Why do med supremacists ignore the Celtic Oppidums that existed before the Roman Empire?

>Gaul had cities
They did?

Yes. They had paved road, walls, organized trade, monetary system, wells, irrigation, and buildings, not too different from what the Greeks and Romans or most sedentary urbanized people in the Near East had as well.

Even Caesar and other Romans comment on the Celtics being "civilized" but only refer to them as barbarians for being non-Romans/non-Greeks and foreigners to them. Caesar even starkly and directly contrasts this as other Romans do with Germanics being more properly "savage" tribalistic fuckers.

No
Rome was a republic full of grecoboos
Thay fucking hated persia though

The Gauls built some pretty gnarly fortresses

>Rome was a republic full of grecoboos
No it wasn't. A lot of Romans in the late Republic period disliked Greeks for seeming Grecians as being corrupted and made complacent with Eastern hedonism and debauchery.

>
>>Caesar even starkly and directly contrasts this as other Romans do with Germanics being more properly "savage" tribalistic fuckers.
Interesting, any quotes to that effect?

And did they have writing?

I heard an interesting point that one of the reasons Charlemagne had an easier time in conquering Germany was because they had already started to create their own cities and roads and had begun to chop down their forests to create farmland.

>Celtic culture is civilized in modern terms, it's just that the Romans are assholes
Gee I wonder if this great Celtic civilization actually wrote things down and modern people didn't have to rely on Greco/Roman sources

>And did they have writing?
No. Typical barbarians.

Distinct groups of Celts did know how to write. The ones in Italy and near France adopted Old Italic and Greek. Celtiberians adopted the Greek alphabet from Greek/Carthaginian colonies and the ones in Britain adopted the Latin script before the Romans had conquered them.

No Ancient Celtic works remained. What's left are inscriptions.

Look at all the civilizations of the past. Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, Jews, Greeks, Romans. All left works. Celt and Germanic savages only wrote down things like "Sven's Box".

...

WE WUZ CIVILIZED N SHIEET DA MED MAN BE LYIN BOUT OUR HISTORY SENPAI. WE WUZ KANGZ

You don't have to have writing to be a civilization

They were in the same level as West African kingdoms

Celts had their own standardized currency and even produced their own coins.

So did Jews

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekel

Ok and?

...

Yes you do. Sumeria is considered the first civilization because it was the first to have writing. If a society doesn't have writing it's just referred to as "culture" instead of civilization.

So the Incas weren't a civilization?

Cmon, this AT LEAST counts as a proto-civilization.

user just learned something cool and wanted to share it with you guys.

His mind will blow up when he realizes that a bunch of civilizations like Carthage used the shekel too.

He has a point. There's a big difference between writing actual texts and scratching out a few inscriptions on rocks and shit. Like in Ireland, ogham script was used purely to inscribe names on stones, and it wasn't until Latin was introduced that you get actual texts. I don't know much about Gaul and Briatin though, maybe they used writing more extensively.

You're a fucking idiot. The Sumerians are considered the first civilization because they were the first with permanent cites and bureaucratic states. Do you seriously think the Eastern Islanders were more civilized than the Incas?

w-what did you think Alesia was?

>He has a point. There's a big difference between writing actual texts and scratching out a few inscriptions on rocks and shit. Like in Ireland, ogham script was used purely to inscribe names on stones, and it wasn't until Latin was introduced that you get actual texts. I don't know much about Gaul and Briatin though, maybe they used writing more extensively.
Thanks. Caesar says in his commentaries that the druids of the Celts never wrote down anything on purpose. It was their savage culture.

>tfw can never recreate this in caesar III because walkers and caesar iv is shit

>Carthage used the shekel too
Their shekel was inspired by the Hebrew shekel.

I mean Phoenicians & Hebrews were both Canaanites so it makes sense

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanite_languages

Why would the most powerful empire in the Mediterranean adopt the currency of an irrelevant backwater? It even says in the article that shekels were used by all western Semites and that the Carthaginians developed theirs in Sicily.

...

