X Marks the Scot - An on-line community of kilt wearers.
-
14th January 09, 07:01 AM
#36
As the Picts were the original "Scots", or at least inhabitants of what is now known as Scotland, and as the Picts did not have much if any written history, and were absorbed into the other culttures that invaded and "settled" Scotland (Celtic Scots from Ireland, vikings from Denmark, Norway, etc.., invading Normans and Brittons, with the residual ancient Roman genetic influence---well we are all Mutts, even if we can claim 100% Scottish ancestry going back centuries. Scotland was a much warred over part of the world---not necessarily regularly conquered, but at least repetitively transiently settled by various races over time.
My family name, Foster, from the Scottish and English Forrester, is likely a derivative of Forrestierre, one of William the Conquerors first lieutenants who was granted significant lands at the north end of what William conquered, namely up to about the Firth of Forth, so my family name is actually french/flemish in origin and my roots in scotland settled in the northern lowlands around Midlothian/Edinburgh extending west to Stirling and maybe a bit further toward glasgow. But then again we are septs of both Douglas (notorious lowlanders) and MacDonalds (notorious west Islanders and Highlanders). so who really knows for sure, unless you can really trace your pedigee piece by piece back for centuries.
I am still trying to find out where my first ancestor to land on the american shores actually landed, and from whence he came originally in the old world. Waiting on a book which may help me. Am still considering the DNA thing but waiting for now.
-
Similar Threads
-
By g koch in forum General Kilt Talk
Replies: 33
Last Post: 16th February 06, 02:44 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks