How exciting! When I go to Spain next month shall I claim that I'm returning "home"?-or have they also discovered that the current Spaniards are descended from the Moors???

So I'm descended frae the same gene pool as wee Pepe the bartender that poured thae braw big Spanish measures in that nice wee bar in Marbella aw thae years ago when me an yer maw went oan wur honeymoon, eh? Wha'd hae thunk it?

So much for all of that rubbish about the Brits being a mongrel race then!!!!

How Interesting.

Does it really matter?

Does anyone really care--I doubt it.

Maybe no one bothers but at least the scotsman lets you post in the non confrontational, meaningless, articles

What I want to know is that being a Celt and staying in Tasmania, how many years have to go by before I call myself a Tasmanian. (Taswegian)

I've always known I'm a Celt. In fact, I've always known I'm a Pict. This doesn't really add anything to what I already knew. But of course "the Brits" are mongrels. Even those of us from the county of Angus with a substantial Pictish element. There was loads of mixing over the centuries. None of us is "pure" anything.

Gordon says

"So we ARE all British after all - anyone told the SNP yet?" - I don't see what that comment has got to do with anything. I'm not a member of the SNP, I may not even vote for them, but I'm a supporter of independence for Scotland. Independence has got nothing to do with "race".
It's a question of culture, and of having some control over the politicians. We have zero control over how they rule us from London.

This must surely only mean that those percentages of people have SOME Celtic ancestry, cnceivably a small part. There are all kinds of other things in there whether it be Picts, Vikings, Black, Asian....

For those who see advantage in all of us being related and for those who see advantage in each of us being unique, they are both right in part. The question is: Does society represent an association of free individuals or a collection of persons pressurized into being the same?

I've always thought that the English are germano-celtic rather than "pure" germanic. It does explain what little civilised part of their natures exists. However it does bely the fact that in the 4th-7th centuries, the evidence points to mass immigration into England (and SE Scotland) from the germanic tribes of what is now NW Germany, Holland, Denmark etc etc. There is also evidence that the germanic tribespeople established themselves, and their language, through violence and displacement, as well as obvious absorption of the indigenous celtic brits. The grave of the war chief at Sutton Hoo is that of a german, not a british chief.
I'm no academic , but I have read a fair bit of ancient history and I would doubt these findings, that Scots are 70odd% celtic seems right to me, but I reckon the English are far more germanic than celt.

Agree with Dave,it's not a question of race, but of culture . Having said that I do feel sleepy every afternoon , should I demand an afternoon nap on
racial grounds ?.
Can you see it ... coming from Spain to sunny Scotland and thinking ..."AAH Perfect " no ? neither can I.

This study was funded by Gordon Stachan.

Professor Brian Sykes says that the "myth" that was recorded in the Declaration of Arbroath, may have come from "residue" in peoples memories.
Sorry Prof. I for one am sticking with the "myth" as there is so much evidence to support it.
It is inevitable that the human genome can be traced back to one group or tribe somewhere in Iraq. So humans are all the same using this argument, which we can see they are. Except that migration and evolution has changed us all in different ways. Time for a siesta.

Andy (11)
"There is also evidence that the germanic tribespeople established themselves, and their language, through violence and displacement, as well as obvious absorption of the indigenous celtic brits. The grave of the war chief at Sutton Hoo is that of a german, not a british chief."

As I understand it there has alays been a QUESTION of to what extent the Celtic "Britons" were displaced by the Germanic incomers back in the 5th century on. But what mustn't be forgotten is that the historical picture is always going to be distorted by the group which has POLITICAL power. They are always going to present historians with an image of themselves as the major group regardless of the demographic make-up of the general population.
The clearest examples of this are the Normans in England and elswhere. They may have comprised only a very small percentage of the population, but politically they were enormously influencial to the extent of changing the whole underlying ethos of the English nation. It is most unlikely that the Wars of Independence would ever have taken place if the English has remained the politically dominant group in their own country. Similarly, the histories of Ireland and Wales would have been very different. Even today the mainly English class system is a remnant of Norman, not English, influence.
It would seem that this research is beginning to answer the initial question. Just to what extent were the Britons displaced? It would seem that this effect of the invasions may have been less than generally thought.

