As author of the Old Celtic Dictionary and founder of the Gallaecian Language Revival Movement, I find John T Koch's and Barry Cunliffe's project very amazing. This explains why the Gallaecian hillforts of Galicia , Asturias and Northern Portugal are much older than the hillforts found in Hallstatt, Austria.
It's also where we find all the oldest Stonehenges and Dolmen, and going further back the earliest cave paintings. They recently found 3 cattle with a women in Portugal, dated to 9500BP, this puts them very close to the first to domesticate the Auroch. It suggests they also colonized Sardinia, Malta, Crete, Cyprus, and Phoenicia. It was the Phoenicians who made up the Pharoah Priest class of the Lower Kingdoms. Hephaestus in particular, King Og, the first Pharoah, was a Cabieri, who were the founders of Greece, and lend their name to Beruit, a Phoenician center for which no evidence remains. We also find Dolmens on the East coast of the Black Sea, and in New England, associated with the ancestors of the Algonquin. Further more Celtic remains have been found as far afield as New Zealand, where they constructed the same Megalithic monuments designed to track the Solstices and the Moon, the Moari "Pa" bears a striking resemblance to the Henges of Germany and Iberia. I suspect they are the israelites of the Bible, and were hunted down and exterminated by the Romans with the same verocity as they did the Jews, the Celtic, Phoenician, Jewish, and Egyptians all celebrated the same New Years, in September, with the rise of Orion and Pleiades, Ala Osiris and Isis. Isreal is the Phoenician word for Saturn, or El, Fruit of Isis and Ra, associated with Serpentis, the 13th Sunsign of the Babylonian Zodiac
I want to congratulate Barry on this and his other lectures on the Western Celts. This new and more convincing origin history, is backed up with DNA evidence as well. As an Irishman and student of Celtic History and Art, I throw my cap in the air and shout "YES".
@@veronicalogotheti5416 Are you not hearing the lecture, and seeing the images/maps. The country of Ireland is a very much unavoidable geographic area that is situated along the Atlantic way between southern Spain and the Orkney island.
Ten years ago, an Irish pub owner was clearing land for a driveway when his digging exposed an unusually large flat stone. The stone obscured a dark gap underneath. He grabbed a flashlight to peer in. "I shot the torch in and saw the gentleman, well, his skull and bones," Bertie Currie, the pub owner, said this week.The remains of three humans, in fact, were found behind McCuaig’s Bar in County Antrim, Northern Ireland. And though police were called, it was not, as it turned out, a crime scene. Instead, what Currie had stumbled over was an ancient burial that, after a recent DNA analysis, challenges the traditional centuries-old account of Irish origins from as far back as the 16th century, historians taught that the Irish are the descendants of the Celts, an Iron Age people who originated in the middle of Europe and invaded Ireland somewhere between 1000 B.C. and 500 B.C. That story has inspired innumerable references linking the Irish with Celtic culture. The Nobel-winning Irish poet William Butler Yeats titled a book “Celtic Twilight.” Irish songs are deemed “Celtic” music. Some nationalists embraced the Celtic distinction. And in Boston, arguably the most Irish city in the United States, the owners of the NBA franchise dress their players in green and call them the Celtics. Yet the bones discovered behind McCuaig’s tell a different story of Irish origins, and it does not include the Celts.
Time Team did a dig in Cornwall. A forest found buried on a beach. "The island name means Gray Stone in the Forest" Then they say :- "This forest was submerged around 3000 BC." Actually saying without saying it "Cornish was spoken here 3000 BC".
I'm buying it. I'm in. I like it. Good job. Keep looking, there's much we have yet to explore, discover, examine and reflect upon. My theory? Just when we get it all, all hell breaks loose and we have to start all over again - ha ha ha ha ha!
@@siddislikesgoogle My commiserations.....I feel the same....why put this on youtube for the public to see when it turns out to be disrespectful and annoying to the viewers....like you and me!? There are quite a few videos like this regarding lectures on the Celts and others, but fortunately I've seen the 6 part BBC series on youtube of the history of the Celts which was a great viewing experience for me and highly educational as well......highly recommend that for viewing to anyone who would like to have a meaningful video experience on this subject.
At least you get a few seconds on this recording. Ya'll should read the comments left on a Cunliffe speech delivered in 2008 where NONE of the images were captured at all. Sheesh does it occur to anyone that the upload may have been a secondary thought. How much poorer would we be if the owner of the recording realized the poor production and decided not to put it up for public consumption.
I am privileged t o have met and communicated with these two scholars in the 1970s through a great Italian friend and colleague, whom we all miss: Professor Riccardo Francovich
@@Simonsvids "Tolerant"?? Like the emerging (more & more) right-wing, neo-fascists in places like Austria, parts of France & even England, who have always looked down on the Irish? I can see why you don't say any more because you'd be showing what a fool you are by stereotyping whole societies as if they all think in lockstep as their government!
Slow down. Before condemning ask questions. My comment is full of ambiguities. I do not even say who 'we' are, or what I am referring to. Its a long video. What am I saying I am tolerant of? University level criticism please not high school. Ask specific questions first before criticising.
If you want proof of the Atlantic connection come to Cornwall and especially Penwith where I am from there is tons of evidence also seen in the Scilly islands..
Ten years ago, an Irish pub owner was clearing land for a driveway when his digging exposed an unusually large flat stone. The stone obscured a dark gap underneath. He grabbed a flashlight to peer in. "I shot the torch in and saw the gentleman, well, his skull and bones," Bertie Currie, the pub owner, said this week.The remains of three humans, in fact, were found behind McCuaig’s Bar in County Antrim, Northern Ireland. And though police were called, it was not, as it turned out, a crime scene. Instead, what Currie had stumbled over was an ancient burial that, after a recent DNA analysis, challenges the traditional centuries-old account of Irish origins from as far back as the 16th century, historians taught that the Irish are the descendants of the Celts, an Iron Age people who originated in the middle of Europe and invaded Ireland somewhere between 1000 B.C. and 500 B.C. That story has inspired innumerable references linking the Irish with Celtic culture. The Nobel-winning Irish poet William Butler Yeats titled a book “Celtic Twilight.” Irish songs are deemed “Celtic” music. Some nationalists embraced the Celtic distinction. And in Boston, arguably the most Irish city in the United States, the owners of the NBA franchise dress their players in green and call them the Celtics. Yet the bones discovered behind McCuaig’s tell a different story of Irish origins, and it does not include the Celts.
“The DNA evidence based on those bones completely upends the traditional view,” said Barry Cunliffe, an emeritus professor of archaeology at Oxford who has written books on the origins of the people of Ireland. DNA resarch indicates that the three skeletons found behind McCuaig's are the ancestors of the modern Irish and they predate the Celts and their purported arrival by 1,000 years or more. The genetic roots of today's Irish, in other words, existed in Ireland before the Celts arrived. “The most striking feature” of the bones, according to the research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, is how much their DNA resembles that of contemporary Irish, Welsh and Scots. (By contrast, older bones found in Ireland were more like Mediterranean people, not the modern Irish.) Radiocarbon dating shows that the bones discovered at McCuaig's go back to about 2000 B.C. That makes them hundreds of years older than the oldest artifacts generally considered to be Celtic - relics unearthed from Celt homelands of continental Europe, most notably around Switzerland, Austria and Germany. For a group of scholars who in recent years have alleged that the Celts, beginning from the middle of Europe, may never have reached Ireland, the arrival of the DNA evidence provides the biological certitude that the science has sometimes brought to criminal trials.“With the genetic evidence, the old model is completely shot,” John Koch, a linguist at the Center for Advanced Welsh and Celtic Studies at the University of Wales. The senior author of the DNA research paper, Dan Bradley of Trinity College Dublin, was reluctant to weigh in on the cultural implications, but he offered that the findings do challenge popular beliefs about Irish origins. “The genomes of the contemporary people in Ireland are older - much older - than we previously thought,” he said. Reading the past in ancient Irish genomes Geneticists from Trinity College Dublin, and archaeologists from Queens University Belfast, have sequenced the first genomes from ancient Irish humans.There are essentially two arguments for linking the Celts to the Irish, and both have been undermined in recent years. The first link revolves around language. The Irish language is, like Welsh and Scottish Gaelic, part of a group that linguists have labeled Celtic. The languages share words and grammar. They seem to have emerged after a similar evolution from Indo-European. They are indisputably related, and indisputably a well-defined category. What is unclear is whether the term “Celtic” is an appropriate name for that group of languages. To be sure, some think that Celtic languages originated with the Celts on continental Europe and subsequently spread to Ireland, Wales and Scotland. This is the traditional view, and it dovetails with the idea that the Celts moved into Ireland during the Iron Age. But over the last decade, a growing number of scholars have argued that the first Celtic languages were spoken not by the Celts in the middle of Europe but by ancient people on Europe’s westernmost extremities, possibly in Portugal, Spain, Ireland or the other locales on the western edges of the British Isles. Koch, the linguist at the University of Wales, for example, proposed in 2008 that “Celtic” languages were not imports to the region but instead were developed somewhere in the British Isles or the Iberian Peninsula - and then spread eastward into continental Europe. His doubts about the traditional view arose as he was studying inscriptions on artifacts from southern Portugal. The inscriptions on those artifacts strongly resembled the languages known as Celtic, yet they dated as far back as 700 B.C. This placed Celtic languages far from the Celt homelands in the middle of Europe at a very, very early date. “What it shows is that the language that became Irish was already out there - before 700 B.C. and before the Iron Age,” Koch said. “It just didn’t fit with the traditional theory of Celtic spreading west to Britain and Iberia.” Numerous digs, most notably in Austria and Switzerland, have traced the outlines of the Celts. The artifacts offer evidence going back as far as about 800 B.C. The ancient Greeks and Romans also left written accounts of the Celts, and probably knew them well - the Celts sacked Rome around 390 B.C. and attacked Delphi in Greece in 279 B.C. It seemed plausible that this group that had invaded Rome had invaded Ireland as well, and in the standard view, it was this people that eventually made it to Ireland. For decades, however, archaeologists and other scholars have noted that the evidence for the standard account is flimsy - and how broad, nonetheless, is the application of the term “Celtic.” In 1955, an Oxford professor, J.R.R. Tolkien, better known as the author of "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" novels, described the popular understanding of "Celtic" in a celebrated lecture: “‘Celtic’ of any sort is ... a magic bag into which anything may be put, and out of which almost anything may come.... Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight, which is not so much a twilight of the gods as of the reason.” Moreover, in recent years, some archaeologists have proposed that the traditional story of the Celts' invasion was, in a sense, exactly wrong - the culture was not imported but exported - originating on the western edge of Europe much earlier than previously thought and spreading into the continent. In a 2001 book, Cunliffe, the Oxford scholar, argued on the basis of archaeological evidence that the flow of Celtic culture was opposite that of the traditional view - it flowed from the western edge of Europe, what he calls “the Atlantic zone” - into the rest of the continent. In many places of the Atlantic zone, he notes, people were buried in passages aligned with the solstices, a sign that they shared a unified belief system. “From about 5,000 B.C. onwards, complicated ideas of status, art, cosmology were being disseminated along the Atlantic seaways,” Cunliffe said, and that culture then spread eastward. “If we’re right, the roots of what is known as ‘Celtic’ culture go way way back in time,” Cunliffe said. “And the genetic evidence is going to be an absolute game-changer.” If the new scholarship proves correct, exactly what to do with the word Celtic will probably be a matter of some dispute: Should it be applied to languages or cultures that, no matter how clearly defined, were largely uninfluenced by the historical Celts of continental Europe? Complicating any answer are old ethnic antagonisms: The old notions of a distinct “Celtic race” or “Irish race” have been used not just for poetic tributes, but for scorn. The famed American anthropologist Daniel Garrison Brinton, for example, described the Celts in 1890 as having conspicuous mental traits: “turbulent, boastful, alert, courageous, but deficient in caution, persistence and self-control, they never have succeeded in forming an independent state, and are a dangerous element in the body politic of a free country. In religion they are fanatic and bigoted, ready to swear in the words of their master rather than to exercise independent judgment.” The new evidence from genetics, however, undermine notions of a separate Irish race, describing them instead as one sliver of the European spectrum. According to the genetic research, the Irish are at the extreme end of a genetic wave that washed across Europe, a wave of migrants that swept westward from above the Black Sea across Europe about 2,500 B.C. That wave of migration had been documented in previous research led by David Reich at Harvard University, but it was unclear whether it had extended all the way to Ireland. The Y chromosome and other aspects of the DNA in the bones found behind McCuaig’s, however, link the Irish to that surge of population. “The way to think about genetic variation in Europe is that it is more of a gradient than it is of sharp boundaries," said Bradley, the DNA researcher. "Sometimes, cultural features like language and natural borders can coincide with genetics, but most times not. Genetics is fuzzy, and it doesn't follow political and cultural borders." Even so, some experts warned that the new findings will disappoint many who would prefer a simpler answer to the question Irish origins. "The public will always want a place on the map and for someone to point and say, 'This where the Irish are from,' " said J.P. Mallory, an emeritus professor of archaeology at Queen's University Belfast and the author of a book, "The Origins of the Irish." "But there’s going to be no way to do that. These groups were frequently traveling east-west across Europe, from one place to another. Everyone is a mix.”
Today's modern irish people are, like all modern Europe people, are racially mixed. It is known that there were people living in Britain long before the Celts arrived. It is believed that the Celts intermixed with the original people and were already a mixed race even before the Vikings and Normans came to Ireland. Are "Celts" a race? I don't believe so - a tall red haired Scotsman and a shorter dark haired Welshman appear to be quite different people! My understanding of "Celtic" is a linguist and cultural heritage. The Celtic languages and cultures were absorbed by other peoples through either conquest or peaceful contact. The best example would be the Vikings who conquered parts of Ireland then absorbed the Gaelic language and culture once they settled in Ireland. This suggests that the Celtic culture was considered a important culture by others who came in contact with it. An equivalent in today's world would be three English speaking young people, one from India, one from Africa and one from Asia - they all speak English and all live a Western life-style but none are actually English or even racially European. Being able to speak an international language such as English and adopting a Western life-style is culturally beneficial today, perhaps being able to speak a Celtic language and having a Gaelic life-style may have had similar benefits 1, 000 years ago!
The moment we get attached to an idea, we have lost our desire for truth. I say this not to be flippant. but to drive home the point that we easily blind ourselves to the possibilities...
Jamie Hume yes, you're right; just like in many scientific circles, knowledge which becomes, to many of the "establishment" & the more conservative types who don't like, once they've uncovered some sort of findings that they soon turn into a kind of dogma, newer, younger, more open-minded scientists who come along & challenge this supposedly "established dogma" with newer, more accurate technology & work at it with just as much enthusiasm as the older generation, if not more. Why? Because for the conservative dogmatics it's very difficult, almost impossible, to admit that the discoveries they'd made decades earlier have a lot more to this knowledge or that this "dogma" is flat-out wrong and the hard-working, better technologically outfitted scientists have "shown-up" their "forebears" & these geezers (wrongly) take it as an affront to their work & so, to try & deflect the defects of their "dogma" (which is something that should NEVER exist in ANY science, be it anthropology, archaeology, physics, chemistry or whatnot! Science is not some idiotic religion which claims to have had the "truth" "revealed" to them. That is the farthest from how science works. The honest & intelligent scientist, whatever the discipline, will tell you that one of the most important concepts of science & the scientific method is that the quest for knowledge is a never-ending search and that current, established ideas, maybe not all of them but a good portion of them, will eventually fall; will one day be proved wrong or incomplete and also that there is NO SUCH THING as any absolute "Truth".
"Portugal" derives from Portus + Cale. Latin for Port + Celtic for Port. Cale was the main port city of Northwest Iberia where the Gallaecian Celts lived.
I am Spanish and I agree with you. But don’t forget that it happens the same way as we Say “England” and “the English” when we should say “Britain” or “the British”. It is very difficult to unlearn stereotypes passed on for centuries.
Why should I? I have done nothing to you, hater! I will comment if I want to as I have the same right as anyone. Thank Goodness! Now bog off to whatever nasty small minded cave you happened to crawl out of!
Celt is a ancient Greek label , cymry is the ancient native name derived from The cimmerians of 4000 plus years ago otherwise we are acting like slaçademics.
My ancestor came from Scotland to America in the 1800's, my grandmother walked out of the mountains of the South, my dad's father came from Northern Italy, My DNA results Irish and Basque French ? Negative blood
I live in Britain and my Haplogroup is R1b L21 which is Celtic Atlantic and my blood group is Rhesus A Negative. All of my family has Scottish and Irish names and I believe the Celts are native to the British isles and always have been.
@@leewade8888 Everybody came from somewhere at one point.... your people came from Northern Spain. Google Stephen Dillane and Julen Lopetegui then you will see what I mean. Too many doppelgangers I've seen from both Brits and Basques.
@@leewade8888 DNA results are proving very helpful. However, the term ‘celt’ is very misleading. Marchell Abraham’s has a new channel tracing the trail of the alphabets. She is a member of the BHH group. See, on Y T : BritainsHiddenHistory Ross (+ Cymroglyphics 01 Overview) They would be very interested to receive authentic proof that this term ‘celt’ was ever applied to Britain prior to the 18th century. The older records and inscriptions definitely build a different picture. Whoever this term ‘celt’ is now applied to, it is a strong possibility that migrations to the east and south were pre-ice age. Migrations returning to the west (and Britain) can be traced through the written records and comprehended more accurately if the very old scripts are taken into account. E.g., the hieroglyphs are not letters: they are root syllables and depictions (rebus) and, when sounded out, speak words and phrases... in Welsh!
I'm looking forward to a time when people understand that watching some youtube videos isn't the same thing as being an actual learned expert on a subject.
Not everyone can be a trained historian. I'd say if someone is interested enough to sit through this lecture on here they could at least engage in an interesting conversation on the topic, whether or not they're as learned on it as Barry. Don't fault people for trying to research and learn something that piques their interest, especially if they don't have to be doing it. I'd for sure be happy if more people watched this instead of Jake Paul videos.
I would like to know about the celtic mummies found in China that date back 3500 years. Would that not put a spanner in the works. I have found the presentation fascinating and informative.
They aren't Celtic. They are basically European, but the tarim basin mummies are descended from a branch of Europeans that migrated from central/eastern Europe east into the steppe and then into the tarim basin. He is wrong about the Celts genetically. There was an invasion of Britain that almost completely replaced the neolithic farmer population with the incoming Indo-European population just before 2000bc
@@alexdunphy3716 thank you Alex it looks like the historians today want to write their own history . You're right about the mummies found in China and India only got the full information on them after I made the decision to make a comment. Thanks again.
