Why did the celts get BTFO so hard? It was a sad destiny

The Galatians are also, in fact, Gauls we had resettled in Anatolia.

source?

>being retarded
Dude the Irish language was only replaced because of
1. Fammine
2. Free schools with the English language taught there

>ask for source
>YOU'RE A RETARD
cite your claim or gb2 Reddit

Dude it's common knowledge, if you ask for a source on literally everything said just to prove your point you're a spastic
also
>calling everyone and everything you don't like reddit

Ever seen a Celtic woman and a Celtic man? The woman has all the fire until you booze up the man. Then he finds his balls, but can't do anything with them. The entirety of their war strategy throughout most of time has been, "lets get' em." As we see all across history, any society/culture that the men are that lackluster in society building, technology and warfare gets trampled.

Great music, beautiful stories and art, can't stop from being fucked up the ass against their will.

Doesn't help they weren't a unified culture. The Roman's fought them one at a time and picked apart lose confederations. A real army with logistics will trump tribal warriors every time.

Even in afgahinsatn or vietnam for a modern example. The US rarely lost a fight but could not kill them fast enough or alter their society sufficiently to prevent new warriors from spawning

I find them fascinating. I love bizarre fish-out-of-water enclaves.

Galatians were very popular mercenaries for the Hellenistic Kingdoms in the near east.

>Thureos

How do you not know this?

>spouts outdated anti-Irish English propaganda
Really gets the almonds activated

What I want to know is how the hell did they get there in the first place. This is some Looney Toons shit

Remnants of an invasion force

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_settlement_of_Eastern_Europe

Pretty neat story.

Could I have a source for taht chain mail claim? I'd love to boast about it to this guy I know.

Common misconception. Sets have been found in Dacian and Etruscan sites that predate the earliest Celtic finds.

>The Galatians
That was who he was talking about with Anatolia.

Ever heard of walking and boats?

Migrations weren't all that uncommon back then, both Celtic and Germanic tribes/confederations moved whenever their homeland got too hard for them to live on. They originally went to Thrace and then tried to invade Greece but got their shit handed to them, so they kept moving until they could settle a place where they could beat back the natives.

>I love bizarre fish-out-of-water enclaves.
>Crimean goths died out in the 19th century
>Kafiristan was conquered
>berberpagans on the canary islands are no more

At least Basques, Kalmyks and Haitivodooans are still there.

Raymond Hickey's book The English Language in Ireland

>tfw no Greeks in Afghanistan these days

I get the most massive history boner thinking about a timeline in which the 19th century British get to northern India, start sending scouts into Afghanistan, and find Greco-bactrian kingdoms: still building parthenon-style buildings, worshipping Zeus, performing Aristophanes plays, and generally maintaining little islands of ancient Greek civilisation constantly under siege from Muslim tribes.

Basically like The Land That Time Forgot, only with Greeks instead of dinosaurs.

Basques are mostly a joke these days. Too much western cultural influence, poor things. At least the language is still alive.

Dumb thread, is dumb.

The French and English standardized their languages, eliminating the small localized languages.

The Irish didn't speak one language, they spoke several dialects of Gaelic, this has left a legacy of extremely contrasting accents in disparate parts of the Island.

Most regions of Europe have this phenomenon, but the French and English were more militaristic in standardizing their languages into the regions.

>the celts get BTFO so hard

In Galatia Pergamon hired Baltic Celts to defeat the Galatians.

In Northern Italy, Celtic peoples adopted the Latin culture, just as the Etruscans did.

Celtic and Latin are twins on the language tree.

There was a Tarzan book (one of the originals by Burroughs, same guy from The Land That Time Forgot) where he finds a lost roman civilization hidden somewhere in the middle east that goes by just how you described, still living according to their times, oblivious to the fact that their ancestors are gone and the world has moved on. Cool shit.

>I'd expect there to be more Celtic nations left other than Ireland

Wales.

It was at risk to dissapear, but they made a come back and now you can even find some descendents from Andalucians immis talking basque.

quality quads

that's cool. But the Greco-Bactrian kingdoms actually existed for hundreds of years, whereas the Romans never got that far - Greek culture surviving in isolated areas of central asia until the 19th century almost sounds like it could actually have happened. (after all, there are still a handful of Greek speakers left over from the Greek colonies in Italy to this day.)

It should totally be the official language of Spain. Romance languages fuck off.

