PDA

View Full Version : Celtic Tribes of the British Isles



Pages : 1 [2]

Jean M
08-10-2015, 09:14 AM
You have to call that one Blood of the Iron Age, because, you know, not all of their ancestors spoke a Germanic language. ;)

Certainly the case. Here's a snippet from Blood of the Celts:


Proto-Germanic (the immediate ancestor to the Germanic language family) did not develop until about 500 BC. It has an interesting feature. Up to one-third of its lexicon is non-Indo-European. ...Many of these non-Indo-European words are agricultural, and so must have been borrowed from a farming culture. Furthermore, traces of this same language can be found in the Greek, Latin and Celtic languages. The common feature seems to be contact with Balkan farmers or their descendants.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 09:46 AM
In 2005 however, Graham Isaac's view was:

"I conclude that the speech community/ies of North-East Scotland was/were different from those of the rest of Britain. Hypothesis: that difference lay in their use of a different language or languages, which was/were not Celtic or Indo-European."

That is from Isaac, “Scotland”, New approaches to Celtic place-names in Ptolemy's Geography, J. de Hoz / E.R. Lujan/ P. Sims—Williams eds., Madrid, 2005. I do not have this work unfortunately, but from comments on it, Isaac was discussing non-IE place-name evidence.

It would be very exciting indeed if he has picked up evidence of a non-IE language in the North-East of Scotland, as that is the land of the brochs, long suspected to have some foreign origin. In general broch-building societies appear multi-cultural. Some probably had chiefs of distant origin, but subordinates of more local origin. Most brochs were built between 200 BC and 100 AD and some remained in use as late as the 6th century AD. It was during this main burst of broch-building that a new type of quern appeared among the broch-builders. This adjustable disc quern was unknown elsewhere in Britain, but found in Iberia, and so hints at continuing contact with Brittany, which had trading links to Iberia

alan
08-10-2015, 12:11 PM
That is from Isaac, “Scotland”, New approaches to Celtic place-names in Ptolemy's Geography, J. de Hoz / E.R. Lujan/ P. Sims—Williams eds., Madrid, 2005. I do not have this work unfortunately, but from comments on it, Isaac was discussing non-IE place-name evidence.

It would be very exciting indeed if he has picked up evidence of a non-IE language in the North-East of Scotland, as that is the land of the brochs, long suspected to have some foreign origin. In general broch-building societies appear multi-cultural. Some probably had chiefs of distant origin, but subordinates of more local origin. Most brochs were built between 200 BC and 100 AD and some remained in use as late as the 6th century AD. It was during this main burst of broch-building that a new type of quern appeared among the broch-builders. This adjustable disc quern was unknown elsewhere in Britain, but found in Iberia, and so hints at continuing contact with Brittany, which had trading links to Iberia

If there was a place where one might expect pre-IE languages to survive it would be the extreme north and north-west and outer Hebrides. However with the Celtic name Orkneys attested very early and the name of the Long Island of the outer Hebrides apparent Domon 'deep' in Celtic (and attested in Gaelic sources too) its very hard to see how a non-IE group could be there. Also AFAIK all the tribal names in the far north and north-west of Scotland are transparently Celtic.

Personally I think the mystery of the Broch towers is not all that mysterious at all. Last time I read - admittedly a few years back - they seemed to evolved from complex Atlantic round houses. Again its a long time since I read into this so ideas may have changed.

I have heard the broch users suggested as being the Attecotti by a process of elimination because they were somehow considered different from the Britons, Picts, Scots and Irish and the Broch provenance sort of stands out as a distinctive zone. However I think that was guessology.

There is also a curious scattering of what look like complex Atlantic Roundhouses, apparently dating to the Roman era, in the central lowlands of Scotland.

alan
08-10-2015, 12:28 PM
Certainly the case. Here's a snippet from Blood of the Celts:

It is curious that Germanic in particular has a lot of weird non-IE or certainly not standard IE form vocab. Interesting that you say it has a lot of agricultural aspects - I didnt know that. Its something that I dont think can be explained by just having an agricultural substrate in the present north Germanic zone because most of Europe had an agricultural substrate and if anything agriculture was somewhat weaker in development around Scandinavia and adjacent. So, it seems logical to deduce that this non-IE agricultural vocab goes back to a very early stage before the pre-Germans reached their likely destination in the north. I suppose it could suggest the pre-Germans picked up some traits from the Cuc-Trip groups which would make sense if they were derived from groups on the steppe-farming NW interface around the middle Dnieper and adjacent. Alternatively or additionally there could be some social structure difference because the Germanic peoples seem to have a much greater mix of male lineages than the Celts for example who seem to have been more exclusive and non-integrationist in terms of male lines. That sort of fits what we know about Celtic and Germanic societies at the opening of history - Germanics operated a more open 'leader and followers' based society while Celts seem to have been obsessed with lineage.

One thing interesting is that very dynasty and lineage based like the Celts, Italic and the sort of lineage structure we see patrilineal 'conical clans' as pervasive among the Celts was also echoed by very similar set ups among the Caucasus tribes. I wonder if that part of the IE social structure came from the Caucasus. Some groups on the periphery of Yamnaya may have had less Caucasus influence - and David seems to include Corded Ware in those with less of the possible Caucasus autosomal component while Yamnaya itself had a lot of that component as well as apparent cultural influences reaching into the Repin-Yamnaya genesis area using the Don and Volga.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 05:23 PM
If there was a place where one might expect pre-IE languages to survive it would be the extreme north and north-west and outer Hebrides. However with the Celtic name Orkneys attested very early and the name of the Long Island of the outer Hebrides apparent Domon 'deep' in Celtic (and attested in Gaelic sources too) its very hard to see how a non-IE group could be there. Also AFAIK all the tribal names in the far north and north-west of Scotland are transparently Celtic.

I thought I could rely on you to point that out. ;) Without the paper/chapter itself, I'm stymied as to what he could be talking about. The book is out of print.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 05:27 PM
It is curious that Germanic in particular has a lot of weird non-IE or certainly not standard IE form vocab. .. I suppose it could suggest the pre-Germans picked up some traits from the Cuc-Trip groups

I am assuming that the substrate was acquired in the meld with the Funnel Beaker people. But we should leave that for another thread I suppose.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 05:39 PM
Personally I think the mystery of the Broch towers is not all that mysterious at all. Last time I read - admittedly a few years back - they seemed to evolved from complex Atlantic round houses. Again its a long time since I read into this so ideas may have changed.

Euan W. MacKie 2008:


A new overview of the broch and wheelhouse-building cultures is offered because recent comparable attempts have omitted substantial amounts of relevant data, such as discussion of the most plausible broch prototypes and of the details of the material cultural sequence, particularly the pottery. Well dated Early Iron Age roundhouse sites have often been described, but promontory forts of the same period, showing the specialized broch hollow wall, have not. The example at Clickhimin, Shetland, is now reliably dated to the sixth century BC at the latest and the associated pottery shows clear links with north-west France. Another unexcavated example in Harris can be restored in some detail and shows how these sites were probably used. The pivotal role of Shetland in the emergence of the new culture is confirmed by the early dating of the broch at Old Scatness to the fourth/third centuries BC. However, a separate development of the round broch tower seems also to have occurred in the west, in the third/second centuries BC. English Early Iron Age pottery is also prominent in some of the earliest sites in the west and north. The picture is of a dynamic, maritime zone open to influences from several remote regions.


I have heard the broch users suggested as being the Attecotti by a process of elimination because they were somehow considered different from the Britons, Picts, Scots and Irish and the Broch provenance sort of stands out as a distinctive zone.

The Attacotti were presumably Irish vassal peoples known as aithechthuatha. See P. Rance 2001. Attacotti, Déisi and Magnus Maximus: the case for Irish federates in Late Roman Britain, Britannia, 32, 243-270.

vettor
08-10-2015, 06:52 PM
Koch expands on this in Atlas of Celtic Sudies:

""Thus the Celts have been assumed to be (1) all users of the iron age material culture called La Tene for the swiss type site, (2) all speakers of early celtic languages and (3) all groups called Keltoi or Celtae by Greeks and Romans. (The same ancient writers also repeatedly stated the equivalence of Keltoi/Celtae with Galli or Galatae and generaly regarded the former pair as more ancient and correct). Thus anyone of these three symptoms has often been taken to imply the other two and to be adequate to confirm the presence of Celts.

At best the three way modern synthesis is frayed at the edges. La Tene is rare to non existent in areas with well attested ancient celtic languages in South West Ireland, the Iberian peninsular and Anatolia. Greeks or Romans never used the terms Keltoi or Galli to describe the inhabitants of Britain and Ireland and, so far as we know, the inhabitants never applied such labels to themselves."
(Koch, Atlas of Celtic Studies)

depends on how people note these different tribes or how they want to note these tribes............with the ancient bavarians being noted as Gallic in BC times( becoming Germans in AD times ) , they can also be associated as being celtic as well, regardless if they left remnants of themselves in Alsace, north-italy( bologna ), bohemia or modern Bavaria

A question is - Are all Gallic tribes also all Celtic tribes , is what should be analysed

alan
08-10-2015, 07:09 PM
Euan W. MacKie 2008:





The Attacotti were presumably Irish vassal peoples known as aithechthuatha. See P. Rance 2001. Attacotti, Déisi and Magnus Maximus: the case for Irish federates in Late Roman Britain, Britannia, 32, 243-270.

That theory was busted a long time ago by linguists - Irish form of the 3rd centuries or so would have been radically different from aithechthuatha and didnt sound like Attacotti at all.

alan
08-10-2015, 07:15 PM
I am assuming that the substrate was acquired in the meld with the Funnel Beaker people. But we should leave that for another thread I suppose.

Could be. Maybe will start another thread. If I do can you post links or refs the the German non-IE vocab being often agricultural. That is interesting and I hadnt really read about it.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 07:19 PM
..with the ancient bavarians being noted as Gallic in BC times( becoming Germans in AD times )

The region of Bohemia was the home of the Boii, a Celtic tribe, who were pushed out as the Germani expanded. The Germanic Bavarii took the place of the Celtic Boii. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Germanic_tribes for a map of the expansion of the Germani.


A question is - Are all Gallic tribes also all Celtic tribes

Yes.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 07:22 PM
That theory was busted a long time ago by linguists - Irish form of the 3rd centuries or so would have been radically different from aithechthuatha and didnt sound like Attacotti at all.

Oh dear. Well that's something to note if there is a second edition on the new book.

[Added] Actually, now I refresh my memory, the source I cited, Rance 2001, was returning to an old idea that was dismissed many years ago. How widely his thinking has been accepted I don't know. His paper is online: https://www.academia.edu/8872970/_Attacotti_D%C3%A9isi_and_Magnus_Maximus_the_Case_ for_Irish_Federates_in_Late_Roman_Britain_Britanni a_32_2001_243-270

Jean M
08-10-2015, 07:44 PM
Maybe will start another thread. If I do can you post links or refs the the German non-IE vocab being often agricultural.

Come to think about it, you already have a pertinent thread: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5089-what-did-Corded-Ware-west-of-Poland-speak . I'll post something there.

alan
08-10-2015, 08:03 PM
Deleted

alan
08-10-2015, 08:10 PM
Someone else may be able to answer this - I often find it hard to read some of the autosomal DNA graphs due to slowly going longsighted but too vain for glasses LOL-how much less of the supposed Caucasian farmer component does CW have compared to Yamnaya. Also Euro-farmer is meant to be missing from Yamnaya but how much does CW have?

vettor
08-10-2015, 08:11 PM
The region of Bohemia was the home of the Boii, a Celtic tribe, who were pushed out as the Germani expanded. The Germanic Bavarii took the place of the Celtic Boii. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Germanic_tribes for a map of the expansion of the Germani.



Yes.

what's the link in reference to ?

the batavi are dutch people not bavarians

Jean M
08-10-2015, 11:02 PM
what's the link in reference to ?

the batavi are dutch people not bavarians

I said nothing about the Batavi. I mentioned the Bavarii. The link is to a page in Wikipedia that has a map of the Germanic expansion. I directed you to the map which shows that once upon a time the Germani did not live in Bohemia. Here is the map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Germanic_tribes#/media/File:Germanic_tribes_%28750BC-1AD%29.png

The Germani spread out from the region coloured red.

Jean M
08-10-2015, 11:40 PM
Without the paper/chapter itself, I'm stymied as to what he could be talking about. The book is out of print.

Happily a PhD thesis on Pictish by Guto Rhys is online: Approaching the Pictish Language: Historiography, Early Evidence and the Question of Priteni. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/6285/7/2015RhysPhD.pdf

While in the slides (also online) of a lecture he gave on the different views of Pictish, he cited Isaac 2005 as saying that there was a non-IE language in north-east Scotland (which Authun quoted), in his thesis, he shifts this to north-west and goes into detail:



After much deliberation Isaac in his article ‘Scotland’ (2005(c), 212), published as part of a larger study on Ptolemy’s Geography, argued for the survival of such a language in the north-west of Scotland perhaps as late as turn of the first century CE. The evidence was that about five river-names could not be analysed as Celtic.... This discussion was summarised in Broderick (2010), in a weighty article engaging with non-Indo-European contact influences on Celtic. Isaac restated his view in his article ‘Cormac’s Pictish Brooch’ (2005(a), 73-82) where the evidence adduced was not only the ogham inscriptions but also the royal name Brude amongst others. Recourse to the endnotes reveals that the personal names referred to include the ‘list of thirty Brudes’ an unhistorical and later retrospective pseudo-historical insertion. The numerous items in this list which are compatible with Brittonic e.g. Pant, Gart are not discussed, neither is the fact that most IE languages attest similar borrowings.


Excitement over.

alan
08-11-2015, 10:46 AM
Happily a PhD thesis on Pictish by Guto Rhys is online: Approaching the Pictish Language: Historiography, Early Evidence and the Question of Priteni. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/6285/7/2015RhysPhD.pdf

While in the slides (also online) of a lecture he gave on the different views of Pictish, he cited Isaac 2005 as saying that there was a non-IE language in north-east Scotland (which Authun quoted), in his thesis, he shifts this to north-west and goes into detail:



Excitement over.

I find any arguement for spoken language at a particular time based on the river names recorded at the same time very unconvincing. We know very well that rivernames of older languages survive and have nothing to do with the language spoken in the same places today and date back thousands of years before the death of the language. We only have to look at present day river names of Celtic, old European and even pre-IE types surviving today in England to see that. That fact would have also applied 2000 years ago. The tribal names are much more telling and as far as I recall all those NW Scottish tribes on Ptolemy like the Smertae, Creones etc are Celtic. Some people just like mysteries and dont like the more mundane truth it seems.

If there was an pre-IE survival in Britain one would think the Outer Hebrides was most likely as it is still a pretty long ferry trip from the mainland - far longer than the Inner Hebrides. However, the fact that the Outer Hebrides share aspects of culture with the Orkneys (such as Brochs etc) an island with a clearly Celtic name recorded in very early times makes it seem rather unlikely.

There are a number of small Pictish lineages recorded in the extreme NW of Scotland and Skye that get little attention. I remember stumbling on a useful website that outlined them and posting it some years ago. The names in those lineages might be worth looking at but I am pretty sure they are Celtic with names like Gartnait and so on.

Jean M
08-11-2015, 11:13 AM
I find any argument for spoken language at a particular time based on the river names recorded at the same time very unconvincing. We know very well that rivernames of older languages survive and have nothing to do with the language spoken in the same places today and date back thousands of years before the death of the language.

Exactly. There has been a lot of pottiness over Pictish. But this little diversion has happily led me not only to the Rhys PhD, but to the Broderick 2010 paper, which I am currently perusing. All grist to the mill.

R.Rocca
08-11-2015, 12:35 PM
I find any arguement for spoken language at a particular time based on the river names recorded at the same time very unconvincing. We know very well that rivernames of older languages survive and have nothing to do with the language spoken in the same places today and date back thousands of years before the death of the language. We only have to look at present day river names of Celtic, old European and even pre-IE types surviving today in England to see that. That fact would have also applied 2000 years ago. The tribal names are much more telling and as far as I recall all those NW Scottish tribes on Ptolemy like the Smertae, Creones etc are Celtic. Some people just like mysteries and dont like the more mundane truth it seems.

If there was an pre-IE survival in Britain one would think the Outer Hebrides was most likely as it is still a pretty long ferry trip from the mainland - far longer than the Inner Hebrides. However, the fact that the Outer Hebrides share aspects of culture with the Orkneys (such as Brochs etc) an island with a clearly Celtic name recorded in very early times makes it seem rather unlikely.

There are a number of small Pictish lineages recorded in the extreme NW of Scotland and Skye that get little attention. I remember stumbling on a useful website that outlined them and posting it some years ago. The names in those lineages might be worth looking at but I am pretty sure they are Celtic with names like Gartnait and so on.

Very unconvincing indeed. In the county where I live in New Jersey (Bergen Co.), almost all of the larger rivers have Native American names. The Dutch then displaced the Native Americans and named many towns and roads. I'm sure these names will persist for thousands of years. Attributing non-IE river names to the Pics would be something like the English attributing the Native American river names to the Dutch, just because they were living there when the English started to move into the area.

Jean M
08-11-2015, 02:54 PM
But this little diversion has happily led me ... to the Broderick 2010 paper, which I am currently perusing.

Finally realised that I already had the Broderick paper (or one version same)! It makes clear that Graham Isaac in "Scotland" 2005 found that the majority of river-names in Britain as noted by Ptolemy in his sample are clearly Celtic (34/47, i.e. 72.34%), with a smaller number (6/47, 12.77%) of non-Celtic / non-IE provenance. Of these names most of the non-Celtic / non-IE are to be found in North-East Scotland (coastline from Naver to Forth)
1. Celtic 4/11.
2. Possibly Celtic 2/11.
3. Non-Celtic / Non-IE 5/11.

So that explains his thinking, but it remains as unconvincing as ever.

authun
08-11-2015, 03:33 PM
A question is - Are all Gallic tribes also all Celtic tribes , is what should be analysed

Well, according to Caesar, "All Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which the Belgae inhabit, the Aquitani another, those who in their own language are called Celts, in our Gauls, the third. All these differ from each other in language, customs and laws." We know from the work of the late Larry Trask that the language of the Aquitanians was a Vasconic language, the group to which Euskara, the language of the Basques belongs and there are several proposals for the language of the Belgae, the most plausible of which belong to various theories about peoples between Germans and Celts who moved westwards as the Germanic speaking north moved southwards towards the celtic speaking peoples in southern Germany, see Martinet's theory about Venetic for example:

5530

or the distribution of *apa hydronyms for example. There are several theories.

5531


As far as the Boii are concerned, Tacitus refers to Caesar's account:

"That the Gauls were in times past more puissant and formidable, is related by the Prince of authors, the deified Julius [ie Julius Caesar] and hence it is probable that they too have passed into Germany. For what a small obstacle must be a river, to restrain any nation, as each grew more potent, from seizing or changing habitations; when as yet all habitations were common, and not parted or appropriated by the founding and terror of Monarchies? The region therefore between the Hercynian Forest and the rivers Moenus [ie Main] and Rhine, was occupied by the Helvetians; as was that beyond it by the Boians, both nations of Gaul. There still remains a place called Boiemum, which denotes the primitive name and antiquity of the country, although the inhabitants have been changed. But whether the Araviscans are derived from the Osians, a nation of Germans passing into Pannonia, or the Osians from the Araviscans removing from thence into Germany, is a matter undecided; since they both still use the language, the same customs and the same laws. "

The Boii appear to have gone by the time of Tacitus' writing, according to him, expelled by the Marcommani, "Amongst these the Marcomanians are most signal in force and renown; nay, their habitation itself they acquired by their bravery, as from thence they formerly expulsed the Boians." which is why the name Bohemia, from the latinised Boi(o)haemum uses germanic rather than celtic, haemum being cognate with modern german heim. If it were pure latin, it would presumably have used latin domus. It is as if the romans enquired of the lands beyond them and were told that they were the home of the Boii. The name of the Boii is also possibly preserved in the 6th cent. ethnogenesis of the Baiuvarii (Bavaria) out of remnant Romans, Marcomanni, Allemanni, Quadi, Thuringians, Goths, Scirians, Rugians and Heruli.

authun
08-11-2015, 03:50 PM
Very unconvincing indeed. In the county where I live in New Jersey (Bergen), almost all of the larger rivers have Native American names. The Dutch then displaced the Native Americans and named many towns and roads. I'm sure these names will persist for thousands of years. Attributing non-IE river names to the Pics would be something like the English attributing the Native American river names to the Dutch, just because they were living there when the English started to move into the area.

But the names do have to be transmitted and names like the Ouse, Don and Humber in Yorkshire for example were transmitted to the celtic speakers of the Late Pre Roman Iron Age and later to the germanic speakers. The question is when did the non celtic speakers interact with the celtic speakers? Earlier in the thread I asked who the bronze age salt miners and meat processors at Hallstatt might have been. There is continuity of place but this does not require continuity of people, although it may do. We can assume that they might be but it is not an explanation which requires them to be. We simply do not know what language they spoke.

The point about dividing the known languages exclusively into two groups, celtic and germanic, assumes we know all there is to know about each group. Mostly we have only a few names trnsmitted by romans. If Pictish or the language of the Belgae were unknown celtic languages, and it is assumed that languages evolve phylogenetically like a branching tree, we still cannot add Gaulish, Goidellic, Brythonic, Pictish, Belgic nodes onto a branch to demonstrate the filial relationships between them. Nor can we add dates of these nodes. We don't have enough data so why favour one explanation over another?

authun
08-11-2015, 04:47 PM
In the county where I live in New Jersey (Bergen Co.), almost all of the larger rivers have Native American names.

It's not the ultimate age of the name that is important, it is the time at which the name was transmitted from non europeans to the europeans. In the case of North America, this was in the last few hundred years, even if the name itself is much older. We don't know when the pre celtic names were transmitted to the celtic speakers but we shouldn't assume either that it was distant in time or indeed, that all the names belong to a single group. Some may be pre celtic but still indo european but some may be non IE.

vettor
08-11-2015, 07:01 PM
Well, according to Caesar, "All Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which the Belgae inhabit, the Aquitani another, those who in their own language are called Celts, in our Gauls, the third. All these differ from each other in language, customs and laws." We know from the work of the late Larry Trask that the language of the Aquitanians was a Vasconic language, the group to which Euskara, the language of the Basques belongs and there are several proposals for the language of the Belgae, the most plausible of which belong to various theories about peoples between Germans and Celts who moved westwards as the Germanic speaking north moved southwards towards the celtic speaking peoples in southern Germany, see Martinet's theory about Venetic for example:

5530

or the distribution of *apa hydronyms for example. There are several theories.

5531


As far as the Boii are concerned, Tacitus refers to Caesar's account:

"That the Gauls were in times past more puissant and formidable, is related by the Prince of authors, the deified Julius [ie Julius Caesar] and hence it is probable that they too have passed into Germany. For what a small obstacle must be a river, to restrain any nation, as each grew more potent, from seizing or changing habitations; when as yet all habitations were common, and not parted or appropriated by the founding and terror of Monarchies? The region therefore between the Hercynian Forest and the rivers Moenus [ie Main] and Rhine, was occupied by the Helvetians; as was that beyond it by the Boians, both nations of Gaul. There still remains a place called Boiemum, which denotes the primitive name and antiquity of the country, although the inhabitants have been changed. But whether the Araviscans are derived from the Osians, a nation of Germans passing into Pannonia, or the Osians from the Araviscans removing from thence into Germany, is a matter undecided; since they both still use the language, the same customs and the same laws. "

The Boii appear to have gone by the time of Tacitus' writing, according to him, expelled by the Marcommani, "Amongst these the Marcomanians are most signal in force and renown; nay, their habitation itself they acquired by their bravery, as from thence they formerly expulsed the Boians." which is why the name Bohemia, from the latinised Boi(o)haemum uses germanic rather than celtic, haemum being cognate with modern german heim. If it were pure latin, it would presumably have used latin domus. It is as if the romans enquired of the lands beyond them and were told that they were the home of the Boii. The name of the Boii is also possibly preserved in the 6th cent. ethnogenesis of the Baiuvarii (Bavaria) out of remnant Romans, Marcomanni, Allemanni, Quadi, Thuringians, Goths, Scirians, Rugians and Heruli.

There is an ethnic division of people in ancient times of "proper" germanic ethnicity in North Germany and the gallic ethnicity of South Germany . Keep in mind the recent skeletal finds of the Royal burial sites of the celts near modern frankfurt.

In regards to tribes you mentioned, they all settled in "gallic" lands...........heruli in Concordia Friuli ( NE Italy ), rugians in eastern Austria ( pushing out the lombards from there ) etc etc. The point being is that the germanic ethnicity was limited to a small area in northern Germany and denmark, while the gallic ethnicity was 10 times larger

Jean M
08-11-2015, 07:20 PM
..names like the Ouse, Don and Humber in Yorkshire for example were transmitted to the celtic speakers ...

Let's get to grips with these supposedly pre-Celtic hydronyms:

The Humber estuary seems to appear in Ptolemy as Abos, from the Celtic root ab, meaning "river", from a very similar PIE root. However a Proto-Celtic root *ambu- = river seems more to the point for later attestations that can be definitely tied to the Humber.

The name of the Ouse which runs into the Humber appears to be derived from Proto-Celtic *utso = water.

The river name Don appears in various parts of Europe and appears to derive from PIE *dehanu = river, but in the form *Dānu is also included in Proto-Celtic river names.

http://www.wales.ac.uk/Resources/Documents/Research/CelticLanguages/EnglishProtoCelticWordlist.pdf

Jean M
08-11-2015, 07:23 PM
The point about dividing the known languages exclusively into two groups, celtic and germanic, assumes we know all there is to know about each group.

Of course it doesn't. We would never be able to get anywhere with the pursuit of knowledge if we couldn't say anything until we were positive that we knew everything. :biggrin1:

Labels are needed so that we can have a discussion.

Jean M
08-11-2015, 07:34 PM
There is an ethnic division of people in ancient times of "proper" germanic ethnicity in North Germany and the gallic ethnicity of South Germany . Keep in mind the recent skeletal finds of the Royal burial sites of the celts near modern frankfurt.

That's it Vettor. :)

Just a little reminder though that this thread is supposed to be on the Celtic Tribes of the British Isles.

glentane
08-11-2015, 08:25 PM
All grist to the mill.
Talking of which, Alan Lane did a critical review (1987) of the "foreign" (IE: out-of-area) material in NW Scot brochs and other big round stony things, and sticks the boot into Mackie a bit. There's a bit about those disc-querns a fair way in.
http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload?t=arch-352-1/dissemination/pdf/vol_117/117_047_066.pdf (just hit "Accept" if it doesn't load)

He's a sensible chap, you'll like his attitude, Jean.


Unpopular though they may be, invasions and migrations do take, and have taken, place in the past. They are historically documented throughout the world. However, as Collis has pointed out, the archaeological evidence for even well-documented incursions is often very slight (1977,1) - another case in point being the supposed Dalriadic migration into Scotland c 500 AD. Some archaeologists would respond by arguing that such particularist interpretations are not the proper domain of archaeology. But for those for whom archaeology is an historical discipline such questions cannot be merely shrugged away. This does not mean that we must return to the invasion mania of previous decades but population movement should be considered as a genuine social process and a problem for archaeology.


