Who Were The Celts?

Ibiblio.org ^ | unknown

[Cronos]

the influx of asain and mongoloid ( is there distinction there? I think there is.. )

If by Asian you mean everyone who lives in Asia, then you are completely wrong -- as Asia consists of Mongoloids (East Asia), Indo-European Caucasoids (India, Iran, Russia), Semitic Caucasoids (The Middle East bar Iran) and Negroids (the Indonesian islands).

[MacDorcha]

Never said anything about an "invasion" simply "went to"

I think that is fair enough, considering the "echo" from India a couple thousand years later in the global community. Heavy Aryan influences.

I believe (And NO, this is NOT an "Aryan Race" piece) that the origins of the Arayan languages could be the root of all languages (or at least, is VERY close)

Wherever they came from before they got in to the mountians is where our answers may lie.

[Cronos]

I believe (And NO, this is NOT an "Aryan Race" piece) that the origins of the Arayan languages could be the root of all languages (or at least, is VERY close)

I doubt that -- I know a bit of Avestan and Arabic along with French, Spanish, German, English and a bit of Polish (very, VERY little of Polish!), but there is a substantial similarity between the Indo-European langauges. There is NO similarity to Arabic, none at all. I'd say proto-Indo-European is a branch of the 'pre-Babel' language, but is not the main stem

[bad company]

This might interest you ping.

[RightWhale]

The oldest undisputed Mongoloid skeleton ever found is only 10k years

I'll bet you are real popular when you visit China.

[RightWhale]

We know all that. They weren't Romans at the time, but just a few stragglers from Troy who had a little run-in with Carthage and whose wives had just burned their fleet so it is natural they would be a little testy. At the time of the sack of Rome, there were no Romans in Rome. Everybody else was in Rome; the Romans were elsewhere--still are.

[Cronos]

I'm not talking aobut the Aenied -- which was a fairy tale concocted to make Caesar Augustus feel good. At the time of the Sack of Rome in the 4th century B.C., the Romans as we know it were in Rome -- they had thrown out their Etruscan kings in the previous century. Whaddya mean the Romans were elsewhere outside rome?

[Drammach]

I'm sorry, I see no evidence for the peoples in WEstern China to have been 'proto-Celts'. I can agree that they were 'Indo-European' peoples but how can you call them proto-Celts????

I used that label for lack of a better word.. just a difference in terminology.
Referring to the different articles in this thread/discusson, it has been (more or less) established ( as a premise? ) that a red-haired, caucasoid type of people lived in western china at a specific period of time, preceding and coinciding with historical records of celts moving into the etruscan region..
Since the Etruscan record is the first we know of that actually refers to them as celts, I simply referred to that group prior to that time as "proto-celts", meaning that the western world didn't have a name for them before that time, and we ( I ) were not sure what they were called.
Indo-europeans may very well be an accurate name/label/description.. I don't know..
That is, I guess, what I'm trying to establish..

[Drammach]

If by Asian you mean everyone who lives in Asia, then you are completely wrong -- as Asia consists of Mongoloids (East Asia), Indo-European Caucasoids (India, Iran, Russia), Semitic Caucasoids (The Middle East bar Iran) and Negroids (the Indonesian islands)

I'm not talking "modern" Asian.. ( and I think I'm right in my distinction here.. )
If we were talking about today's asian you would be correct.

The reason I asked ( in parens ) if there was a "distinction" was due to the time frame..
The American Indian is basically the "pure" asian I am discussing in that post..
That migratory group had not yet been mixed with others, including ( and this is where my question lies ) with the mongoloid..
Where were the mongoloid prior to/during/at the end of the Ice Age?
The Eastern continent? Farther inland?
Did they have as much contact with the asians at that time?

Likewise, where were the Indo-Europeans, Melonesians, etc.. ?
I guess what I'm saying is, I was actually pointing out in that post that this was a time of "mass migrations" of basic racial groups, which forced the celts out of the area, to the west..
As those groups in the asian continent expanded, and forced out the celts, they also intermingled, and that was where the question of "distinction" between asian and mongoloid came in..

[blam]

"Where were the mongoloid prior to/during/at the end of the Ice Age?"

I believe the oldest Mongoloid skeleton was found around the Lake Baikal area. Oppehheimer's DNA/teeth studies indicated that the North Asian descended from the South Asians and after some isolation in the north, developed the exaggerated Mongoloid features as, flat face, sindonot teeth, lighter skin, etc.
There is one skeleton found around the Lake Bakail area that is 22,000 years old (this is the disputed Mongoloid skeleton), that provokes such arguments that these guys who study such things have stopped talking about it.

Personally, I believe the Mongoloid and Caucasian 'races' were distinguished during the Last Glacial Maximum(LGM), 22-18k years ago from a common source, probably from the Jomon/Ainu types that had already been distinguished from the 'out-of-Africa' types.
The Melanisians (Negritos) were probably part of the original 'out-of-Africa' stock that mingled intermittently with some of the other groups but some remained in isolation ( and not mixing) on the misc islands in the region.
When the Ice Age ended, many millions of people had to move...and, they went in all directions. It wasn't until the final melt/surge 7-8,000 years ago that opened up the Strait Of Mallacca(sp) and allowed these immigrants to sail to India, Persian Gulf, Egypt and etc (Some to the Americas) establishing the ancient civilizations there. Some were probably 'the wise men from the east.'

