Germanic faction(s)

[Rodmar]

I wouldn't suggest that, only that for those scholars, everything north from the Alps was Celtic. Do you see the nuance?

The "from the Iberian coast to the Danube's mouth Celtic world" was just a carpet that blinded them before they could actually travel beyond it, much later.

BC, you had the same extrapolation in the fringe of the known world with Ethiopa (south), India (east) and Scythia (north).

[greycat]

Another name for a German.

Teuton

1

: a member of an ancient probably Germanic or Celtic people.

2

: a member of a people speaking a language of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family; especially : german

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/teuton

This is why I feel it is not a very good term...

Rather than relating directly to this tribe, the broad term, Teutonic peoples or Teuton in particular, is used now to identify members of a people speaking languages of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family generally, and especially, of people speaking German.

Edited November 14, 2013 by greycat

[greycat]

Celt

1

: a member of a division of the early Indo-European peoples distributed from the British Isles and Spain to Asia Minor

2

: a modern Gael, Highland Scot, Irishman, Welshman, Cornishman, or Breton

The problem here is that (1) does not coincide with modern archeological evidence especially within the past 5 years.

http://www.keltenwelt-glauberg.de/en/research-centre/the-celts/

Edited November 14, 2013 by greycat

[greycat]

It also does not coincide with modern genetic studies.

The North of the Alps, at the border of modern Switzerland, Austria and Germany, was the cradle of the Celtic Hallstatt and La Tène cultures. The greatest technological advances of the Bronze age and Iron age in Europe came from that region. Of all the regions of Europe, southern Germany (notably the Baden-Württemberg) is thought to have inherited the most from these Celtic people, genetically. We will start by breaking one of the most erroneous clichés, i.e. the idea that Germany is fundamentally Germanic, or that all German people are ultimately of Scandinavian descent. This is not what DNA tells us. South-western Germany at least is first and foremost region of Celtic heritage. The S28 marker, defining haplogroup R1b1c10, is thought to coincide with La Tène Celtic descent.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/germany_austria_switzerland_dna_project.shtml

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[greycat]

My point is ancient scholars, modern archeology and modern DNA studies all conclude that the Germans are in fact Celts.

"Of all the regions of Europe, southern Germany (notably the Baden-Württemberg) is thought to have inherited the most from these Celtic people, genetically."

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/germany_austria_switzerland_dna_project.shtml

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[Andrettin]

My point is ancient scholars, modern archeology and modern DNA studies all conclude that the Germans are in fact Celts.

"Of all the regions of Europe, southern Germany (notably the Baden-Württemberg) is thought to have inherited the most from these Celtic people, genetically."

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/germany_austria_switzerland_dna_project.shtml

How are DNA studies relevant when we are talking about cultures? People assimilate; when a person of Celtic descent begins speaking a Germanic language and practicing Germanic customs, that person becomes Germanic himself.

[greycat]

How are DNA studies relevant when we are talking about cultures? People assimilate; when a person of Celtic descent begins speaking a Germanic language and practicing Germanic customs, that person becomes Germanic himself.

Language has little to do with it also. I speak English. I am not English.

[greycat]

If we follow your model the Irish were to longer Celtic when they killed the last of the druids during the time of St. Patrick.

[greycat]

Also Romans changed language at least once and that did not stop them from being Roman.

[Andrettin]

Culture is not transmitted by genetics - but by spoken or written language.

[SDM]

Indeed. I would also argue that geographic barriers can and do split single cultures into many. Unless you can validly prove that the "Celts" and the "Germanics" share the same cultures and languages, I wouldn't consider grouping them together, just like how it wouldn't be fair to group all Amerindian peoples together even as subfactions.

Archeological sources and linguistics are the best tools we have, contrary to what one member in this thread may say. I wouldn't rely on genetics as much.

Edited November 15, 2013 by SDM

[Rodmar]

My point is ancient scholars, modern archeology and modern DNA studies all conclude that the Germans are in fact Celts.

"Of all the regions of Europe, southern Germany (notably the Baden-Württemberg) is thought to have inherited the most from these Celtic people, genetically."

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/germany_austria_switzerland_dna_project.shtml

Thank you very much for this very interesting link (one of those pages has a comprehensive meta-search from late paleolithic to iron age skeleton analysis). However, it seems that most of these DNA search are far beyond the scope of the Iron Age and the 500 BC - 0 AD period. Hopefully one day, a transversal study will consolidate knowledge about the complex settlement of Europe and the World.

For now and even concerning BC events, archaeologists are reluctant to associate ethnicity (tribes) to material evidences and prefer to talk about "material cultures", because a grave won't tell for sure whether a culture trait had just been adopted by an otherwise foreigner culture. In some cases however, it may show a cultural habit brusquely disappearing (in one generation), and that could be an evidence for a tribe being "pushed" rather than assimilated by another one. As an example, have a look at the wiki page about the interactions (or lack of) between the Przeworsk and Wielbark Germanic cultures and the migrations in central-oriental Europe.

As I tried to say to posts ago, of course you can say that Celts and Germans (and whoever they have subjugated) are culturally and linguistically nearer to each other than to Hellens and Indo-Iranians, but that won't help us for the 500 BC - 0 AD period.

Also, concerning those marvelous genetic tools, they are only meant to be used jointly with other fields of study such as archeology, linguistic, myth and historic accountancies, etc.

