German and Celtic Tribes

[Rameses the Great]

The way you can tell the difference between a Germanic and Celtic tribe is usually by farming, by what I gathered. Celts were more farming based while Germans believed in migrating and having a staple diet of cattle. The Germans usually had a chieftain in charge of a tribe, there would be a new one every so often. Celts lived in tribes that were based upon villages each having a job to do.

 

I just listed some differences I though of. It seems in terms of technology they were the same but the societal structure is completely different.

Edited February 25, 2007 by Rameses the Great

[caldrail]

There are cultural differences too. The german fashion for a sideways topknot (hairstyle that is) for instance, or perhaps the style of clothing, weaponry etc. What about tattoos or warpaint? Housing styles?

[edgewaters]

There's also language (obviously). Maritime tradition in the Baltics was quite different from any Celtic designs. Clothing was very different; Germanics liked brilliantly painted shields, but wore plain textiles usually without dye, where Celts had very plain shields, but brilliantly dyed woolen twill clothing. The wool thing is a bit odd, considering that, as mentioned, Celts tended more to agrarian ways and Germanics more towards pastoral ways, it really should be the other way around - Celts in textiles and Germanics in twill - but it is not.

 

Settlements were different - no true hillforts in the style of things like Maiden Castle for the Germanics (except in the twilight cultures along the shared frontier).

 

Probably one of the biggest differences is that Germanics were not in strong contact with Meditteranean and/or Greco-Roman culture. Celts were, throughout their history - either as neighbours (eg Alpine Celts, Celts along the Danube, Gauls of southern France, Celtiberians, etc) or through the tin trade (eg Britons), or even via Greek or Carthaginian colonies established in Celtic lands, such as the Carthaginian colonies in Spain or the Greek colony at Massalia. The Italic languages - including Latin - are most closely related in origin to Celtic. It's thought the Etruscans are not actually native to Italy, but entered from the north as a proto-Celtic peoples around 1500 BC. This, of course, influenced alot of things - Celts were quick to take to Romanization after conquest, because they were closer culturally. Even before conquest, Celts seem to have taken to Roman or Meditteranean ways at times - coins of southern Britain start showing Hellenic motifs even before Caesar arrives, and at very large oppidum like Bibracte, the wealthy Celts were building homes in a Greco-Roman style long before the conquest of Gaul.

[Pantagathus]

:mummy: :

 

What sources are you accessing in your 'gathering' to make these generalizations? Your comments on the tribal structure (especially in regards to chieftains) seems quite erroneous.

 

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

[Kosmo]

Bastarnae (peucini). This people lived in what is today romanian Moldova and afterwords in the Danube Delta. There are some literary sources that consider them germans and other as celts. Arheologists digged many bastarnae sites, but just from finds could not tell if they were celts or germans.

I personally believe them to be celts as they appeared in an era when eastern celts were still present in this area while germans did not appeared yet, but this is pure conjecture.

It is extremly difficult to tell the "ethnicity" of somebody just from the material culture. This is a great thing for pseudohistorians and for nationalist fake history.

[Pantagathus]

This is a great thing for pseudohistorians and for nationalist fake history.

Amen...

[Rameses the Great]

What sources are you accessing in your 'gathering' to make these generalizations? Your comments on the tribal structure (especially in regards to chieftains) seems quite erroneous.

 

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

 

It was a book made for people starting on Rome. (A hardback kids book .) It talked about Caesar's Commentaries, however I'm not sure if Caesar made not of this or just the author.

 

All I remember is it is title 'Caesar's Conquest of Gaul.'