Out of Africa – focus shifting North West!

[Ed P]

I was going to tack this Ars Technica article onto the earlier thread that diverted into human origins, but I could not find it.

Joining the dots for known Celt migrations Ireland/Wales- Cornwall – Brittany – Portugal just tack on Morocco and a strong argument could be made that the Welsh are the original inhabitants of the UK. ?

[JayCeeDee]

Ed P wrote:

I was going to tack this Ars Technica article onto the earlier thread that diverted into human origins, but I could not find it. Joining the dots for known Celt migrations Ireland/Wales- Cornwall – Brittany – Portugal just tack on Morocco and a strong argument could be made that the Welsh are the original inhabitants of the UK.

 

I’ve always thought that – when the Romans invaded, the UK locals scarpered. Not many people had lived in Wales ( and Scotland ) before, as despite the natural beauty, the weather was horrible. All those that could swim, made it to Ireland and settled there. All those that couldn’t stayed in Wales. All those that headed North, shut the door behind them with a wall.

Simples…….??

[dwynnehugh]

Ed P – please please don’t say that, some of our Welsh Nationalist fanatics will think they are now God’s chosen own!!

The more you meet people the more you understand why Noah took animals instead of humans

[Bob Williams]

JCD –

the UK locals did not “scarper”. Tribes in what became SE England had been trading with the Romans for at least a couple of centuries: Cantiaci, (origin of ‘Kent’ ) Regenses, Trinovantes and Belgae had all been practically inviting the Romans in. Rome was after 4 things it always wanted – grain to make bread for the sprawling city of Rome and its riotous inhabitants: more land to expand the Empire: men to train as Legionnariess or auxiliaries and fight their wars in other lands: and slaves, which were the biggest money-spinners of all. Slaves were practically a currency in those days and the inhabitants of Prydain, as Britain was then, were big lads and lasses, much more attractive in face and body than most others the Romans met and conquered.

The rest of Prydain’s tribes to the SW, East, North and West, were hostile to Rome but fought each other as well. The Romans were the first to use “divide & conquer”, by using some native tribes against others. Something that the British themselves used against other peoples in much later centuries, when building the largest – ever world empire.

They never conquered Caledonia (Scotland) and they never fully conquered North Wales.

The people called “The Celts” were actually a mishmash of tribes across Europe, who once invaded and sacked Rome, something the Romans never forgot. The ‘Celts’ were never one people, but a grouping of different tribes with some being tall, blonde and fair, some short, dark and others red-haired. All were warlike, due to all the tribes having fought and raided each other for centuries. They could at first understand each other’s speech, but that changed over centuries as tribes moved West.

Ed is right about the migration routes: the areas of Western Europe and Eastern North Africa, are known as “The Celtic Fringe” by historians. It is no coincidence that the two oldest-known European languages are Brythonic (Welsh, Gaelic, Gallic, Cornish) and Basque. The southern peoples of the Fringe traded with the western Brythonic peoples for centuries before Rome was founded. So did the Greeks and Phoenicians, which is how the Greeks got much of their Tin and Copper to make the bronze weapons which gave them such an early advantage.

Another BS history lesson. No charge, folks…

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.

[JayCeeDee]

I didn’t mean it to be taken seriously BS – it was a tease:-):-)

 

Some of that was familiar, but history was never my thing, that fell to my sister, who did her degree in it along with languages, putting it to good use many  years later as an author of  historical novels.

[Bob Williams]

Your sister has a great talent both for history and as an author, John. I had not heard of her before, but have bookmarked her site and will take a look at her work. From the short pieces I have read, she is historically correct and entertaining: I like authors who make history entertaining as well as accurate. Long, dry stretches of factual text just bore me to tears and are best left to those who are studying the subject academically.

I apologise for what may have seemed like a lecture, but I have always loved history, especially of my country. It annoys me that people soak up Egyptology, yet fail to look at the ancient history in these islands. Our first civilisations came before the pyramids.

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.

[The Duke]

They should of built some British pryimids bob. If only the Poles came earlier we may of ☺️

[Bob Williams]

The Duke wrote:

They should of built some British pryimids bob. If only the Poles came earlier we may of

????  Nice one, Steve!

Anyone who wants to read about the history of our country from the earliest beginnings, but hates the kind of dry stuff that most historians write, is advised to read two very good books by Francis Pryor: “Home” and “Britain AD”. This is the man from so many TV programmes which brought history and archaeology to the ordinary people of Britain – “Time Team” being the one everyone remembers.

“Home” is about the arrival and gradual evolution of people in these islands, but what makes it interesting is that Dr. Pryor tells it as the everyday, ordinary folk of the times, how they lived, how they found food and brought up their families. The amusing way that he came to use ‘Home’ as a title, is based upon hearing Sir Michael Caine on the BBC World Service saying “I’m a family man….I regard the family as the greatest organisation ever created by human beings.”

Dr. Pryor had been considering writing the books for some time. Now he had a framework from an unexpected source, to base them upon: write about history from the point of view of families, and family life, which became larger and then morphed into tribes. It’s easy to relate to that. The books are not just lists of dates and types of pottery, they are about people not much different to ourselves. It’s about where we come from, how we got here and what we did next. It also clearly shows the differences and the similarities between the people who gradually became British, from their near neighbours. For example: why did the original inhabitants of Britain build roundhouses, all to the same pattern all across the land, north to south and east to west? The eastern lands their ancestors came from, built rectangular houses, and continued to build them like that. But the boats  and tools built and used by Brits and Europeans of the same times, were very similar.

