Are Scots really that Celtic?

[TheForeigner]

I know the name of the people and country comes from an ancient Celtic people, but France's name comes from an ancient Germanic people. Scotland started out multilingual and indeed Gaelic Scottish is still alive, but quite marginal and the country is almost all English speaking(forgetting non-traditional or immigrant languages). It is to be remembered that Southeast Scotland with the capital Edinburgh had been part of England and the old Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria and was conquered during the 11th century, bringing in a sizeable English element. The Northern Isles use to have their Scandinavian language Norn(extinct in the 18th century) and the people are a mix of British Celts and Norse settlers(Vikings). Could it be said that the country is Anglo-Saxon(and Germanic) instead, since even a good portion of the ancestry is English and Norse? What do Scots tend to think of this?

[TheForeigner]

Bump

[Hevo]

Da only true Celts were the Hallstatt Celts from Central Europe bro.

[Balmung]

I don't even really consider the English and Scottish to be seperate ethnicities tbh. And I just pissed off all the Scottish members.

[TheForeigner]

I don't even really consider the English and Scottish to be seperate ethnicities tbh. And I just pissed off all the Scottish members.

That would be common thinking in Continental Europe.:) Except according to that viewpoint all British Islanders(Irish too) would be English and Anglo-Saxon, more or less.

[TheForeigner]

Da only true Celts were the Hallstatt Celts from Central Europe bro.

I was really thinking of culture and not who was the original or pure Celtic people.

[Dani Cutie]

Cantabrians (from Spain) are the most celts i think...

Look:

NORWEGIAN:

North Sea- 39.74
Atlantic- 23.47
Baltic- 13.26
Eastern European- 11.48
West Med- 7.37
West Asian- 3.6666666
East Med- 0.6466666
Red Sea- 0.23
Northeast African- 0.06

IRISH:

North Sea- 36.38
Atlantic- 30.66
Baltic- 11.15
Eastern European- 8.12
West Med- 6.98
West Asian- 3.34
East Med- 1.24
Red Sea- 0.67
Northeast African- 0.07

FRENCH:

North Sea- 28.25
Atlantic- 26.05
Baltic- 8.22
Eastern European- 6.32
West Med- 15.53
West Asian- 4.66
East Med- 6.72
Red Sea- 2.83
Northeast African- 0.11

SPANISH GALICIA:

North Sea- 23.22
Atlantic- 24.88
Baltic- 6.54
Eastern European- 3.91
West Med- 21.78
West Asian- 2.42
East Med- 8.93
Red Sea- 4.48
Northeast African- 1.52

SPANISH CANTABRIA:

North Sea- 19.95
Atlantic- 32.03
Baltic- 5.93
Eastern European- 4.22
West Med- 23.95
West Asian- 2.17
East Med- 6.59
Red Sea- 2.68
Northeast African- 0.91


Pure galaecians are more closer to Cantabrians i think, because during the inquisition, some Portuguish jews escape to Galicia.

[TheForeigner]

I wasn't really speaking of just genes or ancestry, but culture too. Also, what are the Celtic components there?

[Graham]

Scots are mostly like their Celtic Iron age ancestors in genetics.

[TheForeigner]

Scots are mostly like their Celtic Iron age ancestors in genetics.

What about language and culture though?

[Graham]

I wasn't really speaking of just genes or ancestry, but culture too. Also, what are the Celtic components there?

About the same as In Ireland culture. a dwindling Celtic language over the centuries, With a 'small' Gaeltacht. But retained many of it's celtic roots in place names & archaeology sites. With some celtic music like the Tin whistle, the Celtic harp etc.. with Ceilidh culture..

[Dani Cutie]

I wasn't really speaking of just genes or ancestry, but culture too. Also, what are the Celtic components there?

They have a monsters/legends in their culture too , like Ojancanu :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oj%C3%A1ncanu

http://perso.wanadoo.es/bertta/images/Ojancanu.jpg

[Dani Cutie]

And genetics,I think that atlantic facade is conected by celts, by this reason i think that atlantic =Celt.

[TheForeigner]

Do Scots consider themselves Celtic and never Anglo-Saxon or Germanic? What about you Graham?

[KawaiiKawaii]

Their language is dying, so soon they won't be any mo'. Welcome to the club of former Celts!

[Reith]

Scots is a Germanic language, not to be confused with English and Scottish Gaelic which is also spoken.

Their DNA is very L-21, but since the Isle bias in DNA testing, that leads most people to think of that haplogroup as Celts. IMO when more continental testing done L-21 will be numerous and odlest on the continent.

[Graham]

L-21, was found in the ancient Hinxton Iron age Brits.

[Vasconcelos]

Pure galaecians are more closer to Cantabrians i think, because during the inquisition, some Portuguish jews escape to Galicia.

Not really, there were prosecutions on both sides of the border..no side had much clemency. Never heard of Portuguese Jews fleeing to Spain, let alone Galicia.

[Dani Cutie]

Their language is dying, so soon they won't be any mo'. Welcome to the club of former Celts!
In less of 100 years we must speak in arab if this not change...

[Wild North]

The original Scots were Celtic.

[Dani Cutie]

Do Scots consider themselves Celtic and never Anglo-Saxon or Germanic? What about you Graham?

Wich Nordic/Germanic tribbes conquest Ireland?

[Graham]

Do Scots consider themselves Celtic and never Anglo-Saxon or Germanic? What about you Graham?

No one in Scotland would call them self anglo-saxon( political or historical, it is quite complicated when most Scots don't originate from South East Scotland, but a later movement into areas that the Northumbria Angles once held)... And the English language isn't a properly Germanic one, due to Normans.

