A Real Scot Is A Celt - Ridiculous Idea Some Have

[Weedman]

I have heard a few times people seem to suggest that the "original Scots were Celts" or that Scotland is a Celtic country and therefore a person is not Celtic they are not Scottish. People who say this seem to be mostly referring to Gaels and not to Britons like the Strathclyde people. Scotland has several ethnic groups, Britons, Picts, Gaels and Germanics. They were not a single polity at first either. Therefore why do some equate being Scottish with having to be Gaelic? This is especially so when national feeling among non-Gaelic Scots is just as much as among Gaels.

personally I think it has to do with the whole commercialization of the geneolgy business. At least from an American perspective. It's a whole romantic-myth really.

The early "Scots" were Pict and Britons. DNA evidence shows many people of the Highlands and Lowlands still carry Pictish and Brythonic ancestry, yeah even the Lowlanders are collectively a mixture of Celts and Germanics.......and so are the Highlanders who typically have mixed Norse-Celtic ancestry.

The Scotti/Gaels did not come to Scotland in great numbers until after the Romans started to leave, and about the same time the Angles were creating Northumbria in the eastern lowlands, so it's stupid to assume the Gaels are true Scots while the Angles werent, since they both arrived in Scotland at about the SAME TIME!

The Norse heavily settled the NE and the Isles, so most Highlanders are not of pure Celtic ancestry anyway but of mixed Norse-Celtic background and DNA shows this as well.

It's all historically inaccurate. The reality is, through most of Scottish history , the majority of the people lived in the Lowlands, and not Highlands which were sparsely settled.

At one time the Lowlands spoke Old British/Cumbric, then parts of the west, like Galloway, spoke Gaelic, while parts of the East spoke Old Scots.

In the highlands, the Gaels became politically dominate over the Picts which is why the Gaelic language prevailed there, except the far NE and Shetland/Orkney etc..

In the Lowlands, the Northumbrians became politically dominant over the Britons and the foreign Gaels (Norse-Irish) of Galloway and so Old Scots prevailed there.

ALL groups are true Scots, the Britons, Picts, Northumbrians, Scots, and Norse were all true Scots who have been there since ancient times. Without the historical legacy of each group left behind in Scotland, then Scotland would not even be Scotland.

All of these groups are true Scots and anyone who says different is very ignorant about the history of Scotland.

and again, not to mention that the Gaels arrived in Scotland about the same time the Angles did, so the Gaels are not any more or less Scottish than the Angles of the lowlands are.
In a historical sense, when the Scots won over Pictland and named it Alba/Scotland, they also eventually won over the Western Lowlands and incorporated Strathclyde into the Kingdom of the Scots, but after that the Northumbrians and Angles in the Eastern Lowlands came to win out over the western Lowlands politically.

Angles, Scots, Britons, Picts, Vikings, are all true Scots.

Scotland (both Highland and Lowland) has, for the most part, historically been a mix of Germanic/Celtic peoples, except in pre-Roman times, but the Gaels were not there before the Romans were, either.

[Weedman]

The scythians were r1b and probably were part of the germanic migrations that swept through europe, so it's not impossible.

.

where do you get your, obviously, WRONG info?
DNA evidence shows time and time again the Scythians were overwhelmingly R1a and no, they were not part of the Germanic migrations that swept through Europe in late Roman times.
Both of those are the dumbest things I have ever heard in my life.

Maybe you are referring to the very few, isolated cases of Scythian or Sarmatian soldiers in the Roman empire being garrisoned in other parts of Europe but you can hardly say they had anything to do with the migrations taking place at the time based on that.

[Weedman]

Yes I think so. It seems very ambiguous in Scotland. More or less anyone who has ancestry within Scotland, regardless of ethnicity or region is considered a "Scot".

I suppose the question should be asked at what point the lowlanders considered themselves Scottish. There may have been a point in history where they though they were English subjects of the Scottish kingdom.

It seems that the separation between lowlanders and highlanders is due to this subconscious ethnic division within the country, between Gaelic and non-Gaelic peoples.

I dont think it's an ancient division between Highland and Lowland. IMO alot of originates from later historical times.

The Northumbrian (Old Scots) language and cultrue eventually dominated the Lowlands while the Gaelic language/culture eventually dominated the Highlands. I guess you cansya that would be a somewhat ancient division, but to me, most of it started later.

King David brought alot of Norman influence to the Lowlands, such as feudalism and the culture of the ruling class. The in the religious wars, early on, most Lowlanders were Calvinist while most Highlanders remained Catholic.

The Lowlands had a feudal society while the highlands remained semi-tribal which meant part of their way of life was cattle rustling, which the lowlanders despised them for.
Most of the economic and trade in Scotland was centered in the urban areas of the Lowlands, as opposed to the vast wilderness of the Highlands.

