Here they talk about finding smelting furnaces from the 14th century ad. So the same site had been used for smelting iron from 1400 bc to 1400 ad...This to me is continuity...
This is a leap of faith on your part. Finding artifacts from two widely separated periods is no evidence of continuity. I dug a hole in my garden on Wednesday to plant a shrub. I will dig another couple of holes tonight. This does not mean that I've been digging holes in the garden continuously
So not just any Iron age ironworks. The guys new how to make pure 100% iron, which is currently impossible to reproduce even in most advanced laboratories...
That's all very interesting, but it has no bearings on the points I raised.
There's not an "unbelievable amount of "Celtic" toponyms"; there's a very believable amount of chance resemblances. (Which are more likely than you seem to think.)
How do you know? Did you study toponymes and hydronimes of the Balkans? Or are you just arrogant and dismissive?
Not of the Balkans specifically, but I am a linguist and toponyms are one of my areas of interest and have been for a couple of decades now.
No one is attacking neither you nor anything you believe in. Science is not a religion, there is nothing to defend. It is all about truth and learning. So stop fighting, and wait until i present the toponimes and hydronimes that i am talking about and then you can analyse them yourself and make up your own mind.
I'm not getting defensive. I'm trying to explain to you the fundamental flaws in your methodology. If your methodology is badly flawed, it doesn't matter what data you present, your results will still be invalid. Case in point:
Just to start, in Serbia you can find Mountain Tara and river Tara, but also mountain taor which is how you pronounce Teamhair (tavor, taor (tabor)) the actual old name of Tara in Ireland.
This is exactly what I'm talking about: Comparing a contemporary Irish word with a contemporary Serbian one when you're arguing for prehistoric contact is a fundamental methodological flaw. You need to compare the earliest attested forms
of each name, since the forms of names can and do change significantly over time.
Since Irish orthography is rather conservative, even the spelling itself demonstrates that you are on the wrong track: medial mh
in Irish comes from earlier *m. So there's labial consonant in the stem of the name Teamhair
that isn't reflected at all in the Serbian toponym. Where did it go? (Or, conversely, how did it get added?)
Moreover, this only supports the point I made earlier about chance resemblances. It isn't hard to find placenames with "Tara" around the world. There's an island in Indonesia called Batu Tara
means "stone".) There's a town called Tara (太良) on the Japanese island of Kyūshū. Does this mean that the Celts settled East and Southeast Asia as well as Western and Southern Europe?
In Serbian tabor is a military camp. Utaboriti se is to set up camp. Taborovati is to camp. Tavoriti is standing in one place, not moving. Tabor, Tavor, Taur, Tara....Tabor
is an obvious borrowing of Turkish tabur
"battalion; military camp". Any etymological dictionary of Serbian (or Hungarian or Rumanian or any of the other languages which have borrowed the same word) will tell you that.
And by the way there is no clear etymology for tara or Teamhair in Gaelic....
There's a big difference between "X doesn't have a clear etymology" and "any etymology I propose for X is as good as any other". If you're really interesting in the origins of the name, I suggest you read the scholarly articles concerning it in The kingship and landscape of Tara
from Four Courts Press. The leading theories are that it derives from a Proto-Indo-European root *tem- meaning "dark" or "cut" with the nominal suffix *ro-. Both of these elements are richly attested in Indo-European languages, as is deriving words in this manner.
Sometimes "there is no explanation" is the explanation. As the Irish comic Dara Ó Briain puts it, "Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale most appeals to you."
I like Dara. I have been living in Dublin for 20 years now and had a chance to see him many times. And he is funny, but he is also full of himself and full of the same Sh** you are now coming out with: "Just because i don't know about it and i don't understand it it doesn't exist and particularly if its not the established truth it is double rubbish". You know nothing about what i am talking about but you are dismissing it out of hand because you know everything and if you don't then its rubbish? Not very scientific...
I never claimed to know everything; neither does Dara. He's actually rather modest about his achievements. All the same, he has a degree in Mathematical Physics from University College Dublin. So when it comes to science and the scientific method, it's safe to say that he generally knows what he's talking about. And I have a degree in Linguistics from the University of Chicago. So again, it's not like I'm talking out of my ass when I say that your understanding of historical linguistics is faulty.
I don't know what your background is, but let's say you're an auto mechanic with years of experience working on cars. How well would you take to someone coming into your place of work and telling you they know better than you how to repair cars, that you're going about it all wrong, and that they can repair their own with nothing more that a hammer and some aluminum foil? Would you tell them, "Golly, you must be right; my whole life's work has been a waste!" Or would you say, "Have you noticed that your car doesn't actually run? Perhaps you might want to read a book on car repair before going at it again."
I'm telling you your car doesn't run. Not because I'm "arrogant and dismissive", but because I'd really like you to learn how to fix it for real.