tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post8624627365164946999..comments2024-03-09T15:46:44.638+01:00Comments on For what they were... we are: Basque autosomal geneticsMajuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comBlogger173125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-11681779051925839732011-09-20T17:10:19.963+02:002011-09-20T17:10:19.963+02:00Ok, thanks (again) Heraus. I'm hence closing c...Ok, thanks (again) Heraus. I'm hence closing comments now.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-10611189987355666502011-09-20T16:32:55.493+02:002011-09-20T16:32:55.493+02:00The discussion is indeed becoming meaningless : Ca...The discussion is indeed becoming meaningless : Carpeta can contact me on my blog on whichever entry he wishes so that I can answer him as I'm clueless about what remains to be told now that the debate is derailed.Heraushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032921971763481466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-11658709926661088202011-09-20T16:27:41.933+02:002011-09-20T16:27:41.933+02:00It seems that Blogger Spam Filter has you in some ...It seems that Blogger Spam Filter has you in some blacklist... wonder why. <br /><br />Your comments have been restored.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-75204483632909721402011-09-20T13:26:31.455+02:002011-09-20T13:26:31.455+02:00I agree with the closing (truth hurts ?). You are ...I agree with the closing (truth hurts ?). You are repeating same arguments again and again based in Fernandez and Aznar onomastics non-science (no datation =speculation: that´s history). <br /><br />But my comment (the one you are commenting) is not appearing. Pls check. Also I do not know if you received my answer to Heraus. Pls confirm.<br />Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-31192630621165676442011-09-20T02:56:19.594+02:002011-09-20T02:56:19.594+02:00It's you who is extending this quite empty deb...It's you who is extending this quite empty debate. Anyhow:<br /><br />1. If you do not have at least two languages you cannot get a proto-language. I don't care what you or others say but 1x1=1, not 2.<br /><br />2. "undated onomastics (of any kind) has zero scientific value"...<br /><br />It has scientific value, just that you prefer to disdain them on any grounds. <br /><br />Also from context we have dates: Roman Age, probably early.<br /><br />"could be from I b.C to IX b.C when romances developped"...<br /><br />9th century "before Christ" was when "Romances developed"? <br /><br />I do not think you have any grounds to claim they are Medieval. They are Roman era. And the use of classic Latin and not Vulgar Latin (as in Veleia, for example) strongly suggests early Roman era.<br /><br />There's no other blind than who does not want to see. <br /><br />"Comparing Aquitaine with La Rioja is dumb".<br /><br />Why? Aquitaine is larger, indeed. But both are peripheral Basque areas, more exposed to Roman influences like Latin or writing than the core. <br /><br />"aquitaine south of garrone with Navarra, whole Basque country, Part of Burgos, La Rioja, Norht of Soria, and parts of Huesca".<br /><br />That was exactly my point on density. It was you who raised the issue of density but I have not yet seen any figure like 3 slabs per square km or whatever. It's all but a rant. <br /><br />"Not a single celt tribe was called Celtiberian".<br /><br />I do have several books as well on the matter as well and Celtiberi were a single ethnicity living mostly in Soria, Teruel, Calatayud... Roman historians (Pliny I believe) gathers their own legend on how Celts and Iberians were fiercely confronted to each other in the area but eventually they signed some sort of peace and merged. Ovid, if my memory is correct, considers the Celtiberians the only civilized Celts, etc. <br /><br />Some authors (but almost never Spanish ones) confuse Celtiberi(an) with Celts of Iberia but this is just wrong. <br /><br />"Regarding IE you consider mere hypothesis as facts".<br /><br />Theory. The Kurgan model is far more solid than any mere hypothesis. <br /><br />Not only that: it is the only model that isn't full of holes. <br /><br />"you views are out of the general consensus at present"<br /><br />Re. Ligurians and Picts? Maybe but that's only because most Europeans speak primarily or only Indoeuropean and they are shaped by that. They choose because they are ethnically and they are ethnically because they speak a language: being IEs it's very difficult for them to think on pre-IEs and such. <br /><br />In any case the evidence is nearly zero in both cases (excepted toponimy and archaeology, which support the pre-IE models at least to some extent) and it is all wild speculation. <br /><br />When Heraus replies I'm closing this discussion. It has long outlived its usefulness. Thanks for nothing Carpeta.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-75654042744855329962011-09-19T20:23:08.177+02:002011-09-19T20:23:08.177+02:00Is there a limit of 164 comments per thread or wha...Is there a limit of 164 comments per thread or what ? Pls check again my last comment. Thanks. <br /><br />I have one pending for answer Heraus.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-10645732856363204992011-09-19T20:10:58.163+02:002011-09-19T20:10:58.163+02:00Heraus,
