Ancient and ArchaeologyΜύ permalink
Theory on results of British DNA testing
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Μύ
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi all
I want to put forward a theory concerning the DNA testing that was done on the English/British and how this relates to the invasion or non invasion theory of Celtic migrations to this country. My proposal is that the interpretaion of the results is seriously flawed. The DNA results themelves are not in question it is the interpretaion of these results that I think is questionable.
The results have shown that the make up of the English British or England is not much different to what it was thousands of years ago. This has been used to deny any invasion theory or of peoples arriving with new ideas and new tools weaopons etc etc. Everything now being home grown and developed in tandem with elsewhere but at a later time. This is the theory that I think is flawed.
In my view there were two types of Celtic peoples in ancient Britain. The Western Celts of Ireland and western wales, perhaps cornwall and northwest England and Scotland. These western Celts had their origin in Iberia - (Spain/Portugal) according to the DNA results. This also fits in well with Irish myths which relate a similar pattern. Now the eastern Celts who occupied England and the east were from Western Europe and hence Germanic as the DNA testing has revealed. The eastern Celts themselves said that they came from acrosss the Rhine in Ancient times and that they considerd the Germanic tribes of the eastern Rhine to be the 'real' Celts. So my proposal is that the eastern Celts were of a northern European origin.
Now the Anglo Saxon, Danes, French(Franks) were also Northern European. It follows then that England was inhabited by western Celts and so any invasions from the contininet of ancient Celts would not change the DNA signature of the people there. And the invasions of the Anglo Saxon, Danes,Normans and Franks would also not change it. Yet we do not deny that the Normans or Danes or Anglo Saxons took over or invaded in large numbers.
So the theory that there were no invasions is flawed, because the DNA signature would be the same for all Northern Europeans. The western Celts of Iberian origin may have spread into the English landscape somewhat but did not make a big enough impression as the eastern Celts probably spent alot of time fighting them off.
Obviously even though this theory of non invasion can now be seen to be flawed, it also means that there is no proof via DNA for invasions either. So using DNA signatures for interpreting the possibility of invasions or not should be abandoned in my opinion.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 2
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi all
Slight error in one paragraph above, highlighted below to correct :
Now the Anglo Saxon, Danes, French(Franks) were also Northern European. It follows then that England was inhabited by _eastern_ Celts and so any invasions from the continent of ancient Celts would not change the DNA signature of the people there. And the invasions of the Anglo Saxon, Danes,Normans and Franks would also not change it. Yet we do not deny that the Normans or Danes or Anglo Saxons took over or invaded in large numbers.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 3
Posted by generallobus (U1869191) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi Artorious
As far as I can remember the results from the DNA survey indicated that the majority of contemporary English blood was basically Danish. The areas of, shall we say, non Danish dna were Cornwall, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. The dna in these areas was more connected with that in Brittany and Spain. There were small areas down the western seaboard of the uk - hebrides, skye, northumbria, Wirral - that showed traces of norwegian dna.
Cheers
LobusLink to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 4
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Artorius,
Interesting hypothesis. I know nothing about DNA tests, but there is one aspect of your argument I would like you to clarify. You claim that there were two types of Celtic people living in the British Isles. Is there evidence for this in the DNA results, or is that just your interpretation of what might be?Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 5
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi TonyG
Well, lets look at this way. Current theory and evidence holds that the DNA signature of the English has not changed significantly, giving rise to the theory that there were not waves of invasions. It follows then that if the Celts who were here before the Anglo Saxons came, were not wiped out but co-existed with the English, then the Celts of Britain must have been Eastern Celts with the same DNA signature of the Anglo Saxons. Hence there is the difference. The western Celts were of Iberian origin and the Eastern Celts of England of Northern European origin. This may lead of course to the differences in P celtic and Q celtic.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 6
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Fair point. Could it not also mean that the Celts were eliminated from eastern Britain by invading Europeans?
Sorry, I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand as it is an area I know nothing about.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 7
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
there is something to Artorius argument although I would say that the Irish were the first settlers and the (what are now Welsh) the second wave.
As he says about the P and Q Celtic that would show up the stages of invasion.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 8
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi Tony,
Yes, your point is the one I was hoping you would make. I did not want to mention it myself!! As that would nullify completley the current argument that the Anglo Saxon invasion was not a total wipe out of the existing Britons/Celts.
But as the DNA of the people who lived before the Saxons has been found to be little different to the Anglo Saxon and Danish of later times, and ot much different to modern day English/British then
the argument swings the other way to the point I am making...that the DNA evidence cannot be used to claim no invasions took place.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 9
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi Richie
Yes, I have studied the Irish invasion myths, the Fir bolg, Fir Domhain, Milesians, Tuatha De Danaan and the great heroes such as Nuada of the Silver arm, Breas the Beatuful, Balor of the evil eye etc. I love the beautiful artwork depicting these myths by Jim Fitpatrick, if you get a chance check them out. Obviously some of these invasions were the Iberians. And some would have been possibly eastern Celtic via Scotland or even from the north via Iceland.
If I remember rightly the P and Q divison aparantly happened fairly early on so probably the one branch went along the northern coasts of the med(southern coasts of Europe) ending up in Spain and then Ireland eventually. The other branch heading directly eastwards into northwestern western Europe, France and England...Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 10
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi Tony,
Yes, your point is the one I was hoping you would make. I did not want to mention it myself!! As that would nullify completley the current argument that the Anglo Saxon invasion was not a total wipe out of the existing Britons/Celts.
