=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Neanderthals v Humans
Log In to post a reply
137 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
tiompan
tiompan
5758 posts

Re: Scots/Picts/Celts/Romans/Saxons/etc
Nov 03, 2012, 19:48
GLADMAN wrote:
tiompan wrote:
[Cunliffe suggests an immigrant Anglo -Saxon ratio in the south and east of England of between 1:3 to 1:5 and describes it as “significant” .

The genocide of the Picts was a medieval myth . Most contemporary historians of the period point out the gradual gaelicisation of Pictland long before the accession of Kenneth who may well have been pictish himself and was described at his death as King of Picts . The Dupplin Cross close to the important royal centre of Forteviot has gaelic references to Pictish kings prior to Kenneth . Kenneth's son Causantín , complete with pictish name , was described as King of the Picts which is odd if his father had just destroyed them . Alex Woolf describes Kenneth as “the fifth last of the Pictish kings rather than the first Scottish king."


So why falsify the king lists? Or did that not occur? And why construct foundation myths going back to Brutus etc to convince the pope to support resistance to English claims of suzererainty if the original inhabitants had willingly joined the party. Sounds very much to me of a case of 'the lady doth protest too much, methinks'.

And again, why would a warlike (and apparently rather good at it) people like the Picts willingly adopt another language and renounce their group identity. What was in it for them? These are questions I'd need answered..........


The source of the Brutus foundation myth was Nennius , a Welshman , then Geoffrey of Monmouth ,another Welshman built on that . I think you may be thinking of Scota ,the Scots equivalent . Foundation myths like over imaginative (hi)stories are everywhere .Another one is the Scots genocide of the Picts , resulting in a unified nation .
The King list , like the above was written centuries after the most of the kings had died . Considering that the Picts had no written records they were unlikely to be accurate , they are false up to just before the the time of writing , that is different from being falsified which suggests some tampering of the “facts “ . The use of gaelic was part of the assimilation of that language and culture into that of the Picts ,it can be seen in material culture where the earliest Pictish stones had no christian iconography by the mid period around the time when Kenneth was crowned , Christianity the religion in the Gaeltachd , informed and was mixed with Pictish symbols , by the end of the tradition the Pictish stones had a only christian symbols ,a clear transition rather than abrupt revolutionary change .
In reply to:
Re: Scots/Picts/Celts/Romans/Saxons/etc (GLADMAN)		 Replies:
Re: Scots/Picts/Celts/Romans/Saxons/etc (GLADMAN)
Topic Outline:
The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index