Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Legionary Chronicles (Part 1): War in Gaul file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Legionary Chronicles (Part 1): War in Gaul book. Happy reading The Legionary Chronicles (Part 1): War in Gaul Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Legionary Chronicles (Part 1): War in Gaul at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Legionary Chronicles (Part 1): War in Gaul Pocket Guide.
Navigation menu

In a glen in Valentia, Marcus builds an altar to sacrifice the olive-wood bird he has carried with him since boyhood All summer they cast northwards back and forth across Valentia without finding the trail of the Ninth, and turn south again at the firth. In the ruined fort of Trinomontium , they meet Guern the Hunter, a man of the Painted People, singing a Latin marching song he claims to have learned from the Legionaries After Guern invites them to his homestead, Marcus sees the callus of a Roman helmet strap on his shaven chin and taxes him with his identity.

Guern admits that he was once a centurion of the Ninth Legion, which bore an old curse and a tactless Legate into Valentia during unrest following the death of the Emperor Trajan. After severe losses from guerrilla attacks on the march north, they suffered one assault in their crumbling Agricolan wall fort before petitioning the Legate to make terms and retreat.

The Legate refused, was cut down, and the fort overrun, many of the men retreating with the tribesmen. The remaining two cohorts, led by Marcus's father the Senior Centurion, fled south in the night and were hunted down. Guern, who dropped out and crawled into a village, saw the Eagle carried northward by the Epidaii tribe. Marcus, brutally disillusioned, resolves to find the Eagle for the sake of Frontier peace, though such a Legion can never be re-formed They search Epidaii territory to no avail until they meet Dergdian, a Chieftain whose baby has a severe eye infection; while Marcus remains at their dun treating it, Dergdian's Seal Clan hosts the Feast of New Spears at the Place of Life, where the Eagle of the Ninth is brought out of the barrow to show the crowd at the end of the ceremony Dergdian's grandfather Tradui tells Marcus the story of how a great hosting of tribes ten or twelve autumns before had hunted a Red Crest army to their last stand in the bogs north of Trinomontium, and shows Marcus the emerald signet ring he took from their leader, Marcus's father.

That night, Marcus and Esca return to the Place of Life to steal the Eagle, hiding it under the banks of the lake before creeping back into their beds The next day they take their leave with the rest of the festival-goers, and the day after, as expected, meet Dergdian and his men looking for the Eagle, and let themselves be searched, fruitlessly. That night they beg the shelter of an outbuilding in which Marcus can cast out the fever supposedly afflicting Esca, and Esca doubles back to the Loch of Many Islets to retrieve the Eagle.

The next evening, still two days from the frontier of Valentia, they notice that the brooch is missing from the cloak the Eagle is wrapped in, and Esca remembers that it caught on the bank while he collected the Eagle. If the tribesmen find it, there can only be one reason for Marcus and Esca to have returned They make tracks down from the highlands, sell their horses at the river crossing into Valentia, and travel by night halfway across it until pursuit catches up with them.

Abandoning their horses and fleeing downriver, they meet Guern the Hunter leading a strayed cow The next night, while his tribe is out hunting for Marcus and Esca, he leads them through the only unguarded route south, a nearly impassible bog. Marcus invites him to return with them, but he chooses to remain in the life he has made with his wife and children. Two days later, a few miles from the Wall, the hunt catches up with them, and they go to ground in an abandoned signal tower, not expecting to come out again They ambush the three young hunters who follow them in, and threaten to throw the Eagle into the tarn below if Liathan, Dergdian's young brother, doesn't wave the others off.

Liathan tells Marcus that Tradui recognised him for his father's son and sent his ring to bury Marcus with. They take the tribesmen's ponies and make for the Wall, collapsing before the Commander of Borcovicus fort In late October, Marcus and Esca arrive home in Calleva, where they deliver the Eagle and their story to Claudius Hieronimianus, passing north again.

He confirms Marcus's not-quite-hopeless guess that the Legion cannot be re-formed, and Uncle Aquila suggests that they lay it to rest in his hypocaust Marcus's leg injury relapses in reaction to months of overuse, and he spends the winter recovering and once again uncertain about his future. In spring, a newly grown-up Cottia returns from winter vacation and a letter from the Legate arrives on behalf of the Senate: Esca is granted Roman citizenship, and Marcus awarded a full legionary pension in land and a little money, enough for him and Cottia to marry on.

His friends expect him to claim land in the Etruscan hills, but Marcus discovers that like Uncle Aquila, he has made the north his home, and he will take his land here in Britain. The Foreword notes, "Sometime about the year AD, the Ninth Legion, which was stationed at Eburacum where York now stands, marched north to deal with a rising among the Caledonian tribes, and never came marching back.

The events of the novel take place nine to twelve years later, to CE. Perhaps the spread of agriculture and other techniques helped the expansion of the celtic language into the west. We are more connected than we used to think. I believe that languages and accents contribute largely to our perception of people's ethnicity. I grew up in an argentine neighbourhood were many of my friends were of italian, german, polish, jewish, and even irish origin. Being all of us middle class kids with no socio-economic differences we never felt there were any difference amongst us while growing up.

Actually, we all looked strickingly similar one another. It was only when we were becoming adults when our environment, the society, prejudices and stereotypes affected the perception we had of ourselves and the supposed differences we had. What I mean is, if we put many naked people in one room spaniards, british, french, etc with no clothes, no visible cultural signs and with their mouths shouted, any of us would find it very hard to tell the origin of any of them.

