Late Romans mostly Celt?

[varistus]

My Celtic friend tells me that he has read much data to suggest the Romans were mainly Celt. That the Romans thought the Celts to be taller,stronger fighters therefore took over the army. The Romans owe everything to the Celts from weaponry to soap! Only conceding the Romans to be great builders, due to their proximity to Greek culture though.
My premise is the opposite, Celts a little taller perhaps but looking at Caesars accounts and their battles it seems the Romans always built up their enemies just to tear them down. Think the Romans were probably as fierce as they come in hand to hand(reading many individual battles look like the Romans were the savages and the braver on many accounts) and just over extended themselves and eventually vanished into various population groups in time.
Also, I feel that too many others our overlooked, from Greece,Asia minor,Dacia to Africa. Did not these people enter the Roman Army, of course. He says the contrary, they were only few.
My premise I told him is that so much of Europe derived something from the Romans that they want to take complete claim. I say Asia minor,N.Africa was the place to be in that era: winters were cold and long. Why would anyone want to live in those conditions in that day? I would take Judea over any Celt land. Over course he says the Celts also had the best vessels to get you there, those of the Celts living off the European side of the English Channel.
I give up I say...Celts are the real (late)Romans.

[Robert Vermaat]

varistus\\n[quote]My Celtic friend tells me that he has read much data to suggest the Romans were mainly Celt. quote]

Your friend should tell you where he read that. And he should answer your question why, if the Celts were so good, tall, handsome and superior twisted:

Seriously. The Celtic peoples (your friend should know this, but there was no Celtic people, it's Cetltic culture and Celtic languages, but those do not necessarily have to be the same) surely invented a lot of good stuff, and the Romans surely made thankful use of that. As they used a lot of good inventions from other peoples too. Celtic horsemanship was really valued as the Romans were no great horsemen themselves. Gallic infantry was very valued, all through to Late Roman times.

But the Romans were not mainly Celts, that's nonsense. That's as much nonsense as claiming the Romans were a special race themselves. Your friemd should prove why not many people from all the other territories joined the Roman (armies? does he mean that?) intead of just Celts. We know from all the inscriptions where soldiers came from, and they are not all Celts, they came from all over the Empire. Tell him that.

You are right to believe that Roman writers always liked to describe their enemies as taller, more fierce and whatnot, so they could claim an even bigger victory!

Oh, and, northern Europe was not such a bad place back then - you could grow grapes as far north as Britain, it only became colder and wetter after the 3rd c. or thereabouts..

[L C Cinna]

Agree with Vortigern. Celtic is a cultural thing and the further in time we move away from the conquest of Gaul the harder it becomes to tell who is who.

People often try to use modern conceptions and points of views on our ancient friends. The modern concept of nationalism and "races" and such things leads people to make destinctions a Roman probably wouldn't have made, at least not in such a clear way.

I think it would be hard to find a "true" celt among the late Romans. Some populations maybe used more typically celtic things than others or in some regions people prefered a celtic godess to a greek one and some areas speak a celtic tongue but who are the people living there?

It's easier with the rural population which didn't move too much and kept the original culture and traditions much longer but when it comes to higher classes or the army it gets complicated.

It's easy during the time of Augustus when we know that legions are recruited from Italians mainly and the newly recruited Aux. have some tribal names or whatever. but this whole recruitment process changes very quickly.

Many aux units are not refilled with the people coming from the tribes which originally the soldiers came from and the legionaries are not mainly recruited in Italy anymore. After the troops had their more or less fixed bases at the boarder and retired soldiers would often marry women from the regional population and settle near the camps most of the soldiers were recruited from those families. This leads to the fact that most families which served in the military for generations were probably a complete mix of people from all over the empire.

Just an example of what might happen>

So we have a Syrian for example serving with an auxiliary unit at the Rhine. He meets this beauty from CCAA, has a few children with her and marries her after his retirement. He's a Roman citizen now, has a Celtic or Germanic wife and lives near one of the bases where he bought some land and has a little farm. His eldest son will get the farm when he dies and his younger sons join the army now as citizens

One of them joins a legion, becomes a centurio, is moved all around the empire,meets his future wife while serving in Egypt, ends up as primus pilus of a British legion, marries the woman who had followed him there with the kids, retires, becomes an eques and sends his children to Rome and Greece for better education.

The other son from our Syrian-Celtic family volunteers for an Ala and is transferred to the Danubian frontier to fight against the Sarmatians or whatever and finds his wife there. has children and settles somewhere in Moesia. His sons.....

well you get it. All in all for a person living at that time they would be Romans as they served the state, had citizenship a.s.o., if they get education like the sons of our primus pilus and are pagans they'd be Hellenes as well, the boys probably spoke some of the regional dialects from where they grew up and their mam spoke, maybe a bit of dad's syrian, latin and maybe a little greek(well they all live in the west at the moment )

I think the mix in the army was so strong you can't really say the guys were this or that, they served for Rome so they were Romans after all

[hoplite14gr]

Ralph you friend conveniently omits Cretans, Thracians, Balearics, Armenians, and others who were particularly effective against Celtic ill disiplined war-bands when they were in Roman service.
And Michael gave a good account that the roman legions were a bit
"foreign legions" to say the least.

Kind regards

[Conal]

Ralph you friend conveniently omits Cretans, Thracians, Balearics, Armenians, and others who were particularly effective against Celtic ill disiplined war-bands when they were in Roman service.
And Michael gave a good account that the roman legions were a bit
"foreign legions" to say the least.

Kind regards

As would any diciplined troop but how were they against diciplined Celtic war bands

Lets not forget the Greeks & Romans did not beat them every time ... Dephi :roll:

[varistus]

I agree, the late Romans were akin to Americans in this regard. (Perhaps that is one of the reasons why we are so fascinated by them) The 'Celts' did have a culture throughout most of Europe and controlled such. They should have their due too. Looking at Caesars diaries in reality the Celts gave him allot of problems, whereby the Germans were disposed of with relative ease. The Celts were not 'barbarians' in the negative sense and Caesar it seems new this. His negotiations show much sophistication on both sides, not just unilateral.
Gaul was an extremely valuable piece of fertile land, coveted by German and Romans alike. It is obvious Caesar did his nasty deeds there for himself only as many senators surmised. It was an illegal act according to some senators and one that brought about ruin and loss of a valued trading partner, besides losing a very effective buffer.
My Celt Friend says what he meant was that there were so many Celts that they were easily the majority in the late Roman army but not the only group of course. Yes , I know that many people from the Balkans were in the army and became emporors even and from everywhere else.
However, perhaps he has a point to suggest because of sheer weight of numbers the 'Celt' presence had to be strongest.

[hoplite14gr]

Well they didn´t got the better of hoplites in the 2nd battle of Thermopylae.
Tim Newark wrote a fascinating text to impress (and there is an impressive drawing from uncle Angus too in the book) but the only accounts from the battle comes from Pausanias where he says they didn't make it to Delphi.
Diodorus is so mixed up in his accounts that his accuracy is questionable.
The earlier damages in Delphi have been dated to Alarich 4th century AD not before.
Well Celts sacked an obscure little town called Kallio and I guess anybody coming home with plunder from the temple of Apollo in Kallio claiming it was from Delphi there was no thing to challenge his word :lol:
Especially if he was 6 foot tall and with an oversized sword :twisted:

Kind regards

[Martin Wallgren]

I agree, the late Romans were akin to Americans in this regard. (Perhaps that is one of the reasons why we are so fascinated by them) The 'Celts' did have a culture throughout most of Europe and controlled such. They should have their due too. Looking at Caesars diaries in reality the Celts gave him allot of problems, whereby the Germans were disposed of with relative ease. The Celts were not 'barbarians' in the negative sense and Caesar it seems new this. His negotiations show much sophistication on both sides, not just unilateral.
Gaul was an extremely valuable piece of fertile land, coveted by German and Romans alike. It is obvious Caesar did his nasty deeds there for himself only as many senators surmised. It was an illegal act according to some senators and one that brought about ruin and loss of a valued trading partner, besides losing a very effective buffer.
My Celt Friend says what he meant was that there were so many Celts that they were easily the majority in the late Roman army but not the only group of course. Yes , I know that many people from the Balkans were in the army and became emporors even and from everywhere else.
However, perhaps he has a point to suggest because of sheer weight of numbers the 'Celt' presence had to be strongest.

How do your friends recon they are "Celts"? Do they belive in Celtic gods or speak a celtic language... just wonder because there is not many who do anymore. I met one or two gaelicspeakers in Ireland back in 99 but I don´t think they where more celtic than I´m Germanic.

[Conal]

Well they didn´t got the better of hoplites in the 2nd battle of Thermopylae.
Tim Newark wrote a fascinating text to impress (and there is an impressive drawing from uncle Angus too in the book) but the only accounts from the battle comes from Pausanias where he says they didn't make it to Delphi.
Diodorus is so mixed up in his accounts that his accuracy is questionable.
The earlier damages in Delphi have been dated to Alarich 4th century AD not before.
Well Celts sacked an obscure little town called Kallio and I guess anybody coming home with plunder from the temple of Apollo in Kallio claiming it was from Delphi there was no thing to challenge his word :lol:
Especially if he was 6 foot tall and with an oversized sword :twisted:

Kind regards

I myself am rather circumspect regarding histories written for a home audience :? If this applies to so called plunder from Kallio then it applies to home grown literary types.

I have read that Livy thought it had been sacked and Strabo believed that treasures found in a lake at Toulouse had come from Delphi.

Were they six foot tall ... whose feet were used as a measure

And as for the sword being oversized ... the average blade length at the time of the "supposed" sacking of Delphi was 60cm :roll:

[Tarbicus]

It is obvious Caesar did his nasty deeds there for himself only as many senators surmised. It was an illegal act according to some senators and one that brought about ruin and loss of a valued trading partner, besides losing a very effective buffer.

It did take roughly eight years for the Senate to try to put a halt to Caesar's conquest of Gaul, and even Pompey Magnus sent him troops, so I would say that if Caesar was guilty then so was the Senate. The loss of the trade I would suggest was secondary to reaping taxes from subject peoples, on whom trade would be forced anyway through colonisation - wherever the army went so did the traders and merchants.

My Celt Friend says what he meant was that there were so many Celts that they were easily the majority in the late Roman army but not the only group of course.

You have a point IMHO, and it's been said a few times now on RAT. I personally feel it is *one* of the main influences in the choices of weapons, tactics and armour, but a very gradual one.

[Robert Vermaat]

The earlier damages in Delphi have been dated to Alarich 4th century AD not before.

Aaah! hock: The man was right! The Celts really sacked Delhi in the 4thc. AD, not BC! Therefore the Celts must have lived during Late Roman times! :twisted:

[Conal]

Was there a noticable increase in boasting, singing , drinking and fighting amongst the ranks in the late Roman army .... if so it sounds like the Celts were there :oops:

I read once that in the American Civil War that a regiment made up largely of
Irishmen was distinctive in that the number of puchups recorded in one week/month nearly exceeded the number of men in the regiment
hock:

[hoplite14gr]

Was there a noticable increase in boasting, singing , drinking and fighting amongst the ranks in the late Roman army .... if so it sounds like the Celts were there :oops:

I read once that in the American Civil War that a regiment made up largely of
Irishmen was distinctive in that the number of puchups recorded in one week/month nearly exceeded the number of men in the regiment
hock:

That goes for any army. And I agree with Tim Newark's comment that Duke Wellingdon expected Celtic ferosiousness from his Highlanders.
The Archeological evidence agree with Pausanias not Strabo.
Delphic itemes in Toullouze need not to be plunder.
The stories about "Hyperborean Connection" seem to have some validity.
Even "rock throwers" and other psiloi could block the passage of Yambolis.
A small force could hold off multiple their number as Pausanias describes.
I visit the place often and I know what I am talking about.
Sulla, Nero and Alarich heve been beyond doubt the only "tourists" who got "souvenirs" from Delphi.
Brennos was a competent leader but he was not Alexander and he didn´t make it. He had an unreliable tourist guide probably :lol:

Kind regards

[Conal]

Maybe Brennos did not like to leave much of a signature :roll:

He sacked other towns .... did he do a proper job so that we can tell he was there ?

[Dan Diffendale]

Aaah! Shocked The man was right! The Celts really sacked Delhi in the 4thc. AD, not BC! Therefore the Celts must have lived during Late Roman times!

Delhi! Who knew that the Celts bested Alexander? :wink: