*charges nakedly at your double walled fortification*

They were no match for the Romans in open battle. Their cavalry was pretty good, though.

They were pretty much even around 400 BC, when the sack of Rome by Brenus happened. It was not until much later that the Romans developed superior technology and superior military tactics to them.

It's almost like "barbarism" is meaningless and doesn't actually reflect the reality of the time

You don't strike me as someone who knows anything about antiquity, particular religion in antiquity

The Celts had as much of a caste system as the Romans did. In truth, neither of these groups had a caste system. Social stratification != caste system

None of those groups were "mudhut niggers", and the Germans had urban or proto-urban settlements themselves. 2nd century geographer Ptolemy lists 94 poleis in Germania

Roman military success against the Gauls owes more to Caesar's particular military intellect, a much larger manpower pool, and a greater average troop quality due to the Marian reforms, then any kind of simplistic, video-gamey "Romans had more points in the tech tree" idea.

>None of those groups were "mudhut niggers"

...

Comfy af tbqh familia

Stilt houses are better. Italy had those since 2100 BC:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polada_culture
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terramare_culture

The Britons were more advanced than the Gauls

no

cam.ac.uk/research/news/bronze-age-stilt-houses-unearthed-in-east-anglian-fens

So did the British. And they had roads, and advanced metalworking, and irrigation, and tin mining and built brochs and they built their own artificial islands in Scotland. They weren't stupid, they just no reason to live in any other way than they did.

But Italy developed the Etruscan civilization from those cultures while they regressed into mudhuts instead. It goes like this Polada >>> Terramare >>> Villanova >>> Etruscans >>> Romans. The British Celts never advanced like they did.

Whenever someone makes one Celtic thread where bound to have at least 5 others.

>yfw you will never live in a hill fort as comfy as this

No because they didn't have any reason to. And they didn't "regress" into mudhuts, some people lived in them, some lived in wattle and stout houses, some people lived in forts, some people lived in middows.

There were several groups of Celts in Britain. We can already see from the Gauls that they weren't equal in terms of how 'civilized' they were. Some were mudhut dwellers dancing naked in the forest, others were probably a bit more advanced. It is worth noting that things like the Stonehenge weren't built by the Celts that came later, but by an early wave of farmers from Anatolia, who would be closest to modern Sardinians today. Sardinia had the Nuragic civ that lasted until they were conquered by Romans: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuragic_civilization

>half-IE religion
What are you on ?

Gauls were Indo-europeans same goes for their religion.

They don't know who started building stonehenge, but they do know it took over 3000 years to complete. So no, it wasn't Nuragics.

I'm not saying it was the same exact people who lived in Sardinia, but they descended from the same Anatolian farmers who brought agriculture to Europe and blanda upped with the native hunter gatherers. Indo-Europeans came to Britain in 2100 BC. Stonehenge was pretty much already finished at this point. The Celts decided it to use it as a religious site late.

It took over 3000 years to complete? how do we know that?

That's an Anglo-Saxon Paehpe.

It didn't. Construction started it in 3100 BC and finished in 1600 BC. But by the time Indo-Europeans came only small re-arrangements were made to the stones. Stonehenge 3 IV was basically complete already: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge#Stonehenge_1_.28ca._3100_BC.29

huts of that size were used for storage or basket weaving

when people say "mudhuts" in regard to celts or germanic people they mean wattle and daub. I don't think they ever had literal mud huts

*flies away*

kek

Why did the Gauls have a boar fetish

Boars are dangerous and scary as hell.

Imagine being iron age man and having to go fight one because it mauled your favorite horse something.

Is this what an ancient Celtic warrior looks like

>It's their half-IE religion
wut
>the pre-IE thing they had back in Germania.
wut

Internet Explorer was a huge deal in the ancient word dude

Go a genuin laff oot this aye , cheers hen xxx

It is generally believed Celtic religion has elements of Indo-European general religion, such as the cult of the horse, and the dominant male aspect of society in tribal scale (as opposed to previous more female influenced cults), but it wasn't entirely typically IE like other groups.
What we find in their most ancient regions while in Europe, in modern Germany, is sometimes mixed with older non- or pre-IE artifacts. And the older we go, the less IE elements it has. Eventually the remains stop being typical Iron Age culture and just go into the Bronze Age but some IE elements remain.

No, McGregor is able to maintain that level of fitness through a strict diet and exercise routine. Celts would have more fat as a result of their diet, and didn't exercise to the extent of an MMA fighter.

