Gaels VS Gauls

Red pill me on all of this, Veeky Forums. ALL OF IT.
Red pill me so goddamn hard I wouldn't be able to sleep.
And no wikipedia-tier BS shitposting, please. Do the shit by yourselves, presenting your own view on this. In my personal understanding so far, Gaels were domesticated/cultured descendants of Picts (which were extremely barbaric rendition of Celts) and they mainly used silver as a decorative metal, while Gauls were Gael settlers which traveled overseas to mainland Europe after which they developed their own branch of Celtic culture, with main decorative metal being gold, and became even more cultured than Gael were before that. Basically, Gaels were domesticated Picts, preferred silver, and still retained large portion of their Pictic barbarity in their everyday behavior, while Gauls were smarter/better cultured, preferred gold, and left Gael to develop their own kind of Celtic way. Picts/Gaels/Gauls were all Celts, but not all Celts are one and the same. Picts - barbaric Celts, downright dumb berserk, loved no one and liked full-body tattoos similar to Maori (but unlike Maori, which mainly used black color, Pictic tattoos were often very colorful with blue and red being dominant colors). Gael - domesticated Picts of slightly lesser barbarity (still massive assholes, though), Gauls - smartest Celts around circa 300 BC~100 AD. Who do you think would have won if Gaels fought against Gauls in a large battle?

P.S.
I myself am a descendant of Thule blood, regardless the flag. OP pic slightly random (them are Slavic super-heroes of legends on the pic).

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Tène_culture
greekmythology.com/pictures/Myths/Places/142202/pictish_skull_1/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Newfriend pls go to a more friendly board like /b for funney may-meys

What? What meme?

Trying to learn history.

...huh?

>Gaels were domesticated/cultured descendants of Picts
No. The Picts were the indigenous inhabitants of Scotland or Alba whereas the Gaels originated from Ireland.

>regardless the flag
>flag
Where do you think you are faggot

They're literally in a boat-swimming distance of Britain, so what makes you think Picts couldn't be transported to Ireland where they could be made into Gaels?

Literally everything you have posted is wrong. Where are you even getting this from? It's like something out of an 18th century antiquarian's diary.

>In my personal understanding so far, Gaels were domesticated/cultured descendants of Picts
Wrong, these two groups have nothing to do with each other. Picts were Brythonic, Gaels are, well, Gaelic.
>which were extremely barbaric rendition of Celts
Wrong, this was a belief for a long time but thanks to modern archaeology we know that they weren't very different from other British Celts.
>while Gauls were Gael settlers which traveled overseas to mainland Europe
Wrong, Gauls were unrelated to Gaels. Their names are etymologically unrelated. "Gaul" is a transliteration of a Germanic term for "foreigner", while "Gael" is a derivation of a Brythonic term for "wild one". Gaelic culture came into its heyday long after the Gauls had ceased go be a regional power.

I'm honestly utterly confused by everything you've written. It's mind bogglingly wrong. Where did you get your information?

Because the linguistic and cultural evidence shows that they were distinct peoples.

>And no wikipedia-tier BS
maybe try reading wikipedia. It'd let you see how much bullshit you're talking.

Gaels and Picts aren't related, beyond a distant linguistic connection
Gaels and Gauls aren't related, beyond a distant linguistic connection
Picts had no preference for silver and Gauls had no preference for gold
Picts weren't any more barbaric than other British Celtic tribes and also probably didn't tattoo themselves

>Who do you think would have won if Gaels fought against Gauls in a large battle?
I think this is the most hilarious part of your post and shows just how wrong you are about everything. Gaelic warfare was probably at its most pronounced and organised in the 16th century, 1500 years after the Gauls basically cease to exist as an independent people. Gaels would've been using guns and pike formations. I don't think the Gauls would've fared too well against that.

How new can one be?

>Picts had no preference for silver

>Gauls had no preference for gold

>Picts didn't tattoo themselves

>Picts dindu no tattoos
Oh I'm laffin'

This drawing is from the 17th century. No artistic depictions that the Picts made of themselves feature tattoos.

But these are from hundreds of years after the Picts existed as an independent culture. They made many artistic depictions of themselves, none of which have tattoos.

>Gauls were Gael settlers which traveled overseas to mainland Europe after which they developed their own branch of Celtic culture
saved

educate yourself user
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Tène_culture

>Gaels and Picts aren't related
nobody knows
>Gaels and Gauls aren't related
inaccurate

>implying sword and buckler style isn't useful

>Gaels would've been using guns
>"Gaels were largely conquered and subdued by Normans in early 12-th century"
>12 century
>Guns

I think you might actually have a mental disability. Are you OP?

>B-b-b-BUT those were made after assimilation! So naturally they must be wrong, right!? Rite, guyse!? Anyone!?

I said Gaelic warfare was at its most organised in the 16th century, which is true. It's the Irish military apogee, representing a shift away from guerilla skirmishing tactics and adoption of more continental styles of warfare, as well as the first real organised and regimented army under the command of the Lords of Ulster.

The Normans initially did have a lot of success against the Gaels but they were beaten back in many areas, and by the 16th century English governmental control in Ireland didn't extend very far outside the walls of Dublin.

I can recommend you some books about Gaelic warfare if you'd like?

>GAELS USED GUNS, BECAUSE I SAID SO!

>I myself am a descendant of Thule blood
Who gives a flying fuck

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. The image of the tattooed Pict was popularised by John White, an Anglo-Irish antiquarian who lived in the 17th century. There is no artistic, literary or archaeological evidence to suggest that the Picts painted themselves.

>Pictish
>1400BC

point at him and laugh

They did use guns, quite frequently. As I've said I can recommend you some literature that details the adoption of pike and shot tactics in Gaelic warfare in the 16th century if you're interested. I'd have to dig out my students' reading list but it's a very interesting topic.

That 16th century picture was simply to show you, the dumb fuck, that Gaels themselves STILL used only cold weapons by 16th century, EVEN when guns were already invented and used in many countries. From 12th century to 16th, for 400 years NOTHING fucking changed for those fucks. Gaelish did NOT use guns EVEN in the 16th century.

>There is no archaeological evidence that Picts painted themselves
>He was shoved a literal Pictish skull in his face
>LALALALALALA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU, NOP, NO EVIDENCE AT ALL! LALALALALALALAH!

A typo, chill.

That isn't a Pictish skull. It's a resin art project made by a Deviantart user called GrimDeva

Here is a page where she goes into detail about how she made it
greekmythology.com/pictures/Myths/Places/142202/pictish_skull_1/

I'm quite interested in hearing your comeback to this one.

>trying to pass a DeviantArt project painted with what is clearly modern acrylic paint as a Pictish skull from 1400 BC
Has Veeky Forums reached a new low?

>From 12th century to 16th, for 400 years NOTHING fucking changed for those fucks.
Again, this is quite wrong, Gaelic warfare changed massively in that space of time. I studied it for quite a while. I'll ask one last time, would you like me to recommend you some books on it, so you can read and see for yourself? Do you have a genuine interest in the topic or are you just shitposting?

You are the single most embarrassing person who had ever posted on Veeky Forums. You're on the same level as the "it would take decades to reach Sardinia from Sicily" guy

>Gaelish did NOT use guns EVEN in the 16th century.
Most continental armies still had majority pike armies before Louis XIV, not sure what impression you're under to think guns were hot shit until a century later.

what the FUCK were you thinking with this post

Wtf is even going on in this thread? How is retardation of this caliber even possible? Is this what happens when you substitute education for Varg wannabe “historical” youtubers?

The absolute fucking state of Veeky Forums

>PICT-URE
A pun after my own heart!

>the "it would take decades to reach Sardinia from Sicily" guy
wot

>GAELS USED SILVER

Ireland 1000BC

>GAELS USED SILVER

...

>GAELS USED SILVER

user we have long since established that OP is a retardo who thinks that 2012 high school art projects are skulls from 1400 BC, please just let the thread die

not him but gib book please

Not him, but I'd like those recommendations.

Except that pictures from that time, which I've already shoved in your face as well as my cock, clearly show that even in 16th century Gaels still relied only on bows, knifes, spears and swords.

I never said they "ONLY" used silver, you dumb fuck. I've clearly said - they PREFERED to use silver over other metals. Gauls, on the other hand, preferred gold OVER silver.

OP what the fuck are you even still doing here. You've already demonstrated that you have no idea what Gauls, Gaels and Picts even are.

What the fuck does Lech, Czech and Rus have to do with Gauls?