Languages aside, we are all very similar. I have never seen any Britons who looked like Basques; yet Galicians do. Cheddar Man's ancestors still live en situ. Perhaps we have enough failed Social Engineers, without trying to re-engineer history. David Jenkin February 22, at MindYaSel August 2, at History is mostly myths and fantasies, not fact. DNA is fact. Andrew August 2, at There is nothing new about this article. It is a regurgitation of the Nazi doctine of prehistoric nationalism and as such is an evil fantasy.

You can dabble in archaeology, interpret linguistics, quote genetics - but all these are imprecise. Janclantara August 8, at If the Saxons had mass slaughtered 'all the natives', this would be in the archaeological record. However, mass graves on this scale are just not found 2 sites,in Chester and Norfolk show some violence You can't trust writers such as Gildas, a cloistered monk; being a native he's hardly going to write, 'We let them have our land because we were afraid', now is he?

If we believe Gildas, that means we must believe all ancient 'historians' such as Geoffrey of Monmouth--heck,we don't still believe Merlin built Stonehenge,do we? Actually,away the dna side of things, VERY recent isotope testing on a bones from a bronze age ritual site in Kent has shown a mix of native born people, Iberians and Scandinavians. This would actually accord pefectly with the article above, with Scandinavians coming to the north and east coast long pre-vikings, and Iberians approaching from the western seaboard into south-western England.

Certainly a fair amount of Welsh and Irish people DO look somewhat 'Spanish' even the Romans noticed this in the Welsh and mentioned it! My own family are of this type,some even having black hair. As for the guy trying to claim modern Spanish people are somehow 'mixed'; that flies in the face of recent dna testing,and besides that, the Moors were north African caucasoid ,AND I'm not so sure about his lurid rape n pillage fantasies either the Moorish cities of Spain which were in the SOUTH also had sections for Jews,Christians and Muslims but seemed pretty fair overall--actually showing a LACK of mixing rather than the reverse.

But back to British archaeology, it actually was known for YEARS that the people buried in long barrows were of a physical type known as Mediterranean, and probably came from Iberia via France esp Brittany. I have books over years old that state this! England is England, and The English are English. Just facts nothing pompous. What is your agenda? Additionally, if you read the article he was examining genes, which provide hard evidence.

People who make comments like you are subversive to the average Britan. Daz September 1, at Fernando You're just sore because us English have a respect and connection with the Basques. Whats the matter? Not happy they're not rolling over and dying like you want? Hahahhaha its pretty easy to get, the majority of the population of britain and western europe descends from the basque R1b hablogroup.

Greetings from Sweden a proud decender of the blond north iranians! Why whilst he's at it doesn't he just include India and Australia? Because he's talking about events relating to the ENGLISH, but his book also relates to the rest of Britain, maybe you should read it like I have done instead of passing idiotic comments.

Fernando September 13, at Daz: I don't understand your comment to mine. I just meant that historically Spaniards and the English have been very frequently enemies, and that we feel strong sympathy towards the Irish, also historically. Not being an expert in Demography or Genetics, I just wanted to remark that there is a megalithic culture that spreads through Iberia, West of France and the British Islands, which is specific of western Europe, and whose origen could be related to people migrations, maybe accompanying a softening of climatic conditions after the last glaciation probably, nobody lived in the British Isles Michael September 18, at Truth is a lot of genes like R1a, I1a and R1b were all here before the Romans.

There is no evidence of a link to a haplogroup and a historic group of people as most of these people were all mixed haplogroups too. Oppenheimers information makes sense. We should stop dividing haplogroups as coming at particular historic periods. Language too I believe is older and has been in Britain for a lot longer - these later groups merely were taking over from previous already Germanic speaking groups - it makes sense.

Mercian dialect in the West Midlands simply wouldn't have developed so distinctively as it was in the 7th century if the Anglo-Saxons had just arrived there, there wasn't time enough to develop. Dave September 20, at Instead of using the abusive word Viking for the peaceful Danish and Norwegian settlers in Northern England and eastern counties in the Midlands why not use the abusive term white niggers instead? The Anglo-Saxon extermination myth is useful for the far right in excusing the extermination of Jews by the Nazis and more recent events in central Africa.

Michael September 24, at What seems to be quickly forgot is that Sutton Hoo and Beowulf show huge Scandinavian influences prior to the Vikings, yet because this doesn't fit a nice Celtic-Roman-Anglo-Saxon-Viking-Norman view of British history it is quickly brushed to one side. Who knows when Scandinavian influences came in after all Britain had been trading with northern Europe for thousands of years. For a start the genitic study done suggests that the Celts and Basque come from a common line. It is ment to suggest that the two are closely related and not that they are two seporate groups.

The Basque and island celts have a common gene that covers both "To try to work out where the Celtic population originally came from, the team from UCL, the University of Oxford and the University of California at Davis also looked at Basques. Andrew October 31, at Just had a quick glimpse at the article. But the whole concept of the indigenous population of the entire British Isles i. This is interesting. I'm not sure why but I have very, very dark hair and eyes. Maybe I have some ancestry I'm not aware of. This is interesting though and I'll continue to keep reading things.

Ghostmojo December 3, at Oppenheimer is on to something and people shouldn't be scared of it all. A thorough reading of his book as opposed to just the article above would help. He is not a revisionist Englishman he explains his own mixed heritage and approaches the subject in a calm, methodical and quite neutral manner.

If that is all tosh, then it is all tosh. Let's look for the truth with an open mind. Liz December 7, at Has anyone considered the impact of the Black Death in Europe? What about other pandemic diseases before and since? Perhaps the book mentions this, but I find it intriguing to think that we're the decendents of virtually a handful of people who survived a plague that decimated the population of Britain and much of Europe. Perhaps there are genes that died out with the plague, the survivors having a natural genetic resilliance to the desease?

