Atlantis Online
September 22, 2019, 05:16:06 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Underwater caves off Yucatan yield three old skeletons—remains date to 11,000 B.C.
http://www.edgarcayce.org/am/11,000b.c.yucata.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

the Picts & the Lost English Mythology

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: the Picts & the Lost English Mythology  (Read 584 times)
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2007, 01:34:57 pm »

From Wikipedia:

The Picts were a confederation of tribes in what later was to become central and northern Scotland from Roman times until the 10th century. They lived to the north of the Forth and Clyde. They were the descendants of the Caledonii and other tribes named by Roman historians or found on the world map of Ptolemy. Pictland, also known as Pictavia, became the Kingdom of Alba during the 10th century and the Picts became the Fir Alban, the men of Scotland.

The name by which the Picts called themselves is unknown. The Greek word Πικτοί (Latin Picti) first appears in a panegyric written by Eumenius in AD 297 and is taken to mean "painted or tattooed people" (Latin pingere "paint"). This may, however, be due to early folk etymology and the term likely has a Celtic origin, perhaps Pehta, Peihta (meaning "fighters").[1] The Gaels of Ireland and Dál Riata called the Picts Cruithne, (Old Irish cru(i)then-túath), presumably from Proto-Celtic *kwriteno-toutā. There were also people referred to as Cruithne in Ulster, in particular the kings of Dál nAraidi.[2] The Britons (later the Welsh and Cornish) in the south knew them, in the P-Celtic form of "Cruithne", as Prydyn; the terms "Britain" and "Briton" come from the same root.[3] Their Old English name gave the modern Scots form Pechts.[4]

Archaeology gives some impression of the society of the Picts. Although very little in the way of Pictish writing has survived, Pictish history, from the late 6th century onwards, is known from a variety of sources, including saints' lives, such as that of Columba by Adomnán, and various Irish annals. Although the popular impression of the Picts may be one of an obscure, mysterious people, this is far from being the case. When compared with the generality of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, Pictish history and society are well attested.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts
Report Spam   Logged
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2007, 01:35:54 pm »



Clach an Tiompain, a Class 1 Pictish symbol stone in Strathpeffer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts
Report Spam   Logged
Zeptepi
Full Member
***
Posts: 13


« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2007, 03:45:28 pm »

Europa,
Early Viking history, similar to the so called Pictish history, is, I agree,  very sketchy indeed.  However, this makes research that much more interesting!

Sources are quite numerous really, and my research, (if I can call it that) is multi-dimensional.  This is looking afresh at the highly biased orthodox material available, ancient mythology and recent DNA samplings with another look at the dating of the many post Neolithic habitation sites to be found in NW coast of Scotland and Orkney and Shetland islands.

A good place to start is a book named, The Blood of the Vikings, by Julian C Richards. ISBN-10: 0340733853.  This is an excellent source of DNA tracing that attempts to show the spread of Norwegian  ancestry through the UK.  Unfortunately, timelines dating to my period in question remain well within the realms established  academia.

My most reliable source, at the moment,  is probably study of the Celtic myths and the Norse Sagas.  All of these can most be likely ‘googled’.   I treat them the same way as I do with Sumerian clay tablets (Sumeria is my main study) that is to read them to be literally  true and not to place any modern or quasi-religious spin on them.  That way we might, just might, uncover what exactly they were saying to us.  If read in this manner they shed an entirely different view, so much so, that much of our history needs revising.

What’s your own view?

Best wishes,
John.


Report Spam   Logged
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2007, 01:35:38 pm »

Hi John,

Thank you for your input, I noticed you said your main area of emphasis is the Sumerians, I have started some research upon them as well.

As for what my own views are on the origins of both the Picts and the Vikings, I am open to any new ideas about either, provided that I have the ability to prove them.  The academic community hasn't been terribly interested in the early history of the Vikings, and that should change, as they are one of Europe's most influential peoples. I'm convinced that they are far older than they are given credit for, and that we are missing much history.  Anymore specifics you can provide about them, whether theoretical or proven, feel free.

As for the Picts, I believe Unknown put it mildly earlier when he said they are mysterious.  Historians tend to focus on the Roman history of Britain, almost to the exclusion of everything else. Since so much is already known about the Romans, I believe that academia is duty bound to find out about all the people who were their contemporaries and who they tried to subject.