@@alexdunphy3716 The fact of the matter is that those Tarim mummies' remains contain the oldest pieces of tartan. And you know perfectly well that the Tocharians may well have descended from the Yamna culture just like the later Celts. Just look at the art coming out of the Tarim basin, it's positively proto-Urnfield in style. We all know that this would be BIG if only CHINA had less control and less of a frenzied, horribly jealous freak-focus on manipulating the narrative. Things are changing, friend, and you know it, you know what these new horse burials, chariot burials being researched even now truly mean. People are going to wake up. The East will be shown to have, beneath those Asiatic trappings, ancient European foundations. And us Celts deserve our heritage manifest. Let unto us DELIVERANCE be unleashed.
@Monarch of the Glen & @Alex Dunphy: They (Those mummies found about 30 or 40 years ago, in what is now a part of Xinjiang in Western China 🇨🇳) were probably of ancient Tocharian people, who were known to the Greeks & had their own language (that became extinct in a way that was similar to how Gothic also later did, with no continued derived forms), but which was an early member of the Indo-European branch of languages & peoples, whose Caucasian features & origins were also of peoples dwelt then across the Central & Eastern Eurasian Steppes to the western most edges in the Tarim Basin of the later Chin Empire & its earlier forerunners, between about 2000BC till around 800AD.
why on earth didnt the video maker ask him for digital copies of the images ans insert then into the video he will still be heard speaking over the images, would make the whole thing more informative
Shalom, the Celts were so-called black people indigenous to Europe. Google black Celts and black European royalty. Then check the etymology of the word Europe. It is just sad that whiteness causes some people to literally steal the identity of others in order to have a history. Example: if Homer and all those so-called Greek fathers really existed, what alphabet did they use when they supposedly wrote all that good stuff? The rabbit hole is deep
There's a big gap between the core Atlantic region being Celtic and central Europe being Celtic. The 5th century bc expansion to the east and south didn't start from the Atlantic region. The expansion into northern Italy was by a group of allied tribes who lived in an area between Le Mans and Langres between the Seine and Loire rivers. Most of this region is outside the Atlantic zone meaning these tribes were already established as Celtic before the expansion. Is a hundred years enough time to Celticise this region and then grow enough to launch a mass migration 500 kms away over a mountain range and presumably securing safe passage through the lands of other tribes? A hundred years because the Gauls enter Northern Italy around 400 bc and this expansion the professor mentions takes place around 500 bc. The Roman historian Livy mentions Bellovessus who invades Northern Italy and founds Milan during the reign of Tarquinus Priscus who reigned 200 years before the supposed Gallic invasion of around 400bc. Bellovessus was from the Bituriges who would be near the eastern border of the Atlantic zone so could potentially be part of this early expansion. Livy could be mistaken under which Tarquinius was ruling at the time or the invasion simply took place earlier than Cunliffe thought.
You know what would have made this a really good video? If the slides that he is talking about were shown on the screen so that we could follow along while he is talking about them. Instead, all we see is the speaker, we know what he looks like, so that is not helpful. Too bad, because the ideas are very interesting. This could have been a first rate video. Oh well...
He doesn't. There was no Portugal or Spain in the Iron Age. When he says "Spain" in this context he does not mean the modern country of Spain, but instead what was then known as "Hispania" by the Romans and Iberia by the Greeks. The entire peninsula, including modern Portugal.
Great to hear from a Celtic history enthusiast who doesn't identify as a modern Celt. Unfortunately there's often a political motive amongst researchers who identify themselves as belonging to one of the Celtic Nations and are trying to prove some point. Regarding the languages there has been research by a now deceased Breton language expert Francois Falc'hun, who discovered t one dialects of Breton may have a Gaulish substrate and that Gaulish language was still being spoken in western France when the ancestors of the Bretons came from Cornwall and Devon. His theory is that today's modern Breton people share mixed Celtic heritage. This theory upset both the Breton nationalists and French "purists" ! Recent DNA evidence from Brittany seems to prove him right.
This is now the second YT-clip about Mr. Cunliffe and his very interresting topics, and each time I see a very, very poor work of the camera man or the man who switched the slides or the life picture. I think there are some people working with no idea how to produce a movie like that. I fead, they sat that man behind his camera for a bahshish, to prevent the came from being stolen, and that was his job. I would advice Mr. Cunliffe to take car for such amateurs on the technics
I am from the tribe of the Nerviërs, the bravest Celtic tribe in the world like the world Nervous where it came from. Belgian Celts. When the Romans came we fought with 300.000 soldiers against the Romans.
Phoenicians, Jews, Celts, Egyptians and Assyrians all share the same Astrology and New Years, all associated with Serpentis, 13th Sunsign of the Babylonian Zodiac. We are likely looking at branching communities of the same people. Phoenicans and Israelites are one and the same, Abraham and St Paul both came from the same region as Gobekli Tepe, the earliest known form of the Zodiac
I agree with the whole Celtic culture (speakers of what became Celtic after say 1000 BCE) West to East theme. That is accept your conclusion "Celtic" didn't start with Hallstatt but could well be earlier & along Atantic coast & rivets But I am keptical about timing when relying upon Gray&Atkinson PIE out-of-Anatolia modeling. Profs A Pareltsvaig & M Lewis point out problems such as the "Polish & Romani Problems", urban Anatolian farmers needing to borrow from nonIE hunter-gatherers in Greece terms for statecraft, Mediterranean agriculture, & structures (Greek substrate) & the assumptions using only lexical similarities to establish language families (can't ignore grammar) & fundamentally that languages diffuse like viruses. And there's the whole "wheel line" problem (wheel-wool-wagen & horse PIE roots derivable across most PIE daughter from Tocharian to Iranian to Germanic & Romance). I subscribe to Kurgan hypothesis which places the speakers of what becomes protoCeltic close to the Pontiac Steppe ~4000 BCE. Still if agriculture took 3000 years to go from Greece to Britain (7000-4000 BCE) & the Black Death only a few years to get from Sicily across Europe along WELL ESTABLISHED TRADE ROUTES, I see no reason why the pre-protoCelts couldn't get from Pontiac Steppe to Atlantic seaboard in far less time. (Up Danube & Down Rhine+ others hence along coast & over to Britain-Wales-etc.) Then Celts have time to move East - witness the Gothic types running across Europe in 300-400s AD. Celts just sweep aside or assimilate any PIE or nonPIE language just north of the Alps. I wonder if post1000/900 BCE Celt movements Easteatds pushed Etruscans *back* over the Alps.
@@christophercripps7639 You're right - Lewis & Perltsvaig tore apart that bullshit Gray & Atkinson / Bouckaert (sp?), et al garbage that somehow made it into Science magazine - for months after that article was published about every week after for several months there were many critical articles/essays on the "mid-modeling" of ancient peoples.See David Anthony in a talk from Rotterdam that is here, on You Tube (search "David Anthony: Migration, Economics, and ...damn, I forgot the 3rd part, but one can find it easily enough or else look at Jim Mallory's talks).
It seems there's a synchronicity between Anatolia, the Balkans, Iberia, and the Pontic Steppes, it's more likely a much more fluid picture of all 4 groups sharing a common root, and bleeding into and influencing one another. As time progresses further waves of immigration from the east overwhelms the Eastern most groups, leaving only the western most populations untouched. It's also logical that these different communities of the same cultures developed in their own ways, adopting novel technologies in different ways. Iberia seems like the oldest, but appears out of nowhere, the Tripillian culture speaks to very ancient origins, Anatolia may well be a colony of either Iberia or the Balkans, or it could be vs versa. It's likely going to be decades before we can fully resolve these riddles
He seems to be suggesting that the early farmers spoke an indo-european language. There is the Anatolian theory of indo-european language expansion into europe which fits with the suggested time scales of language divergence in the slide he showed previous to that comment. The Kurgan theory is more widely accepted as the explanation for indo-european language expansion, though neither is conclusive.
But where did the Celts come from! They couldn't have just appeared on the Atlantic coasts! I got THAT info already from Bryan Sykes! What do YOU say? Are the Celts settled Phoenicians??!
tHE ONLY POWERFOOL NAVY OF 4000 bC WAS THAT OF CRETE..THE ::PHONECIAN: LETERS ARE THE LETERS OF THE PELASGOI FROM ARCADIA..WE NAME THEM LETERS OF PALAMIDES.THE CENTRE OF THE OAK RELIGION IS A PLACE NAMED DODONI IN EPIRUS S.W. IN GRECCE..THATS ALL FOR THE ORIGINS OF CELTS..ARE WELL KNOWN IN GREECE WHERE WE CALL THEM gALATES AND THERE IS A LETER OF APOSTLE PAUL TO THEM WRITEN IN PERFECT GRREK.
that was before the languages arrived + split apart as we know them (German-Celtic-Slavic were still mixed together, and in Russia) but if you believe Barry then those wouldve been the Celt's distinct ancestors so who knows!
A few problems with the bronze age comment. Celtic language could have been taught to the population left behind after the loss of Doggerland, Celts did exist before the bronze age and even before they were written about before the bronze age, and the Celtic language could have been left behind in the islands after the flooding of Doggerland as well as remaining on the mainland. That's the problem with assuming the history of a people begins with written history.