I will never get over the fact that we know next to nothing about the languages and culture of the people who lived in Europe before the iron age.

They never occupied such big territory as that map implies to begin with

We know Basque.

Lack of solid continuity in government /society. Everyone raided each other and backstabbed and shit. Really only gaf about the greater "celtdom" when it came down to the wire and then that didn't pan out. E.g. vercingetorix

just wait until he finds out about welsh

Same as ...
how the heck is that "reddit"?

Even today Scots Gaelic is absolutely retarded.
I learned BBC Gaelic, but found out I can't communicate with Gaelic speakers in Canada because they have a completely different dialect, and when I go to Scotland each region is different.
Blows my mind how such small regions speak so differently.

France is primarily Celtic
England is primarily Celtic
Spain is primarily Celtic
Austria is primarily Celtic
Germany is over half Celtic
Scandinavia has some Celtic DNA although this can be chalked up to thralls.
Scotland, Ireland, Wales, obviously very Celtic
The Celts still control most of Europe.
R1b is the trademark "Celtic" DNA, this is prevalent in Western Europe.
Germanic DNA exists only in Scandinavia and there are very few true Germanics left.
If we talk about language then Germanic language is very widespread and the same goes for the Romance languages of the Mediterraneans.
But the Latins too have R1b in high quantities.
Germanics gave their language and part of the their culture.
it was the Celts who build Europe.
They weren't BTFO, they absorbed everyone else.
>"lets get' em."
Best strategy.
>tried to invade Greece but got their shit handed to them
You do realize they burned Delphi and defeated the Greek confederation at Thermopylae?
They did with a few thousand what a few million could not.
They were a raiding party and they presented a very real existential crisis to the Greeks.
They raided, lost men, and decided it wasn't worth losing more just to settle.
So they continued east and settled in central Anatolia.

And soon the bomb will be too!

This film literally has everything you described in it "the man who would be king" it's a great little history buff adventure, with Sean Connery and Micheal Caine.
m.imdb.com/title/tt0073341/

...

>You do realize they burned Delphi
No primary source mentions the burning of Delphi, only that the Gauls were defeated there.
> and defeated the Greek confederation at Thermopylae?
If by "defeated" you mean the Gauls instead went around to attack Aetolian villages defending by women and children, only to lose there, and return to Thermopylae to find it abandoned and for them to pass through, then yeah they won that battle.
>They did with a few thousand what a few million could not.
Who had millions?
>They were a raiding party and they presented a very real existential crisis to the Greeks.
Their army that invaded Macedon the previous year numbered 80,000+, even the third of that which Brennus personally led would have been a serious threat to anyone in the region.

You clearly don't understand what the term 'Celtic' means. R1b is not the trademark celtic gene marker. R1b is associated with an Atlantic neolithic-bronze age culture that long predates the Indo-European invasions (remember, the celtic language has its origins in central asia or the eastern black sea region).

yes, almost and that's where I got the idea. But in The Man Who Would Be King the Greeks are only a half remembered legend carried on by the local Afghan priesthood. I'm talking about a true, Greek speaking, successor state

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brennus_(3rd_century_BC)
>implying the Greeks would give accounts of their utter and totally non-heroic defeats
Angry Theban detected.
The Persians were as numerous as the seas
>but modern estimates
no primary source states the Persians did not number in the millions.
In fact the sources say the Persians were at least in the millions.
>their army that invaded Macedon
who cares, they were a migrating tribe looking for easy targets, it just so happens the Greeks are just easy targets for strong and superior Northern Europeans.
>mfw Greek cucks
That's not true or at least its not the whole story.
We only saw Celtic culture arise where we had high concentrations of R1b.
The origin of Celtic language being non-European doesn't mean the Celts were indo-euros, the Celts certainly aren't Germanic yet plenty of Celtic countries speak Germanic languages, Austria for example speaks German and French has more than a few German elements.
Same for the U.K. and Ireland.
The language might come from somewhere different, but the people, the people were always in Europe and always in areas where Celtic culture was dominant.
R1b is still the dominant Haplogroup in Western Europe today and has even expanded into areas that were previously dominated by I1.

>We only saw Celtic culture arise where we had high concentrations of R1b.
That's not true either. The Celtic culture arose in southern Germany or the northern alps - R1b is more associated with the Atlantic coast. The modern day celtic remnants are all in R1b areas, but that's just because the central core of celtic culture was taken over by the Romans and Germanic tribes.

