Ian Stewart's "The Celts: A Modern History" refutes the romanticized notion of a unified Celtic past. Stewart argues that "Celtic" is a largely modern construct, shaped by 18th and 19th-century romanticism and nationalism. While acknowledging shared linguistic and cultural elements in ancient communities across Europe, he emphasizes their diversity and distinct identities. The book traces how the concept of "Celticism" evolved and was variously appropriated for political and cultural agendas, demonstrating that contemporary interpretations of Celtic identity are far removed from historical realities. Stewart’s rigorous approach deconstructs the persistent myth of a singular Celtic people, presenting a more nuanced and historically accurate view of the dispersed communities labeled "Celtic."
In an extensive review published in History Today, Neal Ascherson meticulously dissects Ian Stewart's book, "The Celts: A Modern History." Ascherson commends Stewart for undertaking the ambitious task of chronicling the intricate and often politically charged history of the Celtic identity, a narrative spanning centuries and encompassing a diverse range of peoples and geographical regions. He acknowledges the inherent complexities involved in defining "Celticity," a concept often romanticized and instrumentalized for various nationalistic and cultural agendas.
Ascherson highlights Stewart's meticulous approach to disentangling the historical threads of the Celtic narrative from the myths and legends that have often obscured it. The review emphasizes how Stewart traces the evolution of the Celtic identity from its ancient roots, through the medieval period and into the modern era, demonstrating its fluidity and adaptability across different historical contexts. Ascherson notes Stewart's careful examination of the role of language, archaeology, and genetics in constructing and understanding this complex identity, while also acknowledging the limitations of each of these disciplines in providing definitive answers.
The review further elaborates on Stewart's exploration of the Celtic Revival movement of the 19th and 20th centuries, a period during which the concept of Celtic identity experienced a resurgence in art, literature, and political thought. Ascherson emphasizes Stewart's analysis of how this revival, while often imbued with romantic notions of a shared Celtic past, also served as a vehicle for distinct nationalist movements in regions such as Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. He points to Stewart's careful delineation of the varying ways in which Celtic identity was employed in these different contexts, sometimes serving as a unifying force and at other times exacerbating existing divisions.
Furthermore, Ascherson applauds Stewart's nuanced examination of the political ramifications of the Celtic identity in the modern era, including its role in regionalist and nationalist movements. The review underscores Stewart's discussion of the complexities and contradictions inherent in invoking a shared Celtic heritage, recognizing its potential both for fostering cultural exchange and for fuelling political tensions.
Finally, Ascherson concludes by praising "The Celts: A Modern History" as a valuable contribution to the ongoing scholarly conversation surrounding Celtic identity. He lauds Stewart's rigorous research, his clear and engaging prose, and his ability to navigate the intricacies of a subject fraught with historical and political complexities. The review positions Stewart's book as a vital resource for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the historical evolution and contemporary significance of the Celtic identity, its enduring power, and its contested nature.
Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43432291
HN commenters largely discuss the problematic nature of defining "Celts," questioning its validity as a unified cultural or ethnic group. Several highlight the anachronistic application of the term, arguing it's a modern construct retroactively applied to disparate groups. Some point to the book's potential value despite this, acknowledging its exploration of how the idea of "Celticness" has been constructed and used throughout history, particularly in relation to national identity. Others suggest alternative readings on the topic or express skepticism towards the review's framing. A recurring theme is the romanticized and often inaccurate portrayal of Celtic history, especially within nationalistic narratives.
The Hacker News post titled "The Celts: A Modern History' by Ian Stewart Review" has generated a modest discussion with a few insightful comments. No one disputes the general premise of the review, which is largely positive.
One commenter highlights the enduring fascination with Celtic culture, particularly in places like Brittany and Galicia, where a sense of Celtic identity persists despite the complex historical realities. They emphasize the importance of recognizing that "Celtic" encompasses a diverse range of cultures and traditions, rather than a single monolithic entity. This commenter also expresses interest in exploring the genetic connections between these regions.
Another comment focuses on the book itself, pointing out that the author, Ian Stewart, is a mathematician, and expressing curiosity about his approach to historical writing. They wonder if his mathematical background influences his analysis and presentation of the historical narrative.
Another commenter provides a brief historical overview of the Celtic languages, highlighting the distinction between the "Q-Celtic" languages like Irish and Scottish Gaelic and the "P-Celtic" languages like Welsh and Breton. This commenter points out the geographical distribution of these languages and their eventual decline in the face of other languages like English.
Finally, a commenter mentions the ongoing debate and lack of clear consensus on defining who exactly qualified as "Celts" historically. They suggest that the term is often used rather loosely and may encompass groups with differing origins and cultural practices.
Overall, the comments are thoughtful but limited in number. They touch upon the complexities of Celtic identity, the author's background, the linguistic history of the Celtic languages, and the ongoing debate about the very definition of "Celt." They do not, however, delve deeply into any specific points raised in the review itself.