I was thinking the same thing, the remarkable consistency of the megalithic complexes across northern Europe could have been built before doogerland sank, when you could go from Denmark to Antrim on foot. Could also give another flavour to the word Gall-Ghael, or foreign Gael, which for some reason seems to be to be a recognition of the degree of similarity rather dissimilarity. The symbol stones of the Picts, seen beside the artwork or the megalithic monuments from Newgrange to Brittany and into Northern Europe seem like precursors to the La Tène motifs, a stunning example of this is the Turoe Stone. After the sinking of Doggerland, Northern Europe became more isolated from each other, became refugees and all the rest of it.
Celts are indo european...so not earlier that 2000 BC they were not the neolithic farmers, they overran the neolithic farmers.. we are the third wave, not the second..
@@veronicalogotheti5416 They have, the Celts of Anatolia were settled there by Nicomedes I of Bithynia. He found them raiding the lands around Byzantium so ferried them over the Bosporus to his kingdom to help him win a civil war which they did. Prior to that they were raiding in south east Europe where they were part of the failed invasion of Greece. They were later given old Phyrgian lands which were divided up between the three main Celtic groups.
@@jameshazelwood9433 He never wrote any books because his order was a secret one. But just before he died he did do a TV interview....I believe it's on CZcams under "The Last Druid".
Christopher Robinson yeah I know some of it documentary bit more about spiritual things but he obviously knew there ha been a link to trade and culture down the Atlantic coast going back much further than we have been lead to believe
@ 46:03 "......You are not decendent from a horde of drunken Germans, who just rushed across the Channel to rape and pilage......" However the myth of being decendent from a conquering hero ( who raped and pilaged, just to proove his virility) seems to have a larger appeal than the idea of being decendent from a dirt farmer belonging to a population living already 1000's of year at the spot. Hence the Tuana de Danaan and Milinesians myths or the Hengist and Horsa myth.
@@damionkeeling3103 not sure what you mean by this, but the Amesbury Archer indicated that Brittain did not excisted in isolation, but was part of an extended trade network.
@@kamion53 "......You are not decendent from a horde of drunken Germans, who just rushed across the Channel to rape and pilage......" The Amesbury Archer is from Germany, it was just a light reference that the Celtic Britons still had "German" ancestors who crossed the Channel. Whether they were drunk at the time I don't know.
@@damionkeeling3103 the Amesbury Archer is supposed to be from 2300 BC, Hallstatt tradionaly considered the "birthplace"of the Celts is from the 12th century BC. Those 800 year difference is a bit of very weak link to tie the ancestry of the Britons on. It could only be established the Amesbury Archer was born in an alpine region. unless there is evidence showing his genome can be tied to that of later Britons ( from graves between 1st and 5th century) there is no reason to assume he had any impact on the population of the British Isles. One thing; it is sort of likely this man was constant drunk, just to dull the pain of the abcess he was suffering from.
Speaking of Spain when referring to the Iberian Peninsula of 2000 years ago is incorrect. Moreover Portugal has probably a bigger percentage of Celtic influence than Spain which is mostly Mediterranean.
Iberia antes de llamarse iberia se llamaba IS-PAN-YIA por los fenicios y egipcios, si quieres fuentes, pídelas y te las paso, y te digo también que significa.
Anyonde wish to count the number of "Uh's" in this marvelous lecture? VERY distracting. At least this good Brit does not use the base non-word "Gonna."
I agree, It would appear the Celts would have originated from the time Iberia, France and the British islands were one contiguous land mass; Likely the survivors of the cataclysm (comet) that hit North America melting the ice 12,000 years ago, raising the sea level 400 feet.
Where did Barry get the cameraman who can't focus on the slides? This is not his first talk to be so spoiled. Frankly, I don't believe very much of what he says. These people had to have spoken proto-Indo-European long before their language shifted to Celtic. The Celtic mythos must trace back ultimately to the IE homeland, presumably in the Caucasus. The Celts cannot have arisen out of whole cloth on the Atlantic coast. Also, I should point out that these raiding warrior/traders don't sound very much like the farmers that the Celts supposedly were. They sound much more like early Vikings. They seem to have favored land that was heavily forested, not open plains suitable for planting of crops. I don't think he does the Celts any favors by denying their presence in any part of Germany. I don't think much can be made of the lack of place names in areas later overrun by the Germans. German is also an IE language, and they may have preferred to systematically translate the place names from Celtic into German. It would not have been difficult. It's really only a relatively recent and strange English custom that makes us tend to preserve the original form of names. Most other languages do not have such a custom. If there is any doubt, check the frequency of Celtic place names in England as opposed to Ireland, Scotland and Wales. You will find very few Celtic place names in England compared to the other areas. This is not for lack of historical Celtic presence in England.
There are many more Celtic derived placenames in England than was previously thought. Even iconic names like London and Dover, Kent just to name a few. Wiltshire is full of them too. Read this:www.alarichall.org.uk/placenames/appendix.htm#Peniel
There might be merit in pushing the Celts back to 900 BC in Iberia, but pushing them back to 4000 BC in the British Isles undermines the entire history of Indo European language and culture as we know it, and completely contradicts the growing archeological and genetic evidence supporting the Kurgan Hypothesis and the Yamnaya culture as the Proto-Indo Europeans. We are supposed to accept Indo Europeans in Britain 1500 years before the Yamnaya?
So many things wrong with the theory - 4 or 5 - but I don't have the patience to repeat them here. I already put them in a comment on the video "Barry Cunliffe: Who Were the Celts?" which I see is in the suggestions column to the right.
Enjoyed first 10 mins then he kept refering to drawings and slides i coulnt see so i couldnt follow wtf he was on about :pity it looks like it could have been interesrting
As author of the Old Celtic Dictionary and founder of the Gallaecian Language Revival Movement, I find John T Koch's and Barry Cunliffe's project very amazing. This explains why the Gallaecian hillforts of Galicia , Asturias and Northern Portugal are much older than the hillforts found in Hallstatt, Austria.
It's also where we find all the oldest Stonehenges and Dolmen, and going further back the earliest cave paintings. They recently found 3 cattle with a women in Portugal, dated to 9500BP, this puts them very close to the first to domesticate the Auroch. It suggests they also colonized Sardinia, Malta, Crete, Cyprus, and Phoenicia. It was the Phoenicians who made up the Pharoah Priest class of the Lower Kingdoms. Hephaestus in particular, King Og, the first Pharoah, was a Cabieri, who were the founders of Greece, and lend their name to Beruit, a Phoenician center for which no evidence remains. We also find Dolmens on the East coast of the Black Sea, and in New England, associated with the ancestors of the Algonquin. Further more Celtic remains have been found as far afield as New Zealand, where they constructed the same Megalithic monuments designed to track the Solstices and the Moon, the Moari "Pa" bears a striking resemblance to the Henges of Germany and Iberia.
I suspect they are the israelites of the Bible, and were hunted down and exterminated by the Romans with the same verocity as they did the Jews, the Celtic, Phoenician, Jewish, and Egyptians all celebrated the same New Years, in September, with the rise of Orion and Pleiades, Ala Osiris and Isis. Isreal is the Phoenician word for Saturn, or El, Fruit of Isis and Ra, associated with Serpentis, the 13th Sunsign of the Babylonian Zodiac
@@uncannyvalley2350 some moaris recount that there was a red haired people already on New Zealand when they got there, they are said to be refugees ?
@uncannyvalley2350 some very awesome connections you mentioned. Thank you for putting this on my radar for further research
I want to congratulate Barry on this and his other lectures on the Western Celts. This new and more convincing origin history, is backed up with DNA evidence as well. As an Irishman and student of Celtic History and Art, I throw my cap in the air and shout "YES".
Irish are not celts
@@veronicalogotheti5416 Irish is a Celtic language making its speakers a Celtic people. There's also evidence showing links between Ireland and Gaul.
@@veronicalogotheti5416 Are you not
hearing the lecture, and seeing the images/maps. The country of Ireland is a very much unavoidable geographic area that is situated along the Atlantic way between southern Spain and the Orkney island.
@@jamesdolan4042 the rutes
Ten years ago, an Irish pub owner was clearing land for a driveway when his digging exposed an unusually large flat stone. The stone obscured a dark gap underneath. He grabbed a flashlight to peer in.
"I shot the torch in and saw the gentleman, well, his skull and bones," Bertie Currie, the pub owner, said this week.The remains of three humans, in fact, were found behind McCuaig’s Bar in County Antrim, Northern Ireland. And though police were called, it was not, as it turned out, a crime scene.
Instead, what Currie had stumbled over was an ancient burial that, after a recent DNA analysis, challenges the traditional centuries-old account of Irish origins from as far back as the 16th century, historians taught that the Irish are the descendants of the Celts, an Iron Age people who originated in the middle of Europe and invaded Ireland somewhere between 1000 B.C. and 500 B.C.
That story has inspired innumerable references linking the Irish with Celtic culture. The Nobel-winning Irish poet William Butler Yeats titled a book “Celtic Twilight.” Irish songs are deemed “Celtic” music. Some nationalists embraced the Celtic distinction. And in Boston, arguably the most Irish city in the United States, the owners of the NBA franchise dress their players in green and call them the Celtics.
