Keltic Cycles

[Tiberius Nero]

So are those old collections or have they been made into cycles by modern philologists for ease of reference?

[cmacq]

Kelt Cycles are modern constructs and not ancient devices. And, oudysseos the 'K' is there for a reason. I will not apply Lhuyd's usage here and as this was taken from the Greek, shall I use Κελτοί?

Ἀνερρίφθω κύβος

[The General]

To use 'Keltic' instead of 'Celtic' seems just a little funny when speaking (writing) in English, since 'Celtic' is the norm spelling of the word and follows the norm with which English words in general are spelled (using 'c' over 'k', unlike for example how words are written in Finnish, which uses 'k').

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
GAH! It just leads to confusion (Seltik ). K is better.
.

[Elmetiacos]

Oh dear, I fear I've re-opened a large can of worms. No matter, because it seems the worms had long since set off to seek their fortunes elsewhere. Or something.

cmaq: what bothers me most about these cycles isn't so much their putative existence (we don't know how large they are, or whether they are really cycles in the sense of the matter associated with the Tain Bo Cuailgne etc.) it's that the language used isn't Irish. It seems to be a weird mixture of Welsh with Irish. For instance, try and find any reference to this "Entata uiManawydan"... you can't? Not surprising - the name is gibberish. There is no Irish or Welsh Entata. The supposed patronymic makes no sense - Manawydan is a character from the Welsh Mabinogion; here's a quick reference to who he is from Wikipedia. There's no reference in the Mabinogion to a son or daughter called Entata and moreover "ui" is Irish, but it's the plural form of the familiar O we find in many surnames (the older form is Ua) and is only used collectively.

Similarly "Telam duaNam"... try searching for the name Telam; you'll only find it as a name in Azerbaijan, not in any Celtic source. What's "dua"? It's placed as if it's meant to be a patronymic prefix like Ua or Mac or Ni, but there's no such word. "Muirran ta Breahain" - who is that? What's "ta"? Tá is the 3rd person singular of the verb "to be" in Irish (and in some dialects the 1st and 2nd person also) but it makes little sense in a name and you can't have a median H in Irish or in Scots Gaelic orthography. "Breahain" looks like a mistake for "Breitheamh" the (later) original form of the anglicised "Brehon" - a subdivision of Irish Druids (probably) who acted as judges and lawyers.

An inscription on an "idol" of Andrasta? No such animal. Presumably this is supposed to be Andraste, said to have been invoked by Boudicca... what a shame whoever it was had to make stuff up, when you can click on actual quotation attributed to her by Dio Cassius

I'm afraid an elaborate hoax has been perpetrated at some stage.

[Tiberius Nero]

What perplexes me about those unpublished cycles is that no one has heard of them; I can understand that if they are unpublished no one would know what they are about, but that someone would be working on them and yet they wouldn't appear as "manuscript xyz" in a catalogue of work to be done, I find it a bit hard to swallow. Even unpublished material (and I have worked once on an unpublished papyrus fragment, a receipt from some village in Egypt) has reference numbers. And it isn't as if it would be one of the 500.000 papyric fragments (mostly shopping lists, receipts and random notes) awaiting publication, this should be something major that should at least appear in a catalogue.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

This is our current say on the matter. It is quite clear, but apparently has been missed. We are attempting to expedite the matter, though if that is not enough for some they are free to deny our application for tenure.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...t=95156&page=2

Your concerns are appreciated. There is debate backstage. Bringing it up again has added nothing to the issue beyond another jumping off point to a rumble in the forum, which is counterproductive. We will either keep them or get rid of them, and you'll very likely need to wait until the next release to find out what we've done.

Sorry, that's just how it is.

[blacksnail]

For those who are wondering "gee, why do the EB team members get so testy when all I'm doing is asking a question?" - this specific thread is a perfect example. Same topic, three times, five days. The previous two threads are locked and - as if by magic - a new thread appears discussing the exact same topic.

This thread is also a perfect example of why EB team members stop posting on the public forums. It is not criticism that drives us away, but the same point repeated twelve different ways that we have addressed over and over again. We have a high opinion of the intelligence of our fans, which is why we don't often attribute threads like this to ignorance of the issue - unfortunately that leaves willful ignorance, which we aren't required to humor.

[The Persian Cataphract]

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, this argument about the cycles is getting out of proportion. You are on the Internet discussing possible forgery of historical quotes on a forum for a free-for-all modification of a retail game. You are arguing about one of the most trivial aspects of the mod, one of the least concentrated areas, and you have made several threads about it in the recent time. I understand if you find certain aspects dubious, and I can understand it if you wish to discuss the topic, but this is just silly. You are, in laymen terms, wasting time discussing a bullshit thing. This modification is not about cramming in the most impressive quotes ever conceived by man. Understand that modifying the quotes is at the bottom of the bedrock that represents our priorities, and with the team moving over their efforts to the M2TW platform, these kind of threads are grating on our nerves, mildly speaking.

Why don't you guys move over and criticize my Middle Persian translations instead? I don't hold a degree in linguistics. I am pretty sure I have botched up the grammar considerably and in many places. With work in a Middle-Persian voice-mod, I am sure the problem gets even worse. It is even in late Sassanian rendition. C'mon, why don't you guys come over here with your planks, hammers and nails? This is important. This will bug the hell out of you if you play the Pahlava. You will see those errors constantly, on the campaign map, or even on the battlefield. Why don't you guys question the authenticity on that?

I'll tell you guys this much: When you are out to break new grounds in multimedia, with a set goal and with all the creativity in the world, you are bound to break a few things along the road. Our goal is clear, and it has been stated many times, but this mod is not about peer-reviewed history. We must allow some conjecture, we must allow ourselves many liberties, and in many times against our will and in most times imposed by us because of the game's basic structure. I use Middle Persian because for what it is worth, it changed very little between the Parthian rendition and the late Sassanian incarnation as written by Medieval Zoroastrian scribes; The bi-lingual inscription of Shâpûr I proves its similarity, and the Manichaean "Parthian" texts of Turfan gives all of it another weight.

It is a small sacrifice along the road of a huge improvement, very unorthodox, but a true pioneer's move in breaking new grounds. I do not speak the old Pârnî language. I do not know a terrible lot of Old Persian, and I am not a specialist in discovering the grammatical difference between Parthian Pahlavî and Sassanian Pahlavî (Even though they belong to slightly different branches). But I need a core, a bedrock until I can bring about the chisel and the sculptor's hammer.

So pay some respect and complain about things that matter. I am almost flabbergasted that no one has uttered anything about the Persian translations. Just recently we have a handful of threads about Celtic quotes. What kind of signals does that send to me? Could I just put any kind of garbage into the mod without people noticing? People don't question why there is an Achaemenid bodyguard cavalry with xyston in the game (As accurate as it can get, yet somewhat unorthodox due to how recent the idea of Achaemenid "proto-knight" is), or why there is for instance a completely inaccurate portrayal of a Hyrcanian hillman with a rope for a belt.

Or why there still are Pajama foot-archers wearing the tiara of the old Immortals' regiment. Or why the old Iranian archer-spearmen was once named "Arshtibara" as if they were royal spear-bearers. These were significant things! Partho-Hellenic infantry, and elephants... It's silly, "most" people think of Parthians as being strictly light horse and knight in its military structure.

This is silly. You are arguing about obscure cycles, when the efforts could be better concentrated on healthy observation of more important things.