Re: [tied] Belgians and Gauls

From: fournet.arnaud
Message: 49645
Date: 2007-08-25

As I have already written to Torsten Pedersen,
I do not consider Caesar to be a reliable ethnologist.
 
Caesar is a Roman Middle-class prestige-obsessed bastard,
He conquered and killed as many countries and people as possible
in order to get what he was craving for :
A seat among the old-styled Roman upper-class.
In the end, He failed : this wild beast was killed
because he was becoming too much a danger to everybody.
 
I must reassert that there is nothing to support
this dichotomy between whatsoever Belgian and P-celt GAulish.
(This dichotomy ranks below Bull.Shit)
 
Place-names and French dialects
that have been carefully studied by competent lexicologists
such as Wartenburg and many others 
for 200 years
have never made necessary
that the Gaulish lexical heritage should be cut in two,
(or why not more than two).
 
As far as I can see,
The lexical and toponymic heritage
from the Loire River northward to the Rhine River
requires nothing else than P-Celt Speaking People :
that is to say obviously Gaulish people.
 
So far
the propagandists of this "Belgian" hypothesis
have utterly failed to bring any real FACT and DATA
that would make this hypothesis
anything but "spit in the air".
 
As for the Low-German
(Nederlants) pier "worm"
 
This word requires two comments :
 
1. it is from P-celt
PIE kwer "worm" hence P-celt Gaulish > Nederlants pier.
this makes GAulish the substrate under Nederlants.
 
If we are to find a pre-GAulish substrate in Dutch,
this is not the right word.
 
2. the PIE  "root" *kwerm" must be improved :
Root 1 : kwer "worm"
Root 2 : kum "ant" (with -r- infix)
 
Root 2 has macro-comparative cognates in Touareg root "kum"
Touareg has a reduplicated form : kedede-KUM "ant".
 
Thanks to GAulish preserved in Nederlants PIER,
we can sort out these two roots.
 
 
Please forward my warmest brotherly salutations to the Gwelgians.
They badly need a straw to grab.
 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: george knysh
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Belgians and Gauls


--- "fournet.arnaud" <fournet.arnaud@ wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

> The general opinion about the Celts is that they
> originate
> in the area North of the Alps (Present day Austria
> and Bavaria)
> probably occupying all the area from the Eastern
> bank of the Rhine to Lituania
> If these "Belgians" come from the eastern bank of
> the Rhine
> they just are Celtic.

****GK: Maybe. All we can say is that the language of
the Belgae proper was sufficiently sui generis for
Caesar to consider it as distinct and different from
that of the Gauls. Why should he have been lying about
this? He didn't about Ariovistus' linguistic
proficiencies. ****
>
> My point of view about these "Belgians" is that they
> either are
> a pre-celtic substrate or they just don't exist as a
> "particular" people.

****GK: I prefer Caesar's point (:=))****
>
> On what basis can one speak of "Belgian" invaders ?

****GK: Cf. DBG 2:4: "Cum ab iis quaereret quae
civitates quantaeque in armis essent et quid
in bello possent, sic reperiebat: plerosque Belgos
esse ortos a Germanis
Rhenumque antiquitus traductos propter loci
fertilitatem ibi consedisse
Gallosque qui ea loca incolerent expulisse"
>
> The Gauls too are invaders !
> And their expansion toward west and south was not
> stopped by Roman occupation.

****GK: Certainly, but this hardly affects Caesar's
point.****

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool.
http://autos. yahoo.com/ carfinder/