They were the same thing. All the proto-Hebrew shekels literally are Canaanite shekels. Jewish culture is the only living successor to Canaanite culture.

They didn't. This is why they both used the Shekel.

Canaanites
⇨ Northern Canaanites
⇨ ⇨ Phoenicians
⇨ ⇨ ⇨ Carthaginians

Canaanites
⇨ Southern Canaanites
⇨ ⇨ Hebrews
⇨ ⇨ ⇨ Jews

Why do you think language familes and currency are the same thing?

>Northern/Southern Canaanite were a language family
>Jews are a language family
>Carthaginians are a language family

Literal brainlet. All i'm saying is they were cousin cultures, which is why they both had shekels.

Hold on, let me get this right. Celts are savages and not a proper civilization, because they did not produce works of literature and documents in their own language?

That's the more liberal definition of "civilization" which is defined as "living in cities". In that case we have to consider the Neolithic cultures as the first civilizations.

>Jews are a language family
>Carthaginians are a language family
What the fuck are you saying. They're a part of the same language family, you retard.

>All i'm saying is they were cousin cultures, which is why they both had shekels.
You said the Carthaginian shekel was inspired by the Hebrew one, and I'm telling you that's wrong. They developed it in Sicily in the 4th century, presumably based on other Phoenician currencies.

No, it's more that they lacked cities and organised states. Well really, there was civilization in Gaul but it was very, very brief. It basically had two phases, the first around 500 BC which lasted only about three generations, the second in the decades immediately before Roman conquest. So for most of their existence they weren't really 'civilized'.

>Hold on, let me get this right. Celts are savages and not a proper civilization, because they did not produce works of literature and documents in their own language?

They never wrote anything down, so their side in the story is completely lost, and we have only Roman sources. Which is why it's easy to call them savages, and to take Rome's side in things. They have themselves to blame.

>That's the more liberal definition of "civilization"
No, that's just the definition of civilization.
>The English word "civilization" comes from the 16th-century French civilisé ("civilized"), from Latin civilis ("civil"), related to civis ("citizen") and civitas ("city").
A more modern definition would be based on social complexity, but writing is hardly essential in any definition.

>which is defined as "living in cities". In that case we have to consider the Neolithic cultures as the first civilizations.
There were no cities in the Neolithic you dumbass, unless you're one of those idiots who who thinks every village is a city.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_of_civilization

>The earliest proto-urban settlements with several thousand inhabitants emerged in the Neolithic. The first cities to house several tens of thousands were Memphis and Uruk, by the 31st century BC (see Historical urban community sizes).

Yeah, thanks for agreeing with me I guess.

"several thousand inhabitants" still sound like a city to me.

>A proto-city is a large village or town of the Neolithic such as Jericho and Çatalhöyük, and also any prehistoric settlement which has both rural and urban features. A proto-city is distinguished from a true city in that it lacks planning and centralized rule.

>You said the Carthaginian shekel was inspired by the Hebrew one, and I'm telling you that's wrong
That wasn't me.

When people talk about "Celts" why do they seem to stop at the 1st century AD?

No the celtics were on par with medieval west africa and mesoamerican antiquity for sure. I prefer learning about celts to romans a lot of the tine. And I like the "celts were savages" meme because its nice to see we wuzzing snownigger white supremacists stumble over themselves to redefine what civilization is and what counts as legitemate organized society without accidently including the majority of the world in their definitions because god forbid the dignity of their LARPing is undermined

Because post-Roman Celtic speakers were never called Celts by anyone before modern times, because they never saw themselves as having some kind of connection with the likes of Iron Age Gaul, because modern scholars have pretty much abandoned the term outside of linguistics and because in general they were culturally closer with the likes of the Anglo-Saxons than Iron Age Celts.

>on par with medieval west africa and mesoamerican antiquity
Both of those had much more complex cities and states though, but then I guess the Celts had more complex technology.

There is some writing using greek letters. However, the druid class was against writing, they believed it weakened the mind.

Oppidum and the structure and éléments composition italienne are described in détail and near admiringly in thé War of thé Gauls

I thought this was. Veeky Forums redingote 101

If thats the case even better for making that point

Yes, but the functions that we commonly associate with urbanism happening inside a city usually happened in the city's hinterland, making them very low density.

Yes you do.

In War of the Gauls, Cesar describe how Germans do not sow or farm, their diet consisting mainly of meat, milk and fat (keto?) and how a tribe takes honor in having the vastest expanse of un-occupied land around them, the wider the empty zone, the bigger the prestige. So very few trade networks, no specialists-fed-by-food-surplus at least nowhere near Celts and romans. A wild land populated by wild peole

here
Oppidum and the structure and éléments composing it are described in détail and near admiringly in thé War of thé Gauls

I thought this was. Veeky Forums reading 101

>typing on a phone with man-bear fingers and french auto-correct on, fucking mess of a post

We could've had this but Caesar had to pay his (((denbts)))

>cologne
>celtic
>200 AD
>before Roman empire

Many ppl think anyone in Europe besides Romans and Greek were uncuvilized, They have no idea about the pre existent cultures in either South Europe or West Europe, to be fair Celts are much more well known to the average person than other civilized pre Roman cultures like Iberian, Tartessian, Nuragic, Danuan or Venetian

They were a civilization, they did have cities and shiet

Celts were kind of civilized but behind roman and greeks,they had kicked out their kings in some places and were starting to develop commerce when Caesar invaded.
Gauls around provence were obiously civilized but belgae sure as hell were not.

>Say that you're a sucker for geometry and public works
>Somehow user thinks this means the Celts

Because they're mostly larping, butthurt Latin American shitskins who don't actually read about history.

>Jews
Hehe

Then why should we call them savages? Why would you take up only on Roman sources to judge them as savages?

Stop posting this weird looking androgynous bitch.

>Persia
The only thing left in Old Persian are inscriptions

(F)ersians are barbarians too

He's a shitskin who probably hasn't actually read any works.

Did the West African kingdoms of antiquity have writing?

I know the Mesoamericans didn't, not even the Incas did, which still amazes me considering how advanced they were in other areas.

I keked

>Jews
Hebrews*

I mean persians saw greeks as barbarians

>Jewish culture
What culture?

Do you brainlet faggot believe modern "jews" culture is the same as hebrew culture?

Kill y
Fuck you self, imbecile

Not him but leave this site you unsufferable retard

Fuck off Khazar

Nobody believe that you are related to Hebrews

Where do I go if I wanted to learn about Gaul in depth? What are some books?

The celts also had cities and shit.
You’re being inconsistent.

>med supremacists
can we stop with this meme?

Who is "you"? I never said celts weren't a civilization, dickhead

Pre-Roman Celtic speakers never called themselves "Celts" except for one Gaulish tribe North of Marseille, it is only due to Caesar false claims that people think Gauls called themselves "Celts"

>were culturally closer with the likes of the Anglo-Saxons than Iron Age Celts
If i ask a Welsh, a Breton, or an Irish, i think they will claim otherwise

>All these wh*tes talking about their shitty stone age civilizations
>No love for my nubian megacivilization Egypt or the great and mighty Amerindians

Those werent actual houses though, they were mud or at most wood, Celts/Germanics didnt know how to build with stone

t. Matteo Rigattoni

>look at all my rendered icons of wooden houses and mud hutts of which 0 ruins exist
>wewuz ancient civilization
>wewuz better than rome
Meds BTFO

What are you talking about?

>Meds fucked their siblings but were somehow superior

Okay

Their Quipus count as a writting system, kind of.

Mayans had writing, Incas had a complex system of knotted rope that served the same purpose but thats definitely comparable to celtic runes n shit

>we have mud huts
>look at our civilization
>we put owmen in charge of EVERYTHING
>oh look at that we got genocided out of everywhere but brittany
>at least we have civilization desu
>romans were the barbarians
>cuz they don't have mud huts

>Doesn’t know what a mud hut is