 |
Genetic Genealogy  |
| Send FReepmail if you want on/off GGP list Marty = Paternal Haplogroup O(2?)(M175) Maternal Haplogroup H |
|
| GG LINKS: African Ancestry DNAPrint Genomics FamilyTree DNA mitosearch Nat'l Geographic Genographic Project Oxford Ancestors RelativeGenetics Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation Trace Genetics ybase ysearch |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
WALK LIKE A HIBERNIAN
Scotland was founded in AD 845, when Kenneth MacAlpin married the Blue Pict.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
DNA Test Can Detect Picts' Descendants
The Telegraph (UK) | 8-14-2006 | Auslan Cramb
Posted on 08/14/2006 9:17:14 PM EDT by blahttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1683720/posts
The scale and nature of Viking settlement in Ireland from Y-chromosome admixture analysis
European Journal of Human Genetics | September 6, 2006 | Brian McEvoy, Claire Brady, Laoise T Moore and Daniel G Bradley
Posted on 09/10/2006 8:44:28 AM EDT by CobaltBlue
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1698787/posts
The Romans called this pre-Celtic people Pictii, or "Painted," although Claudius' words are proof that (as claimed by many historians), the ancient Picts actually tattooed their bodies with designs. To the non-Roman Celtic world of Scots and Irish and the many tribes of Belgic England and Wales they were known as "Cruithni" by the Irish - or the "People of the Designs."
Tatooing is unknow to other Gaelic civilizations. At that time only peoples from India, Polynesians and Egyptians peacticed tatooing.
In acient times the Orkneys Islands became island fortress with many stone settlements. By the time Rome became a world empire, the Orcadians were recognized by Rome as a sea power. From recent excavations, it seems that these Orcadian people were a slim, swarthy Caucasian race, with long, narrow heads.
Irish legend says that the Picts arrived in Ireland and requested Heremon to assign them a part of the newly-conquered country to settle in, but he refused. Since the Picts had not brought wives with them, the King gave them as wives the widows of the Tuatha de Danaans, whose husbands had been slain in battle by the Spanish, and he sent them with a large party of his own forces to conquer the country to the East then called "Alba," (present day Scotland) with the condition that they and their posterity should be liege to the Kings of Ireland and that all bloodlines should pass through the wives.
This Pictish matrilinear evidence is confirmed by Bede, who wrote that the Pictish succession went through the female line.
In the writings of St. Columba's biographer, Adamnan details the journey of the Irish saint to the court of Bridei near Loch Ness. However, Columba needed interpreters to speak to the king, clear evidence that the Picts did not speak the Celtic language of the Irish and Scots, or at the very least not the Gael version of the Celtic tongue.
Well I believe it. How else did the Scots learn to love that ancient Egyptian delicacy, haggis??
And all of the English are descended from Pythagoris, since he had all of the Angles.
Very interesting.
I do find the statement that "the nation of the Scots is of ancient stock" to be silly.
Show me one person who is not "of ancient stock."
Snicker...
Neat if true .
At some time between 300 and 250 B.C. Manetho, an Egyptian priest, wrote a list of 31 Egyptian dynasties of kings. Greece ruled the world at the time, and Manetho wanted to prove that Egypt previously had been a great nation also. So he wrote these king lists.
But certain facts need to be kept in mind:
1 - It is well-known among historians that ancient Egyptian writers frequently exaggerated, or lied outright, when it best served their purposes. They slanted information to magnify the greatness of their rulers and nation. Egyptian stone monuments, for example, gloated over victories and never mentioned defeats.
2 - All we have from Manetho are these king lists. Fortunately, we have two copies of his lists. But having two copies only adds to the problem,—for the two lists do not agree with one another! The number of years assigned to each king, and time covered by each dynasty, is different in the two lists. —Yet ancient dating is keyed to Manetho's king lists!
3 - The lists seem to deal with two simultaneously reigning sets of kings. (It is well-known that ancient Egypt was divided into "Upper Egypt" and "Lower Egypt.") If one set of rulers were reigning when the other was, this fact alone would divide in half the total length of years in which those early Egyptian kings reigned.
4 - A number of scholars believe that Manetho fabricated names, events, numbers, and history, as did many ancient Egyptian pharoahs and historians, in order to glorify the nation and its rulers.
5 - Manetho, living about 250 B.C., prepared king lists which are unlike anything written earlier. Many of those names we cannot compare with anything! There is no indication they have ever existed. All we have is Manetho's assurance that they were once alive.
6 - How could Manetho prepare such lists, when, to the best of our knowledge, he had so little to base them on? In other words, how could he be assumed to know so much and be so accurate?
7 - *James Breasted, a leading archaeologist in the 1920s, declared that Manetho's lists were ridiculous, did not agree with Egyptian history, and should be discarded.
With such a background, can Manetho be trusted to provide us with the basic keystone chronology that all modern archaeological excavation is based on? Clearly not.
One would think it would be easy to prove or disprove with DNA
