Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 51 to 57 of 57

Thread: The Indo-European and Possibly Germanic Origins of the Picts

  1. #51
    Senior Member Johann Bomber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Monday, February 5th, 2007 @ 11:21 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    Location
    Zur Zeit Rheinland
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Antifantenjäger
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    Nordische Mythologie
    Posts
    19
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    AW: Re: Who were the Picts?

    The Picts were the offsprings of the first people living on the British islands, so they weren't really celtic. They supposedly had darker hair than the celts and germans. Untill about 500 b.c. , when the Celts (coming mainly from modern days France and Belgium) started to settle in nowadays England and Wales, the Picts supposedly lived in all parts of what we today call England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. But their lands in England and Wales were very soon conquered by the celts, forcing the picts to concentrate on modern days Scotland, as Ireland was taken over by the celts, too.
    When the Romans came to Britain there were some celts being pushed by the invaders into pictish terrytory. During the next decades the picts were partly celtisized (I suppose it's called like that), as they started to believe in many celtic gods and even mixed up their own language with tose of the celts. Maybe they already looked more like the celts - lighter hair etc.
    When the Romans left Britain around 400 a.d. the inhabitants of Scotland (Caledonia) still were called picts, but they allready had little celtic genes.

    In the next 3 hundred years the picts had more and more celtic influence coming over them, as from the west, the Scots and the Dal Riadans (celtic tribes from Ireland) conquered the westbank of later Scotland, and from the south, the Angles pushed the celts living in later Northumbria into pictish grounds.
    By the time the Vikings conquered the scotish westbanks as the scots once did themselves, the original picts didn't really exist anymore. They were speaking celtic dialekts, felt like being celts and were mainly seen as celts by the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings.
    These latest picts supposedly looked quite germanic-celtic (light hair and eyes).
    Nowadays scots are in fact of course of celtic decent, but also have pictish and germaic genes.

    Bomber

  2. #52
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Blutwölfin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Online
    Sunday, October 6th, 2019 @ 05:53 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Skåne and North Frisia
    Country
    Iceland Iceland
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Posts
    4,083
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    61
    Thanked in
    42 Posts

    Sv: Who were the Picts?

    Might have been much easier to use the search option:

    The Pictish Nation
    Picts
    .. and seven more pages of posts..
    Lík börn leika best.

  3. #53
    Senior Member Fionn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, July 20th, 2011 @ 05:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    Celtic
    Subrace
    pred. Keltic-Nordid + Brünn
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Illinois
    Gender
    Family
    Single, looking
    Politics
    Nationalist/Racialist
    Posts
    188
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Who were the Picts?

    Thank you all for your responses.

  4. #54
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Saturday, June 11th, 2016 @ 01:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    CM-Atlantidish
    Country
    England England
    State
    Lancashire Lancashire
    Location
    Mamvcivm
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    British
    Posts
    3,586
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts

    Re: Who were the Picts?

    Don't rush!

    Did you read this PDF? I broadly agree with the content;
    http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/2081/01/languagepictland.pdf

  5. #55
    Member Galaico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 5th, 2012 @ 03:44 PM
    Ethnicity
    Iberian
    Subrace
    Atlanto-Med + Baskid
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Politics
    Atlanticism
    Posts
    937
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts

    Re: Who were the Picts?

    The Picts were not displaced by the Celts and surely weren't more darker than them. Actually, the Picts and the Brythonic Celts were the same people, Britanniae celts were celtized Picts. The Celtic language expanded through all Europe in a more cultural way, most of the times not following an invasion.

    The Celtic language is of the IE family. If we accept the Kurgan theory, the IE languages started North to the Black Sea among people who carried the R1a haplotype, but the R1a is almost not found in the actual Celtic countries, what is more, recent studies don't find close genetic similarities between British & Irish celts with the ancient celts of central Europe.

    The Western Celts, are more a Paleolithic Atlantic population, quite unaltered, that probably first adopted the Celtic language as a lingua franca.

