[HN Gopher] Who Were 'The Celts' and How Did They (Some of Them)...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Who Were 'The Celts' and How Did They (Some of Them) Fight?
        
       Author : gostsamo
       Score  : 66 points
       Date   : 2023-05-12 11:32 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (acoup.blog)
 (TXT) w3m dump (acoup.blog)
        
       | cyocum wrote:
       | I have a degree in "Celtic Studies" and while I tend to study the
       | Irish early medieval period rather than the ancient period, I
       | would highly recommend reconsidering the entire idea of "Celtic".
       | A couple of books that might be good to read if you have time
       | are: John Collis, The Celts : origins, myths & inventions
       | (https://www.worldcat.org/title/921219683) and Simon James, The
       | Atlantic Celts : ancient people or modern invention?
       | (https://www.worldcat.org/title/249450858). I have not had the
       | time lately to read up on the state of the question so I will
       | read the recommended article: Rachel Pope, Re-approaching Celts:
       | Origins, Society, and Social Change
       | (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10814-021-09157-1)
       | with keen interest.
        
         | johnmaguire wrote:
         | From somewhere near the middle of the linked article:
         | 
         | > All of that is to make the point that any treatment of
         | 'Celtic' warfare is immediately begging an enormous question
         | because 'who were the Celts?' is at best an unanswered question
         | and to be frank, probably an unanswerable question.
         | 
         | This table is also of interest:
         | https://acoup.blog/2023/05/12/collections-who-were-the-
         | celts....
         | 
         | So I guess you agree with the author.
        
           | dbingham wrote:
           | That's not the middle - that's pretty near the beginning
           | (look at your scroll bar).
           | 
           | But yeah, the author spends a great deal of time on the
           | question and it's really interesting. I got maybe 20
           | paragraphs in before I realized "this is fascinating, but I
           | need to be doing other things".
           | 
           | I intend to return later though, the author's style is great
           | and this is a really interesting article.
        
             | xapata wrote:
             | I was surprised by the length of his writing, then said,
             | "Ah, that's what he meant by unmitigated."
        
               | DylanSp wrote:
               | I think Devereaux mentioned on Twitter that this is the
               | longest single post he's written; he usually breaks his
               | more detailed writing into series.
        
         | tombh wrote:
         | Could you very briefly describe what you consider to be a more
         | productive way of thinking of "The Celts"?
        
           | cyocum wrote:
           | I will try. I tend to think of "The Celts" linguistically as
           | a set of related languages. However, that is an artefact of
           | my own training and background. How the people who spoke
           | those related languages lived can differ radically wherever
           | you find them. For me, to define Celtic is: did they speak a
           | language that is related to those that we have labelled as
           | Celtic? That means that "Celtic" is a convenient shorthand
           | for talking about these languages and does not necessarily
           | have a meaning outside of that.
           | 
           | I have not yet finished reading the linked article so I will
           | see if it may alter my thinking any.
        
             | colmmacc wrote:
             | Lorient in Brittany hosts an Interceltique festival; it's a
             | cross-cultural festival that celebrates art, food,
             | language, but it's centered around music and features the
             | best bands from Ireland, Scotland, Wales, The Isle of Man,
             | Cornwall, Brittany, Galicia, Cape Breton, PEI, and New
             | Brunswick.
             | 
             | I've gone several times as an accompanist attached to Irish
             | bands, and it's remarkable to me how I can sit in with
             | other musicians from any of those regions and the idioms,
             | base tunes, time signatures, and ornamentation are so
             | similar. I grew up speaking Irish, and while I can
             | understand Scottish Gaelic, I can't follow anything but a
             | word or two of other other Celtic languages. But with music
             | and dance, things seem much much closer. I have to listen
             | and learn much much more to play with other regional folk
             | music, like Eastern European or even French Canadian (which
             | is sort of close to Celtic and shares many tunes), but with
             | the Celtic countries, I've literally sat in on main stages
             | with no rehearsal and we just all know what to do. It does
             | feel like there is quite a deep shared history there.
        
               | Simon_O_Rourke wrote:
               | Awesome anecdote, I'd love to listen to you guys play.
        
