Europes Oldest Civilization Discovered

[Guest]

Ah, shut yer face!!!

[Frank Harrist]

Yep that was 3, (count 'em) three dancin' bananas.

[marduk]

And you know better than the three published historians I just mentioned?! Dream on!
You base that statement on what, exactly?

In search of the Picts by Elizabeth Sutherland

Elizabeth Sutherland, former curator of Groam House in Rosemarkie, Rose-shire, was responsible for establishing the museum as a Pictish Centre. She had published several novels, a guidebook for the Highland life, and other books on the Picts.
There are excellent photographs, maps and drawing to help illustrate her text presentation.
She begins by tracing the origins fo the picts from the neolithic nomad-farmer, coming of bronze age, moving into the invaders from Rome, covering Mons Graupius. The next part of the text goes into the 'foundation myths', the Kings List, St Columba. Also it covers the forts and palaces. She dedications a section to the stones and symbols, especially Pictish-Christian interaction. The 5th sections covers the important people in a Pictish tribe, the warlocks, hunters, monks and touches on Pictish Lore. Section Six dealing with what has been left behind, Language, writing, jewellery. Seventh section dealing with the everyday life in a Pictich Settlement. Finally the last section deals with the Viking invaders, later Viking settlers and the Rise of Kenneth mac Alpin.

so she thinks they are pre celtic because the celts were post neolithic
as do these:-

Perceptions of the Picts: from Eumenius to John Buchan.
Anna Ritchie, 1994

Earl & Mormaer, Norse-Pictish relationships in Northern Scotland.
Barbara Crawford, 1995

The Picts and their Place Names.
W.F.H. Nicolaisen, 1996

A Persona for the Northern Picts.
John Hunter, 1997



and the discovery last year at a 5000 year old pictish passage tomb in carmarthen that showed markers normally associated with orcadian burials such as Meadowseet pollen and a cremated child in a cist which were trademark in Pictish burials only, means that the latest information indicates that the orcadians and by derivation the site at skara brae were pictish, and thats been dated to 3500bce a fact that I have personally confirmed with Anne Brundle Curator of archaeology for orkney council
and the fact that the picts first settled in wales at preseli a place that was later indentifed as the stone henge quarry and of course lets not forget all those henges built all over scotland dating from pre 3000bce

and how about your evidence
Picts, Gaels & Scots by Sally Foster
which concerns affairs from the 5th to the 10th century so isn't relevant
The Ancient Celts by Barry Cunliffe
is about the celts so isn't relevant
The Celtic World by Miranda Green
is about the celts so isn't relevant

I didn't bother to look at your websites i just assumed that you didn't have a clue what you were talking about by the time i'd got that far into your ramble about new age picts, waddya think i am a wiccan or something

or you might like to consider that personally being of pictish descent myself i would be more interested in the actual history of my ancestors and not interested in Psuedoscience by any degree. Its an area i've been researching for over two years now if you really want to argue/discuss/compare notes (choose)

is that enough evidence or do you want some more

p.s. i agree
bloody colonials

[Frank Harrist]

Man you're a smartass! Pointing out the facts would be enough. You don't have to be all smug and arrogant about it. You two make really good opponents in an argument. Oh, go ahead and fight. Don't mind me. I'm highly entertained by it. Just have to comment occasionaly you know from the peanut gallery. I don't know nothin' 'bout picts.

[marduk]

help help
i'm being harangued by a colonial about being a smartass two seconds after he claimed personally to have won the war of iindependance

Hey this ain't been a colony for over 200 years. We won....remember?

War of independance ended on September 3, 1783 and America was then recognised by the treaty of Paris as an independant nation
so when you say we won
who did you think would win in a war between the british and the british
anyway
now you got Dubya youre the all time biggest losers aint cha boyo

[Minimalist]

[Guest]

so she thinks they are pre celtic because the celts were post neolithic

Then either she doesn't know what she is talking about, or you've misread. The first mentions of the Picts came from the Romans in AD 297.

Perceptions of the Picts: from Eumenius to John Buchan.
Anna Ritchie, 1994

Notice it says perceptions

Earl & Mormaer, Norse-Pictish relationships in Northern Scotland.
Barbara Crawford, 1995

Which is obviously referring to the Dark Ages, since the first Viking raid on Scotland was against the monastery at Tarbet in 795AD.

The Picts and their Place Names.
W.F.H. Nicolaisen, 1996

Originally published in the early years of the 20th century, when some people thought everyone who lived in Scotland prior to Robert the Bruce was a Pict. I have one of the companion volumes, Celtic Placenames of Scotland. Guess what? Most of the placenames are the same.

A Persona for the Northern Picts.
John Hunter, 1997

Which sounds like a revisionist attempt to make the Picts something they weren't.

and the discovery last year at a 5000 year old pictish passage tomb in carmarthen

It may have been 5000 years old; it wasn't Pictish and whoever told you different is a) an idiot and b) no archaeologist.

anyone thats been dated to 3500bce a fact that I have personally confirmed with Anne Brundle Curator of archaeology for orkney council

Anna Brundle may have confirmed Skara Brae dates to 3500 BC; the rest is just wishful thinking on your part.

and the fact that the picts first settled in wales at preseli

It's only a "fact" in your twisted imagination....

and how about your evidence
Picts, Gaels & Scots by Sally Foster
which concerns affairs from the 5th to the 10th century so isn't relevant

The Picts only existed in that period; the book is published by Historic Scotland, and is also a recommended coursebook by both the History and Celtic departments at Glasgow University-http://www.gla.ac.uk. They obviously more about the subject than you do.

The Ancient Celts by Barry Cunliffe
is about the celts so isn't relevant
The Celtic World by Miranda Green
is about the celts so isn't relevant

See my comment about the Picts only existing during the afore-mentioned time period. Both of these authors are Professors of Ancient History.

