Go Back   Scotland Discussion Forum > Culture > History

Notices


The Picts

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 17th April 2006, 20:17
gustard gustard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 253
Tartan -
P - Celtic (brythonic) was spoken all over britain at one point (certainly south of the clyde) not to mention much of europe and was displaced over succesive invasions of other languages. It is a later development than q - celtic (ie irish , manx, scots gaelic) as originally the celts had trouble with the letter p.
P celtic is known to have developed sometime before 500 bc because of Spanish place names from when when the Celts invaded Spain - but before that - no ps !
Just to respond to the fascintaing topic deviation about King Arthur :
there is rather a lot of evidence that he wasn't a person at all but a celtic deity who previously went under another name (ill dig it out) and that the grail legend is actually the christianised "cauldron" of an older pagan tradition . It seems the legend of Arthur later became mixed with the epics of several possibly different heroes. Anyhow most of what is known of him come from two main strands - French/Norman and Welsh.
Anyway back to the Picts.....
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 17th April 2006, 20:31
ANDY-J3 ANDY-J3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Grangemouth.
Posts: 1,751
I think the French-Norman myth of Arthur can be discounted because if he did exist it was around the sixth century AD, some 500 years before the Normans arrived in Britain. The main Norman source,Geoffrey of Monmouth could only have drawn upon existing secondary texts which were already several hundred years old. Only those texts which were almost contemporary,written by a Celtic monk Gildas and the Anglo-Saxon Bede can really be regarded as serious evidence. I think they do refer to a real person because the circumstantial evidence from archaeology shows an abrupt halt to Saxon incursions into Britain for a period of several decades at the beginning of the sixth century suggesting that they suffered a serious military defeat and that ties in with the Arthurian legend of a Romano-British chieftan who defeated them in a series of battles around that time.
__________________
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."

- Martin Luther King Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 23rd April 2006, 01:28
littlebriton littlebriton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by gustard
What is actually historically known about them ? What happened to them ? Are there any scottish names/clans known to be pictish in origin ? Tartans ?
Where they the only ones to use wode ? What of their language do we know anything of it all, its etymology ?
I guess most sources must be roman, but maybe some stories hang around in folklore as well (oral) any way so many questions hope theres some answers !
cheers
Gus
They were Celts, Brythonic - possibly closely related to the Gauls (at least in language) who 'disappeared' when they assumed Scottish language and culture following the formation of Scotland (which was a combined kingdom of Scots and Picts ) and thus left with us with surprisingly little trace of themselves. Anyone who claims Pictich descent or influence today is simply a fantasist - along with those types who claim to adhere to a 'druidic' religion.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 23rd April 2006, 09:44
aNonnyMoose aNonnyMoose is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,227
Although to be fair, littlebriton, anyone (like myself) who can prove several hundred years of Scottish descent almost certainly carries a few of their genes handed down over successive generations. Doesn't make me claim to be a Pict, but I probably have a few Pictish genes in the DNA along with all the rest.

Interesting survey a few years ago on the DNA of a 9,000 year old skeleton in the Cheddar Gorge region in England. They traced the DNA thereabouts, and found a man living just a couple of miles away who was almost certainly a direct descendant of the man whose bones were found.

We're all more interlinked than some people like to think, and at the same time carry more evidence of our past than has previously been discoverable.
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 26th April 2006, 17:30
Tartan Paint Tartan Paint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANDY-J3
Ptolemey's map details the tribal names at the time of the Roman invasion of Scotland in the second century AD when the northern tribes are still known as the Caledonii and the term Maetae doesn't appear until a few centuries later,referring to the southern branch of the Pictish kingdom. When Votadini became Gododin is not known because there is a lack of textual evidence but it was probably around the same time as the term Maetae came into use. That particular historian is putting forward his own viewpoint that highland clansmen are descended from the northern Picts however the accepted truth is that they were descended from the inhabitants of Dalriada-most historians would question his conclusions. The origin of lowland Scots is not really in question-they are mostly a mixture of Britons,Picts and Anglo-Saxons. Brythonic is a term applied to a distinct cultural and linguistic group of the Celts-the Britons-and Welsh,Cornish and Breton are derived from that common Brythonic language. As regards the Picts evidence is scarce but it is generally accepted that they spoke a Brythonic dialect mixed with a few words and phrases from the language of the pre-Celtic inhabitants. It is known that they definitely did not speak Gaelic because saint Columba required a translator to talk to them and there is therefore some doubt as to whether they did speak a Celtic language at all.

Thanks for that Andy, evidence does seem to be scarce indeed. I enjoy reading it though, you've managed to clear up one or two things i was wondering about. Thanks for now.
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old 26th April 2006, 17:58
Tartan Paint Tartan Paint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laeg
Don't know if this is any help. But Isobel Henderson may have a point.


'The Ancient Peoples'

Isobel Henderson,a well-known authority on the Picts,has written, 'If we Scots like to think of ourselves as something distinct from an Irish colony,then it is the spirit of the tribes who went to make up the Picts that we must invoke''

'Opinion is divided on whether the Picts of Scotland and the Cruithni or Cruthin of Ulster were essentially the same people. Many authorities, noting the more obvious linguistic and cultural differences[such as the Pickish custom of reckoning succession through the female line] argue they were not. However Eoin MacNeill[co-founder of the Gaelic league,and one time Professor of Early Irish History] firmily believed that both were of the same Pretanic stock.
Cardinal Tomas O'Fiaich, apropos of the coming of the Celts to Ireland,wrote,'With their arrival a new era had begun in Ireland. The Picts in Ulster and other pre Celtic peoples were overthrown.

Older histories of Galloway and the south-west of Scotland
refer to a little - known settlement,apparently mainly of Cruthin from Ulster, in these regions. Unlike the much better-known migration of the Dal Riata to Argyll,there is no tradition or even suggestion that kings,princes or other leaders accompied them,so it is not suprising that no great importance has been attached to the movement by modern national historians,and many ignore it altogether.
Elsewhere historians of the nineteenth century wrote of such a migration with considerable certainity and confidence,describing the settlers variously as 'Irish Picts','Cruthin or Irish Picts', 'Galloway Cruthin'or Galloway Picts.
According to George Chalmers the main Cruthinic migration to Galloway occured in the eighth century A.D.and was followed by 'fresh swarms from the Ulster hive in the ninth and tenth centuries. Local historian Peter McKerlie considered that the movement began in the sixth century and continued 'until the Ulster settlers were so numerous as to become the dominant people'. They both argued that the name Pict was introduced to Galloway with the Cruthin and referred to Ulster immigrants rather than indigenous groups.


I'm not sure about the last part, the origin of the name "Pict". As far as i know this was a term which was used to describe all the people north of Hadrians Wall, at the time it was built? There was not one group of people who were "Picts" but rather it was a collective term for several smaller groups. I think i did read somewhere though that the Pictish kingdom did stretch both sides of the Irish sea into Ulster, as did the Scottish kingdom of Dalriada. I know the latter is true but I'm not entirely sure about the Pictish kingdom encompassing both sides of the Irish sea. I think the "new arrivals in Ireland" that you mention is the Gaels/Scots/Celts. It does state in the declaration of Arbroath that they came from Spain, so this would explain the "new arrivals". However if anyone can clarify whether the Pictish kingdom stretched both sides of the sea or not id be grateful.
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old 26th April 2006, 18:15
Tartan Paint Tartan Paint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by gustard
Tartan -
P - Celtic (brythonic) was spoken all over britain at one point (certainly south of the clyde) not to mention much of europe and was displaced over succesive invasions of other languages. It is a later development than q - celtic (ie irish , manx, scots gaelic) as originally the celts had trouble with the letter p.
P celtic is known to have developed sometime before 500 bc because of Spanish place names from when when the Celts invaded Spain - but before that - no ps !
Thanks, i did have a quick read at what i believe are Welsh triads. It makes for interesting reading indeed. I understand the Gaelic language has Q-variant & P-variant and who spoke what. You mention Spain, as does the delaration of Arbroath which i just spoke about. But the Scots spoke "q" Gaelic. So are you suggesting that the Picts came via Spain, too? I'm not sure if that's what you are saying or not, if not then i apologise. They did speak "P-Celtic"? I haven't got to the origins of the Picts themselves yet, i'm still struggling with the basics, like where the name came from.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:43.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC4 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.