I
have serious troubles with a list who makes problems
when the lutherie of a HG is discussed but who loves
it to “gossips” around on Celtic…
-----Oorspronkelijk
bericht-----
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Oscar
Picazo Ruiz
Verzonden: donderdag 12 oktober
2006 17:02
Aan: [email protected]
Onderwerp: Re: OT celts was: Re:
[HG] From the Savannah Morning News Today....
Hello,
interesting off-topic discussion.
I think what Simon points out (correct me if I am
wrong) is that the term Celtic has now become a kind of fashion, sometimes very
related to celtic music being nowadays in the top-40's, and not really a term
meaning the real history of those people.
In Spain there has been a rising interest in celtic music since about
ten-fifteen years ago, due to the success of some pop-techno-celtic projects by
Hevia or Carlos Nuñez. The Ortigueira Interceltic Festival gathered
more than 60thousand people last year. Music is a very important
part of culture and also marketing this days, that it is very easy for the
audience to make a relationship between country-culture-music. So as you
pointed out, they listen bagpipes and think celtic in a flash...
Even the term Celtic has a lot of acceptions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic
So... what are we referring with "Celtic"?
Some history of Galicia, the spanish page is more extense, but serves as an
intro:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Spain)
Another example is the Alboka, a double reed instrument played in the basque
country. It is really a very traditional basque instrument, related to the
gaita serrana, single reed, in Madrid, and gaita gastoreña, in Cadiz (the term
gaita here does not involve a bag). It seems the origin of all those
derivations is the arab al-buk. SO... is the basque country an arab culture?
NO. And it never had any kind of arab tradition.
Incidentally, the instrument was imported, adopted, improved, evolved, for
hundreds of years.
http://audio.ya.com/ibon-koteron/
one of the best alboka players, with info in english.
And also I find interesting that we have sort of mentioned three different
sources; written history and ethnology, linguistics, and genetics. A very
interesting book about this combination of sciences in historic research is "Genes, people and languages" by
Luigi-Lucca Cavalli Sforza, of which you can find an abstract here:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/94/15/7719
Sorry for the off-topic, interesting stuff don't you think?.
Best regards,
Oscar.
2006/10/12, Simon
Wascher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hello,
Am 12.10.2006 um 09:54 schrieb Christophe Tellart:
> Herodotus, ... Strabo and Plinius Secundus (Pliny the
Elder), also
> clearly refer to them in their works.
Do you know if any of these men ever was at those settlements he
described? ever spoke to the people they are writing
of? They also
wrote about things like Atlantis.
To me, these roman writers mainly proof that Romans belived that the
people in that area are named Kallaikoi - which someone else belived to
be the Greek name for the Gallaeci (or Callaeci), which someone else
belived to be a "Celtic" "tribe".
And a lot of the Roman sources is part of roman propaganda, like Iulius
Caesars writings. This is as if you want to understand Afghanistan from
KGB sources - starting with the fact that "Afghanistan"
is a colonial
construct.
> Archeologists and linguists have discovered
writings by Gallaeci which
> now attest they used to speak a Celtic language.
Last time I asked a linguist specialised in celtic
languages, he
mentioned findings of writings in todays France. This is the first time
I hear of celtic language writings being found in north west Spain.
If there are written findings of celtic languages in this area (where?)
I let myself be convinced.
> Their knowledge of bronze metalworking,
No. Coca Cola bottles in Poland today are by no means evidence to
proove that there are US-americans putting up settlements in Poland or
english being a native language. By the way, these bottles are not
imported, but produced locally.
> their customs and agricultural habits are other reliable evidences
> which prove they were Celts,
Their customs are described again by thesame roman writers (see above).
By the way, even if we find english writings in Poland today, this does
not proof that the people living there people speak
english.
> Another significant proof is that since the Bronze Age and like
many
> other Celtic tribes, former inhabitants of north-western Iberian
> peninsula used to protect their homes in castra (i. e.
walls,
> hillforts or castros, in Spanish)
The use of walls for protection against strangers is not sign of being
a "celt". Not more than the use of bagpipes.
>
> Some searchers say the last Galician Celtic speaker died
in the XVth
> century but I have never found any irrefutable argument in all my
> books and encyclopediae to confirm that fact...
how to confirm the death of a legend?
> The name of the country itself (Galicia) is eloquent enough and
> confirms its Celtic inheritance.
But you know that there is a large area in central Europa called
"Galicia"?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galicia_(Central_Europe)
and one in Turkey:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatia
and one in Romania:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gala%C5%A3i_County
Todays North-West Spain is not more "celtic" than Hungary,
Switzerland,
Belgium or other areas in Europe you want to chose. In all those
coutries somewhen somone lived who was called a "celt" by someone
else
somewhen.
> Celticness has become way too much a fashion,
sometimes...
Yes. There was a similar fashion about a hundred years ago in Europe:
Everyone wanted to be Germanic. We all know where it took us.
kind regards
Simon
|
