|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Nov 30, 2003 20:34:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 2, 2003 16:48:21 GMT -5
I can only see the first picture.
This Gaul looks like what could be described as Keltic-Nordic, probably.
I think he could be a Nordic-Dinaric mix or something with similar results.
|
|
Arawn
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by Arawn on Dec 2, 2003 17:11:52 GMT -5
If i'm not mistaken, one of those is supposed to be of the 'Gauls' of Galatia. Not sure though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 2, 2003 18:09:48 GMT -5
If i'm not mistaken, one of those is supposed to be of the 'Gauls' of Galatia. Not sure though. Yes, they are from Asia Minor. I think they are brachycephalic or mesocephalic at most and their faces seem fairly wide. In my opinion they are very close to central Europeans (they remind me of some Swiss) and the Welsh. You are Welsh I believe, what do you think. |
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 2, 2003 18:23:13 GMT -5
I can only see the first picture, and the guy is definitely a brachycephallic with a straight nose.
|
|
Arawn
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by Arawn on Dec 2, 2003 18:28:41 GMT -5
Yes I am.
Hmm, somewhat, but the pics are a bit iffy due to the angle.
Where are the Galatians supposed to have come from originaly? Central Europe?
|
|
Arawn
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by Arawn on Dec 2, 2003 18:31:36 GMT -5
AWAR Look hereIts a google image search of the pic with 5 results, at least one of them ought to work for you. |
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 2, 2003 18:35:48 GMT -5
France and northern Italy were their traditional homelands but it is not certain how far their area stretched. They are considered Celtic and according to some, Celts lived almost everywhere in Europe. There are even some who claim the Romans and the Greeks had Cetic origins so there is a lot of confusion around this issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 2, 2003 18:37:54 GMT -5
Thanks ARAWN. The second picture isn't very helpful for classification ( at least not to me ). Gaul killing himself and wife....  cool name I wonder what it was originally called. |
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 2, 2003 18:39:58 GMT -5
France and northern Italy were their traditional homelands but it is not certain how far their area stretched. They are considered Celtic and according to some, Celts lived almost everywhere in Europe. There are even some who claim the Romans and the Greeks had Cetic origins so there is a lot of confusion around this issue. Well, if you consider that Celts were a huge mix of peoples who spoke a centum variant of IE language, there is no wonder there is confusion. |
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 2, 2003 18:46:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Artemidoros on Dec 2, 2003 18:51:42 GMT -5
Thanks ARAWN. The second picture isn't very helpful for classification ( at least not to me ). Gaul killing himself and wife.... cool name I wonder what it was originally called. They are from the Attalus Victory Monument at Pergamus. |
|
Arawn
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by Arawn on Dec 2, 2003 19:35:09 GMT -5
What exactly is meant when people speak of 'Keltic' type of physical appearance? I always saw Celtic as a sort of general linguistic/cultural label, like Rommance or what have you not. Not something particulary specific. And why the evil American spelling? Don't you like our hard 'c's  |
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Dec 3, 2003 4:15:35 GMT -5
Yes, I can see them. Great works of art!
ARAWN: Here is a description of the Keltic-Nordic type.
Origin:
Central European Nordic slightly modified through divergent evolution, and possibly by absorption of Alpine, Dinaric and other non-Nordic strains, to greater extent than what is the case with its Scandinavian counterpart.
Description:
To an American, Englishman, or Belgian, the Keltic Nordic phenotype represents a "normal" or "average" appearance. Likewise, in the minds of those who are neither American, English, nor Belgian, nor belonging to any other predominantly Keltic population, the Keltic look will usually stand synonymous with the descriptive tags "American" or "English". This is the most numerous of the two Nordic types - a type which gains in variability with the constant infusion of non-Nordic blood, particularly in North America and Australia. Thanks to one of the most popular phenomena of the 20th Century, the Silver Screen, the Keltic Nordic is quite possibly the most recognized and familiar of all Nordish phenotypes throughout the world.
The modern Keltic Nordic type is tall, slender, and moderately broad-shouldered. The head form is typically mesocephalic, with a mean cephalic index of 79, which is slightly higher than the present Hallstatt mean.
Nordics of this type are low-vaulted, with foreheads of much greater recession than those of the Hallstatt type. The Keltic face is long and narrow, and the chin is strongly developed. The temples, malars, and gonial angles are typically compressed and not visible.
The nose is long and high-bridged, and narrow to medium in breadth. The profile is usually straight, but wavy or concavo-convex forms are also common. The characteristic prominence of the Keltic nose is a good diagnostic for distinguishing between extremes of the two Nordic types.
The lips are thin to medium, and little everted.
|
|
|
|
Post by HINDI on Dec 3, 2003 10:20:45 GMT -5
naked barbarian kelts
Was there a point to this post?
|
|
cool name 