Maybe many gene markers that represented the old population of Europe didn't survive, so the modern population might not be fully representative of the gene pool of our prehistoric ancestors? I also think you need to test a much larger sample of the population to be sure of anything, these gene tests are hugely expensive, so many folks are not able to participate, myself included!

I daresay the population of pre-Roman Britain was more varied than this article even suggests, bearing in mind the UK's position on the Western Atlantic as well as Northern Europe. Speaking for myself, my recent immigrant ancestors came from Denmark also Germany and Sweden via my Danish great grandmother France and all the British so-called Celtic groups and I look as you'd expect a mixture of Nordic and Southern European.

If it happened in the 19th C why not back in prehistory? I think the article has a point and from studying Anglo Saxon burials a little on my degree, as someone else mentions, there was little evidence of violence and hostility between ethnic groups suggesting they were well established before the 5th C.

Badger40 December 15, at I've read as much as I can find on this subject, as well as Oppenheimer's other books. As a HS science teacher, I extensively use several videos that deal with this subject, as well as the Out of Africa DVD, as a springboard after studying genetics to explore the origins of the human races in my 10th grade biology classes.

I loaned Oppenheimer's book on the British Origins to our English teacher.

The Legionary Chronicles Series

I am eager to see more genetic research on the various human population groups of the world. I find it a fascinating subject. According to that study, Walsh, the studied samples are not very numerous. And that study was in R T Martin January 25, at Oppenheimer is media-magnet and a chavinist. He's pushing crap science and selling crappy books. It's never been proven, and is becoming increasly unlikely, that the Basque people themselves represent any sort of early post-ice age population. The low-diversity, high concentration of R1b haplotypes in the Pyreenes is most likely the result of "other factors" that are easily demostrated in small populations.

The founder effect is one. Looks like we're back to conventional wisdom. Old-fashioned, pen-and-paper science where facts matter more than selling books This is an embarassing article. Siegfriedson January 30, at Andrew: "It is a regurgitation of the Nazi Perhaps the truth regarding the origins of the people of the British Isles including Ireland is not as complicated as we are all making it out to be.

The first inhabitants of these lands came over from continental Europe many thousands of years BC. They were the descendants of Cro-Magnon Man who had replaced the Neanderthal, either actively or passively. Then came the great migration of the Indo-European 'Aryan' peoples into Europe from the Russian steppe. They were in Ireland when the Vikings founded Dublin years later. So perhaps the truth is staring us in the face Bill Clogston February 27, at I agree totally with Oppenheimer.

Winston Churchill wrote in his Birth of Britain" that a Saxon mercinary group was invited into Britain to settle a dispute between the natives. Apparently the natives didn't want to use their own men. After the battle the Saxons decided they liked the women and decided to stay. Having no land they settled in the ports, and their language intermingled with Latin became the language of commerce. Churchill said that the only reasom there was no Gaelic in use was because all the Britons spoke Latin. There is so much Latin in English that I believe him. As an aside I am sure you know that is how the Anglo Normans arrived in Ireland.

They were invited in to help an Irish King keep this power. I think so many people want to think of themselves as wild, bloody conquerors and I can only wonder why. Basque March 2, at Why are there some morons that are in denial? Look up who the basques were n youll feel proud The anglos etc sure brainwashed you Manuel Rosa March 8, at After this introduction I have to say that, in my opinion, indeed, we look different from Brits, no question about that but it comes from adaptation to a milder and sunnier climate.

For sure our skin tone looks southerner. But please take this in consideration, maybe the next time you pay us a visit you take at us a different look. I live in central Portugal and I have 2 daughters and my family kind of is a micro cosmos of who we are here: two of us were really blond in early childhood, two of us have green eyes a pair dark and another light , one of us has blue eyes, one of us has brown eyes, two of us have mild brownish skin, two of us have light brown skin, tree of us have dark brown hair and one of us have light brown hair.

When my daughters went to kindergarten I did noticed that more or less half of the kids had blond hair but they kind of loose that tone before 6, so when they go to primary schools those tones almost disappeared, especially in the boys and it is not common to see adult males really blond. Women are more commonly blond but never as light as Scandinavians.

We do have also people with really dark skin color. I can tell you some history now: the only peoples that really migrated here in numbers were the same ones that in this article you call Basques and Germanics Goths and Sueves. In all the other cases there were people coming but is was in fact a kind of military occupation Romans and Muslims.

About the Muslims, in northern Portugal they took control, not for 8 centuries as it is commonly known, but for no more than years. My hometown Tomar, for example, was in that strip of land and was abandoned for years. Detretius March 11, at The Roman cavalry remained even though the infantry were withdrawn. There are also many more than just six Celtic words in English. While I find the ideas Oppenheimer presents in this essay very intriguing and worth taking a second look at, I am disinclined to change much my and the prevailing views regarding ancestry in ancient Britain.

One only has to look at the small elite of English settlers and lords who decimated the Irish language use over the course of several generations, or the Conquistadors who with one swift stroke, managed to wipe out the cultures and languages of dozens of dominant peoples in Mesoamerica. Belief probably also plays a big part in how cultures interact - and we have little to no evidence of what these various peoples thought about each other at their initial meeting. Triki July 17, at You are wrong my friend. Indeed, Spanish took the time to write a grammatic of each indian language they found, its not a lie, the original language of the wrongly called "Aztecs" had a written grammatic by priests and using spanish phonetics and latin scripts even before english had its first written grammatic.