Europa
Report Spam   Logged
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2007, 03:14:51 pm »



The harper on the Dupplin Cross, Scotland, circa 800 AD
Report Spam   Logged
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2007, 03:19:24 pm »

Society
 
The harper on the Dupplin Cross, Scotland, circa 800 ADThe archaeological record provides evidence of the material culture of the Picts. It tells of a society not readily distinguishable from its similar Gaelic and British neighbours, nor very different from the Anglo-Saxons to the south.[6] Although analogy and knowledge of other "Celtic" societies may be a useful guide, these extended across a very large area. Relying on knowledge of pre-Roman Gaul, or 13th century Ireland, as a guide to the Picts of the 6th century may be misleading if analogy is pursued too far.[7]

As with most peoples in the north of Europe in Late Antiquity, the Picts were farmers living in small communities. Cattle and horses were an obvious sign of wealth and prestige, sheep and pigs were kept in large numbers, and place names suggest that transhumance was common. Animals were small by later standards, although horses from Britain were imported into Ireland as breed-stock to enlarge native horses. From Irish sources it appears that the élite engaged in competitive cattle-breeding for size, and this may have been the case in Pictland also. Carvings show hunting with dogs, and also, unlike in Ireland, with falcons. Cereal crops included wheat, barley, oats and rye. Vegetables included kale, cabbage, onions and leeks, peas and beans, turnips and carrots, and some types no longer common, such as skirret. Plants such as wild garlic, nettles and watercress may have been gathered in the wild. The pastoral economy meant that hides and leather were readily available. Wool was the main source of fibres for clothing, and flax was also common, although it is not clear if it was grown for fibres, for oil, or as a foodstuff. Fish, shellfish, seals and whales were exploited along coasts and rivers. The importance of domesticated animals argues that meat and milk products were a major part of the diet of ordinary people, while the élite would have eaten a diet rich in meat from farming and hunting.[8]

No Pictish counterparts to the areas of denser settlement around important fortresses in Gaul and southern Britain, or any other significant urban settlements, are known. Larger, but not large, settlements existed around royal forts, such as at Burghead, or associated with religious foundations.[9] No towns are known in Scotland until the 12th century.[10]

The technology of everyday life is not well recorded, but archaeological evidence shows it to have been similar to that in Ireland and Anglo-Saxon England. Recently evidence has been found of watermills in Pictland. Kilns were used for drying kernels of wheat or barley, not otherwise easy in the changeable, temperate climate.[11]

The early Picts are associated with piracy and raiding along the coasts of Roman Britain. Even in the Late Middle Ages, the line between traders and pirates was unclear, so that Pictish pirates were probably merchants on other occasions. It is generally assumed that trade collapsed with the Roman Empire, but this is to overstate the case. There is only limited evidence of long-distance trade with Pictland, but tableware and storage vessels from Gaul, probably transported up the Irish Sea, have been found. This trade may have been controlled from Dunadd in Dál Riata, where such goods appear to have been common. While long-distance travel was unusual in Pictish times, it was far from unknown as stories of missionaries, travelling clerics and exiles show.[12]

 
Reconstructed crannog on Loch TayBrochs are popularly associated with the Picts. Although these were built earlier in the Iron Age, with construction ending around 100 AD, they remained in use into and beyond the Pictish period.[13] Crannogs, which may originate in Neolithic Scotland, may have been rebuilt, and some were still in use in the time of the Picts.[14] The most common sort of buildings would have been roundhouses and rectangular timbered halls.[15] While many churches were built in wood, from the early 8th century, if not earlier, some were built in stone.[16]

The Picts are often said to have tattooed themselves, but evidence for this is limited. Naturalistic depictions of Pictish nobles, hunters and warriors, male and female, without obvious tattoos, are found on monumental stones. These stones include inscriptions in Latin and Ogham script, not all of which have been deciphered. The well known Pictish symbols found on stones, and elsewhere, are obscure in meaning. A variety of esoteric explanations have been offered, but the simplest conclusion may be that these symbols represent the names of those who had raised, or are commemorated on the stones. Pictish art can be classed as Celtic, and later as Insular.[17] Irish poets portrayed their Pictish counterparts as very much like themselves.[18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts
Report Spam   Logged
Zeptepi
Full Member
***
Posts: 13


« Reply #21 on: March 16, 2007, 05:53:16 pm »

Hi Europa,
Thanks!
Yes, Sumeria is quite a passion with me.  I do hope to be writing soon about the Sumerian flood epic.  I have so much to say on this subject as I feel it has much relevance to the times we are living in now.

You caught my attention when you mentioned, “…provided that I have the ability to prove them”

I am with you on this.  If I can digress, so you may understand me better in any future exchanges I may have with you and hopefully with others too.

Proof.
This is the most difficult area of any research, be it in a professional manner or amateur.  Proof to my mind is the search to find a complete foundation of knowledge.

The search to uncover our past, I have found, falls into two identifiable categories. These are a distinction between ‘optimistic epistemology’ and ‘pessimistic epistemologies‘.  An optimistic approach is one that abides by the doctrine that truth is manifest and therefore the  truth is not always immediately evident, but can become so.  This is associated with the thesis that ignorance is in some way due to a conspiracy.  A pessimistic approach takes the view that the truth is hidden from us and reserved only for the few.  Therefore, what are the sources of our knowledge?  Are they from our established scientific disciplines, and as such, beyond falsification?  Or is knowledge simply a matter of interpersonal exchange through all our social dimensions?  Which of these stands the best chance of creating a method of gaining truth? 

As I move into my older years I do become so aware of my ignorance’s, but more aware of my perceptions, which is in a sense, a source of knowledge or a way to ‘knowing’.  Therefore, I reject nothing, while being aware of my own limited capacity to take in, ‘what I’ve been told’

It’s taken me a while to become un-doctrinated.  Now I feel quite comfortable taking the so called myths of the past to be the original authors truthful concept on a world long past.  They had no reason to lie, at least no more than we do today.

Back to earth.
Recent population DNA samplings of the current populations of northern Europe do suggest that the Celts, Picts, Anglo Saxons and Viking (Norse traders) were all one of the same people.  They are hardly different from each other and had a coherent language that they all shared.  Studies of their ancient habitats also show a striking similarity of construction - right across northern Europe.  It follows that they were established ocean going seafarers going back to the times when they first came to the region.  I suggest this to be as early as 8000BP or even earlier.  I also suggest that they kept in communication throughout those times right up until the Romans came and commandeered their trade.  Where these people, my ancestors, originally came from is another question.  No doubt it was from a ‘well known to them’ southern region.  Boreas, has very interesting views on this which I do hope explore further.


Myths we have romanticised.
I can’t leave this post without mentioning the romantic ideas we have of the Vikings.  Contrary to popular romantic thought they were not invading savage marauders  or were they blond, blue eyed titans with horns sticking out their helmets. They were, as common with all northern Atlantic people, very good seafarers.  The Norse traders looked no different from anyone else.  Diggings in Norway, Shetland and Orkney show that they were of average height, 5,7 to 5,10ft, and of stocky build.  DNA show also that they were probably of fair skin complexion, brownish, fair coloured or reddish hair.  The pure blond types, now commonly  associated with Scandinavia and Iceland came some time later from across land rather than the sea. 

Finally.
You mention that,  “academia is duty bound to find out about all the people…”

Academia, by nature, does not inform, instead it indoctrinates.  They do not like universal disagreement.  They set the verification and condition standards that forms the distinctions of what are going to believe whether we disagree or not.  They know already that we are far too lazy and indolent to challenge their Phd stamp on history.

Best wishes,
John.



Report Spam   Logged
Boreas
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 441



WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2007, 07:17:38 pm »

The last decade has seen a major change in the way that many scholars have perceived the Celts and Picts. Although many have had misgivings about the use of the term ‘Celt’ in British historical and archaeological studies, it was only in the mid-1990s that such concerns began to receive a wider airing. Simon James cast serious misgivings on the word ‘Celt’ in Antiquity, 1998, and in the introduction to Britain in the Celtic Iron Age (1997). Finally - as of 2004 we saw the first major publication of English scholars that picked up the challenge to fill one of the most hartfelt vacums of the Celtic world - that of the "mysterious Picts", known to once have populated the northern part of the Brittish isles.

The Art of the Picts: Sculpture and Metalwork in Early Medieval Scotland



George Henderson and Isabel Henderson
Thames & Hudson, 2004.


Reviewed by Susan M. Youngs, FSA, Jesus College, Oxford


This book’s volume of images and the generous size of the book itself might suggest that within lie lavish illustrations with few words, in the coffee-table book tradition. Nothing could be further from its real content, the fruits of years of study and observation by two scholars of great distinction in the fields of art history and Pictish studies.


The understated purpose, ‘to strengthen the evidence available for the nature of Pictish society’, is first approached by showing the continuing interaction with the response to contemporary Insular art throughout Britain and Ireland. Second, by opening the readers’ eyes to the complexity, subtlety, and brilliance of the works of Pictish sculptors and metalworkers, and to guide them through the complex programmes of ornament and its evidence for scholarship, patronage, and purpose. More broadly, the authors again reinforce the case for international acknowledgement of this evidence in the remarkable intellectual and artistic achievements of the Pictish kingdoms of early Medieval Britain and Europe.