    Among Atlantic Celtic groups, the main line of attack is that – while there is strong evidence for linkages between Atlantic and Continental Celtsearlier assumptions that the Atlantic Celts must be the descendants of Continental Celts have largely been proven false. This finding has led some, including Richard Wagner of the Irish Institute, to assert that the Atlantic Celts are not Celts at all.Defenders of Celtic identity counter that the term has long referred to both Continental and Atlantic groups and is not dependant on any association between the two, so while revelations that the Atlantic Celts are an indigenous and not an immigrant group are of profound academic interest they are not particularly relevant to debates around the ethnic identitifications of the modern Celtic nations.
    Recent genetic evidence seems to indicate that the populations of Ireland, Wales, Brittany, the Isle of Mann, and Galicia may be closely linked and have been remarkably stable for "at least 6,000 years".This would mean that their shared culture actually pre-dates the La Tène and Hallstatt Celtic cultures. This does not necessarily mean that these peoples are not "Celts", however. Rather it means that the historical understanding of who the Celts were and are may need to be revised.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Celts

  6. #56
    New Member keltikvikingsaxon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Saturday, September 12th, 2009 @ 04:30 PM
    Ethnicity
    German, Dutch, English & a wee bit o' Irish
    Ancestry
    Holland, Germany, England, Ireland
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    North Carolina North Carolina
    Gender
    Family
    single
    Religion
    seeker of truth
    Posts
    2
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Picts in Alaska?

    Hi all,

    I'm new and have never posted before, so I'm not sure if I'm doing this correctly? I hope so. I'm curious if anyone has heard of Picts settling in Alaska? If so, could you please share any and all information you have on this subject with me, or point me in the direction of a good book on the subject?

    Thanks!

  7. #57
    Moderator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Blod og Jord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Danish
    Country
    Denmark Denmark
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Engaged parent
    Politics
    Nationalism
    Religion
    Odinism
    Posts
    750
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    127
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    378
    Thanked in
    199 Posts
    The Indo-European and Possibly Germanic Origins of the Picts

    Over the last 100 years or so there has been much speculation over the nature of the language spoken by the ancient Picts. Some scholars see them as non Indo-Europeans, whilst others view them as being Indo-European. Of those that allign to the second view point they are generally divided into two camps: those that believe they were a Celtic people and those a Germanic. The Pictish Chronicle written in Latin states that the Picts were not aboriginal to Britain as many claim but came from "much further afield" (The Last of the Druids, Iain Forbes ) Candidates for this Urheimat include Thrace and Scythia, suggestive in itself of an Indo-European origin. The Picts apparently originally intended to settle in Ireland but were subsequently persuaded by the Irish king to settle in Scotland and were given Irish wives. Significantly the Scottish kings of the kingdom of Dalriada laid claim to the throne of the Picts via this matrilineal succession. It should be noted that the Scots themselves were not native to Scotland but were colonists from Ireland!

    The issue of matrilineal succession was also referred to by the Venerable Bede in his A History of theEnglish Church and People. It is often argued by scholars that because of the matrilinear succession of Pictish kings that this marked them out as a distinctly non Indo-European people but by making this argument they ignore the statement made by Bede that this condition was forced upon the Picts by the Irish king as stated:

    "So the Picts crossed into Britain, (WOTANS KRIEGERS NOTE: they crossed from Ireland) and began to settle in the north of the island, since the Britons were in possession of the south. Having no women with them, these Picts asked wives of the Scots, (WOTANS KRIEGER'S NOTE: the 'Scots' here referred to were the Scots from Ireland) who consented on condition that, when any dispute arose, they should choose a king from the female royal line rather than the male. This custom continues among the Picts to this day."
    By inisting that the Picts choose their kings from the female line the Irish Scots ensured that they always had a controlling interest in the Picts. There is no evidence that this custom originated with the Picts and thus can not be put forward as an argument to deny that they were Indo-Europeans.

    The reference to the Picts having originated in 'Scythia' is a common perception that reaches back to the days of the Roman Empire when it was considered that all barbarians came from Scythia, which was the great land mass to the east of the empire stretching in their eyes from eastern Germania to the Slavic lands and beyond. 'Scythia' in the context of Bede's work may be interpreted as being Scandinavia. It is likely that the colonising Picts were in fact a war band, hence the lack of women aboard their ships. Scandinavia would certainly be a good candidate and this would in all probabilty indicate that not only were the Picts Indo-European but Germanic. Indeed in the late 19th century the Earl of Southesk on studying both Pictish and Scandinavian carvings put forward the theory that they shared a common Germanic origin. (The Origins of Pictish Symbolism). Stephen Oppenheimer seems to also support a Scandinavian identity for Bede's 'Scythia' in his The Origins of the British:

    "How they reached the British Isles from Scythia, east of the Mediterranean, Bede does not make clear, but elsewhere in Medieval literature the region of Scythia is sometimes alluded to as the ultimate Norse homeland in the Danish and Icelandic sagas. The longboats might imply the Picts were from Scandinavia, but in any case this story from Bede makes it clear that he did not think that they were British or Irish. His linguistic skill should have been enough to work this one out for himself."

    Tony Steele in his The Rites and Rituals of Traditional Witchcraft makes the point that at one time it was considered by scholars that the megalith builders were non Indo-European, a notion that is no longer tenable.
    "The archaeologist Colin Renfrew has shown that it is far more likely that Indo-European was introduced to Europe by the original Neolithic settlers, and so the megalithic builders were, in fact, Indo-European. In this connection it is worth pointing out that the territories of the Etruscans and Basques are notable for being devoid of megalithic remains-which is hardly true of the Picts."

    Mr Steele makes this point as the Etruscans and Basques were among the minority of peoples in Europe who did not speak an Indo-European language and this helps to further discredit the theory that the megaliths were the product of a non Indo-European culture. Mr Steele also argues the case for Pictish being a Germanic language, partly based on the close proximity of northern Scotland with Scandinavia but concedes that it is "a very archaic and somewhat degenerate form of Germanic." Interestingly as an aside I would like to remind my readers at this point that Old English is now increasingly being considered as a more archaic language than hitherto thought and could be regarded as a separate subset of the Germanic language group. (Oppenheimer)

    Professor Renfrew does not argue for a Germanic origin for the Pictish language but he does concede an Indo-European one for it:

    "What language was spoken in Scotland, or what languages, is far from clear. We have evidence of personal names, and of place names, as preserved by classical writers and in early medieval sources (including the Pictish Chronicle, a list of kings in a Latin text put together in the middle of the ninth century), and in the place names of more recent times. There is some evidence to be derived from these sources which would not contradict the view that they represent a northern dialect of Brithonic, perhaps not unlike that spoken further south before the dominance of the Romans." (Archaeology & Language. The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins.)

    This theory is also referred to by Stephen Oppenheimer:

    "Pictish, formerly spoken in northern Scotland, is claimed to have been Brythonic, but whether this claim covers all languages present there in the first millenium AD, apart from Scottish Gaelic, is still disputed by a few." (The Origins of the British)

    It is becoming increasingly clear that with the acceptance now that the megalithic builders were Indo-European (including those of Stonehenge), that the Belgic peoples who were present in southern Britain prior to the Roman conquest were Germanic and now the increasing possibility of not only the Indo-European but possibly the Germanic origins of the Picts it is time that the early history of Britain be re-examined in the light of these findings.
    http://celto-germanic.blogspot.com/2...-germanic.html

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Saturday, July 2nd, 2016, 02:30 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Tuesday, April 26th, 2016, 05:31 PM
  3. Origins of the Picts and Scots
    By BeornWulfWer in forum Scotland
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Tuesday, November 17th, 2009, 06:07 AM
  4. The Sintashta Culture - Indo-European & Kurgan Origins
    By torrent in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, October 25th, 2004, 03:19 AM
  5. Major Work: 'Indo-European Origins: The Anthropological Evidence' - J. V. Day (2001)
    By BodewinTheSilent in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Saturday, October 4th, 2003, 01:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •