What would offend a Celt?

[cmacq]

Actually, the term Celt means a person that lived in Gaul. It has been misused in recent times to make nationalistic common cause, which is also strange enough another modern myth. Referring in an analytical sense to a Celtic Culture, Language Group, or Archaeological Construct is one thing, however claiming one is a qualitative abstract is quite another, indeed.

edited: sorry it actually means a Gaul.

[||Lz3||]

Actually, the term Celt means a person that lived in Gaul. It has been misused in recent times to make nationalistic common cause, which is also strange enough another modern myth.

watch out you said he wasn't celt... he might bust your nose too JK

[cmacq]

Another myth, as maybe we'll get a little cheese with that?

[Celtic_Punk]

lol good one LZ3

and what the other guy said, that IS not true. Celts ORIGINALLY from central europe. some tribes in northern gaul sailed to Britain (most likely swam considering our shitty boats we had then haha) in search of tin.

When Caesar wanted to pass a law that would allow "Celtus" to serve as senators(the bill being proposed just before he was murdered I believe) INCLUDED ALL clans under Roman rule.

Celtus was a blanket term for all people of the Celtic ethnicity, which was based on a native term Celts gave themselves.

All the peoples considered as Celts (Gauls, Britons, Gaels, Galatians, ect.) share similarities in language, religion, warfare, society, and other certain areas of daily life.

one exception to this is the Gaelic languages, the three surviving languages(Irish, Welsh, and Scottish Gaelic) developed quite differently (and im sure they were still different to continental celts) due to the isolation of the isles. Till the Romans came there was little contact with mainland Europe.

[cmacq]

Sorry C-Punk, I think you may have jumped a few rungs on your logic ladder? Better check your facts, as there were people the Romans called Gauls, whom they considered Celts that didn’t live in Gaul. Then there were others they simply called Celts that also didn’t live in Gaul. For example the Cimbri in Denmark. Yet, the Romans never called the Britons Celt; nor did they the Irish, or even the Scotts. There were even people that lived in Gaul they did not call Celt. You however may be confusing the Latin Celti or Celtae and Greek Κέλται or Κελτός for the English word taken from the work of Edward Lhuyd in the early 1700’s. A very common mistake but the later is a horse of a different colour.

Strange how if the Roman or Greek historical record doesn’t agree with a preconception, suddenly the ancient, which ironically is the source of most knowledge, becomes so stunningly ignorant.

CmacQ

[Celtic_Punk]

A gaul was no more a celt by your reasoning than any other. The first recorded settlement (by the greeks) of celts was north of the Alps. NOT in Gaul. The word Celtus (the roman term for celts) is an ethnic word that is a blanket for all celtic clans stretching from iberia to galatia. The only people you can really get away with calling non celts are iberians (due to punic infulence) and Galatians.

even if the Romans thought celts were just Gauls(which they didn't), why was there an entire word just for Gauls? and another thing, The Romans were stunningly ignorant people. so if they even believed celts were only gauls, id still be looking for another source.

edit: im familiar with the term from the 1700's, but the fact of the matter is, the celts spread from north of the alps, to iberia, to galatia, and then to the isles. the cultures may have changed (which is why you are most likely so confused) but they still shared critical similarities which allowed them to be traced.

[Cyclops]

Actually, the term Celt means a person that lived in Gaul. It has been misused in recent times to make nationalistic common cause, which is also strange enough another modern myth. Referring in an analytical sense to a Celtic Culture, Language Group, or Archaeological Construct is one thing, however claiming one is qualitative abstract is quite another, indeed.

...yep, that'll do it.

Were the Keltoi the folks up the Danube from the Thrakoi? I suspect the Hellenikoi first struck the occasionally-blue-painted metalworkers of La Tene thereabouts. Or was it around Massilia?

Caesar says there were 3 groups in "All Gaul", Belgae, Aquitani and Gauls. Are they all Celts? Its so confusing. And are Celtiberians really Basques, or Irish?

I suppose its a bit like "what is a Turk?" There's a political, linguistic, cultural and mythical answer and all rather different.

Personally I think if you're angry and drink beer you're a Celt. I consider myself a Celt, more so on a Saturday night after my football team loses.

Hety one answer to the OP would be to denigrate the Celt's footy team, that works for me.

[Celtic_Punk]

...yep, that'll do it.

Were the Keltoi the folks up the Danube from the Thrakoi? I suspect the Hellenikoi first struck the occasionally-blue-painted metalworkers of La Tene thereabouts. Or was it around Massilia?

Caesar says there were 3 groups in "All Gaul", Belgae, Aquitani and Gauls. Are they all Celts? Its so confusing. And are Celtiberians really Basques, or Irish?

I suppose its a bit like "what is a Turk?" There's a political, linguistic, cultural and mythical answer and all rather different.

Personally I think if you're angry and drink beer you're a Celt. I consider myself a Celt, more so on a Saturday night after my football team loses.

Hety one answer to the OP would be to denigrate the Celt's footy team, that works for me.

i doubt the celtiberians were irish, people who came to my island went to britian first, and stopped in ireland (there really isnt another place to go, cept davy jones locker) im sure they are a mix of Basques and celts migrating from southwest Gaul. Celts from Britain and Eire came from the northern coast of France and from belgium, (probably more north aswell) the Isolation of ireland resulted in a strange change of syntax with the Gaelic language aswell. (thats why its so friggin hard to learn the language, i was one of the unfortunate kids who's mum was afraid of the "troubles" so we moved to canada and I never learned it )


You are probably a Gael by blood Cyclops, being from aussyland. Hell theres an entire part of my family that lives in NZ cause their dad's dad's dad's dad's (so on n so on) got shafted stealing corn cause his family had no food (i wonder why? 800 years of theft, rape, murder, oppression come to mind anyone?)

[cmacq]

C-Punk

Of course you’re certainly entitled to your own beliefs, and if you prefer to refer to yourself as a Celt, so be it.



CmacQ

[Jolt]

There is no scientific convention about the identity of a "Modern Celt people", because there is no such thing nowadays. Ancient Celtic people have just mingled with foreign ethnicities and cultures, up to a point where the culture of the Celts had become merged with all others (Much like Macedonians). What we have is a nationalism driven concept, with the objective of clearly spliting the world influent English culture, from the Irish one. It was later adopted by several other regions with the same differentiating purpose.
On a curious note (About the "Celt" term, I think it was used to determine Gauls, really, but I could be wrong. Only the modern term is much broader.) about the "union of the Celtic peoples", is that there have been findings in China of Celtic materials, leading some to believe that the Celtic migrations are much bigger then anyone expected (The Chinese government is playing down these findings. Apparently, they don't want ancient european blood among their ethnical history. That's probably why most people don't even know this fact).

[Hax]

There...are some places that could (!) have some ethnic Celtic populations still.

Orkney, Island of Skye, Man, etc. Perhaps even Bretagne (little chance though).

[dominique]

I let some specialist as Cmacq correct me if I'm wrong.

But...

There's a wide misuse of the name Celt here.

The Celt referred to the inhabitants of Gaul that were first in contact with the greeks in Massilia and Caesar defined them as a sub tribe of gauls living between the Seine and the Garonne. North of the Seine lived the Belgians and south of the Garonne lived the Aquitanians (either a celtiberian or a protobasque tribe).

The greeks made a distinction between Keltoi and Galatoi (the first one living in France, the second referring to the migrating La Tene culture tribes).

The "celts" never called themselves Celts. Gael, Gaul, Goidil, Briton, Cymri (cymbri?), or their tribe name.

As for the "celtic" peoples of the British Isles... The Irish, Manx, Scottish, Welsh peoples are a good mix of ancient Gael, Viking, Norman, English, Pictish and britonnic stock. The lowlanders of Scotland are descendant of Britons and Saxons who joined the kingdom of Alba to form the kingdom of Scotland.

I know people descending directly/undirectly from La Tene cultures call themselves Celts by convention, but it would be like Jewish/Palestinians/Libanese people calling themselves canaanites... Hum...

Anyway, I have O'Neil blood in my veins, but I won't call myself a Celt because of that. That would make me part Gael, though. My paternal ancestor came from a little uphill village in Burgundy. There's a fat chance that his far away ancestors were celts.

[Hax]

Hear hear!

Dominique says wise things.

Also, in modern-day we usually make a distinction from neo-Celtic and Celtic (the former being more of a -cough- lifestyle -cough)

[Celtic_Punk]

I let some specialist as Cmacq correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyway, I have O'Neil blood in my veins, but I won't call myself a Celt because of that. That would make me part Gael, though. My paternal ancestor came from a little uphill village in Burgundy. There's a fat chance that his far away ancestors were celts.

An O'Neil eh? I'm from Armagh, how bout you? My family was under the O'Neil rule.

[Cambyses]

Ah, well that answers the original question at least.

One way to offend a celt: try to deprive him of certainty in his cultural background by telling him he's not really a celt, but actually only a Gaul / Briton / Galatian etc.

[Uhlan]

Had to join the Forum just for this...

1. Laugh uncontrollably at his "manhood" as he ran at you naked. At your own risk, of course...

2. Compare his "manhood" to the big, but bent floppy sword hes been whipping around... (Ok, not SO true, they made good steel... especially in Spain.) Again, consider your ability to out-pace the average 6 foot tall Celt...

3. Tell him his descendants will eventually start worshiping the "Po-ta-toe" *duck*, instead of the bloody gods of war! and will all move to a place called "Boston", speak with a "funny" accent, drink beer (er...) get completely smashed, while watching a sport where a ball is thrown around by a team whose name has had the HARD, manly "C" reduced to an effeminate "Ssssss".

4. Tell him his spiky limed hair is SOOOO early 80's Billy Idol...

BTW,

As to "Celtic" mummies being found in China, there have been some discoveries of the mummified remains of Caucasoids bearing clothing and symbology consistent with Celtic culture (Lots of "C's" there....). Probably part of a people who originally lived in the modern Eastern Ukraine and went much further eastward, while the rest went westward Into Europe most likely after the invention of the Chariot around 2500 BCE?. Or as some have speculated, moved by the vacuum created during the "Sea Peoples" invasions around 1200 BCE or so.

Also, words in ancient Chinese seem to have been borrowed from Indo-European. Chariot, horse, warrior, prince, spear, axe and ruler/emperor. Even the Chinese character for king seems to come from elsewhere. In modern Chinese it is “wang,” but the ancient Chinese pronounced it “gwang.” Chinese characters "White" + "King" = Emperor. "White" + "Man" = Duke. So, (the theory goes) a white man is an Emperor or a Duke. The common folk were called the "Black haired people". Even much later in history, there are tales of the "Orangutan" barbarians. Hairy, wild-men with reddish hair north and west of their borders.

It has also been commented by some historians, (white racial bias not-withstanding), that Temujin himself was tall, red-haired and blue eyed. Much debate about this has been around for centuries... after all, Alexander the Great, and even Jesus Christ have all been portrayed in this manner. Be that as it may, a recent genetic study of a small clan of folks living in northern Pakistan have claimed that they are descended from Alexanders Macedonians (stationed in what was then Bactria). The testing did indeed prove the clans story to a certain degree. As the DNA showed a very close relationship to the Greeks as opposed to the Central Asians and Indians typical of the area. So, I guess anything is possible.

Also, Latin and Celtic, both being Indo-European languages, are fairly close in that many scholars of the time cited a common ancestry. In fact a VERY recent theory suggests that the "Latins" themselves were very early (possibly) Celtic invaders of what was, even by that time, a more or less "Greek" peninsula. The fact that the Etruscans who weren't related linguistically, and "boxed" (or were pushed aside?) the Latins between themselves and the Greeks is somewhat telling, and the date of the founding of Rome at 753 BCE is also consistent with the movement of peoples from the heartland of Eastern Europe further westward.

Sorry for the first post rant explosion.

Graduate from College and this is what happens. What else am I going to do with a degree in History and Genetics?

Thanks for letting me dribble on.