This is necessary because these images are the material masterpieces of people who have, through historical processes, largely lost their voice along with their language and political independence. For life and death there is the growing archaeological evidence of field monuments, strongholds, houses, and cemeteries, but libraries, records, and literature have not survived, whether in the vernacular or in Latin from monastic schools and court circles. Most of what we know of kings, churchmen, and the history of the Picts through three centuries is culled from the record of their Irish and English neighbours and frequent enemies. Assisted by impressive metalwork, finely carved stone has to speak for the Picts, and this it has been persuaded to do here, with at times passionate eloquence. The words are admirably supported by essential images, and the authors pay tribute to the photographs of Tom Grey and the informed eye behind Ian G. Scott’s pencil and pen. The quality, variety, and complexity of the Christian sculpture comprises overwhelming evidence for the art, learning, and resources of its local patrons.



This is not a lazy read, however, as we find in the introductory chapter on Insular art. At no point is any key argument left without support in the text, but there are necessarily references for comparison with decorative features of numerous insular early Medieval works that could not be illustrated for reason of space. Even a well-informed reader has to perform some mental gymnastics to conjure up the relevant details of every manuscript or piece.

It is refreshing to have some familiar pieces of fine metalwork described with a keen eye for detail. Arguments are marshalled to show the Pictish nature of several key fine metalworks, which have previously been identified more broadly as ‘Insular’ in style or Irish. The suggestion that detailed reassessment by an expert in fine metalwork would lead to greater certainty about the Pictish corpus does not reflect the difficulties of dealing with portable complex objects made by itinerant craftsmen, when we are still unable to achieve a consensus on the origins or date of the great Gospel books, whose complex ornament has the added information of texts, scripts, and codicological features.



The authors recognise that the evidence from culturally distinctive and iconographically complex stone sculpture for models in metals is a major tool for recovering lost Pictish fine metalwork. This could certainly form the basis of a separate coherent investigation in favour of non-Pictish origins, which is the charge laid against earlier commentators.

The book ends on an elegiac note with interesting evidence of past losses and deliberate destruction. Finally, there is a trenchant critique of modern standards of presentation, including the display of Pictish monument in the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh. This book will itself stand future generations of students of the Picts and of western early Medieval art in good stead.

www.minervamagazine.com/issue1701/reviews.html





« Last Edit: March 18, 2007, 04:51:25 am by Boreas » Report Spam   Logged

Gens Una Sumus
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2007, 10:55:41 am »

Hi John & Boreas,

Very fascinating material from you both. I have read over it twice, and what strikes me the most is how little that academics really know about the Atlantic & North Sea tribes and how loathe they are to admit it.

I am fully accepting of the idea that all these tribes are linked, but the point of their original origin escapes me. Equally, I wonder if we would be correct in that they had something of a common culture wherein all of them sprung from.

Speculation is fine, and the DNA evidence is a good start (I would like to see a report on the DNA evidence linking all the tribes if you have it John).  I also understand all about intuittion.  Still, when we make absolute statements, I prefer to speak of things that we have, for now anyway, have proof of.  Is there anything we can say with certainty yet about the origins of the Picts, Celts and Vikings?  Because, so far, I have yet to see any.

Europa
Report Spam   Logged
Boreas
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 441



WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2007, 07:02:05 am »

The oldest stories about all the small islands around the northern shores of Scotland tell their roots were from Scandinavia. Modern archeology seem to confirm that the oldest seafaring culture known to he North Sea and the North Atlantic came from mainland Scandinavia, where the resources for larger boats - such as timber - were present at an earlly stage.

That narrows the posibilities down to the coastal low-lands of Sweden-Norway, where the deeper fjords functioned as "warming-pockets". Then we can pick the ones that are accompanied by lowland moisture and soil - to find the earliest possible producers of woodlands - after ice-time.

Fitting to this picture they just excavated the oldest known site from this area at "Gosen" - between Trondheim and Bergen. 11.200 years old settlement, that were fully agricultural at the time of 6.000 BP.

The Orkneys and the Faeroe Islands were populated between 9.500 and 10.000 years ago. Together with Shetland, the Isle of Man and the bay of Dublin they were ruled by the dukes (later earls) from the king of Norway.