They brought their myths, garden of Eden, and flood stories with them...maybe even Atlantis stories.

[Cronos]

Since the Etruscan record is the first we know of that actually refers to them as celts, I simply referred to that group prior to that time as "proto-celts", meaning that the western world didn't have a name for them before that time, and we ( I ) were not sure what they were called. Indo-europeans may very well be an accurate name/label/description.. I don't know..

Indo- European would be the ccorrect term

[Cronos]

Likewise, where were the Indo-Europeans, Melonesians, etc.. ? I guess what I'm saying is, I was actually pointing out in that post that this was a time of "mass migrations" of basic racial groups, which forced the celts out of the area, to the west..

Arrrghh. Stop referring to the Celts as if they were somehow racially distinct from the rest of the Indo-Europeans. The Celts only really diverged from their relatives the Italics and Greeks around the start of the first millenium B.C. There were no 'Celts' in China, there were Indo-European Caucasoids

[blam]

"They brought their myths, garden of Eden, and flood stories with them...maybe even Atlantis stories."

Where Was Atlantis? Sundaland Fits The Bill, Surley

[blam]

Siberian Graveyard's Secrets (More Redheads)

[NoClones]

so 'conan the barbarian' was jewish?

[NoClones]

so 'conan the barbarian' was jewish?

[Drammach]

Arrrghh. Stop referring to the Celts as if they were somehow racially distinct from the rest of the Indo-Europeans.

I don't think I have done anything of the sort.. And I have made no claim of expertise or authority...
Likewise, this article/thread is about the Celts.. Who they were, and where they came from..
Your claim that Indo-Europeans and Celts are one in the same may have some basis in fact, and then again, it may not..
They may be an offshoot, or descendant of basic Indo-European stock, or they may be in fact, Indo-European..
I don't know that as fact, that is what I am trying to determine..

The Celts only really diverged from their relatives the Italics and Greeks around the start of the first millenium B.C.

Now You're just confusing me..
The Celts are NOT Italics or Greeks.. NO WAY..
If the Celts are Indo Europeans as you insist, then the Italics and Greeks are the divergence..
Their Meditteranean heritage is clearly evident, although it is probable the Italics and Greeks may have Indo-European heritage within their bloodlines from an earlier wave of immigration/invasion..
This is exactly what I pointed out in earlier posts..
The Celts were not identified as such until the Po Valley invasion as recorded by the Romans..

Yet, when I tried to refer to them as something different, i.e., "proto-celts", you objected vehemently. ( although in fact, you yourself have referred to them as proto-celts.. )

To: Jim Noble I think the native (pre-Arabic) language of North Africa is related to Gaelic and Breton. Some proto-Celts probably wound up in N. Africa.
Not only proto Celts, but actual Celts would have invaded North Africa when THEY were being pushed from the Celtic homelands in what is now Germany and Eastern Europe, by the Germanics
72 posted on 07/28/2004 2:26:07 AM CDT by Cronos (W2K4!)

That's from the "Siberian Graveyards" link that blam provided in post# 114..

Once again, I think you are mis-interpreting what I am saying..
Once those "Indo-Europeans" living in China were forced out, or for whatever reason, began to migrate west, they were no longer "Indo-European", they became "Celts"..
Once they moved, ( or stayed ) and inter-mingled with other "groups", they became something else..
Of those that stayed, some managed to stay culturally and maybe racially distinct, while others intermingled with asian/mongoloid, ( possibly melanesian? ) and became part of a "group" that would eventually become basically, "asian".. ( a lot of quote marks here, to try to point out that these are extremely broad and general terms, and NOT anthropologically specific and accurate.)

[Drammach]

Thanks for the link.. ( for many reasons..LOL )

I seem to remember reading somewhere of a city discovered in Siberia ( or thereabouts ) that dated from the time of Zoroaster..
This was back when Russia was still the USSR, IIRC..

I wonder what sort of heritage / history is available on the northern siberian "tribes".. ?
From what I understand, they are in some ways, culturally like the Finnish tribes, reindeer breeders and herders, and still use the migratory housing, habits, traditions..
It would be interesting to know what their language history and genetic history is..

[blam]

"so 'conan the barbarian' was jewish?"

Sorry but, FReeper 'LostTribe' was banned years ago.

[Cronos]

The Celts are NOT Italics or Greeks.. NO WAY.. If the Celts are Indo Europeans as you insist, then the Italics and Greeks are the divergence..

The Celts are one of the branches of the Indo-European family. The other branches are the Italic, the Greek, the Irani, the Indian, the Slavic, the Germanic etc. etc.

The pic below may help you out



I hope that's clearer?

Celts in the real term would be a group of Indo-Europeans in EUROPE. Outside Europe they would not be referred to as proto-Celts but as part of the entire family of Indo-Europeans. So, the Indo-Europeans in China were not proto-Celts, but were Aryanic peoples. The Indo-Europeans who colonised the British isles from the native populations were the proto-Celts