But as the DNA of the people who lived before the Saxons has been found to be little different to the Anglo Saxon and Danish of later times, and ot much different to modern day English/British then
the argument swings the other way to the point I am making...that the DNA evidence cannot be used to claim no invasions took place.Μύ
Glad I understood what you are saying. Can you clarify how the experts know that the DNA of the pre-Saxons is similar to that the DNA of Anglo Saxons and Danes? What I mean is, if everyone from the region has similar DNA, how does anyone known who has Celtic DNA and who has Saxon / Danish DNA? Presumably over the centuries there would be some inter-mixing. Can this be identified?Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 11
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi all
If we go even further back to the end of the last Ice age what we find is a direct land bridge to Northern Europe. I believe it is from this land bridge that the first peoples came to re-populate Britain after the Ice age. Then once the Ice melted more the rising sea levels broke the landbridge and the north sea and channel were formed. It makes sense then that the earliest of modern Britons were from the northern\western Europe and so brought with them the DNA signature we still carry.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 12
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi Tony
The remains of Iron age peoples have been tested for DNA and all peoples since. And it is this study which has shown them to be very similar. Yes, there are the odd variations.
DNA testing and research has also found that we are all related to just 6 mothers who came up out of Africa thousands if not millions of years ago. These six mothers all have been given names. Your DNA can be checked to find which one is yours. A quick search on Google would bring up the site where you can pay them to do it.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 13
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Thanks, Artorius. Always nice to learn new things. I think I tend to agree, based on what you are telling me, that the tests probably don't prove much one way or the other.
A relative of mine has spent years investigating the family tree and got back in some strands as far as the 17th century, I think. Leapfroggng all the way back to the beginning of mankind somehow seems like cheating.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 14
Posted by henvell (U1781664) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
As more DNA samples become available in Britain and the UK,it is easier to correlate the genetic results with history and prehistory.
The occupation of the Shetlands and Orkney by the Norse is clearly defined by mtDNA and Y chromosome studies.As the Norse sailed southward they towards Ireland and southern England,they seldom took Norse women with them.They found partners from the local populations.There is a significant y chromosome Norse presence in the Western Isles,but there are minimal mtDNA indications of a Norse presence.
The Danish occupation of NE England is has left a strong genetic presence in the old Danegeld lands.The Anglo-Saxons have left minimal traces in SE England,where there is a circa 20% frequency of DNA from Neolithic farmers from France and Belgium.The low frequency of the Anglo-Saxons might be attributed to plague or insufficient samples from a critical area.
The only locale,where there is any genetic evidence of Celtic migrants from central Europe,is
a low frequency in Yorkshire.There is now adequate genetic evidence to refute a the theory of a massive Celtic invasion from central Europe.Their haplotypes are not present to any significant degree in Britain and Ireland.There are Celtic artifacts,which were largely imports,or copies of Celtic items,which were made by the indigenous populations.
Barry Cuncliffe [2001] has written a book "Facing the Ocean" [not certain of the title],which seriously questions the theory of a Celtic invasion.
As more DNA data becomes available,the history of past immigrations will become clearer.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 15
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Thursday, 26th January 2006
Hi Henvel and all
I think the part of your quote below is pertinnent.
As more The low frequency of the Anglo-Saxons might be attributed to plague or insufficient samples from a critical area.
Μύ
The 'low frequencies of Anglo Saxons'.....and then later you quote low evidence of Celts from Europe. Yet we know the Anglo Saxons arrived in large enough numbers to conquor the entire country. I presume taking Britons as brides in some areas. So if they arrived in large enough numbers to conquor England how come such a low showing? In fact the low showing attributed to Celts of Yorkshire could be for the exact same reasons as for the low showing of Anglo Saxons, it's guesswork.
And this also leads on to my hypothesis that the low showing of Anglo Saxon and Celts from Europe is because they were all here in the first place. These low showings are not evidence of non invasion, they are just evidence of variations in a minority of the DNA of those who came.
The history of mankind has shown that invasions took place all the time in ancient history, not just some of the time, all of the time. Look at the ancient history of any country. Yet here we are(or some people are) trying to deny it ever happened to good old blighty, more pony in my view....Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 16
Posted by heuvel (U1763810) on Friday, 27th January 2006
DNA testing and research has also found that we are all related to just 6 mothers who came up out of Africa thousands if not millions of years ago. Μύ
Hello again Artorious,
DNA testing shows that most Europeans are descended VIA AN UNBROKEN MATERNAL LINE from seven women who lived tens of thousands of years ago. At the same time these Europeans are descended from a large number of other women, but not via an unbroken maternal line. This result is predictable in general terms from simple statistics. Sooner or later a women will have no female children. The media, of course, left out this subtlety. The Oxbridge scientist at the centre of the studies appears to have ridden the media hype brilliantly and built up a good business telling people which βdaughter of Eveβ they are descended from. Some of the wilder claims relating people to locally found skeletons and purporting to show continuous habitation are due to confusion about what the DNA tests actually show. In a number of cases they show only that the locals & the skeleton (in some cases from before the last ice age!) were descended from the same βdaughter of Eveβ (i.e were cousins many times removed who could have arrived with different waves of migrants).
Apart from this thanks for posting your ideas as to how the DNA evidence might be interpreted. I find this a fascinating subject and look forward to reading it in detail when I get back from a trip in a week or so.
HeuvelLink to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 17
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Friday, 27th January 2006
In relation to the argument being proposed by Artorius in this thread can I direct people to the following article:
I hope this works and is allowed by ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ host system.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 18
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Friday, 27th January 2006
A great thread!! Many thanks to all.
Invasion - please define - sounds more militant rather than strong landseeking possibly in small clans who ousted former residents - who may well have been the same themselves once.
And what of the Parisi - I guess you'll know who I mean - has there been any DNA results of relevance in the Yorks(?) area.
You have not questioned the sampling range - so I assume you think it sound: conclusions are another matter.
Sorry to bring a simpler mind into the thread but it is so interesting.
Regards P.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 19
Posted by heuvel (U1763810) on Friday, 27th January 2006
As far as I can remember the results from the DNA survey indicated that the majority of contemporary English blood was basically Danish.