Until the end of Viking-time that implied that every new duke/earl were a son of the reigning king - on the mainland. Yearly trade and tarffic across the North Sea would keep the ties, since they had a relatively rch trading pattern fully established already at the start of the climatic optimuum, 7.000 yrs ago...!

The Norwegian rule of the mentioned islands - as well as of the coasts of Greenland, Labrador, New Foundland, Nova Scotia, Maine and down to Cheasapeak Bay are confirmed areas of "Norse Settlements" - gouverned by the Duke of Greenland, and his sons - the earls of the respective areas down south.

These were basicly islanders, skilled in fishery and travel and trade. Thus we dont think that they occupied any of the major inlands - although they are known to have travelled the big river - Missisippi/Misouri - from the Hudson Bay area - up to Kensington and then down along the river -all the way.

These activities ceased dramatically when the blak death and the little ice-age stroke 3/4 of the mainland population of Scandinavia. By 1362 the connection to Greenland was very poor and the western populations were isolated. Until the pirating looters of different kinds turned up during the last half of the 14th century. Thus Helluland became "Labradores" - since the strong and healty inhabitants were found to be great "Labour".

As you know the Spanish called the area between NY and Chesapeake "Norumbega". Look at Mercators first maps. When the English took it over they had the courtesy to allow the Norwegians back over - but the old Vinland was anyhow named after the ideal of their famous queen, Elisabeth I. Thus it became Virginnia.

In the 17th century the dutch specialist on intstitutional law, Grotius, were asked to describe the legal rigth of American ground - to settle a schism between England, France and Spain. His opening commentary was - "well, gentlemen - if we are to follow the juridical principles, all of east-coast America would belong to Norway...!"

But - of course, you have to be a specific kind of Norwegian to keep the memory of such old stories...

Cool

In 1932 the newly independant Norway tried to get the Hague Tribunal to give them Greenland back. But, politics made the judges sentence in favour of Denmark. By then all the other islands had gone to various other constitutional bodies as well.

Though - that should draw a rough outline to the genetical and cultural origin to the islanders of Northern Scotland. As for the coastal areas of Scotland there were some of them that remained populated by these fisher-cultures from Norway. But the rest of Scotland had closer ties to the Scandinavian agriculturalists - which was developed in southern and central Sweden.  Thus the Scots as the Swedes would keep the "relayed" agriculture - were the herds are using the mountain areas for feeding during summer-time, saving the lower grasslands for hay - to keep bigger stocks alive during winter time.

The Danish-English ties are also seen from their common style of agriculture - different to the Swedish-Scottish. The English meadowlans allows for longer outdoor seasons and there are no hillside summer-barns. Just like Denmark's wide fields (heaths) - that strech south throughout al of continental Europe. Thus we see the Saxons, the Dutch and the Francs having the same basic agriculture - with large manors and big open fields all around.

Thus we end up with the question - were the Picts agricultural and different from the Scots. Me thinks that the Scotts were the agriculturalists - and that the Picts were their fishing neighbours, that kept the traffic going across the north sea and around. Thus the Picts had their villages - as well as their sole properties of the islands. In that case the Picts were directly relative and subjects to the norwegian kingdom - until the end of the 15th century, when the kings of Scotland and England simply "collected" these islands - except the Faeroes.

But still today the English Chrown Prince have to get to the "Great Assembly" at the Isle of Man, -to be accepted by the Ealdormen of Man - before he can go back to London and be inaugurated as "The Rightful King of England". That was their one and only condition for accepting a peace treaty and subject themselves to England - some 500 years ago. And the rule still stands - and have been duely respected to the present Queen...!

Wink
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 07:24:44 am by Boreas » Report Spam   Logged

Gens Una Sumus
Zeptepi
Full Member
***
Posts: 13


« Reply #25 on: March 23, 2007, 07:19:25 pm »

Hi,
Very interesting and informative post covering a huge span of history.

You mention….
“The oldest stories about all the small islands around the northern shores of Scotland tell their roots were from Scandinavia”

Let’s take this premise a bit further. 
11500 years ago a crustal shift occurred sending Northern Europe from its original ice bound position, 1600 miles north, to the  present warmer geographical southerly position we have today.  As one can imagine those northern lands must have taken some time before they could become habitable.  Meanwhile, much further south, lands previously inhabited became unliveable or simply disappeared.  Mass migrations of survivors of that 11500BP cataclysm then ensued.  One identifiable group of the post cataclysm survivors were those called the Phoenicians.

