08-20-2010, 07:58 AM
I'm more than happy to use the word Celtic. Even though they were divided by some aspects of culture. It's the same in Italy. My mother's family if from Trieste, I have been there and they have different aspects in their culture to that which I have seen in, for example, Napoli or Toscana etc. They may have different dialects and some different traditions, but they are still all collectively Italian.
I'm sure it would have been the same in Italy perhaps even in the times of the Roman empire. Italians, Hispanics, Gauls (I'm talking of the time when they had been quite thoroughly Romanised) etc. they would have had some different aspects in culture, but would all have collectively been Roman.
It's the same wit the Germans whether they were Cherusci, Chatti, Suebi/Suevi - they were Germans. The Aedui, the Arverni, Aquitani, Parisii - they were Celts.
EDIT: However, don't get the impression that I am trying to say that these people were united. It's quite obvious they were not. But the point that they shared cultural and religious values etc. can put them under the term Celtic.
- Lorenzo.
I'm sure it would have been the same in Italy perhaps even in the times of the Roman empire. Italians, Hispanics, Gauls (I'm talking of the time when they had been quite thoroughly Romanised) etc. they would have had some different aspects in culture, but would all have collectively been Roman.
It's the same wit the Germans whether they were Cherusci, Chatti, Suebi/Suevi - they were Germans. The Aedui, the Arverni, Aquitani, Parisii - they were Celts.
EDIT: However, don't get the impression that I am trying to say that these people were united. It's quite obvious they were not. But the point that they shared cultural and religious values etc. can put them under the term Celtic.
- Lorenzo.
Lorenzo Perring-Mattiassi/Florivs Virilis
COHORS I BATAVORUM M.C.R.P.F
COHORS I BATAVORUM M.C.R.P.F