Maju is not serving me even as a sparrin...Heraus, <br /><br />Maju is not serving me even as a sparring. You seem best documented. <br /><br />Linguistics and onomastics:<br /><br />You say: <br />“I do possess "El Euskara en La Rioja. Primeros testimonios". IMO after reading this book, the case is closed : there is enough evidence that a Basque dialect was spoken in La Rioja, a Basque dialect the characteristics of which can”. <br /><br />Once again but surelly not last: dates ? I´m not denying that basque was spoken south of the pyrenees at some point of history (even today), there are basque toponimics....the point is when ?<br /><br />Basque dense population in some parts of La Rioja is well explained because it was the frontier with Castilla and Aragon in middle ages. <br /><br />You say:<br />“Basque dialects are probably a reduced illusion of what once were large dialectal domains” and . <br />“I would not be surprised if Biscayan could be proved to be what remains of a greater domain that once spanned Cantabria”. <br /><br />Basque dialects can be explained by elite basque expansion in areas were basque was not spoken. This explains also the fact that Vizcayan dialect is (according to Gorrochategui) more similar to Souletine (Roncalese) than to others. <br /><br />2 History: <br />Adour as a limit. <br />Your point then is that until 13 century AD basques were aplenty in right bank adour ? It is possible that you are right. I´ve not studied well this issue north of the pyrenees. It could be the case that the expansion of basque south of pyrenees did not implied north retraction. <br /><br />Cantabrian tribes: <br />You say: “I don't doubt that IE languages were spoken amongst these tribes, the issue here is to discuss whether or not celtization was really that deep and it's just impossible to know with few tribe names of IE origins”. <br />This is exactly the issue Villar adresses from the linguistic point of view and there is no doubt. Other has studied from other points of view (archeologic etc...) with same conclusions. All these tribes were IE. Pls note that for villar Ancient means pre-roman sources or sources that were based in pre-roman sources. <br /><br />“When you ally with someone, it's best to at least be buddies. If family, that's even greater. If anything, that Cantabrians and Aquitanians allied against the Romans prove they shared much more than being neighbours. The Aquitanians did not side with the Gauls when they were invaded by Caesar.”. I disagree and I can show you many cases of ancient tribes ´wherever in europe that allied with unrelated (by family) neighbours. <br /> <br />3. Genetics: <br />“As for them being newcomers, you'll have to explain why their modern descendants do show classical West European haplogroups and amongst Europeans are those who exihit the most little affinity with West Asians”. <br /><br />That´s a good point..Can you be more concrete about this lack of affinity ? Y-cromosome ?.mtDNA ? autosomal ? For instance regarding some classical markers (i.e. RH) basques are quite similar to some caucasians. This has been explained as drift until now. Paper citation are welcome pls. <br /><br />ps. Maju, I messed up my google account. I had to open a new one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-74850669050555688352011-09-19T20:09:02.170+02:002011-09-19T20:09:02.170+02:00Maju,