Yet the bones discovered behind McCuaig’s tell a different story of Irish origins, and it does not include the Celts.
It's certainly fascinating to hear Barry Cunliffes work on the Celts. It all certainly makes more logical sense than the traditional view.
Agreed.
Time Team did a dig in Cornwall.
A forest found buried on a beach.
"The island name means Gray Stone in the Forest"
Then they say :-
"This forest was submerged around 3000 BC."
Actually saying without saying it "Cornish was spoken here 3000 BC".
Not cornish at that point. Brythonic, cymraeg
Before he even started "teaching" I got very excited about his quick preface about always learning about a topic.
I'm all ears!
I'm buying it. I'm in. I like it. Good job. Keep looking, there's much we have yet to explore, discover, examine and reflect upon. My theory? Just when we get it all, all hell breaks loose and we have to start all over again - ha ha ha ha ha!
Glad those slides were shown for split seconds only, it's not like they were important or anything. Still though, a fascinating lecture
You could just pause it
sure. I could. Its the bad editing/directing that I´m whining about though...
@@siddislikesgoogle My commiserations.....I feel the same....why put this on youtube for the public to see when it turns out to be disrespectful and annoying to the viewers....like you and me!? There are quite a few videos like this regarding lectures on the Celts and others, but fortunately I've seen the 6 part BBC series on youtube of the history of the Celts which was a great viewing experience for me and highly educational as well......highly recommend that for viewing to anyone who would like to have a meaningful video experience on this subject.
At least you get a few seconds on this recording. Ya'll should read the comments left on a Cunliffe speech delivered in 2008 where NONE of the images were captured at all. Sheesh does it occur to anyone that the upload may have been a secondary thought. How much poorer would we be if the owner of the recording realized the poor production and decided not to put it up for public consumption.
It seems to be a problem with most lectures on CZcams. Usually, they don't show the slides at all.
I am privileged t o have met and communicated with these two scholars in the 1970s through a great Italian friend and colleague, whom we all miss: Professor Riccardo Francovich
Would be nice to see the slides too.
Amazing how the Basque language survived with all those Celts around.
Shows how tolerant we are, compared to the ....... well I wont say any more.
@@Simonsvids "Tolerant"?? Like the emerging (more & more) right-wing, neo-fascists in places like Austria, parts of France & even England, who have always looked down on the Irish? I can see why you don't say any more because you'd be showing what a fool you are by stereotyping whole societies as if they all think in lockstep as their government!
Slow down. Before condemning ask questions. My comment is full of ambiguities. I do not even say who 'we' are, or what I am referring to. Its a long video. What am I saying I am tolerant of? University level criticism please not high school. Ask specific questions first before criticising.
@@MrKmanthie Speaking of stereotyping...
Buy a mirror
Love live
damn that girl doing the intro is beautiful...
Yes and she looks like she's about 16.
Norwindian why so mad? Lol
She gave me crabs.
Correction: PIE came via the Pontic Steppes NOT via the first farmers. Not sure what that does to his theory.
If you want proof of the Atlantic connection come to Cornwall and especially Penwith where I am from there is tons of evidence also seen in the Scilly islands..
Bloody legendary
Brilliant !!! 💛💛💛
💚🍀🍀🍀 Slàinte 🍀🍀🍀💚
Ten years ago, an Irish pub owner was clearing land for a driveway when his digging exposed an unusually large flat stone. The stone obscured a dark gap underneath. He grabbed a flashlight to peer in.
"I shot the torch in and saw the gentleman, well, his skull and bones," Bertie Currie, the pub owner, said this week.The remains of three humans, in fact, were found behind McCuaig’s Bar in County Antrim, Northern Ireland. And though police were called, it was not, as it turned out, a crime scene.
Instead, what Currie had stumbled over was an ancient burial that, after a recent DNA analysis, challenges the traditional centuries-old account of Irish origins from as far back as the 16th century, historians taught that the Irish are the descendants of the Celts, an Iron Age people who originated in the middle of Europe and invaded Ireland somewhere between 1000 B.C. and 500 B.C.
That story has inspired innumerable references linking the Irish with Celtic culture. The Nobel-winning Irish poet William Butler Yeats titled a book “Celtic Twilight.” Irish songs are deemed “Celtic” music. Some nationalists embraced the Celtic distinction. And in Boston, arguably the most Irish city in the United States, the owners of the NBA franchise dress their players in green and call them the Celtics.
Yet the bones discovered behind McCuaig’s tell a different story of Irish origins, and it does not include the Celts.
“The DNA evidence based on those bones completely upends the traditional view,” said Barry Cunliffe, an emeritus professor of archaeology at Oxford who has written books on the origins of the people of Ireland.
DNA resarch indicates that the three skeletons found behind McCuaig's are the ancestors of the modern Irish and they predate the Celts and their purported arrival by 1,000 years or more. The genetic roots of today's Irish, in other words, existed in Ireland before the Celts arrived.
“The most striking feature” of the bones, according to the research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, is how much their DNA resembles that of contemporary Irish, Welsh and Scots. (By contrast, older bones found in Ireland were more like Mediterranean people, not the modern Irish.)
Radiocarbon dating shows that the bones discovered at McCuaig's go back to about 2000 B.C. That makes them hundreds of years older than the oldest artifacts generally considered to be Celtic - relics unearthed from Celt homelands of continental Europe, most notably around Switzerland, Austria and Germany.
For a group of scholars who in recent years have alleged that the Celts, beginning from the middle of Europe, may never have reached Ireland, the arrival of the DNA evidence provides the biological certitude that the science has sometimes brought to criminal trials.“With the genetic evidence, the old model is completely shot,” John Koch, a linguist at the Center for Advanced Welsh and Celtic Studies at the University of Wales.
The senior author of the DNA research paper, Dan Bradley of Trinity College Dublin, was reluctant to weigh in on the cultural implications, but he offered that the findings do challenge popular beliefs about Irish origins.
“The genomes of the contemporary people in Ireland are older - much older - than we previously thought,” he said.
Reading the past in ancient Irish genomes Geneticists from Trinity College Dublin, and archaeologists from Queens University Belfast, have sequenced the first genomes from ancient Irish humans.There are essentially two arguments for linking the Celts to the Irish, and both have been undermined in recent years.
The first link revolves around language. The Irish language is, like Welsh and Scottish Gaelic, part of a group that linguists have labeled Celtic. The languages share words and grammar. They seem to have emerged after a similar evolution from Indo-European. They are indisputably related, and indisputably a well-defined category.
What is unclear is whether the term “Celtic” is an appropriate name for that group of languages.
To be sure, some think that Celtic languages originated with the Celts on continental Europe and subsequently spread to Ireland, Wales and Scotland. This is the traditional view, and it dovetails with the idea that the Celts moved into Ireland during the Iron Age.
But over the last decade, a growing number of scholars have argued that the first Celtic languages were spoken not by the Celts in the middle of Europe but by ancient people on Europe’s westernmost extremities, possibly in Portugal, Spain, Ireland or the other locales on the western edges of the British Isles.
Koch, the linguist at the University of Wales, for example, proposed in 2008 that “Celtic” languages were not imports to the region but instead were developed somewhere in the British Isles or the Iberian Peninsula - and then spread eastward into continental Europe.
His doubts about the traditional view arose as he was studying inscriptions on artifacts from southern Portugal. The inscriptions on those artifacts strongly resembled the languages known as Celtic, yet they dated as far back as 700 B.C. This placed Celtic languages far from the Celt homelands in the middle of Europe at a very, very early date.
“What it shows is that the language that became Irish was already out there - before 700 B.C. and before the Iron Age,” Koch said. “It just didn’t fit with the traditional theory of Celtic spreading west to Britain and Iberia.”
Numerous digs, most notably in Austria and Switzerland, have traced the outlines of the Celts. The artifacts offer evidence going back as far as about 800 B.C. The ancient Greeks and Romans also left written accounts of the Celts, and probably knew them well - the Celts sacked Rome around 390 B.C. and attacked Delphi in Greece in 279 B.C.
It seemed plausible that this group that had invaded Rome had invaded Ireland as well, and in the standard view, it was this people that eventually made it to Ireland.
For decades, however, archaeologists and other scholars have noted that the evidence for the standard account is flimsy - and how broad, nonetheless, is the application of the term “Celtic.”
In 1955, an Oxford professor, J.R.R. Tolkien, better known as the author of "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" novels, described the popular understanding of "Celtic" in a celebrated lecture: “‘Celtic’ of any sort is ... a magic bag into which anything may be put, and out of which almost anything may come.... Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight, which is not so much a twilight of the gods as of the reason.”
Moreover, in recent years, some archaeologists have proposed that the traditional story of the Celts' invasion was, in a sense, exactly wrong - the culture was not imported but exported - originating on the western edge of Europe much earlier than previously thought and spreading into the continent.
In a 2001 book, Cunliffe, the Oxford scholar, argued on the basis of archaeological evidence that the flow of Celtic culture was opposite that of the traditional view - it flowed from the western edge of Europe, what he calls “the Atlantic zone” - into the rest of the continent. In many places of the Atlantic zone, he notes, people were buried in passages aligned with the solstices, a sign that they shared a unified belief system.
“From about 5,000 B.C. onwards, complicated ideas of status, art, cosmology were being disseminated along the Atlantic seaways,” Cunliffe said, and that culture then spread eastward.
