what I do not understand is why anyone can think a people aren't who they are when the archaeological evidence supports original thinking, language supports it, and (though there is little) written history supports it.
Lets look at it this way. Despite Britain taking over Jamaica, the culture of Jamaica changed but did not conform to British. Result? Jamaicans are Jamaican not British.
massalia was subjugated by rome. For a time they stayed their original greco-celt culture. but due to massive influence from rome they became romanized. end result? Massalians became ROMAN
You become Canadian by living here and assimilating into the culture. Anyone in Canada who fares well in snow and can take the cold, who can speak either English or French, and well... Acts Canadian (eh!) is a Canadian. I was not born in Canada but I've changed from an Irishman to a Irish Canadian because I have taken in the culture. Anyone who doesn't fare well in cold and snow, does not simulate the social structure (no you don't have to say eh all the time, eh) and ESPECIALLY cannot speak English or French, is not a Canadian, and is still whatever culture they retain.
Culture determines not your ethnic origin (which there is no celt ethnicity, we are caucasian) but who you are. Therefore if Ireland grew acustomed to celtic goods, warfare, celtic gods, and their way of socializing and doing things, and emulated them, they became celtic.
You mistake the subtle differences for being completely different. By your(the OP) way thinking any people living outside the original site of celtic culture is not celtic, but their own form of plagiarized culture. This however is totally false. Celt influence spread over such a vast area by people accepting celtic culture into their daily lives. So for example, instead of an immigrant becoming Canadian, per say, its the Canadians who are becoming the immigrant's culture. They are STILL THE SAME GENETICALLY! but on the outside they've changed.
Bookmarks