Μύ
The DNA studies could not distinguish between Danes & Anglo Saxons based on samples taken in Denmark & Northern Germany today. They just showed that the heaviest concentration of βGermansβ was in the former Danelaw. If you are making a programme entitled Blood of the Vikings you then inform your viewers that there are 1000 place names in the Danelaw which are of Viking origin & conclude that the Danes are therefore the source of most of the Germanic DNA. You may well ask βWhat about the 20000 places in England with Anglo Saxon namesβ. Fear not. The ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ has an answer (radio programme: The Dark Ages of Britain). The Anglo Saxon village system (and its names) arose much later (after all the Celts had learnt to speak English). Interestingly, the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ web-site still carries the 2002 report that β[DNA] research supports the idea that Celtic Britain underwent a form of ethnic cleansing by Anglo-Saxon invaders following the Roman withdrawal in the fifth century.β The researcher responsible for this non-PC statement was duly assimilated by the group featured in Blood of the Vikings. He got his name on their paper too. Fascinating.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 20
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Re my previous message -
The link I expected to come up did not, so here is the article itself:
βWe are not Celts at all but Galiciansβ
[article from the American Journal of Human Genetics]
βCELTIC nations such as Scotland and Ireland have more in common with the Portuguese and Spanish than with the Celts of central Europe, according to a new academic report. Historians have long believed that the British Isles were swamped by a massive invasion of Iron Age Celts from central Europe around 500BC.
However, geneticists at Trinity College in Dublin now claim that the Scots and Irish have more in common with the people of north-western Spain. Dr Daniel Bradley, genetics lecturer at Trinity College, said a new study into Celtic origins revealed close affinities with the people of Galicia. He said : "It's well-known that there are cultural relations between the areas but now this shows there is much more. We think the links are much older than that of the Iron Age because it also shows affinities with the Basque region, which isn't a Celtic region." He added : "The links point towards other Celtic nations, in particular Scotland, but they also point to Spain."
Historians believed the Celts, originally Indo-European, invaded the Atlantic islands in a massive migration 2500 years ago. But using DNA samples from people living in Celtic nations and other parts of Europe, geneticists at the university have drawn new parallels. Dr Bradley said it was possible migrants moved from the Iberian peninsula to Ireland as far back as 6000 years ago up until 3000 years ago. "I don't agree with the idea of a massive Iron Age invasion that took over the Atlantic islands. You can regard the ocean, rather than a barrier, as a communication route," Dr Bradley said.
Archaeologists have also been questioning the links between the Celts of eastern France and southern Germany and the people of the British Isles and the new research appears to prove their theories. The Dublin study found that people in areas traditionally known as Celtic, such as Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Brittany and Cornwall, had strong links with each other and had more in common with people from the Iberian peninsula. It also found people in Ireland have more in common with Scots than any other nation. "What we would propose is that this commonality among the Atlantic facade is much older, 6000 years ago or earlier," Dr Bradley added.
There are also close links between Scotland and Ireland dating back much further than the plantations of the 1600s when many Scots moved to Northern Ireland in search of fertile farming lands, the research showed. However, the researchers could not determine whether fair skin, freckles, red hair and fiery tempers truly are Celtic traits.
Stephen Oppenheimer, professor of clinical socio-medical sciences at Oxford, said that the Celts of western Scotland, Wales, Ireland and Cornwall were descended from an ancient people living on the Atlantic coast when Britain was still attached to mainland Europe, while the English were more closely related to the Germanic peoples of the interior. He said : "The English are the odd ones out because they are the ones more linked to continental Europe. The Scots, the Irish, the Welsh and the Cornish are all very similar in their genetic pattern to the Basque." The study headed by Dr Bradley was published in the American Journal of Human Genetics.β [Report in the Glasgow Herald, 29th September, 2004]Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 21
Posted by heuvel (U1763810) on Friday, 27th January 2006
<quote user='priscilla' userid='1793779'> You have not questioned the sampling range - so I assume you think it sound: conclusions are another matter.
quote>
Quite right. The evidence certainly wouldn't be accepted in a court of law!Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 22
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Hi Priscila and all
Some great messages by all, thanks for the input guys and the links. The confirmation of the spanish/Iberian link to the Celts of Ireland, Wales and Scotland just confirms my suspicion that the there were two branches of Celts in these Isles. The other post about the Celts in relation to Danes and Northern Germanic confirms the other.
Now to Priscillas question re -invasions. I must admit that although there may have been the odd invasion on mass, I would prefer to see it more like the Anglo Saxon `invasion' a slow process taking more than 200 years. The Celts were known for up-rooting their entire population and taking them elsewhere. This is documented and is part of what happened with the Anglo Saxon nations showing how cose the affinity between the two was.
In the very ancient past I dont think enough people were around to warrant a real invasion hypothesis on a grand scale(according to Archaeology). Also there is doubt wether there would have been the organisational skills needed for such an enterprise in such antiquity. However, when we get into the period when a population boom meant a shortage of land for the Pasturalists then leaders would have been thrown up, leading to Kings, and then leading to expansion or movements of people.
The Irish myths we have point to at least, by memory, of 6 invasions or movements of people. These movements could also have been caused by climate changes which occured and made farmland into bogland, former farms being abandoned and populations heading elsewhere.(confirmed by Archaeology) Also flooding and other natural disasters causing movements.(confirmed by studies in northern Europe)
So not all 'invasions' could be construed in the modern sense of the word. I think it was more a matter of necessity and sometimes later for land and trade and moreover it was a long process taking perhaps hundreds of years.
This route in my view would satisfy both camps, the invasion theory, and the theory of gradual changes to new ways ,ceramics and technology.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 23
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Great post Mick_Mac, thanks for that. Excellent article.
Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 24
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Friday, 27th January 2006
If it is accepted that βCelticβ migrations from the continent into the British Isles did not occur then how do we explain the existence of the same tribes in Europe, Britain and Ireland? I will give you some examples:-
The Belgae are known from the Netherlands and Belgium but they also occupied a swathe of territory in Britain from the Isle of Wight north-west to the Bristol Channel. In Ireland they are known as the Fir Bolg or Bolgraige where the ββraigeβ part is cognate with Latin βregesβ, a kingdom.