Let me rephrase

Were the ancient celts crass and brutish bearded redheads?

Sure.

>wattle and daub.
Wtf is wrong with wattle and daub?

Wasn't that like one tribe?

>they had written language

What? They did? I thought they never got to that point.

You're the confusing the Germans(Pre Indo-European I Haplogroup) with the Gauls (Indo-European R1B )

The Gauls had the three caste system, their Gods were mainly masculine, with a few exception like Epona, and they practiced polygamy and the women were killed when their masters/husbands died. There is not trace of matriarchy among the Gauls, the only "Celts" who had a matriarchy were the Britons.

If I wanted to know about Gallic and Briton society what books should I read?

Sometimes on Veeky Forums I get the impression that Italians are the most insecure people about their history in western Europe, despite having absolutely nothing in their history to be insecure about (except the world wars).

Has anyone else thought this?

>who had a matriarchy were the Britons

My bad they still live under a matriarchy

No wonder that feminism spawned from anglo countries

Its kinda like the French

Tell me about gallic shipbuilding traditions Veeky Forums. Did they survive into roman occupation? Did they write their techniques down?

>the women were killed when their masters/husbands died
What
I've never heard of anything like that regarding the Gauls, and that's completely incompatible with the fact that Gallic women could initiate divorces

Regarding
Of course

Is the blue paint or tattoos?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_first_written_accounts

>Gaulish
>500 BC

I think it was only in Mediterranean France where they had contact with the Greeks though. Not sure if it spread to the rest of Gaul or not.

>more to Caesar's particular military intellect
>a much larger manpower pool
>and a greater average troop quality due to the Marian reforms

Sounds like they put 3 points into their tech tree, you overwhelming faggot.

The problem is that "Italian" history doesn't start after 1861, when this piece of shit country was created. The northern and central Italian city-states have a proud history, while the terroni were irrelevant niggers being subjugated by other people.

>mfw a naked Celt with javelins soars over my cohort and all the pilae and ballistae miss him

Oh Neptune...

>Berlusconia

Top kek

It's woad, a type of blue paste

Celts didn't like writing because they thought relying on writing to remember things made there memory dull. This is why most of what we know about the celts came from romes perspective.

That's a stupid excuse. The only Celts that developed written language early on were the southern Gauls, Lepontics and Celtiberians. All due to Italic/Greek influence.

Its not an excuse thats what they believed.

They made up excuses because they were dumb.

They where so dumb that they invented mail.

Some Celts living in bumfuck Romania have nothing to do with the Celts of Britain. Mail was also invented independently by the Etruscans.

What's Guy Fieri doing there?

>Some Celts living in bumfuck Romania have nothing to do with the Celts of Britain.
They still had Mail so whats your point about romania?
>Mail was also invented independently by the Etruscans.
Yes but wasn't it very diffrent from celtic mail?

Sending the Romans to FlavorTown

kek

What about the boats?

I do not know anything about there boat building unfortunately. I would like to though.

Neat, I remember a few months ago Veeky Forums going off on me about how stupid the gauls were since they left no written accounts of themselves.

Love it when threads go side by side like this

No.

gaulish women love Roman cock

not as much as roman women love Gaulish cock

I can confirm, Terroni and Sardinians have 0 history, it's all colonialism (Greeks, Arabs, Byzantines and Normans)

HI I'M GUYIX FERRIX AND TODAY WE'RE GOING GONNA VISIT SOME OF ROME BEST DIVE-IN'S

GAULED.com

No bully Sardinia.

...

>being a norduck

Naked Warriors were an ancient Celtic/British Celt thing.

The Continental Celts can stand toe to toe with """civilized"""" soldiery considering they were the premiere Mercenaries of the 200s-100s BC classical world.

Are you sure you aren't just mistakenly paraphrasing Socrates?

Celts then.

Celts now.

What went wrong?

romans, germanics, franks, vikings and anglos

There is Shit ton of celtic genes around europe.
That picture... Where are those celts i never knew them to meet blacks.

A bunch of Gauls migrated and formed a kingdom in the Balkans and kingdom in central Anatolia (modern day Turkey).

The Ptolemies later hired a bunch of the Gauls in Anatolia as soldiers and settled them in Egypt.

That's badass. Never knew they made it out there.

Celt kingdom in central Turkey? Holy shit, the more you know.

ever heard of GALICIA??

wtf

i meant GALATIA, so sorry

y-you were right the first time too user

I wonder how much Celtic genes they still have.