I knew I had seen something like this a while ago - this evidence (sample below), from academics writing for The Royal Society in 2006 would appear to directly refute the so-called "evidence" in this article. Their conclusions involved a predominantly germanic England, which appear much more believable than this article.

"Using population-genetic models that incorporated both continuous gene flow and mass migration, they concluded that their data is best explained by a massive migration of Anglo-Saxon men into Central England, but not into North Wales, contributing 50–100% to the male population at that time".

This is an interesting piece of research. I think that given the choice I'd much rather be run by Spain than Westminster :-)

That said it is completely irrelevant as far as the independence argument is concerned. The case for independence should not be based on Scotland's history but on its future.

DNA research wordwide is going to disprove an awful lot of peoples cherished national hatreds. A good thing to.

"If one thinks that the English are genetically different from the Scots, Irish and Welsh, that's entirely wrong," he said

Gordon - I won't attempt to enter an academic debate - I haven't the knowledge, however I will say that the material I posted IS evidence, whether you accept it is another matter. The report itself was by what must be regarded as a group of respected academics, albeit that I realise one academic will utterly refute another.
Your evidence is by no means conclusive either, (you cannot say "we know" systematic slaughter didn't happen - there is no conclusive proof of this extant), indeed it could be said that the incidents you outline prove that by the time of recording the British were an endangered species needing protection.
My conclusion is that it is a safe to assume, given the rapid expansion of Anglo-Saxon rule, the spread of the language and the lack of evidence supporting a continuing influence of celtic people in the Anglo-Saxon communities (indeed evidence of the reverse) that Anglo-Saxon expansion involved relacement and possible eradication as well as absoption of the indigenous brits.
I did begin by stating I considered England Anglo-celtic, so I do agree that it is more than likely a significant element of the british population survived and mixed with the germanic, but I diasgree with the articles findings in that I reckon the germanic element came to be much higher than it suggests.

What has Gordon (7) got against people wanting to have thier own country?

I know lots of people who have thier own country.

If that's what people want fine, if not no problem.

Neil 19 - You place way too much faith in science, DNA evidence will do nothing to solve the worlds problems. Do you serioulsy think a Frenchman will respect a German more if he learns he shares a common DNA code? Will an Irishman forget his grandfather killed by the black and tans, will the Croat learn to love the Serb since they are probably very similar genetically?
I don't accept that DNA evidence is at a stage where we can say one person is a Celt or a German in any case, or that it will ever be.

I don't have time for this.

Gordon - Take it easy mate, I have gone to length to say I am not an academic. I know enough, though to allow me the priviledge of not necessarily believing anything just because a new historical theory supports it, for every one this year another will pop up next and refute it.
You obviously know more about the subject than I do, congratulations, but nonetheless your points do not confirm your theory either.
For instance; Northumbia, being at the northern edge of the Anglo-Saxon world would naturally want to have alliances with the rump of the Celtic world? - So what? That only proves they were clever, not a mixture of celt and german.
Prince Philip is Greek and the Kaiser was related to the Czar, that tells us nothing about the populations of Russia or England, so your cousins analogy is suspect.
If the Anglo-Saxons did not use force what led to their rapid expansion, - viagra?
In any case, you say - again - that I am postulating systematic slaughter was the only tool in the Anglo-Saxons bag, I am not, but absorption alone in my view is insufficient to explain Anglo-Saxon expansion.
If you are able, explain to me how the Anglo-Saxons so quickly came to dominate England without violence. I don't believe the brits were accommodating enough to just give them it.

No, you still haven't go it. You are saying in essence that Scotland shouldn't be independent because, largely, according to the latest research, people here and in England are genetically / ethnically the same. That is an argument in favour of the maintenance of the UK state which is based on ethnic nationalism. That is that the nation is the political embodiment of an ethnic group.

As I said before if you really do believe that then you would need to be an opponent of the existence of separate Norwegian, Icelandic, Danish and Swedish states, in favour of the unification of Finland and Hungary, and for Basque independence.

You seem to think that because this research shows that Scottish and English people are alike ethnically that somehow or other demolishes the case for Scottish independence. But it doesn't unless you are an ethnic nationalist. So you can't have it both ways. Your argument would only work if the SNP had based its case for independence on "Scotland for the Scots" (your words). But it hasn't, so your argument is entirely pointless.