The Phoenicians.
They are most definitely a much misinterpreted race of people.  Orthodox historians link the Phoenicians to the Levant, modern day Lebanon and Israel. However, evidence of the same people, with the same seafaring characteristics, are found in North Africa, Spain, Ireland, England and Scotland and then later in Scandinavia.  The linkage is found not only in common language but also in the consistent manner in which they built their massive stone circles, such as Stonehenge …and possibly, quite possibly, the Giza Complex at some earlier date, before the cataclysm of 11500BP.

Again, as in my previous posts, I go back to DNA analysis.  Here we see a well established race of people sharing  identical genetics living all along the western Atlantic coast.  They were fair skinned, light haired people as DNA analysis suggests.  They also had in their possession an ability to use sound as a tool.  This is the knowledge to site their African, European and near East habitations  on energy grids enabling them to throw a magnetic field around massive stone objects de-linking from the known laws of gravity.  The massive 450 to 800 ton stones used to erect the Baalbek structures in Lebanon, Stonehenge in England, and the other numerous  structures of similar construction are a tribute to this seemingly ‘impossible’ lost technology.  (As it happens I live close to such an ancient stone megalithic structure - just 1 mile up road from my home in Scotland)  Many of these stones bear clear Phoenician inscriptions. Probably the most famous being the Scottish ‘Graig-Narget Stone’ dedicated to the Sun-god Bel. 

Aging these massive stone works is always problematic.  However, charcoal remains found at depths of 6 to 12 feet beneath these sites  show a C14 date of around 8000BC.  Weathering upon these stones also reveal a similar antiquity.

But this does not explain who exactly who these ‘Phoenicians’ were.  The name ‘Phoenician’ is immediately misleading.  Phoenicia was simply a 5/4000 year old middle eastern place name.  However, the Gods and Goddesses of the ‘Phoenicians’ were termed as, ‘Barati’ or ‘Barat‘.   Barat, as we know from Sumerian clay tablet decipherments, also means royal blood.  Later language evolvements see this same noun word  being used to describe a distinct dynastic race of people. The people of fortune.  The ancient Indian Vedas also make specific reference to this people as ‘Brithad-ana’   or in modern English, ‘Royal Ones‘. Clearly, the world of 8000 to 10000 years ago were identifying a race of people that preceded them and of whom they were descended from.

As we know the world’s survivors of the 11500BP disaster willingly intermingled in order to sustain their populations for the future.  By 6000BP the middle east was a most certainly a mixture of many races.  By 4000BP there were few habitable places  left where this most human and necessary inter-marriage of race was not visible.  Those few places left were in Northern Europe. Even in Minoan and later Etruscan  times these far away  places in N Europe took on a somewhat mythical guise as where the ‘Barati‘, in pioneer form, still lived.

Later, in more modern times, c60BC, expeditionary Romans would still call these collective lands  as ‘Barati’ or Briton.  The place of fortune.

When the Romans came to the ‘Barati’ lands they found extensive road networks, maritime trade routes from North Africa to Scandinavia and a harmonised society of wealthy and healthy people who used gold money.  Is it not strange that after the successful Roman foray into Northern Europe, the Romans decided that the dynastic linage of the Barati (Britons) that their own Emperors would also become ’wise men’ or Druids.  Keepers of the truth.

As if to under line their Roman racial ascendancy over these ‘Barati’ people, Romans would take these fair skinned, light haired people through the streets of Rome in cages. Finally they would ceremoniously murder, ‘this species’ in front of frenzied crowds.  The basic moral code of the Barati, however, was never to kill as all living, inherently, carried the survival of one to another.  They never fought back.  Instead they rebelled without knowing how to rebel effectively.

The Romans stayed in Britain for some 400 years. After they went, they same people who they conquered came back.  The Barati re-established themselves and entered into another period of revival while Rome died a slow death.  That Barati bloodline is still revered even today.  Unfortunately, there are some white skinned racialist idiots who see this Barati linage to be some sort of evidence of racial elitism.  That is not so.  The Barati were just one human element who most probably evolved in harmony with other fellow human elements, as diverse as they knew themselves to be.  These were times when just being human was enough and when the quest for knowledge superseded all else.  They were quite cool! 

So far as to say: Do be aware, and don’t be led astray, by those poor ignorant souls that factually believe in racial ascendancy.  It is simply not so.  All races of mankind are just the one race. Fondly, we love each other.  This is our spiritual human instinct that we pass on to the next generations. 

Together, and only together, will we conceive all that this universe presents us.

