Re: Not "catching the wind " , or, what ARE we discussing?

> Sez who? Goscinny? Uderzo? You can't change the fact that the Chatti
> archaeologically aren't Celtic.
> Torsten
> ============
>
> I suppose I may have overlooked
> a reference pointing to this.
> Please give it again.

Once more:
"

> O. Uenze left the old thought patterns in a different manner. He
> observed, that the North Hesse group of the early Latène period
> could not with any certainty be called either Celtic or Germanic.
> According to him, they were a tribal group with local
> characteristics [O. Uenze, Vorgesch. der hessischen Senke (1953)
> 26]. By that he implied that the scheme delivered by historical
> linguistics doesn't always correspond to what actually happened,
> but didn't yet find the nearest solution.

"
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/56384

Torsten

==========

You have changed :

Catti people could not with any certainty be called either Celtic or
Germanic.

into

the Chatti archaeologically aren't Celtic.

It seems to me
the first statement does not preclude the possibility
that Catti are actually Celtic
even though we are not sure about it.

My conclusion :
Nothing conflicts with the possibility
that Catti may be Celtic.
It's more unproved, not impossible.

Arnaud

=============