NYT: English, Irish, Scots: They’re All One, Genes Suggest

[mudd]

Human DNA differs from orangutan DNA by only two percent. I don't see that as any particular reason to develop closer relationships with orangutans.

I'd much rather have closer relationships with orangutans than with some of the people in the world today.

[Skweres]

........well, i have a little of all in he, just mostly irish, so im still happy

[Andrew Green]

"What happened in the past should remain in the past - and that should be the case the world over."
Well said. I have seen people who carry "baggage from the past" and I tend to dislike it. I have seen people carry baggage from the past, who don't really have much reason to be doing so (one person whom I know is convinced that he is Irish despite being born in America, to American parents...who for some reason thinks it's a grand idea to take up the "get the Brits out of Ireland" torch... even though he has never been out of the USA)... just drives me up the wall, and is insulting to those who may have more, shall we say "defined" connections to any number of random causes or whatever you wish to call them. Sorry, just had to get that sort of thing off my chest. If in some magical way, proving the genetics of the region to be very similar would fix anything, this is the sort of guy who would just ignore any rational evidence.
So, I don't really know where I was going with that. I think there was some sort of random point in there.

I identify myself as Scottish. Hell, I was born there, and lived there for a few years before my family got stationed elsewhere. My father is American born, with largely Scottish ancestry (although the family has been in the USA for many generations, genetically speaking things probably haven't changed much). My mother is German born, her mother was German, but her father was Czech. There may even be a little English in the mix somewhere too (wouldn't surprise me, given the usual cross pollination that happens between nations, and when a new nation is forming).

I guess the point of that one was that most people are a mix of a few different national origins. It wouldn't surprise me to see very similar genetics now. However, people still often try to identify themselves as one particular nationality or ethnicity, eventhough they may be much more than that. I've known plenty of guys who were half Caucasian, and half African-American. What did they call themselves? Black. Because they had the darker skin tone, almost all of them (many were co-workers who I razzed on all the time for it...in good humour, of course, they usually had something equally silly to throw back) identified himself or herself as one ethnicity, despite the fact that there was much more to each person's genetic makeup.
I don't entirely know why people do this sort of thing..perhaps it's so they have a brief answer when someone asks "What are you?" or "Where are you from?" It saves people from having to give the long answer?
Dunno.
Rant done.

[LoftGuy]

Whilst I believe that neither genetics nor linguistics shall lead to the elemination of the centuries old differences between the English, Scots and Irish, there is, at this moment, a movement underway in Northern Ireland which promises to unite the combantants envolved in the euphamistically named, Troubles.

Scientific and scholarly approaches are difficult for the common person to understand, much less agree with, but this movement revolves around cash, cold hard cash, a commodity easily understood by peoples of any political or religious persuasion, or social status.

That the participants have almost forged such a momentous agreement is truly encouraging for a resolution of the Troubles in Northern Ireland, and perhaps elsewhere.

Please see the attached Guardian Unlimited article:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...028055,00.html

Bob

[macwilkin]

Whilst I believe that neither genetics nor linguistics shall lead to the elemination of the centuries old differences between the English, Scots and Irish, there is, at this moment, a movement underway in Northern Ireland which promises to unite the combantants envolved in the euphamistically named, Troubles.

Scientific and scholarly approaches are difficult for the common person to understand, much less agree with, but this movement revolves around cash, cold hard cash, a commodity easily understood by peoples of any political or religious persuasion, or social status.

That the participants have almost forged such a momentous agreement is truly encouraging for a resolution of the Troubles in Northern Ireland, and perhaps elsewhere.

Please see the attached Guardian Unlimited article:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...028055,00.html

Bob

Before anything happens, let's not open a "can o' worms" with discussions about Northern Ireland, please.

This is the "warning shot".

Regards,

Todd

[slohairt]

Dia Dhuit!

It would certainly make sense that the majority of the population of the British Isles would be ultimately descended from Megalithic stone-builder peoples. Later invaders (Iberian Celts, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Normans, Danes, etc.) would have left a relatively small physical mark on the indigenous people. However, they DID leave a huge cultural mark. That would be assimilation.

"He also adopts Dr. Forster’s argument, based on a statistical analysis of vocabulary, that English is an ancient, fourth branch of the Germanic language tree, and was spoken in England before the Roman invasion."

I wouldn't say this some new-fangled argument. It's generally well-known that English is a Germanic language. Structure is what defines a language, not borrowed vocabulary. As for some form of English being spoken in England before the Roman invasion, I think that's probably nonsense. The Angles, Saxons, and Jutes arrived in Britain after the Romans left.

"Historians have usually assumed that Celtic was spoken throughout Britain when the Romans arrived. But Dr. Oppenheimer argues that the absence of Celtic place names in England — words for places are particularly durable — makes this unlikely."

Absence of Celtic place names? What about Avon? What about London?

"The Celtic cultural myth “is very entrenched and has a lot to do with the Scottish, Welsh and Irish identity; their main identifying feature is that they are not English,” said Dr. Sykes, an Englishman who has traced his Y chromosome and surname to an ancestor who lived in the village of Flockton in Yorkshire in 1286."

I can't believe that in 2007 someone would make such an arrogant, dismissive claim as that. Cultural myth? Evidently the esteemed Dr. Sykes is unaware of such culturally defining features as language, dress, food, music, and other customs. I guess the defining feature of the French people is that they're not English!

As an Irishman, I don't define my "Irishness" as being "non-English" or even "anti-English." That would just be stupid and antagonistic. What's so wrong with English culture anyway? I like Fish and Chips, Bangers and Mash, and Yorkshire Pudding! I like traditional English folk music and I enjoy English history and literature! I don't need to define myself as "not English" because I am not English!

[bubba]

Next the buggers will try to tell us the Celts were just a small marginal tribe.

[jordanjm]

I believe strongly though that stories like this are written to try to get groups of people to react. I believe that this story was written to get people to say I'm not English, or I'm this and that. It almost dares us to keep dividing ourselves instead of daring us to recognize that we are all humans. We are equal, and should treat all others with respect and courtesy.

[An t-Ileach]

...Absence of Celtic place names? What about Avon? What about London?

"The Celtic cultural myth “is very entrenched and has a lot to do with the Scottish, Welsh and Irish identity; their main identifying feature is that they are not English,” said Dr. Sykes, an Englishman who has traced his Y chromosome and surname to an ancestor who lived in the village of Flockton in Yorkshire in 1286."...

Of course, by 1286 even the Viking culture of Jorvik would have passed away into Mediaeval England, so having an ancestor in Flockton in that year tells him and us next to nothing about what he's arguing about.

As for the putative absence of Celtic place names in England, where would he like the opposing list to start (and end)? I suppose Avon was a good one, and London certainly. There's also The Wrekin in Shropshire (Dinlleu Gwrygon), Hereford (Hen Ffordd), the River Cam, the River Thames, Exeter (Caer Uisc), Kent (Caint), Cumbria, and so on...

[Woodsheal]

"The past is not dead. In fact, it's not even past."
-William Faulkner