Everyone knows that the North Sea has an area which was once land: Doggerland, connecting Britain to Europe. Apparently, before the creation of the North Sea and separation from the European mainland, there was a low lying area of Doggerland which was used by the peoples from both sides of the divide. Britain had the best and hardest flint for weapons, tools and scrapers. These were used as currency to obtain goods from the ‘Europeans’ and it is easy to imagine some great parties taking place out there, with consequent liaisons between young people and the introduction of new genetic material * in both directions! I had read about this some years ago, so when I came here to live and began visiting Lincolnshire beaches, it fascinated me to find flints scattered upon the beaches, brought up by tides. Some of these still had sharp edges after an expanse of time that boggles the mind. Nowadays there is an annual beach “Renourishment” along the Lincolnshire coast, by Dutch engineers. This involves dredging the seabed a couple of miles offshore, and pumping up the sand onto the shoreline. This is creating a better coastal defence than a seawall, and is also creating new, higher sand dunes upon which great fields of seagrass grow. It is also throwing up thousands and thousands of flint objects, more for me to wonder over and bore my grandbrats with!

*   So who ARE the Europeans? Who can tell? We Brits have a mix of genetic markers from all over the place!

More hysterical history from BS Bob…

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.

[Ed P]

The Duke wrote:

They should of built some British pryimids bob. If only the Poles came earlier we may of

They did, but made the mistake of building using earth, chalk and clay. e.g. Silbury Hill etc all of which now look a bit naff compared with stone. Maybe we should strip off the topsoil and show it how it was originally.

The archaeologists talk of these as places of religious significance – to me they are very like Maori Pas which were most definitely warlike and built to suppress surrounding inhabitants.

[PlaneMan]

Silbury Hill is amazing.

I climbed it late one Sunday evening, straight up the sides. It’s truly impressive from the ground but after you climb it (probably get shot for doing it now) you realise how insane it is.

Can’t remember how long it took but it was exhausting.

[The Duke]

France is a great place to find past relics. I live in the land of the castles, but francesca has some of the best preserved history.

Cos they have so much room v population, unlike here they don’t knock down and build on top.

Northern France is full of castles, hjge well preserved, nepolionic forts, ww1 and WW2 bunkers. It’s a fainting place.

Also, unlike here, everything is cheap to go and view. Average price was superb 10€ for adults and under 16 free.

Northen france reminds me of wales, it looks alike, but has slightly better weather, and far far far cheaper attractions for when it does rain.

If we could guarantee the weather, and had more reasonably priced attractions I wouldn’t the uk. But it’s cheaper to go to France or Spain than stay here.!

[Bob Williams]

Latest thinking about Hillforts is that the first ones in the Neolithic period were not originally built as a defence, but as enclosed places for keeping and protecting livestock. In those days, wolves and bears still roamed the land, although the Neolithic people were gradually exterminating them. The communities which lived in the enclosures, may have been the first villages. More new hillforts were built in places all over Britain. they weren’t always built on hills, either. Plenty such enclosed spaces have been found in the low lying areas of East Anglia and South Lincolnshire.

As the Bronze Age arrived, the old hillforts were expanded and used for defence. The Iron Age saw increasing warfare between expanding populations, then the Romans invaded. In some hillforts, thousands of slingshot stones were kept: many can still turn up at various forts. Brythonic tribes were deadly accurate with these, being trained from childhood, killing small animals for food. The Romans found that a slingshot stone could put a sizeable dent in their helmets, often enough to crack a skull.

None of those small prey animals were rabbits until the Romans brought them in. I have a problem with one of these furry immigrants atm, as the little bugga comes into my garden. He is eating just dandelion and other weeds for now, but if he develops a taste for SWMBO’s Peonies, and other flowering plants, he is a dead bunny. My big bro and I used to go out hunting rabbits with our dogs late at night in various parts of Sherwood Forest, clean, cook and eat them. (The rabbits, not the dogs. We are not Koreans)?My visitor should bear that in mind….

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.

[The Duke]

Interesting Romans introduced  rabbits. We ain’t exterminating them things. They are everywhere around here, all out at night, when I The sparrow hawks aren’t here. Assume they are in bed/nest.

[Ed P]

The Maori had no bears to fend off, but they did have some pretty evil killer birds around until they ate them all!

“Haast’s eagles preyed on large, flightless bird species, including the moa, which was up to fifteen times the weight of the eagle. It is estimated to have attacked at speeds up to 80 km/h (50 mph), often seizing its prey’s pelvis with the talons of one foot and killing with a blow to the head or neck with the other.

Its size and weight (10-15 kilos) indicate a bodily striking force equivalent to a cinder block falling from the top of an eight-story building. Its large beak also could be used to rip into the internal organs of its prey and death then would have been caused by blood loss In the absence of other large predators or scavengers, a Haast’s eagle easily could have monopolised a single large kill over a number of days.“

[Author]

Posts