Picts are good Warriors... Ross' are the Direct Descendant of the Old Pict Lairds, bra! Pict is for Painted People, Picts never called themselves Picts, that's what Romans did, and now Historians. So if we painted ourselves for battle, because of Germs, and infection was the real killer, it really was, but than we started running around in Kilts (Folded up many times working as Dick Armor, and a Sleeping Bag, or very crappy tent!), and Ross' the old Pict Lairds had sweet armor, and no longer painted ourselves for Battle, we are no longer the same people because the Culture of Painting ourselves went away or eventually the English didn't let us speak our languages or do our Clan Systems so 1000 years later, and than Two Highland Clearances, because I am a Highlander and inside me flows the Blood of Kings, and we know who we are, oh sure maybe a Brown or a Mackenzie as a name means nothing, but the Greatest Clan in Scotland, the Great Clan Ross was Pedigrees mee boi! Like many others, we known who we are, and who you are, A Low Lander! A Pathetic Low Lander! Technically Easter Ross (yes like Game of Thrones, that's were the auther went for inspiration, to Ross-shire, the former Earldom of Ross!) is Low Lands, biggest open area in all the Highlands, but Ross' are from Wester Ross, we just took over Easter Ross, and kicked all the Viking Lairds out from the Highlands and Around, and Came Up off them! You don't mess with the Picts Pal... I mean, that's a Rossist Term! I shouldn't say that! You shouldn't mess with the Race of the Priest, Ra-oss!
"King of the who?" "King of the Britons" "Who are the Britons?" "Well we all are, we are all Britons." "I didn't know we had a King. I though we were an autonomous collective."
Because you only know history from 1066. At least twenty kings were referred to as "King of the Britons", while others were given related titles or descriptions. The table below also contains the paramount native Welsh rulers in the Norman and Plantagenet periods - by this time only Wales (or parts thereof) remained under Brittonic rule in Britain and the term "Britons" (Brythoniaid, Brutaniaid) was used in Britain to mean the Welsh people (Cymry in modern Welsh). This, and the diminishing power of the Welsh rulers relative to the Kings of England, is reflected in the gradual evolution of the titles by which these rulers were known from "King of the Britons" in the 11th century to "Prince of Wales" in the 13th.[2]
Haha. “Autonomous collective” is pretty much how William of Poitiers understood the political structure of Brittany. People there just do what they like, he’d say: men and women sleep with whom they please, everyone goes around armed to repel Normans, and they even work their own land with no one to tell them otherwise.
My dad was Scottish and I was raised at the knee of Scottish history. He knew Scottish history like the back of his hand as his mother had traced the family back to ancient Kings. He would still ask me where did the picts come from? He wasn't even sure but he knew I studied Scottish history as well and would ask me because he thought maybe I found out. He would ask me every couple of years and I couldn't answer him. He's gone now and I wish I could answer him!
No one ever admits to tracing their family back to anyone else but kings. There werent ancient kings. There was an Irish war lord (aka Scot) Fergus McFerchard back in 330 or you could go for Kenneth MacAlpine in 843. But since we are all descended from one or two fecund chaps back in the 10th century, (no idea how that works) who cares?
They did not get on well. What on earth do you base your lies? The Irish fought the Scottish and the Scottish fought the Welsh and the Welsh fought the English. The anglonormans fought the Irish and the British fought the irish. Go to SW Wales and see the English settlers, or the SE of Scotland and see the English settlers, or to Glasgow and see the Irish settlers, or to Ulster. The remnants of those tribes still hate each other and consider the other invaders.
Hello fellow Sullivan, lol. Anyways, I'd have to disagree, Insular Celtic peoples are genetically distinguished from the rest of Europe to be considered their own genetic ethnic groups. To be Celtic, is not only cultural and linguistic, but also can be genetic. A lot of people associate this theory with Celtic supremacists, I personally think that's ridiculous. Why is it every other ethnic group has genetic distinction but somehow Celts don't? Celt itself is really an umbrella term to refer to multiple ethnic groups.
@@Slapnuts9627 I'd say it's both. Insular celts are definitely distinguished genetically because of their insulae nature and living on islands. However the reality too is that most of Europe is/was Celtic. Meaning, 1) Racially European, 2)Spoke or speaks a Celtic language. 3)Practices/practiced a Celtic Culture & religion i.e. worshipping Gods that are associated with the Celtic expression, other materials and art styles etc.
@@Slapnuts9627 The Celts were a cultural phenomena. That doesn't prevent many of the peoples who were and still are Celtic in culture (or cultural ancestry) from being genetically distinct from others. The entire point about the Celts being a cultural phenomena is that they comprised so many genetically distinct peoples, from the Insular Celts, to the Gauls, to the Celt-Iberians, and others. Celt as a term has acquired two separate meanings, one is that of the Celts, the historical peoples who were engaged in the Celtic culture across Europe, comprising of many genetically distinct populations, whose people haven't gone extinct but have since abandoned Celtic culture. The other meaning is that of the current Celtic Peoples, those of the Celtic Nations, the Insular Celts. Who are a set of genetically related Celtic peoples whose languages have survived into the modern day, being the only group of Celts whose languages have managed to survive. The term's dual definitions is the source of the confusion, there's nothing stopping the peoples of the Celtic Nations from using the term Celtic. The only issue arises when Celtic supremacists try to muddy the definitions for political reasons.
I was under the impression that the term Pict was taken from the roman name for these warring tribes "Picti" so called because they were covered in tattoos
Actually, I think they were tattooed mainly on the face and head. The warrior with the blue face and funky hair in "braveheart" was supposed to be a "Pict", as was Franco Columbo in the 1st "Conan" movie..
I think this is a great channel but I think nowadays before people jump on the new wave bandwagon pertaining to celtic studies they need to analyse DNA. It appears to be overwhelmingly probable that the subhaplogroup R1B P312 and it's subclades can be classified as the Celtic branch of the indo European haplogroup R1B, just like R1B S21 is accepted to be the Germanic branch. Every ancient celtic skeleton that has been tested belongs to this specific genetic marker, and it perfectly reflects modern distribution across the continent, with highly varied concentrations where it has been replaced by Germanic lineages. P312 was the genetic signature of the Gauls, Gaels, Picts, Britons, Belgae, Galatians etc, which informs us that in the early bronze age when linguistic groups separated and the proto celtic culture developed in the alpine area, it was in isolation long enough from other peoples to undergo a polymorphism, making those of proto celtic descent recognisable within genome testing, and proving the existence of a Celtic "race", in the same sense that there is a Germanic, and Italic and Slavic "race"
P312 appears to originate in Southern France, maybe in Aquitaine but France's genetic studies are extremely scarce and is very high and quite diverse among Basques and also among some other historically non-Celtic populations like Iberians or Ligurians. It's certainly a pre-Celtic marker.
The haplotype R1b populations are discernible from the end of the ice age, the present Holocene period. There are documented examples of carbon dated skeletal DNA from the first repopulation of Britain not only having the same haplotype but being directly related to living people in Britain today. The simplistic population replacement theory of history is not, (in my view,) the definitive answer to the true story of our past. New research on nuclear and mitochondrial DNA markers is becoming available for our analysis every year and we cannot yet write the conclusion to our story.
Exactly. The Ancient Britons were only 10% Celtic, and the Anglo-Saxons were never in a majority, nor did they drive the Britons up into the mountains. It's all a myth, and DNA analysis is starting to prove that.
@Seumas na Tuaighe: have I missed any recent archaeogenetic research that (finally!) proves that R1b is found in Western Europe "from the end of the ice age"? Because that's one of the most controversial issues of European population genetics and last time I checked there was nothing of the kind (for lack of enough research basically).
On the subject of Pictish language, I once read an account of a Roman general who had gone on a expedition (punitive?) into the far north of Scotland. He used translators, generally hiring people locally, then pushing north. The translators were generally able to translate the local (Brythonic) dialect reasonably well. However he said that up in the far north the translators were useless, saying the local language was unrelated to their (British) dialects. What I take from this is that a pre-Celtic language was surviving in the far north of Pictland in Roman times (but probably not too long afterwards, and wiped out by the Norsemen at the very latest).
Don't know that this means anything to this thread, but I read that 90% of the original Irish were wiped out, but not known how. I have a grandparent come from Ireland to England with a very recognizable Irish name, but DNA says 3% Irish. The main DNA on that side is mainly northern Europe for me.
@ontyam Yes, they are also called the Northmen, also Norsemen. They spoke a language called Norse, hence, Norsemen. Their languages are still called the Norse languages, which include Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish. Northmen probably because they came from an area north of mainland Europe.
There have been found pict glyphs and symbols related to the hamitic Berber languages. The Picts were descendants of the early first Sumerians/Capsians - as were the Black Irish and the Black Welsh and the Pelasgians and the Ligurians and partly the Berber and Libyans and Minoer on Crete and the Phoenicians
Well you have to win the war first before you can write about winning it. Or, at least, the war has to be a draw. See Ramses II’s account of his war with the Hittites. If you go by his version he won a great victory, where the truth is he barely managed to avoid disaster. In the end, Ramses war was a draw. But that didn’t stop him tell his own rather colored version of it. I’m sure the Romans weren’t any different.
War is always a racket. The occult leaders always play both sides. That is why war is also known as Theater. The Soul Diers are Pion eers that must be eliminated, to relieve the debt on the Crown. Its all an Act. World war one and World war 2 were Both Phony Phoenician wars. They set everyone up on both sides, for their own wealth and rule. They even knew back then that this date in time would come, for a virus. The Age of Aquarius and the new Lord Authority for the new religion and the new World order.
Dear Hilbert, i enjoyed this video enormously! i've actually watched this third video about the Picts first, but look forward to watching the other two. This is fascinating, and cheerful, and just great. I hope you make lots of videos about all kinds of things! Thanks!
Way too complicated for me. I'll just tell my friends that the Picts were warriors, who dyed themselves blue, and killed anyone on the battlefield who were not blue.
Josh Wallace some women did fight along with the men the other women looked after the old and young away from the battle ,back home in their community's
Josh Wallace have you been to Scotland it's not that warm, yes they painted the self's blue and red all over before battle but did have clothes, it's showing the birth and death ,they came in naked to this world they will leave this world the same ...naked. ready to die.
And were promptly stomped by Rome for sport, their land basically being used as a human hunting field whenever a general got bored of not killing things.
The Pre Celtic of Scotland were Siberian’s, they came across an archipelago from Scandinavia as the ice caps retreated. The Sami of Finland are a close relation of the Scots. These settlers took with them, the now named, Highland cattle, whose closest relation is the Yak. The Picts are probably an integration of Siberian and Celtic people’s. Like most people in the north of Scotland, my DNA is Siberian, I’m related not just to the Sami, but the Inuits and Canadian Indians. I think that’s exotic!
I'm currently studying my ancestry, and this is where it has led me. Gotta say this is pretty cool! To go back with my family's history to it's original beginning, it opens up a whole new can of research and discovery.
The Bible says God was in the beginning. Makes sense. Nothing else does. He has to be the Creator. In the beginning, He was... Our mind can't comprehend it, so we make up things. But when we do, we're wrong. God allows that, for He will judge us on how we lived and acknowledged Him. Most here want to be acknowledged, actually all do, just not so much publicly. Do you know that we got that desire from God? Only God is good, acknowledge Him, for we are not ALL good. Be honest.
There have been some theories that the Picts were related to the Basque and are indigenous to Northern Europe. There are so many cultures that were destroyed by the Romans. What would the world look like if dominance didn't equal destruction.
There is genetic evidence on the Y-Chromosome to imply that the natives of the British Isles in general are related to the Basques, it's most prominent in the Welsh and Irish but also highly prominent in the Scots, Manx, Cornish, and English. It seems quite possible that the Celts being a cultural phenomena, had taken root culturally within all of pre-Roman Britain and Ireland except for the lands of the Picts, who had retained the older language and culture. The Picts being genetically of the same group as the Britons and Gaels, but having not adopted the Celtic cultural phenomenon.
In your language chart, Breton is shown as descending directly from ancient Gallic/Gaulish. I've always thought it was mainly Brythonic, i.e. closely related to Welsh and Cornish. In fact, I think written Cornish looks like a transitory form between Welsh and Breton - it's got the w's and y's of Welsh, and the k's, e's and z's of Breton.
It can confuse people a lot, because Breton is spoken in a formerly Gaulish-speaking area. Even Goscinny and Uderzo chose to place the main action in Astérix there, because of the region's association with all things Celtic.
Yes indeed, I think I made the language map in France once upon a time for my video on the Gauls though I'll correct it for future videos. That's true, today Brittany is the most Celtic region of France, especially with the Breton language still being spoken there :)
Welsh isn't directly related to Bryrhonic as a lot of it language comes from Old Irish especially since the Bryrhonic language was seriously damaged by the Romans adoption of Latin. Also Wales had huge Irish settlements and a lot of Welsh Nobility went to schools in Ireland. So Welsh really is a P Q language as a lot of the vocabulary and language structure is Old Irish;
I have to correct you on that one, B Mc. The number of Irish loanwords in Welsh is extremely small. Cadach (rag) and cnwc (hill) are some of the very few examples - and some place names like Llyn and Dinllaen. The Irish immigrants in Wales had been assimilated into the Welsh language by 600AD.
That's true but I'm speaking English which is a Germanic language made from the dialects of the Saxons and Angles (bit of Jutish and Frisian probably too) so I will call them Welsh too ;-)
History With Hilbert Old English was almost indistinguishable from Old Frisian to start with I have read.Modern English & Frisian are very different however, although there are some elements that have been retained.There is very little Central or Higher German influence on English.The English language only has influences from Ingvaeonic & Norse (Scandinavian) which are connected anyway, but again have deviated alot over the last 1000 years.English has very little DNA from Saxon, Angles (very little historical background), Jutes (small trace in Kent etc.), I1 haplo-groups are predominent there .The most prominent haplo-groups in England are still pre-Celtic as they in Wales, Lowland Scotland.All these countries have more modern offshoots of this pre-Celtic DNA (The ininitial source is the same, however).England, especially in East Midlands has lower levels of Frisian / Netherland haplo-groups r1b-s21.Southern England has Belgic R1b-U152 (especially Kent 10%).The Welsh language (initially spoken in both Lowland Scotland & the majority of England) is said to have been spread to Britain by these Belgic people.Wales has predominently R1b-l21, however.Therefore a different R1b group spread / transformed their language as it did to Lowland Scotland.Scots is actually related to Old English / Old Frisian.There is very little Norman DNA left in England, although the Norman French language had significant effect on the English language, along with Latin through Roman Catholic Church influence. There are studies being carried out that Old English absorbed Britonic Syntax as English Syntax (or the way words are formed into sentances) is very different to Modern German, Dutch, Frisian or Flemish or related dialects and is more of a similar nature to Modern Welsh. Too call English a Germanic / Ingaevonic language is far too simplistic, especially in the modern sense of the languages which have very much diverged of the centuries.
Robertus Antoninus The Welsh Rb1-L21 is pre-Celtic even as it is in England.The predominent haplogroup in UK is descended from a proto-Italic-Celtic-Germanic population.The people who carried these haplogroups wouldn't have known what these divisions were.Perhaps they defined themselves into different ethnic divisions in other ways that has now been lost to time.These are all modern assumptions of a time long gone.
Language does define ethnic identity. The Picts were literally lost to history and considered an extinct people before modern advances showed they were just Gaelicized. The importance of language simply cannot be stated enough when it comes to distinguishing yourself as an ethnic group. The Picts became Gaelic speakers and in doing so were absorbed into an ethnolinguistic group and lost all claim to distinction.
