe remains of some vast Halstadt Expansion," these are "The Heartland of a very unique culture stretching back to the receding Ice Age."

https://youtu.be/G8FM9nMFbfI?t=1h4m37s

Don't blame me, blame the academic if you don't like it.

- - - Updated - - -

I think the appropriate attitude to revolutionary theories is patient skepticism. Science has a lot of them, but only a few wind up surviving.

Well, in this case Science and Linguistics is backing the West to East hypothesis, and the old narrative is largely crumbling, likely because it is about a century old and was made on faulty reasoning and faulty evidence.

- - - Updated - - -

Clearly, the celts are aliens from another world and Stonehenge was going to be a stargate.

I have an aunt you sincerely believes UFO's abducted her, also Princess Diana was re-incarnated in space I am told....... visiting her is never the highlight of trips. -_-

- - - Updated - - -

It's a fascinating possibility. Of course we do know that there were Stone and Bronze Age civilisations in Britain (possibly Ireland?) before the "Celtic" period in the Iron Age. Is this suggesting that the Celts were actually descended from those cultures rather than a race of invaders? I mean, I've always assumed they must've interbred and integrated at some point anyway.



I think you're referring to the invasion of Brennus in about 400BC. Certainly Celtic peoples must've inhabited Gaul by this time.



They're not that bad they're just not objective. Which no historical sources are, really. But yes on the topic of the Celts/Gauls a lot of our knowledge comes from Caesar's campaigns and he was writing missives back to Rome to tell them a jolly good story and show off his military accomplishments rather than document history accurately. The reality of warfare would make accurate impressions of the enemy pretty hard in any case, people at war with each other inevitably tell tall tales demonising the enemy.

I argue they are bad because they are newer, and IMHO reflect a Rome dealing with them as a threat, not as an idle curiosity.

Of which the Greek sources establish. I go with the Greeks more just because their sources are older and I argue more reliable.

[Theodarzna]

It's a fascinating possibility. Of course we do know that there were Stone and Bronze Age civilisations in Britain (possibly Ireland?) before the "Celtic" period in the Iron Age. Is this suggesting that the Celts were actually descended from those cultures rather than a race of invaders? I mean, I've always assumed they must've interbred and integrated at some point anyway.

The major issue is that we have a culture forming in multiple places fairly close together and not much of any material signs of an invasion. Like shifting population genetic markers, signs of battles, or anything. The main notion put forward by Cunliffe is that its a culture that emerged out of a "System," Mainly a long stretch of interconnected cultures along the Atlantic Sea Coast forming originally an Atlantic culture, We would call the Celts or Proto-Celtic cultural and Linguistic society. Mostly this seems to have been a system that predated the Celtic languages but the Celtic Languages emerged within that system, however the material culture coalesced around a center of gravity in the south of the conveniently named Celtic Sea.

This upends the notion of a Germinating culture upending a previous one and proposes more a weaving together of many cultures into something fairly related.

[Vanyali]

I'd probably agree with those statistics, although the Irish one seems suspiciously high.

Granted, if it was a purely murderous invasion the impact would be negligable, but organised takeovers the likes of Rome, shaped the majority of this island till this day. And Viking excursions / trade have shaped much of the outlying islands.

Despite popular opinion, the "murder everything and everyone" really wasn't the norm for people looking to move into new areas.

[Theodarzna]

Despite popular opinion, the "murder everything and everyone" really wasn't the norm for people looking to move into new areas.

This is likely true, even the Roman claims of murdering a million Gauls and enslaving another Million is likely completely oversold.

[Independent voter]

So the German tribes didn't slaughter all the Brits? Angles, Saxons, Jutes?

[Kalis]

Your position reflects that you haven't really watched the video as that is not substantively the point. Though I think it would be a point of pure cultural ignorance to argue two peoples speaking different languages are the same people if they decide they are not it is up to those people, not up to the Financial Services Guy gobbling date pastries on Malta.

