|
 Log in |
Register
|
|
 Head To Head The Modern Antiquarian General Discussion Forum | Start a topic | Search |
 Communication problems 137 messages | Select a forum: |
| "That does seem to be an area of study that could illuminate our understanding of Bronze and Iron Age peoples" If only archaeologists everywhere spoke the same language! But let's not panic, there are various megalithic conventions around europe every year; comparative archaeology is alive. And researchers are taking more of this into account. A book like Bradley's comparative Rock Art would have been unthinkable years ago. There is just so much stuff that I doubt anyone alive can keep up with it all though. But I hope to one day! "There are so many similarities with Germanic beliefs and customs also and these wretched labels just get in the way. It is an accident of Roman terminology (as Tacitus clearly tells us) that we have the Germans on one side of the Rhine and the Gauls on the other. Ever since, they have been treated as different races. " Yes if you are saying that Europeans all descend from a common paleolithic root with 'later' additions. Countries are clearly not 'races'. If we go for 'ethnicities' or peoples however, we would have to look at each country one by one. France was always a collection of different nations - occitanians, catalans, basques, germanic alsatians, franks, gauls, etc and so was germany, where the only clearly *germanic* part was the north, indistinguishable from denmark and scandinavia for many centuries, living almost in isolation. The fact that these people began to stir and move southwards around the time of the romans and partly merged with/fought along the MAIN 'keltic' population of western germany must have moved the writers of the time to call them all Germanic in the same way that the greeks called everyone they met in Spain or France kelltoi. Both immediate sides of the Rhine clearly had the same people until today, rivers separate and join at the same time. Also, eastern germany had a high influx of slavs and the south a high degree of ancient alpine/north italian/dinaric elements. Parts of Mediterranean France (and Med Europe) for instance has had far more 'foreign' additions and migratory upheavals than anybody else. In other words, france does not equal germany but neither does ANY part of france or germany if we look in 'ethnic' terms. However, as you say, if we look at the bulk of the ancient original population, both countries have the same paleolithic stratum with IE additions but so has the czech republic or italy. The 'bulk' that genetic studies show the basques and the irish may preserve in common due to their luck- in -isolation is the same that each one of us has among many other extra IE additions. "If we could now start to look for similarities and differences in language, customs, artifacts and DNA without prejudice and without trying to make any particular case!!!" Ah but that is a different matter. Once modern politics gets in the way then things begin to fade. I am convinced that some archaeological researchers are often told to shut up. Tourism in 'celtic' Ireland, Wales or Galicia brings americans and dollars to europe. And nationalist / independentist parties in Iberia stick to their own 'archaeologies' as a form of rejection of Spanish culture. In that way, archaeology everywhere is damaged and will be hindered for many years to come. And the fact that modern languages separate EXACTLY the same megalithic cultural area (Portuguese-Spanish, French-German, etc etc) is actually far more common than anyone may think. Hence the need for researchers to begin getting multilingual ! It's been a real pleasure. XXX GP Reply | with quote | Posted by gorseddphungus 12th March 2006ce 23:52 In reply to: Re: mythography (PeterH) |
Messages in this topic: |
|