And alan, he's one of the "brochs probably derive from Atlantic Roundhouses" people, him, Niall Sharples, Ian Armit, and Mike Parker Pearson are the best names to check in this regard right now.
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/share/research/projectreports/southuistprojects/historyofcardiffresearch/history-of-cardiff-research-in-the-uists.html
http://www.scottishheritagehub.com/content/59-atlantic-stone-built-roundhouses-sequence-subdivision-and-interpretations

I have a vague idea Lane did a good paper on the process ages ago, never saw it in print, could be in a Barbara Crawford schrift, (the same one that Forsyth spills the beans on the "enddactamin" ogam spindlewhorl (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckquoy_spindle-whorl), but not the PSAS 1995 paper) but all my books are packed away to save them from the mice at the minute (they go nuts for the glue in the spines), and I'm suffering the torments of hell changing ISPs just now and for the next couple of days, up and down like a yoyo. Or maybe it was John Barrett? Oh dear, I'm dragging this away from the topic as usual, not much Blood and precious few Celts, nevermind.

glentane
08-11-2015, 08:40 PM
It's not the ultimate age of the name that is important, it is the time at which the name was transmitted from non europeans to the europeans.
And I think the point Richard A Rocca was making was that the sequence was non-IE American>IE dialect (double-dutch and therefore itself incomprehensible to the) succeeding >IE dialect (yankees). May have been not much different in the Isles, non-IE>non-celtic-IE>celtic IE.

Jean M
08-11-2015, 08:41 PM
Oh dear, I'm dragging this away from the topic as usual, not much Blood and precious few Celts, nevermind.

No you are bang on topic! I have some stuff on brochs online, but not in the book. This thread was a request for aid with the online stuff. So thank you!

But have to say that Alan Lane's 1987 paper is arguing with McKie of 1970s vintage, whereas I'm citing McKie 2008 and 2010. I do feel that I need to rummage around re the rotary quern, origins of.

Jean M
08-11-2015, 09:16 PM
I do feel that I need to rummage around re the rotary quern, origins of.

As I expected:


The rotary quern is an Iberian innovation; it was probably designed in the northeast of the Iberian Peninsula and spread rapidly and with apparent success. This could be because the new quern allowed the intensification of flour production, thereby freeing up labour for other tasks. The morphological diversity is significant. There are no clear trends and it seems that both domestic and community production may have coexisted.

http://www.raco.cat/index.php/RAP/article/viewFile/288717/376968

authun
08-11-2015, 09:47 PM
There is an ethnic division of people in ancient times of "proper" germanic ethnicity in North Germany and the gallic ethnicity of South Germany . Keep in mind the recent skeletal finds of the Royal burial sites of the celts near modern frankfurt.

Yes, that's right. If you look at the Martinet map that I posted and which you included in your reply, you will see that it includes celtic speakers in what is now southern Germany and to the north of the Danube. The river Moenus is celtic and the Tüb in Tübingen is the same celtic prefix as the Dub in Dublin. One only has to look at the distribution of pre roman Napoleon Hat querns or celtic potin coins, La Tene Oppida or Hallstatt D Wagon Burials.

5561

5562

The area of interest is that immediately to the north of Hessen and to the east of the Rhine. Celtic archaeology appears on the rivers which drain to the south in Hessen and these gradually become displaced by germanic speakers moving along the rivers which flow northwards.

Jean M
08-11-2015, 09:51 PM
As I expected:
http://www.raco.cat/index.php/RAP/article/viewFile/288717/376968

No - wait a minute. Am I looking at the wrong type of quern? What I want is the adjustable disc quern.

dp
08-11-2015, 10:28 PM
I'm an curious as to opinions on the etymology for the River Ure in Yorkshire. It becomes the Ouse. I think one of my ancestral surnames, Eure, derives from inhabitants in Yorkshire. The Barons Eure lived at Malton.
dp :-)

But the names do have to be transmitted and names like the Ouse, Don and Humber in Yorkshire for example were transmitted to the celtic speakers of the Late Pre Roman Iron Age and later to the germanic speakers. The question is when did the non celtic speakers interact with the celtic speakers? Earlier in the thread I asked who the bronze age salt miners and meat processors at Hallstatt might have been. There is continuity of place but this does not require continuity of people, although it may do. We can assume that they might be but it is not an explanation which requires them to be. We simply do not know what language they spoke.

The point about dividing the known languages exclusively into two groups, celtic and germanic, assumes we know all there is to know about each group. Mostly we have only a few names trnsmitted by romans. If Pictish or the language of the Belgae were unknown celtic languages, and it is assumed that languages evolve phylogenetically like a branching tree, we still cannot add Gaulish, Goidellic, Brythonic, Pictish, Belgic nodes onto a branch to demonstrate the filial relationships between them. Nor can we add dates of these nodes. We don't have enough data so why favour one explanation over another?

Jean M
08-11-2015, 10:29 PM
I've only just noticed this project from Bournemouth University: Dig Unearths Prehistoric Town


A previously unknown prehistoric town, which archaeologists have dubbed 'Duropolis' after the local Iron Age tribe (the Durotriges), has been uncovered by Bournemouth University students as a part of an archaeological dig near Winterborne Kingston in Dorset. Remains of 16 Iron Age roundhouses have been examined and geophysical survey has revealed that at least 150 roundhouses and associated features lying along a hill-slope in East Dorset.

The Durotriges were previously thought to have no towns (oppida) before the Roman conquest, so this is big news.

https://www1.bournemouth.ac.uk/news/2015-07-12/dig-unearths-prehistoric-town

There is a video as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36-454aIfDU

glentane
08-11-2015, 10:55 PM
No - wait a minute. Am I looking at the wrong type of quern? What I want is the adjustable disc quern.

Northeast Iberia, you say?
How d'ye fancy these?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Urartian_grain_bruiser02.jpg/800px-Urartian_grain_bruiser02.jpg
Annoyingly they're LBA/IA, from Urartu (Armenia/south caucasus/northeast armpit of the Med). Like those early BA bastida walls ...
".. around 600 BC, this town was captured and torched. Archaeologists have discovered evidence of assault weapons, major conflagration and extensive deaths of residents. Argishtikhinili was probably destroyed by the Scythians[19][20] or the Medes,[21][22] and thus lasted fewer than 200 years." (wiki)


Almost indistinguishable from those used in the Western Isles till recently (although these were probably derived via some mediaeval pan-european type?).

authun
08-12-2015, 10:07 AM
I'm an curious as to opinions on the etymology for the River Ure in Yorkshire. It becomes the Ouse. I think one of my ancestral surnames, Eure, derives from inhabitants in Yorkshire. The Barons Eure lived at Malton.

Well Malton is on the Derwent and is in the east of Yorkshire. It is doubtful there is a connection, compounded by the fact that there is uncertainty about the original name of the River Ure which appars with a jor and a jore prefix.

It may have been Brittonic if the roman name for it was Isurā, based on the roman villa at Aldborough near Boroughbridge being called Isurium. Isurā contains the ndo European is root meaning strong and seen in Isar and Isère. However, the earliest recording, in 1025 is Earp.

authun
08-12-2015, 10:42 AM
Let's get to grips with these supposedly pre-Celtic hydronyms:

The Humber estuary seems to appear in Ptolemy as Abos, from the Celtic root ab, meaning "river", from a very similar PIE root. However a Proto-Celtic root *ambu- = river seems more to the point for later attestations that can be definitely tied to the Humber.

The name of the Ouse which runs into the Humber appears to be derived from Proto-Celtic *utso = water.

The river name Don appears in various parts of Europe and appears to derive from PIE *dehanu = river, but in the form *Dānu is also included in Proto-Celtic river names.

http://www.wales.ac.uk/Resources/Documents/Research/CelticLanguages/EnglishProtoCelticWordlist.pdf


Watts (Cambridge Dictionary of Place Names):

Ouse: Unexplained Usa circa 780, 9th - 1280 Usan. Attempts to explain this from PrW *us < Brit. *usso < IE *udso from the zero grade of the PIE *wed - 'water' are guesswork. The name is probably pre celtic, possibly pre IE.

Humber: Unexplained humbri fluminis c 720 variants from 9th cent, Umbri, Humbris, Hymbri, Humbrae amongst others. The etymology of this river is quite unknown. The name of this river is probably pre celtic.

I see little point in just comparing conflicting etymological arguments. I am happy to live with the fact that five different etymological explanations for Pen y Ghent exist, without having to judge which one is correct. A problem also seems to be that some people equate PIE origin as proto celtic origin when applied to the british isles. Celtic languages are of course IE and therefore share IE elements, but not all PIE elements mean that the word was definitely celtic. As long as different etymological proposals exist, why favour one explanation over the other?

I see no reason to argue with Cameron's statement about the Amber, Clun, Hodder, Humber, Itchen, Kennet, Neen, Nene, Ouse, Soar, Tees, Test, Till, Tweed, Tyne, Ure, Wear, Welland and Witham being of celtic origin to be at least doubtful and 'may well belong to a groupof pre celtic names'.

alan
08-12-2015, 10:48 AM
Finally realised that I already had the Broderick paper (or one version same)! It makes clear that Graham Isaac in "Scotland" 2005 found that the majority of river-names in Britain as noted by Ptolemy in his sample are clearly Celtic (34/47, i.e. 72.34%), with a smaller number (6/47, 12.77%) of non-Celtic / non-IE provenance. Of these names most of the non-Celtic / non-IE are to be found in North-East Scotland (coastline from Naver to Forth)
1. Celtic 4/11.
2. Possibly Celtic 2/11.
3. Non-Celtic / Non-IE 5/11.

So that explains his thinking, but it remains as unconvincing as ever.

My guess as to why the eastern rivers would have particularly ancient names is nearly all the big rivers in Scotland except the Clyde are on the east coast. I think the bigger the feature the more likely ancient names stick

alan
08-12-2015, 10:59 AM
Talking of which, Alan Lane did a critical review (1987) of the "foreign" (IE: out-of-area) material in NW Scot brochs and other big round stony things, and sticks the boot into Mackie a bit. There's a bit about those disc-querns a fair way in.
http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload?t=arch-352-1/dissemination/pdf/vol_117/117_047_066.pdf (just hit "Accept" if it doesn't load)

He's a sensible chap, you'll like his attitude, Jean.




And alan, he's one of the "brochs probably derive from Atlantic Roundhouses" people, him, Niall Sharples, Ian Armit, and Mike Parker Pearson are the best names to check in this regard right now.
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/share/research/projectreports/southuistprojects/historyofcardiffresearch/history-of-cardiff-research-in-the-uists.html
http://www.scottishheritagehub.com/content/59-atlantic-stone-built-roundhouses-sequence-subdivision-and-interpretations

I have a vague idea Lane did a good paper on the process ages ago, never saw it in print, could be in a Barbara Crawford schrift, (the same one that Forsyth spills the beans on the "enddactamin" ogam spindlewhorl (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckquoy_spindle-whorl), but not the PSAS 1995 paper) but all my books are packed away to save them from the mice at the minute (they go nuts for the glue in the spines), and I'm suffering the torments of hell changing ISPs just now and for the next couple of days, up and down like a yoyo. Or maybe it was John Barrett? Oh dear, I'm dragging this away from the topic as usual, not much Blood and precious few Celts, nevermind.

Mackie is a strange case. He was the big expert in Brochs etc way back and then went quiet for a long time while people like Armit 'Beyond the Brochs' (I went to the conference that spawned the book in Edinburgh in 1988 or 89 I think it was) and others took the centre stage and they pushed the dates well back from what Mackie had originally thought. I think Mackie appeared at the end of the conference as a long voice defending his earlier interpretations and seem way out of kilter with the rest of the experts. He seems to have now taken on board at least a fair bit of what the new wave of Broch experts were arguing. I have not followed the Broch and related stuff debate since the mid 90s so I am not sure what twists and turns there have been in it since. Jeez Mackie must have his free bus pass by now because I am pretty sure he was writing about the brochs since the early 70s.

alan
08-12-2015, 11:24 AM
Watts (Cambridge Dictionary of Place Names):

Ouse: Unexplained Usa circa 780, 9th - 1280 Usan. Attempts to explain this from PrW *us < Brit. *usso < IE *udso from the zero grade of the PIE *wed - 'water' are guesswork. The name is probably pre celtic, possibly pre IE.

Humber: Unexplained humbri fluminis c 720 variants from 9th cent, Umbri, Humbris, Hymbri, Humbrae amongst others. The etymology of this river is quite unknown. The name of this river is probably pre celtic.

I see little point in just comparing conflicting etymological arguments. I am happy to live with the fact that five different etymological explanations for Pen y Ghent exist, without having to judge which one is correct. A problem also seems to be that some people equate PIE origin as proto celtic origin when applied to the british isles. Celtic languages are of course IE and therefore share IE elements, but not all PIE elements mean that the word was definitely celtic. As long as different etymological proposals exist, why favour one explanation over the other?

I see no reason to argue with Cameron's statement about the Amber, Clun, Hodder, Humber, Itchen, Kennet, Neen, Nene, Ouse, Soar, Tees, Test, Till, Tweed, Tyne, Ure, Wear, Welland and Witham being of celtic origin to be at least doubtful and 'may well belong to a groupof pre celtic names'.

All very interesting but we well know rivernames can be 1000s of years older than the language spoken at any given snapshot in time - including 2000 years ago so this really doesnt get us anywhere. Noone is arguing there wasnt a pre-Celtic IE and pre-IE layers in prehistory. I think everyone except Palaeolithic continuity theory lunatics would agree with that. So, while interesting the rivernames only tell us what we already accept anyway and rivernames recorded by Ptolemey and other early sources tell us nothing about the language of the time. They are best left alone when trying to establish the language. Far far more useful to look at the names of the tribes, any chiefs whose names are recorded and the names of settlements. When you do that then it can be seen that every single bit of evidence for the language spoken in every part of Britain points to Celtic and indeed P-Celtic when it is possible to disinguise. Arguing, as some might, that there is only modest recording of pre-Roman names or that some Celt may have translated pre- Celtic names really is just pointless. You can only go by what evidence there is and it resoundingly suggests Celtic, apparently all P-Celtic was spoken from Orkney to Kent and from Wester Ross to Cornwall when classical observers arrived and there is zero evidence that anything other than Celtic survived.

