Classify very Scottish looking young man

[omidjahan]

KN/Anglo-Saxon

white guy

[Albannach]

Would you say there is a distinct ‘Scottish’ face and by your phrasing, if it is true, does he look more like Andy Robertson or Stuart Adamson? This is in a country where the average Scotsman is a Brythonic/Pictish/Gaelic/Germanic mix. Stuart Adamson to me has a quintessentially Scottish face but he was from Fife. Whether those who do look distinctly ‘Scottish’ have a greater amount of ancestry from the historically Pictish heartlands. There was a decent amount of immigration from England/Flanders to the Royal Burghs stretching all the way up the east coast, from Fife/Aberdeenshire. This migration was rather pivotal in causing the retreat of Gaelic from said area (even though that has previously displaced Pictish). I didn’t think the English/Flemish migration would have affected the more rural parts, but by a multitude of sources, eastern Scots seem to cluster more with the English than the Irish.

I would say there are certain people who look distinctly Scottish, though probably less so than the Irish, Andy Robertson in my opinion is a good example of someone who looks very Scottish, I see so many people day to day who look like him in Glasgow, Stuart Adamson has a unique look, but it is not one I see as often. There is also a fair bit of overlap in phenotypes between all nations in the Isles, with most people it isn't easy to make a distinction just by looking at them, I would say the Irish are the most easily distinguishable though.

I also think you are making too much of a distinction between Gaels, Britons and Picts, they all ultimately derive from the same Bell Beaker population, and were all insular Celts and in the case of the Picts and Britons were practically the same people. If you are going to make a distinction between Gaels, Picts and Britons why not make the same distinction between Angles, Saxons and Jutes? You are right about the Burghs though, there was significant immigration from England and particularly Flanders into Eastern Scotland, I would say this is reflected in phenotype too, with the East being a bit fairer, saying that Eastern Scots are still only about 20% CNE and about 67% Insular Celt, which is still 15% higher than Cumbria which is the most insular Celtic county in England, the 12% French like ancestry in Eastern Scots is interesting and it is hard to know how old it is. When you say Eastern Scots cluster with the English, which part of England are you talking about? if it's Cumbria and Northumbria then that is understandable as I believe they cluster closer to Scotland than they do to the rest of England, probably due to their higher insular Celtic ancestry, 49% in Northumbria and 52% in Cumbria, it would probably be more accurate to say they cluster with Eastern Scotland than vice versa.

[Watersater79]

I would say there are certain people who look distinctly Scottish, though probably less so than the Irish, Andy Robertson in my opinion is a good example of someone who looks very Scottish, I see so many people day to day who look like him in Glasgow, Stuart Adamson has a unique look, but it is not one I see as often. There is also a fair bit of overlap in phenotypes between all nations in the Isles, with most people it isn't easy to make a distinction just by looking at them, I would say the Irish are the most easily distinguishable though.

I also think you are making too much of a distinction between Gaels, Britons and Picts, they all ultimately derive from the same Bell Beaker population, and were all insular Celts and in the case of the Picts and Britons were practically the same people. If you are going to make a distinction between Gaels, Picts and Britons why not make the same distinction between Angles, Saxons and Jutes? You are right about the Burghs though, there was significant immigration from England and particularly Flanders into Eastern Scotland, I would say this is reflected in phenotype too, with the East being a bit fairer, saying that Eastern Scots are still only about 20% CNE and about 67% Insular Celt, which is still 15% higher than Cumbria which is the most insular Celtic county in England, the 12% French like ancestry in Eastern Scots is interesting and it is hard to know how old it is. When you say Eastern Scots cluster with the English, which part of England are you talking about? if it's Cumbria and Northumbria then that is understandable as I believe they cluster closer to Scotland than they do to the rest of England, probably due to their higher insular Celtic ancestry, 49% in Northumbria and 52% in Cumbria, it would probably be more accurate to say they cluster with Eastern Scotland than vice versa.

Whilst that admixture study you are referring to in question was most enlightening/pivotal, particularly in relation to how we look at the non-Brythonic component in England, there seem to be a few areas that don't quite tie together. Firstly, it seems pretty surprising that the NE of England is basically as 'Brythonic' as Cornwall/Cumbria when there are some marked phenotypical differences and the latter two areas. We are talking about an area (Northumbria) right on the east coast, looking out over the North Sea, compared to an area like Cumbria, facing the other direction towards Ireland and with its population being rather isolated from the rest of those in the NE by a craggy landscape. Also, the Angles and Saxons practically bordered each other on the same flat landmass (the northern German plain), whereas the Irish/Welsh/Scottish are more geographically disparate (not denying that they are still closely related). 'Picts and Britons were practically the same people'... you are referring to genetics? They certainly didn't speak the same language.

[kevinmac]

Keltic Nordoid primarily. Nose looks almost jewish.

[Albannach]

Whilst that admixture study you are referring to in question was most enlightening/pivotal, particularly in relation to how we look at the non-Brythonic component in England, there seem to be a few areas that don't quite tie together. Firstly, it seems pretty surprising that the NE of England is basically as 'Brythonic' as Cornwall/Cumbria when there are some marked phenotypical differences and the latter two areas. We are talking about an area (Northumbria) right on the east coast, looking out over the North Sea, compared to an area like Cumbria, facing the other direction towards Ireland and with its population being rather isolated from the rest of those in the NE by a craggy landscape. Also, the Angles and Saxons practically bordered each other on the same flat landmass (the northern German plain), whereas the Irish/Welsh/Scottish are more geographically disparate (not denying that they are still closely related). 'Picts and Britons were practically the same people'... you are referring to genetics? They certainly didn't speak the same language.

The consensus amongst linguists is that the Picts spoke a northern variety of Brythonic, which lacked the Latin influence that the Brythonic language further south received after centuries of Roman rule, this is consistent with personal names as well as placenames, the numerous Aber, and Strath placenames for example are all very Welsh.

Cumbric, another Brythonic language, spoken in Southern Scotland and Northern England also differed to some extent from the Brythonic dialects spoken further south, Just as Cornish, Breton and Welsh differ, yet no one would deny that they were all Britons. While Pictish culture and language had diverged to some extent, such as the Pictish stones and possible matrilineal inheritance, they were still Brythonic Celts, speaking a Brythonic language and were referred to as Britons by the Romans prior to the the 3rd century, Pict was a term that they didn't even call themselves, they possibly called themselves Albidosi, they were called Cruithni in Gaelic and Prydyn in old Welsh, both terms mean Briton.

This is a good indepth read about the Pictish language.
https://theses.gla.ac.uk/6285/7/2015RhysPhD.pdf

[Watersater79]

The consensus amongst linguists is that the Picts spoke a northern variety of Brythonic, which lacked the Latin influence that the Brythonic language further south received after centuries of Roman rule, this is consistent with personal names as well as placenames, the numerous Aber, and Strath placenames for example are all very Welsh.

Cumbric, another Brythonic language, spoken in Southern Scotland and Northern England also differed to some extent from the Brythonic dialects spoken further south, Just as Cornish, Breton and Welsh differ, yet no one would deny that they were all Britons. While Pictish culture and language had diverged to some extent, such as the Pictish stones and possible matrilineal inheritance, they were still Brythonic Celts, speaking a Brythonic language and were referred to as Britons by the Romans prior to the the 3rd century, Pict was a term that they didn't even call themselves, they possibly called themselves Albidosi, they were called Cruithni in Gaelic and Prydyn in old Welsh, both terms mean Briton.

This is a good indepth read about the Pictish language.
https://theses.gla.ac.uk/6285/7/2015RhysPhD.pdf

There might have been a minor genetic difference between the populations to the north and south of the Antonine Wall, though. Aside from that small piece of land between the Firths of Clyde and Forth, the northern and southern parts of Scotland aren't that 'connected'. Scotland has a sort of hourglass shape with that very compressed middle. This could have ensured some kind of phenotypical/genetic drift between the two groups (Picts/Britons)