>The origin of Celtic language being non-European doesn't mean the Celts were indo-euros
The people might only have had traces of Indo-European ancestry, but it does mean Celtic is an Indo-European culture.

The term 'celtic' can be used in terms of a (now all but extinct) cultural group, but it doesn't fit well with any genetically determined racial group. The French, British, German, etc people whose ancestors would have been Celts also have European ancestors who pre-dated the celts arrival, so if you're going to go by lineage rather than current cultural group, why stop at celt, rather than go all the way back to Europe's pre-celtic roots.

Genes don't make you Celtic.
Genealogy isn't ethnology.

>Germanic DNA exists only in Scandinavia and there are very few true Germanics left.

You do realize over half of Germany is R1b right?
The Alps have very few I1s and Germany has more but not as much as we theorize they used to.
Scandinavia is the only population with significant numbers of I1.
R1b is most heavily concentrated on the Atlantic coast.
But we find it to be the majority throughout Western and Central and sometimes Southern Europe.
Celtic really isn't an indo-euro culture.
Celtic as we know it began with Halstatt culture which we don't know where that came from but we know it was concentrated in Austria.
The language was probably influenced greatly to the point of no greatly distinguished forms from indo-euro language.
It fits quite well with the R1b group since Celtic culture and the longest running conception of Celtic language not only arose out of R1b but existed within R1b groups.
Perhaps there were some linguistic cultural Celts in the Hindu-Kush or something outlandish, but Celtic as we know it, as a defined term can be pinned upon R1b.
R1b isn't a racial group btw...
>Celts arrival
You mean the arrival of what the ethnic Celts adopted what would become what we understand to be Celtic language.
By arguing a language and people are synonymous and thus the Celts as we know them are indo-euros one might easily make the argument that everyone is really just some early proto-communication or something. It's a logical stretch.
The Celts, as in R1b and the greatest promulgators of Celtic culture, were always in Europe. (not technically but you know what I mean)

They were too tribalistic-nationalistic which impeded from uniting against common enemies like Rome and the Germans.

Genes do make you Celtic...
If you're descended from Celts, you're a Celt.
Celt, as I've established is an ethnic group.
That is the greatest and most concise understanding of the term "Celt".
Were there Cultural Celts outside of this group?
Absolutely, but the genetic group that most identifies with Celtic culture and language is the R1b haplogroup.
>having traces of Germanic DNA makes you a full Germanic
Literally "He shares half a haplotype with us, full blooded German prince." tier.
Notice how the Germanic peoples who carried I1 migrated in wave after wave across Europe, yet outside of Scandinavia and Northern Germany they are not only a minority but a very significant one, to the point where they probably have Scandi genes but not even the haplotype.
And even then, the genes get fewer and fewer.
With the migrations, Germans should have taken over Europe genetically.
They didn't and instead actually lost ground.
Germany has more Celts than Germanics.
In terms of Genes of course.

>literally every time they clashed with Romans it was an agglomeration of tribes and chiefdoms

>Germanic genes
>Include Celtic R1B and Slavic R1A Pre Indo-European I1

LMAO

You G*rmanics are just Celto-Slavic-Nordic bastards

You got it the wrong way - the Latins defeated the celts and used them to build Latin cities and temples. Besides, we sill don't know Roman Y-DNA.
God damn Celts, GET OUT OF THRACE REEEEEEEEEEEE

t. never read Gallic Wars

Ceasar defeated the Britons and Gaulish tribes one by one, and sided with the Aedui against the other Gaulish tribes. The Gauls "barely" united when it was too late.

I find it pretty cool reading about the Galatians in Caesar's Commentari and then again in the Bible like 100 years later. The attention to detail is incredible.

And Vercingetorix and his Gaulish Confederation weren't that weak, its just that Caesar was a good general. If only they had let him go east to fight the Parthians...