I did realise that the People's Republic thing was meant to be humorous. There's little else in your postings though that suggests that this is the most well developed aspect of your character.

Well done Micheal, you have well and truly destroyed Gordon's reason ( or lack of it).

The brotherhood of all mankind is what is important.

Better luck next time Gordon.

Gordon - It would appear we both agree to an Anglo-Celtic England, but perhaps disagree about the findings of the article, you agreeing with it because you believe absorption was (much?) more prevalant than violence, me saying that the germanic element is too low and does not take displacement and eradication into account. Nothing like a wee kultur-kampf before a holiday weekend eh?
How would you explain the fact that Scotland did not suffer, to anything like the same extent, an Anglo-Saxon invasion as England and yet ended with as much Anglo-Saxon influence as England - according to this theory? It also does not take into account the huge influx of celtic Irish into the small population of Scotland over the ages, which would generally serve to "boost" the celtic population? The vikings were also a contributor to the makeup of the average Scot, but they were Nordic, not Anglo-Saxon.

Gordon 14 The SNP does not believe in 'Scotland for the Scots' and has never played the racist card, unlike some other parties.

So you should really withdraw that comment. It's not true.

What about Rangers?

Gordon - Signing off now, the paramount issue of the day will have to wait. My point about the Irish was exactly as you say incidentally.
You asked about the article I referred to - it is on the Proceedings of the Royal Society 2006; "Evidence for an apartheid-like social structure in early Anglo-Saxon England" by Thomas, Stumpf and Harke. - I can't find a link but you will find it thru Google. Interesting theory, but like all such - only a theory. It was the stats from it I was referring to - as a counter to those in this article. - Bye

Gordon I have been a member of the SNP for 25 years and I am telling you as a statement of fact that the SNP has never used the slogan Scotland for the Scots.

Gordon you are completely wrong.

The SNP has never used the slogan Scotland for the Scots.

Gordon. When challenged to provide evidence of your allegation that the SNP had a policy of Scotland for The Scots, you say, (Miss H-
The SNP used the slogan 'Scotland for the Scots' until comparatively recently. Take it up with them.)
That is a rather pathetic answer to a very snide and nasty allegation, which is in the character of your postings. Would you care to provide that evidence on this public forum, since you made the allegation on a public forum. I think the term is, put up or shut up!

There are I think quite a lot of watchers waiting to hear where Gordons source of evidence for his nasty allegation against the SNP comes from.........

Interesting that the Celts, or at least one wave of them, came to Britain from Spain. I always read that there were three large waves of Celts who spread over Europe from the east, the last wave being the Brythons from whom Britain takes its name. And that the "Scoti" came from Ireland, or so the Venerable Bede said.

I'd be interested to know just how the Berbers are related to the Celts. I knew a doctor who practised medicine in Berber territory with the Peace Corps, and he recounted that some of his Berber patients were red-haired and freckled. Clearly the Celts got around!

Do you suppose the sudden resurgence of tattooing is just a Pictish racial memory? :-)

Perhaps Gordon is referring to the crackpots in the SNLA? as opposed to the SNP.

AAAchhh, I wanted to be Roman! Guess
ah'll jist hav tae live wi this ginger hair. An ma puir wee son as weel.

I challenge what you say because you are not telling the truth.

There were no posters displayed in the Stirling area or in any other part of Scotland during the 1992 election which used the slogan Scotland for the Scots.

The National Library has an archive of election literature which people can check out for themselves.

You will not find anything from the SNP which carries the slogan Scotland for the Scots because no such literature was produced and no such slogan was used.

Your comments, Gordon. represent an attempt to portray the SNP as ethnic nationalist and to imply some racial basis for supporting Independence. I do call that a nasty piece of work. If you want to argue against Independence then go ahead but stick to the truth because it benefits no-one when you don't.

Politics is not about genetics.

Ireland is not "Britain" so your opening line shoud read "Britain and Ireland" (if Ireland was indeed part of this study, which it doesn't appear to have been).

The SNP did not produce any election literature whatsoever for the 1992 election which used the slogan Scotland for the Scots.

You should withdraw your remarks because they are not true.

Hello to my Scottish brethren. So the Scots are Picto/Celts, the Welsh RomanoCelts and the English AngloCelts. It seems we have more in common than we like to think!
Ps. Steve 53, I've got ginger hair too, it's a cross that we bear.

Miss H ignore the chanty rasstler

As i mentioned earlier "scotland for the scots" was a main plank for the SNLA perhaps gordon is mixing the two up.

The SNLA were the poison letter numpties.

Gordon, on this thread you have said ' the SNP idea of 'Scotland for the Scots' is dangerous naivety.'

'The SNP used the slogan 'Scotland for the Scots' until comparatively recently. Take it up with them.'

'The slogan 'Scotland for the Scots' died a death not long after the other famous one-'Free by '93'.
That's comparatively recently.'

In fact the Scottish National Party did not produce any literature whatsoever in the 1992 election which carried the slogan Scotland for the Scots.

The Scottish National Party has never used the slogan Scotland for the Scots. You cannot provide one single supporting piece of evidence for that except something that you claim you saw.

There's not a lot of genetic difference between human beings and chimpanzees. They do still look different. As a matter of fact, I believe I could tell the difference between (say) a population of 100 Scottish people to another population of 100 English people. In fact I would say I could tell the difference between a group of Aberdonians and a group of Glaswegians based only on their appearance.

By the way if anyone wants to use mild expressions like twerp to describe me, please do. I promise not to get my knickers in a twist and clipe on you to Sir and Miss at the Scotsman.

Gordon,

Your opening statement was to link this study with the politics of the SNP. I have never voted SNP but am unaware that they have ever argued for Scotland as an Ethically "pure" nation.

The SNP seem to me to a more forward looking party looking to build a progressive and inclusive Scotland.

I think you are wrong to attribute this type of thinking to the SNP and to bring politics into this thread. Perhaps you should consider an apology on this matter ( unless you can point me to some evidence) . The rest of your writing is very interesting though.

I don't have to look for scraps of evidence. I campaigned in the 1992 election. No such slogan was used. The very idea is preposterous as the SNP is not and never has been an ethnically based party.

As for the letter you referred to, I have looked for it and have not found it.

I would be grateful if you could post a link because of someone has written a letter claiming that the SNP ever campaigned on the slogan Scotland for the Scots I would like to correct that.

Whether Gordon is right, I can't say; but when I was in Scotland in 1998, there were bookstores selling what was clearing racist anti-English literature. I remember one novel about some magic sword discovered in Edinburgh Castle by some terrorist group and that inspired some bizarre chain of events leading to independence. Unionists didn't write that and I doubt unionists were buying it.
The history of nationalist movements suggests that they require leadership with a high sense of moral purpose to avoid degenerating into racism or tribalism. Clearly in Scotland in 1998 some of the rank-and-file had other ideas.

For goodness sake by that logic the English shouldn't be allowed to govern themselves because of all the extremely silly books written about King Arthur.

All of this nonsense about ethnicty and tribalism and all the rest of it is just that - nonsense.

In the modern world most countries of Scotland's size are independent. Independence is the default position.

Those who oppose Independence are very welcome to make the case for the Union. I for one would be interested in hearing what that case is.

But leave out the scare stuff. Scotland is no more racist or tribalist than England, Ireland, Wales or for that matter Norway, Finland or Sweden.

75:
It may be nonsense, but mass murder and ethnic cleansing have occurred based on such nonsense, although I doubt that would happen in Britain.
I didn't imply nationalism DOES lead to these things; I said the history of these things suggest they ought to be watched. In Quebec in the 1990s, the PQ leader blamed the loss of an independence referendum on "foreign elements" in Montreal and was excoriated for it in the Canadian press.
As a chemistry teacher I know many substances that are safe and useful if handled with proper care that can do very nasty things if handled carelessly. Nationalism is like those chemicals.

Gordon, you obviously love attention.
Get a life.

I find the whole concept of nationalism quite daft. I don't want Scotland to be independent because I am a nationalist. I don't think Scotland is better than any other country. But I don't think it is any worse.

And if nationalism is seen as a problem for Scotland, then it must be a problem for the rest of the UK as well.

In fact I don't think Scotland is all that nationalistic.
Nationalism or patriotism tends to be treated as something of a joke e.g. the Tartan Army.

Will there will ever come a day when people salute the flag far less fly it in their gardens, as Gordon Brown suggested? I doubt it very much and a good thing too. Every time I see Gordon Brown these days the words patriotism and scoundrel pop into my head and I am sure I am not the only one.

There may be some loony tunies out there who get all hot under the collar about whether they are Celtic or Anglo Saxon under the skin but that is not the way I see it and it's not the way the SNP sees it either.

Well, someone is cliping on me because I keep getting my postings removed. Presumably the one before last was on the basis that I used the espression, lunatic ravings. Actually, I imgaine Gordon is enjoying the fun as much as any of the rest of us. Shame it has to be spoiled by a bout of po-facedness at Holyrood Road. These kind of expressions might be shocking to the bright young things that work there but honestly they're very mild and meant to be no more than a bit of fun poking.

Hmmm ... Does the Celts' coming from the Iberian peninsula and pervasive persisting in the Irish and British isles bode new wrinkles for denoument between Gibraltar and Spain?

#50 Martha, the doctor's report is intriguing, the surmise entirely plausible from what I know, and there's more. Somewhere, possibly
Robert Graves's "The White Goddess: A Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth," I have read that the Berbers have had an Ogham writing system.

There have been other ties whether Celt or Norse noted with the Berbers, I believe -- possibly both.

"Clearly the Celts got around!" I also understand that an Ogham inscription has been found as far west as Hackberry Springs in southeastern Colorado -- enormously disputed with the otherwise mild Professor Stuart Piggott of the Department of Archaeology of the University of Edinburgh weighing among others in with, "I ... have no doubt that it is not just fringe but hard-core lunacy." Protocols of the controversy are at http://www.onter.net/biblio/5LA1115.pdf#search=%22Ogham%2..., their reading as folk there might say, a real hoot, and make views and disputes in this forum look downright priggish.

The first settlers of previously uninhabited Iceland included Celts (slaves picked up in Ireland, female, Scandinavian ladies having told the men, "In what wild dreams you want us to go with you where?"), so Celtic mitochondrial DNA is likely to predominate in its population as well, however Norse the Y-chromosomes.

Augustine of Hippo's long-suffering mother Monica is said to have been Berber, so who knows, this preëminent doctor of the church as well may have been of Celtic heredity and heritage 1200 years before the Gallic Jean Cauvin.

Interesting reactions on the Board to this study.
Prof Sykes has based his hypothesis on a limited study on the paternal grandfathers of a Y chromosme group.
Maternal mitrochondia is passed relatively unchanged in the female line only.We can see how important the ancient Egyptians regarded the 'maternal' line to claim the throne.As my Berber guide said',Everyone knows who their mother is!

The name Spain comes from the Ancient Carthaginians who when they landed in the territory and saw it overun by rabbits,shouted 'Span,Span', Span ,being the word for rabbit.
Who were the Carthaginians?Sea Peoples, Phoenicians,Greeks,we don't really know.
A study of DNA in Lebabanon could not prove definitively that the modern Lenbanese are the descendants of the ancient Phoenicians.

Prince Phillip is, I believe, of Danish Royal stock who were invited to take the throne of Greece.

I think what is most interesting about DNA studies is the fact,that each individual has a unique genetic code that occurs only once.We are all originals,never to be seen again.
I think thats the most important thing.Don't you?
I think the 'Butterfly in Beijing' gets it in perspective as what we say and do as individuals echoes around the world and hopefully that will be for the common good.

gordon -
can you explain how the Irish state is based upon ethnic lines?

Article 3 of the Irish Constitution:

It is the firm will of the Irish Nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island.

Ireland was not created under ethnic lines.

Gordon seems to think that Scottish and Irish nationalism is based on ethnicity arguments when in fact both are/were seeking to restore self government to the people of these countries without mention of ethnic origin.
Gordon - where did you get this nonsense from ?