The Hiberi of north-western Spain are attested in the south-west of Ireland under the name Iverni (hence, Hibernia). In turn, these may be the same as the Arverni who were located in the Auvergne Mountains in south central France.
The Parisii in the neighbourhood of Paris and in the Humber region of England.
The Menapii (a P-Celtic spelling) were to be found in southern Holland and in Yorkshire, England. In Ireland they were known as the Fir Manach (a Q-Celtic spelling). They gave their name to the modern Irish county of Fermanagh. Fir Manach means βthe Manachian Menβ or βMenapian Menβ (Fir = men in Irtish Gaelic).
The Brigantes were settled in northern Britain but Ptolemy locates them also in south-eastern Ireland.
The Pictones were found in Loire region of France and in Scotland.
The Semnones occupied territory between the Elbe and the Oder and may also be the same people as the Tuath Semon (or Semonraige) of Ireland. βTuathβ means βterritory ofβ and β-raigeβ means kingdom.
The Veneti of Normandy may be cognate with the Uaithne of Ireland (Ptolemyβs Autini).Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 25
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Re: Message 16.
Heuvel,
welcome to the boards. By your name I suppose that you are an expat from my northern brethern in the Low Countries?
Although you could also be a Walloon from Belgium because due to the surnames via male line you see that there was a lot of migration during the centuries from the North of nowedays Belgium to the South and vice versa. We have many Delameillieures (from the best, translation?) in Flanders to call but one name. I suppose the DNA will than also followed the name?
I read the http from Mick Mac in message 17. It confirmed my views that I am a descendant of Charles V only 25 generations ago. My mother said that I had his physiognomy...
But to prove it. I am born in Ghent, he too. While he was residing there for a whole time and due to hearsay he frequented a lot of women from the neighboorhood from noble till peasant...
And I am also linked too Saint Ricquier from Centula, now Saint Ricquier near Abbeville North of France. He died there in 645. At least I think I am linked to the people of Centula, as the holy man hadn't perhaps not that many descendants as you should think as from Gengis Khan. But with medieval saints you never know...In any case I visited the tomb of my supposed forbear but it was closed due to holidays of the museum employee.
Heuvel, great thread and I wish to thank you, Artorius, Mick Mac and all the others.
BTW as my friend Piscilla, says of herself, I am a bit ignorant about genetics, studied only a bit of chemistry in the time.
Kind regards.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 26
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Re: Message 24.
Mick mac,
thank you very much for this survey. I read nearly the same, but more explained for Belgium and the regions around from a recent study of Belgian professors about the language border in Belgium. And they started with the whole Europe very in detail from after the last Ice age. It is in Dutch. I used already something for these boards but unfortunately there is no English translation.
Kind regards.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 27
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Re: Message 22.
Artorious,
"would satisfy both camps". Artorious, in my view too.
First I have to say that I am a neophyte in genetics. Mad Mike tried to introduce me to them on these boards, but I think he failed. As I understand it from Heuvel and others however there seems still to be a lot of controversy to apply the rules? However it's seems a good tool to trace migrations? If it is applied correctly?
Can it be that there was after the last ice age an atlantic fringe and a rather continental core of genetics? I heard a critique sometime ago (on these boards or else) that it was quite normal that the Hibernians were genetically related to the people of Ireland and so on, while the whole Europe had this background, which was also similar to those from the rest of Europe where the Hallstatt and the La Tène Culture!! much much later came from?
Kind regards.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 28
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Re: message 1.
Artorious,
I think we have to separate the several invasions/migrations in time. I suppose as you or someone else pointed out that there was a settlement after the last ice age of the British Isles from southern europe? If you call them pre-Celts so good. I have notting against the term Celts but as pointed by some including myself the term Celts is linked to the "culture!!" started in the Hallstatt and later the La Tène and gradually covering nearly the whole of Europe till the Gallates and on the British Isles. If you start to mingle genetics in it, I don't say you can't learn from it, but up to now you seem on shaky grounds?
Some geneticians? (smile) in Antwerp recently seems to have found now that the Flemings are more related to Dutch and Germans genetically than to French people. And there we go again...Perhaps the "Vlaams Blok" (Flemish Block) will note it and...
In my opinion most of genetics used to apply, not as working instrument for the study of former migrations, but as prove that some nowadays population group is unique is balderdash, only to confirm a certain "apartheid" to other people surrounding them.
As for Belgium, I think that nowadays people in Belgium nearly don't differ anymore, even not in culture, only some minor item as the language. the North speaks Dutch and the South speaks French.
As for physiognomy: I am reading for the moment about Mendelsohn the philosopher in a book: "The pity of it all. A portrait of Jews in Germany 1743-1933" by Amos Elon. I read about a zealous Protestant deacon in Zurich named Johann Caspar Lavater. He was also an ardent disciple of physiognomy, a pseudoscience according to which a man's character and talents, as well as his fate, were imprinted in the lineaments of his face...From another book the French Georges Vacher de Lapouge(1816-1882): in Europe three types of people the tall, pale-skinned, longskulled Homo Europeus, the smaller and darker shorthead Homo Alpinus and the Mediterrean type. While the Homo Europeus was decreasing due to his emigration to the US and the Southerns were increasing, he proposed to distribute free alcohol to the southern types so that the worst types might kill each other off in their excesses. And he was not joking!
Kind regards.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 29
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Re: Message 22.
Artorious,
can it be that the Celts of the iron age (those from the mingling of the original population (in nowadays Northern France, nowadays Belgium, Holland, Switzerland) with those of the core region of Hallstatt and La Tène) and then mingling again with those of the British Isles, where genetically related? And that later the Anglo-Saxons that much later were mingled with fresh stocks from the east of nowadays Germany in the meantime and so differed from the mingling of the original population mingled with the Celts and of course not that different from the South as nowadays Spain, nowadays Southern France, and North of Italy?