>You G*rmanics are just Celto-Slavic-Nordic bastards
pls stop
t. I think the Gallic wars refutes the examples of Celtic confederations
stop
You do realize the Gauls weren't the only Celtic peoples, right?
>Irish
>Scots
>Britons
>various Franco-Germanic principalities
>Spain
>Roman Y-DNA
R1b
They are just swarthier Celts.
>If only they had let him go east to fight the Parthians...
...He would have gotten slaughtered same as Crapssus.
Literally camel-trains of nothing but arrows.

germanics are swarthy

>If you're descended from Celts, you're a Celt.
>Celt, as I've established is an ethnic group.
>That is the greatest and most concise
>An ethnic group or ethnicity is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities, such as common ancestral, language, social, cultural or national experiences.[1][2]
Ethnicity is primarily a cultural thing. You might day that "ancestral" might hold weight, but ancestry in most minds is a matter where their way of life came from, not a haplogroup.
When you live life speaking a Romance language, eating Mediterranean food, in romance architecture, the populace will believe their lineage came from Latins. Ethnicity is a manner of living, not haplogroups.

Folks had ethnicities before they had knowledge of genes. You weren't a Hittite because you sent a cheek swab into 23andme for 99.99$.

West and South belong to the French, East to the Poles, and North to the Danes.

>germanics are swarthy
Take that back.
>implying Haplogroups aren't what people mean when they say "forefathers"
>implying Haplogroup relations to culture aren't stronger than "ethnic" group relations
The R1b haplogroup in the case of Europe is genetically and ethnically pretty much indistinguishable despite regional differences which do not constitute cultural differences, this is to say familial differences.

That one's going to cut pretty deep.
This kills the neo-nazi

>>implying Haplogroup relations to culture aren't stronger than "ethnic" group relations
But you even admitted they had different cultures. Germanic cultures are not Germanic if they don't have your haplogroup is what you're saying.
>The R1b haplogroup in the case of Europe is genetically and ethnically pretty much indistinguishable despite regional differences which do not constitute cultural differences, this is to say familial differences.
But they clearly fucking do, seeing as how all but the fringes of the Atlantic coast have any Celtic culture, while the rest have been assimilated into Germanic or Romance ethnicities.

no it's not.

it's a geneological thing.

a negro droppe into england as a baby in teh 12 th century would not be an anglo saxon.

and if an anglo saxon baby were kidnapped by barbary pirates and ended raised in an ottoman household, he would not retroactively become turkic.

it's decided by ancestry and therefore genes.

and obvously they did nothave dna tests but they did have an idea about ancestry.

Did you just ignore the cited definition of ethnicity or what?

The reason the negro wouldn't be accepted would be because the whole of the community would be reminded by his dark skin that he didn't share ancestry with them. That's because of identity, not genealogy. A Polanian family washing up on Mercia's shores that goes on to assimilate into the Anglo ethnicity, and drop all culture of their Polanian "heritage" would be assimilated by the next generation.

You had to leap to the farthest disparity possible, but even then that's because physical appearance provides a constant reminder, not because of genealogy.

>but they did have an idea about ancestry
Which is why all southern Germany and England identify as Gaulic and Brythonic people rather than as Englishmen and Germans, right? Because they're Celtic because of genes and know it, right? No?

Look up genealogy.
Look up ethnology.
Notice how they are different.

>The reason the negro wouldn't be accepted
You fail to understand that a Nation is a group of people who share the same ancestry, and that Celts aren't a culture but a nation, thus there will never be BLACK CELTS.

You need to delete the Civic Nationalist bullshit out of your mind.

>a Nation is a group of people who share the same ancestry
Except that pretty much every genetic study ever shows this to be bullshit.

>shows this to be bullshit.

Nope

Basques aren't Celts.

They're Celts rape babies as their genetic prove it

>celts adopting proto-indo-european
Or maybe they're basque rapebabies.
In any casw, they're not celts, they're basques.

>Welsh(Celts) have the most R1B
>The most diversified European R1B area is in France-Gaul(daily reminder that birthplace of an haplogroup is determined by where the said haplogroup is the most diversified)
>R1B is Basque

You're in denial lad

As i see it

Indo-European Hittites aka Trojans fled after the destruction of Troy and then stayed in Northern France-Netherland before migrating once again towards Britain, Italy, Germany, and Spain