1. Linguistics: Your views on proto-basque...Maju, <br /><br />1. Linguistics: Your views on proto-basque and dialectization (your theory has no historical sense) differs from specialists. No more to discuss about this. <br /><br />2. Onomastics: <br /><br />Heraus paper: how many times should I repeat that undated onomastics (of any kind) has zero scientific value ? It´s like ceramic without context. Useless for scientific purposes. These latin/basque epigraphics could be from I b.C to IX b.C when romances developped. Is this range informative in our discussion ? Aznar´s is just an interview full of “I believe”, “My opinion”. It is ok to have beliefs and opinions. Science consist in proving that your beliefs and opinions are those that fits with facts and external evidences. Regarding Basque Pyrenean toponimics. Preciselly Villar (2005) adresses all these issues, debunking such claims in the south in pre-roman times. He talks a lot about Tovar. Of course i can not summarize in a comment 600 pages of a well argumented book. Definitivelly you need to find this book. It is a must for all those which want to debate these issues. <br /><br />Finally, again you show a very short mathematical and scientific method knowledge. Comparing Aquitaine with La Rioja is dumb. You have to compare areas of claimed ancient basque language: aquitaine south of garrone with Navarra, whole Basque country, Part of Burgos, La Rioja, Norht of Soria, and parts of Huesca. Right ? See the maps you link (which in fact show the maps of navarra kingdom at its maximum extension). Then my claim holds. <br /><br />3. History. <br /><br />Celtiberians (I do posses the books i quoted, by far more complete than the wikipedia article), IE...are asides debates that add nothing. Not a single celt tribe was called Celtiberian. This was a greek name for the celts in Iberia the new the better: those in the Iberian mountains. Regarding IE you consider mere hypothesis as facts. In any case Kurgan or not, what does it changes for our debate ? It could be the case that there was languages previous to IE in europe and that basque was a late comer as I hypothesize and as it was the case possibly for etruscan. Same for Picts and ligurians: you views are out of the general consensus at present (pls read wikipedia article (english version)). <br /><br />(cont. answer to Heraus.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-28812309856939931582011-09-19T17:59:14.438+02:002011-09-19T17:59:14.438+02:00Maju,
1. Linguistics: Your views on proto-basque...Maju, <br /><br />1. Linguistics: Your views on proto-basque and dialectization (your theory has no historical sense) are not accepted even by basque specialists. No more to discuss about this. <br /><br />2. Onomastics: <br /><br />Heraus paper: how many times should I repeat that undated onomastics (of any kind) has zero scientific value ? It´s like ceramic without context. Useless for scientific purposes. These latin/basque epigraphics could be from I b.C to IX b.C when romances developped. Is this range informative in our discussion ? Aznar´s is just an interview full of “I believe”, “My opinion”. It is ok to have beliefs and opinions. Science consist in proving that your beliefs and opinions are those that fits with facts and external evidences. Regarding Basque Pyrenean toponimics. Preciselly Villar (2005) adresses all these issues, debunking such claims in the south in pre-roman times. He talks a lot about Tovar. Of course i can not summarize in a comment 600 pages of a well argumented book. Definitivelly you need to find this book. It is a must for all those which want to debate these issues. <br /><br />Finally, again you show a very short mathematical and scientific method knowledge. Comparing Aquitaine with La Rioja is dumb. You have to compare areas of claimed ancient basque language: aquitaine south of garrone with Navarra, whole Basque country, Part of Burgos, La Rioja, Norht of Soria, and parts of Huesca. Right ? See the maps you link (which in fact show the maps of navarra kingdom at its maximum extension). Then my claim holds. <br /><br />3. History. <br /><br />Celtiberians (I do posses the books i quoted, by far more complete than the wikipedia article), IE...are asides debates that add nothing. Not a single celt tribe was called Celtiberian. This was a greek name for the celts in Iberia the new the better: those in the Iberian mountains. Regarding IE you consider mere hypothesis as facts. In any case Kurgan or not, what does it changes for our debate ? It could be the case that there was languages previous to IE in europe and that basque was a late comer as I hypothesize and as it was the case possibly for etruscan. Same for Picts and ligurians: you views are out of the general consensus at present (pls read wikipedia article (english version)). <br /><br />Cromlechs iron age ok, but when in Iron age ? Aquitanian III b.C. is Iron age. <br /><br />In short, Maju, do you really have any serious unflawed argument that falsifies my hypothesis of basques as late III century bC late comers ? <br /><br />(cont. answer to Heraus).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-18395518046917180632011-09-19T17:16:37.668+02:002011-09-19T17:16:37.668+02:00Oki, Carpeta, you are a fool: what you say makes n...Oki, Carpeta, you are a fool: what you say makes no sense at all. <br /><br />"Maybe all of this will evaporate".