I didn't bother to look at your websites i just assumed that you didn't have a clue what you were talking about

I suggest you do so.

waddya think i am a wiccan or something

You're no historian, since you prefer bullshit to actual history.

or you might like to consider that personally being of pictish descent myself i would be more interested in the actual history of my ancestors and not interested in Psuedoscience by any degree

Big deal; anyone born in Scotland to white British parents since AD 1000 is of Pictish descent. You obviously subscribe to the modern version of "I was an Egyptian Pharoah in a previous incarnation" that was rife in the '60s and '70s-and was recognised as bullshit then too.

is that enough evidence or do you want some more

You haven't given me any evidence yet; it's been one long diatribe of New Age crap and wishful thinking on your part so far.

[Minimalist]

[Frank Harrist]

Oh this is good. DOWN IN FRONT! Will Marduk have a snappy comeback and present evidence to defend his side of the argument? Lets see.

[Minimalist]

I think I saw this show on FOX...."When Brits Attack...."

[Guest]

In search of the Picts by Elizabeth Sutherland

Elizabeth Sutherland, former curator of Groam House in Rosemarkie, Rose-shire, was responsible for establishing the museum as a Pictish Centre. She had published several novels, a guidebook for the Highland life, and other books on the Picts.
There are excellent photographs, maps and drawing to help illustrate her text presentation.
She begins by tracing the origins fo the picts from the neolithic nomad-farmer, coming of bronze age, moving into the invaders from Rome, covering Mons Graupius. The next part of the text goes into the 'foundation myths', the Kings List, St Columba. Also it covers the forts and palaces. She dedications a section to the stones and symbols, especially Pictish-Christian interaction. The 5th sections covers the important people in a Pictish tribe, the warlocks, hunters, monks and touches on Pictish Lore. Section Six dealing with what has been left behind, Language, writing, jewellery. Seventh section dealing with the everyday life in a Pictich Settlement. Finally the last section deals with the Viking invaders, later Viking settlers and the Rise of Kenneth mac Alpin.

I've just noticed that you pinched that quote verbatim from a review of this book on Amazon UK by Deborah MacGillivary. If you haven't actually bothered to read the book yourself, please refrain from embarassing yourself any further.

[marduk]

Will Marduk have a snappy comeback and present evidence to defend his side of the argument? Lets see.

why bother
from his use of "bullshit" and "New Age crap" its fairly obvious he's screaming in his sisters panties at the monitor
Pictish is an agglutinative language
Celtic is an indo european language
agglutinative languages are precurser languages and are far more ancient and all known ones date from pre 3000bce
but of course
i fully expect him to now claim thats irrelevant because it doesn't fit into his perrsonal belief in the same way the books that i quoted and have read are irrelevant because he hasn't read them
Like if he doesn't know about something than rather admit it he resorts to personal attacks
its funny how both Archeaologist (who isn't one) and RK Awl-O'Gist (who isn't one either) both claim to be authorities on things they know nothing about

Maybe he can explain how the standing stones of Britain are older and more numerous in the west and younger in the east the direction the celts came from and why the vast majority of them pre date any celtic presence in england
but i doubt it

and yes little boy we all know the romans named them in 297bce because the name pict is latin derived from pictus for painted
you seem to think they materialised at that point out of thin air
so you're history is based on Roman history
and that my friend makes you exactly the same as Arch
i.e. hopeless basket case

[Minimalist]

He?

[Guest]

Will Marduk have a snappy comeback and present evidence to defend his side of the argument? Lets see.

No, is the fairly obvious answer to that one.

why bother
from his use of "bullshit" and "New Age crap" its fairly obvious he's screaming in his sisters panties at the monitor

I'm a 44 year old female. I have plenty of my own panties to scream into.

Pictish is an agglutinative language

Rubbish, since no-one has deciphered Pictish inscriptions yet; not even Dr Katherine Forsyth of Glasgow University's Celtic Department, an acknowledged European expert on the subject.http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/celtic ... orsyth.htm

Celtic is an indo european language
agglutinative languages are precurser languages and are far more ancient and all known ones date from pre 3000bce

Now I know you're just making this up as you go along!

Like if he doesn't know about something than rather admit it he resorts to personal attacks

Like your reference to me "screaming in my sister's panties", you mean?

its funny how both Archeaologist (who isn't one) and RK Awl-O'Gist (who isn't one either) both claim to be authorities on things they know nothing about

I am a professional archaeologist and member of the Institute for Field Archaeologists. I have been since 1984.

Maybe he can explain how the standing stones of Britain are older and more numerous in the west and younger in the east the direction the celts came from and why the vast majority of them pre date any celtic presence in england

They pre-date any Celtic presence in Britain because the Celts didn't build them. And neither did the Picts; go read Surviving in Symbols by Martin Carver.

and yes little boy we all know the romans named them in 297bce because the name pict is latin derived from pictus for painted
you seem to think they materialised at that point out of thin air
so you're history is based on Roman history

I said nothing of the kind, and neither did any of those links I posted. You know, the ones you claim not to have read? Funny thing is, both the plagiarised review of Sutherland's Book and Barbara Crawford's book on Norse-Pictish Relations in the North of Scotland were both listed one above the other on the very first link I posted.....that you claim not to have read!
So the upshot is, you really don't know what you're talking about, and you are making it up as you go along.

[marduk]

not even Dr Katherine Forsyth of Glasgow University's Celtic Department, an acknowledged European expert on the subject

now we're getting to the meat of the argument
are you actually familar with the work of Katherine Forsyth or are you just holding her up as a figurehead because you havn't read her work and are assuming she thinks that Pictish is indo european in line with your erroneous personal belief ?
yes/no