Innes

Be Traist.
24 y/o.
Animist.
Archaeology!
Find my alt @shelflid

[Innes @AnInnes3]

"A lambkin in peace, but a lion in war,
The pride of her kindred, the heroine grew:
Her grandsire, old Odin, triumphantly swore, -"
"Whoe'er shall provoke thee, th' encounter shall rue!"
- Robert Burns, Caledonia.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@CaptainFalke Woden is Caledonia's grandsire, Christianity was but a moment.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

FTDNA primarily reads peoples' Y-DNA, their haplogroup. This is passed unaltered (with occasional mutations) from father-to-son in a traceable line. You can be 5% Insular celt and have a Celtic Y-DNA marker.

FTDNA has 14,225 Scottish testers from the mainland, of which 11% carry a paternal marker suggesting Germanic inheritance from father-to-son.

The daily mail article poorly represents a study that shows there is genetic division in Scotland.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

It is the opposite. Many in Britain are insecure about their identity and cope with genetics to argue that they are Celts or w/e. But genetics do not an ethnicity make! Decent, cultural inheritance and genoelogical - these are the important things.

[onchú ↟ @ulverlover141]

I hate seeing english people larping as purebred Anglo-saxons, they hate to acknowledge that they are more Celt than anything

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@scottishslander @thclymns Y-DNA has nothing to do with percentages of Admixture.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@Maptysk Notable lack of Z381>Z301 despite the presence of other (now rarer) U106 types.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

My initial post is primarily targeted at English people.

In Scotland it is more complex. People who have, for all intensive purposes, been Germanic-speakers with a Germanic culture for 700 years are a Germanic people regardless of what the majority of their DNA is, IMO. If there were any genetic marker that I'd think is important at all it'd be the paternal one.

All Germanic people ever have had Celtic derived ancestry and that is true going back to the ethnogenesis of that people.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

80% Insular DNA is not homogenous. In the borders and the east coast the average for CNE is 20%, with highs in places like Orkney and of course lows in the western isles and the west in general.

You know as well as I do that Scotland is a culturally rich nation that has always had strong regionalism associated with it. People in the east coast can be described as Germanicised insular celts for e.g., whilst in the West they are just Gaels who have only recently become Anglicized linguistically.

To deny the above is to deny what is easily observable in the historic record.

Scottish identity has always been complex. Medieval Scots, regardless of Gael-Teuton distinction, still saw themselves as Scots and the descendants, primarily, of the Gaels - with the only few exceptions being in family mythologies which did not overwrite the general ethnic feeling of said families.

"An Outline of the Relations between England and Scotland." Lays it out pretty well, iirc.

-
The reverse is thus true also. Orange order types from the south-west are, of course, primarily of Gaelic heritage, being anglicized much later than their eastern counterparts. Yet they cling to this notion of being genetically Germanic in so much as it ties to their pan-British pro-unionist and protestant agenda.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@scottishslander Scotland is not genetically homogenous.
I am ethnically Scottish.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

We take very little ancestry (less than 10% of our DNA in total) from the native pre-BB population. By genocide or other forms of population replacement, the BB overcame them.

On the stones at stone henge there is BB graffiti of axes and daggers, so that might tell us something.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

Whilst it is attractive to imagine the roving pastoralist Indo-Europeans conquering the sedentary Neolithic farmers, in the case of Britain, this was not so!

Evidence shows that by the period in which the Bell Beaker people entered Britain, the ilk of those who had built stone henge had - for the most part, and for a very long time - abandoned sedentary methods of farming in favour of semi-mobile pastoralism combining subsistence hunting with herding pigs and cattle.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@scottishslander Nope. You are conflating ethnic and cultural identity with genetics.

[Paxtysk @Maptysk]

Y-DNA of Hunter Gatherers from the Baltic, 6200-2600BC, showing quite clearly that Germanic I1 could not have come from them.
This chart explicitly does not include Corded Ware individuals despite the late occurance of R1a. Those individuals are labeled as Comb Ceramic Culture.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@Bochcore @ulverlover141 Untrue. Lowland Scots have a very little amount of Anglo-Saxon associated DNA compared to England, and it is entirely concentrated on the border and the east coast.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

There is evidence also that the Scots ignored the laws that made the compensation system obsolete and that, in low and high country alike, people still engaged in it as a 'custom'.

Something for Heathens to consider.

[Uriah @crimkadid]

Wergeld is a pagan custom and you might assume Christianity should have killed it. But wergeld for murder was banned in Denmark only in 1558 and even then Danes continued to blatantly ignore the law. This complicated legal ruling is from 1693: 44 people receive payment.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

Genetics without genealogy is butter without bread

[Innes @AnInnes3]

Whilst I enjoy genetics, a fixation on one's own genetics is, to me, a sure sign of a lack of geneological knowledge and the insecurity that comes with it.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

It is the opposite. Many in Britain are insecure about their identity and cope with genetics to argue that they are Celts or w/e. But genetics do not an ethnicity make! Decent, cultural inheritance and genoelogical - these are the important things.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

Descent*.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

Still crazy to me that someone is capable of reading this as if it refers to German people lol.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

In Germanic culture, total annihilation and the killing, especially of high ranking, enemies was important to prevent the inevitable reality that they will seek revenge. This idea is not unique to Germanic culture of course, but it did define it.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@SkinheadEcon Mega cope.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

in Anglo-Saxon culture it created an interesting contrast where the nobility were less likely to be spared post-battle than the lower ranking warriors. There is no point risking the cost of keeping a prisoner of war or a slave that is a warrior of high-rank.

Compare to the middle ages where this reversed entirely. Though I suppose the inner Anglo-Saxon came out at Agincourt and so on.

Battles in medieval Britain did tend to have high casualty rates amongst the nobles, Harlaw in Scotland for instance was notable for this, as were Flodden and Pinkie.

[Innes @AnInnes3]

In Germanic culture, total annihilation and the killing, especially of high ranking, enemies was important to prevent the inevitable reality that they will seek revenge. This idea is not unique to Germanic culture of course, but it did define it.

[Uriah @crimkadid]

This thread is all about your legal options if you were to travel back in time to medieval Europe and murder someone. It's also about measuring the decline of the extended family and the origins of English individualism. On Bertha Phillpotts' "Kindred and Clan in Past Time".

[Innes @AnInnes3]

@SkinheadEcon Thrall means slave.