John.
Report Spam   Logged
Majeston
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 447



WWW
« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2007, 10:09:19 pm »

Zep hi,

Do you believe this and can you supply any evidence of it?

Quote
They also had in their possession an ability to use sound as a tool.  This is the knowledge to site their African, European and near East habitations  on energy grids enabling them to throw a magnetic field around massive stone objects de-linking from the known laws of gravity.  The massive 450 to 800 ton stones used to erect the Baalbek structures in Lebanon, Stonehenge in England, and the other numerous  structures of similar construction are a tribute to this seemingly ‘impossible’ lost technology. 


This was the picture of race mixture presented in central Europe about 3000 B.C. In spite of the partial Adamic default, the higher types did blend.

These were the times of the New Stone Age overlapping the oncoming Bronze Age. In Scandinavia it was the Bronze Age associated with mother worship. In southern France and Spain it was the New Stone Age associated with sun worship. This was the time of the building of the circular and roofless sun temples. The European white races were energetic builders, delighting to set up great stones as tokens to the sun, much as did their later-day descendants at Stonehenge. The vogue of sun worship indicates that this was a great period of agriculture in southern Europe.

The superstitions of this comparatively recent sun-worshiping era even now persist in the folkways of Brittany. Although Christianized for over fifteen hundred years, these Bretons still retain charms of the New Stone Age for warding off the evil eye. They still keep thunderstones in the chimney as protection against lightning. The Bretons never mingled with the Scandinavian Nordics. They are survivors of the original Andonite inhabitants of western Europe, mixed with the Mediterranean stock.



But it is a fallacy to presume to classify the white peoples as Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean. There has been altogether too much blending to permit such a grouping. At one time there was a fairly well-defined division of the white race into such classes, but widespread intermingling has since occurred, and it is no longer possible to identify these distinctions with any clarity. Even in 3000 B.C. the ancient social groups were no more of one race than are the present inhabitants of North America.

http://mercy.urantia.org/papers/paper80.html
Report Spam   Logged

"melody has power a whole world to transform."
Forever, music will remain the universal language of men, angels, and spirits.
Harmony is the speech of Havona.

http://mercy.urantia.org/papers/paper44.html
Zeptepi
Full Member
***
Posts: 13


« Reply #27 on: March 24, 2007, 08:45:26 am »

Majeston,
The manner in which ancient world-wide megaliths were constructed continues to baffle all purely because lies outside the range of modern science. It wasn’t until 1931 that the hypothetical Unified Field Theory, some times called the Theory of Everything that past impossibilities could started to be explained.  In this theory all forces and particles in nature are derived from variations in vibrations of strings. As an example, gravity is said to arise from the lowest vibration of a closed string. Therefore by tapping into the vibrations, could in theory, allow massive weights to effortlessly raised.   Indeed, such physical weights could also be directionally controlled, i.e.,  given velocity and direction.  It is contested that the ancients did have a working form of this unified science, using sound frequencies as the controlling feature.  Play some music close to an object and watch it vibrate then you will see the basic fundamentals of this theory.

The Unified Field Theory is said to be mankind’s last great scientific discovery, or should I say, re-discovery.

With respect I simply do not buy into the Adonite, Urantia postulations.

Best wishes,
John.

Report Spam   Logged
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #28 on: April 10, 2007, 01:15:43 pm »

Religion

Early Pictish religion is presumed to have resembled Celtic polytheism in general, although only place names remain from the pre-Christian era. The date at which the Pictish elite converted to Christianity is uncertain, but there are traditions which place Saint Palladius in Pictland after leaving Ireland, and link Abernethy with Saint Brigid of Kildare.[18] Saint Patrick refers to "apostate Picts", while the poem Y Gododdin does not remark on the Picts as pagans.[19] Bede wrote that Saint Ninian (identified with Saint Finnian of Moville, who died c. 589), had converted the southern Picts.[20] Recent archaeological work at Portmahomack places the foundation of the monastery there, an area once assumed to be among the last converted, in the late 6th century.[21] This is contemporary with Bridei mac Maelchon and Columba, but the process of establishing Christianity throughout Pictland will have extended over a much longer period.

Pictland was not solely influenced by Iona and Ireland. It also had ties to churches in Northumbria, as seen in the reign of Nechtan mac Der Ilei. The reported expulsion of Ionan monks and clergy by Nechtan in 717 may have been related to the controversy over the dating of Easter, and the manner of tonsure, where Nechtan appears to have supported the Roman usages, but may equally have been intended to increase royal power over the church.[22] Nonetheless, the evidence of place names suggests a wide area of Ionan influence in Pictland.[23] Likewise, the Cáin Adomnáin (Law of Adomnán, Lex Innocentium) counts Nechtan's brother Bridei among its guarantors.

