I simply can't trust Greco-Roman sources when it comes to descriptions, especially of the habits of non-Roman peoples. There's a clear confirmation bias and propanadism, and sometimes the sources contradict each other so blatantly that it leaves any attempt to filter out which source is more or less accurate wanting. It feels like we're dealing with clowns. Don't believe me, or do you think I'm exaggerating?Using the Germanic and Celts, there are some descriptions that treat them as matriarchal homosexuals, and other times they are praised as noble, whether in morals or in the art of war—very contradictory. I personally don't trust Tacitus like academia does. Don't believe me? Compare what the Greek Roman grammarian Athenaeus said, who reiterated what Diodorus Siculus said about the Celts preferring to sleep with men rather than roasts, and that young Celts offered themselves to foreigners, and if they were refused, it would be a kind of cultural offense. Then we have other citations of the Celts being fierce and intelligent warriors; Caesar himself comments on this. I don't trust Greeks and Romans.
>>18049935>that treat them as matriarchal homosexualsAt no point does that happen.>Celts preferring to sleep with men rather than roasts, and that young Celts offered themselves to foreigners, and if they were refused, it would be a kind of cultural offense. Then we have other citations of the Celts being fierce and intelligent warriorsThese are not two contradictory statements.
>>18049944>At no point does that happen.We have two possibilities:either you haven't read Greco-Roman writings or you don't know how to read. I gave two examples if you're not blind, and there are several claims of them being controlled by their wives, such as Cassius Dio, Plutarch, etc. You can find it on Wikipedia if it's too difficult.>>18049944>These are not two contradictory statementsI believe the second possibility is more accurate for your position: illiteracy. When describing Celts and Germanics, there is literally a dichotomy of gay barbarians and noble, skilled warriors. Both cannot be right, and one must be wrong. I bet you misunderstood my topic and misunderstood (again, a sign of illiteracy).
>>18049944This is what there is most in Roman writings. This is the price of being a people without writing. You depend on lying Medjeets to write about you.>>18049935Congratulations, genius. Have you just noticed that the Greeks and Romans have egos as high as a beautiful Hollywood girl? These sources are often written by people who have never been in contact with the North, so a piece of advice: ONLY read Roman and Greek sources if they were attested by people who were in direct contact with them. Even then, doubt them. Herodotus, for example, is an author, but he lied a lot about things he had no idea about. And don't read sources from times of war because it's obvious that the Romans, and anyone else, will actually shit on people.
>>18049935dilate, we have evidence outside the Greek-Roman sources that prove the matriarchy of the Celts and Germanics and their barbaric ways, particularly the Celts. There is archaeological and genetic support, there is nothing to say here
>>18049935Of course primary sources are biased and propagandistic, you should learn that part in history 101Doesn't mean you can't learn anything from them
>>18049950>Either you haven't read Greco-Roman writings or you don't know how to read.(you). At no point does any source say that these societies are lead by women. At no point are women in any role that is not advisory or religious. Guess what, the Greeks and Romans did the same exact fucking thing. This does not make them a matriarchy. You seem to think that the presence of women in a society in any way makes a matriarchy. >Both cannot be rightThey can be actually. How does being homosexual stop somebody from being a skilled warrior? The Romans and Greeks found no issue in calling somebody noble and a barbarian at the same time. Cyrus the Younger was a barbarian, but he was a noble and skilled prince. These are not contradictory.
>>18049935Given the penchant for homosexual pederasty among Greeks and Romans how do we know that they weren't just emulating the Greeks/Romans
>>18049979>At no point does any source say that these societies are lead by women.>In book XIII of his Deipnosophists, the Roman Greek rhetorician and grammarian Athenaeus, repeating assertions made by Diodorus Siculus in the 1st century BC (Bibliotheca historica 5:32), wrote that Celtic women were beautiful but that the men preferred to sleep together. Diodorus went further, stating that "the young men will offer themselves to strangers and are insulted if the offer is refused".Dont Talk to me again>>18049956Yes, the momentary context greatly influences the sources, but I still don't trust them.
>>18049987the retarded guy didn't even understand the thread>>18049981This
>>18049989I didn't even wasted my time reading the rest of the post, I'm dealing with an illiterate person>>18049967We're curious anon, how about presenting us with this evidence? Blogs and Wiccan booklets are not valid, okay?>>18049971>Doesn't mean you can't learn anything from themand is there an academic method of differentiating them? I don't think soI see Tacitus' sources, for example, being used as the practical definition of Germanic culture in many circles and it is clearly biased
>>18049935>Celts preferring to sleep with men rather than roasts, and that young Celts offered themselves to foreigners, Literal medfag projection
>>18049987>Celtic women were beautiful but that the men preferred to sleep together. Diodorus went further, stating that "the young men will offer themselves to strangers and are insulted if the offer is refusedAt no point does this say that the society is lead by women.
>>18049998Cope
>>18049993>and is there an academic method of differentiating them?yes, it's called "history"what do you think academic historians do for a living?
>>18050006you didn't understand what I meant
>>18049935but they were like that, there is no way to cry at this point, besides, the Germanic people consulted old women of 60 years old for everything as described in their myths
>>18050016I think you're just asking an incredibly broad question, and also that source criticism is the basis of the historical field
>>18049987Celtic bros? What now?
>>18049935>every single Roman ever>all primary sourcesYou've already pointed out that there are different accounts with different motivations. If you have been with a set of people, just describe the people you have beef with and argue why they're retarded.
>>18049935>>18049987Athenaeus and Diodorus were probably writing from the same source, and neither of them mention Celts having sex with other men, but boys, which is totally normal masculine behaviour.Although their wives are comely, they have very little to do with them, but rage with lust, in outlandish fashion, for the embraces of males. It is their practice to sleep upon the ground on the skins of wild beasts and to tumble with a catamite on each side. And the most astonishing thing of all is that they feel no concern for their proper dignity, but prostitute to others without a qualm the flower of their bodies; nor do they consider this a disgraceful thing to do, but rather when anyone of them is thus approached and refuses the favour offered him, this they consider an act of dishonour.— Diodoros of Sicily, Library of HistorySo too the Celts, even though they have the most beautiful women of all the barbarians, prefer sex with boys; as a result, some of them routinely sleep on their animal-skins with two boyfriends.— Athenaeus, The Learned Banqueters
>>18050189Go fuck yourself
>>18050378Why so angry?
>>18050189You're so disgusting And those sources are actually made up by medjeets
>>18050422>You're so disgusting...for quoting ancient sources?>those sources are actually made up by medjeetsDiodoros lived when the Italian Peninsula was still White.
>>18050423>for quoting ancient sources?>which is totally normal masculine behaviour.Speak for *yourself*>Diodoros lived when the Italian Peninsula was still WhiteBesides trolling around with fake roman sources, (propaganda) you have a very little knowledge about haploamutism
>>18049935you have to read between the lines and use discernment, no different than any academic work through any time period including our own
>>18050965We can't
>>18049956>Herodotus, for example, is an author, but he lied a lot about things he had no idea about.Herodotus has been proven correct about most of what he wrote. As far as ancient historians go, he is one of the most credible.
Because we have very few sources from the peoples themselves. Most Germanic histories are oral; the literate outsiders recorded them.
>>18049956What did Herodotus lie about anon?
>>18050423>Diodoros lived when the Italian Peninsula was still White.you're a retard