If we follow your model the Irish were to longer Celtic when they killed the last of the druids during the time of St. Patrick.

In another thread, I thought I had already suggested you that some modern theories don't credit the mass murdering of the druids in Ireland, but I will make it more clear.

• You can admit that through cultural influences and maturation, the Celtic religion was prepared for monotheism to some extend (faith into a hell/hostile invisible world, one greater, less anthropomorphic, more allegoric divinity compared to the Olympus' many, contractual and anthropomorphic gods);
• Welsh missionaries are said to have debated with the druids (we aren't so naive as to think it was just a display of a better magic!);
• The Gaelic society did massively and "immediately" adhere to the new religion; this is hardly understandable when you consider Ireland was not conquered nor threatened, and the Celtic society was very hierarchic with a strong sacerdotal class;
• The bards, who were more central here than in other Celtic culture (being their kings' counselors), are considered to have evangelized their country;
• Ireland and Wales sent missionaries eastward to other former Celtic lands such as the Gaul, whereas these lands had already met a more "oriental" Christianity;
• I don't want to be OT here, but some early churches are weirdly decorated (only vegetal and allegoric motives), and some of the Christian mysticism is clearly influenced by Celtic remnants (initiating path or to develop one's karma).

So, an explanation could be that the Gaelic church massively and rapidly adopted the new religion, adapted its beliefs to the Celtic mindset, operating a subtle synchretism, and then have this spread among the population. That is, before Rome could have a chance to look at it and something to say about, much later. This doesn't preclude some bloodshed from having happened, but I'd rather consider it more like a political elimination of some refractories to the consensus (in place of a thorough elimination of the whole sacerdotal class).

[greycat]

Culture is not transmitted by genetics - but by spoken or written language.

I speak English that does not mean I share there culture. I think genetics is just a tool.

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[greycat]

Unless you can validly prove that the "Celts" and the "Germanics" share the same cultures and languages, I wouldn't consider grouping them together, just like how it wouldn't be fair to group all Amerindian peoples together even as subfactions.

according to Greek geographer, philosopher and historian Strabo, Romans created the word Germani to indicate they were the true Celts or Galatians in Greek. Caesar was the one that separated them in the first place.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/567832/Strabo

The Celtic tribes were diverse and did not all believe in the same deities. There is no evidence they spoke one language.

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[greycat]

In the beginning of the game they would have only been referred to as Galatians by he Greeks since they didn't yet had conflict with Rome. Also Gaul would not have existed for hundreds of years later.

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[Andrettin]

I speak English that does not mean I share there culture. I think genetics is just a tool.

You are correct in that language isn't everything - two peoples can speak the same language and still have significantly different cultures. Nevertheless, the fact remains that language is very relevant for culture, while genetics is not relevant at all.

[greycat]

You are correct in that language isn't everything - two peoples can speak the same language and still have significantly different cultures. Nevertheless, the fact remains that language is very relevant for culture, while genetics is not relevant at all.

I agree genetics is just another tool to use.

[greycat]

The problem is that the Celtic languages are very tied to genetics. We started calling them that when we found out that some of the people living in England, Ireland and Wales were genetically descended from the Celts. When they started labeling the Celtic languages in this way they had no idea that the people with the most Celtic DNA were living instead in south western Germany.

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[Rodmar]

And ?

That only tends toward showing that Celtic populations (the core centers of Celtic Iron Age!) were more likely assimilated and acculturated there than repelled or destroyed. This doesn't contradict the fact that those people are of Germanic culture now, and for more than a millenary. But look at the Germanic invasions maps: I'm not a linguist, but you could nearly say that those areas with a former Celtic substrate (La Tène) are now speaking High German or Bavaro-austrian...

Anyway, for the "most Celtic DNA", I have to reread your sources... I know very well that you want to conclude that the Insular Celts were only an elite minority ruling a non Indo-European people (like the Iberian). I'd oppose another point of view: the Celts are not the same depending on what time you consider. I guess that this "Celtic DNA" is a late mutation more or less contemporary to the Iron Age, and archaeologists know where Celtic Iron spawned. Other geneticists and linguists speak about Celts from the Bronze Age on, and those ones could have migrated in mass to the islands. But I have to reread your sources.

[greycat]

And ?

You said genetics are not important while language is. I explained they are linked by the way the languages were classified.

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[greycat]

Remember I don't want to change the game. If we did have a Germanic faction I don't care if we don't call them Celtic. I know that Germani was just a name given to them that meant authentic Celt by Romans. Strabo has a very good reputation for his accuracy about history.

Edited November 15, 2013 by greycat

[Rodmar]

What if the German (the Suevan federation, the Frank league, the Anglo-saxons) were not those Germani? Seriously, that was all the point in my post about the Belgian, above: read it again, please.

Strabo was a child when Cesar named the Germania, and here is how he saw his world:

You wouldn't dare to say that there were no Celts outside of Strabo's Celtica.

I'll dare to say there were not only Germans inside Strabo's Germania.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Rodmar

[greycat]

If we can't trust Strabo then we surely can't trust Caesar. That would make them all Galatians/Celts once again.

[greycat]

I'll dare to say there were not only Germans inside Strabo's Germania.

Yes, Caesar states that Gauls had invaded the most fertile parts of Germany and eventually started to dress and eat the same food as the the Germans.

[greycat]

The Belgae claimed decent from Germans to Caesar.

Edited November 16, 2013 by greycat