Euro state names etymology
"Celtiberians were ethnic Celts"
What do you call "ethnic" celts? And please, no links or speeches about genetics, haplotypes...which are so popular in spain.
"It's like calling the English "Germafrench" just because they have been influenced by the French speaking Normans. "
Interesting example, but it is the exactly contrary in Spain. Celts were a military aristocracy in a major iberian language (like franks in France or Goths in Italy).
The problem with celts in Spain come frome the use of the archeological cultures (La Tène, Hallstatt). Archaeologists have found objects of those civilisations in regions like Spain, but it doesn't mean that the dominant language of those regions was celtic. We have no mean to find which language was spoken from objects. It is like if in 1000 years, we would find "Goodyear" tyres in Marseille, and if the future people would make the conclusion that a germanic language was spoken in Marseille. This would have no-sense.
We could also think that actual Turkish people are celts because of Galatians.
"Whats the difference between Basques, Gascons, Bearnais and Aquitaine? "
Do you really think that your question is less confuse? You mix people and regions.
Basque and Gascons are almost the same medieval word to define people of Southwestern France from early Middle Age to the 18th century. Gascony will disappear as a region with the Revolution (or before i don't remember). The basque identity will emerge in the 19th century as a linguistic nationalism, while Gascony does not exit no longer.
Bearn was a province of France until the Revolution. For Aquitaine, the region existed in Roman times until the Middle-Age. It has disapperead, to be more or less replaced by Guyenne. The region was "reborn" as from the french revolution.
http://www.hipkiss.org/data/maps/vidal-lablache_atlas-general-histoire-et-geographie_1912_ancient-france-capetovian-capetienne_2953_4252_600.jpg
"Are the Gascons a Basque, Ligurian or Iberian people? "
It depends what you are talking about. Linguistically (for me), yes, basque language is probably a heritage of ancient iberian (= aquitanians below Pyrenees), and probably "next" to ligurian languages...
"Are the Bernais a de-Basqued Basque people? "
de-Basqued ? It could be a mean to express the concept indeed. With romanization of the Bearn, i mean.
"What areas of France use to be Spanish? "
If you mean linguistic, only Catalogne (though i know that they don't like to be called "spanish"). If you mean politic borders, it depends the period. For example, actual Belgium was mostly spanish in the 17th century.
<< The problem with celts in Spain come frome the use of the archeological cultures (La Tène, Hallstatt). Archaeologists have found objects of those civilisations in regions like Spain, but it doesn't mean that the dominant language of those regions was celtic. We have no mean to find which tlanguage was spoken from objects. It is like if in 1000 years, we would find "Goodyear" tyres in Marseille, and if the future people would make the conclusion that a germanic language was spoken in Marseille. This would have no-sense.
>>
Celtic was not the dominant language in Central Spain, but the only language , because there no evidences of other languages were ever used. It is the most ancient tongue that is traceable despite there had to be other ones before it.
That the Celtic language in Spain was imposed by a minority of people and the bulk of Spanish population was not Celtic maybe true or not. But the same can be said about Gaulish in France, Germanic languages in Scandinavia and so on. IE speakers probably did not replace the autochthonous population in any part of Europe.
Macedonia is named after Italian fruit salad, and not after pregreek state: Macaedonia. So Greekoids, kiss my ass.
"Celtic was not the dominant language in Central Spain, but the only language , because there no evidences of other languages were ever used."
I don't know if you refer to the recent theories of some spanish archaeologists (i don't remember the names) who argued that indo-europeans and neolithic peoples are in fact the same concepts. It is absolutely non-sense, geographically and historically :
- geographically, because in antic times, the more you went to the north and the east, the more you found indo-europeans languages (slavic, baltic, germanic, cimmerians, scythes...). In the contrary, the more you went to the south, the more you found non indo-european ones (etruscan, ligurian, iberian-aquitanian...). So, the second are reliques.
- historically : archaelogy has established that the neolithic settlements has begun from -5000 BC to -2000 BC in Europe, and the indo-europeans ones are dated as from -2000 BC in Ukraine.
Conclusion : celtic settlements could only come from the north in a spanish POV, and the basque isolate is a serious indication that celts were a minority as from Garonne river.
"But the same can be said about Gaulish in France, Germanic languages in Scandinavia and so on."
Not for Gaulish in France, because there are some evidences (or rather correspondances) : roman descriptions by Cesar and his scribes in Bellum Gallicum, Tacited evocations in Northern Gaule, toponymy of the main french cities (Paris, Lyon, Strasbourg, Nantes, Rennes, Reims...) and a lot of villages...I think it is a little more than iberian peninsula (only Strabon has evocated the Berons near actual french border).
And for the germanics, of course not because they are still spoken...
"The origin of the Celts is the Beaker culture"
Already answered. Is ???
"We have no mean to find which language was spoken from objects. It is like if in 1000 years, we would find "Goodyear" tyres in Marseille, and if the future people would make the conclusion that a germanic language was spoken in Marseille."
The origin of the Beaker culture is Spain, and the Celts stem from the Beaker culture, so figure out... Maybe the IE languages originated in Spain and then they did spread North-Easternwards.
" Many theories of the origins of the Bell Beakers have been put forward and subsequently challenged.[8] The Iberian peninsula has been argued as the most likely place of Beaker origin.
"
" Bell Beaker is often suggested as a candidate for an early Indo-European culture or, more specifically, an ancestral proto-Celtic [12] or proto-Italic (Italo-Celtic) culture. "
"Maybe the IE languages originated in Spain"
And maybe the austronesian languages too...You won.
I don't say that, just the Wikipedia.
It makes a lot of sense, because good things never come from the East. For example: the Golden Orde, the Communists, the Black Death, Chinese products, etc. All these bad things came from the East to Europe. So how come did IE languages spread from the East to Europe? No, their origin had to be in Spain, the prodigious land. Now recent researchs admit this truth.
I've forgotten cold winters, vodka and Tchernobyl. It is proved. The evil comes from the East.
<<Not for Gaulish in France, because there are some evidences (or rather correspondances) : roman descriptions by Cesar and his scribes in Bellum Gallicum, Tacited evocations in Northern Gaule, toponymy of the main french cities (Paris, Lyon, Strasbourg, Nantes, Rennes, Reims...) and a lot of villages...I think it is a little more than iberian peninsula (only Strabon has evocated the Berons near actual french border).
And for the germanics, of course not because they are still spoken... >>
Strasburg's got a French quarter/ghetto. It's nether Gauloise or French. Get it!
In the United States we have a state named Georgia. There is also a nation named Georgia. I have never heard of any complaints or confusion because of this. I fail to understand why we can't have two Macedonias