<br /><br />I don't know in your mind but in reality it is already less than vapor. <br /><br />"You probably know more than me about the pyrenean cromlechs: when are they dated ?"<br /><br />They are Iron Age. What is most intriguing to me however is that they only precursor I know of is in the Mid-Danubian area, some 3000 years earlier: the Boléraz group.<br /><br />But the cromlechs or stone rings are not defining of Basque-Aquitanian ethnic culture: they are too restricted to the mountains for that.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-81214293002721727542011-09-19T16:29:27.067+02:002011-09-19T16:29:27.067+02:00Maju,
You are right that all this seems very spe...Maju, <br /><br />You are right that all this seems very speculative. By now I´m only collecting pieces and putting it together to see if the is any puzzle. Maybe all of this will evaporate.<br /><br />I´ve read somewhere that the Pyrenean cromlech limits is just the Aralar-Urumea line to the west and the Aran Valley to the east. <br /><br />You probably know more than me about the pyrenean cromlechs: when are they dated ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-21792642862314322732011-09-19T16:18:43.205+02:002011-09-19T16:18:43.205+02:00Maju,
Apparently it is not only a mere coinciden...Maju, <br /><br />Apparently it is not only a mere coincidence of sounds (this is possible as you say). <br /><br />You like geometry ? Then take your atlas, cut the middle- east part translate and rotate it in order Babylonia point fits with Bayona.<br /><br />(this is the toponimics that is still unexplained, check french wikipedia page; also Adour comes from the Athurates people, there is no doubt about this, which was the name of Assyria in Achemedid persia; Urmia is the name of a lake now in NWIran). <br /><br />What do you see ? Apparently there is an isomorphism where toponimics coincide in orientation and topography in both places. <br /><br />If it is confirmed (as you say it might be just sound and places coincidences) that this is not coincidence but design, when did this design arised ? The names used (Persian times) gives us an upper bound of V century b.C.<br /><br />A first posibility is that this desing was effected when these tribes arrived there (around III b.C). Another is later during middle ages. <br /><br />p.s. Thanks for pointing to Octavia blog. I wonder what he thinks about my hypothesis. He seems to favour a sooner entry of basque in Europe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-82170237189086326422011-09-19T15:30:35.991+02:002011-09-19T15:30:35.991+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-6050197185807593092011-09-19T14:44:16.107+02:002011-09-19T14:44:16.107+02:00"Toponimics in basque area. Araxes, Urumea (=..."Toponimics in basque area. Araxes, Urumea (=Urmia), Aralar (=Ararat)"<br /><br />The = signs would need to be demonstrated: urumea means "child of water" how is Urmia related (if at all)?! Aralar means "pasture of the valley" (which is, by the way), how is it related to Ararat?! I do not say they are not but you have to demonstrate it, to show that, for example, in Hurro-Urartean these words mean something similar. <br /><br />Otherwise it's a mere coincidence of sound, which happens all the time. Ur, uru in Sumerian by the way is "city", not water. It's probably related to Basque uri, iri (modern hiri), as in Uribe or Basauri, but that is Neolithic or Chalcolithic wanderwort for "town" (see also urbs, Ilion, Iriko-Jerico, etc.)<br /><br />"Babilone?(unexplained"...<br /><br />Babylon is totally explained: Semitic Bab (wall) + pre-Semitic ilu, ilon, iri, uru... (city). Walled City. Similarly Irisalem (Jerusalem) is Blessed City, etc. <br /><br />"Adour=¿"<br /><br />Adur means saliva, mucosity, drool. Probably in the past <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humorism" rel="nofollow">humor</a> (medical sense) and therefore the "magic flow" that permeates all. It is a very appropriate name for a river and is also related without almost any doubt to the widespread <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_European_hydronymy" rel="nofollow">pre-IE dur-/tur-</a> (Durus, Turia, Dour, Drawa...). <br /><br />You speculate wildly... according to your knowledge, which is very limited. <br /><br />"Baztan=¿from Urartian Bestam/Bastam fortress in Iran Azerbayan?"<br /><br />It is absolutely crazy. Baztan surely has the same root as batzarre (assembly) or bazterra (shore... of the Bidasoa river). <br /><br />This only shows how someone who wishes to see X will see X in this slippery zone of linguistics, specially if ignorant of the involved languages and local histories. <br /><br />"P.s. I missed Octaviá comments."