sci.archaeology
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: No Roman Invasion? (Hengistbury)

Subject: Re: No Roman Invasion? Hengistbury
From: Philip Deitiker
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 00:25:47 GMT
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology, soc.history.ancient
"Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxx> says  in 
news:42c9ce04$0$14024$dbd4b001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

>     " And this is what she said in this thread
>       before she brought that hype in: "

> I think it is important to keep the attributions clear,

Let me show you a little trick. When I quote people on the Usenet I 
use 

> blah, blah, blah. 

and when I quote people from websites I use 

http:\\www.blah.com 
"
blah, blah, blah.
"

> especially when someone like IEJ is involved.

lol. 
 
>> I particularly like the answer "6" > "5"
> 
> That's nice, but what is the problem you solved here?

The difference between "60 AD" and "50 AD"

>>> btw. I think the poem she calls in as evidence
>>> is Avienus' "Ora Maritima" (still not translated)
>>
>> I don't really care what color of flatulance she makes.
> 
> In other words: you are not interested in the subject.

I have a very latent interest in the celts, round about the time this 
group came into existence I got into a debate with someone about the 
difference between the scots and the irish, and I did an internet 
study at the time, it was like light and day (compared), but I 
learned the basics. I have also collected some information that I am 
sure the mdm would be very interested in concerning the norse and the 
celts, but alas she doesn't deserve it ;^). I think the question was 
where were the gaelic (western) irish from, at that time I concluded 
they were from romania, molecular genetics, however, separates really 
bad theories from good ones. 
  I find it very interesting that no-one yet has touched on some of 
the cultural similarities between the celts and the norse, yet. 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>