Jean M
08-12-2015, 11:59 AM
As long as different etymological proposals exist, why favour one explanation over the other?

Indeed. Why have you been using these particular river names as solid evidence of a Pre-Celtic language? It just muddies the waters. ;)

It is really unnecessary. Logical deduction alone would tell us that the people living in the British Isles prior to the arrival of Celtic speech cannot have been dumb. They spoke. And obviously their language was not Celtic. First there were people speaking long-lost hunter-gatherer languages. Then there were people speaking farming languages. Then there were waves of Indo-European speakers, with (according to the place-name evidence) Celtic arriving after a first wave closer to plain PIE.

It is equally obvious that, if words of an older language survive in substrate or hydronyms or whatever, that incomers bringing a new language managed to communicate sufficiently with locals to absorb and retain said words/names. It is also obvious that this happened when they arrived and made contact with locals. So the question that you keep asking about the language contact resolves itself into "when did the first IE-speakers arrive in the British Isles?" and "when did the first Celtic-speakers arrive in the British Isles?"

These are the very questions to which I have devoted myself for years. I have attempted to answer them as best I can in the forthcoming book. If it took a book to do it, you can safely assume that the whole story will not fit into one post on a forum. I realise that it is a huge temptation to argue with the book before you have read it, but it does not really make a lot of sense. How about waiting until it comes out? Until then I have a window of opportunity to update and improve the online material, which everyone can read, discuss and criticize.

authun
08-12-2015, 01:09 PM
Indeed. Why have you been using these particular river names as solid evidence of a Pre-Celtic language? It just muddies the waters.

I rather think it was you who wrongly assumed that. My last post on the subject by no means infers solid evidence as you claim above:

"I see no reason to argue with Cameron's statement about the Amber, Clun, Hodder, Humber, Itchen, Kennet, Neen, Nene, Ouse, Soar, Tees, Test, Till, Tweed, Tyne, Ure, Wear, Welland and Witham being of celtic origin to be at least doubtful and 'may well belong to a group of pre celtic names'."


The passage where I first mention them is about timing but makes no statement as to the nature of the language:

"But the names do have to be transmitted and names like the Ouse, Don and Humber in Yorkshire for example were transmitted to the celtic speakers of the Late Pre Roman Iron Age and later to the germanic speakers. The question is when did the non celtic speakers interact with the celtic speakers? Earlier in the thread I asked who the bronze age salt miners and meat processors at Hallstatt might have been. There is continuity of place but this does not require continuity of people, although it may do. We can assume that they might be but it is not an explanation which requires them to be. We simply do not know what language they spoke."

I have asked several times, in the context of yorkshire, what was the language of the bronze age dwellers in the Pennines? I have no view on whether it was non IE or an earlier lost IE or Pre Insular Celtic or a proto celtic common or similar to that on the continent. I have had no answers. I have made this clear from the outset with my view on Pictish and the language of the Belgae, "The language of the Picts and the language of the Belgae has defeated the best linguistic minds for over a century." I don't know what language they spoke. I have also asked at what point were these names transmitted to the celtic languages, again, no answers.


It is also obvious that this happened when they arrived and made contact with locals. So the question that you keep asking about the language contact resolves itself into "when did the first IE-speakers arrive in the British Isles?" and "when did the first Celtic-speakers arrive in the British Isles?"

I have asked this several times before in this thread. It's a pity these questions were ignored and ironic that you now present the very questions I have asked higher up in the thread.

There are no answers of course. The entire debate about the existence of a Gallo-Brittonic language, a Pre-Insular Celtic langauge or whether a proto celtic language first entered the islands continues. It is made more difficult, as Koch points out, because by the time we have insular celtic texts with which we can work, the continental celtic languages have all but disappeared. I have also posed the question about placing the goildellic, brythonic, pictish, gaulish and belgic nodes, if indeed belgic and pictish are types of celtic languages, on a filial tree. It cannot be done, because we don't have enough data.

You may be interested in Ranko Matasović's and Tatyana Mikhailova's differing views in The Substratum in Insular Celtic (http://jolr.ru/files/(101)jlr2012-8(160-164).pdf) and the bibliography attached.

alan
08-12-2015, 04:33 PM
I rather think it was you who wrongly assumed that. My last post on the subject by no means infers solid evidence as you claim above:

"I see no reason to argue with Cameron's statement about the Amber, Clun, Hodder, Humber, Itchen, Kennet, Neen, Nene, Ouse, Soar, Tees, Test, Till, Tweed, Tyne, Ure, Wear, Welland and Witham being of celtic origin to be at least doubtful and 'may well belong to a group of pre celtic names'."


The passage where I first mention them is about timing but makes no statement as to the nature of the language:

"But the names do have to be transmitted and names like the Ouse, Don and Humber in Yorkshire for example were transmitted to the celtic speakers of the Late Pre Roman Iron Age and later to the germanic speakers. The question is when did the non celtic speakers interact with the celtic speakers? Earlier in the thread I asked who the bronze age salt miners and meat processors at Hallstatt might have been. There is continuity of place but this does not require continuity of people, although it may do. We can assume that they might be but it is not an explanation which requires them to be. We simply do not know what language they spoke."

I have asked several times, in the context of yorkshire, what was the language of the bronze age dwellers in the Pennines? I have no view on whether it was non IE or an earlier lost IE or Pre Insular Celtic or a proto celtic common or similar to that on the continent. I have had no answers. I have made this clear from the outset with my view on Pictish and the language of the Belgae, "The language of the Picts and the language of the Belgae has defeated the best linguistic minds for over a century." I don't know what language they spoke. I have also asked at what point were these names transmitted to the celtic languages, again, no answers.



I have asked this several times before in this thread. It's a pity these questions were ignored and ironic that you now present the very questions I have asked higher up in the thread.

There are no answers of course. The entire debate about the existence of a Gallo-Brittonic language, a Pre-Insular Celtic langauge or whether a proto celtic language first entered the islands continues. It is made more difficult, as Koch points out, because by the time we have insular celtic texts with which we can work, the continental celtic languages have all but disappeared. I have also posed the question about placing the goildellic, brythonic, pictish, gaulish and belgic nodes, if indeed belgic and pictish are types of celtic languages, on a filial tree. It cannot be done, because we don't have enough data.

You may be interested in Ranko Matasović's and Tatyana Mikhailova's differing views in The Substratum in Insular Celtic (http://jolr.ru/files/(101)jlr2012-8(160-164).pdf) and the bibliography attached.

you are a bit of an optimist if you think we can tease out the detail of the chronology and exact way the pre-IE languages faded and the IE grown.

It appears clear from Germanic that the pre-Germans encountered a branch of the Neolithic farmers and borrowed a fair amount of their vocab. For some reason they seem to have taken more from the pre-IE population than most IE groups did. It must have happened somewhere other than at the CW origin point because other likely CW derived cultural-language groups like Slavic, Baltic, Indo-Iranian etc apparently dont have anywhere near as much pre-IE vocab.

So, in all probability they got these words from the Funnel Beaker farmers. The latter are said to have got their farming culture from late Poilish Lengyel and Lengyel in turn at least owes a lot to LBK LBK in turn tends to be derived from Koros in the Balkans. So there you have a chain that goes back to the Balkans early Neolithic in the Cris-Koros-Starcevo complex.

It is probable that much of the temperate European Neolithic cultures of central and northern Europe have similar roots when you look at the cultural chain and back in 4000BC probably belong to some superfamily with a shared root back around 6000BC with 2000 years of divergence (The Cardial branch may be different so lets not talk about them for now). Indeed the divergence is probably lesser as most of central and northern Europe probably shared a root in LBK c. 5500BC onwards. You could even argue that a lot of the central and northern European cultures have an even closer root in the Lengyel-Rosen sort of cultures 5000-4000BC but you get the basic picture so divergence may have been not drastic in 3000BC across a lot of Neolithic cultures.

Anyway we could argue the detail but the basic picture is clear enough that temperate European farmers probably most shared a root around 5500BC and by the time the IEs were probing into their lands the farmers were maybe about 2000-2500 years diverged and some of the divergence is probably less than that. That sounds a lot but its basically the same amount of time as from Iron Age Celtic to Welsh and Gaelic today and its still clear they are part of the same IE branch.

So where I am going with this is a lot of the IEs who headed west of the Baltic-Carpathian line were encountering farmers who may have been speaking languages of the same dialect albeit diverged to the same degree as Gaelic is from Iron Age Celtic. There is evidence to support this. Apparently Germanic absorbed a number of pre-IE words, often agricultural, that are also present in Greek. So it has been suggested that the farmers both encountered were speaking non-IE languages from the same family. The Germanics probably got them from TRB and/or Cuc-Trype. Lord knows where the Greeks got theirs - they are a bit tricky to work out.

It seems unlikely that this pre-IE Euro-farmer language family has survived or linguists would have surely IDed it by now. I dont think we are looking at Basque or Finnish for example as some of the more crackpot linguists have argued.

I suppose another bit of evidence is that Germanic absorbed a whole lot more of this pre-IE farmer lingo. The only way I can explain it is that the answer may lie in the male lines. The Celts seem to have largely excluded the locals males and acted almost like a caste and so R1b grew massively. This doesnt seem to be so true in the Germanic areas where there is much more of a complex mix of ylines. I would suggest we can still see this in the early history of the Germans and Celts and in information that suggests the Celts were lineage obsessed while the Germans were more of a case of a leader and a band who didnt need to be his own relatives. The Celts also had a system where the elites fostered their sons out until adulthood to an ally. I suspect this may have helped reduce the linguistic and cultural influence of their biological mothers who might originally have been local non-IEs at least in part.

alan
08-12-2015, 05:05 PM
edited and paragraphed previous post - it was done in a rush.

authun
08-12-2015, 06:09 PM
It appears clear from Germanic that the pre-Germans encountered a branch of the Neolithic farmers and borrowed a fair amount of their vocab.

Hawking's list of non IE words seems to be yielding to newly found IE etymologies.

As Pereltsvaig points out, 'linguists have cast considerable doubt on the non-IE Germanic substrate hypothesis.' He cites Roberege 2010 and Roland Schuhmann 2012. I haven' read either so I cannot comment but even the wiki page on the german substrate hypothesis mentions that doubt exists and gives examples of IE etymologies of Hawking's supposed non IE list.

authun
08-12-2015, 06:18 PM
you are a bit of an optimist if you think we can tease out the detail of the chronology and exact way the pre-IE languages faded and the IE grown.

I rather think I made my view clear that it couldn't when I wrote:

"I have also posed the question about placing the goildellic, brythonic, pictish, gaulish and belgic nodes, if indeed belgic and pictish are types of celtic languages, on a filial tree. It cannot be done, because we don't have enough data."

Some people in this thread write as if we know a lot about the linguistic situation whereas the reality is we don't. It is precisely because of this uncertainty that I am open to the possibility of languages other that goidellic or brythonic being spoken at the start of the roman period.

avalon
08-12-2015, 08:53 PM
BTW I am totally happy with the term Ancient Britain. Celt is so pan-European that it doesnt help much in some ways and as you say Ancient Britain conveys the layer cake of different pre-Roman peoples that made up the Britons c 0AD. Its just as long as everyone understands that Germans, Slavs, Italics etc all also made up of similar layers of IE and pre-IE genes. We almost all are in Europe. Personally I think I would have enjoyed the lifestyle and society of the Mesolithic hunters best and I also find the ritual/religion orientated Neolithic more group minded societies fascinating and rather cool. The Bronze Age and on through the Iron age is rather too nuts too close to the historic social structures we see to make it so interesting. It also sounds like a rather unpleasant society where a few violent guys at the top get all the women like in the animal kingdom and have 1000 grandchildren while the rest cry into their pots in a dark hut LOL. I personally think I would have fitted far better into the Mesolithic or Neolithic societies.

A bit late but totally agree with all of that. You and Jean are always fair and balanced in your views. Personally I have always been interested in the Neolithic burial chambers, portal dolmens, cromlechs or whatever they are called.. They are very simplistic but they must be some of the earliest structures that still survive in the isles?

There are plenty of these in West Wales, specifically in north Pembrokeshire, Anglesey and Gwynedd so I guess I have always fancied being descended from the people that built these tombs. Of course it doesn't matter what I want, the truth is more important.

I just think that in terms of ancient dna we are so lacking evidence from the isles in the Neolithic and bronze age that we still know so little about the transition from non IE languages to Celtic. How long did the process take? Did it vary in different parts of the isles? Was it male specific?

I can't get too excited about the Hinxton genomes, it's just a tiny sample from a village in Cambridgeshire and it's also 2500 years after the arrival of bell beaker!

avalon
08-12-2015, 09:00 PM
Indeed, today in Britain there are about 8million people who have at least 1 Irish grandparent (and thus are elligble for Irish passport/dual-citizenship). If you factor in migration since the Great Famine it's reckon that between 12-16million of current British population has some Irish ancestry (circa 20%~ population). About 1 million Irish born currently live in Britain for example.

You can add to that the estimated 3 million English people who have a welsh surname, according to a survey by the welsh assembly.

avalon
08-12-2015, 10:11 PM
The Irish and Scots are more north of the English on any autosomal dna map and they do have a higher ANE percentage. I would say the Northern English would be similar to the Irish and Scots but there is a definite southern pull with the rest of the English. The Hinxton Celtic samples cluster with modern day Irish and Scots and not modern day English. I would love to see more Welsh dna samples as they are a bit of a mystery.

The recent schiffels paper had a pca on which the iron age celts clustered closer to modern English and French than it did to to modern Scottish so I don't think the picture is totally clear cut.

What did you make of the comments by heber that Irish DNA atlas has shown a strong preliminary Atlantic component? I don't really know what to make of it, how does it square with other studies of Irish autosomal DNA?

rossa
08-12-2015, 10:59 PM
The recent schiffels paper had a pca on which the iron age celts clustered closer to modern English and French than it did to to modern Scottish so I don't think the picture is totally clear cut.

What did you make of the comments by heber that Irish DNA atlas has shown a strong preliminary Atlantic component? I don't really know what to make of it, how does it square with other studies of Irish autosomal DNA?

From what I remember DODECAD and Eurogenes used to have components called North Atlantic/West European back when they tetsed new calculators on samples from people who emailed them their raw data. Irish people were usually one of the highest groups in these components (I think Norwegians were the highest).

ADW_1981
08-12-2015, 11:35 PM
I can't get too excited about the Hinxton genomes, it's just a tiny sample from a village in Cambridgeshire and it's also 2500 years after the arrival of bell beaker!

Yet it's amazing how contemporary it is, isn't it?

Jessie
08-13-2015, 04:42 AM
The recent schiffels paper had a pca on which the iron age celts clustered closer to modern English and French than it did to to modern Scottish so I don't think the picture is totally clear cut.

What did you make of the comments by heber that Irish DNA atlas has shown a strong preliminary Atlantic component? I don't really know what to make of it, how does it square with other studies of Irish autosomal DNA?

I'm not sure exactly what the Atlantic component means but I would be surprised if the Irish come out any different than Britain. Any dna study or plots show the Irish to be very similar to Britain with the closest population being Scots. If the Irish DNA Atlas uses a similar methodology I'd be interested to see if there are any major differences between the east and west and also how the Irish plot in relation to the Welsh. Something labelled "Atlantic" is a bit ambiguous.

Helgenes50
08-13-2015, 06:02 AM
I'm not sure exactly what the Atlantic component means but I would be surprised if the Irish come out any different than Britain. Any dna study or plots show the Irish to be very similar to Britain with the closest population being Scots. If the Irish DNA Atlas uses a similar methodology I'd be interested to see if there are any major differences between the east and west and also how the Irish plot in relation to the Welsh. Something labelled "Atlantic" is a bit ambiguous.

With WestEurasia K8, the Atlantic component(Eurogenes K15) is composed of 12.01% of ANE, 42.17% of ENF and 45.81 of WHG and this one peaks among the Basques.

avalon
08-13-2015, 06:41 AM
Yet it's amazing how contemporary it is, isn't it?

I guess it's not surprising that modern Britons share some genetic affinity with Britons of 2000 years ago. We could just do with more ancient dna from all periods in order to work out the finer details of isles history/prehistory.

Jessie
08-13-2015, 08:21 AM
With WestEurasia K8, the Atlantic component(Eurogenes K15) is composed of 12.01% of ANE, 42.17% of ENF and 45.81 of WHG and this one peaks among the Basques.

I doubt that it will be the same. I've had the K8 done and the Irish are similar to the Scots on that as well. Any Irish ANE results I've seen are much higher and also on the K15 most Irish get higher North Sea than Atlantic so they can't be using the same component.

Helgenes50
08-13-2015, 08:49 AM
I doubt that it will be the same. I've had the K8 done and the Irish are similar to the Scots on that as well. Any Irish ANE results I've seen are much higher and also on the K15 most Irish get higher North Sea than Atlantic so they can't be using the same component.

These results are those of the Atlantic component, not Irish's results and this one doesn't peak in NW Europe, but in Basque country. I agree Irish ANE results are much higher. The K13 North Atlantic peaks in Ireland and in Basque country.

In the different calculators the names are often similar, but not with the same meaning

alan
08-13-2015, 05:47 PM
A bit late but totally agree with all of that. You and Jean are always fair and balanced in your views. Personally I have always been interested in the Neolithic burial chambers, portal dolmens, cromlechs or whatever they are called.. They are very simplistic but they must be some of the earliest structures that still survive in the isles?

There are plenty of these in West Wales, specifically in north Pembrokeshire, Anglesey and Gwynedd so I guess I have always fancied being descended from the people that built these tombs. Of course it doesn't matter what I want, the truth is more important.

I just think that in terms of ancient dna we are so lacking evidence from the isles in the Neolithic and bronze age that we still know so little about the transition from non IE languages to Celtic. How long did the process take? Did it vary in different parts of the isles? Was it male specific?

I can't get too excited about the Hinxton genomes, it's just a tiny sample from a village in Cambridgeshire and it's also 2500 years after the arrival of bell beaker!

I would be pessimistic about the chances of ever really understanding the way in the isles the IEs managed to impose their language on the locals. However what we probably can safely say even without ancient DNA samples from the isles is that this changeover does seem to have been marked by a significant genetic impact - something I did not really expect. It seems that the R1b peoples left an autosomal footprint too. I personally would read the genetics as being suggestive that the R1b peoples were pretty exclusive and didnt intergrate local males. They seem to have used their status to superbreed and no doubt and this simply has to have had a role in spreading IE down from the elite to the masses - the language probably spread with the YDNA. This model may explain why, unlike Germanic, Celtic doesnt have a lot of non-IE or atypical for IE vocab. BTW - some of the attempts to get weird unusual IE explanation for oddball German vocab look like special pleading. Recent papers I have read suggests to me that Germanic does indeed have an unusually high substrate.

The only thing I would venture in terms of the timing of the death of non-IE languages is that they were apparently dead by the Iron Age. If various L21 clades in the isles are a proxy for Celtic then it may one day be possible to work out when they were a minority caste and when they grew

alan
08-13-2015, 07:02 PM
Hawking's list of non IE words seems to be yielding to newly found IE etymologies.

As Pereltsvaig points out, 'linguists have cast considerable doubt on the non-IE Germanic substrate hypothesis.' He cites Roberege 2010 and Roland Schuhmann 2012. I haven' read either so I cannot comment but even the wiki page on the german substrate hypothesis mentions that doubt exists and gives examples of IE etymologies of Hawking's supposed non IE list.

I have read that and the counter arguments and I think the proposed IE derivations sound like special pleading.

Coldmountains
08-13-2015, 07:26 PM
I have read that and the counter arguments and I think the proposed IE derivations sound like special pleading.

To be honest the non-IE Germanic substrate hypothesis is hard to believe for me even when there are some good arguments for it. Germanic languages have certainly like other IE languages non-IE vocabulary but is it really so much? Germanics have slightly less R1 than other IEs but this is not really proving that they had a larger substrate than other IEs. Autosomally they still carry more Yamnaya/Corded Ware related ancestry than most other IEs except of Balts and Slavs. I am not a linguist so I can have no opinion about the proposed non-IE terms in Germanic languages but why should Germanics absorb so many non-IE terms compared to other IEs?

avalon
08-14-2015, 11:30 AM
I'm not sure exactly what the Atlantic component means but I would be surprised if the Irish come out any different than Britain. Any dna study or plots show the Irish to be very similar to Britain with the closest population being Scots. If the Irish DNA Atlas uses a similar methodology I'd be interested to see if there are any major differences between the east and west and also how the Irish plot in relation to the Welsh. Something labelled "Atlantic" is a bit ambiguous.

I agree Jessie, the term "Atlantic" is confusing, particularly when it is used by different studies perhaps with different connotations. Geographically the term is quite fuzzy, I mean Ireland is clearly Atlantic and in Northern Europe at the same time. Brittany is clearly Atlantic but when along the north coast of France do we enter Northern Europe?

So it depends on what definition of Atlantic we are using. Brittany may hold the clue as I believe a recent French study highlighted genetic affinity between Ireland and Brittany.

I am not sure about Wales, it's a shame that the POBI samples are not publicly available as they had some good sampling there but my guess would be that they share some affinity with Irish due to shared Celtic history. That being said, it was clear from the POBI results that at a fine scale level the Northern Irish and Scots were close together whereas the Welsh were some way apart.

Heber
08-14-2015, 12:10 PM
I agree Jessie, the term "Atlantic" is confusing, particularly when it is used by different studies perhaps with different connotations. Geographically the term is quite fuzzy, I mean Ireland is clearly Atlantic and in Northern Europe at the same time. Brittany is clearly Atlantic but when along the north coast of France do we enter Northern Europe?

So it depends on what definition of Atlantic we are using. Brittany may hold the clue as I believe a recent French study highlighted genetic affinity between Ireland and Brittany.



The IDA project uses the specific term Western European Seaboard to describe Atlantic Europe which I take as meaning countries with an Atlantic coastline.
Cunliffe and Koch use Atlantic Europe in the Age of Metals and and Koch uses a map to delimit the geographic scope.
It includes the Isles, Brittany, Western France and Western and Northern Iberia.

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/bell-beaker-migrations/
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/32721534768437923/

The EU term for this region is Atlantic Europe.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/515380751079280475/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Europe

avalon
08-14-2015, 03:55 PM
I would be pessimistic about the chances of ever really understanding the way in the isles the IEs managed to impose their language on the locals. However what we probably can safely say even without ancient DNA samples from the isles is that this changeover does seem to have been marked by a significant genetic impact - something I did not really expect. It seems that the R1b peoples left an autosomal footprint too. I personally would read the genetics as being suggestive that the R1b peoples were pretty exclusive and didnt intergrate local males. They seem to have used their status to superbreed and no doubt and this simply has to have had a role in spreading IE down from the elite to the masses - the language probably spread with the YDNA. This model may explain why, unlike Germanic, Celtic doesnt have a lot of non-IE or atypical for IE vocab. BTW - some of the attempts to get weird unusual IE explanation for oddball German vocab look like special pleading. Recent papers I have read suggests to me that Germanic does indeed have an unusually high substrate.

The only thing I would venture in terms of the timing of the death of non-IE languages is that they were apparently dead by the Iron Age. If various L21 clades in the isles are a proxy for Celtic then it may one day be possible to work out when they were a minority caste and when they grew

Your thoughts seem roughly in line with what Maciamo has wrtitten?


It is likely that these Proto-Celts who invaded the British Isles belonged to a great majority to the L21 subclade of R1b, as this haplogroup now makes up over two thirds of paternal lineages in Wales, Ireland and Highland Scotland. If we exclude haplogroups of Germanic origins (Anglo-Saxon, Viking, Norman), it can be estimated that over 90% of British and Irish men carried the R1b-L21 Y chromosome by the end of the Bronze Age. This makes R1b-L21 the quintessential Gaelic paternal lineage. It is not clear how such a drastic change in paternal lineages happened, especially since maternal lineages were much less affected by those Celtic migrations. It has been postulated that technologically superior Celtic warriors, equipped with Bronze weapons and riding on horses, massacred or enslaves indigenous men while taking their women, or that they established a ruling elite that passed on more Y chromosomes through sustained polygamy over many centuries.

avalon
08-14-2015, 04:00 PM
The IDA project uses the specific term Western European Seaboard to describe Atlantic Europe which I take as meaning countries with an Atlantic coastline.
Cunliffe and Koch use Atlantic Europe in the Age of Metals and and Koch uses a map to delimit the geographic scope.
It includes the Isles, Brittany, Western France and Western and Northern Iberia.

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/bell-beaker-migrations/
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/32721534768437923/

The EU term for this region is Atlantic Europe.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/515380751079280475/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Europe

Thanks Heber, that makes it clearer. It seems to me that the prelim results from Irish DNA Atlas are in line with the recent POBI project which also noticed a strong "Atlantic" (FRA14) component in British samples.

Both studies though do seem at odds with other sources.

alan
08-14-2015, 04:12 PM
I agree Jessie, the term "Atlantic" is confusing, particularly when it is used by different studies perhaps with different connotations. Geographically the term is quite fuzzy, I mean Ireland is clearly Atlantic and in Northern Europe at the same time. Brittany is clearly Atlantic but when along the north coast of France do we enter Northern Europe?

So it depends on what definition of Atlantic we are using. Brittany may hold the clue as I believe a recent French study highlighted genetic affinity between Ireland and Brittany.

I am not sure about Wales, it's a shame that the POBI samples are not publicly available as they had some good sampling there but my guess would be that they share some affinity with Irish due to shared Celtic history. That being said, it was clear from the POBI results that at a fine scale level the Northern Irish and Scots were close together whereas the Welsh were some way apart.

I dislike the term because its clear that the north-south dimension in autosomal DNA is far more important than east-west. The north Atlantic peoples cluster with other north Europeans and the south Atlantic people cluster with south Europeans. Atlanticism doesnt look very convincing to me in autosomal DNA.

alan
08-14-2015, 04:14 PM
I agree Jessie, the term "Atlantic" is confusing, particularly when it is used by different studies perhaps with different connotations. Geographically the term is quite fuzzy, I mean Ireland is clearly Atlantic and in Northern Europe at the same time. Brittany is clearly Atlantic but when along the north coast of France do we enter Northern Europe?

So it depends on what definition of Atlantic we are using. Brittany may hold the clue as I believe a recent French study highlighted genetic affinity between Ireland and Brittany.

I am not sure about Wales, it's a shame that the POBI samples are not publicly available as they had some good sampling there but my guess would be that they share some affinity with Irish due to shared Celtic history. That being said, it was clear from the POBI results that at a fine scale level the Northern Irish and Scots were close together whereas the Welsh were some way apart.

