What is the problem religionists have with secularism?

[Hope]

What the heck has Augustine got to do with evangelising the Britons?
He might have been strutting his stuff in what is now the south of England - but Columcille was there before him in the west of Scotland - where he met pre-existing Christian communities founded by Ninian a century earlier.

Just highlighting the fact that the misapprehension many have is just that.  Bear in mind that the 'authorities' in Rome believed that Britain had never been evangelised and sent Augustine to do the business.  He had quite a shock when he arrived, I suspect.

[Anchorman]

What the heck has Augustine got to do with evangelising the Britons?
He might have been strutting his stuff in what is now the south of England - but Columcille was there before him in the west of Scotland - where he met pre-existing Christian communities founded by Ninian a century earlier.

Just highlighting the fact that the misapprehension many have is just that.  Bear in mind that the 'authorities' in Rome believed that Britain had never been evangelised and sent Augustine to do the business.  He had quite a shock when he arrived, I suspect.

-
Yep.
Thus starting four centuries of conflict between Roman Christianity and Celtic Christianity - and inadvertantly sowing the seeds for Scottish identity in the process!

[ProfessorDavey]

What the heck has Augustine got to do with evangelising the Britons?
He might have been strutting his stuff in what is now the south of England - but Columcille was there before him in the west of Scotland - where he met pre-existing Christian communities founded by Ninian a century earlier.

Oh latecomers one and all.

You should head back to the daddy-O of them all. Namely Britain's first Christian martyr, Alban, who (even if you accept the latest date for his death) was in the ground for 60 years before Ninian was even born.

[Anchorman]

I was thinking about the 'evangelisation' bit, Prof.
Apart from the 'candida casa' at Whithorn ( an archaeologist's dream come true, btw), Ninian seems to have founded and inspired several other communities in Galloway and Ayrshire, whic themselves spawned mission churches, all of which were active by the time Columcille (Columba) came from an already semi-Christian area of Ireland to Dalriada.

[ProfessorDavey]

I was thinking about the 'evangelisation' bit, Prof.
Apart from the 'candida casa' at Whithorn ( an archaeologist's dream come true, btw), Ninian seems to have founded and inspired several other communities in Galloway and Ayrshire, whic themselves spawned mission churches, all of which were active by the time Columcille (Columba) came from an already semi-Christian area of Ireland to Dalriada.

Well if 'evangelisation' is your 'thang', then perhaps a bit more attention on Amphibalus, who (if you believe the story) was the Christian priest who converted Alban. Both were executed so he too was one of the very earliest Christian martyrs and also an evangelist, who pre-dated Ninian by about 100 years. Indeed it is reputed that he converted three out of the four earliest christian martyrs in Britain (the fourth being himself).

[Hope]

... and inadvertantly sowing the seeds for Scottish identity in the process!

Scottish only or a wider Celtic identity?

[Harrowby Hall]

... and inadvertantly sowing the seeds for Scottish identity in the process!

Scottish only or a wider Celtic identity?

The Scots - and other occupants of these islands were never Celts.

The Celts were a central European people occupying the Danube valley who spread into neighbouring areas. The idea that the rocky parts of the British Isles were celtic was invented by the Welsh romantic Edward Lhuyd at the end of the 17th century. He determined that the similarity between British and some Iberian and Gaulic languages was due them being of celtic origin. They were not, the Celts had never expanded so far west.

I suppose we now have to accept the modern concept of "celtic", but it is really a fantasy.

[Hope]

The Celts were a central European people occupying the Danube valley who spread into neighbouring areas. The idea that the rocky parts of the British Isles were celtic was invented by the Welsh romantic Edward Lhuyd at the end of the 17th century. He determined that the similarity between British and some Iberian and Gaulic languages was due them being of celtic origin. They were not, the Celts had never expanded so far west.

I suppose we now have to accept the modern concept of "celtic", but it is really a fantasy.

I thought the term 'Celtic' was applied to the British by the Romans.  By the way, your comment would seem to suggest that the Oxford Dictionary is partially wrong in its definition of the term:

Celtic: Relating to the Celts or their languages, which constitute a branch of the Indo-European family and include Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh, Breton, Manx, Cornish, and several extinct pre-Roman languages such as Gaulish.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Celtic

Mind you, one definition of 'Celt' is nearer your understanding:

A member of a group of peoples inhabiting much of Europe and Asia Minor in pre-Roman times. Their culture developed in the late Bronze Age around the upper Danube, and reached its height in the La Tène culture (5th to 1st centuries bc) before being overrun by the Romans and various Germanic peoples.

1.1 A native of any of the modern nations or regions in which Celtic languages are (or were until recently) spoken; a person of Irish, Highland Scottish, Manx, Welsh, or Cornish descent.

Origin

From Latin Celtae (plural), from Greek Keltoi; in later use from French Celte 'Breton' (taken as representing the ancient Gauls).

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/celt?q=Celt#Celt 

The more recent French origin is interesting.

[Anchorman]

... and inadvertantly sowing the seeds for Scottish identity in the process!

Scottish only or a wider Celtic identity?

-
Specifically Scots, Hope, in that the independent streak in the Celtic church never quite left the Scottish Church, even after it had become 'Romanised', a process all but completed under the tutelage of Margaret, Wife of Malcolm Caen Mhor.
The authorities at Canterbury kept insisting that they should be the main source of power in the church in these Isles, but for three centuries, Scots clerics fought an action every bit as invoved as the various military exploits,culminating in Rome making Scotland a 'Special daughter'.
At the Wars of Independence, Bruce would never have achieved any real power without the active support of bishops Wishart and Lamberton (despite both being incarcerated in England-). That's when Bernard, Abbot of Arbroath, became the most prominant 'free' Scots cleric, and in the process, accumulated both prestige for the abbey (which became the richest in Scotland) and even more influence at court for the church. OK, a couple of centuries later, the corruption this would engender would lead, in part, to the Reformation, but at the time the church reinforced Scots identity as a separate state of being from that of England.

[Harrowby Hall]

    Celtic: Relating to the Celts or their languages, which constitute a branch of the Indo-European family and include Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh, Breton, Manx, Cornish, and several extinct pre-Roman languages such as Gaulish.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Celtic

This simply reflects the classification devised by Lhuyd.

I note your observation about the recent French origin.

It could be that Lhuyd was being creative about "celtishness" or perhaps, though being a linguist but not a linguistician confused and then combined two disparate terminologies.

[Dicky Underpants]

    Celtic: Relating to the Celts or their languages, which constitute a branch of the Indo-European family and include Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh, Breton, Manx, Cornish, and several extinct pre-Roman languages such as Gaulish.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Celtic

This simply reflects the classification devised by Lhuyd.

I note your observation about the recent French origin.

It could be that Lhuyd was being creative about "celtishness" or perhaps, though being a linguist but not a linguistician confused and then combined two disparate terminologies.

Surely other linguistic specialists have corroborated Lhuyd's classification of these languages as being directly related to each other? You will accept, I presume, that these languages are Indo-European (with the possible exception of 'Gaulish') and that they evolved separately from the original I_E over a similar period of time? Where do you think the immediate geographical and linguistic roots of these languages lie, if not with those peoples loosely referred to as "The Celts"?

[Harrowby Hall]

McEvoy et al (2004) in American Journal of Human Genetics 75 693-702 employ another approach.

They consider that any such progression of a central European language and its population expansion from central Europe would be manifest in the DNA of people living in the present day "Celtic Fringe". They examine Y chromosome evidence and find little support for any migration from central Europe. I suppose any invasion could have been by women, but that is unlikely.

It seems likely that Lhuyd conflated two things and came up with his Celtic Fringe: the similarity of Atlantic coast languages and the fact that the Romans had called a Gaulish tribe a name with celtic overtones. Hence the languages must be the modern remnants of the original Celtic languages. (I'm not sure if there are any records of the languages spoken by the central Europeans.) His postulation was that the Celts came from central Europe, brought their language with them and settled on the Atlantic coast and remained a seperate, identifiable, people and culture.