“If we’re right, the roots of what is known as ‘Celtic’ culture go way way back in time,” Cunliffe said. “And the genetic evidence is going to be an absolute game-changer.”
If the new scholarship proves correct, exactly what to do with the word Celtic will probably be a matter of some dispute: Should it be applied to languages or cultures that, no matter how clearly defined, were largely uninfluenced by the historical Celts of continental Europe?
Complicating any answer are old ethnic antagonisms: The old notions of a distinct “Celtic race” or “Irish race” have been used not just for poetic tributes, but for scorn.
The famed American anthropologist Daniel Garrison Brinton, for example, described the Celts in 1890 as having conspicuous mental traits: “turbulent, boastful, alert, courageous, but deficient in caution, persistence and self-control, they never have succeeded in forming an independent state, and are a dangerous element in the body politic of a free country. In religion they are fanatic and bigoted, ready to swear in the words of their master rather than to exercise independent judgment.”
The new evidence from genetics, however, undermine notions of a separate Irish race, describing them instead as one sliver of the European spectrum.
According to the genetic research, the Irish are at the extreme end of a genetic wave that washed across Europe, a wave of migrants that swept westward from above the Black Sea across Europe about 2,500 B.C.
That wave of migration had been documented in previous research led by David Reich at Harvard University, but it was unclear whether it had extended all the way to Ireland. The Y chromosome and other aspects of the DNA in the bones found behind McCuaig’s, however, link the Irish to that surge of population.
“The way to think about genetic variation in Europe is that it is more of a gradient than it is of sharp boundaries," said Bradley, the DNA researcher. "Sometimes, cultural features like language and natural borders can coincide with genetics, but most times not. Genetics is fuzzy, and it doesn't follow political and cultural borders."
Even so, some experts warned that the new findings will disappoint many who would prefer a simpler answer to the question Irish origins.
"The public will always want a place on the map and for someone to point and say, 'This where the Irish are from,' " said J.P. Mallory, an emeritus professor of archaeology at Queen's University Belfast and the author of a book, "The Origins of the Irish."
"But there’s going to be no way to do that. These groups were frequently traveling east-west across Europe, from one place to another. Everyone is a mix.”
Today's modern irish people are, like all modern Europe people, are racially mixed. It is known that there were people living in Britain long before the Celts arrived. It is believed that the Celts intermixed with the original people and were already a mixed race even before the Vikings and Normans came to Ireland. Are "Celts" a race? I don't believe so - a tall red haired Scotsman and a shorter dark haired Welshman appear to be quite different people! My understanding of "Celtic" is a linguist and cultural heritage. The Celtic languages and cultures were absorbed by other peoples through either conquest or peaceful contact. The best example would be the Vikings who conquered parts of Ireland then absorbed the Gaelic language and culture once they settled in Ireland. This suggests that the Celtic culture was considered a important culture by others who came in contact with it. An equivalent in today's world would be three English speaking young people, one from India, one from Africa and one from Asia - they all speak English and all live a Western life-style but none are actually English or even racially European. Being able to speak an international language such as English and adopting a Western life-style is culturally beneficial today, perhaps being able to speak a Celtic language and having a Gaelic life-style may have had similar benefits 1, 000 years ago!
Gibberish
It's frustrating when the camera is staying on the speaker describing an unseen slide.
Thank u for sharing
The moment we get attached to an idea, we have lost our desire for truth. I say this not to be flippant. but to drive home the point that we easily blind ourselves to the possibilities...
Jamie Hume yes, you're right; just like in many scientific circles, knowledge which becomes, to many of the "establishment" & the more conservative types who don't like, once they've uncovered some sort of findings that they soon turn into a kind of dogma, newer, younger, more open-minded scientists who come along & challenge this supposedly "established dogma" with newer, more accurate technology & work at it with just as much enthusiasm as the older generation, if not more. Why? Because for the conservative dogmatics it's very difficult, almost impossible, to admit that the discoveries they'd made decades earlier have a lot more to this knowledge or that this "dogma" is flat-out wrong and the hard-working, better technologically outfitted scientists have "shown-up" their "forebears" & these geezers (wrongly) take it as an affront to their work & so, to try & deflect the defects of their "dogma" (which is something that should NEVER exist in ANY science, be it anthropology, archaeology, physics, chemistry or whatnot! Science is not some idiotic religion which claims to have had the "truth" "revealed" to them. That is the farthest from how science works. The honest & intelligent scientist, whatever the discipline, will tell you that one of the most important concepts of science & the scientific method is that the quest for knowledge is a never-ending search and that current, established ideas, maybe not all of them but a good portion of them, will eventually fall; will one day be proved wrong or incomplete and also that there is NO SUCH THING as any absolute "Truth".
@@MrKmanthie History is an ever changing discourse...
"Portugal" derives from Portus + Cale. Latin for Port + Celtic for Port. Cale was the main port city of Northwest Iberia where the Gallaecian Celts lived.
Thank you, love it !
I've watched Cunliffe lecturing before and it's always interesting and always a visual disaster.
Please refer to "Iberia" not Spain. If your going to say Spain also say PORTUGAL the Lusitanian Celts. Please don't forget us. Awesome video.
I am Spanish and I agree with you. But don’t forget that it happens the same way as we Say “England” and “the English” when we should say “Britain” or “the British”.
It is very difficult to unlearn stereotypes passed on for centuries.
Shut up, Moor.
Why should I? I have done nothing to you, hater!
I will comment if I want to as I have the same right as anyone. Thank Goodness!
Now bog off to whatever nasty small minded cave you happened to crawl out of!
Celt is a ancient Greek label , cymry is the ancient native name derived from The cimmerians of 4000 plus years ago otherwise we are acting like slaçademics.
A lot of Arabic influence on the Iberian language and DNA is that right.
Thank you
Excelent video
Full support to this truth.
This is the best book about this topic ive ever read. 👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇
czcams.com/video/MN_b55Zjn-A/video.html
Which book?
@@fintonmainz7845 click into the chat, link is there
@@chrisjames5738 I don't see any link.
My ancestor came from Scotland to America in the 1800's, my grandmother walked out of the mountains of the South, my dad's father came from Northern Italy, My DNA results Irish and Basque French ? Negative blood
I live in Britain and my Haplogroup is R1b L21 which is Celtic Atlantic and my blood group is Rhesus A Negative. All of my family has Scottish and Irish names and I believe the Celts are native to the British isles and always have been.
@@leewade8888 Everybody came from somewhere at one point.... your people came from Northern Spain. Google Stephen Dillane and Julen Lopetegui then you will see what I mean. Too many doppelgangers I've seen from both Brits and Basques.
@@marksang-pur9984
'Doppelganger'........time to grab the dictionary! LOL.
@@leewade8888 DNA results are proving very helpful. However, the term ‘celt’ is very misleading. Marchell Abraham’s has a new channel tracing the trail of the alphabets. She is a member of the BHH group. See, on Y T : BritainsHiddenHistory Ross (+ Cymroglyphics 01 Overview) They would be very interested to receive authentic proof that this term ‘celt’ was ever applied to Britain prior to the 18th century. The older records and inscriptions definitely build a different picture. Whoever this term ‘celt’ is now applied to, it is a strong possibility that migrations to the east and south were pre-ice age. Migrations returning to the west (and Britain) can be traced through the written records and comprehended more accurately if the very old scripts are taken into account. E.g., the hieroglyphs are not letters: they are root syllables and depictions (rebus) and, when sounded out, speak words and phrases... in Welsh!
@@leewade8888 sorry, Y T added an apostrophe. I typed Marchell Abrahams
I'm looking forward to a time when people understand that watching some youtube videos isn't the same thing as being an actual learned expert on a subject.
Chris Ames I second that!! SO TRUE!
Yeah, I think the people here are only trying to learn a thing or two from someone who actually is.
So true, but alot of these so called experts are pretty dumb too
A lecture from a recognized expert is valuable whether it's on CZcams or not.
Not everyone can be a trained historian. I'd say if someone is interested enough to sit through this lecture on here they could at least engage in an interesting conversation on the topic, whether or not they're as learned on it as Barry. Don't fault people for trying to research and learn something that piques their interest, especially if they don't have to be doing it. I'd for sure be happy if more people watched this instead of Jake Paul videos.
great video only pitty the slides are vague and very clear.
I would like to know about the celtic mummies found in China that date back 3500 years. Would that not put a spanner in the works. I have found the presentation fascinating and informative.
They aren't Celtic. They are basically European, but the tarim basin mummies are descended from a branch of Europeans that migrated from central/eastern Europe east into the steppe and then into the tarim basin. He is wrong about the Celts genetically. There was an invasion of Britain that almost completely replaced the neolithic farmer population with the incoming Indo-European population just before 2000bc
@@alexdunphy3716 thank you Alex it looks like the historians today want to write their own history . You're right about the mummies found in China and India only got the full information on them after I made the decision to make a comment. Thanks again.
@@alexdunphy3716 The fact of the matter is that those Tarim mummies' remains contain the oldest pieces of tartan.
And you know perfectly well that the Tocharians may well have descended from the Yamna culture just like the later Celts.
Just look at the art coming out of the Tarim basin, it's positively proto-Urnfield in style.
We all know that this would be BIG if only CHINA had less control and less of a frenzied, horribly jealous freak-focus on manipulating the narrative.
Things are changing, friend, and you know it, you know what these new horse burials, chariot burials being researched even now truly mean.
People are going to wake up.
The East will be shown to have, beneath those Asiatic trappings, ancient European foundations. And us Celts deserve our heritage manifest.
Let unto us DELIVERANCE be unleashed.
@@thegreenmage6956 "Yamnaya" culture.
@Monarch of the Glen & @Alex Dunphy: They (Those mummies found about 30 or 40 years ago, in what is now a part of Xinjiang in Western China 🇨🇳) were probably of ancient Tocharian people, who were known to the Greeks & had their own language (that became extinct in a way that was similar to how Gothic also later did, with no continued derived forms), but which was an early member of the Indo-European branch of languages & peoples, whose Caucasian features & origins were also of peoples dwelt then across the Central & Eastern Eurasian Steppes to the western most edges in the Tarim Basin of the later Chin Empire & its earlier forerunners, between about 2000BC till around 800AD.
WHY CAN'T WE SEE THE SLIDES??????
CORRECTION: Barbarin comes from the Latin barba=beard. Romans shaved their faces.
Good point but: It is a Greek word actually, and predates the Latin barba. Already in use by the 5th century in Herodotus and Xenophon.
why on earth didnt the video maker ask him for digital copies of the images ans insert then into the video he will still be heard speaking over the images, would make the whole thing more informative
Shalom, the Celts were so-called black people indigenous to Europe. Google black Celts and black European royalty. Then check the etymology of the word Europe. It is just sad that whiteness causes some people to literally steal the identity of others in order to have a history. Example: if Homer and all those so-called Greek fathers really existed, what alphabet did they use when they supposedly wrote all that good stuff? The rabbit hole is deep
I wish the slides were more visible.
Is true that also
Introduction by ... a Basque, anyway?
There's a big gap between the core Atlantic region being Celtic and central Europe being Celtic. The 5th century bc expansion to the east and south didn't start from the Atlantic region. The expansion into northern Italy was by a group of allied tribes who lived in an area between Le Mans and Langres between the Seine and Loire rivers. Most of this region is outside the Atlantic zone meaning these tribes were already established as Celtic before the expansion. Is a hundred years enough time to Celticise this region and then grow enough to launch a mass migration 500 kms away over a mountain range and presumably securing safe passage through the lands of other tribes? A hundred years because the Gauls enter Northern Italy around 400 bc and this expansion the professor mentions takes place around 500 bc.
The Roman historian Livy mentions Bellovessus who invades Northern Italy and founds Milan during the reign of Tarquinus Priscus who reigned 200 years before the supposed Gallic invasion of around 400bc. Bellovessus was from the Bituriges who would be near the eastern border of the Atlantic zone so could potentially be part of this early expansion. Livy could be mistaken under which Tarquinius was ruling at the time or the invasion simply took place earlier than Cunliffe thought.
Is written about them
You know what would have made this a really good video? If the slides that he is talking about were shown on the screen so that we could follow along while he is talking about them. Instead, all we see is the speaker, we know what he looks like, so that is not helpful. Too bad, because the ideas are very interesting. This could have been a first rate video. Oh well...
Cheddar man
That is celt
Time to re think the celts did not have a script, Coelbren!
That writing system is a hoax.
Why does this man have a problem acknowledging Portugal? Really...
true, because N. Portugal was actually part of Ancient Gallaecia.
He doesn't.
There was no Portugal or Spain in the Iron Age.
When he says "Spain" in this context he does not mean the modern country of Spain, but instead what was then known as "Hispania" by the Romans and Iberia by the Greeks.
The entire peninsula, including modern Portugal.
He doesn't... Here he means Spain as Hispania. He actually uses artifacts collected in Portugal to make his point. :)
Great to hear from a Celtic history enthusiast who doesn't identify as a modern Celt. Unfortunately there's often a political motive amongst researchers who identify themselves as belonging to one of the Celtic Nations and are trying to prove some point. Regarding the languages there has been research by a now deceased Breton language expert Francois Falc'hun, who discovered t one dialects of Breton may have a Gaulish substrate and that Gaulish language was still being spoken in western France when the ancestors of the Bretons came from Cornwall and Devon. His theory is that today's modern Breton people share mixed Celtic heritage. This theory upset both the Breton nationalists and French "purists" ! Recent DNA evidence from Brittany seems to prove him right.
They knew
This is now the second YT-clip about Mr. Cunliffe and his very interresting topics, and each time I see a very, very poor work of the camera man or the man who switched the slides or the life picture. I think there are some people working with no idea how to produce a movie like that. I fead, they sat that man behind his camera for a bahshish, to prevent the came from being stolen, and that was his job. I would advice Mr. Cunliffe to take car for such amateurs on the technics
11000bc writtings
They were sailing around the world
From east to west
Who is the absolute angelic girl at the start
Different people
I am from the tribe of the Nerviërs, the bravest Celtic tribe in the world like the world Nervous where it came from. Belgian Celts. When the Romans came we fought with 300.000 soldiers against the Romans.
Nice slides.... ;)
The Celts probably came from Ireland/Cornwall, and spread into Europe via the great rivers of France and the low countries..
Except we have Celtic Dolmen and Stone Circles dating to 5000BCE, and genetic evidence of migration from Iberia to Ireland around 4000BCE
We are and never were saxon, the english are !
Hot Aussie opener
The hinon valley
I have speculated whether if the Phoenicians created classical Celtic culture so they would have people to trade with
Phoenicians, Jews, Celts, Egyptians and Assyrians all share the same Astrology and New Years, all associated with Serpentis, 13th Sunsign of the Babylonian Zodiac. We are likely looking at branching communities of the same people. Phoenicans and Israelites are one and the same, Abraham and St Paul both came from the same region as Gobekli Tepe, the earliest known form of the Zodiac
One thing celt
Another hun
Es paña
Julio cesar wrote that they are not the same
Italians(Romans) still do this - if you’re not of their kind they group you into “them” and they leave it at that. Narrow minded.
"Us and them" - The story of mankind
All that is finix
I agree with the whole Celtic culture (speakers of what became Celtic after say 1000 BCE) West to East theme. That is accept your conclusion "Celtic" didn't start with Hallstatt but could well be earlier & along Atantic coast & rivets But I am keptical about timing when relying upon Gray&Atkinson PIE out-of-Anatolia modeling. Profs A Pareltsvaig & M Lewis point out problems such as the "Polish & Romani Problems", urban Anatolian farmers needing to borrow from nonIE hunter-gatherers in Greece terms for statecraft, Mediterranean agriculture, & structures (Greek substrate) & the assumptions using only lexical similarities to establish language families (can't ignore grammar) & fundamentally that languages diffuse like viruses. And there's the whole "wheel line" problem (wheel-wool-wagen & horse PIE roots derivable across most PIE daughter from Tocharian to Iranian to Germanic & Romance). I subscribe to Kurgan hypothesis which places the speakers of what becomes protoCeltic close to the Pontiac Steppe ~4000 BCE.
Still if agriculture took 3000 years to go from Greece to Britain (7000-4000 BCE) & the Black Death only a few years to get from Sicily across Europe along WELL ESTABLISHED TRADE ROUTES, I see no reason why the pre-protoCelts couldn't get from Pontiac Steppe to Atlantic seaboard in far less time. (Up Danube & Down Rhine+ others hence along coast & over to Britain-Wales-etc.) Then Celts have time to move East - witness the Gothic types running across Europe in 300-400s AD. Celts just sweep aside or assimilate any PIE or nonPIE language just north of the Alps.
I wonder if post1000/900 BCE Celt movements Easteatds pushed Etruscans *back* over the Alps.
Lewis & Pereltsvaig on Gray & Atkinson
czcams.com/video/63Grz46cOeg/video.html
@@christophercripps7639 You're right - Lewis & Perltsvaig tore apart that bullshit Gray & Atkinson / Bouckaert (sp?), et al garbage that somehow made it into Science magazine - for months after that article was published about every week after for several months there were many critical articles/essays on the "mid-modeling" of ancient peoples.See David Anthony in a talk from Rotterdam that is here, on You Tube (search "David Anthony: Migration, Economics, and ...damn, I forgot the 3rd part, but one can find it easily enough or else look at Jim Mallory's talks).
It seems there's a synchronicity between Anatolia, the Balkans, Iberia, and the Pontic Steppes, it's more likely a much more fluid picture of all 4 groups sharing a common root, and bleeding into and influencing one another. As time progresses further waves of immigration from the east overwhelms the Eastern most groups, leaving only the western most populations untouched. It's also logical that these different communities of the same cultures developed in their own ways, adopting novel technologies in different ways.
Iberia seems like the oldest, but appears out of nowhere, the Tripillian culture speaks to very ancient origins, Anatolia may well be a colony of either Iberia or the Balkans, or it could be vs versa.
It's likely going to be decades before we can fully resolve these riddles
Hitites
Is he saying that the indo-european languages came with early farmers into europe?
He seems to be suggesting that the early farmers spoke an indo-european language. There is the Anatolian theory of indo-european language expansion into europe which fits with the suggested time scales of language divergence in the slide he showed previous to that comment. The Kurgan theory is more widely accepted as the explanation for indo-european language expansion, though neither is conclusive.
Red hair for Celts is a myth. The red hair in British Isles is from the Vikings. True Celts have dark hair like in western Ireland and Wales.
