Read Online The Origins of the British: The New Prehistory of Britain by Oppenheimer - Free Book Online Page B
Book: The Origins of the British: The New Prehistory of Britain by Oppenheimer
Read Free Book Online
Authors: Oppenheimer
Ads: Link
language of the Argyll west of the Grampians? I shall come back to this puzzle again in the second part of the book.
… and Scots?
The generally accepted view is that Scottish Gaelic was derived not from Scotland, or Caledonia as the Romans called it, but from Irish Gaelic, from the Irish tribe previously called theScotti by the Romans. This may come as a surprise to some readers, but is generally felt to be incontestable. It seems that not even the name ‘Scot’ belongs in Scotland.
But – find an incontestable position, and there will be sure to be someone to oppose it. In an appropriately titled article ‘Were the Scots Irish?’ in the august archaeological journal
Antiquity
, Scottish archaeologist Ewan Campbell, of the University of Glasgow, recently did just that. He starts his polemic by outlining the conventional story of how
the Scots founded the early kingdom of
Dál Riata
in western Scotland in the early sixth century, having migrated there from north-eastern Antrim, Ireland. In the process they displaced a native Pictish or British people from an area roughly equivalent to the modern county of Argyll. Later, in the mid-ninth century, these Scots of
Dál Riata
took over the kingdom of
Alba
, later to become known as Scotland. 42
Campbell then claims that ‘There had never been any serious archaeological justification for the supposed Scottic migration’, citing a 1970 study which failed to find any archaeological evidence for cultural transplantation, into either Scotland or other parts of western Britain such as Galloway. He then goes through the inconsistencies and gaps in the archaeological and historical evidence. 43 It is Campbell’s analysis of the linguistic evidence that is most likely to raise objections – from linguists. He does acknowledge that the phenomenon of Ogham inscriptions came from Ireland. However, he does not mention Patrick Sims-Williams’ inference from those inscriptions that the Irish Gaelic language and names made significant inroads into Wales over the same period, although their influence subsequently faded. 44
This evidence for an Irish linguistic intrusion during the Dark Ages does not necessarily invalidate Campbell’s main alternative. He suggests that, rather than being limited by the Irish Sea until the first millennium AD , Gaelic languages and culture had extended across the North Channel between Antrim and Argyll and Galloway for much longer, perhaps back as far as the Iron Age. A glance at any map of the British Isles shows that geographically, his argument is sound. Ireland, the Isle of Man and western Scotland are very close to one another across the Northern Channel, far closer than the steps on the sea-trading links between northern Spain, Brittany, Cornwall, south-west Wales and County Wexford in Ireland. From the Bronze Age onwards, the sea route would have been far easier for trade than overland, and northern Scotland had the added geolinguistic barrier of the Druim Albin, the ‘Spine of Britain’, the Grampian Highlands. 45
… and Irish?
Campbell also argues for Brythonic intrusions in the opposite direction, from Britain into Ireland. He is not alone. Ivernic, for instance, is said to be an extinct Brythonic language that was spoken in Ireland, particularly in the south-west, by a tribe called the
Érainn
(Irish) or
Iverni
(Latin). There are several independent fragments of evidence to support the notion of Brythonic languages having been spoken at some time in some parts of Ireland, either before or after the present insular-celtic Gaelic (or Goidelic) branch became dominant. David Rankin points to Ptolemy’s description of eastern Ireland, which he says mentions four ‘British-sounding and possibly British connected tribes, such as Brigantes’. Rankin suggests that these could have been possible refugees from the Romans in Britain. 46
These ideas of Brythonic speakers in Ireland are also bound up with legendary concepts of
… and Scots?
The generally accepted view is that Scottish Gaelic was derived not from Scotland, or Caledonia as the Romans called it, but from Irish Gaelic, from the Irish tribe previously called theScotti by the Romans. This may come as a surprise to some readers, but is generally felt to be incontestable. It seems that not even the name ‘Scot’ belongs in Scotland.
But – find an incontestable position, and there will be sure to be someone to oppose it. In an appropriately titled article ‘Were the Scots Irish?’ in the august archaeological journal
Antiquity
, Scottish archaeologist Ewan Campbell, of the University of Glasgow, recently did just that. He starts his polemic by outlining the conventional story of how
the Scots founded the early kingdom of
Dál Riata
in western Scotland in the early sixth century, having migrated there from north-eastern Antrim, Ireland. In the process they displaced a native Pictish or British people from an area roughly equivalent to the modern county of Argyll. Later, in the mid-ninth century, these Scots of
Dál Riata
took over the kingdom of
Alba
, later to become known as Scotland. 42
Campbell then claims that ‘There had never been any serious archaeological justification for the supposed Scottic migration’, citing a 1970 study which failed to find any archaeological evidence for cultural transplantation, into either Scotland or other parts of western Britain such as Galloway. He then goes through the inconsistencies and gaps in the archaeological and historical evidence. 43 It is Campbell’s analysis of the linguistic evidence that is most likely to raise objections – from linguists. He does acknowledge that the phenomenon of Ogham inscriptions came from Ireland. However, he does not mention Patrick Sims-Williams’ inference from those inscriptions that the Irish Gaelic language and names made significant inroads into Wales over the same period, although their influence subsequently faded. 44
This evidence for an Irish linguistic intrusion during the Dark Ages does not necessarily invalidate Campbell’s main alternative. He suggests that, rather than being limited by the Irish Sea until the first millennium AD , Gaelic languages and culture had extended across the North Channel between Antrim and Argyll and Galloway for much longer, perhaps back as far as the Iron Age. A glance at any map of the British Isles shows that geographically, his argument is sound. Ireland, the Isle of Man and western Scotland are very close to one another across the Northern Channel, far closer than the steps on the sea-trading links between northern Spain, Brittany, Cornwall, south-west Wales and County Wexford in Ireland. From the Bronze Age onwards, the sea route would have been far easier for trade than overland, and northern Scotland had the added geolinguistic barrier of the Druim Albin, the ‘Spine of Britain’, the Grampian Highlands. 45
… and Irish?
Campbell also argues for Brythonic intrusions in the opposite direction, from Britain into Ireland. He is not alone. Ivernic, for instance, is said to be an extinct Brythonic language that was spoken in Ireland, particularly in the south-west, by a tribe called the
Érainn
(Irish) or
Iverni
(Latin). There are several independent fragments of evidence to support the notion of Brythonic languages having been spoken at some time in some parts of Ireland, either before or after the present insular-celtic Gaelic (or Goidelic) branch became dominant. David Rankin points to Ptolemy’s description of eastern Ireland, which he says mentions four ‘British-sounding and possibly British connected tribes, such as Brigantes’. Rankin suggests that these could have been possible refugees from the Romans in Britain. 46
These ideas of Brythonic speakers in Ireland are also bound up with legendary concepts of
Similar Books
