![Whatever happened to the good ol days? [561x650 - 251KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/8uTqO7.jpg){kind=link}
I have no problem with the Gauls. I'll happily include them as a sister-race. I'll even call them "Honorary Whites".
But whatever common ancestry we share is older than the origins of the Germanic peoples. Which was the Battle Axe Culture. So, they aren't Germanic.
Yeah they diverged but came from the same stock.
Battle-axe was around 2800-2300 bc. It evolved into a proto-baltic branch and a proto-germanic-celtic branch. The culture ppl generally call celtic started around 1000 bc in central europe.
Yeah they diverged but came from the same stock.
We have no argument here. What I'm saying is that common stock between Celtic/Gaulish and Germanic isn't the Battle Axe Culture. It's some tribe of people between them and the Yamnaya Culture.
It was too long ago to honestly call these people the same people. I mean, the Celtic language and Germanic language branches are completely different branches on the Indo-European language tree.
We seem to be in agreement for the most part. But it seems like you are trying to argue something? Maybe it's just the internet and I'm not reading your intention correctly?
Not really trying to do anything other than discuss something that's pretty interesting and possibly learn more. Yeah sometimes it's hard to communicate via text.
Ive seen theories that the actual IE were the battle axe/corded ware people's rather than the yamnaya. Apparently germanics have the highest percentage of genes that correlate to IE speaking people's of anyone today. Which if they were the ones actually rolling around conquering everyone that would make sense.
I haven't heard the idea that celts diverged prior to that though. I believe celt is closer to germanic than southern euro IE languages.
(post is archived)