Skip to comments.
English And Welsh Are Races Apart
BBC ^
| 6-30-2002
Posted on 07/04/2002 5:27:12 PM PDT by blam
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 421-432 next last
To: LostTribe
Ya I read it, which generated my post inquiring as to your novel concept that the Angles and Saxons were Celt rather than German. Now you square the circle by saying the Germans were Celts. It seems almost everyone is a Celt (well you know what I mean).
121
posted on
07/04/2002 8:19:50 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: Torie
>Is there anyone of European ancestry that was not impregnated by a Viking or Celt?
The Vikings are just one of many sub-categories of Celts. Check the population numbers at my Profile and you'll see how large the Celtic population was, even then. It's little wonder they came to totally dominate all of NORTHERN and WESTERN Europe.
To: dr_who
Yup, moonshine is just fermented and refined corn, which Europeans didn't know about until we got to North America. Whiskey and Scotch are just refined grains and/or malt, which was more available in N. Europe.
To: Torie
>It seems almost everyone is a Celt (well you know what I mean).
No, that overstates the case. But it is safe to say that FAR MORE Europeans (North and West) are of Celtic origin than in the article which began this thread, which confines them to Cornwall/Wales, Ireland and Brittany.
To: LostTribe
My understanding is that the Saxons weren't really Celts. The word Saxon derives from the special type of battle axe they wielded. Anyway, the trouble started when the Celtic Brits hired Saxon mercenaries to help them ward off invaders from the north because the Romans had their own problems with barbarian insurgents and couldn't help out any more. In any case, the Saxons eventually decided that they liked it in Britain and invaded.
125
posted on
07/04/2002 8:23:08 PM PDT
by
dr_who
To: dr_who
No, Scots Irish are Scots that were sent into Ireland by William or Orange as colonizers and settled mostly in Ulster. It is true that they went to the US in droves. Scots Irish are one of the most numerous gene pools in the US (exceeded perhaps only by English and German). They predominated as frontiersman, and were favored because they were viewed as rough and ready sorts, used to conflict. Andrew Jackson was Scots Irish, as was George Wallace.
126
posted on
07/04/2002 8:24:31 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: Torie
There are four types of Scots. There are those who descend from Angles and Saxons who moved North into fertile valleys. There are the old Picts who are akin to the original Britons in the South and in Wales. There are the Scandinavians out in the Hebrides!~ (MacBeth's wife, Lady MacBeth, was the daughter of the Scandinavian King of the Hebrides. In that context, she was probably as normal as any Thor worshiper ever got.)
Then, there are the Highland Scots! These magnificent people are direct descendants of the Irish who invaded and conquered Alba and changed its name to Scota in the 900s.
Most Scots and Scottish descendants are descendants of one or more, or maybe all, of these groups.
The people in Northern Ireland are either Irish or they are descended from a mix of peoples who came from Great Britain to colonize Ulster. They are not all Scottish in origin.
That's why it would be in error to inform the Scots-Irish and the Irish in Ulster that they are the same folks - they are not the same folks!
To: LostTribe
...probably because they were good war chariot drivers.
128
posted on
07/04/2002 8:25:09 PM PDT
by
dr_who
To: Torie
One theory - which I am particularly attracted to - has ALL PEOPLES (well, 8 of them anyway) starting out after the flood of Noah, in Anatolia, which is Turkey. From there the original Celts migrated north and west, or south and west around the Black Sea and into Europe. So, the theory is not at all farfetched as it sounds. You are just hearing the tail end of it.
To: Torie
"Blue Hibuscus? Maybe you mean Hydranga." Yup. You are correct. I get the names mixed up.
130
posted on
07/04/2002 8:25:23 PM PDT
by
blam
To: LostTribe
131
posted on
07/04/2002 8:26:14 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: Cleburne
132
posted on
07/04/2002 8:31:07 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: dr_who
133
posted on
07/04/2002 8:32:08 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: blam
We already know this. Arthur was Welsh as well, and was responsible for preventing an AngloSaxon sweep of Wales. The new English like Tony Blair object to being called British or Brits. They know, too.