<br /><br />You can go and visit <a href="http://vasco-caucasian.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">his blog</a>. There you can discuss nonsense with each other forever.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-12442487006777023632011-09-19T12:49:56.838+02:002011-09-19T12:49:56.838+02:00Just for completeness regarding languages. South a...Just for completeness regarding languages. South and east of mesopotamia other languages were spoken (Sumerian and Elamite), at present considered isolates. Some hypothesis relate them with Hurrite-like languages, some with Dravidian.The dravidian hypothesis implies that either sumerians came from SA either that Harapans came from middle east. A possible intermediate site is Jiroft.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-12721793346599330792011-09-19T12:36:44.688+02:002011-09-19T12:36:44.688+02:00b) Toponimics in basque area. Araxes, Urumea (=Urm...b) Toponimics in basque area. Araxes, Urumea (=Urmia), Aralar (=Ararat) toponimics in Guipuzcoa are possibly not causual. Just the tip of an Iceberg. It seems that when expanding in higher middle ages Basque were already aware of their middle-eastern origins and were renaming the area with middle eastern toponimics: <br />--Bayone=¿Babilone?(unexplained, you can read the french entry in wikipedia)=Babilone<br />--Adour=¿Athure=Assirya?<br />--Elusates=mercenaries from the palestinian Elusates ? <br />--Midour=¿from Medes/Media?<br />--Baztan=¿from Urartian Bestam/Bastam fortress in Iran Azerbayan?<br />etc... <br /><br />I agree that until now this might seem highly speculative, but some structure is emerging. <br /><br />P.s. I missed Octaviá comments. He seems to be an expert in this Vasco-Caucasian issue...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-71467699881063553292011-09-19T12:34:29.667+02:002011-09-19T12:34:29.667+02:00Thanks all for your informative comments. Highly b...Thanks all for your informative comments. Highly busy at present to answer all. Will try to answer asap. I want tor ead this Aznar paper first. <br /><br />After reading a lot about ancient middle-east history I see my hypothesis more and more plausible. <br /><br />To be more concrete about my hypothesis, Galatians were acting as mercenaries in the middle eastern area and quite possibly some of them went to Aquitania in III b.C. with some other mercenaries from Assyria, from Palestine, from Pontus area,. These mercenaries probably forgot these antecedents that were rediscovered later (possibly after the Crusades). <br /><br />Some impressionistic (impresionantes ?) highlights. <br /><br />a) Assyria in achemenid persia was named Athura (from here came Athurates). <br /><br />As you know from the begining of history in this area there were at least 3 language families attested (source: Mario Liverani, el Antiguo Oriente): <br />--Semitic in Levant and the steppes of the south mesopotamia, <br />then Akadia, Babilonia etc...<br />--Indoeuropean in West anatolia and west iran (Gutians were very possibly IE, attested 2200Bc and related with tocharians, called yuechi. I know chinese and that´s how a chinese will pronounce Guti; Hitites attested since asirian colonies period, source Trevor Bryce, El reino de los Hititas)<br />--the language speaked by Hurrians, Hattis etc...This language family is less known but it was pervasive in anatolia and northern mesopotamia and North West Iran. In short all around Armenian mountains: upper reaches of Eufrates and Tigris (this part later called Assyria), East and south-east Lake Urmia (where hurrian like speakers Manneans lived), the later Atropatene satrapy, Transcaucasia and the poontic area later occupied by the Kingdom of Pontus. <br /><br />(cont.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-52677298124700591852011-09-18T23:46:26.503+02:002011-09-18T23:46:26.503+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-4879731884415837112011-09-18T22:24:37.528+02:002011-09-18T22:24:37.528+02:00Octavià: you know you are persona non grata: you c...Octavià: you know you are persona non grata: you can be posting like forever, many comments per day and with eternal ramifications.