Six or Seven Celtic nations?

[Bugbear]

I'm not sure, seanboy, I still see your originil post that I was responding to... Well, hope you enjoy the forum.
[
And Ron, we're all part of the grand lobotimy, so ya.

[Bugbear]

Hmmm! Now I see what you were talking about with your post, seanboy. The one responding to my responce wasn't there untill just a little bit ago, but the time is... That weird. Celtic is being redefined in meaning I guess like the word "naughty" and it was a made up propaganda word in the first place. Also, I no longer have faith in "history" just look up the history on the early maps of the Americas. History is absolutely subject to political and religious whims. I wern't there; I didn't see it; can't say for sure. Take care.

[macwilkin]

Also, I no longer have faith in "history" just look up the history on the early maps of the Americas. History is absolutely subject to political and religious whims. I wern't there; I didn't see it; can't say for sure. Take care.

As a historian by profession, I'll refrain from responding to this statement, except to say that I am proud of my work & research, and that I always try to tell all sides of a story as much as possible.

Todd

[Bugbear]

Point well taken. I will say that there are historians (today) digging up very good history, but this is rewriting what I was told to be historical fact when I was growing up and in college.[QUOTE=cajunscot;468421]As a historian by profession, I'll refrain from responding to this statement, except to say that I am proud of my work & research, and that I always try to tell all sides of a story as much as possible.

Todd[/QUOTE

And I am glad you are doing your research, so thank you.

Woh! I just now saw what the problem is. I'm really sorry if this is the way it is being taken. I am NOT saying that the modern writing down and research of history is political and religiously controled. I mean that political and religious forces shape history as in the direction of events. Even more than that,they have destroied records and oral traditions and so on in the past.]

[macwilkin]

Point well taken. I will say that there are historians (today) digging up very good history, but this is rewriting what even young whippersnapper me was told to be historical fact when I was growing up.

Ted,

As new sources are discovered, history is rewritten. Primary sources are key to telling the story, and historians have an obligation to see that the whole story is told, and in an objective way, as much as possible. When a new primary source is discovered, it is the obligation of the historian to ensure that it is brought to light, just as a scientist would not be expected to withhold new data or findings.

T.

[seanboy]

History is absolutely subject to political and religious whims. I wern't there; I didn't see it; can't say for sure. Take care.

this is why celtic history was distorted long before myself and my forefathers were alive. I think "celtic culture" should be contained were it belongs, in renaissance festivals and such.

with a linguistic oral recording culture, the truth is we know almost nothing about the celts and the little we do know was written by their enemies.

[seanboy]

I think that the best accounts of the celts that we have today was written by julius ceaser who I believed had written extensively on them, but I have to admit I will have to research into that to verify that.

[Bugbear]

,Understood.

I had to go back and look carefully at what I had written because I didn't quite understand your responce, cajunscot .
Let me clarify if not correct what I was trying to say.
I no longer have faith in the history that (I was taught) because it was quite flaud. This has nothing to do with the history research, and everything to do with the people teaching the history. Very sorry for the mistake and I get what you're saying about the revising and correcting as more information comes in. My point on the maps was that they were probably revised for religious reasons at the time they were being made.
And now I see that it's taking a little while for each of our posts to show up and we're stepping on eachother a little bit.
seanboy, I think you are kind of pointing out what I was getting at. Celtic is kind of in a way a mythical cultural
thing of today. It lives in our minds. I remember a book from my college days and I think it was called "The Phylosiphy of History" by I think Heagle or some spelling. Heuge book, but one of the gists of the book was that history is a spirit trying to be born. That is where I'm coming from. If Celtic-ness becomes one of our cultural myths in our symbolic minds, it has a reality to it.

[The Wizard of BC]

There are a couple of new books out that are attempting to trace the histories of the peoples of the British Isles using DNA.

May I suggest you find a copy of;

Saxons, Vikings and Celts
The genetic roots of Britain and Ireland
by Bryan Sykes
Paperback version published by Bantam Press 2006
ISBN 978-0393062687

or

The Tribes of Britain
Who are we and where did we come from
by David Miles
Published by Phoenix Press 2007
ISBN 978-0753817995

I have just finished the first of these and there are some surprises. Bryan Sykes is one of the most respected DNA researchers today. After analyzing his data he makes the postulation that it seems the current interest in Celtic culture is due to WWII. Prior to that people of the isles considered themselves more aligned with the peoples of Germany.
His research can find no "Lost Tribes", Celts as a race, or peoples other than the Picts who may have inhabited the Isles prior to the arrival of the H haploid group arriving via the Atlantic seaboard route from Spain.
As more mDNA and Y chromosome research is done I think we may have to re-think all of our roots.

For more information may I suggest you check out "The Genographic Project" sponsored by The National Geographic Society and IBM. Bobbie and I got each other DNA sampling kilts for Christmas and her family line is already plotted. Mine should be finished in a week or two.

[gilmore]

For more information may I suggest you check out "The Genographic Project" sponsored by The National Geographic Society and IBM. Bobbie and I got each other DNA sampling kilts for Christmas and her family line is already plotted. Mine should be finished in a week or two.

The Genographic Project isn't designed or intended to tell one about one's family history. It shows human migration patterns, mostly prehistoric, and in very broad, vague and general terms. They test only 12 markers, a very small number. It won't tell you others whom you match with, and you can't upgrade to test more markers.

If you want DNA testing that is meaning for genealogy, for tracing one's own patrilineal or matrilineal lines, the best place to test is Family Tree DNA at www.ftdna.com. Theirs is the largest database, and their FAQ does a good job of explaining what Y DNA and mtDNA can and cannot show you.