Highlanders supported a Catholic and or Anglican king while Lowlanders wanted a Protestant one.
All of these later historical influences cause alot of the division between Highlander and Lowlander, IMO.

As for today, even most Scottish historians say the romantic-myth making of people like Sir Walter Scott and the romanticism of the Victorian era, are largely responsible for the whole modern over-emphasis on Highland/Clan Gaelic culture today.

Not to mention the whole commercialization of the genealogical business that tends to emphasize Irish and Highland Scottish culture more so than English or general Scots culture for it's target audience, especially diaspora groups.

The truth is, for most of Scottish history, 3/4 of the people lived in the Lowlands, which means historically a typical Scot never wore a kilt, was not part of any Highland Clan ,although the Border people had a similar system, and unless you refer to ancient times, most Scots were not Gaelic speakers from the later middle ages on up.

How can people say Lowlanders or Germanics are not true Scots? They are not invaders if they have lived there since the freak'in 500's AD!

If that's the case then most Gaels are not true Scots either, since they were not even in Scotland until the Romans left, at about the same time the Angles came to Scotland, btw.

I dont think the Lowland Scots ever saw themselves as "English subjects of Scotland"
They never saw themselves as anything but Scots in the national sense.

If you are referring to a time when the Kingdom of Scotland was mainly in the highlands (Pictland) there was no major collective national identity for anyone living then.

People like William Wallace, Andrew Murray and Robert the Bruce saw themselves as Scots and those who lived in the Isles or Highlands as just another groups who lived in Scotland that had a culture somewhat different from other parts of Scotland.

[Graham]

Angles, Scots, Britons, Picts, Vikings, are all true Scots.

The Scots Kingdom itself was a continuation of the Picts through Bloodlines. Imo the real people of Scotland were any of those who lived from the Medieval ages. When we had written records & borders to define a Nation.

[Weedman]

thank you,

most the time all you find is the opinions that Americans or other diaspora groups have about it.

I really want to know how Scots feel about it who actually still live there.

[fergusgiselle]

Yes I think so. It seems very ambiguous in Scotland. More or less anyone who has ancestry within Scotland, regardless of ethnicity or region is considered a "Scot".

I suppose the question should be asked at what point the lowlanders considered themselves Scottish. There may have been a point in history where they though they were English subjects of the Scottish kingdom.

It seems that the separation between lowlanders and highlanders is due to this subconscious ethnic division within the country, between Gaelic and non-Gaelic peoples.

yes, Scots are a mixture. My proud father comes from a region known for a Norwegian influence. Haggis is also of Norwegian influence.

[Graham]

yes, Scots are a mixture. My proud father comes from a region known for a Norwegian influence. Haggis is also of Norwegian influence.

What part? Sorry If I'm nosey. You might have said,,, can't remember.

[Grace O'Malley]

Reasoning of some

"English are obviously Celtic, no such thing as Germanic influence on culture or Genetics. Scots are tr00 Celts despite that Scotland was inhabited by Picts at first and has had many populations!"

The Picts seem to be mostly Celtic anyway. Scotland like most of the British Isles is a Celtic country. Most of what Scotland is known for is from Gaelic culture. People shouldn't forget their Celticness over a Germanic identity.

[Grace O'Malley]

Just reading some of the comments here on the Germanic input into the Scots. I've always wondered why people try to separate the Scots and the Irish. Are the Scots a Germanic people and the Irish Celtic? Why do the Irish cluster with the other British Isles people if the Irish are Celtic and the British Germanic? Scots are known as Mac because of their surnames. Mac is Gaelic and is used in Irish surnames as well. Are the Scots any more Germanic than the Irish? The Scots have more in common with Irish people than they have with any Germanic people. Do Germanic people have more influence on Scottish culture than Gaelic people? I don't think so.

[Grace O'Malley]

Wouldn't it be the other way around? (if you exclude backwards migrations). When the glaciers retreated people started off in southern England and moved north. How would celtic culture suddenly appear in Ireland when the direct migration route led from southern england into scotland into ireland? In the 10,000 years since the glaciers retreated their must have been a lot of back and forth migrations between scotland and ireland but I don't think they started in Ireland. Ireland is only more pure gaelic than Scotland because Scotland has been more influenced by other cultures (perhaps) even though places like Dublin were strong viking enclaves compared to anywhere in Scotland.

I suppose it is fairly obvious because it was in the 5th Century and Ireland was the only place at that time to speak Q-Celtic as in Gaelic language. Originally the Irish were from Britain but at that time in the 5th Century it was pretty where people originated from.