Celts seemed to have substantial territory, and done influence on the classical cultures of the Mediterranean. Why is it that they never seemed to make anything much beyond that era? I understand that Gaul was well on its way to being a nation of city-states, did Rome simply kill Celtic civilisation in its infancy? What made them never have their time like Slavs, Germanics, and Italics?
Celtic civilization died in the cradle
>>1186798
Stabbed to death by the eternal Latin
>>1186779
>did Rome simply kill Celtic civilisation in its infancy?
Pretty much
>What made them never have their time like Slavs, Germanics, and Italics?
They kind of did, just "their time" was so early that it's basically irrelevant by now.
>>1186798
with a silver spoon
>>1186779
>I understand that Gaul was well on its way to being a nation of city-states
Was it? Afaik the celts were politically organized in rather loose tribal confederations, that's totally different from city state organization.
>>1186845
Baby painted blue, man on the chariot
>>1186869
It had something to do with them creating neutral trading posts so that the clans could engage in peaceful commerce, and this was encouraging ever-growing permanent settlements.
>>1186779
the celts were romans. Any time the roman government left them ie britain and gaul, germanic people took over them
I don't want to get too /pol/ here but the British celtic people were never replaced, just ruled by different masters.
As said above the celtic ruling class was killed before it could take off, but I'd love to know cultural traits survived from the Celts and are about today but we don't realise.
>>1187728
Not to get even /pol/er, but don't the islands have a much larger pre-indo European farmer presence? You know the typical dark-haired Irish ?
>>1187774
>typical dark-haired Irish
Likely descendants of the Spanish sailors left by the wreck of the Armada.
>>1187817
Nope, descendants of Middle Eastern migrants from the neolithic
>>1186779
>did Rome simply kill Celtic civilisation in its infancy?
yes
and yes
>>1187728
500,000 Saxons would disagree with you
>>1187817
retard
>>1187728
Celtic is an ethnicity. That means they need things like their language, traditions, and religions to be Celtic. Otherwise, it's just a random haplotype. In fact, there's never been a gene that neatly coincides with any of these cultural groups.
>>1187728
Any Celtic influence in England is more likely to be from immigration or cultural contact with Wales, Ireland and Scotland than leftover pre-Roman Britain. There are some aspects of the English language that I suspect might come from Old British, but that's based on my knowledge of Irish and Irish and Old British are very different. It's basically just a guess.
Also early christianity in England was spread by Irish monks, so there was a certain amount of Celtic influence there, though it mainly passed with the arrival of the normans. The Old English shared a general political and cultural sphere with the Celts but after the Normans they were brought closer in line with the continent and were set up in opposition to the "savage" celts.
>>1187774
>>1187817
These are memes. The insular celts and to a slightly lesser extent the English have a varied set of phenotypes but these don't really correspond to any genetic markers. It's fairly common to have a random mix of characteristics, even within the same family, you could have a brother with blonde hair and brown eyes, another with red hair and blue, and another with black hair and green eyes. Nobody really knows why this is. I've even seen swarthy gingers with brown eyes. It's funny