But where did the Celts come from! They couldn't have just appeared on the Atlantic coasts! I got THAT info already from Bryan Sykes!
What do YOU say?
Are the Celts settled Phoenicians??!
Watch his other lecture, Who Were the Celts?
@SlojaySimpson that isnt true, and nothing more than just an idiot hipothesis, It hasnt no historic background support
tHE ONLY POWERFOOL NAVY OF 4000 bC WAS THAT OF CRETE..THE ::PHONECIAN: LETERS ARE THE LETERS OF THE PELASGOI FROM ARCADIA..WE NAME THEM LETERS OF PALAMIDES.THE CENTRE OF THE OAK RELIGION IS A PLACE NAMED DODONI IN EPIRUS S.W. IN GRECCE..THATS ALL FOR THE ORIGINS OF CELTS..ARE WELL KNOWN IN GREECE WHERE WE CALL THEM gALATES AND THERE IS A LETER OF APOSTLE PAUL TO THEM WRITEN IN PERFECT GRREK.
@Vegan Dropout Yep!
@@luizalmeida5398 Think again buddy . He's right.
Devedhys ov a Kernow, My a gews Kernewek,meur ras, dyw genes!
Camera person. Wake up! Wake up! Move the camera to the slide screen.
And the runes are greeks
I need to know the truth!!!!
Kevin Gee know thyself for you are the truth you seek
These people were left overs
Not phoenicians
Finix
I figure britannic celts were the ones left on the west side when the north sea flooded doggerland...
Doggerland was mesolithic, not the bronze age.
that was before the languages arrived + split apart as we know them (German-Celtic-Slavic were still mixed together, and in Russia) but if you believe Barry then those wouldve been the Celt's distinct ancestors so who knows!
A few problems with the bronze age comment. Celtic language could have been taught to the population left behind after the loss of Doggerland, Celts did exist before the bronze age and even before they were written about before the bronze age, and the Celtic language could have been left behind in the islands after the flooding of Doggerland as well as remaining on the mainland. That's the problem with assuming the history of a people begins with written history.
I was thinking the same thing, the remarkable consistency of the megalithic complexes across northern Europe could have been built before doogerland sank, when you could go from Denmark to Antrim on foot. Could also give another flavour to the word Gall-Ghael, or foreign Gael, which for some reason seems to be to be a recognition of the degree of similarity rather dissimilarity. The symbol stones of the Picts, seen beside the artwork or the megalithic monuments from Newgrange to Brittany and into Northern Europe seem like precursors to the La Tène motifs, a stunning example of this is the Turoe Stone. After the sinking of Doggerland, Northern Europe became more isolated from each other, became refugees and all the rest of it.
@@shirehorse91 but not their adn
Not convinced
Celts are indo european...so not earlier that 2000 BC they were not the neolithic farmers, they overran the neolithic farmers.. we are the third wave, not the second..
The alphabet he is on about is Palo/ Hebrew. Professor for the Freemasons.
Celts were from anatolia
There are writings about them
They are indoeuropeans from pergamo
Those going around naked in the cold were not celts
lol These celts in Anatolia got their via Europe.... not the other way around...
@@SideWalkAstronomyNetherlands read history
@@SideWalkAstronomyNetherlands in the ice you cannot leave
@@veronicalogotheti5416 They have, the Celts of Anatolia were settled there by Nicomedes I of Bithynia. He found them raiding the lands around Byzantium so ferried them over the Bosporus to his kingdom to help him win a civil war which they did. Prior to that they were raiding in south east Europe where they were part of the failed invasion of Greece. They were later given old Phyrgian lands which were divided up between the three main Celtic groups.
We don't need to know!
🍻
Dont need to know....what?
If you're not going to even pretend to be interested, then get off the stage black jacket man.
We had the ice period
So there were people there they were killed
5 or 6 years? Ben MacBrady was saying this way back in the 80s.
Christopher Robinson which book did write?
@@jameshazelwood9433 He never wrote any books because his order was a secret one. But just before he died he did do a TV interview....I believe it's on CZcams under "The Last Druid".
Christopher Robinson thank you I look it up now
@@jameshazelwood9433 NP Its sad everyone laughed at him back then.
Christopher Robinson yeah I know some of it documentary bit more about spiritual things but he obviously knew there ha been a link to trade and culture down the Atlantic coast going back much further than we have been lead to believe
The greeks wrote the ruts
Ugarit siria
Assirians
There are wittings by the greeks about the barbarians
@ 46:03
"......You are not decendent from a horde of drunken Germans, who just rushed across the Channel to rape and pilage......"
However the myth of being decendent from a conquering hero ( who raped and pilaged, just to proove his virility) seems to have a larger appeal than the idea of being decendent from a dirt farmer belonging to a population living already 1000's of year at the spot. Hence the Tuana de Danaan and Milinesians myths or the Hengist and Horsa myth.
Where was the Amesbury Archer from again?
@@damionkeeling3103 not sure what you mean by this, but the Amesbury Archer indicated that Brittain did not excisted in isolation, but was part of an extended trade network.
@@kamion53 "......You are not decendent from a horde of drunken Germans, who just rushed across the Channel to rape and pilage......"
The Amesbury Archer is from Germany, it was just a light reference that the Celtic Britons still had "German" ancestors who crossed the Channel. Whether they were drunk at the time I don't know.
@@damionkeeling3103 the Amesbury Archer is supposed to be from 2300 BC, Hallstatt tradionaly considered the "birthplace"of the Celts is from the 12th century BC. Those 800 year difference is a bit of very weak link to tie the ancestry of the Britons on.
It could only be established the Amesbury Archer was born in an alpine region. unless there is evidence showing his genome can be tied to that of later Britons ( from graves between 1st and 5th century) there is no reason to assume he had any impact on the population of the British Isles.
One thing; it is sort of likely this man was constant drunk, just to dull the pain of the abcess he was suffering from.
Hebrew
Phoenicians are not finix
And scottish and irish are not celt dna
So they were replaced
I need her twitter handle...
Wtfoooey, no slides!! What a dim camera man who should have been filming the subject matter...the slides...grrrrrr
Speaking of Spain when referring to the Iberian Peninsula of 2000 years ago is incorrect. Moreover Portugal has probably a bigger percentage of Celtic influence than Spain which is mostly Mediterranean.
Well, PortuGal has more Atlantic then Spain.
Iberia antes de llamarse iberia se llamaba IS-PAN-YIA por los fenicios y egipcios, si quieres fuentes, pídelas y te las paso, y te digo también que significa.
Not that much.
The detail
Scottish and irish are vikings not celts
The dna
The wall of the romans
ho man if you wanna see real Celtic cities go to Lusitania and your blood even become wine
Anyonde wish to count the number of "Uh's" in this marvelous lecture? VERY distracting. At least this good Brit does not use the base non-word "Gonna."
you seem easily distracted
I agree, It would appear the Celts would have originated from the time Iberia, France and the British islands were one contiguous land mass; Likely the survivors of the cataclysm (comet) that hit North America melting the ice 12,000 years ago, raising the sea level 400 feet.
No, that's much too early for the origin of the Celts.
No.
Where did Barry get the cameraman who can't focus on the slides? This is not his first talk to be so spoiled.
Frankly, I don't believe very much of what he says. These people had to have spoken proto-Indo-European long before their language shifted to Celtic. The Celtic mythos must trace back ultimately to the IE homeland, presumably in the Caucasus. The Celts cannot have arisen out of whole cloth on the Atlantic coast. Also, I should point out that these raiding warrior/traders don't sound very much like the farmers that the Celts supposedly were. They sound much more like early Vikings. They seem to have favored land that was heavily forested, not open plains suitable for planting of crops. I don't think he does the Celts any favors by denying their presence in any part of Germany.
I don't think much can be made of the lack of place names in areas later overrun by the Germans. German is also an IE language, and they may have preferred to systematically translate the place names from Celtic into German. It would not have been difficult. It's really only a relatively recent and strange English custom that makes us tend to preserve the original form of names. Most other languages do not have such a custom. If there is any doubt, check the frequency of Celtic place names in England as opposed to Ireland, Scotland and Wales. You will find very few Celtic place names in England compared to the other areas. This is not for lack of historical Celtic presence in England.
He doesn't say that the Celts suddenly appeared on the Atlantic, as he trace them back to an IE homeland.
There are many more Celtic derived placenames in England than was previously thought. Even iconic names like London and Dover, Kent just to name a few. Wiltshire is full of them too.
Read this:www.alarichall.org.uk/placenames/appendix.htm#Peniel
There might be merit in pushing the Celts back to 900 BC in Iberia, but pushing them back to 4000 BC in the British Isles undermines the entire history of Indo European language and culture as we know it, and completely contradicts the growing archeological and genetic evidence supporting the Kurgan Hypothesis and the Yamnaya culture as the Proto-Indo Europeans. We are supposed to accept Indo Europeans in Britain 1500 years before the Yamnaya?
So many things wrong with the theory - 4 or 5 - but I don't have the patience to repeat them here. I already put them in a comment on the video "Barry Cunliffe: Who Were the Celts?" which I see is in the suggestions column to the right.
Central asia
Not celt not chinese
Huns
Enjoyed first 10 mins then he kept refering to drawings and slides i coulnt see so i couldnt follow wtf he was on about :pity it looks like it could have been interesrting