So if there was then the Celtic invasions/migrations, who encountered on the British Isles people not differing that much genetically from them in the five centuries BC and you had a lot later invasions/migrations from the North/Central Europe in the meantime genetically a bit changed by influx from the North-East of Europe also by migrations, it is quite normal that you find some differences between the original mingling Celtic/pre-Celtic populations and the new arriving Anglo-Saxons.
Oef...I made it...If one understands it? Congratulations.
Kind regards.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 30
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Paul, I understand what you are trying to say, it is one of the problems that the Blood of the Vikings survey ran into as they could not distinguish between genetic material on the y chromosone from Denmark and Germany despite the centuries difference. On the other hand the interaction beteween the demilitarised South of England and the rest of the Mediterranean Empire is worth bearing in mind.
Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 31
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Hi Mick_mac,Paul and others,
Another great post Mick. The later arrivals of Celts I dont think is contested, or shouldnt be if it is as there is archaeological evidence to support the arrival of the Belgae. If I remember rightly one of the Belgae kings was said to be a Great King, over tribes of both Britain and Europe. So much for then for the idea that they were non associated seperate tribes with no cohesive or cultural body.
There is evidence for much co-operation of Celtic tribes both in Britain and on the continent. We know how tribes in England moved to Britany, they didnt invade, they were given land by the Celts already there. This shows above all that a common kinship existed between them and more importantly it was kinship between tribes of Britons and tribes of Continental Europe. Hence if we call them all Celtic I see no problem in this label..to me they were a cultural identity. Yes their languages may have differed slightly but this is to be expected with regional accents and influences from elsewhere.
Paul has pointed out what has alwas been a very touchy subject....the identity of peoples who are called Proto-Celts or pre-Celts. This term has often been frowned upon by scholars who now claim no such people existed in the sense of a celtic cultura identity. I would have to agree to a certain extent that they may not have had, as yet at this early stage, the attributes we now associate with the Celts. But were the people who inhabited western Europe at the time, shortly before peoples were fused into Celts, of northern European origin or not?
I presume they must have been according to the DNA evidence. The fusing of peoples arrose when eastern tribes, possibly Cimmerians/Scythians pushed westwards bringing along ideas and attributes that later came to be associated with the Celts such as head removal of enemies.
It would be a difficult task to try and trace the arrivals of peoples in relation to the archaeological evidence but we must start somewhere. How about the arrival of the Beaker people. These I presume could not have been what we would consider Celts, but could they have been the pro-celts, the inhabitants of western europe before the fusing of peoples created the celtic identity? Not an awful lot is known about them. Cant say I know alot about them. I presume their DNA make-up is same as rest of England but will have to have a fresh look at them...Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 32
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Friday, 27th January 2006
Hi Paul,
Your message 29, yes that is what I am proposing, along the lines you have stated. A northern European celtic identity and a southern Europe/Iberian Celtic identity. The Iberian reaching Ireland, Cornwall, wales(via Ireland) and Scotland.
I also beleive that on more than one occasion these different Celtic peoples, lets call them PCelts(Northern European) and QCelts(Iberian) went to war against each other and were bitter enemies. We can see from the time of Arthur and the time of the Gogoddin how incursions of the QCelts was taken very seriously and they were immediately attacked and driven off. Although in the end numbers told and they estabished a foothold in Wales.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 33
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Artorius,
This will probably muddy the waters even more, or it may be completely unrelated, but this thread reminded me of something I noticed a long time ago and had almost forgotten.
Around the area of Scotland I grew up, north of the River Tay, there are many small tree-covered mounds, usually a couple of hundred yards or so in diameter. You often see them right in the middle of agricultural land, completely untouched by plough or animal. The legend was that they were ancient burial mounds and that bad luck would befall anyone who disturbed. Folklore related how one farmer ploughed the edge of one and died shortly afterwards in a freak accident. Nobody seemed to know how old these mounds were.
Around 20 years ago, I was on a travelling holiday in Europe and went to Berlin by train. From there, I took a train south, towards Munich, I think. Crossing what was then East Germany, I noticed identical tree mounds sitting undisturbed in the middle of farmland. This is the only other place I have noticed them.
It may be coincidence, of course, or perhaps they are everywhere and I just haven't noticed them, but the resemblance was striking at the time. Perhaps they are not burial mounds at all, just natural geological sites. As far as I know, nobody has ever excavated one in Scotland.
However, if they are ancient man-made mounds, it suggests that, if they are "Celtic", the north Europeans are also found in the east of Scotland. Unless they are "pre-Celtic"?
Of course, I could be talking complete rubbish and there is another perfectly ordinary explanation that I have not yet come across.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 34
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Hi TonyG
I am about to re-read 'Scotland Before the Scots' by V.Gordon Childe (1944 Metheun -Rhind Lectures). This may throw some light on the mounds and other intersting stuff, which at first skimming of the book have been associated with Beaker people. But they are also associated with straight cists. The mounds you describe are probably round cairns?
The Beaker people apparantly arrived sometime around 2500-2300BC. Bringing with them:
Bows and Arrows - tanged and barbed arrowheads.
Flint daggers and Bronze Daggers.
Beaker type ceramics
Their skeletons dispayed a round headed type. The previous inhabitants being long headed.
So an early timeline would start after the ice age which would be around 10,000BC. There couldn't have been an indiginous people of Scotland whilst the ice was around so we must conclude that peoples who settled there came from North or western Europe over the landbridge that existed, probably from around 8000BC. These peoples also moving further westward to northern Ireland. These must have been the original 'long headed' type. I am not sure this term had validity anymore. Not sure also what DNA these long headed types carried. Presumably western European.
