DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Progniusis** · 06-25-2012, 02:23 AM

Its not so much that as more the fact that "Celtic" people never referred to themselves as such at the macro level unlike the Slavs. The term doesn't come into play to lump people together who have an apparent "Celticness" together until much much later. It is a type of exonym rather than an endonym.

Oh I see. Well just because they didn't recognise their similarity to each other and their relationship it doesn't mean we shoudn't.

---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 19:25 ----------

It is possible that certain subclades of R1b picked up the Indo-European cultural package from R1a groups around Central/Eastern Europe and then moved West spreading the language and culture to their R1b kin.

The problem with that is, if the R1a and R1b people were so similar, how could they possibly speak languages from totally different families before this exchange took place?

06-25-2012, 02:23 AM	#10
Progniusis Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 477 Senior Member	Its not so much that as more the fact that "Celtic" people never referred to themselves as such at the macro level unlike the Slavs. The term doesn't come into play to lump people together who have an apparent "Celticness" together until much much later. It is a type of exonym rather than an endonym. Oh I see. Well just because they didn't recognise their similarity to each other and their relationship it doesn't mean we shoudn't. ---------- Post added 2012-06-24 at 19:25 ---------- It is possible that certain subclades of R1b picked up the Indo-European cultural package from R1a groups around Central/Eastern Europe and then moved West spreading the language and culture to their R1b kin. The problem with that is, if the R1a and R1b people were so similar, how could they possibly speak languages from totally different families before this exchange took place?
	Quote