To: muawiyah
>The Norse invaders of what became Normandy were not all that numerous. The basic Celtic population remained in place.
The Normans WERE Celts. Rollo was from Norway and brought many Danes with him to threaten the simple French king into giving them "Normandy". By the time William got around to invading, many of his men had married other Celtic French women. The battles of 1066 were largely battles between Scandinavians to see who would KEEP England. (The Scandinavians won. ---ggg---
>We can be sure of that because they held on to their Gallo language!
Actually, good linguistic researchers say that language is a very poor way to try to draw conclusions, because the languages do not remain, any more than our ancestors languages remained with us several generations after they came to America.
To: LostTribe
Go back to "identifiable". Where we had European cultures that were identifiably Celtic in origin, or where folks spoke Gaelic dialects, or Gallo, they have had massive emigration to the Americas! Ireland, Wales, Cornwall, Brittany, Galicia, Scotland - 90% of the descendants of the populations resident in those places in the 1500s now live here!
Certainly there are descendants of Celtic people throughout Europe, but they don't know it having been conquered by Eastern barbarians.
The jury is out on the Germans being just a different tribe of Celts, but the fact is their coloration is different. Now that's somewhat obscured in modern populations due to the population rebuilding efforts after the 30 Years War where numerous Irishmen and Bretons volunteered to help the German ladies have babies, but it's pretty clear the Germans are really different!
Gaelic speakers are known to have been at large in the Mediterranean previous to 700 BC, and resident at Troy for at least 1000 years prior to the arrival of the Greeks on the scene. They had a culture and civilization coincident with the first stirrings of serious civilization in the Levant. I read your site where you seek to turn Gaelic speakers into the "Lost Tribes", but you wait until 610 BC. The known dates for independent Gaelic civilization are much older than that and must be respected.
One of the prophets does note that David has in his ancestry a Scythian, and the Scythians at that time are Celtic. I'd rather think that's how Gaelic speakers ended up among the Semitic speaking Kurds occupying Palestine in the old days - they showed up in a boat and visited the ladies - nothing need be more complex than that.
To: muawiyah
Are the Picts and Highlanders both Celtic, albeit with different geographic histories? I always assumed the Scots were Celt, but I take your point that the Anglo Saxons probably grabbed the best land. How do the Normans fit into all this? Are they also Anglo Saxon, or some other group? The Normans I know are also Germanic. I am assuming that the Anglo Saxons invaded earlier, per the Arthurian legends, but I am getting wobbly here.
137
posted on
07/04/2002 8:37:53 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: dr_who
>The word Saxon derives from the special type of battle axe they wielded.
The word Saxon goes back far before that, and derives from "saka-suni" which is loosely "Isaacs son". Please read the 3-MINUTE history at my Profile to save bandwidth. Thanks.
To: LostTribe
I've often wondered what the difference was between the Saxons and the vikings were. I guess the vikings weren't really a distinct ethnic group, just a group of people who made their living doing hit and run raids. After all, Beowulf, that first big English classic story was written in Anglo-Saxon but wasn't written in England. But here's a link to some Anglo Saxon poetry:
http://www.kami.demon.co.uk/gesithas/readings/readings.html
139
posted on
07/04/2002 8:41:50 PM PDT
by
dr_who
To: keithtoo
"One theory - which I am particularly attracted to - has ALL PEOPLES (well, 8 of them anyway) starting out after the flood of Noah, in Anatolia, which is Turkey. From there the original Celts migrated north and west, or south and west around the Black Sea and into Europe. So, the theory is not at all farfetched as it sounds. You are just hearing the tail end of it." I sorta subscribe to that theory.
I believe that there was a large population of Celts (fishers/farmers) crowded around the fresh water Black Sea prior to it being flooded with salt water.
The whole area around the Black Sea was very arid during that period and only the coast line and the river valleys could support life. When it flooded (rising one foot per day) all these folks fled up the river valleys displacing all in their path and eventually covering all of Europe and introducing farming to all the areas in which they settled.
Linguists support this theory as they can trace all the farming words in the European language back to this region.
140
posted on
07/04/2002 8:43:29 PM PDT
by
blam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 421-432 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson