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 -----
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/