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-79785638457721194462011-09-18T11:48:55.474+02:002011-09-18T11:48:55.474+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-60642820430401284642011-09-18T11:33:32.252+02:002011-09-18T11:33:32.252+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-40617581561110517292011-09-18T11:15:56.258+02:002011-09-18T11:15:56.258+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-49846141504494571222011-09-18T10:35:45.497+02:002011-09-18T10:35:45.497+02:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Octavià Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14569731729402710400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-70312470466557293202011-09-18T06:24:28.290+02:002011-09-18T06:24:28.290+02:00"I don't doubt that IE languages were spo..."I don't doubt that IE languages were spoken amongst these tribes"...<br /><br />I do. Of course we're not talkin of the occasional bilingual individual, or at the border strip, but large sectors of the populace. I understand that in the mid-run people (specially in times without schools or TV) speak this or that and that bilingualism is exceptional, affecting either individuals or whole border strips (where many individuals are bilingual but not all and anyhow one or the other language has clear preeminence in daily affairs) but not whole tribes or regions. <br /><br />I find that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Languages_of_pre-Roman_Iberia.jpg" rel="nofollow">Celtic toponimy</a> is restricted to the border zone, south of the Ebro (Flaviobriga does not count, being a Roman foundation), an area with alleged Celtic texts (one of which at least sounds Basque to me). <br /><br />There's even less linguistic evidence of Celtic in the land of Cantabri and Astures, BTW. And even in Gallaecia it is quite weak.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-66178106354709421152011-09-18T01:21:45.780+02:002011-09-18T01:21:45.780+02:00carpetanuiq :
"There is no doubt in academi...carpetanuiq : <br /><br />"There is no doubt in academic circles (even in nationalist academic circles) that Galicians, Asturians, Cantabrians, Autrigones, Vardules and Caristios were IE or celtic when romans came to the peninsula."<br /><br />I don't doubt that IE languages were spoken amongst these tribes, the issue here is to discuss whether or not celtization was really that deep and it's just impossible to know with few tribe names of IE origins. For instance, in Aquitania, if one had a look at the first names of Aquitanian leader (such as Adietanus, the chief of the Sotiates) or those of the inhabitants of Lugdunum Convenarum, one could build whole theories about Aquitanians being Celtic, yet we're blessed with first names from more humble people both amongst the Sotiates and the Convenae which prove the Basque character of the autochtonous inhabitants, the elite having adopte other customs, first Celtic then Latin.<br /><br /><br />"The situation regarding Bascones is unclear (I´ve changed opinion several times, evidence that the evidence is not conclusive). The situation regarding aquitanians is clear: some were celtic, some were euskaldun (according to my hypothesis newcomers from asia Minor, with Volques and Boiis). "<br /><br /><br />If there were Celtic Aquitanians then they were not Aquitanian by definition, Aquitanian being the name given to non-Celtic people of SW Gaul.<br /><br />As for them being newcomers, you'll have to explain why their modern descendants do show classical West European haplogroups and amongst Europeans are those who exihit the most little affinity with West Asians.<br /><br /><br /><br />"The correct methodology is the one followed by Villar: take ancient toponimics in ancient well-dated documents and then make the ethymological analysis. Anything diferent is unbased especualtion."<br /><br /><br />AGIRSAR, ATTAS, ARANCIS, AGIRSEN, SESENCO, OANDISSEN, LESURIDANTAR, ... are all ancient Riojano first names. In the East of modern Rioja and around Tarazona, were Vasconian cities named Ilurci (then renamed as Graccurri), Calagorri, Ergavia, Araceli, Bendian, ... In Beronian lands were Varea/Uara which may be IE indeed, Bibilium, Libia and Vergegio (modern Berceo). Vergegio can be analyzed thanks to Celtic but after all, one could very well believe that it is linked with Basque (h)egio "zone" found in Alavese Basque : see Aznar's book for the remainder of the demonstration.<br /><br /><br />"During the roman empire construction many peoples allied with their neighbours. That quote might be evidence that autrigones, caristios and vardulos were considered cantabrians. "<br /><br />When you ally with someone, it's best to at least be buddies. If family, that's even greater. If anything, that Cantabrians and Aquitanians allied against the Romans prove they shared much more than being neighbours. The Aquitanians did not side with the Gauls when they were invaded by Caesar.Heraushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07032921971763481466noreply@blogger.com