The homogeneity in the DNA of people living in the British Isles does not suggest that there was any major Iron Age influx from central Europe. It may be therefore that any imagined ethnic differences between different communities in the British Isles are just that - imagined.

[jeremyp]

It may be therefore that any imagined ethnic differences between different communities in the British Isles are just that - imagined.

No.  Ethnic differences are more cultural than genetic. 

[Harrowby Hall]

It may be therefore that any imagined ethnic differences between different communities in the British Isles are just that - imagined.

No.  Ethnic differences are more cultural than genetic.

EDITED FOR CLARITY

Ethnic differences more cultural than genetic? I suppose it depends on what you mean by "ethnic". If you are talking about "German" ethnicity and "Danish" ethnicity then I would agree. But what about "Northern European" and "Mediterranean" ethnicities. There are typically physical differences which are transmitted through inheritance rather than culture. I admit that these differences may be slight - a tendancy to a particular natural skin colour, a tendancy to a particular hair colour etc.

Lhuyd's argument (and this, of course, was pre-Mendel) was that the Atlantic coast celts came from a different genetic heritage than the rest of the British Isles population, they were a different people from a different place. And that they were physically different with a tendency towards red hair, stocky build, knobbly knees ...... God knows what.

And there are still people around believing this guff .....

My statement was a conclusion based on findings from the examination of DNA samples: no evidence of an invasion of central Europeans, of a different people, and a high level of genetic homogeneity amongst people from all parts of the British Isles - so no seperate "Celtic" genotype.

Of course "ethnic" differences in these circumstances are going to be cultural.

[Hope]

... though being a linguist but not a linguistician confused and then combined two disparate terminologies.

Hi HH, could you define what you mean by the term 'linguistician' and how it differs from the more commonly used term 'linguist'?

[jeremyp]

... though being a linguist but not a linguistician confused and then combined two disparate terminologies.

Hi HH, could you define what you mean by the term 'linguistician' and how it differs from the more commonly used term 'linguist'?

He's trying to distinguish between people who know lots of languages and people who study language, I think.

[jeremyp]

But what about "Northern European" and "Mediterranean" ethnicities. There are typically physical differences which are transmitted through inheritance rather than culture.

Take a baby born in Scandinavia, have it brought up by Greek parents.  When it grows up, will it be Greek or Scandinavian in its outlook, values, likes and dislikes etc.  I think it will be unambiguously Greek, although it might look a bit funny compared to its friends.

It used to be thought that, when the Saxons arrived, they displaced the existing population, so complete was the cultural shift.  However, genetics tells us this was not the case and the existing population simply adopted the Germanic culture.

I think we overrate the importance of genetics and "race".  I once heard a black comedian (unfortunately I forget her name) say "I once went to Nigeria to discover my roots.  I found out my roots were in Hackney".

[Harrowby Hall]

... though being a linguist but not a linguistician confused and then combined two disparate terminologies.

Hi HH, could you define what you mean by the term 'linguistician' and how it differs from the more commonly used term 'linguist'?

A linguist is a person who speaks more than one language.

A linguistician is a person who practises linguistics, an academic discipline which is related to psychology. Linguistics is the scientific study of language as a phenomenon. Its most notable practitioner is probably Noam Chomsky.

[Harrowby Hall]

But what about "Northern European" and "Mediterranean" ethnicities. There are typically physical differences which are transmitted through inheritance rather than culture.

Take a baby born in Scandinavia, have it brought up by Greek parents.  When it grows up, will it be Greek or Scandinavian in its outlook, values, likes and dislikes etc.  I think it will be unambiguously Greek, although it might look a bit funny compared to its friends.

It used to be thought that, when the Saxons arrived, they displaced the existing population, so complete was the cultural shift.  However, genetics tells us this was not the case and the existing population simply adopted the Germanic culture.

I think we overrate the importance of genetics and "race".  I once heard a block comedian (unfortunately I forget her name) say "I once went to Nigeria to discover my roots.  I found out my roots were in Hackney".

You are taking this all out of context.

Why, I don't know.

I was merely trying to explain the origin of the modern concept of "Celtic" and the role of Edward Lhuyd in its development. Nothing more. I had been asked a question by Dicky Underpants was attempting to provide some academic evidence.

[Harrowby Hall]

But what about "Northern European" and "Mediterranean" ethnicities. There are typically physical differences which are transmitted through inheritance rather than culture.

Take a baby born in Scandinavia, have it brought up by Greek parents.  When it grows up, will it be Greek or Scandinavian in its outlook, values, likes and dislikes etc.  I think it will be unambiguously Greek, although it might look a bit funny compared to its friends.

It used to be thought that, when the Saxons arrived, they displaced the existing population, so complete was the cultural shift.  However, genetics tells us this was not the case and the existing population simply adopted the Germanic culture.

I think we overrate the importance of genetics and "race".  I once heard a block comedian (unfortunately I forget her name) say "I once went to Nigeria to discover my roots.  I found out my roots were in Hackney".

You are taking this all out of context.

Why, I don't know. But, in general I agree with you.

I was merely trying to explain the origin of the modern concept of "Celtic" and the role of Edward Lhuyd in its development. Nothing more. I had been asked a question by Dicky Underpants was attempting to provide some academic evidence.

[Udayana]

I recommend Stephen Oppenheimer's book "The Origins of the British" which covers the genetics and linguistics of European and British peoples. It is an excellent read for anyone that likes to get down into details.

The word "celtic" is used differently in different contexts so doesn't really have a firm definition. He shows that large parts of England already had similar language and culture, in fact also genetics, as the post-Roman "Saxon invaders". 

Link to an article by Oppenheimer giving a summary of his work (ignore the headline para at the start which is misleading though):
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/mythsofbritishancestry

And also Q+As in a follow up which is interesting in itself:
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/mythsofbritishancestryrevisited

[Anchorman]

I'd say the Celts are defined more by cultural and linguistic ties, etc, than genetic connections.
The similarities between music and language in Galicia, Ireland Wales, Cornwall, the Gaeltacht in Scotlannd and Cape Breton, not to mention the areas which styl have traces of their Brythonic Welsh heritage such as the area covered by the former kingdom of Strathclyde, etc, are the bonds which bind us.
Just go to Celtic connections in Glasgow in January....academic tomes cease to be relevent at that point!

[Dicky Underpants]

I'd say the Celts are defined more by cultural and linguistic ties, etc, than genetic connections.
The similarities between music and language in Galicia, Ireland Wales, Cornwall, the Gaeltacht in Scotlannd and Cape Breton, not to mention the areas which styl have traces of their Brythonic Welsh heritage such as the area covered by the former kingdom of Strathclyde, etc, are the bonds which bind us.
Just go to Celtic connections in Glasgow in January....academic tomes cease to be relevent at that point!

Well, that was the line I was taking in the question I asked. I don't doubt that it's very unlikely that a single group could be defined bearing similar genetic characteristics which would differentiate them from other early inhabitants of these isles. But I'm still puzzled about the geographical-linguistic origins of all these "celtic" languages, which so obviously bear close relationships with each other, and which are equally obviously of the Indo-European class of languages.
However, there being no written examples of the ancient development of these languages (like Indo-European itself), I suppose we're never likely to know. Unless some strange glyphs are found which turn out to be some unknown form of developed Indo-European. That's not beyond the bounds of possibility - after all, the ancient Hittite language (written in cuneiform) puzzled linguists for decades, until - wonder of wonders - it turned out to be a form of Indo-European (the key to this puzzle was the word "Watter", which turned out to mean "water"!

[Dicky Underpants]

I recommend Stephen Oppenheimer's book "The Origins of the British" which covers the genetics and linguistics of European and British peoples. It is an excellent read for anyone that likes to get down into details.

Thank you for that, Udayana. I'll check that one out. One more for a long list

[ippy]

I wonder what the Bretons and the Celts would think about, What is the problem religionists have with secularism? 

ippy