Around 4000BC the climate started to get wetter, leading to the problems of land becoming unusable and people having to move elsewhere by 3000-2500BC. Shortly after this period is when the Beaker people arrived on the scene. So can we associate the beaker settlements with any mytholigical 'invasion'.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 35
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Hi TonyG
I am about to re-read 'Scotland Before the Scots' by V.Gordon Childe (1944 Metheun -Rhind Lectures). This may throw some light on the mounds and other intersting stuff, which at first skimming of the book have been associated with Beaker people. But they are also associated with straight cists. The mounds you describe are probably round cairns?
Μύ
If I get time, I'll try to get hol dof that book myself. Unfortuantely,time is at a premium just now. reading thes emessage boards is about all I have time for.
Not sure about them being "round cairns". A cairn is usually associated with stone, and these are definitely not that. Could just be my misuderstanding terminology, though.
I did once visit some burial cairns near the Moray Firth. They are known as the Clava Cairns. There is no roof on them but you can walk along the straight passage to a circular chamber. When I was there it awas a lovely sunny day but suddenly, while standing in one of the chambers, both my wife and I got a really funny feeling and felt we had to get out of there quickly. I am not what you would call a spritual person and have little time for ghost stories, so I have always been a bit annnoyed at the way I felt that day. But it was a quite overpowering feeling of danger. It was very eerie. I have since heard that others have had similar experiences.
Anyway, back to the point. The mounds I mentioned are not like these burial cairns at all. In fact, they look very natural, if it was not for the fact that they are usually isolated and surrounded by farmland, like little islands.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 36
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
To Artorious, Mick the Mac, Paul and all of you. Great thread I say again.
A small point. Where do the Ligurians of sourthen France fit in - they were ancient - I don't mean the Etruscan side - and possibly settled the Belariacs (Those sling shot people in the hills.)
Has any DNa testing been done in those areas? It seems a vast undretaking and the parameters must surely be very clearly defined.
Using village names ? I can't believe it possible. Place names change all the time.
For UK I suppose the Domesday book is a good start. I do know of a family in our village whose name is still in it. I keep meaning to tell them. I doubt they'll be much interested.
I am not too convinced of some of the 'origins of place names' in the many books, either.
A mish mash, sorry. Leaving boards for a while shortly had to put in my pennyworth.
Regards P - and disregard above if too boring - or to use my word - daft.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 37
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Eric Brewster44th:
Hummm so you think that the Celts were not overwhelmed by the Irish, Danish and Viking invaders, good so do I.
Just shortly after the last iceage that would later brake the landbridges to the European mainland, the Britain and Irish areas of the UK were settled by several groups of Pre-Celtic Peoples, in Ireland there were about 3 main groups, the Prehistoric Northern Celts, the Middle Celts and the Southern Irish Celts.
In Britain there were 4 main groups of PreCelts and an odd 5th group that would filter in from about 100 BC to the Mid 300s AD that were known as "Tall Fair Folk", these were what you can call the Atlantians. In Britain there were the Preceltic 4 groups that can be loosely called the Northern British Celts, the Mid-Eastern and Western British Celts and the Southern British Celts. Their DNA was not too far away from their Irish Celtic cousins. Because now in Britain, before WW2, you had 4 main groups of people in the 1900s that corresponded with the DNA testing you have described here.
Since I did have my DNA tested for genealogy reasons, it has been found that my DNA matches the British Celts of about the 1100s to the 1600s and there is a chance between 75% to 87% that my DNA will match the early British and Irish Celts pretty closely, I thank modern DNA Sciences for that little tidbit.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 38
Posted by Eric_Brewster (U2829317) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Eric Brewster44th:
Ahhhhh TonyG, on your travels those mounds you seen could very well be Celtic burial mounds. It is very possible they are, most burial mounds were hollowed out of an hill and reinforced by local stone to create an "crypt" and outer "porch", over time sadly, the fortifications that were near them soon became removed since people had to use that stone for other purposes and their ancestors had died off.
Of course there remains some ruins of fortifications that were typical in the Dark Ages, Medieval ages etc. When the Vikings came and settled in Britain then they married into the Celtic British, of course when they became nobles then they used that stone for their own constructions, when the Normans eventually came and settled in Britain, the same stone was put to use in their own castles and buildings.
The very churches in Britain and Ireland were often built around and over earlier Celtic fortifications and Prechristian Monastaries, often they preserved some of the structures that had been built around.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 39
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Re: Message 36.
Priscilla,
have to leave in some minutes. Before you leave and perhaps not in the open of the "cafΓ©" (smile). I spent too much time in the "cafΓ©" neglecting my work (the backlog) and I agree a bit ashamed on other places even diverting to trivial things like sunbeds, losing a lot of time with it. And here on the outskirts of the virtual village, we can perhaps talk a bit more quietly (smile).
Thank you very much for the reply in the cafΓ©. The warmth of your conversation came through. I read that you wrote a novel or novels? I tried once but came not further than a fourty pages. The keymoments I could make a good story of it, but I have a lot of difficulty to connect the highlights with the superfluous stuff you usually read in novels. I read already novels from my 9 on and in the time was used to the superfluous up to my 18. Now if I read a novel, mostly historical ones, after 50 pages I lose patience and start to read vertically and if I lost the thread I return some pages to catch again.
BTW. Were it we that discussed Sicily, Roger and the lady that give birth to a son? in public in the middle of a village on her way to Sicily to be sure that everyone would know that it was her son? daughter? that would be the legitimate heir to the throne?
Warm regards if I don't see you for a while and sorry if it was a bit daft...
Paul.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 40
Posted by henvell (U1781664) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Some of the prehistorians make a distinction between the celtic language and the celts from central Europe.They contend that the celtic languages evolved along the ancient searoad,which was in use prior to the megalith builders and was the interregional common language of the mariners,who traded along the coast the Atlantic fringe.It could [?] have its roots as early as 5000bce,which would appreciably predate the celts in central Europe.The latter traded with Britain and Ireland and adopted the celtic trade language.The theory has merit,but it is speculative.
As more long sequence mtDNA and Y chromosome samples become available we may be able to trace with a greater degree of credence the past migrations of people from the continent to the offshore western islands.Genetics is still in the early stages of development and there is a long way to go before the science is prefected.None of the five most common cenral European celtic haplotypes [ie J1a] have been indentified in Britain and Ireland to any significant degree "to date".Future samples may overturn the extant data.Based on the available information,there is no evidence to substantiate a mass migration [or invasion] of central European celts to the UK.However this is an interim conclusion.the jury is still out on this verdict.
Always wondered where my surname came from.Thank you for the info.Henvell is a derivative of Heuvell.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 41
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Eric Brewster44th:
Ahhhhh TonyG, on your travels those mounds you seen could very well be Celtic burial mounds. It is very possible they are, most burial mounds were hollowed out of an hill and reinforced by local stone to create an "crypt" and outer "porch", over time sadly, the fortifications that were near them soon became removed since people had to use that stone for other purposes and their ancestors had died off.
Μύ
Perhaps I am not explainging this very well. The mounds I am talking about are not in any way carved out of a hill. The opposite is true. There is no stone working on them and, in fact, they look like natural woodland except for the strange way in which they are conspicuously isolated an dundisturbed despite being inth emiddle of fertile farmland. I have see stone crypts or barrows and these are nothing like them. Artorius's suggestion of pre-Celtic origin has an appeal in that I have never seen them anywhere apart from eastern Scotland and, as I mentioned, East Germany.
And Atlanteans? Oh, Please!Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 42
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Hi Tony
Well, they may either be round barrows or alternatively a form of terminal moraine. From a link I found this:
"Undamaged round barrows, again in earth or stone, have the shape of an inverted bowl and almost always an encircling ditch, but are often now near-obliterated by weathering or ploughing. In general, stone barrows (ie, cairns) are found in the North and West, earthen barrows elsewhere.
Both types of barrow can easily be confused with other landscape features. In northern England, Ireland and Scotland, as well as North Norfolk, there are areas of morainic remnants from glaciation which are long mounds and ridges, looking deceptively artificial although composed of sands, gravels and boulders. Medieval pillow-mounds are also similar, with material thrown up from flanking ditches, although they are rectangular and lower than long barrows. Pillow mounds were possibly artificial rabbit warrens."Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 43
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Hi Priscilla
The Ligurians have always been a bit of a problem. They were obviously a very ancient people and are supposed to have reached Ireland and Britain in very ancient times, as far back as 9000BC via Iberia again and landbridges. It is most likely these are the first inhabitants of Ireland and Britain following the end of the Ice Age in concert probably with some other peoples comming from north western Europe.
The earliest inhabitants, before the comming of the Beakers appeared to be Moon worshippers. StoneHenges early patterns were for moon cycles. The Beaker people appear to be Sun worshippers. They changed the aspect of the site to point to the rising sun on the solstice and their graves contained crude sun discs. It's even possible they remained in southern England during the ice age as the ice only got as far as just beyond the south wales line into Devon. I think Stonehenge in fact was a marker for about how far the ice got. It has now been found that the bluestones for Stonehenge were not from Wales, but from terminal morain deposits. One has been found buried nearby to Stonehenge. This would explain a lot and do away with the theory of the huge organisation that would have been needed to get them from Wales.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 44
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Saturday, 28th January 2006
Tony,
In Ireland we also have raised, flat circular mounds sitting in isolation in farmland. These mounds can be anything from a few metres to tens of metres in radius and are extremely common. Archaeologists have determined that the larger ones are the remains of earthen forts or pallisaded farm enclosures and the smaller ones were simple farmhouses. It is thought that the larger, defensive enclosures were built for the protection of farm animals from robbers or wolves rather than military attack. Occasionally these remains may have been 'crannogs' (i.e. artificial or man-made islands) built in what was originally swampy or marshy land which has since become dry or drained leaving a raised mound in a field.
Irish farmers call these structures 'fairy forts' and would never plough them out or interfere with them in any way because it was considered to be very bad luck to do so. Farmers would plough right up to their boundaries and leave them completely untouched. Over time they become overgrown with weeds, shrubbery and eventually trees.
Sometimes they were used for burying unbaptized children and were then called 'cillineachs'. Old superstitions about these remains are gradually dying out and, in more recent times, they have come under increasing threat from the bulldozer and the plough.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 45
Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Sunday, 29th January 2006
Mick,
Thanks for that. Very interesting and that does sound very similar to the ones I am familiar with, certainly in terms of the folklore that goes with them. I must admit that, having started talking about them, I have this fear that they are, after all, only natural phenomena - which is still not impossible, of course.
For Artorius, perhaps you can clarify the point raised by Eric brewster. Is ther any DNA evidence for the presence of Atlanteans in what is now Britain?
Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 46
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Sunday, 29th January 2006
Hi Mick and all
I have bee having a look at the DNA evidence. The main evidence for mesolithic times is from one tooth which shows a similar female DNA pattern to 11% of modern Europeans. This is obviously not a high amount. What about the other 89%. Mesolithic would be the time before the Beaker peoples arrived. The Beaker peoples seemed to encompass quite a wide area, from Iberia to all the way to Northern Germany including Ireland and Britain. They could be seen as the first wave of migrations or 'invasions' to these Isles on a grander scale, briging new weopons, bronze, bows and arrows, horses and distinctive pottery. In this repsect someone has linked the people indicated in the Beaker or pre-beaker timeframe, surprisingly to Celts, ie the Celtic language :
"A new method of analysing language supports the idea that farmers carried Celtic to the British Isles, Ireland and France in a single wave 6,000 years ago, researchers report."