Who are you to decide what we are in Britain? You are American.

Apparently the narrative remains true, you and I are different, you've said so yourself. And again, something isn't gone because YOU have declared it as such. If people decide something they are something. Language and culture are up to the people, and the evidence seems to contradict you here, so I suspect your just easing your hurt feelings and cultural anxiety that other people assert they ARE from somewhere and haven't decided to be what YOU have decided we all aught be.

You are not British, you were not raised in Britain, so you are different to me and the rest of us British. I have no issues with stating that.

The English part said 68%, did you bother to watch it? seriously try to watch the video. As it exemplifies, it reflects mainly one core issue, the Germanic Invasions and the Normans had a tremendous impact on the Isles. However the more rigidly Celtic-Linguistic areas remained more as is.

68% is "nearly 70%". Are you saying that nearly 2% makes all the difference?

The point of the genetic study was to find out if one culture substantively influenced via population influx or via cultural formation. The core argument being Celticness, as opposed to Germanicness has no specific "seed," or origin point. It essentially coalesced along the Atlantic Sea Way if you read Koch. The various threads sowing into themselves. Your hurt feelings and feelings of inadequacy that someone asserts a connection to a place that you have decided nobody is allowed to do so is your own dumb problem. Everyone can see the movement of genetic population after the Anglo and Norman conquests and dispersal's. So your shouting about nothing, you assert that none of it matters so why do you care?

What feelings of inadequacy? I am not trying to be something I am not, I am not claiming to be Anglo-Saxon or Celtic based on trying to claim some purity in my past.

[QUOTEPerhaps you would be better suited to a thread's about the European Union than History.[/QUOTE]

You wanting to accpet any theory that you can try to twist into your "English are big meanies" narrative is not showing me that you are really suited to history.

And here I thought you did not care and none of this mattered? Yet when confronted with the old narrative not working or being bunk you're very quick to double back on previous claims.

It does not matter, hence my pointing it out. There are no Anglo-Saxons, there are no Celts, there are British and Irish all mixed up in one big rainy bag.

That is cool, it simply ignores the topic and is you angsting over your own insecure identity.

Which he mentions as the idea of Celtic Roots ideal comes up, particularly. here: https://youtu.be/G8FM9nMFbfI?t=1h3m47s

Nobody is taking your Britishness away, just not everyone is seemingly sold on the idea as you are.

What insecurity? I just hate foreigners like you trying to spin some myth about differences that do not exist. You are the one trying to tie yourself into a culture that is not yours, you are the one asserting how Welsh they are, in spite of not being raised in Wales.

Actually Cunliffe asserts Celticness can be considered indigenous and that rather than seeing oneself as the "Fringe remains of some vast Halstadt Expansion," these are "The Heartland of a very unique culture stretching back to the receding Ice Age."

https://youtu.be/G8FM9nMFbfI?t=1h4m37s

Don't blame me, blame the academic if you don't like it.

He can not prove that the Celtic culture was created in the British Isles, as he has no proof of that, it may well have been an import from Iberia for all he knows.

[Vanyali]

This is likely true, even the Roman claims of murdering a million Gauls and enslaving another Million is likely completely oversold.

Doing so is both inefficient and wasteful; you're having to travel with an army, in addition to those that are going to colonize, and get weaker for every settlement you burn to the ground and have to rebuild. Not to mention missing out on slaves, which could fund your army or just keep it running.

[Theodarzna]

So the German tribes didn't slaughter all the Brits? Angles, Saxons, Jutes?

Not really no, they moved into a vacuum left behind by the instability of the Romanized parts of the Island. By all accounts though the Britons did not seriously recede culturally or genetically until the plague of Justinian (I suspect anyway it was a related plague) swept the Britons and crippled them leading to the current Socio-Linguistic and to an extent genetic makeup of the Island.

- - - Updated - - -

Doing so is both inefficient and wasteful; you're having to travel with an army, in addition to those that are going to colonize, and get weaker for every settlement you burn to the ground and have to rebuild. Not to mention missing out on slaves, which could fund your army or just keep it running.

Rome definitely F'd up Gaul, and indeed the end of the Atlantic System can probably be attributed almost entirely to them. That rascal Julius Ceaser.

[Vanyali]

Rome definitely F'd up Gaul, and indeed the end of the Atlantic System can probably be attributed almost entirely to them. That rascal Julius Ceaser.

I did say generally, but in fairness Rome was scared shitless of the Gauls and what they might do. For good reason.

[Kalis]

I'd probably agree with those statistics, although the Irish one seems suspiciously high.

Granted, if it was a purely murderous invasion the impact would be negligable, but organised takeovers the likes of Rome, shaped the majority of this island till this day. And Viking excursions / trade have shaped much of the outlying islands.

Things like Roman takeovers, Vikings, Anglo-Saxons, etc. came and settled within a larger local populace, so though the numbers for Ireland do seem a bit high, considering England has nearly 70% it may be legit - after all, England has had a lot more contact with foreign countries than the other Home Nations, simply due to the geographic location of each.

[Theodarzna]

I did say generally, but in fairness Rome was scared shitless of the Gauls and what they might do. For good reason.

"A Gaul united forming a single nation living of the same spirit can defeat the Universe" - Julius Caesar, 'De Bello Gallico', VII.29

Caeser was assuredly terrified of it.

- - - Updated - - -

One thing I absolutely love about history is the controversy it breeds. Barry Cunliffe mentions it in his lecture video, but primarily as Nation-State identity deteriorates people turn often towards older, more local identities. To the champions of the Nation States as constructed communities this can seem to be a coming apart. For example the French whom have long laboured about making Brittany French. People not agreeing with the narrative is often jarring and causes conflict.

Its like a debate about the causes of the Vietnam War, talk about dumping gasoline and lighting matches.

- - - Updated - - -

Who are you to decide what we are in Britain? You are American.

And you are in Malta...... congrats. We both I presume were born in the UK, yet you while curiously arguing against Nativism of any kind resort to a kind of Nativism because I only spend Summers there and you? Idk..... but Jolly good show I guess, Your against the identities and ideas of Cunliffe and you point out the land my mother and father brought me to as a child as proof that Cunliffe is full of shit and the man in Malta is absolutely right..... Good Show, Really good show.

Good on you for resorting to nativism, to argue against anything vaguely nativist or jarring to your preferred identity.

You are not British

I doubt I ever said I was, and wouldn't even if I moved back permanently. Your the one wrapped in your Union Jack and obsessed with it, and I personally don't care if you are British, maltese or a Moonenite.... Seriously, you must not take these forums so seriously.

You wanting to accpet any theory that you can try to twist into your "English are big meanies" narrative is not showing me that you are really suited to history.

God damn your feelings are still hurt, The English likely invented Gin, they are absolved of all crimes and sins, even if they didn't I give them credit for it. Also trial by Jury, and a marvelous legal system.

He can not prove that the Celtic culture was created in the British Isles, as he has no proof of that, it may well have been an import from Iberia for all he knows.

He did not say it was created in any specific location, that it formed along the Sea Coast of the Atlantic coastline appears to be his argument, Seriously Watch the video or leave the thread.

[Deleted]

Where in Wales are you from, @Theodarzna?

[Theodarzna]

Where in Wales are you from, @Theodarzna?

Physically born in Cardiff and for a brief spell raised between there and Gwynedd. My sister returned, mainly because she has a male companion / baby daddy and she does encourage me to return eventually but ehhhhh..... life is complicated. I have set up roots, friends, professional networking. Though I may be Glasgow bound for further education.

[Theodarzna]

You'll have fun here, no greater place to be a student.

I do admire Scotland and Scottish history a great deal.

I'll add that to the yes column of "YES DO THIS YOU STUPID CUNT!"

[Kalis]

And you are in Malta...... congrats. We both I presume were born in the UK, yet you while curiously arguing against Nativism of any kind resort to a kind of Nativism because I only spend Summers there and you? Idk..... but Jolly good show I guess, Your against the identities and ideas of Cunliffe and you point out the land my mother and father brought me to as a child as proof that Cunliffe is full of shit and the man in Malta is absolutely right..... Good Show, Really good show.

Good on you for resorting to nativism, to argue against anything vaguely nativist or jarring to your preferred identity.

I left England at 36, I think I win in the "Who knows Britain best" game.

I never said Cunliffe was full of shit. Your take on his thesis is full of shit, that is not the same thing.

I doubt I ever said I was, and wouldn't even if I moved back permanently. Your the one wrapped in your Union Jack and obsessed with it, and I personally don't care if you are British, maltese or a Moonenite.... Seriously, you must not take these forums so seriously.

You are the one who makes spurious claims of ethnic purity, not me.

God damn your feelings are still hurt, The English likely invented Gin, they are absolved of all crimes and sins, even if they didn't I give them credit for it. Also trial by Jury, and a marvelous legal system.

Somewhat different to your previous claim that English men want to rape Welsh women in order to assert their authority over them.

How come you keep ignoring that it was you who said the English are somehow different, and that I said there is no fundamental difference between British people? My claim is backed up by the genetic data provided by the video you linked, you need to disprove the evidence in that video, whilst at the same time using it as evidence for your own agenda.

He did not say it was created in any specific location, that it formed along the Sea Coast of the Atlantic coastline appears to be his argument, Seriously Watch the video or leave the thread.

I have watched the video, as demonstrated by my pointing out nearly 70% of English people had ancestry dating back to pre-neolithic times, which nobody had mentioned until I brought it up. Do you think I guessed that?

[Theodarzna]

On a personal note I consider this discussion amazingly successful, History has a place in Gen-OT..... You people surprised me.

- - - Updated - - -

I left England at 36, I think I win in the "Who knows Britain best" game.

I never said Cunliffe was full of shit. Your take on his thesis is full of shit, that is not the same thing.

Lol, right, so a Nativist argument to disprove a non-existent nativist argument,

And I am simply presenting his thesis, you just don't like it.

You are the one who makes spurious claims of ethnic purity, not me.

Ah, here it is..... the defense is "YOUR RACIST!" how dare someone contest your narrative. And no, I am not claiming blood purity, if anything this would imply Celticness was not a blood lineage from a Germinating population.

Somewhat different to your previous claim that English men want to rape Welsh women...

Ah, your still pissed..... Your identity angst isn't the topic of the thread.

I have watched the video

No, you didn't. You can't quote details, you don't recall any critical parts and you seem to have ignored a lot of important details. You either skimmed it or you didn't care.

[Mormolyce]

This is likely true, even the Roman claims of murdering a million Gauls and enslaving another Million is likely completely oversold.

By the time of Caesar Romans had a fair bit of Celtic blood in their veins anyway. Wasn't that a stigma Pompey bore because he was from Picenum?

Doing so is both inefficient and wasteful; you're having to travel with an army, in addition to those that are going to colonize, and get weaker for every settlement you burn to the ground and have to rebuild. Not to mention missing out on slaves, which could fund your army or just keep it running.

And besides, wouldn't you rather fuck them?

[Theodarzna]

By the time of Caesar Romans had a fair bit of Celtic blood in their veins anyway. Wasn't that a stigma Pompey bore because he was from Picenum?

You might be right on that. While we don't know exactly what the Celtic People(s) saw themselves or if they had some similar notions of race, but the Romans I believe did have some of that, as the Greeks did. I am a bit less up on the specifics of Rome, but I'd imagine so.