Go Back   Scotland Discussion Forum > Culture > History

Notices


The Picts

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #43 (permalink)  
Old 28th April 2006, 15:52
HollyElise HollyElise is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,384
I thought you might be interested in this:

The Origins of the Iron Age Picts
http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/origin1.html

Who were the Picts? Well, if you were looking for an area that is full of controversy this is it! This is in no way a comprehensive picture but an outline of one or two theories of the origins of the Picts. I will however be going into more detail of the Picts and the various areas mentioned here in future articles.

There is no doubt that the whole subject of their origins is misted in Fables, Legend, Fabrication and a severe lack of historical and archaeological information. Were they Celtic, Iberian, Scandinavian etc? I think to try and make sense of it all we must first go back to go forward, to a time not long after the ice age and Scotlands hunter-gatherer Mesolithic past (8000 –4000 BC).

These Iberian hunter –gatherers moved through France and lower Britain to enter Scotland around 7000BC. Remains of their campsites are rare, Morton in Fife and another on the River Lussa being two examples. At Lussa the camp contained stone rings approximately 1.5m in diameter and may be the oldest stone structures in Scotland. The West of Scotland Islands give a further reinforcement to the movement of these Mesolithic people by the finds of large shell mounds and various tools such as fish hooks and harpoons but as I said Artefacts of the period are scarce.

A slow transition took place for these Mesolithic people and by (4000 – 2500 BC) they moved into a Neolithic farming life. Many other things must be taken into consideration at this time too like the introduction of new flint and stone tools, pottery, permanent settlements, new religious beliefs and Tombs and ‘Temples’. These structured Tombs were round barrows called Cairns in the East, like Calva Cairn while in the West and North the Chambered tomb such as Maes How in Orkney was preferred and these Tombs are probably the best supplier of artefacts of this time. There is very Little evidence of the settlements but probably the best known is that of Skara Brae in Orkney which remained virtually intact due to being covered for many centuries. Other Neolithic monuments in Scotland include henges and stone circles. Henges are widely spread across the country including two in Orkney - the Ring of Brogar and the Stones of Stenness. A henge is a banked and ditched enclosure, there is a central platform enclosed by a deep ditch, the ditch material is then thrown onto the outer edge to form a bank around the whole.

(2500 – 700 BC) sees the entrance of the Beaker People from Northern and Central Europe and the start of Scotland’s Bronze Age. The beaker people are known by this name for the cremated remains of their dead being cremated and buried in pots and interred in single graves, unlike the Neolithic people who buried their dead in groups. It is also recognised that the beaker people were the ones to introduce metalwork to Scotland. There is no record of any conflicts between the two peoples in Scotland although their lifestyles were in many ways so different and it is the bonding of these two peoples into various tribes (who for unknown reasons seemed to be forever pushed northwards). That leads to the theory that the Picts were an aboriginal race and non-Celtic. The difference in language must also be taken into consideration with this theory, as it is believed that the Picts did not speak with a Celtic tongue.

The second theory of the Picts is that their origins were Celtic. Believers in this describe the two branches as Q-Celts and P-Celts. Both origins were that of Indo-European qu being Q-Celtic and the other transforming the qu into p became P-Celtic. Examples given of this are Q-Celtic were Goedelic languages such as Irish, Scottish, Gaelic and Manx and the P-Celtic were Gaulish and Brittonic that of British, Welsh, Cornish and Breton.

It is suggested that the Q-Celts reached Ireland by the 6th Century BC and the P-Celtic entered Scotland in the 4th Century BC at the start of the Bronze Age. There is no doubt that the Q-Celts entered the South of Scotland in Argyle from Ireland but there is week evidence apart from possible similarity of language and the written ‘Ogham’ (the Brandsbut Stone at Inverurie being an example) that the Picts were of Celtic origin.

My Own Thoughts!

My own thoughts are that the Picti (painted people) named by the Roman Eumenius in 297 AD for these fierce warrior tribes, ‘certainly north of the Antonine wall’ were indeed non Celtic in their origin. Apart from the movement of peoples as briefly laid out above, there is other evidence to support this theory. Again I will try to keep this brief, as I would like to cover these areas in a more detailed manor in future topics on ‘Pictish Pages’.

The first part to tackle I feel is the controversial area of language. You would think that if Picts spoke a form of Celtic, that at least some of the spoken word would be the same. This does not seem to be the case, as St Columbus biographer states, that the Irish saint needed an interpreter when he preached to the Pictish King Brudei in 565 AD on the banks of Loch Ness. The ‘Ogham’ the written language of the Picts found carved on some of the standing stones in Pictland is also shrouded in doubt, as although the markings are similar to that of the Celts, the script is not in Celtic context and is barely, if at all, decipherable.

The Irish name for the Picts was ‘Cruithne’, likewise thought to mean ‘Painted People’ and was a name also used by the Irish, to describe a group of aboriginal people in Ireland prior to the coming of the Celtic Gael. These people were at one time one of the most predominant tribe in the North of Ireland around Ulster. Munster, another part in Ireland was also predominately ‘Cruthne’ and is also the place to have similar inscription stones to that of the Pictish ‘Ogham’.

Accompanied by the uniqueness of the carved standing stones found in Pictland their art and their lineage, which was taken from the mother and not the father. Leaves no doubt in my mind that the people of Pictland were Non Celtic. There are also other areas in this synopsis which I have not covered like ‘What do the Palaeontologists have to say’ but I will cover this in future articles.



© John A Duncan FSA Scot. 2001
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old 28th April 2006, 16:00
ANDY-J3 ANDY-J3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Grangemouth.
Posts: 1,665
I would agree with most of the above but as regards this point-

"The difference in language must also be taken into consideration with this theory, as it is believed that the Picts did not speak with a Celtic tongue."



That isn't 100% true. It's known they didn't speak Gaelic and there might be some small doubt that they did speak a Celtic language but some of the Pictish place names are recognisably similar to Brythonic so I think most historians and linguists would tentatively state that they believed the Picts did speak a Celtic tongue which contained words from the ancient pre-Celtic language of the "beaker people".
__________________
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."

- Martin Luther King Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old 28th April 2006, 17:13
Lianachan's Avatar
Lianachan Lianachan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: A' Ghàidhealtachd
Posts: 346
Kathryn Forsyth has written two excellent papers about this. Language In Pictland and Literacy In Pictland.

Both can be downloaded freely and legally from the internet.
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 29th April 2006, 03:12
littlebriton littlebriton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by aNonnyMoose
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.
The belief that genes are in any way directly pertinent almost goes hand in hand with fantacism. A sizable portion of the English population carry Danish, French etc genes but none of them would have the gall to claim to have any real connection to the Danes or French. The Picts however are a 'fashionable' historical people so you get numerous fantastists claiming some link or other. The modern Scottish population has no more a legitimate link to the Picts than the French have to the Gauls or the modern Arabs of Egypt to the original Egyptians ( The Copts at least having preserved some semblence of ancient Egyptian language and culture) or the Turks to the Hittites or Galatians or Trojans or Greeks who once inhabited Asia Minor. What most defines you is the language and culture into which you were born, raised and which is thus natively yours - not whatever some vague ancestors some hundreds, if not thousands, of years back might have spoken/practiced.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 29th April 2006, 03:53
anSiarach's Avatar
anSiarach anSiarach is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 122
Send a message via MSN to anSiarach
Quote:
Originally Posted by ANDY-J3
That isn't 100% true. It's known they didn't speak Gaelic and there might be some small doubt that they did speak a Celtic language but some of the Pictish place names are recognisably similar to Brythonic so I think most historians and linguists would tentatively state that they believed the Picts did speak a Celtic tongue which contained words from the ancient pre-Celtic language of the "beaker people".
The hypothesis that they spoke anything other than a Celtic language has been pretty much entirely discarded by the academic community. They have been accepted as a Brythonic, or perhaps more accurately in this context P-Celtic, speaking people who were possibly more closely related in language to the Gauls than ancient Britons.
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 29th April 2006, 03:56
anSiarach's Avatar
anSiarach anSiarach is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 122
Send a message via MSN to anSiarach
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlebriton
What most defines you is the language and culture into which you were born, raised and which is thus natively yours - not whatever some vague ancestors some hundreds, if not thousands, of years back might have spoken/practiced.
If you were raised speaking English in an English/Anglo-Saxon country then you are to all meaningful intents and purposes English. I am not particularly sorry if this conflicts with whatever pleasant fantasies you may have concocted with regard to very distant and possible ancestral groups/civilizations/races. Being named MacDonald or whatever doesnt make you Scottish anymore than the fact that being named Saxe-Coburg-Gotha made the British royal family German before they changed their name to Windsor - Genetics is, when accorded undue prominence in this context, simply the plaything of racists.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 30th April 2006, 04:22
gustard gustard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by anSiarach
If you were raised speaking English in an English/Anglo-Saxon country then you are to all meaningful intents and purposes English. I am not particularly sorry if this conflicts with whatever pleasant fantasies you may have concocted with regard to very distant and possible ancestral groups/civilizations/races. Being named MacDonald or whatever doesnt make you Scottish anymore than the fact that being named Saxe-Coburg-Gotha made the British royal family German before they changed their name to Windsor - Genetics is, when accorded undue prominence in this context, simply the plaything of racists.
Having said that, I remember seeing this Black girl with dreads standing in a queue in London. I think her parents were from the West Indies or somewhere though she was born and raised in London. Her friends were taunting her that she was English and she was stamping her foot, smoke blowing out her ears saying "Im not f****g English, Im NOT English"
I dont think genetics can just be dismissed as racist, its when people start claiming superiority on the grounds of genetics that it becomes racist.
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 20:55.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC4 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.