Its not just a north Irish or plantation thing that causes Scots and Irish to cluster though. There seems to be a much more ancient strong similarity. I wouldnt even put that all or even mainly down to the early AD links either. It seems a lot of it is older. You can even see this in the archaeology where Ireland and north Britain have a lot of connections in all the periods.

alan
08-14-2015, 04:16 PM
To be honest the non-IE Germanic substrate hypothesis is hard to believe for me even when there are some good arguments for it. Germanic languages have certainly like other IE languages non-IE vocabulary but is it really so much? Germanics have slightly less R1 than other IEs but this is not really proving that they had a larger substrate than other IEs. Autosomally they still carry more Yamnaya/Corded Ware related ancestry than most other IEs except of Balts and Slavs. I am not a linguist so I can have no opinion about the proposed non-IE terms in Germanic languages but why should Germanics absorb so many non-IE terms compared to other IEs?

I would suggest it is because Germanic society seems to be less lineage based than Celtic. Therefore more integration was possible. Certainly the classic Celtic and early Germanic societies seem to have that contrast when history begins. How far it goes back is unknown but it makes sense in terms of the DNA IMO.

Jean M
08-14-2015, 04:42 PM
Updated:
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscothighlands.shtml
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscotlowlands.shtml

Heber
08-14-2015, 05:27 PM
Thanks Heber, that makes it clearer. It seems to me that the prelim results from Irish DNA Atlas are in line with the recent POBI project which also noticed a strong "Atlantic" (FRA14) component in British samples.

Both studies though do seem at odds with other sources.

Gianpiero did note the similarity with Britain and it was top of the list of admixture matching after Ireland

Ireland
Britain
France
Spain
Germany
Italy

As expected the WE Seaboard (Atlantic) component was highest in Atlantic countries and this was the largest component of the three admixture components.
I would agree with you that recent POBI, Brittany, NW France and Iberia studies confirms this connection.

https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/people-of-the-british-isles/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/france-dna/
https://www.pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/iberian-dna/

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2015114a.html

These were preliminary results. We should get an update at Genetic Genealogy Ireland in October.

rms2
08-14-2015, 05:57 PM
Gianpiero did note the similarity with Britain and it was top of the list of admixture matching after Ireland

Ireland
Britain
France
Spain
Germany
Italy

As expected the WE Seaboard (Atlantic) component was highest in Atlantic countries and this was the largest component of the three admixture components.
I would agree with you that recent POBI, Brittany, NW France and Iberia studies confirms this connection.
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejhg2015114a.html

These were preliminary results. We should get an update at Genetic Genealogy Ireland in October.

That's odd, because in other studies that I have seen, the British and Irish tend to cluster with other northern Europeans and the Spanish with other southern Europeans.

5590

avalon
08-14-2015, 08:50 PM
That's odd, because in other studies that I have seen, the British and Irish tend to cluster with other northern Europeans and the Spanish with other southern Europeans.

5590

I would agree with you about Spain but as alan mentioned up thread that 2008 autosomal DNA study took its samples from Dublin and Aberdeen, hardly the best choices of locations. Genes mirror geography gives a general overview of European populations but will it necessarily have detected populations that were relatively isolated like Orcadians, French Basques or Gaeltacht Irish.

The Irish DNA Atlas samples are restricted to people with 8 great grandparents from a local area so is better quality IMO.

I am guessing that the Irish project may have samples from Brittany that show some affinity to Ireland, hence the Atlantic component.

David Mc
08-14-2015, 09:13 PM
Jean, will you be including the Isle of Man in any of these pages? Little work has been done there, I know, and the island's history of successive invasions doesn't make it easy to distinguish archaeological levels, but it would be interesting to know more about its primary links to the main island (tribes from Cumbria/Lancashire? Wales? Southern Scotland?) and Ireland (Ulaid?).

Jean M
08-14-2015, 10:16 PM
Jean, will you be including the Isle of Man in any of these pages?

I hadn't thought about it. The basis of Celtic tribes is tribal names from Ptolemy and other documentary sources. We have none for the people of Man until we get Ogham inscriptions, and then only one which is accepted to give a tribe or clan (Old Irish Conual, Conall), which is suggested to relate to Conailli Muirtheimne of north Louth and south Down.

rms2
08-14-2015, 11:03 PM
I would agree with you about Spain but as alan mentioned up thread that 2008 autosomal DNA study took its samples from Dublin and Aberdeen, hardly the best choices of locations. Genes mirror geography gives a general overview of European populations but will it necessarily have detected populations that were relatively isolated like Orcadians, French Basques or Gaeltacht Irish.

The Irish DNA Atlas samples are restricted to people with 8 great grandparents from a local area so is better quality IMO.

I am guessing that the Irish project may have samples from Brittany that show some affinity to Ireland, hence the Atlantic component.

Honestly, I'll believe it when I see it. There may be some autosomal "Atlantic Component" shared by populations along the Atlantic facade, but I doubt that overall the British and Irish resemble any southern European population, including the Spanish, more than they do other northern European populations.

As I recall, when it comes to Lazaridis' three ancient European source populations, the Orcadians most closely resembled the Ukrainians. I recall that because my own ANE, EEF, and WHG profile was a pretty close match to those two populations. The Spanish, on the other hand, are much lower in ANE than the British and Irish, and much higher in EEF.

David Mc
08-15-2015, 01:18 AM
I hadn't thought about it. The basis of Celtic tribes is tribal names from Ptolemy and other documentary sources. We have none for the people of Man until we get Ogham inscriptions, and then only one which is accepted to give a tribe or clan (Old Irish Conual, Conall), which is suggested to relate to Conailli Muirtheimne of north Louth and south Down.

Thanks, Jean. Given your parameters, (Ptolemy et al.), it makes sense to bypass the Isle of Man. There is the "of Bivaidonas, son of the tribe Cunava[li]" inscription, which you reference above and ties in nicely, perhaps, with the taking of Man by the Ulster king Báetán mac Cairill. That's a few centuries later than most of your sources, although the Conailli Muitheimne, being Cruthin, could also suggest deeper British roots. If I wanted to grasp for some extra tenuous links I could mention Sétanta (Cú Chulainn's birth name) who was based in Muirtheimne and the Setantii from the Lancashire coastlands, or, conversely, I could wonder about the island's name's relationship the Belgic Menapii. That would be building castles out of the air, though. I wonder if any of the archaeology points to the direction of flow into Man (for example Brigantian style artifacts or Welsh style hillforts).

Jessie
08-15-2015, 04:57 AM
I would agree with you about Spain but as alan mentioned up thread that 2008 autosomal DNA study took its samples from Dublin and Aberdeen, hardly the best choices of locations. Genes mirror geography gives a general overview of European populations but will it necessarily have detected populations that were relatively isolated like Orcadians, French Basques or Gaeltacht Irish.

The Irish DNA Atlas samples are restricted to people with 8 great grandparents from a local area so is better quality IMO.

I am guessing that the Irish project may have samples from Brittany that show some affinity to Ireland, hence the Atlantic component.

Possibly but all my father's side were from Western Ireland (Sligo & Roscommon) and that area seems to have a strong connection to West Scots genetically. I can imagine areas like Donegal especially to have a lot of connections to Scotland.

Also an area like Brittany I would think would have more connections to parts of Britain like Cornwall/Wales as they spoke a Brittonic language whereas Ireland and Scotland were Goidelic.

cairn
08-15-2015, 05:01 AM
Jean M,

On the page, "Celtic tribes of southwest England," it says, "This surrender could could explain why a part of Dobunnic territory...".

Edit: further down on the same page: "...punning on the word Latin word for damnation."

Sorry for my poor formatting, I'm on mobile.

Jessie
08-15-2015, 05:05 AM
Honestly, I'll believe it when I see it. There may be some autosomal "Atlantic Component" shared by populations along the Atlantic facade, but I doubt that overall the British and Irish resemble any southern European population, including the Spanish, more than they do other northern European populations.

As I recall, when it comes to Lazaridis' three ancient European source populations, the Orcadians most closely resembled the Ukrainians. I recall that because my own ANE, EEF, and WHG profile was a pretty close match to those two populations. The Spanish, on the other hand, are much lower in ANE than the British and Irish, and much higher in EEF.

I really can't see any Irish study being radically different than Britain. People have seen enough genetic information to have a good idea about this. I really hope they don't have something like an "Atlantic" component as this is not very descriptive and can give a misleading result. I hope they use labels like the PoBI study.

David Mc
08-15-2015, 06:19 AM
As a follow-up to my last post, Neil McDonald, in his Isle of Man: A Megalithic Journey, suggests that the hill forts on Man are of a kind with the ones that appear in Cumbria around the time of the expansion of the Brigantian confederacy in northwest Britain. He also posits that this signals settlement of the Isle of Man by the Carvetii and Setantii. On the other hand, an earlier travel writer (ca. 1935) suggested the Manx hillforts were similar to ones he had seen in Wales. There is a real paucity of information on the Manx Iron Age, I'm finding, and it's frustrating.

Jean M
08-15-2015, 07:21 AM
Jean M,

On the page, "Celtic tribes of southwest England," it says, "This surrender could could explain why a part of Dobunnic territory...".

further down on the same page: "...punning on the word Latin word for damnation.". Fixed thank you! :)

rms2
08-15-2015, 10:53 AM
I really can't see any Irish study being radically different than Britain. People have seen enough genetic information to have a good idea about this. I really hope they don't have something like an "Atlantic" component as this is not very descriptive and can give a misleading result. I hope they use labels like the PoBI study.

I get the impression that some folks, even among the researchers, are really enamored with Barry Cunliffe's idea of the prehistoric importance of the Atlantic facade and really want to see some genetic evidence of that. When I first got started in genetic genealogy (2006), it was all the rage but has suffered some hits since then. I think it gets over stressed and over played.

avalon
08-15-2015, 08:39 PM
I get the impression that some folks, even among the researchers, are really enamored with Barry Cunliffe's idea of the prehistoric importance of the Atlantic facade and really want to see some genetic evidence of that. When I first got started in genetic genealogy (2006), it was all the rage but has suffered some hits since then. I think it gets over stressed and over played.

Maybe, but on the flip side I think that some folks tend to under play the importance of the Atlantic facade for some strange reason, that despite recent genetic studies which have highlighted the links between the Isles and Western France. Eg, POBI project, Irish DNA Atlas and a French DNA study that highlighted genetic proximity between Bretons and Irish.

rms2
08-15-2015, 08:43 PM
Maybe, but on the flip side I think that some folks tend to under play the importance of the Atlantic facade for some strange reason, that despite recent genetic studies which have highlighted the links between the Isles and Western France. Eg, POBI project, Irish DNA Atlas and a French DNA study that highlighted genetic proximity between Bretons and Irish.

Those folks are far fewer than the Cunliffe Atlantic facade crowd, and where are the actual details of this supposed resemblance? How can it coexist with the apparent disparity in the proportions of Lazaridis' three ancient ancestral European populations (ANE, EEF, and WHG)? Something is fishy, IMHO.

avalon
08-15-2015, 08:56 PM
Also an area like Brittany I would think would have more connections to parts of Britain like Cornwall/Wales as they spoke a Brittonic language whereas Ireland and Scotland were Goidelic.

There was a recent study "Fine scale genetic structure in Western France" that specifically commented on the genetic proximity between Irish and Bretons.

I think overall it is fair to say that in autosomalDNA, the Irish most closely resemble the British. After that though I am not sure because different sources appear to be saying different things, some point towards Northern Europeans like Dutch, Germans, etc but others point towards the Atlantic coast, I am just trying to work out why?

Just to add I think any genetic relationship between the Isles and Spain is very small. I am really talking about Atlantic France.

rms2
08-15-2015, 09:00 PM
There was a recent study "Fine scale genetic structure in Western France" that specifically commented on the genetic proximity between Irish and Bretons.

I think overall it is fair to say that in autosomalDNA, the Irish most closely resemble the British. After that though I am not sure because different sources appear to be saying different things, some point towards Northern Europeans like Dutch, Germans, etc but others point towards the Atlantic coast, I am just trying to work out why?

Just to add I think any genetic relationship between the Isles and Spain is very small. I am really talking about Atlantic France.

Of course, the Bretons probably received a substantial shot of autosomal dna from British refugees in the immediate post Roman period. They might not be the best population to judge an Atlantic component by.

avalon
08-15-2015, 09:05 PM
Of course, the Bretons probably received a substantial shot of autosomal dna from British refugees in the immediate post Roman period. They might not be the best population to judge an Atlantic component by.

Agreed. I think we really need to wait for the Irish DNA Atlas to publish its results in full, mainly to find out where precisely they collected their continental samples from.

glentane
08-16-2015, 12:15 AM
Updated:
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscotlowlands.shtml

Typo-hound on the job:
Cardowan at Whishaw on the Clyde it's Wishaw (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28226652).


territory was stratigically strategically

glentane
08-16-2015, 12:38 AM
Updated:
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscothighlands.shtmlYou say Schiechallon, I say Schiehallion, let's call the whole thing off .. ;)
(sounds even more like lenited Caledon(ii), if it's any consolation).
Argentocoxo > Argentocoxos (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mxxwmg48bFgC&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=argentocoxos&source=bl&ots=7fFdHn3Fk4&sig=kSNr3DJAO0yUrfLweTKg_E7eFHM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBmoVChMIy5WImK-sxwIVg9caCh3xDwJY#v=onepage&q=argentocoxos&f=false)
And that'll be Cowal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowal) not "(Kintyre and) Cowell". Yes it's a nightmare, I only know on account of being up against the coalface so to speak for over half a century.

Rory Cain
08-16-2015, 02:13 AM
There are a number of small Pictish lineages recorded in the extreme NW of Scotland and Skye that get little attention. I remember stumbling on a useful website that outlined them and posting it some years ago. The names in those lineages might be worth looking at but I am pretty sure they are Celtic with names like Gartnait and so on.

That claim was also made for the Ogilvie clan based on their descent from the early Earls of Angus, in turn supposedly descended from their Pictish predecessors. One Ogilvie line claiming descent from an Ogilvie chief proved to be DF21, which appears somewhat too southerly in the rest of it's distribution.

But as you and others with a linguistic bent appear to be saying the Pictush is simply part of a P-Celtic continuum, it is unclear how you would explore the Pictish origins of clans. I may be reading you too literally as I understand the linguists are unable to separate Picts from say Strathclyde Britons.

JohnHowellsTyrfro
08-16-2015, 07:59 AM
Some observations on Wales and Brittany.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDAQFjACahUKEwiJruz-jq3HAhXIWBQKHcdaAp0&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.benybont.co.uk%2Fother%2Fess-art%2Ffrench.htm&ei=vUDQVcnbHMixUce1iegJ&usg=AFQjCNG7TxuAL6qP61YcFKIwZvhw_YPUhw&sig2=3Jjh11akzV8lmWuIUf9ALQ

Jessie
08-16-2015, 11:16 AM
Maybe, but on the flip side I think that some folks tend to under play the importance of the Atlantic facade for some strange reason, that despite recent genetic studies which have highlighted the links between the Isles and Western France. Eg, POBI project, Irish DNA Atlas and a French DNA study that highlighted genetic proximity between Bretons and Irish.

I do think there is a relationship with Bretons with Britain and Ireland. Northern French are quite close genetically but with Spain, Portugal and the Basque not so much. So I think they should be more specific in what is meant by "Atlantic".

Jean M
08-16-2015, 11:22 AM
Typo-hound on the job: it's Wishaw (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28226652).

strategically


You say Schiechallon, I say Schiehallion, let's call the whole thing off .. ;)
(sounds even more like lenited Caledon(ii), if it's any consolation).
Argentocoxo > Argentocoxos (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mxxwmg48bFgC&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=argentocoxos&source=bl&ots=7fFdHn3Fk4&sig=kSNr3DJAO0yUrfLweTKg_E7eFHM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBmoVChMIy5WImK-sxwIVg9caCh3xDwJY#v=onepage&q=argentocoxos&f=false)
And that'll be Cowal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowal) not "(Kintyre and) Cowell". Yes it's a nightmare, I only know on account of being up against the coalface so to speak for over half a century.

Bless you! All fixed and I decided to boost the Novantae while I was at it.

Jean M
08-17-2015, 03:22 PM
The current issue of British Archaeology has an interesting article re-evaluating the Snettisham Treasure, now seen more as ritual deposits than a sort of treasury. http://www.britisharchaeology.org/

I thought I would pop something on it into my entry on the Iceni, giving it my own twist. http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/belgicengland.shtml

moesan
08-19-2015, 09:43 PM
I have not read the book, but you can see some sceptical reviews here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tribe_of_Witches
Della Hooke (author of The Anglo-Saxon landscape: the kingdom of the Hwicce) thinks this particular idea is fantasy.

I go along with Patrizia de Bernardo Stempel, Linguistically Celtic ethnonyms: towards a classification, In Juan Luis Garcia Alonso (ed.), Celtic and Other Languages in Ancient Europe, pp. 101-118. Ediciones Universidad Salamanca 2008. She classes both Dobunni and Dumnonii as meaning "The Lowland People". I say that in the introduction, and should add that etymology to the specific tribal names.

Alan Raude thinks Dobuni and Dumnonii are 2 distincts names with different etymologies - he thinks Devon is formed upon Dobunia Dobuni's land, and not upon Dumnonia.
the O>>E mutations is a well know case of metaphony, among brittonic languages. the westic english forms doesn't make obstacle according to him.So the Dubonians , previously settled between Somerset and Gloucestershire would have shift towards South-West, at the cost of Dumnonians.

concerning a previous post of mine, A. Raude said the name Brittones appeared in some cohorts names, aside Britanni in other cohorts; the first ones were rather recruted among Northern Britanni (ex: Brittones Caledonenses. and the term Brittania (-TT-) appeared lately, surely a confusion (Gildas 545)

Rory Cain
08-20-2015, 09:30 PM
Alan Raude thinks Dobuni and Dumnonii are 2 distincts names with different etymologies - he thinks Devon is formed upon Dobunia Dobuni's land, and not upon Dumnonia.
the O>>E mutations is a well know case of metaphony, among brittonic languages. the westic english forms doesn't make obstacle according to him.

In which case, given the possible O>E shift, would it not be equally possible that Dumnon was the source of Dewnan, often given as the older form of Devon?

Jean M
08-20-2015, 10:10 PM
Alan Raude thinks Dobuni and Dumnonii are 2 distincts names with different etymologies - he thinks Devon is formed upon Dobunia Dobuni's land, and not upon Dumnonia.

Devon is from the OE tribal name Defnas, derived from British *dubno-, *dumno , represented in Welsh as dwfn, and Breton doun = deep. It seems clearly linked to the Dumnonii. Not only that, we have evidence of the Kingdom of Dumnonia after Britain left the Roman Empire. The sequence is unusually clear in fact.

What is the etymology he gives for Dobunni? Rivet and Smith say that the etymology is unknown. I'm guessing that Patrizia de Bernardo Stempel takes the name from *dubno, but she does not say.

Jean M
08-20-2015, 10:35 PM
concerning a previous post of mine, A. Raude said the name Brittones appeared in some cohorts names, aside Britanni in other cohorts; the first ones were rather recruited among Northern Britanni (ex: Brittones Caledonenses.

This seems more or less the case. I now have the relevant chapter from The People of Roman Britain by Anthony Richard Birley (1980). He thinks that those cohorts recruited in the original province of Britannia took the name Britannorum or Britannica, whereas those levied from the peoples overrun by the Flavian governors were units of Brittones.

Saetro
08-21-2015, 08:28 AM
Interesting material...only one typo I see...first paragraph, 4th sentence...

"Goldsmiths flourished in Bronze Age Ireland, leaving a wealth of jewellery and other art work."

To my eye, it should be spelled "jewelry."

In England and Australia it is "jewellery" as the second "e" is pronounced.

moesan
08-21-2015, 11:50 AM
Devon is from the OE tribal name Defnas, derived from British *dubno-, *dumno , represented in Welsh as dwfn, and Breton doun = deep. It seems clearly linked to the Dumnonii. Not only that, we have evidence of the Kingdom of Dumnonia after Britain left the Roman Empire. The sequence is unusually clear in fact.

What is the etymology he gives for Dobunni? Rivet and Smith say that the etymology is unknown. I'm guessing that Patrizia de Bernardo Stempel takes the name from *dubno, but she does not say.


I'm sorry because this could seem a hair splitting, but A. Raude thinks otherwise:
Defnas (to read *DefEnas?) is an Old West Eglish form (accusative) based itself on an older english form DefEnascir (look at the E; a brittonic form Defn would have given *Dem in english according to westic english evolution (efn >> em, hrefn >> hrem) - Dumnonia/*Dovnonia to Devon supposes a lost of the ending *Devnon >> *Devn, what is absent in brittonic, (vocalic infection: no problem!) and *Devn to Devon an epenthetic vowel development what occurred only since the 9th Cy (K. Jackson) -
the welsh Devneint for Dumnonia, with a final -T = false etymology (influence of 'nant', 'neint' : "valleys", "dales" at first) does not more explain modern Devon -
I close here because it's the Raude's thoughts...
&: "deep": I'm not sure at these old times -bn- group in celtic turned into -mn- (?); '-bn-' at first sight seems corresponding to germanics 'deep', 'diep', 'tief', 'dyp', 'djup'...
the gaelic (irish?) 'doimhn' could be a false etymology (it occurred: 'troigh' or 'troidh' : britt- 'troed', 'troad', 'trôz': "foot", 'ubhal', 'ughal' "egg"...)
&&: the fact Dumnonia name was found for the region at some stages is a possible element of proof but not THE whole proof.
sorry for the lost of time

moesan
08-21-2015, 11:59 AM
sorry for 'ubhal'/'ughal' : I ment 'ubh'/'ugh'!!! I'm ashamed! 'ubhal' would be "apple"!

Jean M
08-21-2015, 12:04 PM
I'm sorry because this could seem a hair splitting, but A. Raude thinks otherwise:

Still seems impossible to me, but thank you for the clarification of his thinking.

Rory Cain
08-22-2015, 12:42 AM
Devon is from the OE tribal name Defnas, derived from British *dubno-, *dumno , represented in Welsh as dwfn, and Breton doun = deep. It seems clearly linked to the Dumnonii. Not only that, we have evidence of the Kingdom of Dumnonia after Britain left the Roman Empire. The sequence is unusually clear.

Then my source was wrong about the etymology but right about the Dumnonii. Jean, what I like about your posts is that your expertise is not confined to linguistics alone but you have a broad knowledge that gives you peripheral vision.

Linguists have been unable to offer much evidence (or agreement) either way whether the Dumnonii of southwest England. the Damnonii of southwest Scotland and the Fir Domnainn of Ireland were related, or which was the mother colony and which were later colonies.

For some time we have been aware that DF21 is a significant component of many Strathclyde clans in the former Damnonii territory. DF21 is also emerging in Ireland not far from where Domnainn kings ruled at Dun Ailinne in Leinster and in Connaught where several Domnainn leaders ruled. The missing piece was southwest England, where DF21 has been harder to find. Several Cornwall and Devon DF21 have now been found. While nothing conclusive yet, the possibility of the Dumnonii, Damninii and For Domnainn being related seems far from disproven.

Jean M
08-22-2015, 11:18 AM
what I like about your posts

Thanks for your kind words.


For some time we have been aware that DF21 is a significant component of many Strathclyde clans in the former Damnonii territory. DF21 is also emerging in Ireland not far from where Domnainn kings ruled at Dun Ailinne in Leinster and in Connaught where several Domnainn leaders ruled. The missing piece was southwest England, where DF21 has been harder to find. Several Cornwall and Devon DF21 have now been found. While nothing conclusive yet, the possibility of the Dumnonii, Damninii and For Domnainn being related seems far from disproven.

Interesting, but I think I'll await aDNA on this one. I just go for "probably related" in the text on the Fir Domnann, where it seems to me we have clues that they came from Britain. Here's my text:


Domnann: the Fir Domnann (Fir = people) appear in Irish legend as among the invaders of Ireland. They were probably related to the Dumnonii of south-west Britain and what is now the western Scottish Lowlands. The name is based on the Celtic root dumno-, meaning both "deep" and "the world". The name occurs in Inber Domnann (Malahide Bay, Co. Dublin), and more frequently in north-west Mayo as Iorrais Domnann (Erris, Co. Mayo) and the nearby Mag Domnann and Dun Domnann. An early Irish poem describes one of their leaders as the over-king of Leinster. At Ballydavis in County Laois (within Leinster), some 4km north-east of Portlaoise, an extensive Iron Age complex has been discovered, which bears comparison with the Celtic royal cemeteries of Cruachain and Tara. An unusual cylindrical tinned bronze box (image in the online report) from the site is similar to one from the chariot burial of a woman at Wetwang Slack, Yorkshire. This does not necessarily imply a relationship, but does suggest contacts between north Britain and Ireland during the Late Iron Age.

I think I'll add something to the effect that they do not appear in Ptolemy's coverage of Ireland (which is another clue that they arrived after 150 AD.)

Anything else new and exciting on them?

alan
08-22-2015, 03:24 PM
Thanks for your kind words.



Interesting, but I think I'll await aDNA on this one. I just go for "probably related" in the text on the Fir Domnann, where it seems to me we have clues that they came from Britain. Here's my text:



I think I'll add something to the effect that they do not appear in Ptolemy's coverage of Ireland (which is another clue that they arrived after 150 AD.)

Anything else new and exciting on them?

Always found it curious if Novantae really means 'new people'. There is a small outlying cluster of Brochs on and close to the Rinns of Galloway -the general zone where their 'town' of Rerigonium is usually speculated to be placed. Wonder if the 'new' element could relate to broch builders arriving by sea. The southern Scottish brochs certainly when I was reading about it some years ago tended to be paced very late in the Broch sequence - even the early AD period.

I just read the wiki page and somehow I had never heard the y Gododdin reference to the Three Chiefs of Novant before.

Apparently Moffat cites the name as meaning The Vigorous People which in some ways makes more sense that calling yourselves 'the new people'.

alan
08-22-2015, 03:41 PM
Thanks for your kind words.



Interesting, but I think I'll await aDNA on this one. I just go for "probably related" in the text on the Fir Domnann, where it seems to me we have clues that they came from Britain. Here's my text:



I think I'll add something to the effect that they do not appear in Ptolemy's coverage of Ireland (which is another clue that they arrived after 150 AD.)

Anything else new and exciting on them?

Generally I am skeptical of tribal name duplication as a clear indicator of links and migrations but in the case of these three names, the distribution along the Irish Sea sort of zone makes it more plausible. Certainly the post-Ptolemy dating of the Fir Domnain and certain aspects of the mythology of the Leinstermen does make at leas a connection of them to one of the two British tribes seem likely.

I am not so convinced that the tribes in SW England and SW Scotland are connected. The name meaning 'deep' or similar sounds like it relates to the sea or a sea god/goddess a bit like all the Menapii type tribal and placenames do (Menapii, Manapi, Isle of Man, Mona, Menia, Menavia, Manannan, Manawydan etc. So we could be talking about shared focus on a particular sea god perhaps linked to their coastal locations. Then again those Menapii related names do cluster around eastern Ireland, north Wales, Isle of Man, Ynys Mon which are not very far apart - the Belgic one being an outlier.

moesan
08-22-2015, 04:17 PM
aside of the principal topic, I wonder if some of the forms in Domn- / Dumn- would not be related to the meaning of "power", "ruler" (derived from a celto-italic *domin- from I-Ean *doma ("house" but maybe "territory" >> "possessed territory" and so on??? just an amateur's bet... see McDonald Mac Domhnaill

Jean M
08-22-2015, 05:34 PM
Always found it curious if Novantae really means 'new people'. ... Apparently Moffat cites the name as meaning The Vigorous People ...

The name seems to come from the river. My text as it currently stands:


Novantae (Lat.), Novantai (Gr.): Lived on the west coast, east of the peninsula of the same name (now The Rhins). Ptolemy gives the names of two settlements: Locopibia and Rerigonium. The former was probably an attempt to render the Celtic name Leucovia ("the shining place"), apparently given to a Roman fort at what is now Glenlochar. Rerigonium is clearly a Latin version of a Celtic name meaning "a royal place". The name is repeated in Rerigonium Sinus, identifiable as the Loch Ryan, one arm of the sea that shaped the Rhins peninsula. At the head this sea loch stands Stranraer. The royal site is likely to have been somewhere nearby. To the east of The Rhins the coast cuts south and east to the Solway Firth. Ptolemy lists the coastal features including the mouth of the Novius river. The tribe perhaps took its name from this river, today known as the Nith, derived from the Celtic word for "new" or "fresh", cognate with the Latin novus. We hear of them later in a 7th-century Welsh poem as the Novantians (Wyr Enouant).

alan
08-22-2015, 05:43 PM
Another curious thing is that while some tribes like the Novantae, Votadini etc seem to be remembered by later versions of the same tribal names in post-Roman times in Welsh sources, it seems that the old name Damnonii didnt survive at all, despite the importance of their successors the Britons of Strathclyde with their capital at Dumbarton. In fact it is only ever mentioned in Ptolemy. I wonder if the disappearance in Scotland after Ptolemy and the appearance of the Fir Domnainn in the same timeframe are connected? This contrasts sharply with the Dumnonii of SW England who survived beyond Viking times.

alan
08-22-2015, 05:44 PM
The name seems to come from the river. My text as it currently stands:

Cheers. That makes a lot more sense than a tribe calling themselves the newbees.

Rory Cain
08-22-2015, 09:07 PM
Another curious thing is that while some tribes like the Novantae, Votadini etc seem to be remembered by later versions of the same tribal names in post-Roman times in Welsh sources, it seems that the old name Damnonii didnt survive at all, despite the importance of their successors the Britons of Strathclyde with their capital at Dumbarton. In fact it is only ever mentioned in Ptolemy. I wonder if the disappearance in Scotland after Ptolemy and the appearance of the Fir Domnainn in the same timeframe are connected? This contrasts sharply with the Dumnonii of SW England who survived beyond Viking times.
Incisive observation. I don't know the answer except that the Strathclyde Britons extended their borders beyond the original Damnonii territory as far South as Cumbria. Perhaps a single tribal name became too narrow for this expanding kingdom?

Among the Scots clans who have a DF21+ core is Galbreath, a Gaelic name from the Highland part of Damnonia/ Strathclyde. It is a compound of Gall or "foreigner" and Bretnach or "Briton". It's an interesting statement of DF21's association with Britic-speakers.

Jean M
08-22-2015, 09:34 PM
.. it seems that the old name Damnonii didn't survive at all....

In fact the name may survive in a couple of place-names. Their territory was split by the Romans who first secured the neck of land between the Clyde and the Forth, later taken again and marked by the Antonine Wall. It appears that the part of the tribe north of the Antonine Wall appear later as the Miathi/Maeatae, for whom I have a separate entry. If the Maeatae were the larger part of the Dumnonii, that might explain their name, which could mean "people of the larger part". The insecure position of the rump of the Dumnonii could have driven some over to Ireland.


Damnoni/Dumnonii: Lived north of the Selgovae. It is more than likely that Ptolemy's spelling Damnoni is in error and the tribe was actually the Dumnonii, also identified in south-west Britain and in Ireland (as the Domnann). The name derives fron a Brittonic root *dubno or *dumno, meaning "deep" (as an adjective) or "world" (as a noun). The tribal name has been interpreted as ‘The Lowland People’, which would certainly fit their location. According to Ptolemy, their towns were Colania [Camelon?], Vindogara [Ayr?], Coria , Alauna [Stirling], Lindum [Drumquhassle, Stirlingshire] and Victoria [Kinross]. Alauna indicates somewhere on the Allan Water, a river running through Strathallan and Bridge of Allan to join the Forth at Stirling. Although Rivet and Smith identified the location as Ardoch, the coordinates given indicate Stirling, according to Christian Marx. There is also disagreement over the location of Victoria, for which Rivet and Smith suggest the Roman legionary fortress at Inchtuthil, Perthshire. However that seems too far north for the Dumnonii, and the coordinates suggest Kinross. Vindogara is surely somewhere on Irvine Bay, called Vindogara sinus by Ptolemy. Rivet and Smith suggest Irvine or nearby. Marx identifies it as Ayr.

[B]The place-names Cardowan at Wishaw on the Clyde and Dowanhill at Milngavie on the lower Clyde may refer to the Dumnonii, which would indicate that their territory included the Clyde. James Fraser suggests that the Clyde could have been their southern frontier, but as we have seen, the Dumnonii were considered to stretch south of the Clyde to Irvine Bay.

Their territory was strategically significant to the incoming Romans. It encompassed that narrow neck of land between the Clyde and the Forth which would make a convenient frontier. Tacitus tells us that his father-in-law Agricola, when governor of Britain (AD 77-85), secured this neck with garrisons. So the territory of the Dumnonii was split long before the building of the Antonine Wall between the Clyde and Forth from around AD 146.

Those Dumnonii north of the Antonine Wall seem to reappear in AD 197 as the Miathi, while the Kingdom of Alt Clud developed on the lower Clyde in the Post-Roman period, with its stronghold at Dumbarton (fortress of the Britons). Its king Coroticos famously came under the displeasure of St Patrick in the 5th century for seizing Irish Christians in slave-raids. In 870 Vikings from Dublin sacked the fortress of Dumbarton. The kingdom of Alt Clut was no more, many of its people slain or enslaved. But a new kingdom of Strathclyde took its place, with a power-base at Govan on the outskirts of present-day Glasgow.

References in the original: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscotlowlands.shtml

Rory Cain
08-22-2015, 11:29 PM
A possible reason why the name Damnonii only survived in the form of place-names, not as a people or kingdom:

"When we write about 5-7th century kings we have this misplaced need to assign them a kingdom. We forget that when their contemporaries in neighboring kingdoms referred to them, they were usually referred to as King of Britons, King of Picts, King of Saxons. Within their people, they do refer to kings of tribes, or kingdoms. Bede refers to English kings by their kingdom, but their neighbors are kings of the Irish/Scots, Picts or Britons. He never gives those kings a region or kingdom. The Irish refer to a dizzying array of kings and their realms, sometimes by kindred, sometimes by place. Kindreds only really seem to apply to the Irish because only they seem to have settlements based on kinship with enough longevity to generate a big enough population to be politically significant. All of the other peoples of Britain likely had large royal kindreds, but they were still a small proportion of the total population they rule over. Among the Saxons, Britons and Picts, it is more likely that kings would be identified by their core region or primary fortress. I think the kings of Alt Clut and potentially Eten (Edinburgh) are a primary examples of this.

"Fraser points out that we actually don’t know that Eugein (Owain) ap Beli, King of Britons, who defeated and slew Domnall Brecc of Dalriada (Cenel nGabran) in the battle of Strathcarron in 642 was actually king of Alt Clut. (Notably Owain is the next and only king of Britons recorded after Rhydderch of Alt Clut before the late 7th century.) This is especially true because his reputed brother is Bridei ap Beli, King of Picts who killed his cousin Ecgfrith of Northumbria in 685. Fraser wonders if this family didn’t originate as kings of the Miathi. Could the Miathi have produced kings that could be either British or Pictish? Possibly, there was no people more on the frontier than them. The Maithi were considered a major Pictish tribe by the Romans but had their lands incorporated within the British civitas of the Damnonii, the same civitas as Alt Clut. After the time of Oswiu of Bernicia, the Britons were reduced to a small enough area around Alt Clut that one king may indeed have formed a kingdom later called Strathclyde. Prior to the consolidation of Northumbria and its extended hegemony, fixed kingdoms may simply not have existed. There were many kings who ruled form a primary fortress and the power of these local dynasties bobbed up and down with the success of individual kings. Only when one dynasty retained control of a large region with significant hegemony over its neighbors did something like a kingdom begin to form. Now, Eugein/Owain’s dynasty did manage to retain control of the remaining northern Britons, based from Alt Clut at least part of the time, from the mid-7th century until it finally fell to a combined Scottish and Norse siege. Such a dynasty is what was needed for Strathclyde to form into an actual kingdom. The only king who can’t be linked into Owain’s progeny is Guret who died in 658, but as the Welsh triads call him base born and this is the height of Oswiu of Northumbria’s power, it is possible that he was imposed upon them by Oswiu. It is noticable that Owain’s two sons who reputedly succeed him were named Elphin (Ælfwine) and Domnagual (Domnall) suggesting that Owain’s family had intermarried extensively with both the Scots and English. Recall that Owain’s brother Bridei ap Beli is said to be the cousin of Ecgfrith of Northumbria in the Historia Brittonum.

"As for kings of this kindred moving into Alt Clut, I think this is perfectly natural for any major British dynasty that grew up in this area to take Alt Clut (Dumbarton). First of all, its possibly the best fortress in the area and further away from the English. I think the most important reason for Alt Clut being so important though is its position on the Irish Sea. Sitting at the mouth of the Firth of the Clyde, it is ideally placed for Irish Sea trade. Even Stirling, if there was a fortress there in the 7th century, was largely inaccessible to trade because the English and the Niuduari Picts controlled the entrance to the Firth of Forth."

Reference: https://hefenfelth.wordpress.com/tag/miathi

alan
08-23-2015, 11:35 AM
In fact the name may survive in a couple of place-names. Their territory was split by the Romans who first secured the neck of land between the Clyde and the Forth, later taken again and marked by the Antonine Wall. It appears that the part of the tribe north of the Antonine Wall appear later as the Miathi/Maeatae, for whom I have a separate entry. If the Maeatae were the larger part of the Dumnonii, that might explain their name, which could mean "people of the larger part". The insecure position of the rump of the Dumnonii could have driven some over to Ireland.



References in the original: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/celticscotlowlands.shtml

Its hard to know for sure the exact details but its usually accepted that Dumbartonshire - a small county or shire north of the wall was part of the kingdom of Strathclyde.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbartonshire#/media/File:ScotlandDunbartonshireLieut.png

There is a stone near Loch Lomond that means 'stone of the Britons' suggestive of being the ancient boundary between Strathclyde and Dalriada which does make a great deal of geographical sense c. 500-800AD.

Its funny, looking at a map I realised I hadnt really ever thought much about Dumbarton's position before or even really looked at it closely on a map. As well as being a very spectacular rock, it is a very strategic location not far west of where the Clyde met the west end of the Anthonine Wall. Dumbarton therefore lay on the north shore of the Clyde, just north of the west end of the wall where it meets the Clyde. Very very interesting location. Is some ways it is position is towards the frontier rather than in the core of Strathclyde and of course it is very close to the Roman frontier, close to Argyll and being as it is relatively close to the west end of the Antonine Wall.

Jean M
08-23-2015, 02:13 PM
There is a stone near Loch Lomond that means 'stone of the Britons' suggestive of being the ancient boundary between Strathclyde and Dalriada which does make a great deal of geographical sense c. 500-800AD.


Thanks. Apparently there are two stones similarly named. Well worth mentioning. I could link to this blog post by Tim Clarkson. https://senchus.wordpress.com/2015/04/03/stones-of-the-britons/

[Added] Done! Thank you.

Rory Cain
08-23-2015, 10:21 PM
A useful map of Britain ca 570 AD at http://Caelinschronicle.com/map570.html

Kwheaton
08-23-2015, 10:45 PM
Very cool Map thanks Rory!

Jean M
08-23-2015, 10:51 PM
A useful map of Britain ca 570 AD at ...

That makes clear what Alan was saying. I will make a small adjustment to my Damnoni/Dumnonii entry, (which is now so big I've subdivided it!). Thanks again.

Rory Cain
08-24-2015, 03:10 AM
Very cool Map thanks Rory!

My pleasure. If my speculation that the Damnonii tribe, SNP marker DF21 and such clans as Galbraith and others were either the same, overlapping or at least partly interchangeable, the the following regarding the Galbraith clan origins and their original Loch Lomond territory is also relevant to the tribal map. Extracted from Wikipedia's entry on Clan Galbraith:

"The surname Galbraith is of Gaelic origin. The name is derived from the elements gall ("stranger") + Breathnach ("Briton"), meaning "British foreigner". The elements used in the surname would denote the differences between the Gaels —who have been generally thought to have begun migration to Scotland in about the 5th century— and the native Welsh speaking Britons, particularly the those of the Kingdom of Strathclyde. The Strathclyde Britons remained a distinct ethnic group from both the Highland Gaels and Lowland Angles until the 14th century.[1] The former capital of the Kingdom of Strathclyde was Dumbarton ("Fortress of the Britons"), in the Lennox.[2]

In Scottish Gaelic the Galbraiths are called Breatanuich or Clann-a-Breatannuich, meaning "Britons" and "Children of the Britons".[3] The early Galbraiths held lands in the Lennox, in the area of Loch Lomond, north of Dumbarton. The stronghold of these early Galbraiths was on the island of Inchgalbraith which is located on west side of Loch Lomond about 2 miles south-east of Luss.[2] The heraldist Iain Moncreiffe of that Ilk speculated that the Arms of the Galbraiths —which bore three bears' heads— may allude to the British name Arthur that is thought by some to mean "bear".[2]

rms2
08-24-2015, 12:58 PM
Why is so large a chunk of Britannia missing from the "map of Britannia"? Am I missing something? Is there a way to see the rest?

Rory Cain
08-25-2015, 08:08 PM
Why is so large a chunk of Britannia missing from the "map of Britannia"? Am I missing something? Is there a way to see the rest?

Perhaps if we knew the original source?