#50 Martha, ico 82: Another bemusing intriguement of the Berber - Celt possibility is that of the north African Berber "blue people" Touaregs and the British quite possibly proto-, more likely pre-, Celtic bewoaden Picts (from of course Latin "picti," painted ones).

In other words, are the Touaregs, or even the Berbers entire, the migrated descendants of the Picts?

Or perhaps the movement went the other way, possibly in several waves along the lines of the Celtic and other same-people migrations? Maybe Boudicca was merely a culmination of Picts just trying to quit being bothered by the Romans' molestations, and then in Britain encountering them one more time after fleeing Italian forays into north Africa. (The Carthaginians with Punic, while evidently Phoenician Semitic, seem to have been ethnically and linguistically distinct from the Berbers, however rude to both the Romans may have been.)

Pictic seems thought to have been an Afro-Asiatic language related to related to Semitic, Berber(!), and Egyptian (!!) languages! While I always read to Wiki with a big salt shaker at hand, its http://www.wiki.frath.net/Pictic redirecting to Razaric is circumstantially (cf. Scottish juridical "not proven") astonishing.

I don't know that any study has been made of possible Celtic traces in the Tuaregs' language Tomashek.

Yes, the Spanish link is interesting here. I note in today's Daily Mail (p35) that Prof Bryan of oxford Uni says that all the Celts are Spanish.

Well, Scotichronicon does say that Scota was exiled from Egypt to Spain, and from there they went to Ireland and Scotland. This is why Spain and Scotland have the same name - Iberia, Hibernia.

I'll take a look at that link.

Cheers
Ralph Ellis

That was some day at the office Gordon. Scottish Parliament is it?

A further Spanish tie: Heard news report a few hours ago that infertile couples in the UK are flocking to the Marquez Clinic in Barcelona, where they can receive in vitro fertilization for as little as one-fifth the cost and donors give anonymously.

However, because Spanish law requires that egg donors match as closely as possible in appearance the host parents, for blue-eyed, fair-skinned Brits Russian women in the area are regarded as the prime prospects.

Well, I guess this is better than the Cold War, whoever won it.

'Scotland for the Scots'
If some activist used it , then it doesn't necessary mean ethnically, but merely Scots as 'Everyone who lives in Scotland'.
However, I have never seen this slogan used on any official SNP literature. The SNP makes a big deal about being all-inclusive and this could be too easily misunderstood.

Regarding the anglo-saxon invasion, there is an interesting bbc article suggesting an apartheid type society:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5192634.stm

Well these findings really sit badly with those nationalists more preoccupied with Scottish racial purity than any rational argument about independance. Only 95 posts. If you are a nationalist in denial, of course the science must be wrong.

As a Scottish Nationalist it is very comforting to read and hear the vitriol and lies spun out by the Unionist parties, especially near election times, this board is but a pathetic wee example.
It is obvious that the Unionists or should we say Royalists, have shut some drones in a dungeon with there Internet connection with instructions to refute and attack every single word that is pro independence.
Either that or there are drones at 'work' who have bugger all to do, so go on line and amuse there brain cell. Likely paid for by us. I think having read the above that is more likely. One of them seems to be in The Scotsman building.

Stop calling the SNP Nationalists please. The correct term is National.

Gordon & Prof. Sykes are ethnic biggots w/no knowledge of our history. We the people of true celtic blood only seek the right to have a voice in our own beloved countries no matter from what nation we hail. These people promotion a negative message and one based on tainted findings.

To Gordon#

You must be sad to find out you are not a Anglo- Saxon.

Away south and begone with you. Reading your unionist drival is becoming tiring.

Francis #83, actually I think the word "span" isn't from rabbits but staves, as the old term for spears with fire-hardened points "weder spans" (wooden spans) whence the Scottish surname Witherspoon.

It may be that whether Carthaginians the Scottish precursors used these spans for flushing the Iberian rabbits. Thus the expression, "more rabbits than we could shake a stick at" ...

How Welsh rabbit came about is anybody's guess.

There's been a quite a few posts discussing how this news about everyone's ethnic and racial roots affects the issue of so-called independence for Scotland. It always make me laugh when I see Scottish nationalists banging on about independence for Scotland. The truth is that the SNP and others who are pro-independence for Scotland are really not seeking independence at all. They want to remain in the EU for a start. How independent is that? What they mean is they are anti-English. They want independence from the union with England but they want to remain in the union with Europe. It's laughable and it's not Scotish indpendence.

What were you before you were a Scotsman? once a workmate said to me your the double of my next door neighbour, I replied what is his name he said John Ireland, I replied there's nothing Irish about me, now much to the consternation of the choir who sing the praises of " Londonderrys walls" we are told we are all Celts. Now that I have tested my Y chromosome it reveals I am Scots dalriadic of Irish descent, spanish, portugese, german,danish, Belgian, french,ashkenazic jew, levite jew, central chinese muslim, the idea of race is not applicable,now I regard my self as multiracial, how far do you want to go back to prove what you are?

.

This rather backs up the claims I made in my recent book,

"SCOTA,EGYPTIAN QUEEN OF THE SCOTS"

There, I trace the chronicle of Scotichronicon, and demonstrate that it is more fact than fiction. In the chronicles, the Scots actually came from Egypt, but spent many generations on Spain and Ireland before migrating to Scotland. In fact, the monuments left on the Balearic Islands are the same as in Ireland and Western Scotland.

There are also other pointers to a common heritage stretching back to Egypt, which include the golden Irish-Egyptian necklaces and the symbol of the red hand of Ulster.

At present, this book is listed in Amazon under its co-title of "Cleopatra to Christ"

Ralph Ellis

.

.

I am also in the process of explaining exactly what the Scottish brochs (supposedly defensive round towers) of Scotland and ireland are (and the Balearic Islands of Mallorca and Minorca). I can tell you now that they were not for defence.

However, it is a great shame that while the Irish have recognised the value of their ancient monuments (in both heritage and tourism), the Scots have left theirs to rot.

I am interested in surveying and reassembling a nearly complete broch in Skye, but the Scottish tourism and archaeological fraternity appear to be totally uninterested. Would any other groups have an interest?

Ralph Ellis

.

The whole of North western Spain is Celtic, think of Celta Vigo, the football team, and a brand of cigarettes called Celtas.
Speaking of Rangers ,what about them? And the last time I went to the berbers three of them were wearing celtic tops, make you think does n't it.

My husband recently had his genealogical DNA done by Family Tree DNA, they traced his roots back 9,000 years and according to Mr. Bennet Greenspan, president of Family Tree DNA, also a genealogist, the Celts came from the Middle East and Indo Asia about 9,000 years ago, they brought to Europe, which was then a hunter/gather society three important things; A high level of agricultural skills, the horse and grain, they taught the Europeans how to farm, thus turning this nomadic group of tribes into settlers and then creators of villages, towns and cities. My husband DNA results showed that he carried two markers that were very rare and belong to only 6 percent of all Scottish males. The DNA process will indeed shatter many ideas, and yes we are all Celts under the skin, so we are all brothers and sisters, Yeah for the Celts! I too am pictish in origin according to my DNA. Annie Macpherson

as regards to origins of people remember where the red hair of the Irish, Scots, Celts etc comes from and it sure ain't from these folks. Its ancient hebrews scattered in diaspora several times in their ancient history. Consider what was the mark of Cain that made him instantly recognizable, obviously his red hair he got fron his father Adam which means ruddy. St. Patrick tossed the 'snakes', tribe of dan, tuatha danae out of Ireland and these folks migrated to danmark, became known as danes and these guys came back later with a vengeance as vikings. Parts of England became danelaw, norse vikings who went to north france became normans came back to england and ireland with a vengeance with their hebraic redhair and other genetic trappings that are part of their cultural baggage just like the Irish, Scots, Welsh, English perpetuated their own genetic hebraic traits. Even the spanish from iberia, named after a son of japeth named iber are ancient hebrews. Hibernia is just an anglicization of this iberian connection whereby waves of folk originating from iberia migrated to hibernia, and gave folks a fresh dose of genetic hebraic traits. I dare say a majority of Celts migrating originally from the Black sea area way back when were offspring from enslaved fertile diaspora hebrew women who were blended in with every wave of migration to include the Huns, Goths, Vandals etc. Brian Sykes talks of 7 daughters of Eve from a period of time way back when Shem, Japeth, Ham got into the begatting biz.

I forgot to include a comment to Miss H about racism in various north countries like sweden. Sweden is being rocked to its very political foundations due to recent election success of a native white supremacy group's message that would do the KKK proud. Miss H get your facts straight before you pontificate, this is not a pun, I assure you. Just look at recent election results of a right wing extremist party in North Germany and Norway it seems this is growing all over Scandinavia due to success of a white supremacy anti-immigration party in Danmark, yes the Danes call their country Danmark, does the tribe of Dan ring a bell with you? These groups make reference to their proto-celt-teutonic roots to make sure they cover all the bases, the same ones being bandied about in this thread.

here's something to make your day and make you feel proud to be a bloke. EU is working on a regional plan and is re-drawing the administrative areas of Europe. UK is now divided into 5 parts, with scotland being amalgamated with danmark and sweden. I hope you will enjoy learning those languages. These scandics left tons of their calling cards all over UK, like towns ending with letters 'by' means village in danish, 'ham' is a variant of 'hem' in swedish means home, etc. You have 'thorpes' which is danish, you say 'ta' to mean thank you...guess what it means the same in the swedish you got it from. Consider your selves lucky 'cuz a majority of scandics speak clearer more intelligible english than do the natives of UK. Folk in scotland speak dialects that are comparable to swedish, due to the fact the vikings way back when were the main trading partners of the scots and influenced the vocabulary of scotland. Bairn in scotland a reference to a small child is 'barn' in swedish, kirk for church like kyrk-an in swedish for church. By the way swedes love scottish whiskey and a distillery tour is a swedes idea of a hajj, instead of going to mecca, scots have a lot of positive things going for them. So far your football yobs and hooligans haven't attained the same reputation in sweden your english variant has. Everybody in sweden knows a hybrid half-breed swede Henke Larsen played soccer in Scotland. I read most of the comments above and they are rather parochial when one considers that Scotland is a part of the united states of europe, and your future is decided in Brussels not in Edinburgh. Not a single person made this rather basic observation, nor reference to Scotland being administratively lumped into Scandinavia. The importance of this being how much the EU is going to invest in scotland versus how much scotland is going to pay for the privilege of being in EU. The basic assumption obviously being scotland is deemed equally as affluent as scandinavia. How does it f

a lady mentioned she and hubby got a DNA test but failed to mention if it was matrilineal mitochondria which Brian Sykes bases his 7 daughters of Eve or patrilineal according to Sykes is rather vague in that a man can spread his DNA far and wide, and a woman can only do it 1 child at a time and only the female child will carry her matrilineal line regardless of who the father is. Point being made here is millions of black female slaves in the America's were force bred by their owners and their offspring carry identical DNA as white females from the British Isles who were a majority of slave owners. Mendellian distribution has made it possible for creation of a person called an octaroon whereby if a person has 1/8 of black bloodline and for all appearances is white is still black, marries another octaroon can produce a virtual rainbow of colors in their offspring. Next point being all of this progeny of crossbreeding, interbreeding they are still anglo-saxon, celt, british bloodline with a little dash of african bloodline thrown in. Classic example being President Thomas Jefferson and his octaroon house servant Sally who had several of his children born with the same fiery redhair as Jefferson himself. Are these children matrilineal black africans or patrilineal anglo-saxon, celt, British, even though in many cases the female slave line has been over several generations exclusively white bred, to the point of 1/16th, 1/32nd black blood and being 15/16ths, 31/32nds white bloodline. It is this sort of hair splitting I detect thru out these threads. I consider myself a member of the Adam family, just like the rest of humanity, regardless of race, color, national affinity, ad nauseam. After the flood wiped out a majority of the nephilim interbreed and Noah's sons Ham, Shem, Japeth did their beggating thing with a gusto, in order to get the Adam family back on track, we trace ourselves back to one of these 3 proto-fathers or one of their wives, which makes mesuspiciou

I was told by some prominent psychic that we're originally from different star clusters.

The Jews, for example, are from Syrius. Wherever that is.

I was told by some prominent psychic that we're originally from different star clusters.

The Jews, for example, are from Syrius. Wherever that is.

What d'you mean, not suitable??!! By what criteria, pray tell?