As a Scot, this is an important issue for me. There is now a scholarly consensus that the Picts, as you mentioned, spoke a P Celtic language. I really don't care if the Celts are an ethnic group or simply a Cultural and Linguistic one. It is the latter that matters to me. However, there is some recent evidence to suggest that the Celts did arrive in the British Isles from mainland Europe.
Of course they did. Where else was there to come from? :) The Ancient Britons came over from Southern Europe about 12,000 BC as the ice receded. They had to come from Southern Europe because Northern Europe was still covered in ice. The Celts arrived in Britain about 400 BC and were never anything but a small minority. But over the next 400 years the Britons took on Celtic ways and the mixture of the language of the Celtic settlers and the existing Britons became Brythonic, the main Celtic language spoken all over the British Isles at one time.
There's surprisingly little genetic evidence for the Roman presence in Britain. For that matter, neither the Anglo-Saxons nor the Vikings left as much genetic evidence as you would expect. (See Neil Oliver's series, "The Faces of Britain" for more information about this.)
Isn't it time somebody got round to digging up some bone-fide pictish bones and doing a DNA-analysis on them? This would at least prove or disprove the Basque connection.
Many academics believe that the Picts, like most of peoples of Britain and Ireland, were mainly descended from the Beaker People who arrived around 4400 years ago. Also if one considers ancient Iberia to be representative of the Basques then their connection to the Picts was investigated in 2018, see link: www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2018/february/the-beaker-people-a-new-population-for-ancient-britain.html The study of over 400 ancient skeletons from western and central Europe, involving the UK Natural History Museum, shows that, during the Bronze Age 4500 years ago, the Beaker culture spread into central Europe from Iberia without a significant movement of people. Skeletons from Beaker burials in Iberia are not genetically close to central European Beaker skeletons. Large megalithic structures such Stonehenge were built in Britain by Neolithic (or New Stone Age) people, who were replaced by the Bronze Age Beaker population Britain saw significant population changes, however. Beaker culture was taken up by a group of people living in Central Europe whose ancestors had previously migrated from the Eurasian Steppe (thought by most to be the Indo-European homeland). This group continued to migrate west and finally arrived in Britain around 4,400 years ago The DNA data suggests that over a span of several hundred years, the migrations of people from continental Europe led to an almost complete replacement of Britain's earlier (Neolithic) inhabitants. The Beakers were Indo-European but not Celtic culturally. Thousands of years later the descendants of the Beakers living in the north of Scotland became culturally Celtic either by immigration from Central Europe (the Celtic homeland) or by cultural adoption or perhaps a combination of both.
I found these , I think in one of these links they are on about doing DNA, www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39002843 www.realmofhistory.com/2017/07/21/facial-reconstruction-pictish-man-scotland/
@@molecatcher3383 have you seen the facial reconstruction of the Stonehenge man, he was no beaker people. www.newscientist.com/article/dn24811-stonehenge-man-not-just-a-pretty-face/
@@de-bo2515 Thanks for that link which I read. You are right that he was not a Beaker but he was of Neolithic farmer, and probably Mesolithic hunter gatherer descent. He lived before the Beakers had arrived in Britain. One thing which does not seem right is that they said he had a hint of ginger in his hair indicating Celtic origins. It is not possible that he could have been of Celtic descent because at that time there were no Celts in Britain or even in Western Europe. This story was from 2014 but the link that I gave in my earlier comment was from 2018 which confirmed that there had been a 90% population replacement in Britain with the arrival of the Beakers. Given that the DNA of Britain barely changed between the Beakers and the departure of the Romans this confirms also that the Stonehenge man could not be of Celtic descent.
Pictish surnames often ended in “is or es” such as Forbes which in their homeland is still pronounced Forbis.The names Burns was originally Burnis the poet Robert Burns family came from the North East and changed the spelling of their name when they move south to Ayrshire,presumably to avoid discrimination so as late as the 18th century there was still an awareness of the different ethnic heritage of the commoners in Scotland.Another group often cropping up in the ‘folk’history of Scotland is the Galloway Picts who inhabited the inland parts of the south west.The term “Creenies,”survives into the modern era,and is used to describe the isolated peoples of Galloways uplands,the name evolving from the Gaelic word for Picts. 11:04
Bro, thank you so much for this information. I'm trying to revive the ancient languages, and the pictish will be my first. I didn't know this nice facts. Thank you very much.
Interesting theories on the Picts. I had forgotten about Basque and the theory that it's not Indo-European is very intriguing. I loved that henge joke. "It's got a nice ring to it.."
Thank you very much! A French teacher of mine was a Basque hence why I know a little about it :D Yes!! I'm glad someone got it, I'll be sure to add some more historical humour in the next one too :D
The Picts never wore tattos they wore body painting. You can find evidence for tattooed Vikings, Egyptians and most people that used tattoos but non when it comes to The Picts and bodies have been found well preserved in bogs and such that didn’t have them so they most likely didn’t have tattoos but painted their bodies
Loved this presentaiton. Thoughtfully organized, professionally articulated. And the graphics (maps &c) helped immeasurably. Excellent job. Now I have to watch all your other presentations, as well !
The fact that Basque is definitely no indoeuropean language does not mean it was the only pre-indoeuropean language in Europe. It may be the only one left. To assume there were no others in such a large region in such pre-ancient times is contradictory to the high variety of languages we find elsewhere.
Very interesting documentary. The origin of the Picts has been a matter of intense debate among scholars for centuries now . The Celtic theory has been strongly defended by professor Forsythe lately . However , I have to disagree . I think the Picts were NOT Indo-Europeans . The capital of the Pictish kingdom was Urqhart , in the lake Ness . The main castle is almost entirely surrounded by water . Ur means water in Basque , the only pre Indo-European language alive today in Western Europe . URARTE or Ugarte means island or between water in Basque . Ure is an important river in Scotland. There are other roots like Ibar , Ara or Aber that are common in Basque as well as they are common toponymic roots in Scotland .
Are you familiar with the work of Gerald Massey? He would also re-iterate that the Picts were not an Indo-European people. See a book of the beginnings Vol 1, for a toponymic comparison of major places in Scotland & England.
The Picts were probably a pre-IE people who acquired a Celtic language when the Celts arrived in Britannia. There are Pictish inscriptions in Scotland written in a Celtic language, but there are also inscriptions written in an unintelligible pre-IE language. So it's probable that for a certain period the Picts were bilingual, still speaking their ancestral pre-IE language and speaking Celtic to communicate with the Celtic tribes living in the south. The Celtic language eventually prevailed, totally replacing the ancestral language.
My forefathers were Scandinavian/Viking from Norway that landed In Scotland and Ireland around the 1000's although Viking Is an immature name to call them In the context most people use it and think of It. My family Hewison comes from the ancient Scottish Dalriadan Clans of Argyllshire and the ancient Kingdom of Dál Riata. Descended from the MacDonalds of Sleat. the largest and most powerful of Highland clans, Lords of the Isle. Our Motto: By sea and by land. Norwegian longships were the most advanced naval designs In the world at that time. And they taught the Anglo-Saxons and Britons new military tactics before successfully Integrating themselves into their new cultures. Vikings eventually came to Rule France, Normandy and the British Isles by way of marriage and power.
Ever hear of the Scottish Rite? Ever wonder why the Washington Monument is an Egyptian Obelisk? lol Same thing. The Royals are scam artist Nazis and they lie about everything.
So basically, without the Whole Nine Yards, Aryans ruled the world for the Age of Aries, for at least those 2000 years. Then the rulers reset the calender to zero and began conversions into Semitism. Romans killed anyone who did not comply and they were together with Islam and the Jews. There is only 1 Religion. Then there are cults of that 1 religion and we call them Religions. But they are cults of the same religion. Men killing other men. For beliefs.
Excellent video! As about one quarter of my blood comes from the Picts, I have always been interested in their history. As you mentioned, historians cannot agree on this topic. You did a good job of delineating all the possibilities.
1) I would not dismiss the Bede version completely given the numerous other groups that did cross to britain from Scandinavia over time. 2) there is however, strong genetic evidence for an Iberian connection to the post-ice age Irish who became the pre-Norman gaelic. 3) Like linguistics, I think an analysis of place-names would provide more to the discussion. 4) The proximity of Ulster to SW Scotland is a hard thing to ignore. Iona and the Irish monastic movement that went all the way to Northumbria after the Romans left shows that. I suppose a researcher might try to analyze mitochondrial dna in known Pict descendants for a clue about the Irish women in Bede's story. Thanks for posting your information.
Some other things to support Bede's claims: 1) Early Pictish stones are identical to Gottland stones. I'm talking identical symbols, identical layouts, identical borders, identical art styles... it is staggering that this is not being studied by academics 2) Picture stones themselves only occur in Germanic areas with the sole exception of the Picts 3)The Romans frequently professed a Germanic identity or at least origin to the Caledonians/Picts, including Tacitus (who was kind of the authority on Germanic peoples at the time) 4)Their language is repeatedly stated to be distinct from both the Britons (Welsh) and the Gaels (Irish) 5) Bede spoke Old English, this language was very similar to the languages of Scandinavia as the English had originated in the same general region as Norse did, so he would likely know a Scandinavian peoples if he encountered them 6) Pictish stones show them hunting with falcons, which at the time in Europe was only practiced by the Goths an other Germanic tribes who adopted it from the Huns, there's also no evidence that any other peoples of the British Isles practiced falconry at this time 7) Pictish areas are extremely close geographically to Scandinavia and it's highly unlikely they had not been trading and interacting for a long time 8) Ptolemy seems to record a tribe of Lugii around Caithness in the 150s 9) We know the Picts did have some kind of interaction with the Germanic peoples as they coordinated with Saxons and Franks to invade Rome in the Barbarian Conspiracy where they ravaged Britannia for a year along with the Irish 10) The Picts are eventually believed to have been slowly Gaelicized over centuries, the only other recorded group we have this happening to were... the Norse who settled western Scotland and Ireland around the same time the Picts were being Gaelicized 11) Pictish stones literally depict Loki While I wouldn't go so far as to claim they were a Germanic people, I think it's kind of undeniable that there was Germanic influence on the Picts, it's a question of how much and whether they were perhaps an early Germanic people (so perhaps proto-Norse or even proto-Germanic) who settled the British Isles and just became slowly Celticized over the centuries due to various factors.
3:19 Breton has two dialects: the one spoken in Kernev, Tregor and Leon is close to Cornish. The one in Vannes is a form of Welsh and Welsh names like Ridoredh occur there.
Interesting that the Ogham alphabet was used as text by the Irish Celts, the Welsh Celts and the Picts. To me that suggests an ancestral connection to all three cultures. Great video by the way. Louie.
Ogham is thought to have first appeared around 400AD by which time the peoples you mention were already distinct from each other. The Picts were later converted to Christianity by Irish missionaries would have passed on knowledge of Ogham to them.
Never heard about the Picts or Welsh using Ogham. The Ogham script was used solely by the Irish as far as I know, and it was limited to very short dedications. The few inscriptions found in Scotland are attributed to early settlements of Gaels from Ireland, if I'm not mistaken. The script appears very shortly before the Christianization of Ireland and the adoptions of the Latin script, so it never had any chance to truly shine.
@@elimalinsky7069 ogham writings have been found in scotland. most likely pictish. there was no settlments of gaels from ireland. the gaels were already here
@@elimalinsky7069 no, that,s only ever been based on mythical writings. type in.....irish and scottish gaels on irish origenes...this is the most believable i,ve came across so far. irish historians now concede the 1st people to enter ireland came from scotland
And what the Picts show is that genetics are irrelevant if you lose your language, at the end of the day. As you will be lost to history and grouped with the people whose language to switched to. Nobody claims to be a Pict today, do they, regardless of what their genetics say.
That's because people think that the genetic tests from 23andMe and Ancestry are real genetic tests and not just for the fun of it. Even the companies acknowledge that these tests are nowhere near as good as true genetic testing.
It seems most likely to me that the Picts are just the Britons who were never conquered by Rome. Both the name “Briton” and “Pict” are exonyms that were given to the peoples of this island by the Romans. They called the island Britain, and therefore the people who lived on it and their language British. They then conquered most of Britain, so the term Briton came to refer to that subset of Roman subjects that were from Britain. But when they failed to conquer the top third of the island, they needed a new exonym for those people that were still not under Roman rule (the term Briton no longer being a term for people outside the empire), so they called them the “painted ones” - Picts. After 350 years of Roman occupation, the people on either side of the dividing wall came to regard themselves as different peoples, so the names Briton and Pict stuck into the post-Roman era. But there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of a clear ethnic dividing line before the Romans split the island. So were just different branches of the same people group.
@@joda7129 The Celtic Culture and Languages were a cultural phenomenon, not a genetic one. Many disparate and genetically distinct peoples were Celtic at varying stages of the culture's lifespan. It's highly likely that the Picts, being on the northernmost tip of the island, in the highlands, hadn't yet adopted the Celtic culture and language, whereas those populations who were of the same genetic stock to the south of them had done. Likely being that the rest of Britain and Ireland once spoke that same language, before those same peoples later adopted the Celtic culture. Those highland regions were relatively more remote than Ireland was to Britain, with extensive trade, travel, raiding, and cultural exchange between the Britons and Gaels prior and during the Roman Era of Britain. Hence they both became Celtic, whereas the Picts retained the older culture that the others also once shared in.
Basque is a unique non-Indo-European language and has been in place at least since Roman times, as loanwords from Latin with ki- instead of ci-, and Basque names in Roman inscriptions, show. In Roman times, it was spoken north of the Pyrenees too. But the 'Vascon hypothesis', that most of Europe, or at least Western Europe, spoke languages related to Basque, is very vague and impossible to prove. It relies mostly on river names that are similar throughout Europe, like Ebro in Spain, Ivre in France, and Ebrach in Germany. Both Indo-Europeanists and experts on Basque have severely doubted the hypothesis. It has been suggested that even Turkish could be related to Basque if this hypothesis were true. But Turkish definitely is not, for it came from Central Asia in the Middle Ages.
I have some ideas about the Picts. Suppose for instance, that they didn't come from Scythia or any other part of Europe, but instead were the people of the Northern Isles, the descendants of the hunter gatherers who were displaced from Doggerland Not because they suddenly got flooded out, but because the followed the herds of food to higher ground, which eventually became the Orkneys and Shetlands. Now, there's not much in the way of woodland there so to build habitation they used the one material of which there is plenty: Stone! Scara Brae is so sophisticated that we recognise the dressers, beds, fireplaces, fresh food storage boxes and the village in general.The layout and structure of the Neolithic house in Scara Brae is not much different to the layout of the Black House of the last millennium! These were the people who knew how to use stone architecturally. They invented corbelled roofs, they counted their year by observation of the cosmos from the huge stone circles and other monoliths that they constructed. They were the people of the stones, so let's say that instead of repeating the worn out mantra's of the classically educated historians of the past, that civilization came from the East, shall we consider that there may have been a civilization that spread from the North all the way down Western Europe and maybe beyond, of which the People of Northern Scotland were the last remnant. Their philosophies and customs and community knowledge having been expunged from the record by the influence of Christianity, which most definitely did, like the Roman culture, come from the Mediterranean.
I have always wondered what ancient peoples had lived in Britain before the Celts! Your video was very interesting! I'm going to watch more of your videos! ~Janet in Canada (I am half Scottish, on my Dad's side)
Well, it is generally considered these days, that the "Celtic people of Britain" were the original inhabitants from the time of the Ice Age. Much like when the Normans (French Vikings) invaded, Danes (Danish Vikings) invaded, Anglo-Saxons (Northern Germans) invaded, Scots (Irish) invaded, Belgae (Belgian Celtic/Germanic people) invaded, all that changed was the "nobility" and the languages. Most of the underlying general population stayed the same.
