|
Post by Marcus on May 1, 2006 11:44:18 GMT -5
www.clannada.org/timeline.php The biggest and most detailed timeline of celtic History online! Begins at 1200 BCE and is still going at 1998 CE. Very detailed indeed!
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 3, 2006 20:34:09 GMT -5
www.clannada.org/timeline.php The biggest and most detailed timeline of celtic History online! Begins at 1200 BCE and is still going at 1998 CE. Very detailed indeed! I like this site Cu Chulainn! Isn't this the one you posted on the other site?
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on May 4, 2006 11:00:48 GMT -5
www.clannada.org/timeline.php The biggest and most detailed timeline of celtic History online! Begins at 1200 BCE and is still going at 1998 CE. Very detailed indeed! I like this site Cu Chulainn! Isn't this the one you posted on the other site? Yup tis indeed! I get all this stuff/links from the An Chartlann database at www.craobhcrua.org
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 5, 2006 12:54:44 GMT -5
I like this site Cu Chulainn! Isn't this the one you posted on the other site? Yup tis indeed! I get all this stuff/links from the An Chartlann database at www.craobhcrua.orgIt really is a shame we don't know more about the origins of our people. We do know that at one time there was a race known as Keltoi, though we have no idea whether they themselves used this term to describe themselves, or if they simply named through individual tribes. For all we know the term "celt" may be very wrong...The debate seems heated. What everyone does seem to agree on thanks to the texts Greeks and Romans, and archaeological evidence that there was a civilization near Greece's Aegean Sea in the third fourth millenennia B.C. This according to most scholars was most likely the same race that later moved out across Europe, becoming the many Celtic tribe most of which are still known today. It does seem likely...To me at least that all the "Celtic" practices may have come from a single denominator, made obvious by the similarities within each that are still there today.
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on May 5, 2006 13:25:38 GMT -5
It is still very unclear indeed.
There is absolutely no record of the term "Celt" being used in connection with the inhabitants of Ireland and Britain prior to the 19th century. Celt was just a name that Romans gave to the western tribes. The where not an empire.
Something that still confuses me alot is Ireland though. It has very little connection with the other "celtic lands" it was like a separate civilisation.
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 5, 2006 13:29:47 GMT -5
It is still very unclear indeed. There is absolutely no record of the term "Celt" being used in connection with the inhabitants of Ireland and Britain prior to the 19th century. Celt was just a name that Romans gave to the western tribes. The where not an empire. Something that still confuses me allot is Ireland though. It has very little connection with the other "Celtic lands" it was like a separate civilization. The Irish did seem to be cut off from the other Celtic lands for a good deal of time I think, however the similarities are very much there and strong, a testament I think to the effectiveness that an oral tradition can sometimes have.
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 5, 2006 13:33:51 GMT -5
Do you happen to remember where the 4 cities of the Tuatha De were, and where the texts say the Tuatha de came from?
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on May 5, 2006 13:51:05 GMT -5
It is still very unclear indeed. There is absolutely no record of the term "Celt" being used in connection with the inhabitants of Ireland and Britain prior to the 19th century. Celt was just a name that Romans gave to the western tribes. The where not an empire. Something that still confuses me allot is Ireland though. It has very little connection with the other "Celtic lands" it was like a separate civilization. The Irish did seem to be cut off from the other Celtic lands for a good deal of time I think, however the similarities are very much there and strong, a testament I think to the effectiveness that an oral tradition can sometimes have. Yes there are connections for sure. This is very evident in from Roman writings. We know that the Irish helped the Britons fight the Romans and the Saxons so they are obviously closely linked. What i meant was earlier in time when the celts first settled in Europe.
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 5, 2006 13:54:39 GMT -5
The Irish did seem to be cut off from the other Celtic lands for a good deal of time I think, however the similarities are very much there and strong, a testament I think to the effectiveness that an oral tradition can sometimes have. Yes there are connections for sure. This is very evident in from Roman writings. We know that the Irish helped the Britons fight the Romans and the Saxons so they are obviously closely linked. What i meant was earlier in time when the celts first settled in Europe. The Keltoi I think were in the 3rd and 4th millenniam BC...Is that what you meant?
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on May 6, 2006 13:23:58 GMT -5
when the celts first settled in Europe. I thought "Keltoi" was just the Greek way of saying Celt? Do you mean that the Keltoi and Celts where separate peoples? I never thought of that.
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 8, 2006 15:34:23 GMT -5
when the celts first settled in Europe. I thought "Keltoi" was just the Greek way of saying Celt? Do you mean that the Keltoi and Celts where separate peoples? I never thought of that. I think "Keltoi" was a way for the Greeks to categorize a people who had no name for their people as a whole, only tribal names. The first time "Keltoi" is ever mentioned is by Hecataeus in 517 BC, and by this time they were already dominating much of Europe (Having already sacked Rome in 390 BC and several Greek cities including Delphi by 280 BC). Hecataeus locates the "Keltoi" tribe to be in Rhenania which was around Southwestern Germany...However given the information in the above post the term seems to have been a wide spread classification. The Roman term for Keltoi was of course Celtae. However this term was used as a term for the continental Gauls, and not the "Insular Celts" who actually were divided into two groups the Goidhels and the Britons. The Greeks even had a god named for the Celts called Celtus, son of Heracules and Celtine according to Wikipeidia...It would make an interesting debate..."Celt or Keltoi". I think the word evolved from a common root...However I wonder if the term "Kelt" was a common rootword for many tribes and Celtic cultures.
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on May 9, 2006 12:10:27 GMT -5
I allways just assumed that Keltoi was the same as Celtic and the celtic was the name the romans or greeks gave to the western tribes of Gaul and Britain.
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 9, 2006 13:02:48 GMT -5
I allways just assumed that Keltoi was the same as Celtic and the celtic was the name the romans or greeks gave to the western tribes of Gaul and Britain. Well, it may have been...Theres just not that much known about the term only what is written by the Greeks and Romans. Though I do wonder if the common denominator here is some old Celtic word.
|
|
|
Post by ceilteachdragan on May 15, 2006 15:35:37 GMT -5
Mind you, i'm still new to all this myself, but the very liitle research i've done seems to point this way... Nobody really knows for sure where The Tuatha De Danann came from other than a referense to "The Islands in the North." Of course, there is much debate as to where this might be. Some say North Wales. Others have actually claimed that the Tuatha De may actually be of Norse origin. I'll have to find the site where i found that again. I'll post a link when i find it.
|
|
|
Post by Senbecc on May 15, 2006 16:12:59 GMT -5
Mind you, i'm still new to all this myself, but the very liitle research i've done seems to point this way... Nobody really knows for sure where The Tuatha De Danann came from other than a referense to "The Islands in the North." Of course, there is much debate as to where this might be. Some say North Wales. Others have actually claimed that the Tuatha De may actually be of Norse origin. I'll have to find the site where i found that again. I'll post a link when i find it. The four cities are infact under debate, some say that the four were spread to the four directions, However like the Fir Bolg it is believed by most that the Tuatha Dé Danann were descended from Nemed. The Genealogies show this. "They came from the north of the world, Greece and then Scotland (Ireland and what is Scotland today)." Lebor Gabala Erin Also the Norse were not much more advanced at the time then the people of Ireland, and the Tuatha were said to have great advancements in technologies...
|
|