I have heard Scots who proudly claim to have Norse lineage, mainly in the North.

[TheForeigner]

Wich Nordic/Germanic tribbes conquest Ireland?

The Norse Vikings did conquered and settled parts of Ireland and founded cities like Dublin. Also the English are Germanic and did conquer Ireland, even though they had a Norman rulling class and French king.

[TheForeigner]

No one in Scotland would call them self anglo-saxon( political or historical, it is quite complicated when most Scots don't originate from South East Scotland, but a later movement into areas that the Northumbria Angles once held)... And the English language isn't a properly Germanic one, due to Normans.

I have heard Scots who proudly claim to have Norse lineage, mainly in the North.

The Northern Isles had their own Scandinavian language for centuries. I know the early medieval cities which grew into the modern ones were established and peopled by Englishmen at first. Didn't know other people moved into the Southeast after it was seized from the English. Was that area something other than English speaking and Britonic/Welsh before that?

[TheForeigner]

http://isteve.blogspot.it/2012/07/diversity-before-diversity-thomas.html In 1855, Thomas Babington Macaulay, the British politician and poet, published the third volume of his History of England. It includes a portrait of the Scottish Highlands, home of his ancestors, and of the changing opinions toward Highlanders of the English and the Lowland Scots (collectively, "the Saxons") that is perhaps the most brilliant lengthy passage in the intellectual history of diversity (emphasis on lengthy). This is interesting to note how some Scottish intelectuals did see themselves as Anglo-Saxon and how sharpt the distinction between Lowlanders and Highlanders was once.

[Neon Knight]

I think much of it is in the imagination. How close is modern Scottish/Irish/Welsh culture to that of celtic culture in 50BC?

[TheForeigner]

I think much of it is in the imagination. How close is modern Scottish/Irish/Welsh culture to that of celtic culture in 50BC?
I understand thatmuch which is associated with Scottish people today like kilts, clans and bagpipes were only typical of the Highlands for centuries and were only adopted into the national culture of Scotland in the 19th century.

[TheForeigner]

Bump

[Graham]

I understand thatmuch which is associated with Scottish people today like kilts, clans and bagpipes were only typical of the Highlands for centuries and were only adopted into the national culture of Scotland in the 19th century.
You mean Walter Scott's Romanticism period.

It was an Amalgamation of culture, when Scotland started to become urbanised, mainly to Strathclyde. Like I said a population shift. Majority of lowlanders are a Highland or Irish mix with Lowlander. Just look at the clan maps & you'll see where all the prominent Scots surnames were from the 17th century.

[TheForeigner]

You could argue the real Celts were largely assimilated by Germanic people.

[Graham]

You could argue the real Celts were largely assimilated by Germanic people.

English itself isn't even a truely Germanic language, it's a hybrid Germanic-Latin one. Scotlands first proper Anglicisation came from the Norman period( David I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_I_of_Scotland)) & for centuries Scotland still had just as close a link to France as it had with England. The main reason for Britain was religion. That is why we have our UK today.

[Smaug]

I don't even really consider the English and Scottish to be seperate ethnicities tbh. And I just pissed off all the Scottish members.

That's an absurd.

[Antimage]

English itself isn't even a truely Germanic language, it's a hybrid Germanic-Latin one. Scotlands first proper Anglicisation came from the Norman period( David I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_I_of_Scotland)) & for centuries Scotland still had just as close a link to France as it had with England.

english is a truely germanic language. period. what determines that it is germanic or not is the grammar. loanwords don't make it "less germanic"

[KawaiiKawaii]

english is a truely germanic language. period. what determines that it is germanic or not is the grammar. loanwords don't make it "less germanic"

Not only the grammar, but its origins, its most used vocabulary, everything. There are no lesser or more something languages.

[Graham]

The back bone is anglo-saxon. But any Brit would see old English as impossible to read, it is very different & reformed. English today has its origins in Middle English.

[Antimage]

Not only the grammar, but its origins, its most used vocabulary, everything. There are no lesser or more something languages.

yes you are right. english language is in fact as germanic as the german language itself.

hungarian vocabulary is 21% uralic, 6% latin and greek, 11% german, 20% slavic. does that mean hungarian language is more indo european than uralic? that's complete nonsense. loanwords don't magically change the structure of the language

[KawaiiKawaii]

The back bone is anglo-saxon. But any Brit would see old English as impossible to read, it is very different & reformed.

Languages evolve, it doesn't mean that it stops being Romance or Germanic.

[Antimage]

The back bone is anglo-saxon. But any Brit would see old English as impossible to read, it is very different & reformed.
so what? it's a natural thing that languages change over the centuries. I can't read old hungarian.
The french can't read latin language from 5th century.Does that make french a fake romance language?

[Antimage]

The back bone is anglo-saxon. But any Brit would see old English as impossible to read, it is very different & reformed. English today has its origins in Middle English.

middle english has its origins in old english. old english has its origins in proto germanic that was spoken in northern germany or scandinavia or i don't know, it doesn't really matter.
there are no "more germanic languages" and "less germanic languages" there are no "romance-germanic" languages only romance and germanic

[TheForeigner]

Well I think British Celts in moder times are both Celtic and Germanic culturally and especially linguistically. The French Bretons are also both Latin and Celtic.

[Wild North]

Bump.

According to the historical sources: the original inhabitans of Scotland were the Picts. And now scholars differ in their opinions who the Picts were. According to some they were 1. A Brythonic Celtic people, 2. A non-Celtic but Indo European tribe and lastly 3. A completely non-IE people. But the Picts were the first known inhabitans in Scotland.
But later on, the Gaelic Scots migrated from Ireland and settled in Scotland. As also the Germanic Anglo-Saxons did still later. And lastly the Norse Vikings, that settled in the maninland, and on the islands.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

I know the name of the people and country comes from an ancient Celtic people, but France's name comes from an ancient Germanic people. Scotland started out multilingual and indeed Gaelic Scottish is still alive, but quite marginal and the country is almost all English speaking(forgetting non-traditional or immigrant languages). It is to be remembered that Southeast Scotland with the capital Edinburgh had been part of England and the old Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria and was conquered during the 11th century, bringing in a sizeable English element. The Northern Isles use to have their Scandinavian language Norn(extinct in the 18th century) and the people are a mix of British Celts and Norse settlers(Vikings). Could it be said that the country is Anglo-Saxon(and Germanic) instead, since even a good portion of the ancestry is English and Norse? What do Scots tend to think of this?

The Scots are more Celtic than the English but the Scots are also more Germanic than the Irish and the Welsh. Mainlaind Scots are halfway genetically between the native Welsh (I would guess the Welsh genetics comes from the ancient kingdom of Cumbria and also from the Picts who are closely related) and Irish (Northern Irish settled Scotland in the kingdom of DalRiata hence Scottish Gaelic), on the one hand, and the English and Germanics on the otherhand. The reason why Scots identify as Celtic rather than Celto-Germanic or Germanic is because they want to differentiate themselves from the English who are more Germanic than the Scots. See the below comment on a scientific genetic study of Scotland and England (see especially the part I highlighted in bold text) :


June 13, 2003

CELTS AND ANGLO-SAXONS

I have at last got my hands on C. Capelli et al.: A Y Chromosome Census of the British Isles, Current Biology, vol. 13, 979-984, 27 May 2003.

Capelli et al. took DNA samples from men in 25 small towns around the British Isles, excluding men whose paternal grandfathers were born more than 20 miles away. For comparison they also took samples from Norway, Denmark, North Germany (Schleswig-Holstein), Friesland (Netherlands), and the Basque region of Spain. Using comparison of Y chromosome haplotypes, the Danish, North German and Frisian samples are all closely similar to each other, but the Norwegian sample is significantly different from these, and the Basque sample is widely different.

In a Principal Components analysis the Irish and Welsh samples (with one exception) cluster together with the Basque sample, supporting earlier findings. As the Basques speak a pre-Indo-European language, this suggests that the Irish and Welsh (so-called ‘Celts’) have a largely pre-Celtic genetic ancestry, possibly going back to the Palaeolithic. In Britain, the Orkneys, Shetlands, Western Isles, Isle of Man, and Cumbria (Penrith) show a clear Norwegian input, as expected. Elsewhere in mainland Britain there is no obvious Norwegian input, but varying degrees of German/Danish ancestry. Scottish mainland sites are intermediate between English sites and the ‘indigenous’ (Welsh/Irish) ones. However, all the English and Scottish sites show some ‘indigenous’ ancestry. The German/Danish component is strongest in eastern England and weakest in England south of the Thames.

Most of this is unsurprising, but there are two more controversial conclusions.
One is the claim that ‘the results seem to suggest that in England the Danes had a greater demographic impact than the Anglo-Saxons’. This is based on the finding that the German/Danish element is strongest in areas like Yorkshire that are known to have been settled by Danes. The conclusion seems to me a non-sequitur. The areas settled by Danes were the areas most exposed to invasion from Denmark and North Germany, and they got a double dose of German/Danish genes: first from the Angles, then the Danes. It would be very surprising if they did not have the strongest German/Danish element.

The other controversial conclusion is that the German/Danish element in southern England (south of the Thames) is limited, and that the male ancestry of this area ‘appears to be predominantly indigenous’. This may be true, but I would want to see it replicated with different samples and methods before taking it as firmly established. It should perhaps be noted that the samples with the smallest German/Danish element all come from areas (Wessex, Sussex, and Kent) reputedly settled by Saxons and Jutes, while the samples with larger German/Danish elements come from areas settled by Angles (East Anglia, Mercia and Northumbria). Conceivably there was already a genetic difference between these three ethnic groups before migration, though this does not seem particularly likely, as they all came from much the same area of Northern Europe.

As Capelli et al. recognise, their results seem to conflict with those of Weale et al., ‘Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration’, Molecular Biology and Evolution, 2002, vol. 19, pp.1008-21, which found a sharp distinction between central English and Welsh populations, but no significant difference between the English population and a Frisian sample. This discrepancy needs to be reconciled.

As I am a historian and not a geneticist it may help if I outline the historical evidence on the ethnic origins of the English. There is no dispute that British Celtic) elements were predominant in Cornwall and Cumbria, where Celtic languages survived long after the Anglo-Saxon invasions. There is also good evidence of British elements surviving in Kent and Wessex (see esp. Myres, ‘The English Settlements’, pp.147-73). But beyond that, there has been controversy since Victorian times. At one extreme, which I call the ‘Wipeout’ theory, it is believed that Celts were virtually exterminated or expelled by the invading Anglo-Saxons. At the other extreme, which I call the ‘Upper Crust’ theory, the Anglo-Saxons took over as a ruling elite but left the peasants largely untouched (rather like the later Norman Conquest). And of course there are intermediate positions.

The main lines of evidence are as follows:

Written sources: the main sources - Gildas, Bede, and the Anglo- Saxon Chronicle - make it clear that invaders from the Continent took political control of what is now England, and that in many places there was violent conflict between the invaders and native forces. But there are no reliable written sources on the numbers and proportions of different groups.

Language: the Old English or Anglo-Saxon language, in its various forms, is purely Germanic in its grammar and vocabulary, with no discernible Celtic element. If the Celts learned English, they learned it very thoroughly. The later Danish settlements strongly influenced the form of Old English spoken in eastern England, but did not replace it.

Place-names: the names of major towns and rivers often show some derivation from Celtic or Romano-British names, but the names of rural settlements are overwhelmingly Germanic (Anglo-Saxon or Danish), except in western England, where there is a ‘cline’ of increasing Celtic influence. However, there have been controversial claims that some Anglo-Saxon names have disguised Celtic origins.

Continental evidence: before the Anglo-Saxon settlement of England there were people known as Angles in northern Germany, and after it there weren’t. Around the same time, the Armorican peninsula was settled by Celtic Britons, to the extent that the area became known as Britain (Bretagne or Brittany). This certainly looks like a mass displacement of populations.

Religion: late Roman Christianity and Celtic religions disappeared from England and were replaced by Anglo-Saxon paganism until Christian missionaries from Ireland and Rome arrived.

Archaeology: there are few recognisable remains of any kind from the 5th century. After that, archaeological remains are mainly Germanic in style. It was formerly assumed by archaeologists that a change in style of this kind involved a migration of people, but the recent tendency has been to assume that styles change by ‘cultural diffusion’ or elite influence. Sometimes archaeologists seem to forget that ‘no conclusive proof that A’ is not the same
as ‘conclusive proof that not-A’.

Social structure and customs: the evidence from Anglo-Saxon poetry, laws, etc., is of a Germanic/Scandinavian society and customs. However, some sources do refer to ‘wealh’ (Welsh) inhabitants, who are presumed to be surviving Britons. The laws of Ine, king of Wessex in the late 7th century, make it clear that ‘wealh’ people could be either free or slaves (theow), and that they could belong to ‘wealh’ kinship groups, which implies survival of more than isolated individuals. Also, some charters and other documents refer to substantial numbers of slaves. (It complicates matters that the word ‘wealh’ itself, which originally meant ‘foreigner’ or ‘stranger’, may sometimes be used to mean ‘slave’, implying status rather than necessarily ethnic origin.)

The positive evidence, so far as it goes, seems to me consistent with something closer to the ‘Wipeout’ theory than the ‘Upper Crust’ theory, though with survival of ‘wealh’ populations in varying proportions. The advocates of the ‘Upper Crust’ theory rely heavily on an ‘argument from impossibility’: it is impossible, they say, that a relatively small number of Anglo-Saxon invaders can have wiped out a much larger Romano-British population. However, I think this is a misunderstanding of the invasion scenario. Roman-British society rapidly broke down when the Romans left. Even without invasion there would have been a population crash. The Romano-British were virtually defenceless apart from mercenaries who were themselves mainly Germans (Saxons), and quick to invite their relatives over to share the spoils. To destroy a defenceless population, it is not necessary to kill them individually. Just take a few captives in the first village you come to, skin some of them alive in the market-place, and let the rest of them go to spread the news. A wave of panicking refugees will spread out in all directions, and starvation and disease will do the rest. For analogy, suppose you heard that Martians with invincible weapons and sadistic habits had landed twenty miles away. You would run like buggery!

However, the feasibility of a scenario does not mean it is true. Further genetic evidence may finally resolve the controversy. If it is in fact proved that the ‘Celtic’ element was predominant in southern England, this would have interesting implications for cultural history and evolution, for it would show that a complete change of language and culture can be imposed by a dominant minority, in an illiterate pre-industrial society, and in a short period of time.


DAVID BURBRIDGE

http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000648.html

[Grace O'Malley]

The Scots are more Celtic than the English but the Scots are also more Germanic than the Irish and the Welsh. Mainlaind Scots are halfway genetically between the native Welsh (I would guess the Welsh genetics comes from the ancient kingdom of Cumbria and also from the Picts who are closely related) and Irish (Northern Irish settled Scotland in the kingdom of DalRiata hence Scottish Gaelic), on the one hand, and the English and Germanics on the otherhand. The reason why Scots identify as Celtic rather than Celto-Germanic or Germanic is because they want to differentiate themselves from the English who are more Germanic than the Scots. See the below comment on a scientific genetic study of Scotland and England (see especially the part I highlighted in bold text) :



http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000648.html

The Irish and Welsh don't cluster together. The Welsh are closer to Cornish and South West English populations while the Irish cluster with the West Scots so there are differences in the British Isles and it's not so cut and dry between what is Celtic and what is Germanic.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

The Irish and Welsh don't cluster together. The Welsh are closer to Cornish and South West English populations while the Irish cluster with the West Scots so there are differences in the British Isles and it's not so cut and dry between what is Celtic and what is Germanic.

According to the analysis of the scientific genetic study, I posted, the Welsh and the Irish cluster with the Basques (so they do cluster together and this is far from the first scientific study to link the Basques to the British isles) so they really aren't Celts like some people in central Europe. The latter are real celts. The Irish and Welsh aren't celts genetically but culturally (since they have largely pre-celtic ancestry). BTW, you should back up your claim with scientific genetic studies otherwise what you say is useless. I backed up what I said with science.

[Vasconcelos]

The Basques don't cluster with anyone else, and they are closer to other Iberians than to any other population..also, that study is over 10 years old. Things change by the hour this day.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

The Basques don't cluster with anyone else, and they are closer to other Iberians than to any other population..also, that study is over 10 years old. Things change by the hour this day.

Who cares if it is over 10 years old ? It is from 2003. For instance, the entire human genome was already mapped by 2003 so what is your point ? Oh, yeah , you have none. You are just another idiot who is wasting my time. Also, it should be obvious that the culture of the megaliths, in Britain, is associated with mediterraneans i.e. Basques :

(this study predates the first one and supports it)


Genes link Celts to Basques

The Welsh and Irish Celts have been found to be the genetic blood-brothers of Basques, scientists have revealed.

The gene patterns of the three races passed down through the male line are all "strikingly similar", researchers concluded.

Basques can trace their roots back to the Stone Age and are one of Europe's most distinct people, fiercely proud of their ancestry and traditions.

The research adds to previous studies which have suggested a possible link between the Celts and Basques, dating back tens of thousands of years.

"The project started with our trying to assess whether the Vikings made an important genetic contribution to the population of Orkney," Professor David Goldstein of University College London (UCL) told BBC News.

'Statistically indistinguishable'

He and his colleagues looked at Y-chromosomes, passed from father to son, of Celtic and Norwegian populations. They found them to be quite different.

"But we also noticed that there's something quite striking about the Celtic populations, and that is that there's not a lot of genetic variation on the Y-chromosome," he said.

To try to work out where the Celtic population originally came from, the team from UCL, the University of Oxford and the University of California at Davis also looked at Basques.

"On the Y-chromosome the Celtic populations turn out to be statistically indistinguishable from the Basques," Professor Goldstein said.

Pre-farming Europe

The comparison was made because Basques are thought by most experts to be very similar to the people who lived in Europe before the advent of farming.

Genetic tests BBC
Genetic tests have identified key gene groups
"We conclude that both of these populations are reflecting pre-farming Europe," he said.

Professor Goldstein's team looked at the genetic profiles of 88 individuals from Anglesey, North Wales, 146 from Ireland with Irish Gaelic surnames, and 50 Basques.

"We know of no other study that provides direct evidence of a close relationship in the paternal heritage of the Basque- and the Celtic-speaking populations of Britain," the team write in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Viking TV

But it is still unclear whether the link is specific to the Celts and the Basques, or whether they are both simply the closest surviving relatives of the early population of Europe.

What is clear is that the Neolithic Celts took women from outside their community. When the scientists looked at female genetic patterns as well, they found evidence of genetic material from northern Europe.

This influence helped even out some of the genetic differences between the Celts and their Northern European neighbours.

The work was carried out in connection with a BBC television programme on the Vikings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/1256894.stm

[Grace O'Malley]

According to the analysis of the scientific genetic study, I posted, the Welsh and the Irish cluster with the Basques (so they do cluster together and this is far from the first scientific study to link the Basques to the British isles) so they really aren't Celts like some people in central Europe. The latter are real celts. The Irish and Welsh aren't celts genetically but culturally (since they have largely pre-celtic ancestry). BTW, you should back up your claim with scientific genetic studies otherwise what you say is useless. I backed up what I said with science.

Great. I just looked at it and it is from 2003 and completely outdated. The Irish are more distant to the Basque than even the English are. Here is a more up-to-date study on Scots and Irish comparing them to Portuguese, Swedes and Bulgarians.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TInkAichSOI/AAAAAAAACkg/oE32FL8mBoM/s1600/pca_moskvina.jpg

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v18/n11/full/ejhg201087a.html

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/population-structure-in-ireland-and.html

There are loads of more up-to-date genetic studies out there and no one today would say that the Irish and Welsh have more in common with Basques than they do other British Islanders. I've also seen quite a few Irish dna results and have myself and 3 members of my family tested so I think I do know a bit more than you do especially if you post the information you have.

[Vasconcelos]

Your need to insult without being provocked just shows how insecure you are. And yes, things change a lot in 10 years because we learn and discover a lot of new stuff that we previously did not know.


Did you even read what you copied?

On the Y-chromosome the Celtic populations turn out to be statistically indistinguishable from the Basques

This topic has been beaten to death here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?88926-The-Irish-are-closer-to-Germans-or-to-Iberians/).

[Grace O'Malley]

Who cares if it is over 10 years old ? It is from 2003. For instance, the entire human genome was already mapped by 2003 so what is your point ? Oh, yeah , you have none. You are just another idiot who is wasting my time. Also, it should be obvious that the culture of the megaliths, in Britain, is associated with mediterraneans i.e. Basques :



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/1256894.stm

It's completely outdated and has been shown to be incorrect. It was based on very basic R1b (ydna) studies. They also thought then that R1b was a lot older and came from the Ice Age Refuge when it is only quite young in Europe. Please update your knowledge as I'm not going to go over all this again. Read up on some up-to-date genetics.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

Great. I just looked at it and it is from 2003 and completely outdated. The Irish are more distant to the Basque than even the English are. Here is a more up-to-date study on Scots and Irish comparing them to Portuguese, Swedes and Bulgarians.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TInkAichSOI/AAAAAAAACkg/oE32FL8mBoM/s1600/pca_moskvina.jpg

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v18/n11/full/ejhg201087a.html

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/population-structure-in-ireland-and.html

There are loads of more up-to-date genetic studies out there and no one today would say that the Irish and Welsh have more in common with Basques than they do other British Islanders. I've also seen quite a few Irish dna results and have myself and 3 members of my family tested so I think I do know a bit more than you do especially if you post the information you have.

Whatever, both your links are from 2010. In 2009 Professor Dan Bradely of Trinity College Dublin's Smurfit institute of genetics presented scientific genetic evidence that the Irish are most closely related to people in various parts of Galicia and the Basque country according to his genetic studies that he led . He presented his research to the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in Chicago. So there we have a more recent genetic evidence backing up the older genetic evidence. You expect us to believe that a genetic study from 2009 is supposed to be outdated compared to one from 2010 ? We aren't talking about silicon valley here but biology so you would be wrong if you tried to make that point. Also, my original study was from 2003 but like I said the entire human genome project was completed by 2003. My point by mentioning that is that genetics already reached its golden age by then so anything since then is more like a refinement of older methods but such refinement would not be so radically different as to completely outdate research from 2003 IMHO. The science that is now entering a golden age is neurology it is no longer biology/genetics. So far I have presented 3 scientific studies and you have only presented two. There is also a scientific study from 2007 by a scientist called Oppenheimer which links the British isles to the Basques so that would make at least four scientific studies that back up my claim and only two for you.

[Grace O'Malley]

Whatever, both your links are from 2010. In 2009 Professor Dan Bradely of Trinity College Dublin's Smurfit institute of genetics his presented scientific genetic evidence that the Irish are most closely related to people in various parts of Galicia and the Basque country according to his genetic studies that he led . He presented his research over the weekend at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in Chicago. So there we have a more recent genetic evidence backing up the older genetic evidence. You expect us to believe that a genetic study from 2009 is supposed to be outdated compared to one from 2010 ? We aren't talking about silicon valley here but biology so you would be wrong if you tried to make that point. Also, my original study was from 2003 but like I said the entire human genome project was completed by 2003. My point by mentioning that is that genetics already reached its golden age by then so anything since then is more like a refinement of older methods but such refinement would not be so radically different as to completely outdate research from 2003 IMHO. The science that is now entering a golden age is neurology it is no longer biology/genetics.

You don't know what you are talking about. Professor Dan Bradley never said any such thing. Give a link to support this as I'm quite aware of Prof Dan Bradley's studies. No one now would ever say that the Irish are linked to the Basque as they would be ridiculed. I'm Irish and I have looked quite extensively into Irish genetics. So I'm waiting for a link to what Dan Bradley says please. And don't be posting old newspaper articles.

You just don't have any basic knowledge in genetics.

[Grace O'Malley]

Please post a genetic study and not newspaper articles. Why? Because a lot of journalists don't have a clue about genetics and this is why you will find loads of newspaper articles constantly regurgitating that same old information about the Celts and Basques being linked. Anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge of genetics would see the error in these articles. Anyway Prof Bradley is talking about Niall of the Nine Hostages these days.

http://www.backtoourpast.com/mysitecaddy/site3/dnaandtheirish.htm

Anyway KevinB you don't appear to know the difference between y-dna and autosomal dna?

[Grace O'Malley]

Here's one you will like KevinB. The Irish are actually Turks.

http://www.irishcentral.com/roots/new-study-claims-that-irishmen-descended-from-turkish-farmers-83217437-237788351.html

[Duke]

Celtic is a such wide term, aren't original celts like north italians, swiss, south germans?

Then there is gaelic, however, were picts gaelic, or were gaels actually gauls, who imposed their superior language and culture to picts and brittons at one time?
With very primitive cultures such expansion is viable.

I think its more complicated, there is not celitic peoples all over Europe, only celtic culture and language, that was spread at one time, and it was later replaced with latin and germanic

[Styrian Mujo]

Meh they are just Anglos to me.

[TheForeigner]

I think it's debatable who Celtic any of the ''modern Celts'' really still are.

[Grace O'Malley]

Celtic is a such wide term, aren't original celts like north italians, swiss, south germans?

Then there is gaelic, however, were picts gaelic, or were gaels actually gauls, who imposed their superior language and culture to picts and brittons at one time?
With very primitive cultures such expansion is viable.

I think its more complicated, there is not celitic peoples all over Europe, only celtic culture and language, that was spread at one time, and it was later replaced with latin and germanic

The Celts in the British Isles are mostly Celtic by culture. There wasn't a large population movement into these countries. Looking at genetics I'm very close to North Dutch so how can that be explained?? I'm not sure whether the Belgic Celts are the reason.

[just]

Scots were Celtic tribe who is migrated from Irealnd.
Before that in nowadays Scotland, there were people who is called the 'Picts'.
Their origin is not accurate, but some historians said to be they are people who got Norman genes from Norway.
Scots look actaully pretty palest among the Brits, and their skulls are long with the Scandinavians.
And there are heavy Viking invasions from Norway to Scotland in coastal regions.
Culturally, the highland Scotland is Celtic, using the Scot Gaelic language,
the lowland Scotland is Germanic, using the Scots which is dialect form of English. (Germanic language)

[Albannach]

Scots were Celtic tribe who is migrated from Irealnd.
Before that in nowadays Scotland, there were people who is called the 'Picts'.
Their origin is not accurate, but some historians said to be they are people who got Norman genes from Norway.
Scots look actaully pretty palest among the Brits, and their skulls are long with the Scandinavians.
And there are heavy Viking invasions from Norway to Scotland in coastal regions.
Culturally, the highland Scotland is Celtic, using the Scot Gaelic language,
the lowland Scotland is Germanic, using the Scots which is dialect form of English. (Germanic language)

Actually parts of lowland Scotland spoke Gaelic in to the 18th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_McMurray

Most Scots men are L21 along with the Welsh, Irish and Bretons.