6000 years ago would be either the pre-inhabitants of England before the Beakers,possibly Ligurians, or it could be the Beaker culture itself, if his dates are little to early. Not sure how linguistics could place the develoment of Celtic that early...But this does raise an interesting question, how old is the Celtic language? We know it is older than Latin as Latin has some of its routes via Celtic. Also there is stone in Spain with Ogham on it dated from 800BC, which indicates celtic language was around even before this time, easily to 1000BC I would say, we also know it is an indo european language so its roots do go back for millenia. Ogham itself looks as though it has developed from Dravidian or Cuniform.
Another problem highlighted is a problem within the DNS itself. During the Viking DNA sampling this happened:
"A group of researchers at the Henry Wellcome Ancient Biomolecules Centre of the University of Oxford, in Britain, made the finding while studying Viking specimens. They found that about half of the specimens had DNA that suggested they were of Middle Eastern origin.
But more detailed analysis revealed that many of the genetic sequences in the double helix molecule, which carries the genetic information of every individual, were damaged at a key base that separates European sequences from Middle Eastern genetic types - damage which made the skeletons appear to have originated in the Levant"
Hopefully this probem will be sorted soon and a clearer picture emerge.
Back to the Beaker people, are these the first wave of invasions mentioned in the Irish tales?, were they Celtic speakers?, and were they proto-Celts?? There were apparantly three different 'invasions' of Beaker peoples over time each bringing slightly different ceramics ans new innovations.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 47
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Sunday, 29th January 2006
Hi Tony
I once took the idea that the Atlantis tale may have had northern European roots quite seriously. (Atlantis of the North - Spurgun -Atlantis Island was in North Sea) The theory being that when the peoples of the north were pushed southwards due to floods and the like, they went into Greece and macedonian territory taking the tales of Atlantis with them and like migrants to the USA did, called places after their own homelands. I would place this around the time of the Thera explosion which brought on not only worldwide floods, climate change, earthquakes and other volcanic eruptions, but also caused the devastation of the Greek penninsula leaving it open to invaders from the north. It also brought and end to the Egyptian old kingdom, leaving it open to invasions of the Hyksos. Other middle easterm cultures also suffered the same fate.
To see if this theory may hold any weight I looked at how Atlantis could be derived in a celtic language and wether it would make sense in the context of the Atlantis story. What I ended up with was something like Ad-lan-tia. Not sure of the original celtic rendering as I cant find my original text on it. But the Ad bit may be Ahd or Ard. Anyway, the general meaning was 'Land of the Gods', or enclosure of the Gods or some such, which seemed to fit in well. Notice the Tia or Dia at the end. This is the word for God, same root as Deus, Zeus etc...It's an interesting theory and when linked to the theory of Troy being in England(on the Gog Magog Hills) by another author(Wilkens 'WHERE TROY ONCE STOOD'http://www.troy-in-england.co.uk/p0.htm) made an interesting hypothesis. A bit too radical though methinks and just cant be proven. Wilkens book I gave away to stranger , wish I hadnt, it sells for up to Β£700 now on Amazon.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 48
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Sunday, 29th January 2006
Hi all
Further on the Beaker people problem. Their distribution does show it's main centre to be Iberia, spreading via the Atlantic sea coast - Northern France and Northern Germany and reaching Ireland and UK. But NOT into the central mainland of Europe where the first culture of La Tene developed.These were the people who later expanded via contact with the Cimmerans and Scythians to form the identity of those we now call Celts. Wether the existing pre-Celts - the Beakers aka Ligurians spoke a Celtic dialect or language is debatable. That the LA tene did is probably more certain?
So we have the evidence of the Iberian Celts settling Ireland and parts of Britain and Scotland very early on. Some claiming they already spoke a Celtic language.
When the Cimmerians and Scythians pushed into the central regions of Europe and France around 800BC they caused the fusion of a people later to be known as celts. These Celts had taken on many attributes, weopons, ideas and culture of the invaders. Then these Celts expanded and by 700-600BC had started to push westward, ending up in Briton/England as another invasion or migration, probably first as refugees of the Cimmerian Scythian advance, then as the new identity of Celts.
How does this square with DNA evidence. Well the mesolithic tooth appears to be Ligurian, pre-beaker. The Beaker appear to be another wave of Ligurian. What language did they speak? So the remaining 89% of DNA must I presume be Germanic. This leads to the proposition that not all Beaker folk were Iberian. The trade or spread of the pottery style may have spread, but perhaps not the whole people enough to change the northern Germanic signature.
The later La tene celts/Central European arriving later about 800-500BC in varous waves.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 49
Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Sunday, 29th January 2006
Here is an interestng story concerning the landbridge that existed between Britain and the Europe. It states it was still around about 8000 years ago, that is 6000BC !!!:
"A prehistoric lost world under the North Sea has been mapped by scientists from the University of Birmingham.
The team used earthquake data to devise a 3D reconstruction of the 10,000-year-old plain.
The area, part of a land mass that once joined Britain to northern Europe, disappeared about 8,000 years ago.
The virtual features they have developed include a river the length of the Thames which disappeared when its valley flooded due to glaciers melting.
Professor Bob Stone, head of the Department of Engineering's Human Interface Technology Team, said they were working to ensure the visual accuracy of the environment.
"This is the most exciting and challenging virtual reality project since Virtual Stonehenge in 1996.
"We are basing the computer-generated flora on pollen and plant traces extracted from geological core samples retrieved from the sea bed."
Dr Vincent Gaffney, director of the University's Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity and lead investigator on the project said they still had a lot of work to do.
"We intend to extend the project to visualise the whole of the now submerged land bridge that previously joined Britain to northern Europe as one land mass, providing scientists with a new insight into the previous human occupation of the North Sea."Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
-
Message 50
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 29th January 2006
Re: Message 40.
henvell,
thank you for this interesting information about the Celts.
I put "heuvel" in Google and found the Dutch "heuvel" (hill) also as "heuvell", also in "van den heuvell" (from the hill).
Kind regards.Link to this forum: Theory on results of British DNA testing
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Μύto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ iD
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ links
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.