As a yank I don't know what the word is to describe England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales as a whole entity. It seems you folks can't even agree on that term, so it leaves us outsiders hopelessly confused. So I will say "British Isles" to describe all 4 nations as one entity. (I've heard the Irish hate this term and insist on being totally separate. Guess I can't please everyone). Anyway, a genetic study was published about 2 years ago now which looked at this question. It was a massive study that looked at over 100 ancient skeletons from all over the "British Isles". What they found was that in the bronze age (2500 BC) a major population replacement happened. 90% of the "British Isles" gene pool was replaced in a 400 year period. So, no, people in the "British Isles" today are not the same as those in the Ice Age or the Neolithic. The population has been very steady since about 2500 BC, however. Yes these bronze age invaders wiped out the builders of Stonehenge, which is going to keep the archaeologists busy trying to understanding that dynamic. For instance, how did the newcomers view Stonehenge? Did they adopt it or try to destroy it? How about the Druids? Were they part of the old culture that was retained and adopted or did they only arise much later? So many fascinating questions. Now this is not to say none of the Neolithic folk survived. About 10% did and their DNA is still there today. Actually, I think the average person from the Isles has something like 20-30% Neolithic ancestry, so those guys made a recovery it seems. And, no, the Anglo-Saxon "invasions" weren't invasions at all really. It was an elite dominance type of scenario where a few impose their will on the many. DNA studies suggest they made little impact. Then again, its hard to tell since the Scandinavians are so closely related in the first place. The people who invaded Britain in the bronze age also invaded all of Northern Europe and replaced those populations too. So the Anglo people were already closely related.
@@Wowzersdude-k5c I have read similar about 90% of the Irish disappearing in ancient times, and as my grandmother has a distinctly Irish name, who came to England, Liverpool in the 1800s, it seems like I should have more than 3% Irish. We have 18% Scandinavian, but the other half of my family came from Sweden. We have a relatively high northern Europe ancestry, most is the Saami, though.
@@Wowzersdude-k5c I find it highly dubious that "90% of the gene pool was changed in 400 years", in a time when mobility was so incredibly slow. Secondly, and even more dubious, is the fact that these skeletons which were all available for a very long time in modernity for scientific research, ONLY happened to be DNA tested NOW! - and surprisingly all just happened to show the same utterly revolutionary conclusion! Staggering! The armies of previous researchers over the decades had just never thought to conduct DNA tests on them, or had been utterly incompetent when doing so! Staggering! It definitely wouldn't have anything to do with the notorious glo bal ist revisionism that is presently going on, to seriously distort the origins of things, the origins of peoples, and subvert their connection to and sense of ancient ownership to their native lands! This wouldn't in any way aid, in mass uncontrolled imm ig ration into Europe of course. So no John Smith: a lot of us here in this part of the World would outrightly reject these silly 'new findings' conducted by 'scientists' for the highest bidders. Thank you very much for that.
Celtic comes from Greek traders (from Agrika = Farmers) who traveled up the Danube looking for trade and logged timber for their ship building industry. {The following is an true apocryphal tale:) There they met a group of respected elders of the inland groups and asked them "Who are you?" The leader of the group, the spiritual leaders of one of the inland tribes, answered "We are the Ceile' De." Thereafter the Greeks referred to them as the Keltoi (Kelts), the best the Greek traders could do to explain their discovery of this unknown people. Ceile' De means "Companions of God" or "Servants of God". Thus the missionaries came to be the identity of the entire peoples of Central and Western Europe, the Kelts (Celts). Strangely enough, the Romans were also people originally of the Ceile' De, but they were so corrupted that they referred to their priests as Cellis and had no knowledge of that word's meaning. Julius Caesar bought a high Cellis priesthood for it was a great source of money, then proceeded to slaughter the Helvetians, a most passive tribal group on a peaceful migration to the West coast of Gaul. The Helveticians were farmers & herdsmen, as well as scholars and physicians and teachers to the tribes. They wore their wealth of purest gold as armlets, bracelets and torques upon their persons as no Gauls would ever do them harm, for they were a Holy People. Unskilled in war, which they did not practice, they were slaughtered. Survivors mostly women and children were sold into slavery, into the brothels of Rome. Julius Caesar took the stolen gold and crossed the Rubicon to his death and the death of the Roman Republic.
While you do have bits of that story , somewhat competently and coherently down....theyre are large flaws in it as well, and to be peddling it is wrong. The Helveti were no more "Holy" then the Armorica in the West, The Franks of the East, The Aquatani of the South, or the Belgae of the North. All Celtic ( Gaulic ) and all warring with each other constantly! And those "Scholars" murdered just as many innocent Celts in the South of Gaul during their "Invasion" as Ceasar. They were no hero's to those Celts/Gauls. While I don't always agree with Caesars actions, you can bet he always knew what time it was.....metaphorically speaking. Blade with Blade, Blood with Blood, Diplomacy with Diplomacy.... A hard man for very hard times. And that goes to my baser point, that was the world of the day, not the creation of some bogeyman named Gaius Cornelis.
The ancestors of the Picts were the tribes who lived in the north of Scotland, beyond the River Tay. In the first century AD, the Romans called these people Britanni, today we think of them as the Caledonii or Caledonians.
The proto-Celtic Britons were already culturally Indo-European (via Beaker migration from northwestern Europe). Earlier inhabitants of the Isles -e.g. the tribes associated with the Boscombe Bowmen and Amesbury Archer remains - that have been linked to Stonehenge and numerous other megalithic sites in the Isles have shown to be genetically indistinguishable from ancient Northern Iberians of the same period (not strictly the Basques). This early Ibero-Brythonic founding population would come to be dispossessed and displaced by subsequent waves of Beakers, proto-Celtic types, Celts, Germanic migrants, and Scandinavian raiders. The last remnants of the ancient Anglo-Iberians were in fact able to find refuge in the southwestern fringe of Britain - where a modest genetic link to Northern Iberia is still present in much of the local population.
That's interesting. May I ask about your use near the end of your comment of the term aglo-iberian, as I thought that anglo is generally used to refer to the angles who came along later with the jutes and the saxons? Thanks.
Very interesting video, thank you. I read in an article that most of the things Picts left on stones could not not been understood / deciphered (except drawings of ordinary scenes, of course). Curious that their symbolic was so specific.
The Britons of the south also painted themselves blue with woad body paint. In fact, woad production continued in Cambridgeshire until the late 20th century when they replaced it with a synthetic dye. Still blue, though.
It's worth considering that etymologically both Pict and Briton are the same thing. The word 'Briton' being a Romanised corruption of 'Prydain'; 'pryd' in Welsh meaning colour or tint. So the name Britain is accepted in modern history as meaning 'painted', thus named for the inhabitants culture of body painting. 'Pict' means the same but in Latin. I might posit that 'British' is the older bastardised version of the word Pict, that became a common usage. Perhaps by the time they had established Hadrian's Wall the practice of body painting was discontinued, or even outlawed, in Roman controlled areas. The unconquered Picts were still practicing the old tradition, which is why the Romans called them Pictii. It's the same 'pict' we see in the word 'picture'.
Stephen Faherty The romans never outlawed cultural practices that didn't threaten their rule. We know, however, that they did abolish things like human sacrifices. A lot of celtic peoples were named after the practice of body painting. Romans spoke of this practice as a battle religious ritual. This practice must have been discontinued in Britannia, due to the fact that there was no fighting during the Pax Romana period. The people were acculturated by the romans, the elite spoke latin and the people spoke vulgar latin, mainly in the south east, while brythonic prevailed in the center, the west, and the north. Furthermore, the roman rule didn't end at Hadrian's wall. One of the main purposes of the wall was to collect trading taxes. The brythonic languages all use a name derived from vulgar latin to designate great britain and themselves, while, for example, welsh uses a descendant of the celtic ethnonym "pritani" that gave Britannia in latin to designate the Picts.
Potatoes ! Interesting. One wonders if the body painting was primarily a war paint, as Neil Marshall suggests in his film Centurion. Not an altogether serious suggestion, but it could explain perhaps that the practice may have waned during Pax Romana, while it continued in the unconquered regions. It's just interesting to have these parallel nomenclatures based on different ethnonyms.
@@Ibnafrika Julius Caesar said the Britons applied the colour to their skins using glass. This suggests to me that they used the sharp edges of glass shards to puncture the skin before applying the paint making the resulting pigmentation permanent. Of course, with no examples of bodies dug out of permafrost as with Otzi and Kurgan burials, we have no way of knowing for sure.
I always assumed the Celts were White until I read Geschichte Deutschen und Skythen (History of Germans and Scythians). Until then I had no idea they were Coloureds. They were also mentioned in Mohren Bilder (Black Pictures).
There's actually very few such placenames in Pictish areas, they are overwhelmingly Goidelic which is unusual as other areas the Gaels conquered seemed to retain Brittonic or Norse placenames, such as Strathclyde and the Hebrides. There's not really enough placenames in Pictish areas to support the idea that they ever spoke Brittonic, in fact there are as many, if not more, English derived placenames in Pictish areas.
it's worth considering that the Picts, being quite different to any modern culture or indeed any known ancient culture, might not have thought of places and place names in the same way we do.
The theory that the Gaels came to Scotland via Ireland has been challenged a great deal over the years. Mainly because there is no archaeological evidence to support large scale migration from Ireland into Scotland (I'm using the modern names for simplicity's sake) and so it is not necessarily true that the Gaels landed in Scotland via Ireland. I personally think that the British Isles were populated by pre- Indo European people and while Doggerland still existed, this was a thriving part of the world. Orkney is thought to have been the origin of the Megalith culture that spread throughout the British Isles. I personally think the Celtic languages may have originated along the Atlantic Sea Board -- from Spain up to Scotland and travelled East as opposed to the more common theory that it travelled to the British Isles West, from Europe. I could be wrong but I think the Picts and other native Brits and Irish are the descendants of Stone age people who became isolated after the disappearance of Doggerland.
Pre-Celt: This is a good day to take a walk. Can't wait to meet my future girlfriend. *WILD TRIBES OF CELTIC LANGUAGE APPEAR OUT OF NOWHERE* Celt: Cad atá suas, SOITH! Pre-Celt: All right, keep your secrets then.
Overall I like the video, because I *can* follow what you're discussing. Thank you for creating and posting about a topic that not everyone will jump at the chance to watch. I return to your videos, because this isn't information I have to recall regularly but find immense interest in and would like to teach my child. Therefore, I thought you would welcome how you could improve the stylistic aspects of the video to compliment the monumental task of all you say. 1. I believe the animations in this video need to be updated; nothing is highlighted as you move along in your discussion, which, at least for myself, distracts me from listening to the valuable information you're dispensing and the speed at which you sometimes hop to the next image. In other words, I am looking for the locations on the maps that aren't there nor are highlighted as they are mentioned and therefore am missing what you say thereby requiring me to rewind back to what I missed. 2. Some of the colors of the words are barely visible (e.g., light pink for, at least, the "Britons" post Angles invasion mentioned in the first three minutes of the video). 3. You mention Cumbria at the 2:20 mark, but Cumbria is not on the map. 4. While the following are merely examples of Brythonic Scottish kingdoms as well as that you state Gododdin is destroyed by the Northumbrians, Gododdin and Strathclyde are mentioned but not on the map. 5. What do "P" and "Q" stand for on the Celtic Languages Tree? While you *do* provide examples of "P-Celtic" and "Q-Celtic" languages when returning to the map at the 3:47 mark, you still don't elaborate on what the letters stand for.
I'm not against the Picts being descended from Neolithic farmers that spread from Anatolia, that's possible, but I think more likely Indo-European Beaker people, and maybe the Basques are a last holdout of the Neolithic farmer population that disappeared almost overnight with the arrival of the Beaker people into Europe from the Steppes. I've also heard the Basques might be of Solutrean ancestry, which if true, would be mind blowing. (I think Cheddar man might be Solutrean but apparently all the flint tools were discarded at the time so we don't know the style of flint napping which could have helped). Beaker people burials are found all over Scotland though, so you might extrapolate from that the Picts probably didn't descend from Neolithic farmers to any great degree. Even though there's no evidence of the Beakers exterminating the Neolithic farmers violently, it does occur that it was maybe another wave of Bubonic Plague which has often occurred with Steppe peoples arriving in Europe.
My forefathers were Scandinavian from Norway that landed In Scotland and Ireland around the 1000's although Viking Is an immature name to call them In the context most people use it and think of It. My family Hewison comes from the ancient Scottish Dalriadan Clans of Argyllshire and the ancient Kingdom of Dál Riata. Descended from the MacDonalds of Sleat. the largest and most powerful of Highland clans, Lords of the Isle. Our Motto: By sea and by land. Norwegian longships were the most advanced naval designs In the world at that time. And they taught the Anglo-Saxons and Britons new military tactics before successfully Integrating themselves into their new cultures. Vikings eventually came to Rule France, Normandy and the British Isles by way of marriage and power. Hilsen Brødre
On the subject of the Pre-Celtic possibility: There is a hypothesis that the megalith building pre-Indo-European culture in Britain and Northern Europe was Afroasiatic and perhaps related to the spread of farming into Europe from the Eastern mediterranean (not that we know those earliest farmers were necessarily Afroasiatic speakers, seeing as some ancient peoples in the area were not).
@History With Hilbert, Your videos are always informative and enjoyable, however, as an Irish person I have to say I find it irritating that you so often conflate Ireland with Britain. Even in this video which deals with a period of time predating by many centuries the first British incursions into Ireland. Also, in Ireland, nobody uses the term, 'British Isles', a blanket term invented by the British to cover their colonised territory.
thank you very for your pick series. I do very much like to so call dark age time , and want to learn more. for some passable future topics. I would like to hear about the Germans of that time as well as the Welsh Cornish and Irish
No problem at all, thank you for watching and commenting on the series! I plan to make videos covering all of these civilizations in the future - so stay tuned for more :D !!
I was always of the understanding the Picts were quite short in height people and the lived as you said north east Scotland, I would assume I have some Pictish blood through Scottish heritage and not because I am only 5'7" :)
They found a skeleton of a pict man and he was 5ft 6" ,I found these 2 links of 2 pict men with facial reconstruction. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39002843 www.realmofhistory.com/2017/07/21/facial-reconstruction-pictish-man-scotland/
The Picts were mainly north of the Roman built Antonine wall which stretched between the rivers Clyde and Forth. You failed to mention the Antonine Wall in this video, it was built in AD 142, twenty years after Hadrian's Wall.
Reasonably accurate presentation; loads of tosh in the comments, particularly linking linguistic & genetic groups; the aboriginal languages of Britain were neither Pictish nor Basquish; they're now lost, but their influence is evident in English & Celtic (e.g. the progressive or continuous present tense, unknown in other Germanic languages).
Like to see you tie this to DNA studies of late that show a strong tie between the people of the Britain and Ireland and the Iberian peninsula. Your mention of Basque interests me and their linguistic tie to the Picts.
Although the term "Celt" and the whole identity that goes with it, has come under intense scrutiny in the academic world, there was undoubtedly a commonality between several of these people, the Iberians you mention being the northern Galicians from Spain, are possibly thought to have introduced some language and cultural influences on the Irish. The point about Basque would be before these Celtic links had been established, so even older. As I said in the video, Basque looks quite weird to us with "z"'s and "x"'s in words, so some linguists think they can prove Pictish might be related to this pre-Celtic Basque-type language. Interesting stuff :)
Steven Clark Although Basque has completely different haplo-groups of R1b than Ireland / Britain.The Basque language is non-indo-european.Rb1 is definately a Indo-European haplogroup.Basque is a language predominently inherited from a completely different people.A Basque type language may have been spoken all over Western Atlantic coastal regions 5000 years ago, possibly associated with 'J' haplo-group Semitic languages (largest remaining haplogroups in Northern Spain)or 'G' haplo-group Caucasian languages (less haplogroup present today).'I' haplogroup (Norse, North East German Coast, predominently) would have been more present the further north you went.R1b haplogroups almost completely superseded these early haplogroups as they advanced from the East.
I seriously doubt there was never any by-sea connection between Celtic Iberia and Celtic Britain/Ireland, other than the Phoenicians passing by in search of tin. Seriously: Celts were not sailors and the processes of Celtization in Iberia and Britain&Ireland are almost totally disconnected: they only tie up at the Celtic homeland in West Germany. There was however intense maritime trade between both regions in the pre-Celtic period, the so-called Atlantic Bronze Age and also before, but it was the Celtic conquest of Portugal and Galicia which actually interrupted it.
If you go to Asturias in the north of Spain, you may be surprised by the fair/red hair and pale skin of many people. Astur, king of the region, and generally recognised as an old Celtic area.
@@LuisAldamiz The Ancient Britons started arriving in Britain about 12,000 BC, as the ice receded. This was thousands of years before the Indo-European language group existed. Celtic did not exist in those days. The Celts didn't arrive in Britain until about 400 BC. The Ancient Britons MUST have come over from Southern Europe, because, at the time, Northern Europe was covered in ice. It's generally reckoned that they came from Iberia, and that is borne out by DNA.
Britain, British, Great Britain all come from the word Brythoniaid which we still use in welsh today. Brythonic adjective denoting or relating to the southern group of Celtic languages, consisting of Welsh, Cornish, and Breton. They were spoken in Britain before and during the Roman occupation, surviving as Welsh and Cornish after the Anglo-Saxon invasions, and being taken to Brittany by emigrants. Glad you mentioned the Gododdin area of stratchlyde as it proves what ive just said. GOOGLE, Y Gododdin poem and you will find that it is the oldest manuscript composed in the british isles and written in welsh (brythonic) in din eidyn which is now Edinburgh.
Hi! Although I agree that the Celtic people were more likely related by language rather than sub-race, two observations I have is the predominance of black-haired and even swarthy people in the P-Celtic part of Scotland, Wales and Cornwall, whereas the Q-Celtic Irish and Scottish have a high number of ginger-haired people as I believe are seen in the Basque region of Spain. Remember, too, that Spain was once invaded by the Black Moors. Indeed, some historians think the British Isles, certainly Scotland, were first inhabited by quite black people though with slightly different features than found in Africa.
They will NEVER admit that the Original Dane's, Celts, Picts were Northern Ethiopian's!!!! White Cauc-Asian's are not indigenous to Europe just as they are not indigenous to America!
Sean Mounts It's plenty of evidence!!! They have the bones they found in Europe and it wasn't these newly made race of people! They know that Black people are the first on Earth and my school teacher in highschool told me that! He was White! So therefore black people being the first people proves that we are the first everywhere! ALL first civilization's were BLACK! An honest intelligent white person will sneak up to me when there's no one watching and tell Me, you're telling the Truth!!!
@@kano3030 They found bones...? That's your evidence? They found bones? They found bones where? In Celt burial grounds. You're going to need to elaborate and cite some credible sources. Otherwise you just sound like an afrocentric psuedo-historian and a kook.
I've heard a few (a very few) that speculating that the Celtic Culture may have started in Britain and spread outwards. I always thought that the Picts were simple the Celts that weren't Romanized, I didn't know they existed before the Romans (hey you learn something new everyday).
The Britons were never romanized, this is a BBC lie. Zero Italic DNA was left after the 5th century. This has been proved by modern DNA sequencing read 'Survive the Jive' academic truth based on science
Excellent 'Stuff'' "Hilbert"!! My Father and Grand-Father, were (Professional and Amateur, respectively) Historians/Linguists/Archeologists/Genetisists, and tried to teach me as much as possible on such matters as these, in our all too short time together. (My Father, was actually 'fortunate' enough, to be befriended, by Rahn and Forresthal, before their deaths and WWII's end.) Many Thanks, 'M'Lad' for your informing us, and still keeping things interesting! (BTW: Agree very much with you and your sources, about the 'Basques', as I have several cousins who are so, and they have spoken often, of it as you and your sources do!) Again, Many Thanks!
Many cultures have no written language and their histories are normally handed down through art and story telling. This has been the case through out history.
I don't know if you do any gaming... but if you do and you haven't checked out Mount & Blade with the Viking expansion, you should check it out - highly fun and very educational...
The Modern Hermeticist Yes haha, it made me chuckle after I said it too xD!! I have it actually, a very fun game indeed! Thanks for suggesting it though :)
+The Modern Hermeticist I'm an Proud YORKSHIRE -Viking/Northumbrian-Angle but Even just thinking..."Whoad Ewe Fancy Hugging ta Coast O"The Veneeriale Bede"
This stuff is beautiful. As a descendent of the Dal Raiadans, Welsh and Saxons, it's great that this stuff is being disseminated so broadly these days. If the world comes to understand that unless you are an Australian Aboriginal or Kalahari Bushman there's no such thing as a "pure race" we'll all take a collective huge leap forward...
Spot on Hilbert. A National Geographic magazine article on the Welsh some years back discussed a certain Y chromosome that is lightly scattered across Europe, but found in large concentrations amongst the Welsh and the Basques. This lends credibility to the idea that Basques are the aboriginal pre-IndoEuropean peoples of Europe, and that the pre-Roman peoples of Britain included proto-Celtic populations who'd for one reason or another adopted a Celtic language.
My understanding is that the Picts was a fiction of 19th century historians trying to explain the reason why the Romans built Hadrian's wall, in that a very aggressive peoples lived north of the wal, hence the reason for building Hadrian's wall. The principle peoples north of the wall were the Celtic Caledonia not Picts. id the Romans refer to anyone as the Picke
Not sure if its already been said but, you got your arrow in wrong place regarding "Breton", its descended from Brithonic, not Gallic! Gallic is extinct. regarding the Pre-Celtic population, they were in all probability, Bell Beaker folk, who spoke a Proto Celtic language descended from Indo European. You state at the beginning that Q - Celtic developed in Ireland, but then later say there was 2 waves, and the first wave was Q Celtic, then second was P Celtic, correct, early Haldstat developed from Proto Celtic, and was older, and was probably Q, the later La Tene, then had the P, and this was the second wave, which pushed Q to the extremities of the Isles, so maybe Q always was in the Hebrides and SW Scotland, and never pushed all the way to Eire. The arrow at the end which indicates Celtic migration from wales to Ireland, would be better placed in SW Scotland to Ireland, as this is what Genetic similarity shows, that Celtic migration spread throughout Britain then migrated from SW Scotland to Ireland.
Except we literally have accounts of an Irish Kingdom, older than the oldest Scottish dialects of old Irish, heading east conquering Mann, the hebrides and Galloway, then and only then do we see old Irish there, on the other hand wert have very early old Irish manuscripts, dating back several hundred years before the invasion of Scotland might I add, in guess where? Good old Éirinn
I found these 2 links, I read they were looking into it, the 2 links show 2 pict men and they did facial reconstruction www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39002843 www.realmofhistory.com/2017/07/21/facial-reconstruction-pictish-man-scotland/
Very in depth video. As a former professional linguist, I think you did an excellent job. Language is fluid and very difficult. One needs only to look to Ukraine today to see how language can change very quickly. Bravo.
My only question is what was the deciding factor to an established civilization feeling the necessity to build a physical wall...thinking about logistics of resources and labor of the time?...was it executed out of economic necessity or out of fear...just a question I've always wondered about. For the record I'm a born and raised American just trying to understand my Grandfather's "Scottish Pride"...he passed when I was 11...I'm 42 now, and so many things he said ring in my ears today. He was a simple farmer and was willing to sacrifice any worldly things for his family other than his "pride"...this has been a good and difficult thing for my life, but I'm not willing to let go of the values he taught me. Just trying to understand where it all comes from, is it cultural or is it that he was just an amazing man!? He used to tell me "aon latha thèid mi dhachaidh, agus le bhith a ’creidsinn annad a’ creidsinn annamsa ... bidh e comasach dhomh a ràdh gun do rinn sinn e!" That's the only Gaelic phrase I know(probably typed it wrong, forgive me if I did), but always wondered what he really meant...
Steven Williams Might I recommend you go through my playlist covering the Picts and especially watch the video on Language, Culture and Lifestyle where I talk about what remains of the Pictish language? Pictish Playlist: The Picts: ruclips.net/p/PLWHb-MbcZ9kouDPymw9zeG6ek7yrByvyL
Jah blessed you with truth. It's not that hard to figure out what Tacitus wrote regarding who the Roman Legions found in the British Isles when they arrived.
Sounds like the Dal Riatans were the first Scots-Irish, though going the wrong direction ;-) When the Scots-Irish started migrating in great numbers to the English colonies in North America in the early 18th century they had a profound influence on what would become American culture despite being viewed as unlettered and violent. Might be worth a video.
it would be quite an interesting video, i am a scot by the way and i agree that the scot-irish times is probably the wrong way round though does have a slightly better sound to it. it funny though the northern irish counties (geographically speaking nothing to do with the current setup) and the south-west of scotland have basically been swapping migrants for millenium. in many respect i don't think it can be understated just hpw related both nation are in terms of there history, culture and in many ways shared struggle. in some ways scotland is almost like an alternative history ireland. and speaking of the scot-irish influence on north america cant be understated scotland in the british empire had a certain ability to punch well above it wait in terms of influence, the irish of course didn't have that same amount of influence in terms of history as a direct result of british racism and anti-irish sentiments but culturally especially in the american south the influence can be seen quite clearly.
A lot of things but mostly that Atlantic Celts are roughly related and somewhat similar to Basques in many markers (Y-DNA, blood groups, etc.) However autosomal (nuclear, recombinable) DNA indicates they are part of a Northern European cluster which spans from Ireland to Russia. It also seems that the modern markers (pointing in both directions) only appeared in the Bell Beaker period (at least in North Ireland) and that there's been mostly genetic continuity since then (previously Ireland's inhabitants were more Mediterranean, something Spanish or Sardinian like).
@Oculus Prime It's your logic that it's faulty. We were talking about Europeans and what they did, have done and still do; and you decided to jump into the "others are also mean" wagon (childish). Nobody was mentioning Asians and Africans until you decided to applied your so-called logical argumentation by "reminding" the world that all ethnic groups can be as horrible as white supremacist. Of course they can. So, what? Leaving behind your parallel universe, and coming back to this one and only planet/reality/history: My statement stands firmly. You are welcome.
June Purple-Tea you try to sound complex and intelligent, but all you achieve is sounding emotional and incapable of doing anything but playing victim to western culture.
@Mike Scattergood I don't try anything, if you find I sound complex and intelligent, that's about your perception. Btw, I'm European, as "white" as a human being can be. I'm all Western culture. How you came to the conclusion that I could play the victim to my own culture is beyond my understanding.
The Picts were good warriors. They were all hand-pict.
That was really good😅
😂
Dude....
Lol!
Picts are good Warriors... Ross' are the Direct Descendant of the Old Pict Lairds, bra! Pict is for Painted People, Picts never called themselves Picts, that's what Romans did, and now Historians. So if we painted ourselves for battle, because of Germs, and infection was the real killer, it really was, but than we started running around in Kilts (Folded up many times working as Dick Armor, and a Sleeping Bag, or very crappy tent!), and Ross' the old Pict Lairds had sweet armor, and no longer painted ourselves for Battle, we are no longer the same people because the Culture of Painting ourselves went away or eventually the English didn't let us speak our languages or do our Clan Systems so 1000 years later, and than Two Highland Clearances, because I am a Highlander and inside me flows the Blood of Kings, and we know who we are, oh sure maybe a Brown or a Mackenzie as a name means nothing, but the Greatest Clan in Scotland, the Great Clan Ross was Pedigrees mee boi! Like many others, we known who we are, and who you are, A Low Lander! A Pathetic Low Lander! Technically Easter Ross (yes like Game of Thrones, that's were the auther went for inspiration, to Ross-shire, the former Earldom of Ross!) is Low Lands, biggest open area in all the Highlands, but Ross' are from Wester Ross, we just took over Easter Ross, and kicked all the Viking Lairds out from the Highlands and Around, and Came Up off them! You don't mess with the Picts Pal... I mean, that's a Rossist Term! I shouldn't say that! You shouldn't mess with the Race of the Priest, Ra-oss!
"King of the who?"
"King of the Britons"
"Who are the Britons?"
"Well we all are, we are all Britons."
"I didn't know we had a King. I though we were an autonomous collective."
Because you only know history from 1066.
At least twenty kings were referred to as "King of the Britons", while others were given related titles or descriptions. The table below also contains the paramount native Welsh rulers in the Norman and Plantagenet periods - by this time only Wales (or parts thereof) remained under Brittonic rule in Britain and the term "Britons" (Brythoniaid, Brutaniaid) was used in Britain to mean the Welsh people (Cymry in modern Welsh). This, and the diminishing power of the Welsh rulers relative to the Kings of England, is reflected in the gradual evolution of the titles by which these rulers were known from "King of the Britons" in the 11th century to "Prince of Wales" in the 13th.[2]
"Well, I didn't vote for you..."
Haha. “Autonomous collective” is pretty much how William of Poitiers understood the political structure of Brittany. People there just do what they like, he’d say: men and women sleep with whom they please, everyone goes around armed to repel Normans, and they even work their own land with no one to tell them otherwise.
jones whooooosh
And here we see the violence inherent in the system
My dad was Scottish and I was raised at the knee of Scottish history. He knew Scottish history like the back of his hand as his mother had traced the family back to ancient Kings. He would still ask me where did the picts come from? He wasn't even sure but he knew I studied Scottish history as well and would ask me because he thought maybe I found out. He would ask me every couple of years and I couldn't answer him. He's gone now and I wish I could answer him!
I heard the picts shared alot with the Cornovii tribe but not sure…
Bullshit
No one ever admits to tracing their family back to anyone else but kings. There werent ancient kings. There was an Irish war lord (aka Scot) Fergus McFerchard back in 330 or you could go for Kenneth MacAlpine in 843. But since we are all descended from one or two fecund chaps back in the 10th century, (no idea how that works) who cares?
Wonderful history lesson making the unique Scottish ancestry come alive. Grateful for your efforts.
They did not get on well. What on earth do you base your lies? The Irish fought the Scottish and the Scottish fought the Welsh and the Welsh fought the English. The anglonormans fought the Irish and the British fought the irish. Go to SW Wales and see the English settlers, or the SE of Scotland and see the English settlers, or to Glasgow and see the Irish settlers, or to Ulster. The remnants of those tribes still hate each other and consider the other invaders.
You've nailed Celtic identity here Hilbert. I too believe that Celts were and are a cultural phenomena.
Hello fellow Sullivan, lol. Anyways, I'd have to disagree, Insular Celtic peoples are genetically distinguished from the rest of Europe to be considered their own genetic ethnic groups. To be Celtic, is not only cultural and linguistic, but also can be genetic.
A lot of people associate this theory with Celtic supremacists, I personally think that's ridiculous. Why is it every other ethnic group has genetic distinction but somehow Celts don't?
Celt itself is really an umbrella term to refer to multiple ethnic groups.
@@Slapnuts9627 I'd say it's both. Insular celts are definitely distinguished genetically because of their insulae nature and living on islands. However the reality too is that most of Europe is/was Celtic. Meaning, 1) Racially European, 2)Spoke or speaks a Celtic language.
3)Practices/practiced a Celtic Culture & religion i.e. worshipping Gods that are associated with the Celtic expression, other materials and art styles etc.
@@Slapnuts9627 The Celts were a cultural phenomena. That doesn't prevent many of the peoples who were and still are Celtic in culture (or cultural ancestry) from being genetically distinct from others. The entire point about the Celts being a cultural phenomena is that they comprised so many genetically distinct peoples, from the Insular Celts, to the Gauls, to the Celt-Iberians, and others.
Celt as a term has acquired two separate meanings, one is that of the Celts, the historical peoples who were engaged in the Celtic culture across Europe, comprising of many genetically distinct populations, whose people haven't gone extinct but have since abandoned Celtic culture.
The other meaning is that of the current Celtic Peoples, those of the Celtic Nations, the Insular Celts. Who are a set of genetically related Celtic peoples whose languages have survived into the modern day, being the only group of Celts whose languages have managed to survive.
The term's dual definitions is the source of the confusion, there's nothing stopping the peoples of the Celtic Nations from using the term Celtic. The only issue arises when Celtic supremacists try to muddy the definitions for political reasons.
@@treeaboo Its never about Celtic supremacy, it's about Celtic survival.
I was under the impression that the term Pict was taken from the roman name for these warring tribes "Picti" so called because they were covered in tattoos
Actually, I think they were tattooed mainly on the face and head. The warrior with the blue face and funky hair in "braveheart" was supposed to be a "Pict", as was Franco Columbo in the 1st "Conan" movie..
My "the history of Scotland" book says they tattooed their faces and did their hair up with mud to Make themselves look fierce to their enemy.
wasn't Guinevere supposed to be a pict ???
@@nunyab1836 From King Arthur? I think she was french
Nunya B Guinevere was a fictional character
I think this is a great channel but I think nowadays before people jump on the new wave bandwagon pertaining to celtic studies they need to analyse DNA. It appears to be overwhelmingly probable that the subhaplogroup R1B P312 and it's subclades can be classified as the Celtic branch of the indo European haplogroup R1B, just like R1B S21 is accepted to be the Germanic branch. Every ancient celtic skeleton that has been tested belongs to this specific genetic marker, and it perfectly reflects modern distribution across the continent, with highly varied concentrations where it has been replaced by Germanic lineages. P312 was the genetic signature of the Gauls, Gaels, Picts, Britons, Belgae, Galatians etc, which informs us that in the early bronze age when linguistic groups separated and the proto celtic culture developed in the alpine area, it was in isolation long enough from other peoples to undergo a polymorphism, making those of proto celtic descent recognisable within genome testing, and proving the existence of a Celtic "race", in the same sense that there is a Germanic, and Italic and Slavic "race"
P312 appears to originate in Southern France, maybe in Aquitaine but France's genetic studies are extremely scarce and is very high and quite diverse among Basques and also among some other historically non-Celtic populations like Iberians or Ligurians. It's certainly a pre-Celtic marker.
The haplotype R1b populations are discernible from the end of the ice age, the present Holocene period. There are documented examples of carbon dated skeletal DNA from the first repopulation of Britain not only having the same haplotype but being directly related to living people in Britain today. The simplistic population replacement theory of history is not, (in my view,) the definitive answer to the true story of our past. New research on nuclear and mitochondrial DNA markers is becoming available for our analysis every year and we cannot yet write the conclusion to our story.
Exactly. The Ancient Britons were only 10% Celtic, and the Anglo-Saxons were never in a majority, nor did they drive the Britons up into the mountains. It's all a myth, and DNA analysis is starting to prove that.
@Alan F. Brookes: what about this (Martiniano 2016): www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10326
@Seumas na Tuaighe: have I missed any recent archaeogenetic research that (finally!) proves that R1b is found in Western Europe "from the end of the ice age"? Because that's one of the most controversial issues of European population genetics and last time I checked there was nothing of the kind (for lack of enough research basically).
On the subject of Pictish language, I once read an account of a Roman general who had gone on a expedition (punitive?) into the far north of Scotland. He used translators, generally hiring people locally, then pushing north. The translators were generally able to translate the local (Brythonic) dialect reasonably well. However he said that up in the far north the translators were useless, saying the local language was unrelated to their (British) dialects.
What I take from this is that a pre-Celtic language was surviving in the far north of Pictland in Roman times (but probably not too long afterwards, and wiped out by the Norsemen at the very latest).
To make it short, the Vikings that invaded England/Northern isles
Don't know that this means anything to this thread, but I read that 90% of the original Irish were wiped out, but not known how. I have a grandparent come from Ireland to England with a very recognizable Irish name, but DNA says 3% Irish. The main DNA on that side is mainly northern Europe for me.
@ontyam Vikings were from Norway, Denmark and Sweden.
@ontyam Yes, they are also called the Northmen, also Norsemen. They spoke a language called Norse, hence, Norsemen. Their languages are still called the Norse languages, which include Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish.
Northmen probably because they came from an area north of mainland Europe.
There have been found pict glyphs and symbols related to the hamitic Berber languages. The Picts were descendants of the early first Sumerians/Capsians - as were the Black Irish and the Black Welsh and the Pelasgians and the Ligurians and partly the Berber and Libyans and Minoer on Crete and the Phoenicians
"You don't win by winning a war. You win by writing that you won the war." So often true!
10:20 - Beautiful carved stone!
Well you have to win the war first before you can write about winning it. Or, at least, the war has to be a draw.
See Ramses II’s account of his war with the Hittites. If you go by his version he won a great victory, where the truth is he barely managed to avoid disaster. In the end, Ramses war was a draw. But that didn’t stop him tell his own rather colored version of it. I’m sure the Romans weren’t any different.
Not only by writing that you won the war, but by breeding with the their women and mixing with them, much like the great Normans did in France!!!
Not that often! Thought about twice: Never!
I think we can see this in the current need to reshape history and culture.
War is always a racket. The occult leaders always play both sides. That is why war is also known as Theater. The Soul Diers are Pion eers that must be eliminated, to relieve the debt on the Crown. Its all an Act. World war one and World war 2 were Both Phony Phoenician wars. They set everyone up on both sides, for their own wealth and rule. They even knew back then that this date in time would come, for a virus. The Age of Aquarius and the new Lord Authority for the new religion and the new World order.
I've binged watched most of your videos and learnt more than I ever did in conventional history lessons. I appreciate it 👌
Dear Hilbert, i enjoyed this video enormously! i've actually watched this third video about the Picts first, but look forward to watching the other two. This is fascinating, and cheerful, and just great. I hope you make lots of videos about all kinds of things! Thanks!
Way too complicated for me. I'll just tell my friends that the Picts were warriors, who dyed themselves blue, and killed anyone on the battlefield who were not blue.
I believe the women fought naked along with them or was that Ireland? Maybe both.
Some went on to be successful mascots for Gaviscon.
Josh Wallace some women did fight along with the men the other women looked after the old and young away from the battle ,back home in their community's
Josh Wallace have you been to Scotland it's not that warm, yes they painted the self's blue and red all over before battle but did have clothes, it's showing the birth and death ,they came in naked to this world they will leave this world the same ...naked. ready to die.
And were promptly stomped by Rome for sport, their land basically being used as a human hunting field whenever a general got bored of not killing things.
The Pre Celtic of Scotland were Siberian’s, they came across an archipelago from Scandinavia as the ice caps retreated.
The Sami of Finland are a close relation of the Scots. These settlers took with them, the now named, Highland cattle, whose closest relation is the Yak.
The Picts are probably an integration of Siberian and Celtic people’s. Like most people in the north of Scotland, my DNA is Siberian, I’m related not just to the Sami, but the Inuits and Canadian Indians. I think that’s exotic!
Is this for reals mate? WTF
This is interezting.
longliveavalon12 Afraid so.
Robert Miles it’s interesting alright Robert.
Blows all this race stuff away 👍
Not to forget Russ or Russia is derived from the Nordics, hence Scotlands links to both sharing much later St. Andrew.
I'm currently studying my ancestry, and this is where it has led me. Gotta say this is pretty cool! To go back with my family's history to it's original beginning, it opens up a whole new can of research and discovery.
Mate. There is no original beginning. You can keep going back and back and back…
All fruits of Earth... same people same problem one planet.
The Bible says God was in the beginning. Makes sense. Nothing else does. He has to be the Creator.
In the beginning, He was...
Our mind can't comprehend it, so we make up things. But when we do, we're wrong.
God allows that, for He will judge us on how we lived and acknowledged Him.
Most here want to be acknowledged, actually all do, just not so much publicly.
Do you know that we got that desire from God?
Only God is good, acknowledge Him, for we are not ALL good. Be honest.
Studying your ancestry is an art. It led me to the Caucasus mountains.
There have been some theories that the Picts were related to the Basque and are indigenous to Northern Europe. There are so many cultures that were destroyed by the Romans. What would the world look like if dominance didn't equal destruction.
There is genetic evidence on the Y-Chromosome to imply that the natives of the British Isles in general are related to the Basques, it's most prominent in the Welsh and Irish but also highly prominent in the Scots, Manx, Cornish, and English.
It seems quite possible that the Celts being a cultural phenomena, had taken root culturally within all of pre-Roman Britain and Ireland except for the lands of the Picts, who had retained the older language and culture. The Picts being genetically of the same group as the Britons and Gaels, but having not adopted the Celtic cultural phenomenon.
In your language chart, Breton is shown as descending directly from ancient Gallic/Gaulish. I've always thought it was mainly Brythonic, i.e. closely related to Welsh and Cornish. In fact, I think written Cornish looks like a transitory form between Welsh and Breton - it's got the w's and y's of Welsh, and the k's, e's and z's of Breton.
You're absolutely right here Mauer because the Bretons were really Celtic Britons fleeing the Anglo-Saxons. I will change this in future videos :)
It can confuse people a lot, because Breton is spoken in a formerly Gaulish-speaking area. Even Goscinny and Uderzo chose to place the main action in Astérix there, because of the region's association with all things Celtic.
Yes indeed, I think I made the language map in France once upon a time for my video on the Gauls though I'll correct it for future videos. That's true, today Brittany is the most Celtic region of France, especially with the Breton language still being spoken there :)
Welsh isn't directly related to Bryrhonic as a lot of it language comes from Old Irish especially since the Bryrhonic language was seriously damaged by the Romans adoption of Latin. Also Wales had huge Irish settlements and a lot of Welsh Nobility went to schools in Ireland. So Welsh really is a P Q language as a lot of the vocabulary and language structure is Old Irish;
I have to correct you on that one, B Mc. The number of Irish loanwords in Welsh is extremely small. Cadach (rag) and cnwc (hill) are some of the very few examples - and some place names like Llyn and Dinllaen. The Irish immigrants in Wales had been assimilated into the Welsh language by 600AD.
The map says Welsh, Britons. Welsh is a Saxon word which the Saxons called the native Britons.
That's true but I'm speaking English which is a Germanic language made from the dialects of the Saxons and Angles (bit of Jutish and Frisian probably too) so I will call them Welsh too ;-)
History With Hilbert Old English was almost indistinguishable from Old Frisian to start with I have read.Modern English & Frisian are very different however, although there are some elements that have been retained.There is very little Central or Higher German influence on English.The English language only has influences from Ingvaeonic & Norse (Scandinavian) which are connected anyway, but again have deviated alot over the last 1000 years.English has very little DNA from Saxon, Angles (very little historical background), Jutes (small trace in Kent etc.), I1 haplo-groups are predominent there .The most prominent haplo-groups in England are still pre-Celtic as they in Wales, Lowland Scotland.All these countries have more modern offshoots of this pre-Celtic DNA (The ininitial source is the same, however).England, especially in East Midlands has lower levels of Frisian / Netherland haplo-groups r1b-s21.Southern England has Belgic R1b-U152 (especially Kent 10%).The Welsh language (initially spoken in both Lowland Scotland & the majority of England) is said to have been spread to Britain by these Belgic people.Wales has predominently R1b-l21, however.Therefore a different R1b group spread / transformed their language as it did to Lowland Scotland.Scots is actually related to Old English / Old Frisian.There is very little Norman DNA left in England, although the Norman French language had significant effect on the English language, along with Latin through Roman Catholic Church influence.
There are studies being carried out that Old English absorbed Britonic Syntax as English Syntax (or the way words are formed into sentances) is very different to Modern German, Dutch, Frisian or Flemish or related dialects and is more of a similar nature to Modern Welsh.
Too call English a Germanic / Ingaevonic language is far too simplistic, especially in the modern sense of the languages which have very much diverged of the centuries.
Robertus Antoninus The Welsh Rb1-L21 is pre-Celtic even as it is in England.The predominent haplogroup in UK is descended from a proto-Italic-Celtic-Germanic population.The people who carried these haplogroups wouldn't have known what these divisions were.Perhaps they defined themselves into different ethnic divisions in other ways that has now been lost to time.These are all modern assumptions of a time long gone.
Welsh are gauls , in French welsh = Galois
Tom Palfrey Exactly mate, example...loads of countries speak English now, that does not mean all those natives of all those countries are English.
Language does not necessarily identify ethnic identity...many ethnic groups adopt foreign languages giving up their own.
The Gauls for instance!
French, for example.
Language does define ethnic identity. The Picts were literally lost to history and considered an extinct people before modern advances showed they were just Gaelicized. The importance of language simply cannot be stated enough when it comes to distinguishing yourself as an ethnic group. The Picts became Gaelic speakers and in doing so were absorbed into an ethnolinguistic group and lost all claim to distinction.
They are not only using the language to prove this but language also leaves a trail
Munja I thought that was obvious to anyone that studies history.
As a Scot, this is an important issue for me. There is now a scholarly consensus that the Picts, as you mentioned, spoke a P Celtic language. I really don't care if the Celts are an ethnic group or simply a Cultural and Linguistic one. It is the latter that matters to me. However, there is some recent evidence to suggest that the Celts did arrive in the British Isles from mainland Europe.
Of course they did. Where else was there to come from? :)
The Ancient Britons came over from Southern Europe about 12,000 BC as the ice receded. They had to come from Southern Europe because Northern Europe was still covered in ice.
The Celts arrived in Britain about 400 BC and were never anything but a small minority. But over the next 400 years the Britons took on Celtic ways and the mixture of the language of the Celtic settlers and the existing Britons became Brythonic, the main Celtic language spoken all over the British Isles at one time.
Can you say more?
"The Vulnerable Bede" is priceless art, man.
Today marks the first time I've encountered the term, or even the notion of, "Celtic supremacists".
I can only Picture who they were.
I see what you did there :D ...
I thought it was pretty good xD
Hey! For that pun, I have a bone to pict with you!
There's surprisingly little genetic evidence for the Roman presence in Britain. For that matter, neither the Anglo-Saxons nor the Vikings left as much genetic evidence as you would expect. (See Neil Oliver's series, "The Faces of Britain" for more information about this.)
I'm a descendant of Pict royalty. Wiki 'Forbes clan.'
I think you have by far the most positive comment feedback or any youtuber I've seen so far. :)
I would absolutely agree, subscribblers don't come better than the ones subscribbled to History with Hilbert, could not be happier with everyone here!
Lol so true.
First Last. Crap off. Ha Ha pwoaned you blud.
Whenever I am graced with an "explanation" of the picts, I finish up more confused than before the "explanation"!
That is common when studying pre-literate societies, or societies with writing systems we haven't managed to translate yet.
Isn't it time somebody got round to digging up some bone-fide pictish bones and doing a DNA-analysis on them? This would at least prove or disprove the Basque connection.
Many academics believe that the Picts, like most of peoples of Britain and Ireland, were mainly descended from the Beaker People who arrived around 4400 years ago. Also if one considers ancient Iberia to be representative of the Basques then their connection to the Picts was investigated in 2018, see link: www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2018/february/the-beaker-people-a-new-population-for-ancient-britain.html
The study of over 400 ancient skeletons from western and central Europe, involving the UK Natural History Museum, shows that, during the Bronze Age 4500 years ago, the Beaker culture spread into central Europe from Iberia without a significant movement of people. Skeletons from Beaker burials in Iberia are not genetically close to central European Beaker skeletons.
Large megalithic structures such Stonehenge were built in Britain by Neolithic (or New Stone Age) people, who were replaced by the Bronze Age Beaker population
Britain saw significant population changes, however. Beaker culture was taken up by a group of people living in Central Europe whose ancestors had previously migrated from the Eurasian Steppe (thought by most to be the Indo-European homeland). This group continued to migrate west and finally arrived in Britain around 4,400 years ago
The DNA data suggests that over a span of several hundred years, the migrations of people from continental Europe led to an almost complete replacement of Britain's earlier (Neolithic) inhabitants.
The Beakers were Indo-European but not Celtic culturally. Thousands of years later the descendants of the Beakers living in the north of Scotland became culturally Celtic either by immigration from Central Europe (the Celtic homeland) or by cultural adoption or perhaps a combination of both.
No such thing as respecting the dead anymore. Anyone notice that?
I found these , I think in one of these links they are on about doing DNA,
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39002843
www.realmofhistory.com/2017/07/21/facial-reconstruction-pictish-man-scotland/
@@molecatcher3383 have you seen the facial reconstruction of the Stonehenge man, he was no beaker people.
www.newscientist.com/article/dn24811-stonehenge-man-not-just-a-pretty-face/
@@de-bo2515 Thanks for that link which I read. You are right that he was not a Beaker but he was of Neolithic farmer, and probably Mesolithic hunter gatherer descent. He lived before the Beakers had arrived in Britain. One thing which does not seem right is that they said he had a hint of ginger in his hair indicating Celtic origins. It is not possible that he could have been of Celtic descent because at that time there were no Celts in Britain or even in Western Europe. This story was from 2014 but the link that I gave in my earlier comment was from 2018 which confirmed that there had been a 90% population replacement in Britain with the arrival of the Beakers. Given that the DNA of Britain barely changed between the Beakers and the departure of the Romans this confirms also that the Stonehenge man could not be of Celtic descent.
Pictish surnames often ended in “is or es” such as Forbes which in their homeland is still pronounced Forbis.The names Burns was originally Burnis the poet Robert Burns family came from the North East and changed the spelling of their name when they move south to Ayrshire,presumably to avoid discrimination so as late as the 18th century there was still an awareness of the different ethnic heritage of the commoners in Scotland.Another group often cropping up in the ‘folk’history of Scotland is the Galloway Picts who inhabited the inland parts of the south west.The term “Creenies,”survives into the modern era,and is used to describe the isolated peoples of Galloways uplands,the name evolving from the Gaelic word for Picts. 11:04
Bro, thank you so much for this information. I'm trying to revive the ancient languages, and the pictish will be my first. I didn't know this nice facts. Thank you very much.
Interesting theories on the Picts. I had forgotten about Basque and the theory that it's not Indo-European is very intriguing. I loved that henge joke.
"It's got a nice ring to it.."
Thank you very much! A French teacher of mine was a Basque hence why I know a little about it :D Yes!! I'm glad someone got it, I'll be sure to add some more historical humour in the next one too :D
History With Hilbert
I'll be sure to look out for more humour in the next one.
I just built my own mini-model of Stonehenge that I got for Christmas, so that joke is even better.
LegoMonkeycat That was a good present then! I swear I didn't know xD
Yeah, this video kinda got me motivated to take it out of the box and construct it.
The Picts never wore tattos they wore body painting. You can find evidence for tattooed Vikings, Egyptians and most people that used tattoos but non when it comes to The Picts and bodies have been found well preserved in bogs and such that didn’t have them so they most likely didn’t have tattoos but painted their bodies
As a question, does that mean modern British have Italian ancestry in them through the Romans?
Loved this presentaiton. Thoughtfully organized, professionally articulated. And the graphics (maps &c) helped immeasurably. Excellent job. Now I have to watch all your other presentations, as well !
The fact that Basque is definitely no indoeuropean language does not mean it was the only pre-indoeuropean language in Europe. It may be the only one left. To assume there were no others in such a large region in such pre-ancient times is contradictory to the high variety of languages we find elsewhere.
Scythia - sɪðiə, not an "i" as in sigh, but an "i" as in hit :)
aside from that, an interesting video.
Very interesting documentary.
The origin of the Picts has been a matter of intense debate among scholars for centuries now . The Celtic theory has been strongly defended by professor Forsythe lately .
However , I have to disagree . I think the Picts were NOT Indo-Europeans .
The capital of the Pictish kingdom was Urqhart , in the lake Ness . The main castle is almost entirely surrounded by water . Ur means water in Basque , the only pre Indo-European language alive today in Western Europe . URARTE or Ugarte means island or between water in Basque . Ure is an important river in Scotland. There are other roots like Ibar , Ara or Aber that are common in Basque as well as they are common toponymic roots in Scotland .
Are you familiar with the work of Gerald Massey?
He would also re-iterate that the Picts were not an Indo-European people. See a book of the beginnings Vol 1, for a toponymic comparison of major places in Scotland & England.
With your images, I would recommend displaying the dates of which you're speaking.
The Picts were probably a pre-IE people who acquired a Celtic language when the Celts arrived in Britannia. There are Pictish inscriptions in Scotland written in a Celtic language, but there are also inscriptions written in an unintelligible pre-IE language. So it's probable that for a certain period the Picts were bilingual, still speaking their ancestral pre-IE language and speaking Celtic to communicate with the Celtic tribes living in the south. The Celtic language eventually prevailed, totally replacing the ancestral language.
the Scots and the Irish have always been intertwined it seems
My forefathers were Scandinavian/Viking from Norway that landed In Scotland and Ireland around the 1000's although Viking Is an immature name to call them In the context most people use it and think of It. My family Hewison comes from the ancient Scottish Dalriadan Clans of Argyllshire and the ancient Kingdom of Dál Riata. Descended from the MacDonalds of Sleat. the largest and most powerful of Highland clans, Lords of the Isle. Our Motto: By sea and by land. Norwegian longships were the most advanced naval designs In the world at that time. And they taught the Anglo-Saxons and Britons new military tactics before successfully Integrating themselves into their new cultures. Vikings eventually came to Rule France, Normandy and the British Isles by way of marriage and power.
Aryans. The history has been erased.
Scots and Irish are both Middle Eastern.
Ever hear of the Scottish Rite? Ever wonder why the Washington Monument is an Egyptian Obelisk? lol Same thing. The Royals are scam artist Nazis and they lie about everything.
So basically, without the Whole Nine Yards, Aryans ruled the world for the Age of Aries, for at least those 2000 years. Then the rulers reset the calender to zero and began conversions into Semitism. Romans killed anyone who did not comply and they were together with Islam and the Jews. There is only 1 Religion. Then there are cults of that 1 religion and we call them Religions. But they are cults of the same religion. Men killing other men. For beliefs.
Excellent video! As about one quarter of my blood comes from the Picts, I have always been interested in their history. As you mentioned, historians cannot agree on this topic. You did a good job of delineating all the possibilities.
Please explain your claim that one quarter of your blood is Pictish.
1) I would not dismiss the Bede version completely given the numerous other groups that did cross to britain from Scandinavia over time.
2) there is however, strong genetic evidence for an Iberian connection to the post-ice age Irish who became the pre-Norman gaelic.
3) Like linguistics, I think an analysis of place-names would provide more to the discussion.
4) The proximity of Ulster to SW Scotland is a hard thing to ignore. Iona and the Irish monastic movement that went all the way to Northumbria after the Romans left shows that.
I suppose a researcher might try to analyze mitochondrial dna in known Pict descendants for a clue about the Irish women in Bede's story.
Thanks for posting your information.
Some other things to support Bede's claims:
1) Early Pictish stones are identical to Gottland stones. I'm talking identical symbols, identical layouts, identical borders, identical art styles... it is staggering that this is not being studied by academics
2) Picture stones themselves only occur in Germanic areas with the sole exception of the Picts
3)The Romans frequently professed a Germanic identity or at least origin to the Caledonians/Picts, including Tacitus (who was kind of the authority on Germanic peoples at the time)
4)Their language is repeatedly stated to be distinct from both the Britons (Welsh) and the Gaels (Irish)
5) Bede spoke Old English, this language was very similar to the languages of Scandinavia as the English had originated in the same general region as Norse did, so he would likely know a Scandinavian peoples if he encountered them
6) Pictish stones show them hunting with falcons, which at the time in Europe was only practiced by the Goths an other Germanic tribes who adopted it from the Huns, there's also no evidence that any other peoples of the British Isles practiced falconry at this time
7) Pictish areas are extremely close geographically to Scandinavia and it's highly unlikely they had not been trading and interacting for a long time
8) Ptolemy seems to record a tribe of Lugii around Caithness in the 150s
9) We know the Picts did have some kind of interaction with the Germanic peoples as they coordinated with Saxons and Franks to invade Rome in the Barbarian Conspiracy where they ravaged Britannia for a year along with the Irish
10) The Picts are eventually believed to have been slowly Gaelicized over centuries, the only other recorded group we have this happening to were... the Norse who settled western Scotland and Ireland around the same time the Picts were being Gaelicized
11) Pictish stones literally depict Loki
While I wouldn't go so far as to claim they were a Germanic people, I think it's kind of undeniable that there was Germanic influence on the Picts, it's a question of how much and whether they were perhaps an early Germanic people (so perhaps proto-Norse or even proto-Germanic) who settled the British Isles and just became slowly Celticized over the centuries due to various factors.
3:19 Breton has two dialects: the one spoken in Kernev, Tregor and Leon is close to Cornish. The one in Vannes is a form of Welsh and Welsh names like Ridoredh occur there.
thas wild.
Interesting that the Ogham alphabet was used as text by the Irish Celts, the Welsh Celts and the Picts.
To me that suggests an ancestral connection to all three cultures.
Great video by the way. Louie.
Ogham is thought to have first appeared around 400AD by which time the peoples you mention were already distinct from each other. The Picts were later converted to Christianity by Irish missionaries would have passed on knowledge of Ogham to them.
Never heard about the Picts or Welsh using Ogham.
The Ogham script was used solely by the Irish as far as I know, and it was limited to very short dedications. The few inscriptions found in Scotland are attributed to early settlements of Gaels from Ireland, if I'm not mistaken. The script appears very shortly before the Christianization of Ireland and the adoptions of the Latin script, so it never had any chance to truly shine.
@@elimalinsky7069 ogham writings have been found in scotland. most likely pictish. there was no settlments of gaels from ireland. the gaels were already here
@@brucecollins4729 But the Gaels came from Ireland. The Scots are people from Ireland originally.
@@elimalinsky7069 no, that,s only ever been based on mythical writings. type in.....irish and scottish gaels on irish origenes...this is the most believable i,ve came across so far. irish historians now concede the 1st people to enter ireland came from scotland
Jeez, this comments section. So many genetics experts in the world isn't there...
A lot of people who have studied genetics look at videos like this. Why skeptical?
And what the Picts show is that genetics are irrelevant if you lose your language, at the end of the day. As you will be lost to history and grouped with the people whose language to switched to. Nobody claims to be a Pict today, do they, regardless of what their genetics say.
That's because people think that the genetic tests from 23andMe and Ancestry are real genetic tests and not just for the fun of it. Even the companies acknowledge that these tests are nowhere near as good as true genetic testing.
@@stardust86x Science, including genetics, has no use for political ideologies. It is facts, not feelings, that matter.
@@palepilgrim1174 no it's the opposite. What the Picts show is that genetics doesn't matter. ..some do still see themselves as Pict.
New subscriber thank you for this channel I love prechristian history. A day without learning is a day waisted
Learn how to spell wasted
For MaximillianMus - You just backed up the point being made! Thank you Captain Pompous Arse of the Grammar Police
It seems most likely to me that the Picts are just the Britons who were never conquered by Rome. Both the name “Briton” and “Pict” are exonyms that were given to the peoples of this island by the Romans. They called the island Britain, and therefore the people who lived on it and their language British. They then conquered most of Britain, so the term Briton came to refer to that subset of Roman subjects that were from Britain. But when they failed to conquer the top third of the island, they needed a new exonym for those people that were still not under Roman rule (the term Briton no longer being a term for people outside the empire), so they called them the “painted ones” - Picts. After 350 years of Roman occupation, the people on either side of the dividing wall came to regard themselves as different peoples, so the names Briton and Pict stuck into the post-Roman era. But there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of a clear ethnic dividing line before the Romans split the island. So were just different branches of the same people group.
Then why would that roman expedition's translators not be useful up in PIctland and only in around Strathclyde?
@@joda7129 The Celtic Culture and Languages were a cultural phenomenon, not a genetic one. Many disparate and genetically distinct peoples were Celtic at varying stages of the culture's lifespan.
It's highly likely that the Picts, being on the northernmost tip of the island, in the highlands, hadn't yet adopted the Celtic culture and language, whereas those populations who were of the same genetic stock to the south of them had done. Likely being that the rest of Britain and Ireland once spoke that same language, before those same peoples later adopted the Celtic culture.
Those highland regions were relatively more remote than Ireland was to Britain, with extensive trade, travel, raiding, and cultural exchange between the Britons and Gaels prior and during the Roman Era of Britain. Hence they both became Celtic, whereas the Picts retained the older culture that the others also once shared in.
Fantastically in - depth! Thank you, I now know more about my Welsh-ness than in all my life until now. Regards, T.
Basque is a unique non-Indo-European language and has been in place at least since Roman times, as loanwords from Latin with ki- instead of ci-, and Basque names in Roman inscriptions, show. In Roman times, it was spoken north of the Pyrenees too. But the 'Vascon hypothesis', that most of Europe, or at least Western Europe, spoke languages related to Basque, is very vague and impossible to prove. It relies mostly on river names that are similar throughout Europe, like Ebro in Spain, Ivre in France, and Ebrach in Germany. Both Indo-Europeanists and experts on Basque have severely doubted the hypothesis. It has been suggested that even Turkish could be related to Basque if this hypothesis were true. But Turkish definitely is not, for it came from Central Asia in the Middle Ages.
I have some ideas about the Picts. Suppose for instance, that they didn't come from Scythia or any other part of Europe, but instead were the people of the Northern Isles, the descendants of the hunter gatherers who were displaced from Doggerland Not because they suddenly got flooded out, but because the followed the herds of food to higher ground, which eventually became the Orkneys and Shetlands. Now, there's not much in the way of woodland there so to build habitation they used the one material of which there is plenty: Stone!
Scara Brae is so sophisticated that we recognise the dressers, beds, fireplaces, fresh food storage boxes and the village in general.The layout and structure of the Neolithic house in Scara Brae is not much different to the layout of the Black House of the last millennium! These were the people who knew how to use stone architecturally. They invented corbelled roofs, they counted their year by observation of the cosmos from the huge stone circles and other monoliths that they constructed. They were the people of the stones, so let's say that instead of repeating the worn out mantra's of the classically educated historians of the past, that civilization came from the East, shall we consider that there may have been a civilization that spread from the North all the way down Western Europe and maybe beyond, of which the People of Northern Scotland were the last remnant. Their philosophies and customs and community knowledge having been expunged from the record by the influence of Christianity, which most definitely did, like the Roman culture, come from the Mediterranean.
Well said. Would you postulate that these were melanated people and thus their accomplishments have been downplayed?
The Picts were mighty cartoonists who created a host of animated adventures, as commanded by their all-powerful Leader, the Pict-Czar.
This is hilarious idk why it doesn’t have more likes
Hardly all powerful. They are gone now. Bu Bye. Put that blue chalk on your pool cue as a reminder. lol
Looks like they ended up being converted into Russians from Aryans, by the Royals. If they had a Czar. lol All Middle Eastern anyway.
@@je-freenorman7787 Please don't ever reproduce.
The Pict-Czar. Love it.
I have always wondered what ancient peoples had lived in Britain before the Celts! Your video was very interesting! I'm going to watch more of your videos! ~Janet in Canada (I am half Scottish, on my Dad's side)
The documentary called ,'THe Celts'.. can shed more light
Well, it is generally considered these days, that the "Celtic people of Britain" were the original inhabitants from the time of the Ice Age. Much like when the Normans (French Vikings) invaded, Danes (Danish Vikings) invaded, Anglo-Saxons (Northern Germans) invaded, Scots (Irish) invaded, Belgae (Belgian Celtic/Germanic people) invaded, all that changed was the "nobility" and the languages. Most of the underlying general population stayed the same.
As a yank I don't know what the word is to describe England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales as a whole entity. It seems you folks can't even agree on that term, so it leaves us outsiders hopelessly confused. So I will say "British Isles" to describe all 4 nations as one entity. (I've heard the Irish hate this term and insist on being totally separate. Guess I can't please everyone).
Anyway, a genetic study was published about 2 years ago now which looked at this question. It was a massive study that looked at over 100 ancient skeletons from all over the "British Isles". What they found was that in the bronze age (2500 BC) a major population replacement happened. 90% of the "British Isles" gene pool was replaced in a 400 year period.
So, no, people in the "British Isles" today are not the same as those in the Ice Age or the Neolithic. The population has been very steady since about 2500 BC, however.
Yes these bronze age invaders wiped out the builders of Stonehenge, which is going to keep the archaeologists busy trying to understanding that dynamic. For instance, how did the newcomers view Stonehenge? Did they adopt it or try to destroy it? How about the Druids? Were they part of the old culture that was retained and adopted or did they only arise much later? So many fascinating questions.
Now this is not to say none of the Neolithic folk survived. About 10% did and their DNA is still there today. Actually, I think the average person from the Isles has something like 20-30% Neolithic ancestry, so those guys made a recovery it seems.
And, no, the Anglo-Saxon "invasions" weren't invasions at all really. It was an elite dominance type of scenario where a few impose their will on the many. DNA studies suggest they made little impact. Then again, its hard to tell since the Scandinavians are so closely related in the first place. The people who invaded Britain in the bronze age also invaded all of Northern Europe and replaced those populations too. So the Anglo people were already closely related.
@@Wowzersdude-k5c I have read similar about 90% of the Irish disappearing in ancient times, and as my grandmother has a distinctly Irish name, who came to England, Liverpool in the 1800s, it seems like I should have more than 3% Irish. We have 18% Scandinavian, but the other half of my family came from Sweden. We have a relatively high northern Europe ancestry, most is the Saami, though.
@@Wowzersdude-k5c I find it highly dubious that "90% of the gene pool was changed in 400 years", in a time when mobility was so incredibly slow.
Secondly, and even more dubious, is the fact that these skeletons which were all available for a very long time in modernity for scientific research, ONLY happened to be DNA tested NOW! - and surprisingly all just happened to show the same utterly revolutionary conclusion! Staggering! The armies of previous researchers over the decades had just never thought to conduct DNA tests on them, or had been utterly incompetent when doing so! Staggering!
It definitely wouldn't have anything to do with the notorious glo bal ist revisionism that is presently going on, to seriously distort the origins of things, the origins of peoples, and subvert their connection to and sense of ancient ownership to their native lands! This wouldn't in any way aid, in mass uncontrolled imm ig ration into Europe of course.
So no John Smith: a lot of us here in this part of the World would outrightly reject these silly 'new findings' conducted by 'scientists' for the highest bidders.
Thank you very much for that.
Celtic comes from Greek traders (from Agrika = Farmers) who traveled up the Danube looking for trade and logged timber for their ship building industry.
{The following is an true apocryphal tale:)
There they met a group of respected elders of the inland groups and asked them "Who are you?"
The leader of the group, the spiritual leaders of one of the inland tribes, answered "We are the Ceile' De."
Thereafter the Greeks referred to them as the Keltoi (Kelts), the best the Greek traders could do to explain their discovery of this unknown people. Ceile' De means "Companions of God" or "Servants of God".
Thus the missionaries came to be the identity of the entire peoples of Central and Western Europe, the Kelts (Celts).
Strangely enough, the Romans were also people originally of the Ceile' De, but they were so corrupted that they referred to their priests as Cellis and had no knowledge of that word's meaning.
Julius Caesar bought a high Cellis priesthood for it was a great source of money, then proceeded to slaughter the Helvetians, a most passive tribal group on a peaceful migration to the West coast of Gaul.
The Helveticians were farmers & herdsmen, as well as scholars and physicians and teachers to the tribes. They wore their wealth of purest gold as armlets, bracelets and torques upon their persons as no Gauls would ever do them harm, for they were a Holy People.
Unskilled in war, which they did not practice, they were slaughtered. Survivors mostly women and children were sold into slavery, into the brothels of Rome.
Julius Caesar took the stolen gold and crossed the Rubicon to his death and the death of the Roman Republic.
Abe De Du lop n Dunlap the first orgin of that name
who they are
and we're they came
or.we
While you do have bits of that story , somewhat competently and coherently down....theyre are large flaws in it as well, and to be peddling it is wrong.
The Helveti were no more "Holy" then the Armorica in the West, The Franks of the East, The Aquatani of the South, or the Belgae of the North. All Celtic ( Gaulic ) and all warring with each other constantly! And those "Scholars" murdered just as many innocent Celts in the South of Gaul during their "Invasion" as Ceasar. They were no hero's to those Celts/Gauls.
While I don't always agree with Caesars actions, you can bet he always knew what time it was.....metaphorically speaking.
Blade with Blade, Blood with Blood, Diplomacy with Diplomacy....
A hard man for very hard times. And that goes to my baser point, that was the world of the day, not the creation of some bogeyman named Gaius Cornelis.
The ancestors of the Picts were the tribes who lived in the north of Scotland, beyond the River Tay. In the first century AD, the Romans called these people Britanni, today we think of them as the Caledonii or Caledonians.
The proto-Celtic Britons were already culturally Indo-European (via Beaker migration from northwestern Europe). Earlier inhabitants of the Isles -e.g. the tribes associated with the Boscombe Bowmen and Amesbury Archer remains - that have been linked to Stonehenge and numerous other megalithic sites in the Isles have shown to be genetically indistinguishable from ancient Northern Iberians of the same period (not strictly the Basques). This early Ibero-Brythonic founding population would come to be dispossessed and displaced by subsequent waves of Beakers, proto-Celtic types, Celts, Germanic migrants, and Scandinavian raiders.
The last remnants of the ancient Anglo-Iberians were in fact able to find refuge in the southwestern fringe of Britain - where a modest genetic link to Northern Iberia is still present in much of the local population.
That's interesting. May I ask about your use near the end of your comment of the term aglo-iberian, as I thought that anglo is generally used to refer to the angles who came along later with the jutes and the saxons? Thanks.
Very interesting video, thank you. I read in an article that most of the things Picts left on stones could not not been understood / deciphered (except drawings of ordinary scenes, of course). Curious that their symbolic was so specific.
The Britons of the south also painted themselves blue with woad body paint. In fact, woad production continued in Cambridgeshire until the late 20th century when they replaced it with a synthetic dye. Still blue, though.
It's worth considering that etymologically both Pict and Briton are the same thing. The word 'Briton' being a Romanised corruption of 'Prydain'; 'pryd' in Welsh meaning colour or tint. So the name Britain is accepted in modern history as meaning 'painted', thus named for the inhabitants culture of body painting. 'Pict' means the same but in Latin.
I might posit that 'British' is the older bastardised version of the word Pict, that became a common usage. Perhaps by the time they had established Hadrian's Wall the practice of body painting was discontinued, or even outlawed, in Roman controlled areas. The unconquered Picts were still practicing the old tradition, which is why the Romans called them Pictii. It's the same 'pict' we see in the word 'picture'.
Stephen Faherty The romans never outlawed cultural practices that didn't threaten their rule. We know, however, that they did abolish things like human sacrifices. A lot of celtic peoples were named after the practice of body painting. Romans spoke of this practice as a battle religious ritual. This practice must have been discontinued in Britannia, due to the fact that there was no fighting during the Pax Romana period. The people were acculturated by the romans, the elite spoke latin and the people spoke vulgar latin, mainly in the south east, while brythonic prevailed in the center, the west, and the north. Furthermore, the roman rule didn't end at Hadrian's wall. One of the main purposes of the wall was to collect trading taxes. The brythonic languages all use a name derived from vulgar latin to designate great britain and themselves, while, for example, welsh uses a descendant of the celtic ethnonym "pritani" that gave Britannia in latin to designate the Picts.
Potatoes ! Interesting. One wonders if the body painting was primarily a war paint, as Neil Marshall suggests in his film Centurion. Not an altogether serious suggestion, but it could explain perhaps that the practice may have waned during Pax Romana, while it continued in the unconquered regions. It's just interesting to have these parallel nomenclatures based on different ethnonyms.
‘Prydain’ meant painted- not tatoos-
Painted means they were people of colour. Melanated. The ancient indigenes of the British isles.
@@Ibnafrika Julius Caesar said the Britons applied the colour to their skins using glass. This suggests to me that they used the sharp edges of glass shards to puncture the skin before applying the paint making the resulting pigmentation permanent. Of course, with no examples of bodies dug out of permafrost as with Otzi and Kurgan burials, we have no way of knowing for sure.
I always assumed the Celts were White until I read Geschichte Deutschen und Skythen (History of Germans and Scythians). Until then I had no idea they were Coloureds.
They were also mentioned in Mohren Bilder (Black Pictures).
Please elaborate.
I like the way he uses Welsh text over Ireland while he's explaining the celtic invasions
Worth it just for the Vulnerable Bede and Hogging England
I doubt the Venerable Bede was vulnerable.
@@catmom1322 I don't know... I bet a little wine, some Barry White and Kenny G... I could have him purring like a Walrus.
Thank you. I enjoy your sharing of knowledge very much. The idea that the picts may have been a branch of the Basque is very possible.
Pict DNA www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/picts.html
the place names in Scotland point to it being a Brythonic p-celtic language.
There's actually very few such placenames in Pictish areas, they are overwhelmingly Goidelic which is unusual as other areas the Gaels conquered seemed to retain Brittonic or Norse placenames, such as Strathclyde and the Hebrides. There's not really enough placenames in Pictish areas to support the idea that they ever spoke Brittonic, in fact there are as many, if not more, English derived placenames in Pictish areas.
it's worth considering that the Picts, being quite different to any modern culture or indeed any known ancient culture, might not have thought of places and place names in the same way we do.
The theory that the Gaels came to Scotland via Ireland has been challenged a great deal over the years. Mainly because there is no archaeological evidence to support large scale migration from Ireland into Scotland (I'm using the modern names for simplicity's sake) and so it is not necessarily true that the Gaels landed in Scotland via Ireland. I personally think that the British Isles were populated by pre- Indo European people and while Doggerland still existed, this was a thriving part of the world. Orkney is thought to have been the origin of the Megalith culture that spread throughout the British Isles. I personally think the Celtic languages may have originated along the Atlantic Sea Board -- from Spain up to Scotland and travelled East as opposed to the more common theory that it travelled to the British Isles West, from Europe. I could be wrong but I think the Picts and other native Brits and Irish are the descendants of Stone age people who became isolated after the disappearance of Doggerland.
Fascinating. Thank you. I'm of Irish/Scots ancestry and enjoy learning the history of the People.
Thank you I needed this history. My family is from the picts
Pre-Celt:
This is a good day to take a walk. Can't wait to meet my future girlfriend.
*WILD TRIBES OF CELTIC LANGUAGE APPEAR OUT OF NOWHERE*
Celt:
Cad atá suas, SOITH!
Pre-Celt:
All right, keep your secrets then.
These were the guys that took over after King Conan of Aquilonia sailed out to sea for the last time.
Overall I like the video, because I *can* follow what you're discussing. Thank you for creating and posting about a topic that not everyone will jump at the chance to watch. I return to your videos, because this isn't information I have to recall regularly but find immense interest in and would like to teach my child. Therefore, I thought you would welcome how you could improve the stylistic aspects of the video to compliment the monumental task of all you say.
1. I believe the animations in this video need to be updated; nothing is highlighted as you move along in your discussion, which, at least for myself, distracts me from listening to the valuable information you're dispensing and the speed at which you sometimes hop to the next image. In other words, I am looking for the locations on the maps that aren't there nor are highlighted as they are mentioned and therefore am missing what you say thereby requiring me to rewind back to what I missed.
2. Some of the colors of the words are barely visible (e.g., light pink for, at least, the "Britons" post Angles invasion mentioned in the first three minutes of the video).
3. You mention Cumbria at the 2:20 mark, but Cumbria is not on the map.
4. While the following are merely examples of Brythonic Scottish kingdoms as well as that you state Gododdin is destroyed by the Northumbrians, Gododdin and Strathclyde are mentioned but not on the map.
5. What do "P" and "Q" stand for on the Celtic Languages Tree? While you *do* provide examples of "P-Celtic" and "Q-Celtic" languages when returning to the map at the 3:47 mark, you still don't elaborate on what the letters stand for.
I'm not against the Picts being descended from Neolithic farmers that spread from Anatolia, that's possible, but I think more likely Indo-European Beaker people, and maybe the Basques are a last holdout of the Neolithic farmer population that disappeared almost overnight with the arrival of the Beaker people into Europe from the Steppes. I've also heard the Basques might be of Solutrean ancestry, which if true, would be mind blowing. (I think Cheddar man might be Solutrean but apparently all the flint tools were discarded at the time so we don't know the style of flint napping which could have helped). Beaker people burials are found all over Scotland though, so you might extrapolate from that the Picts probably didn't descend from Neolithic farmers to any great degree. Even though there's no evidence of the Beakers exterminating the Neolithic farmers violently, it does occur that it was maybe another wave of Bubonic Plague which has often occurred with Steppe peoples arriving in Europe.
Very interesting!Greetings from Norway
My forefathers were Scandinavian from Norway that landed In Scotland and Ireland around the 1000's although Viking Is an immature name to call them In the context most people use it and think of It. My family Hewison comes from the ancient Scottish Dalriadan Clans of Argyllshire and the ancient Kingdom of Dál Riata. Descended from the MacDonalds of Sleat. the largest and most powerful of Highland clans, Lords of the Isle. Our Motto: By sea and by land. Norwegian longships were the most advanced naval designs In the world at that time. And they taught the Anglo-Saxons and Britons new military tactics before successfully Integrating themselves into their new cultures. Vikings eventually came to Rule France, Normandy and the British Isles by way of marriage and power. Hilsen Brødre
@@cptjohnbhewler1529 Vær hilset bror.
Lovin' the Cymraeg in on the diagrams
Da iawn!
They were quite possibly mexican
Wicked Notes ll l
impossible, because Britain had a wall.
I get confused as one every summer and my family is white European decent?
May they wuz black n shiiiiiiiiiiiiieeet
They were Australians
On the subject of the Pre-Celtic possibility: There is a hypothesis that the megalith building pre-Indo-European culture in Britain and Northern Europe was Afroasiatic and perhaps related to the spread of farming into Europe from the Eastern mediterranean (not that we know those earliest farmers were necessarily Afroasiatic speakers, seeing as some ancient peoples in the area were not).
"You don't win by winning a war. You win by writing that you won the war."
I've heard something similar, but that statement really clicked with me...
@History With Hilbert, Your videos are always informative and enjoyable, however, as an Irish person I have to say I find it irritating that you so often conflate Ireland with Britain. Even in this video which deals with a period of time predating by many centuries the first British incursions into Ireland. Also, in Ireland, nobody uses the term, 'British Isles', a blanket term invented by the British to cover their colonised territory.
thank you very for your pick series. I do very much like to so call dark age time , and want to learn more. for some passable future topics. I would like to hear about the Germans of that time as well as the Welsh Cornish and Irish
No problem at all, thank you for watching and commenting on the series! I plan to make videos covering all of these civilizations in the future - so stay tuned for more :D !!
I was always of the understanding the Picts were quite short in height people and the lived as you said north east Scotland, I would assume I have some Pictish blood through Scottish heritage and not because I am only 5'7" :)
They found a skeleton of a pict man and he was 5ft 6" ,I found these 2 links of 2 pict men with facial reconstruction. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39002843
www.realmofhistory.com/2017/07/21/facial-reconstruction-pictish-man-scotland/
I also heard Picts were short and dark then I heard they were tall light haired like Germatic I'm confused???
The Picts were mainly north of the Roman built Antonine wall which stretched between the rivers Clyde and Forth. You failed to mention the Antonine Wall in this video, it was built in AD 142, twenty years after Hadrian's Wall.
Reasonably accurate presentation; loads of tosh in the comments, particularly linking linguistic & genetic groups; the aboriginal languages of Britain were neither Pictish nor Basquish; they're now lost, but their influence is evident in English & Celtic (e.g. the progressive or continuous present tense, unknown in other Germanic languages).
Interesting i'll pass this onto Dr Anthony Cox in Dundee, he is an expert all things pictish
Thank you very much, I'd really like to hear his opinion on it!
Loved how welsh was your default “Celtic”; you made the mainland AND Ireland speak Cymraeg. 😀 Diolch yn fawr iawn!
Like to see you tie this to DNA studies of late that show a strong tie between the people of the Britain and Ireland and the Iberian peninsula. Your mention of Basque interests me and their linguistic tie to the Picts.
Although the term "Celt" and the whole identity that goes with it, has come under intense scrutiny in the academic world, there was undoubtedly a commonality between several of these people, the Iberians you mention being the northern Galicians from Spain, are possibly thought to have introduced some language and cultural influences on the Irish.
The point about Basque would be before these Celtic links had been established, so even older. As I said in the video, Basque looks quite weird to us with "z"'s and "x"'s in words, so some linguists think they can prove Pictish might be related to this pre-Celtic Basque-type language. Interesting stuff :)
Steven Clark Although Basque has completely different haplo-groups of R1b than Ireland / Britain.The Basque language is non-indo-european.Rb1 is definately a Indo-European haplogroup.Basque is a language predominently inherited from a completely different people.A Basque type language may have been spoken all over Western Atlantic coastal regions 5000 years ago, possibly associated with 'J' haplo-group Semitic languages (largest remaining haplogroups in Northern Spain)or 'G' haplo-group Caucasian languages (less haplogroup present today).'I' haplogroup (Norse, North East German Coast, predominently) would have been more present the further north you went.R1b haplogroups almost completely superseded these early haplogroups as they advanced from the East.
I seriously doubt there was never any by-sea connection between Celtic Iberia and Celtic Britain/Ireland, other than the Phoenicians passing by in search of tin. Seriously: Celts were not sailors and the processes of Celtization in Iberia and Britain&Ireland are almost totally disconnected: they only tie up at the Celtic homeland in West Germany. There was however intense maritime trade between both regions in the pre-Celtic period, the so-called Atlantic Bronze Age and also before, but it was the Celtic conquest of Portugal and Galicia which actually interrupted it.
If you go to Asturias in the north of Spain, you may be surprised by the fair/red hair and pale skin of many people. Astur, king of the region, and generally recognised as an old Celtic area.
@@LuisAldamiz The Ancient Britons started arriving in Britain about 12,000 BC, as the ice receded. This was thousands of years before the Indo-European language group existed. Celtic did not exist in those days.
The Celts didn't arrive in Britain until about 400 BC.
The Ancient Britons MUST have come over from Southern Europe, because, at the time, Northern Europe was covered in ice. It's generally reckoned that they came from Iberia, and that is borne out by DNA.
Britain, British, Great Britain all come from the word Brythoniaid which we still use in welsh today. Brythonic
adjective
denoting or relating to the southern group of Celtic languages, consisting of Welsh, Cornish, and Breton. They were spoken in Britain before and during the Roman occupation, surviving as Welsh and Cornish after the Anglo-Saxon invasions, and being taken to Brittany by emigrants. Glad you mentioned the Gododdin area of stratchlyde as it proves what ive just said. GOOGLE, Y Gododdin poem and you will find that it is the oldest manuscript composed in the british isles and written in welsh (brythonic) in din eidyn which is now Edinburgh.
Hi! Although I agree that the Celtic people were more likely related by language rather than sub-race, two observations I have is the predominance of black-haired and even swarthy people in the P-Celtic part of Scotland, Wales and Cornwall, whereas the Q-Celtic Irish and Scottish have a high number of ginger-haired people as I believe are seen in the Basque region of Spain. Remember, too, that Spain was once invaded by the Black Moors. Indeed, some historians think the British Isles, certainly Scotland, were first inhabited by quite black people though with slightly different features than found in Africa.
Been waiting decades to hear my own feeble theories voiced!
So basically nobody really knows.
Exactly!
They will NEVER admit that the Original Dane's, Celts, Picts were Northern Ethiopian's!!!! White Cauc-Asian's are not indigenous to Europe just as they are not indigenous to America!
@@kano3030 Why would they admit to something that has never been evidenced or observed to be true
Sean Mounts It's plenty of evidence!!! They have the bones they found in Europe and it wasn't these newly made race of people! They know that Black people are the first on Earth and my school teacher in highschool told me that! He was White! So therefore black people being the first people proves that we are the first everywhere! ALL first civilization's were BLACK! An honest intelligent white person will sneak up to me when there's no one watching and tell Me, you're telling the Truth!!!
@@kano3030 They found bones...? That's your evidence? They found bones? They found bones where? In Celt burial grounds. You're going to need to elaborate and cite some credible sources. Otherwise you just sound like an afrocentric psuedo-historian and a kook.
I've heard a few (a very few) that speculating that the Celtic Culture may have started in Britain and spread outwards.
I always thought that the Picts were simple the Celts that weren't Romanized, I didn't know they existed before the Romans (hey you learn something new everyday).
The Britons were never romanized, this is a BBC lie. Zero Italic DNA was left after the 5th century. This has been proved by modern DNA sequencing read 'Survive the Jive' academic truth based on science
Excellent 'Stuff'' "Hilbert"!! My Father and Grand-Father, were (Professional and Amateur, respectively) Historians/Linguists/Archeologists/Genetisists, and tried to teach me as much as possible on such matters as these, in our all too short time together. (My Father, was actually 'fortunate' enough, to be befriended, by Rahn and Forresthal, before their deaths and WWII's end.) Many Thanks, 'M'Lad' for your informing us, and still keeping things interesting! (BTW: Agree very much with you and your sources, about the 'Basques', as I have several cousins who are so, and they have spoken often, of it as you and your sources do!) Again, Many Thanks!
I'm very much enjoying your videos. Thanks for asking.
History is what is written not what happened!
Many cultures have no written language and their histories are normally handed down through art and story telling. This has been the case through out history.
Wish we had a time machine to see what really happened!
lol the Vulnerable Bede hahaha
I don't know if you do any gaming... but if you do and you haven't checked out Mount & Blade with the Viking expansion, you should check it out - highly fun and very educational...
The Modern Hermeticist Yes haha, it made me chuckle after I said it too xD!!
I have it actually, a very fun game indeed! Thanks for suggesting it though :)
a.k.a. the Venomous Bede
+The Modern Hermeticist I'm an Proud YORKSHIRE -Viking/Northumbrian-Angle but Even just thinking..."Whoad Ewe Fancy Hugging ta Coast O"The Veneeriale Bede"
I like "venerial bede" too
This stuff is beautiful. As a descendent of the Dal Raiadans, Welsh and Saxons, it's great that this stuff is being disseminated so broadly these days. If the world comes to understand that unless you are an Australian Aboriginal or Kalahari Bushman there's no such thing as a "pure race" we'll all take a collective huge leap forward...
Spot on Hilbert. A National Geographic magazine article on the Welsh some years back discussed a certain Y chromosome that is lightly scattered across Europe, but found in large concentrations amongst the Welsh and the Basques. This lends credibility to the idea that Basques are the aboriginal pre-IndoEuropean peoples of Europe, and that the pre-Roman peoples of Britain included proto-Celtic populations who'd for one reason or another adopted a Celtic language.
My understanding is that the Picts was a fiction of 19th century historians trying to explain the reason why the Romans built Hadrian's wall, in that a very aggressive peoples lived north of the wal, hence the reason for building Hadrian's wall. The principle peoples north of the wall were the Celtic Caledonia not Picts. id the Romans refer to anyone as the Picke
Apologies for my mis-spelling of the "Picts." This may explain the difficulty in tracing their origin, as they simply did not exist? .
Geordie and proud ... north of the wall.
Not sure if its already been said but, you got your arrow in wrong place regarding "Breton", its descended from Brithonic, not Gallic! Gallic is extinct. regarding the Pre-Celtic population, they were in all probability, Bell Beaker folk, who spoke a Proto Celtic language descended from Indo European. You state at the beginning that Q - Celtic developed in Ireland, but then later say there was 2 waves, and the first wave was Q Celtic, then second was P Celtic, correct, early Haldstat developed from Proto Celtic, and was older, and was probably Q, the later La Tene, then had the P, and this was the second wave, which pushed Q to the extremities of the Isles, so maybe Q always was in the Hebrides and SW Scotland, and never pushed all the way to Eire.
The arrow at the end which indicates Celtic migration from wales to Ireland, would be better placed in SW Scotland to Ireland, as this is what Genetic similarity shows, that Celtic migration spread throughout Britain then migrated from SW Scotland to Ireland.
Except we literally have accounts of an Irish Kingdom, older than the oldest Scottish dialects of old Irish, heading east conquering Mann, the hebrides and Galloway, then and only then do we see old Irish there, on the other hand wert have very early old Irish manuscripts, dating back several hundred years before the invasion of Scotland might I add, in guess where? Good old Éirinn
Does anyone have a Pict bone where a good DNA sample can be obtained, and trace their relationships that way?
I found these 2 links, I read they were looking into it, the 2 links show 2 pict men and they did facial reconstruction
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39002843
www.realmofhistory.com/2017/07/21/facial-reconstruction-pictish-man-scotland/
Very in depth video. As a former professional linguist, I think you did an excellent job. Language is fluid and very difficult. One needs only to look to Ukraine today to see how language can change very quickly. Bravo.
My only question is what was the deciding factor to an established civilization feeling the necessity to build a physical wall...thinking about logistics of resources and labor of the time?...was it executed out of economic necessity or out of fear...just a question I've always wondered about. For the record I'm a born and raised American just trying to understand my Grandfather's "Scottish Pride"...he passed when I was 11...I'm 42 now, and so many things he said ring in my ears today. He was a simple farmer and was willing to sacrifice any worldly things for his family other than his "pride"...this has been a good and difficult thing for my life, but I'm not willing to let go of the values he taught me. Just trying to understand where it all comes from, is it cultural or is it that he was just an amazing man!? He used to tell me "aon latha thèid mi dhachaidh, agus le bhith a ’creidsinn annad a’ creidsinn annamsa ... bidh e comasach dhomh a ràdh gun do rinn sinn e!" That's the only Gaelic phrase I know(probably typed it wrong, forgive me if I did), but always wondered what he really meant...
The Picts have always interested me. I can't find out anything about them. Only from you. Does even one Pictish word survive?
Steven Williams Might I recommend you go through my playlist covering the Picts and especially watch the video on Language, Culture and Lifestyle where I talk about what remains of the Pictish language?
Pictish Playlist:
The Picts: ruclips.net/p/PLWHb-MbcZ9kouDPymw9zeG6ek7yrByvyL
There's also many books on them.
Jah blessed you with truth. It's not that hard to figure out what Tacitus wrote regarding who the Roman Legions found in the British Isles when they arrived.
pertyyyyy sure the Picts were just Britons. Unless all Britons were "negroes"? darned whyte pepel takin oer are his-story smh.
Doric is our language
Sounds like the Dal Riatans were the first Scots-Irish, though going the wrong direction ;-) When the Scots-Irish started migrating in great numbers to the English colonies in North America in the early 18th century they had a profound influence on what would become American culture despite being viewed as unlettered and violent. Might be worth a video.
Scotch Irish are Northumbrians which aren't Irish or Scots but Jutes from Denmark
it would be quite an interesting video, i am a scot by the way and i agree that the scot-irish times is probably the wrong way round though does have a slightly better sound to it. it funny though the northern irish counties (geographically speaking nothing to do with the current setup) and the south-west of scotland have basically been swapping migrants for millenium. in many respect i don't think it can be understated just hpw related both nation are in terms of there history, culture and in many ways shared struggle. in some ways scotland is almost like an alternative history ireland. and speaking of the scot-irish influence on north america cant be understated scotland in the british empire had a certain ability to punch well above it wait in terms of influence, the irish of course didn't have that same amount of influence in terms of history as a direct result of british racism and anti-irish sentiments but culturally especially in the american south the influence can be seen quite clearly.
Rubbish
what is?
B Mc that's completely false
what does the DNA say?
A lot of things but mostly that Atlantic Celts are roughly related and somewhat similar to Basques in many markers (Y-DNA, blood groups, etc.) However autosomal (nuclear, recombinable) DNA indicates they are part of a Northern European cluster which spans from Ireland to Russia. It also seems that the modern markers (pointing in both directions) only appeared in the Bell Beaker period (at least in North Ireland) and that there's been mostly genetic continuity since then (previously Ireland's inhabitants were more Mediterranean, something Spanish or Sardinian like).
@Oculus Prime
and spread racism and white supremacy
@Oculus Prime
It's your logic that it's faulty.
We were talking about Europeans and what they did, have done and still do; and you decided to jump into the "others are also mean" wagon (childish).
Nobody was mentioning Asians and Africans until you decided to applied your so-called logical argumentation by "reminding" the world that all ethnic groups can be as horrible as white supremacist. Of course they can. So, what?
Leaving behind your parallel universe, and coming back to this one and only planet/reality/history: My statement stands firmly.
You are welcome.
June Purple-Tea you try to sound complex and intelligent, but all you achieve is sounding emotional and incapable of doing anything but playing victim to western culture.
@Mike Scattergood
I don't try anything, if you find I sound complex and intelligent, that's about your perception.
Btw, I'm European, as "white" as a human being can be. I'm all Western culture. How you came to the conclusion that I could play the victim to my own culture is beyond my understanding.
Definitely a topic that needs more videos.
Always enjoy.
Bits n pieces of knowledge from different sources to make a whole through ďivine heureka-epiphanies