Slashdot Mirror


The Irish Not of Celtic Origin?

schwit1 writes: The discovery of a burial site in Ireland has thrown into doubt all theories concerning the Celtic origins of the Irish. "'The DNA evidence based on those bones completely upends the traditional view,' said Barry Cunliffe, an emeritus professor of archaeology at Oxford who has written books on the origins of the people of Ireland. DNA research indicates that the three skeletons found behind McCuaig's are the ancestors of the modern Irish and they predate the Celts and their purported arrival by 1,000 years or more. The genetic roots of today's Irish, in other words, existed in Ireland before the Celts arrived." The article is quite detailed, and outlines the overall scientific problem of the Celts: [namely that it] is now quite unclear who they were, where they came from, and where they went. In related news: Scientists have found new evidence of a human presence in Ireland as far back as 12,500 years ago.

9 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. Where the bodies are buried by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Funny
    From TFS:

    DNA research indicates that the three skeletons found behind McCuaig's are...

    Anyone else read this description and think it sounds like some sort of "mob hit" or something? "Yeah, those three skeletons we found over there behind Jim's house...."

    Actually, now that I clicked on the link to see TFA, I see that McCuaig's is a pub. Now I'm guessing the remnants of a prehistoric barfight....

  2. Kiss me... by OakDragon · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... I brutally displaced the Irish!

  3. The simple truth by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Humans are mutts.

  4. Fitting and not surprising at all by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 5, Funny

    That the oldest Irishman should be found buried behind a pub.

    Happy (belated) St. Paddy's Day, sir!

  5. Re:What it means to be Irish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Guinness.

  6. Nonsense by jandersen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The discovery of a burial site in Ireland has thrown into doubt all theories concerning the Celtic origins of the Irish

    The Celts, according most thinking on the subject, originated in Central Europe or there abouts some time in the bronze age, something like 1200BC. The earliest evidence of humans in Ireland, according to the BBC article quoted in the OP says:

    Since the 1970s, the oldest evidence of human occupation in Ireland has been the hunter-gatherer settlement of Mount Sandel on the banks of the River Bann, County Derry, which dates to 8,000 years ago.

    - we now have evidence of humans even earlier than that. So, it was already obvious that the Irish are not likely to be descended purely from the Celtic tribes that immigrated to the island later. Not unless they completely eradicated the previous inhabitants; in any case, this new discovery changes nothing about the ancestry of the Irish.

  7. Re:What it means to be Irish by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Funny

    and why are people so determined to invade us?

    LOL, dude, seriously?

    Whiskey, Guinness, and red-heads. Duh.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  8. Bad summary not his fault by T.E.D. · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The summary is kind of bad, but probably only because the beginning of TFA itself is so horrible.

    What they've found is that there's DNA in some 4000 year old remains that highly correlates with modern people in the modern "Celtic" area (Ireland, Scotland, and Wales), vs. the rest of Europe. The interesting thing about this is that the current guesstimate of the emergence of proto-Celtic from proto-Indo-European is only about 3000 years ago.

    What this could reasonably mean:

    1. The current guesstimate is wrong, and they actually split more than 4000 years ago. As an addendum, the Halstatt culture may not be the one and only indication of the proto-celts.
    2. Celtic culture spread to the British Isles by cultural diffusion, not by the replacement of actual peoples. At least where those particular genes are concerned.

    What it doesn't say:

    1. The Irish are not Celtic. Not only doesn't it say this, its a patently absurd. Linguistically this is as much a settled fact as exists, and no archeology work is going to change that. We may not be sure where proto-Celtic originated (we weren't even before this), we may not be sure exactly when, but the evidence for the group's existence is unaffected.
    2. Celtic is not Indo-European. Again, laughable. Its relation to Indo-European is so linguistically sound, that from a layman's perspective it can be taken as fact.

    What this find does is add fuel to the already raging fire over exactly what archeological cultures were Celtic, and where and when it originated. That was already going before this though.

  9. "Etymological" fallacies by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Informative

    Humans are mutts.

    Agreed.

    And the problem seems to me here to be more one of terminology. Once you clear that up, this finding isn't surprising at all.

    It's also wrapped up in the so-called "etymological fallacy," where we assume a word must mean the same think as the root it might have come from thousands of years ago. But meanings change over time. And so do cultures.

    The word "Celtic" comes from words used by Greeks and Romans to describe a group of people who inhabited central Europe and France. When you look at these ancient texts by Greeks and Romans, they use completely different terms to describe the inhabitants of the British Isles. The earliest Greek terms refer to the Pretannikai nesoi ("Pretannic Isles"), which is the root of our word "Britannic." Roman sources often differentiate between "Celts" and "Britons."

    Most of the people who were the original "Celts" in Roman and Greek terminology still inhabit various parts of central Europe and France. But they don't call themselves "Celtic."

    Instead, at some point the term floated westward. Some of this may have been actual migration of Celtic peoples, but undoubtedly some of it was simply a linguistic process of progressively referring to the people outside of the "civilized world" as "Celtic." The "Celts" and the "Gauls" were originally the people outside of Roman territory to the North and West, but once those regions were assimilated (with the native populations), it makes sense that the "new Celts" would become those "barbarians" outside of the Roman regions.

    Fast-forward quite a few centuries, and you have modern narratives of Irish and Celtic history being created, along with an impulse to create a separate identity from the English (and their associations first with Romans then with French). So, whoever is living in these parts of the British Isles come to identify as "Celtic," not because they actually know they are descended from the original "Celtic people." Even Wikipedia clearly understood this long before this new find supposedly upended all previous theories: there are separate articles for the original Celtic people vs. the modern "Celtic" idea. The latter article clearly notes: "The concept of modern Celtic identity evolved during the course of the 19th-century...."

    Yes, there have been many who have tried to posit connections between the ancient Celtic peoples of continental Europe and ancestors of modern Irish, etc. But those theories often had little evidence associated with them. Even linguists often debate how much the so-called insular Celtic languages are related to the actual languages used by the "Celtic peoples" on the continent that the Greeks and Romans actually called "Celtic." (The "insular Celtic languages" are the only ones still spoken today, and the evidence from the morphology of extinct Continental ones is pretty scant, so it's hard to judge the detailed relationships. Also, it should be noted that if there were any migrations at all of actual Celtic continental peoples to the British Isles during historical times, any commonalities could be due to such contact, even if there was a pre-existing culture and language already in Ireland.)

    Anyhow, there's lots to all of this -- but the point is that there are at least three different meanings to the word "Celtic": (1) the actual group of people the Romans and Greeks referred to in Continental Europe, whom the Romans and Greeks viewed as distinct from the Britons, (2) the modern "Celtic" languages, which mostly seem more related to each other (and confined to the islands) than to other extinct ancient languages, and (3) the modern concept of "Celtic" culture, which tends to be associated with Ireland and neighboring regions.

    Anyone who knows anything about ancient history realiz