Retard

Not an argument

Meanwhile :
The Hittites (c. 2000-1178 BCE) were the first Indo-Europeans to defy (and defeat) the mighty Mesopotamian and Egyptian empires. There are two hypotheses regarding the origins of the Hittites. The first is that they came from the eastern Balkans and invaded Anatolia by crossing the Bosphorus. That would mean that they belonged either to the L23* or the Z2103 subclade. The other plausible scenario is that they were an offshoot of the late Maykop culture, and that they crossed the Caucasus to conquer the Hattian kingdom (perhaps after being displaced from the North Caucasus by the R1a people of the griffin Catacomb culture). In that case the Hittites might have belonged to the R1b-M269* or the R1b-M73 subclade. The first hypothesis has the advantage of having a single nucleus, the Balkans, as the post-Yamna expansion of all Indo-European R1b. The Maykop hypothesis, on the other hand, would explain why the Anatolian branch of IE languages (Hittite, Luwian, Lydian, Palaic) is so archaic compared to other Indo-European languages, which would have originated in Yamna rather than Maykop.
There is substantial archaeological and linguistic evidence that Troy was an Indo-European city associated with the steppe culture and haplogroup R1b. The Trojans were Luwian speakers related to the Hittites (hence Indo-European), with attested cultural ties to the culture of the Pontic-Caspian steppe. The first city of Troy dates back to 3000 BCE, right in the middle of the Maykop period. Troy might have been founded by Maykop people as a colony securing the trade routes between the Black Sea and the Aegean. The founding of Troy happens to coincide exactly with the time the first galleys were made. Considering the early foundation of Troy, the most likely of the two Indo-European paternal haplogroups would be R1b-M269 or L23.
vieilleeurope.wordpress.com/2015/11/26/the-hittites-r1b-chariots-iron-the-first-indo-euro-writing/

>a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.
So EVERYONE has to have the same haplogroup to form an ethnicity, all R1B, with absolutely no regard for the tangible aspects of ethnicity that is made clear to be culture.

You throw definitions out the fucking window to fit your notions.

No centralization at all, effectively an unconscious blob of tribes

>fit your notions.
Y-haplogroup is transmited from father to son and the original carrier of R1B-M269 was obviously the ANCESTOR OF THE CELTS

What of history, culture, or language?
Notions of ancestry in a national consciousness do not neatly fall alongside haplogroups.

I fucking GUARANTEE you that there were ancient Gauls without R1B.

By absolutely no definition of ethnicity or nation is it defined solely by a genealogical haplogroup.

>Notions of ancestry in a national consciousness do not neatly fall alongside haplogroups.

It doesn't orignally, but if you want to go beyond the "Myth of Ancestry" you must use genetics to either confirm or infirm your claim, and surprisingly enough, the claim of the Celts(by race) was revealed to be true unlike the claim of the Germanics who are in fact a mix of R1B, R1A, and I1, contrary to the Celts who are mostly(70% + on average) R1B

>By absolutely no definition of ethnicity or nation is it defined solely by a genealogical haplogroup.

It is

This is why you have French claiming Celtic ancestry, Galicians claiming Celtic ancestry, or even English claiming Celtic Ancestry despite they do not speak a Celtic language or have a Celtic culture.

"Celt" unlike "German" or "Slav" is purely racial.

>Celts who are mostly(70% + on average) R1B
>"Celt" unlike "German" or "Slav" is purely racial.
>purely
I didn't know "purely" means about 70%.

>This is why you have French claiming Celtic ancestry, Galicians claiming Celtic ancestry, or even English claiming Celtic Ancestry despite they do not speak a Celtic language or have a Celtic culture.
And that's wewuzery

>It is
Provide it

>you must use genetics to either confirm or infirm your claim
Ancestry is only part of ethnicity
So what about those 30% others who are not R1B despite being identical to their neighbors? Are they separate ethnicity?

You sound like an American trying to claim ebin celtic heritage without living like a Celt in any tangible way

The 30% are mostly composed of Germanic invaders, pre Indo-European natives, they are clearly distinguishable from the Celts and aren't considered as Celts.

Meanwhile, the Germans are so mixed they don't have a prevalent haplogroup-ancestry, and basically anyone speaking a Germanic language will be considered as Germanic.

And 70% is an average, but untainted place like Wales (as an example) is 92% R1B.

> French
>they do not speak a Celtic language or have a Celtic culture.
Brittanny exist user. Also the french language itself have gaulish influence

>and aren't considered as Celts.
By whom? You? Is there any actual Celt other than faggots on internet forums who has ever considered those other-haplogroup guys non-Celts?

>they are clearly distinguishable from the Celts and aren't considered as Celts.
No they're not, since they all share the same culture, language, religion, and other ethnic traits.
Do you have gene-vision?

Gaulish is a dead language, like all Continental Celtic.
Brittany are Brythonic refugees from later in time.