The importance of monastic centres in Pictland was not perhaps as great as in Ireland. In areas which had been studied, such as Strathspey and Perthshire, it appears that the parochial structure of the High Middle Ages existed in early medieval times. Among the major religious sites of eastern Pictland were Portmahomack, Cennrígmonaid (later St Andrews), Dunkeld, Abernethy and Rosemarkie. It appears that these are associated with Pictish kings, which argues for a considerable degree of royal patronage and control of the church.[24]

The cult of Saints was, as throughout Christian lands, of great importance in later Pictland. While kings might patronise great Saints, such as Saint Peter in the case of Nechtan, and perhaps Saint Andrew in the case of the second Óengus mac Fergusa, many lesser Saints, some now obscure, were important. The Pictish Saint Drostan appears to have had a wide following in the north in earlier times, although all but forgotten by the 12th century. Saint Serf of Culross was associated with Nechtan's brother Bridei.[25] It appears, as is well known in later times, that noble kin groups had their own patron saints, and their own churches or abbeys.[26]

Report Spam   Logged
Europa
Administrator
Superhero Member
*****
Posts: 4318



« Reply #29 on: April 10, 2007, 01:16:31 pm »

History

The means by which the Pictish confederation formed in Late Antiquity from a number of tribes are as obscure as the processes which created the Franks, the Alamanni and similar confederations in Germany. The presence of the Roman Empire, unfamiliar in size, culture, political systems and ways of making war, should be noted. Nor can we ignore the wealth and prestige that control of trade with Rome offered.[27]

Pictland had previously been described as the home of the Caledonii.[28] Other tribes said to have lived in the area included the Verturiones, Taexali and Venicones.[29] Except for the Caledonians, the names may be second- or third-hand: perhaps as reported to the Romans by speakers of Brythonic or Gaulish languages.[30]

Pictish recorded history begins in the so-called Dark Ages. It appears that they were not the dominant power in Northern Britain for the entire period. Firstly the Gaels of Dál Riata dominated the region, but suffered a series of defeats in the first third of the 7th century.[31] The Angles of Bernicia overwhelmed the adjacent British kingdoms, and the neighbouring Anglian kingdom of Deira (Bernicia and Deira later being called Northumbria), was to become the most powerful kingdom in Britain.[32] The Picts were probably tributary to Northumbria until the reign of Bridei map Beli, when the Anglians suffered a defeat at the battle of Dunnichen which halted their expansion northwards. The Northumbrians continued to dominate southern Scotland for the remainder of the Pictish period.

In the reign of Óengus mac Fergusa (729–761), Dál Riata was very much subject to the Pictish king. Although it had its own kings from the 760s, it appears that Dál Riata did not recover.[33] A later Pictish king, Caustantín mac Fergusa (793–820) placed his son Domnall on the throne of Dál Riata (811–835).[34] Pictish attempts to achieve a similar dominance over the Britons of Alt Clut (Dumbarton) were not successful.[35]

The Viking Age brought great changes in Britain and Ireland, no less in Scotland than elsewhere. The kingdom of Dál Riata was destroyed, certainly by the middle of the 9th century, when Ketil Flatnose is said to have founded the Kingdom of the Isles. Northumbria too succumbed to the Vikings, who founded the Kingdom of York, and the kingdom of Strathclyde was also greatly affected. The king of Fortriu Eógan mac Óengusa, the king of Dál Riata Áed mac Boanta, and many more, were killed in a major battle against the Vikings in 839.[36] The rise of Cínaed mac Ailpín (Kenneth MacAlpin) in the 840s, in the aftermath of this disaster, brought to power the family who would preside over the last days of the Pictish kingdom and found the new kingdom of Alba, although Cínaed himself was never other than king of the Picts.

In the reign of Cínaed's grandson, Caustantín mac Áeda (900–943), the kingdom of the Picts became the kingdom of Alba. The change from Pictland to Alba may not have been noticeable at first; indeed, as we do not know the Pictish name for their land, it may not have been a change at all. The Picts, along with their language, did not disappear suddenly. The process of Gaelicisation, which may have begun generations earlier, continued under Caustantín and his successors. When the last inhabitants of Alba were fully Gaelicised, becoming Scots, probably during the 11th century, the Picts were soon forgotten.[37] Later they would reappear in myth and legend
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy