Where was the ancient "Gaul" located?

Is it important that I agree or not? Do you have a better hypothesis, other than what most scholars believe?

http://www.fact-archive.com/encyclopedia/Celt : The Celtic language family is a branch of the larger Indo-European family, which leads some scholars to a hypothesis that the original speakers of the Celtic proto-language may have arisen in the Pontic-Caspian steppes.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri There is certianly a relation between Gaels, Gauls, Gallians, Galatians,

http://www.giftofireland.com/Celticmummies.html 

Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 02-Sep-2008 at 21:12

I think it is because you learn new things here!  Lets compare Celtic and Tucharian numerlas:

Proto Celtic
1. oinos -> Tocharian "sas"? / Gaulish "oino"
2. d(w)oßu -> Tocharian "wu" / Gaulish "do"
3. treis -> Tocharian "tre" / Gaulish "tri"
4. kwetwar(s) -> Tocharian "sêtwar" / Gaulish "petvar"
5.  kwenkwe -> Tocharian "paànþ" / Gaulish "pinpe"
6. swe(k)s -> Tocharian "sŽaàk" / Gaulish "suekos"
7. sektnŽ -> Tocharian "sŽpaàt" / Gaulish "sextam"
8. okto -> Tocharian "okaàt" / Gaulish "oxtu"
9. nauin -> Tocharian "nþu" / Gaulish "nau"
10. deknŽ -> Tocharian "sêaàk" / Gaulish "decam"

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Styrbiorn, it seems you believe there has never been any migration to Europe and all peoples of this continent have alwyas lived there! It is really interesting for me that you prefer to believe the existence of the Copernican science in the ancient times but not a Gaulish presence in the east of the Caspian sea!!

There were plenty of migrations, no doubt about that. You are inventing things though. Misreading ancient sources, mixing up Gaeli with Galli, basing arguments on pre-industrial propagandists and never criticise your sources. Stop doing those things and I promise people will start listening to you more.

You even misunderstand in this very post. No one has been talking about Copernican science in the ancient time. Read this carefully: the Greeks knew the world was round, and even measured it's circumference.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri I think it is because you learn new things here!  Lets compare Celtic and Tucharian numerlas:

Or maybe we are amusing him ;)
Tocharian and Celtic languages are both Indo-European...  this seems like a repeat.

I have a feeling this is turning out to be yet another Scythian thread.


Edited by Styrbiorn - 03-Sep-2008 at 09:22

Cyrus admit it! You're joking! I know you are.

There were plenty of migrations, no doubt about that.

just from an European country to another, not from Asia, Afr, yes?!

Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 03-Sep-2008 at 18:52

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri just from an European country to another, not from Asia, Afr, yes?!

No, there were plenty of those as well. Doesn't make it right to invent some based only on name comparisons.

The problem is just that you believe in no sources, even modern websites!

I don't give much credit to the sources you have presented, no. Try to choose some more modern sources instead of posting pseudo-historians, 19th century propagandists and similar.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Did Pilny mean Gaul-istan (Golestan) province in the north-east of Iran? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golest%C4%81n_Province

Another Saka-gerrak?? When are the Slavs on turn?? Perhaps Republika Polska would be in fact pol-saka??


Edited by Slayertplsko - 03-Sep-2008 at 20:41

I say it again that Pliny knew there were some Gaulish people beyond the Caspian sea, so he thought the world should be similar to it:

... For it has been explored not only by the arms of Alexander the Great and of the kings who succeeded him, by Seleucus and Antiochus, who sailed round even to the Caspian and Hyrcanian Sea ...

It is obvious if you read this chapter: Book 6, Chapter 39 about the earth division into parallel circles.