[Grace O'Malley]

Actually parts of lowland Scotland spoke Gaelic in to the 18th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_McMurray

Most Scots men are L21 along with the Welsh, Irish and Bretons.

Yes L21 is definitely interesting and a majority in the Celtic countries.

[TheForeigner]

It's not genes that make a people Celtic. Celts originated in Central Europe anyway. If most don't speak Celtic languages anymore, then maybe they aren't so Celtic anymore.

[TheForeigner]

The Celts in the British Isles are mostly Celtic by culture. There wasn't a large population movement into these countries. Looking at genetics I'm very close to North Dutch so how can that be explained?? I'm not sure whether the Belgic Celts are the reason.

North Dutch don't even have Celtic substratum.

[Grace O'Malley]

North Dutch don't even have Celtic substratum.

All my family are very close to Dutch on the Gedmatch calculators. My brother comes up half Frisian on K23b and my closest population on Eurogenes K13 is North Dutch. How does anyone explain these things? That is the reason why I'm not sure about categories like Celtic and Germanic.

[Duke]

All my family are very close to Dutch on the Gedmatch calculators. My brother comes up half Frisian on K23b and my closest population on Eurogenes K13 is North Dutch. How does anyone explain these things? That is the reason why I'm not sure about categories like Celtic and Germanic.

Do you agree since your Irish, that Scots and Irish, even tho very close genetically to each other, have different looks?

I am not sure, but what i have seen, that seems to be the case

[Grace O'Malley]

Do you agree since your Irish, that Scots and Irish, even tho very close genetically to each other, have different looks?

I am not sure, but what i have seen, that seems to be the case

No I don't agree. I could quite easily fit in Scotland as could a lot of Irish. Ask Graham for his opinion on the subject. Anyway WhiteBear has seen what I look like so he can give an objective opinion.

[Grace O'Malley]

Sometimes I wonder about people's ability to use their logic. It just beggar's belief.

[TheForeigner]

No I don't agree. I could quite easily fit in Scotland as could a lot of Irish. Ask Graham for his opinion on the subject. Anyway WhiteBear has seen what I look like so he can give an objective opinion.

I wouldn't know how to tell your ethnicity if I didn't know already. I would just have guessed someting more northern maybe or possibly British Isles or typical white American/Australian. I don't believe you could tell the difference by looks bewteen English,Scots, Irish and Welsh anyway. I've only heard that English have a bit more blonds and Scots slightly more than Irish and Welsh only. Also people say English have less gingers than other British Islanders, but Coon said English are as often red haired and freckled. Those are minority tendencies, since most Brits and Irish have brown hair and don't freckle. And you Grace are a lovely and classy blond Irish-Australian lady.:)

[TheForeigner]

Sometimes I wonder about people's ability to use their logic. It just beggar's belief.

Hm?

[TheForeigner]

All my family are very close to Dutch on the Gedmatch calculators. My brother comes up half Frisian on K23b and my closest population on Eurogenes K13 is North Dutch. How does anyone explain these things? That is the reason why I'm not sure about categories like Celtic and Germanic.

Yes I agree. Most ancestry in British Isles is neither Celtic, nor Germanic and even in the Netherlands and northern Germany there is some pre-Germanic substratum. But I was actually refering to languages and cultures which are what together with ancestry, history and self-perception and consciousness define ethnicities.

[Grace O'Malley]

Why would people think that people in the British Isles are distinctive populations? People have political agendas and I know about Irish nationalism. My father was very much an Irish Nationalist. He would have been surprised at some of the information I have discovered but I think he would have been fascinated as well. He never knew that his Grandmother had a Scot's surname for starters and he never knew that he was M222 which is the Niall of the Nine Hostages haplotype. This haplotype is also common in lowland Scots. My mother also thought she was very Irish but on 23andMe she has some French/German in her dna and I don't know where that comes from because I don't know her father's family. I hope that I can discover more about my Grandfather's background.

Most populations are mixed especially British Isles populations.

[Catkin]

Do you agree since your Irish, that Scots and Irish, even tho very close genetically to each other, have different looks?

I am not sure, but what i have seen, that seems to be the case

I think there are some typically Irish looks and some typically Scottish looks, but there has been so much immigration and mixing between the countries that you find both types in both countries anyway, and of course the people of each would pass in both places. The same is also true when including England and Wales.

It's more about proportions of different types rather than the presence or total absence of types.

[TheForeigner]

Why would people think that people in the British Isles are distinctive populations? People have political agendas and I know about Irish nationalism. My father was very much an Irish Nationalist. He would have been surprised at some of the information I have discovered but I think he would have been fascinated as well. He never knew that his Grandmother had a Scot's surname for starters and he never knew that he was M222 which is the Niall of the Nine Hostages haplotype. This haplotype is also common in lowland Scots. My mother also thought she was very Irish but on 23andMe she has some French/German in her dna and I don't know where that comes from because I don't know her father's family. I hope that I can discover more about my Grandfather's background.

Most populations are mixed especially British Isles populations.

I think that is a genetic component that might not refer to modern populations necessarily. Just some ancestral component that peaks in them and is very ancient and possibly even prehistoric in some similar cases. It could even be actual Celtic ancestry or Germanic too.

[Grace O'Malley]

I think that is a genetic component that might not refer to modern populations necessarily. Just some ancestral component that peaks in them and is very ancient and possibly even prehistoric in some similar cases. It could even be actual Celtic ancestry or Germanic too.

I thought it might be more to do with Norman ancestry because 23andMe is supposed to pick up more recent ancestry. She has a Grandmother with a Norman name. I really don't know until I can find out more about my Grandfather's names.

[altin]

english is a truely germanic language. period. what determines that it is germanic or not is the grammar. loanwords don't make it "less germanic"

The dictionary constitutes the bulk of a language and it's the part that takes more time to learn. I can show this with an example:

1. She is a beautiful woman. - English dictionary + English grammar.
2. She is a woman of beauty. - English dictionary + Albanian grammar.
3. Ajo eshte nje bukur grua. - Albanian dictionary + English grammar.

Guess which version is intelligible to an English speaker and which is not.

[Graham]

There is too much emphasis on Celticity and Germanics with Scotland on anthro forums anyway. This is how Scotland defines its ancient history really, by division . A mixed people.. The trump card..


I am a Gunn I can trace Viking ancestry, my name is Celtic etc..
http://www.mooseman.de/pics/maps/map_scotland_clans.gif

[Graham]

No I don't agree. I could quite easily fit in Scotland as could a lot of Irish. Ask Graham for his opinion on the subject. Anyway WhiteBear has seen what I look like so he can give an objective opinion.

You could fit in from kent to Donegal to Stoneheaven,, Fraserburgh & Wick.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

You could fit in from kent to Donegal to Stoneheaven,, Fraserburgh & Wick.

Do you think I could pass for Scottish ? 75% of my ancestry is from the British isles (mostly Irish and Scottish out of 100 only 12.5% of my ancestry is English and 25% German with a little French maybe). Some people here say I don't look Scottish and I look French or Spanish but I think that might be because this site has a retarded nordicist slant. I heard there are dark Scots around Glasgow and the NorthWest lowlands. For instance, here is a Scot who seems dark like me (her name is Norma Macleod):

http://www.nm.stir.ac.uk/img/site-images/norma-macleod.jpg

[TheForeigner]

All peoples are mixed, if you look up their ethnogenesis. But I guess it's true that it's more complicated with Scots, Irish and Welsh and even the Bretons in France. They are even mixed culturally and linguistically. Celto-Germanic and Celto-Romanic people they are. I should have made the thread about so called ''modern Celts'' and not just Scots.

[Styrian Mujo]

Why complicate? I can understand why Irish Catholics would want to be "Celtic" but presbyterian Scots IMO are perfectly Germanic. I still don't know what beaing "Celtic" is supposed to mean.

[TheForeigner]

Why complicate? I can understand why Irish Catholics would want to be "Celtic" but presbyterian Scots IMO are perfectly Germanic. I still don't know what beaing "Celtic" is supposed to mean.

It should be based on Celtic languages, but most don't speak the anymore for many generations now. In some areas in Scotland it's been centuries. They say they have Celtic cultures, but I haven't see them define it well and convincingly.

[Antimage]

The dictionary constitutes the bulk of a language and it's the part that takes more time to learn. I can show this with an example:

1. She is a beautiful woman. - English dictionary + English grammar.
2. She is a woman of beauty. - English dictionary + Albanian grammar.
3. Ajo eshte nje bukur grua. - Albanian dictionary + English grammar.

Guess which version is intelligible to an English speaker and which is not.

you don't know anything about linguistics. english is a germanic language as much as german is. end of discussion

[altin]

you don't know anything about linguistics. english is a germanic language as much as german is. end of discussion

I understand linguistics more than you think, but this is not about me. Well, if English is as much a Germanic language as German is, any English speaker should be able to understand all Germanic languages, but that's not the case.

[KawaiiKawaii]

you don't know anything about linguistics. english is a germanic language as much as german is. end of discussion

Don't mind him, he has some crazy theories. I now ignore him.
English is a Germanic language because its origins are Germanic. That's all.

[Antimage]

I understand linguistics more than you think, but this is not about me. Well, if English is as much a Germanic language as German is, any English speaker should be able to understand all Germanic languages, but that's not the case.

that's a really retarded argument. so swedish isn't germanic because they can't understand german?

[Antimage]

Don't mind him, he has some crazy theories. I now ignore him.
English is a Germanic language because its origins are Germanic. That's all.

not only its origins are germanic... it's quite a germanic language even now

[altin]

that's a really retarded argument. so swedish isn't germanic because they can't understand german?

Well, if they have a common origin they should have a good part of their dictionary, especially basic words, in common. Or, if not exactly the same, you should be able to transform those common words from one language to the other using a few rules. English has a good part of its dictionary, even basic words, that are not "Germanic".

[LightHouse89]

The English settled in Ireland too. The area known as the Pale to be exact. Then the Norse created all of the major cities in Ireland. Wales only had a small impact from the Anglo-Normans and Norse.

[TheForeigner]

The English settled in Ireland too. The area known as the Pale to be exact. Then the Norse created all of the major cities in Ireland. Wales only had a small impact from the Anglo-Normans and Norse.

Norse came first and then Anglo-Normans and English obviously conquered and settled in Wales too.

[Antimage]

Well, if they have a common origin they should have a good part of their dictionary, especially basic words, in common. Or, if not exactly the same, you should be able to transform those common words from one language to the other using a few rules. English has a good part of its dictionary, even basic words, that are not "Germanic".

you didn't answer my question, idiot. swedes don't understand spoken german, unless they learned that language. yet, swedish is germanic and german is germanic too.

like it or not, english is germanic language. there's not a single linguist who support your idiotic theories.

[TIGERZZZ]

Lots of Viking DNA in Scotland. Google that.