Egypt's ban of Exodus: Gods and Kings

Post Reply New Topic

Before the Celts were in Britain, people speaking a pre-Indo European language lived there. This is the case for large parts of Europe.

As we're talking about illiterate prehistoric societies in ancient Britain, it's impossible to know the ethnic or linguistic origin of the people living there. In the past, it had been assumed the Celts had arrived in Britain in the Iron Age with the Hallstatt-LaTenne material culture, which had originated in central Europe. But the fact is, it's hazardous to equate swords and pots with a particular ethnicity. And there is no real evidence of a large scale migration from continental Europe to the British Isles at that time period, save for the rather late - and limited - colonization of the Celto-Germanic Belgae. I personally agree with the theory that the ancestors of the British Celts can be traced back to the Neolithic Zone Beaker culture, that had originated in Germany's Rhineland and the Netherlands, and then had migrated into the British Isles. It's impossible to know if Zone Beaker was Indo-European, or if they were part of Old Europe, and were only Indo-Europeanized at a later date.

Not to mention, the Romans - even more than the Anglo-Saxons - had been responsible for the extinguishing of Celtic culture, and that the British opposition to the Anglo-Saxons were probably fighting for the preservation of their take on Roman civilization, and not that of their Celtic tribal ancestors.

I didn't mean to say the invaders wiped out the original inhabitants, it's generally believed that with most cultural/linguistic invasions the old population adopts the language and customs of the new elite. But we know there were likely speakers of a pre-IE language living in Britain, because Britain has been inhabited for much longer than the IE languages arrived in Europe. Britain was connected to the mainland up to 8000 years ago in what is now the North Sea (Doggerland). Even this Doggerland was likely inhabited long before IE languages show up in Europe, fishermen have found human artifacts in the sea and also mammoth bones.

Of that, I have no doubt. My point was that the Britannic Celts were probably descended from the Neolithic Zone Beaker culture, which predated the Hallstatt-LaTenne material culture that is associated with the Celtic peoples. Whether Zone Beaker were stone Age Proto-Celts/Indo-Europeans, or if they were simply acculturated into Celtic civilization, is anyone's guess.

This is a valid point. Without written evidence the language spoken is often impossible to confirm. There's even an new movement in British archaeological circles that suggest the ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons were already living in western Britain when the Romans arrived. it's all really conjecture.

There is still a pre-christian window period between Roman departure and the rise of the Anglo-Saxon kings. The Romans never forbid the indigenous Celts from practicing their beliefs. However christian monks eventually did.

Actually, the Romans had cracked down on the native religion, as the Druids were often the leaders of Anti-Roman resistance. So the Romans used the fact that the Britons offered up human sacrifices as a pretext to crack down on their religion. But the Romans had also promoted a softer, Pro-Roman cult among the Celts.

I've heard that theory. While it's not outside the realm of possibility, the fact remains that the Anglo-Saxon migration to Britain was undeniable. And if there was a Germanic presence already present in Britain prior to the Anglo-Saxons, one doesn't have to look as far back as Pre-Roman prehistory, as the Romans had settled Germanic mercenaries and prisoners of war in Britain, among them many Frisians.

The only thing I know about the Celtic languages is why they stopped speaking it: it's impossible to pronounce.

I sometimes wonder why some languages survived and others did not. In some cases the invaders adopted the language of their subjects, and in some cases it's the other way around. Perhaps because some languages had higher status, or maybe some languages are just harder or less efficient? I saw an experiment on tv a while ago where they studied how language affected behavior. People had to distinguish between colors and different shades of colors, and it turns out Russian speakers are better at differentiating between different shades of blue since their language has seperate words for light blue and dark blue. Pretty interesting that we may have "hidden skills" because or brains are rewired because of our language.

Not sure what your point about the Celts is. They did precede the Anglo Saxons in the British Isles. Not that they werent a savage bunch.

But about the Egyptian text books- in this case whats expedient just happens to ALSO be the truth. No "rewriting" was needed. I agree that keeping the rabble quiet is the real motivation for banning the movie- but Cairo's version of that history happens to be correct.

The notion that "Jews built the Pyramids" was invented by American vaudeville comedians spouting simplistic versions of ancient history on stage- it is not in either scripture nor is it from secular scholarship.

The Pyramid building phase of Egyptian history was only the first two centuries of that civilization's 25 century history. After that phase they went on to build more advanced structures (columns, post and lintels, etc - that actually enclose usable space-as opposed to just stacking blocks into big fat bottomed piles). The pyramid phase ended around 2400 BC. The consensus among modern western archeologists is that the pyramids were indeed built by free labor, and not by slaves.

The Jews supposedly did not even exist as a people until the prophet Abraham-who lived centuries after the Pyramids were built. And Moses was long after Abraham.

The events in Exodus (if they really happened) are thought to have happened around 1300 BC - more than a thousand years after the Pyramids were built. Jewish slaves (if Jews ever really were slaves to some Pharaoh) might have been put to work building some OTHER later monumental Egyptian stone edifices. But not the pyramids.

Yes, agree the Romans bought Germanic speaking mercenaries. I notice the British history curriculum currently teaches primary/secondary aged students that Anglo-Saxon villages were concurrent with Roman walled fortresses. Who came first is somewhat blurry.

Yes agree with this. Despite the prevalence of Roman deities and the removal of Druids, the indigenous culture was largely intact outside of Roman influence in Southern Britain in the north and west.

Agree with your post. One minor point of clarification is that the presence of Jewish settlements in Ramses time is not disputed archaeologically. The Egyptians referred to these settlements as "Habiru" which equates to Hebrew.