IF they destroyed their culture in such a way.. Edgar Kacey the greatest psychic of all time said while he was in a trance? They developed astronomical technology The invented solar and lunar calculators thousands of years before any other race! They invented the SAIL and harnessed wind power thousands of years before any other known people!

They beat the Viking by a good All came and went I could go on and on and on and on I could go into the unique biology of the Basques These people are the true founders of european culture Etruscans were ethnic Basques and these people founded rome n taught the romans everything yet the romans took all the credit and glory wtf the basques created the 1st known civilization n now to finally drop ur jaw they also created egypt,mesopotamia,the indus valley n troy There is much to learn concerning the mythology and the magic-spiritual practices of the Basque peoples.

They contain the archetypes from which all the knowledge of the world has emerged. Within the deep knowledge of this people it seems that are hidden the keys to open the secret doors of all the world Traditions. The genetic and ethnic-cultural constitution of the Basques, the remote origin of their language that seems to stem directly from the ancestral memory of the earth and possibly from words, sparks of life fallen from the gods of heaven, allow us to perceive a remote enchanted garden, beyond the barriers of time, inhabited by fantastic and wonderful creatures.

This article is very interesting because the majority of the world thinks England is a germanic country. Are the people today english of the anglish kingdoms more germanic than southern England? Philology in and since , genetics, demonstrated that Basque people are the direct descendants of the Homo Sapiens. Thus, the common roots of all the inhabitants of the planet are rooted in the Basque country. In National Geographic magazine published an article entitled The Basque: The first family of europe.

Something their mythology had mentioned repeatedly. In the introduction and the epilogue of the last glaciation the widespread colonization of Europe was initiated from the Basque country. In , two American archaeologists established the thesis that America was populated by Basque sailors 20, years ago. The current Cantabria can not hide its basque substrate.

Its capital Sant-Ander, Castro Urdiales or Mazcuerras gives us an idea of which people settled there in the past. In Euskera Basque ezpain end,extreme , was used to refer to Spain, as the peninsula has always been the extreme land of the known world, the West.

Hence the british named it Spain. Throughout the whole basque country constitutes a real faculty of anthropology where all europeans and even people around the world are represented. As a prehistoric people, they are jealous cultivators of their ancient traditions and festivities. The fact that the Sanfermines the running of the bulls be recognized as the world's most universal festivity is genetically and chemically pure atavism.

Over the coming decades, the world will discover puzzled how cultural manifestations of humanity originated in Basque lands. As a mother tongue of all european languages, Basque should become a compulsory subject for all European institutes and universities, replacing the Greek and Latin, which are sons, too,of the basque language. I have always been surprised by the large number of basque names that are scattered around the world, and the similarity of basque with other very distant languages and parallel customs with other remote cultures.

This can only be understood when we recognize that after the ice age basque people scattered throughout the world sharing their culture in the backpack. Denying it indicates ignorance and fanaticism. Archaeology, Genetics, philology and anthropology have the final say in this regard. Nobody knows today that even in a british italian map of the eighteenth century,called greek ocean to Cantabrian Sea or Sea of biscay In the coming years,the world will discover and will be stunned how the ciclopes or titans both very talked about in classical mythology which are recognized as ancestors of all rational people on the planet built a bridge of over ms.

The Egyptian pyramids do not exceed years old. Compare, then, with those 50, years Do you understand better now why Basques like lifting stones of great weight and size? If the Homo Sapiens was born and was forged as such in basque lands, only benefits will derive for our specie to reunite with the people and the culture that spawned him and made him like he is If Castile and, by extension the rest of Spain, is removed from its Basque substrate, it reduces to nothing As undisputed cradle of all europeans, the basque country should host the headquarters of the council of europe and european parliament".

Alexander Akopian September 19, at According to your theory, sounds as if immediately after the great flood when Noah's ark rested on the Armenian mount Ararat, Noah couldn't wait another year or two to put things together but rather told his clan to get ready to march to Basque Country and establish the ancient world there before people find out about it. How about we simply lean towards the biblical references. We the Armenians never left the region. In fact there are some other supporting evidence that both Basques and British came from Armenian, as in the first Anglo - Saxon chronicle states the following: The island Britain 1 is miles long, and miles broad.

The first inhabitants were the Britons, who came from Armenia. A spanish historian of 17th century Gaspar Eskolano, in his book about the history of Valencia , wrote that after the Worldwide flood the patriarch Tubal and his people disembarked on the coast of Spain and they spoke Armenian. Bill Clogston May 30, at Hasn't anyone read Churchill's "Birth of Britain.

Myths of British ancestry

Churchill writes that the language of commerce and indeed the spoken language in early England was Latin. Remember that years of Roman occupation. By the way, what happened to their descendents. Churchill goes on that two British or "Celtic" tribes, fueding, invited a mercenary group of Saxons in, with the Saxons taking sides and waging a battle.

The winning Saxons would determine the winning Celtic side. History shows the Celts did that type of thing to save their own. Churchill wrote the Saxons liked the Celtic women and decided to stay, but having no land engaged in commerce which resulted in the huge Latin influence on the English languge sixty percent according to him. I also was taught in school a long ago that the Romans called the early natives of Britain the Latin word for Angles because they were universely red and blonde haired with blue eyes and blond haired.

Check out the Latin word for yourself and see the closeness. Nennius's "Historia Brittonum" - written in the 9thth C - refers to the pre-Roman myth that "Britain" derives from Brutus, son of Aeneas who sailed from Rome and Troy around Spain and whose descendents populated Britain. Did I also read somewhere that the use of the chariot by the pre-Roman Britons was unique in N Europe?

In other words it had been learned from those early Greek settlers. James June 4, at I find the article interesting but not entirely correct. DNA results in the past do not go with what Mr. Oppenheimer says here. I do not belive that all Englishmen, Irishmen etc There is no DNA for celt or german or roman. That is bullshit. The word celt came from the greeks to refer to 'barbarians' from the north. The romans came up with the terms 'teuton' meaning germanic today for people living east of the rhine and used the term celt or gaul for people living west of the rhine. In reality all western europeans are the same barbarians.

ADVERTISEMENT

As the romans documented celts and germans were of tall stature, bright haired, muscle build, and bright eyed. I doubt all of them appeared this way but to the roman soldiers their enemies [our ancestors in this case] were pretty scary looking ot them. The romans themselves were of the same stock at one time but were very influenced by the greeks. Our mythologies are a great example of our similarities. Different names for dieties but they all represent the same meaning.

I however find it hard to believe that I am not descended from barbarinas of any of these tribes and just descended from hunter gatherers from the basque region of spain. On top of this Basques are pretty much Gauls in Spain, maybe the last bastion of them? Genetics prove nothing when it comes to inheritence. Im proud of the barbarian roots wether they are basque, norse, irish, etc Gravlin July 10, at I see evidence that the Celts migrated from Spain to northern Europe and nearby France. Gravlin, Florida. Liz appears to make the point that the black plague might have wiped out certain populations --perhaps a lot of Celtic descendants--that didn't have a high level of resistance.

The Plague could wiped out other groups missing in the current genetic pool. My theory is that many groups migrated out of Northern Africa into Spain across Gibraltar. During the last Ice age 50, yrs ago, N. Africa was well watered and the Sahara was a well watered plain with giraffs and antelope according to the cave paintings found in the area.

Other groups migrated along the East end of the Med. There are a lot of fascinating, intelligent comments. Gravlin, Jupiter, Fl.


  • WAIF.
  • Get A Copy;
  • A Simple Guide to Mark (Simple Guides to the Gospels).

The Basques were the first explorers too, known as the Vanir the vikings considered them gods to the Vikings n settled America n many places many thousands of years before the Vikings did. The Basques? Basque villages were devastated by bombs,Franco's bombers pursued the ships, but they arrived safely. Basque children who were orphaned were adopted by the British people. We leave our Basque brethren in the Pyrenees til the day when "Their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the peoples; all who see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed the?

Lord has blessed. Partridge July 26, at Turns out that Oppenheimer was wrong. It would be quite easy to accuse Oppenheimer of trying to promote an agenda, in the process abusing his position as a 'trustworthy' scholar, but let's just suppose he made a mistake. Gregory August 21, at In the chronicle of English history it is written that the first inhabitants of Britain were from Armenia and settled first in the southern part of Britain.

Here is the video link for your info. Unfortunately I do not have the titles to quote. I wonder if you have come acrosss these and also would you be kind enough to shed some light on these theroies. There was a British academic who was obsessed with finding an ancient Armenian Kingdom in Britain unfortunatley he did not find any. I would be interesed to know your opinion on this matter also.

Ebon, basque guy, get a life and go out more! You sound like a bunch of fascists! I'm also unique and I must be a descendent of homo sapiens,unless I'm related to a monkey, which I am of course. Maybe you are too, importa? Michael Byrne September 24, at Makes complete sense to me and fits with all the evidence, we have all genetic similarities, look at red hair and dark hair in ireland, which is mixed suggesting two post ice ages groups migrating to ireland. But I wouldn't use the term basques thats a more recent ethnic term.

England is a Germanic country linguistically and culturally to much extent but this is because of earlier groups not anglo-saxons etc. The Anglo-Saxons were eaily integrated as they spoke a similar language, similar culture. But you have to separate culture and language, England would have had what is termed a celtic culture but a germanic language, in effect it's its own country all of england adopted a germanic language - that's where old english comes from a native language of england. R1b groups are all related, yes different r1b sub groups came to britain but all are related.

I1 is native to europe too so is r1a. The Basques direct descendents still are a colony of the lost tribes of judea thats why they say the "celtic" people and to a lesser extent the english descend from the judeans watch the video "british dna". The etruscans pre indo european people just like the basques and the etruscan language also was an agglutinative language just like basque!!

The original cromagnon man evolved into the basque man ask any honest scientist. No language in the world is related to basque. The word "original" is of basque origin,pretty tellin right?. The Basques are the original europeans and the oldest european tribe and 1st white tribe around. Experts have claimed the basques are of a holy bloodline so more evidence..

Irish Man October 16, at Migrationism is the main method of colonization of an area eg USA. Please note I only used Ireland as an example as I know Ireland best. The Basque seem, from the descriptions, as the polynesians of the Atlantic. Saying that all these peoples descend from the basques is not correct. They don't descend from basques, rather, they share a common origin with them. When the ice sheets covered most of Europe, small groups of humans found refuge in in the southern part of the continent.

It is believed that Spain and southern France was one of them. There, the endogamic practice of these few humans achieved genetic homogeneity originating the R1B haplogroup, which is commonly considered "celtic". However, this is a mistake. It's origin is prior to any notion of "celtic".

It is the main haplogroup found in basques, french, spaniards and britons. Moreover, there many evidences archeological as well as historical sources that confirm a strong celtic presence in Spain: tribe names, comments by classical authors greeks and romans and war registries such as the celtiberian wars. On the other hand, there are no mentions of "celtics" in britain from historical sources. No one ever called britons "celts", and we don't know if they ever considered themselves as such. There is only a comentary by Julius Caesar, who said that the language in the cost of britain facing towards the continent was similar with that of the belgians, but that the inhabitants of the inner parts of the island were natives and different.