             | awesome_dude wrote:
             | I like this answer because it's relatable to today's
             | English. English is spoken by many people around the world,
             | but it's not one group of people, it's many many different
             | people and cultures who have come to use English for one
             | reason or another.
        
               | ak_111 wrote:
               | But you can still point out who the original English were
               | or at least trace almost 100% of English speakers today
               | as originating from 1600s England's conquest of the
               | world.
               | 
               | The debate about 'The Celts' is that we can't point out
               | where the original language emerged, and the potential
               | range of where it emerged is quite huge stretching from
               | Ireland through central Europe with some claiming it
               | emerged in Turkey even.
        
               | awesome_dude wrote:
               | I'm not sure how that's related to what I am saying, or
               | what I was replying to.
               | 
               | The point being made is how celts are peoples that are
               | grouped by language, but have a disparate set of
               | histories.
               | 
               | And I am recognising that a contemporary analogy is how
               | English speakers around the world also share a language,
               | but have disparate histories.
               | 
               | Your problem of where the Celts originated from is
               | separate.
        
               | sammalloy wrote:
               | > who have come to use English for one reason or another
               | 
               | Pretty sure that singular reason was colonialism.
        
               | awesome_dude wrote:
               | For a great many, yes, but not for all. Some because of
               | much _much_ worse things (Slavery), some because of
               | trade.
        
               | sammalloy wrote:
               | What a strange hill to die on. English is the colonial
               | language, and its global success was singularly due to
               | imperialist hegemony. This is taught at the university
               | system level and is in every textbook on the subject. I
               | love a good myth about capitalism just as much as the
               | next exploited worker, but attributing the success of
               | English to trade is equivalent to teaching children myths
               | about Thanksgiving and Washington chopping down a cherry
               | tree.
        
               | awesome_dude wrote:
               | I cannot see anyone trying to argue anything about why it
               | was successful, only you have decided that that is the
               | point.
               | 
               | I've merely pointed out that it is widespread and that
               | there are (at least) three reasons for people to speak
               | it.
               | 
               | Edit: Note, if you don't wish to speak it, that's fine by
               | me - I'll be just as happy to not hear from you again :-)
        
               | sammalloy wrote:
               | English is widely spoken because it was the colonial
               | language enforced at the highest levels of society. This
               | is still true today and is currently a primary plank in
               | the political platform of US conservatives.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-only_movement
               | 
               | There are libraries of books written solely on this
               | subject. Your bizarre hypothesis ignores this and instead
               | points to slavery and trade. More to the point, there are
               | new articles on how English was enforced on subjugated
               | people published on an almost weekly basis. Last week,
               | the article I read on this topic was about how indigenous
               | orphans were prohibited from using their native language
               | and forced to use only English. But let's talk about
               | glowing myths about trade and slavery instead which have
               | literally nothing to do with it.
        
               | awesome_dude wrote:
               | Then stop speaking it.
               | 
               | Let's have a korero in Maaori instead.
        
               | sammalloy wrote:
               | Why do you think an irreversible binomial employed as a
               | thought-terminating cliche in the form of an argumentum
               | ergo decedo is an appropriate response?
        
               | awesome_dude wrote:
               | Why do you not think?
               | 
               | Toku tangata were massively affected (read:
               | disadvantaged) by colonialism (and we still are), but we
               | started learning English to trade with Pakeha, we married
               | them, and learnt their reo.
               | 
               | Colonialism, for us, came after, not before. It came as a
               | direct result of a need to trade, in goods, and ideas.
               | 
               | Now, as for absurdities: your faux complaint about the
               | only language you can speak, that you have being throwing
               | about in some bizarre need to garner attention for
               | yourself, because you certainly haven't been interested
               | in discussing the actual points, is where all the
               | absurdity begins and ends in this sub-thread.
               | 
               | Even your Latin is stolen.
        
             | ak_111 wrote:
             | Where would the origin of the Celts be according to current
             | archeological finds if you approached it from this
             | linguistic point of view? Atlantic or central Europe?
        
               | skywal_l wrote:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_T%C3%A8ne_culture
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | pfdietz wrote:
       | Picts or it didn't happen.
        
         | prox wrote:
         | XD
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-13 23:01 UTC)