And we don't even know if the belgians were celts. They were more likely germans of celticized germans. In sum: I strongly believe in a common origin of all the western europeans, specially on the Atlantic fringe, from Spain to Skandinavia. Those natives received through the centuries many immigrants from other parts of Europe, Asia and even Africa, changing their genetic makeup to some extent, and creating different variations.

But the truth is that, if we put together in a room a few individuals coming from all parts of western europe, naked and with their mouth shut, anyone would have a very hard time figuring out who is who The term "Keltic", which is no clear matter given that its usage was less than consistent historically.

The term may have been drawn from a Keltic root word attached to several tribes of Continental Europe, in a region known to the Romans as Gaul, which encompassed parts of France, Luxembourg, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, and the Po Valley. However, in the Gallic Wars, Julius Caesar refers?

Falling Sky: The Gallic Ways of War

Ardent Seeker December 10, at It is a genetic, linguistic, historical, and archaeological fact that before the invasion of Western Europe by the Indo-European speaking Latins, Celts, and Germans, the non-Indo-European speaking Basques were widespread throughout prehistoric Western Europe, living in northern Spain, the Atlantic coastal plains of France right up to the Strait of Dover, and in Britain and Ireland.

The invading Indo-Europeans were to subsequently impose their language on the conquered Basques, until the only Basque speakers were confined to an area of northern Spain in the Pyrenees where they live to this day. The Indo-Europeans originally lived as pastoralists in the steppes and prairies north of the Black and Caspian Seas in present day Ukraine and southern Russia, and they campaigned on horseback as mounted archers.

The reason why the Latin vernacular survived in the Gaulish-French language, although it had formally belonged to the Celtic language family before the Roman conquest, despite the invasions by such Germanic groups as the Franks, Burgundians, Visigoths, and Ostrogoths in the 's A. This explains why the Celtic language survived for so long in Wales and Cornwall. The Germanic invaders of Roman France were prepared to learn the Latin French vernacular, associated with the grandeur of the Roman Empire, but the Germanic invaders of Britain probably looked down upon the British Celtic language as a peasant language.

The fall of the West Roman Empire can be partly attributed to the recurrent dynastic civil warfare which plagued it in the years from , , , , , , and A.

Myths of British ancestry | Prospect Magazine

The Huns, with their powerful recurve bow, proved to be quite effective cavalry archers, although they too used swords and lances in battle. Per December 11, at Where does the red hair from as many Irish have? Has the Irish potentially strong features from Neanderthals? Neanderthals had genes for red hair and no other people in the world have red hair than the Scots, Irish and people of Eastern Europe.

Barats or Early "Brit-ons," Basque people whose long-lost history and origin are now recovered for us in great part in these pages by my new keys, are disclosed by a mass of??


  • Sweet Redemption (The Pregnancy Affair Book 3.
  • The Crown of Freedom: A Novel of Scottish Independence.
  • Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus.

One God"- David Icke. The original europeans n the holy people that gave rise to white people justice n pass it on. Sam Haskell January 4, at Viking Blood? The Vikings were not a people. There is no viking blood, no more than there is woodcutter blood or merchant blood or farmer blood. Well, people may argue back and forth about where R1b came from and when,and how much Saxon ancestry is or isn'tr in England, but the indisputable archaeological facts are that after the hunter-gatherers who have left too little material remains to really make comment on possible origin though a western seaboard route makes the most sense geographically the neolithic people who build the megaliths were a slight,gracile people with long 'Meditteranean' type skulls, whose culture stetched the length of the western Atlantic seaboard right up to the tip of Norway, with its main centres in Iberia, Brittany and the British Isles.

There were several million people living in England at the time of the Saxon incursions--the idea they could annihilate so many is ludicrous,esp. Celtic languages did survive in several western areas of England outside of Cornwall till the Normans. Bob M January 5, at I see that Wikipedia seems to be able to find apparently knowledgeable people to write on both topics. I wouldn't doubt that there will be some debate about the scope of the terms but "no agreement Basque villages were devastated by bombs,Franco's bombers pursued the? Basque children who were orphaned were adopted? We leave our Basque brothers in the Pyrenees til?

Frankster January 22, at The genetic makeup of Britain and Ireland is overwhelmingly what it has been since the Neolithic period and to a very considerable extent since the Mesolithic period, especially in the female line, i. In continental Europe, this same Cro-Magnon genetic legacy gave rise to the Basques. But both "Basque" and "Celt" are cultural designations not genetic ones and therefore to call a Celt "Basque" or a Basque "Celtic", is a fallacy. Iconoclast February 12, at Oppenheimer needs to look at his own source material more carefully.

He admits that the people of the Celtic countries have very similar DNA, yet makes a big deal of the fact that this same DNA is found in abundance in Spain. Also, he is trying to assert that the english language existed at the time of the Roman empire. The roman historians said that the languages of Gaul and Britain differed very little. The indigenous legends of the CELTIC countries tell us that the stone megaliths were not built by some imaginary pre-celtic race Legendry is FULL of stories that tell how these megaliths were built.

He is right, though, to assert that the Hallstatt culture was probably not related to the modern-day inhabitants of Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Brittany, Man, Cornwall, and Galicia. And also correct to assert that the continental Celts, better known as Gauls, are not directly related to the modern nations that identify themselves as Celtic.

It is because we are talking about a people who were too fiercely independent to ever have been totally unified. Yet, at a later time, when people from the Celtic countries began examining their culture, and examining other cultures, they realized that they shared a huge number of similarities with certain other cultures. They needed a word to denote this obviously related group of subcultures, so they adopted an old Greek term. So, why do roman-biased historians continue to assert that this connection between seven nations is not real, just because it wasn't fully realized until a few hundred years ago?

The Celtic identity that you are attacking does not exist, but there is a real Celtic identity and clearly Oppenheimer knows nothing about it. I am Celtic and proud, and so are millions of others. Disprove that, you racist pig. MArk April 16, at From caer feddwyd emssage board : Language or culture! As soon as he moves away from genetics, Oppenheimer's theories are, frankly, bollocks.

The evidence suggests that the genetic makeup of the British Isles has not changed significantly since the Neolithic, which is all fine and dandy. However, genetic continuity does not indicate cultural and linguistic continuity: in fact, all the evidence points in the opposite direction. Oppenheimer seems to be under the impression that populations do not change their languages, rather language replacement only stems from population replacement.

Evidence for language shift without wholesale population replacement is abundant throughout the world, an particularly in the British Isles: the Cornish, for example, did not stop speaking Cornish and start speaking English because they were slaughtered or driven off by Anglophone immigrants.

Caesar's Gallic Wars (Pt. 1)

He also seems to be under the impression that a lack of Celtic place-names in eastern England is an indication that there have been no Celtic speakers there. While few modern placenames in eastern England derive from Celtic, we have plenty of evidence for pre-Saxon Celtic placenames in the area: Camulodunum, Dubris, Noviomagus, Verulamium etc are all Celtic names, not Germanic. If during the Roman occupation of Britain this area was speaking some early form of English, why don't we have records of Germanic place names here?

Overall, he doesn't seem to have the first clue about historical linguistics. Which is fair enough, he's a geneticist. I know sod all about genetics. On the other hand, I don't concoct wild theories about genetics and foist them on the unsuspecting public in paperback form. Were I to come up with such a theory, I'd make damn sure I read the relevant literature on the subject before publishing: something Oppenheimer clearly hasn't done. For example, claiming that speakers of a Celtic language arrived in the British Isles around BC is ludicrous, and indicates that he hasn't bothered to read the literature.

Proto-Celtic's own parent language, Proto-Indo-European, probably wasn't even spoken at that time. Furthermore, if I may comment on the quote from the article on romanarmy. Oppenheimer agrees with Dr. Forster's argument, based on a statistical analysis of vocabulary". There's nice, two geneticists agree on something they know nothing about.

Glottochronology dates from the 50s, and was abandoned by linguists only shortly afterwards. Because it does not work. It's not a matter of being "too cautious", it's abandoning a tool that doesn't work. Would you try to fix a computer with the remote from your telly? No, because it wouldn't work, no matter how much two carpenters tell you that you're being "too cautious".

In summary: it's bollocks. Selleslagh May 18, at Just a few remarks: 1. It is likely that the Belgae were Brythonic, as it is plausible that their tribe's name is related to Welsh 'balch' 'proud', maybe 'brave' in much earlier Welsh ; which would explain why J.

Caesar tells us they were 'horum omnium fortissimi', the bravest of all these, i. Even so, it is equally likely that some eastern Belgic tribes were either Celticized Germanics or vice versa. If the Belgae were Brythonic, it would also explain why at the time the language on both sides of the Channel, north of the Seine mouth, was very similar. Caesar tells us that the Galli in Latin called themselves 'Celtae'.

He doesn't apply this to the Belgae nor the Aquitani, who were demonstrably Basque, through inscriptions. So the term Celts could not be used for all we call Celts nowadays: only for the Q-Celts, the Goidelics. Welsh has a few quirks, like some egativity i. The only ergative language in Europe is Basque, so that looks like a substrate effect.. During the last Ice Age northern populations were pushed southward and ended up along a line that can be described very roughly as 'Paris to Vladivostok'.

After the Ice Age many of these hunters followed the receding ice cap rim northhwards, because of the animals living there. Evidence is mounting that not all these populations moved northward, but that large pockets remained in southern locations, giving rise to Etruscan now shown to be related to the ancient Proto-Hungarian, and originally from the Egean Islands , Basque which contains a few but significant traces of Altaic and Uralic , Caucasian and Sumerian. Remarkably, also Proto- Indo-European seems to be a rather peculiar member of this group, at least in its oldest form.

Within IE, Itaiic, Celtic and Germanic seem to stem from one the same IE branch, but heavily influenced by older languages acting as substrates. It is remarkable that such diverse languages like German, Finnish, Turkish and Basque share the same ancient genitive ending -en. My conclusion: western IE is built on top of an older layer of languages related to Uralic, Basque vasconic ancestor and possibly Altaic via Uralic.. I think the pre-IE frontier between vasconic and uralic must have been somewhere at the latitude of the Belgian-Dutch border or the Thames mouth.

English has a few words that don't have a satisfactory etymology in IE, like 'kill' and 'ill'. But in Basque that would be obvious: the semantic field of 'hil' and 'il un ' covers 'darkness', 'death' etc. The problem of the Picti painted ones in Latin, Prytyn i. Britons in Brythonic, Cruithni in Goidelic : In later centuries it was thought they were Celtic, but it is more likely they were aboriginals of non-IE origin, maybe Basques or Uralics.

They were certainly celticized at some stage, whence the idea. BTW, I am not confounding genetics and language, but there is a pretty high degree of statistical correleation between tribal groups which may be genetically diverse and language under favorable circumstances, like isolation caused by sparse population in large territories. When regions become more populated, cultures start to merge, overrun each other but always leave substrate traces and the like. My viewpoint on Basque: A mixed language of ancient Pyrenean language of the Basque glacial refugium and Iberian, imported from the eastern Mediterranean via the islands.

The Iberians brought a much higher dominant culture to Iberia that probably started of as an elite culture and language. This same Iberian elite switched entirely to Latin in less than years. Iberian and Basque share many characteristcs and even grammatical particles etc. I call them unrelated sisters.

Joe Soap May 28, at This is another thinly veiled attack on English identity from a corrupt Leftist establishment. He wrote as a unionist. What do you expect him to say? Furthermore we absorbed Latin through religious scholarship much later, not by dint of the Roman Legions here years before us. Stakes are high and the ambitions of an internationalist political elite remain unsatisfied. Remember too that universities are gatekeepers. Bastions of impartial intellectual endeavour they are not, as many who strive to live up to the ideological demands of honesty and impartiality find to their cost.

That study? I happen to know that one of its authors left the field of Anglo Saxon genetics in disgust after coming under pressure from publishers and academic authorities to alter his findings. People believe what they want to believe in the end. Real English people know who they are. Welchers gave us a useful word for dishonesty but not much besides. They were handed a new home and left to get on with it, other remnants being forced into Northern France ['Brittany'? These are the salient facts.

Accept them and get on with your lives. Linda Dale Burns June 16, at I contributed to this discussion years ago. Britain is a melting pot just as America is. We are who we are. My grandmother in her later years looked very "English", white hair, rosey cheeks, thick Geordie accent. When she was young she had very dark hair. My mother and her sister were very dark haired with green eyes and would tan very darkly, looking more Mediterranean which with DNA testing by the Genographic Project by National Geographic proved.

We are J2b1a1. They all were from Northumberland and the Borders area. My grandparents were British through and through till their dying day here in America. I dare say most people would be very surprised to find out who they really are through DNA testing. We suspected but were still surprised by the results.

Prejudice against any race, ethnicity, so called "class" of people is really ridiculous. Before anyone thinks they are better than any other person or race they better find out "who they really are"!!!! Igor June 17, at The difficult part is to explain how it started, somehow there was a group with Rh- big enougth to survive all the time and not necesarilly in the same place, but taking in account how easilly can disappear a civilization I can guess there was a time it was a really big group, a lot bigger than now otherwise we have had disappeared.

Selleslagh June 18, at Actually, even the first child is at risk if the father is RH positive and the child inherits this trait, but the danger worsens with each pregnancy. Whence the former belief in certain parts of the Basque country that 'a child from a stranger non-Basque is a child of the devil'. That is a clear indication of how they thought about marrying non-Basques. Another symptom of this attitude is that the Basques had a matrilinear inheritance system, so 'intruding' non-Basque husbands could not inherit Basque property. Intermarriage with other people would inevitably led to reduction of Rh- baby numbers.

BTW, RH negative is not a feature, but rather the absence of a feature: the lack of an antibody even though it can arise following sensitizing events. Something similar can be said about bloodgroup O. Alejandro July 4, at As a spaniard having lived in the UK, I have to admit there are some people who could pass as Spanish. As being from Basque region, there are usually whiter looking people there than the south, but apart from those few english or british , who look like spanish, I think the rest of the english population are definitely more german looking to me than spanish. Having recently visited germany Frankfurt, then stayed in Berlin for a bit I think the english and germans might be a lot closer than they realise or care to admit.

Perhaps I find it easier to see such differences as an outsider of england, but even here in spain we relate the english to germans, dutch etc than french, spanish etc. Also worth mentioning that from my trip to germany, having arrived in southern germany, i saw many men and women who resembled basques, certainly more than english as a whole. Iam Yue July 6, at If there are any doubters out there I would suggest that you have your mitochondrial DNA tested by a company such as Oxford Ancestors. It was also found in a significant group of Palestinian Arabs.

Scratchy July 31, at What I find the most misleading part in this article is by calling the Belgae Germanic. Wouldn't it be more accurate to call the Belgae Nordic rather than Germanic. As far as I can work out there is no case for there being a Germanic gene. The Danish definately have a predominantly Norse gene pool, although the East Germans have a predominantly Slavic gene pool.

The German population in the south west have a general Western European gene pool although even they have other genetic mixes. Really haven't got a clue why the Belgae could be considered Germanic genetically really. The word Germania basically means border people. The Belgae were probably Atlantic Celtic to begin with but have been highly Nordicised in the last 3k years. Eduard Selleslagh-Suykens August 1, at The Flemish are mostly the direct descendants of the 5th. In West-Flanders there is an older stratum of coastal Ingwaeonic Germanics related to the Frisians and coastal English.

At the arrival of the Franks Flanders was very sparsely populated marshes in the west, heath in the east , so they became the majority; in the south Wallonia the already heavily romanized original Celts Belgae remained the majority, which gave rise to the present language border which has shifted a little to the north since then.

Note that the largely French speaking island of Brussels in Flanders is a recent phenomenon that started in the 18th. As to the Belgae Caesar speaks about, they were undoubtedly Celts in the present meaning of the word, not Caesar's , but as he says, clearly distinct from the Gaulish people Galli, Celtae. The claim that they were Germanic has to do with the shift in meaning: the Romans called 'germanic' all peoples east of the Rhine.

It is very plausible that some of them were also Celtic and related to the tribes west of the Rhine. Which kind of Celts were the Belgae? In my opinion, they were most likely Brythonic like the Welsh, Bretons, Cornish : the etymology of their name seems to point to 'balch' 'proud' in modern Welsh, maybe a shift from an earlier meaning of 'brave' or the like.

Just a little misunderstanding In Wallonia there are lots of Brythonic toponyms e. Marbehan, Bohan