The English are 'Celtic' too!!
CJBrady
melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
little celtic genetic inheritance here.
Indeed - if there really was any 'celtic' blood lines left in
these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
together.
But the other interesting result from the research is that there
is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English,
i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
true state of things.
And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
described as being 'celtic' today.
Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
C.J.Brady.
--
Email: 10034...@compuserve.com
Homepage: http://ourworld/compuserve.com/homepages/ChrisBrady/
James C. Woodard
CJBrady <10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message ...
>The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
>melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
>England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
>little celtic genetic inheritance here.
>
Jim
Rube Lloyd
seem to know nothing about History, and even less about the people who
settled Briton!!
English are as much Celtic as they are Eskimo!! You really should not
have droped out of school, you know?
Jeri Corlew
>The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
>melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
>England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
>little celtic genetic inheritance here.
As was explained to me, the term "Celtic" refers to a family of languages, not a
race of people.
>C.J.Brady.
Conrad, will you *stop* speaking with a fake Japanese accent!?
__
Jeri Corlew
(Remove "XXX" to reply)
Allan-John Marsh
>
> The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
> melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
> England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
> little celtic genetic inheritance here.
>
> these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
> together.
>
> But the other interesting result from the research is that there
> is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
>
> This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English,
> i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
> invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
> political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
> true state of things.
>
> And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
> give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
> described as being 'celtic' today.
>
> Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
>
> C.J.Brady.
I have believed this anyway - once they have proven something so
thorough as blood, the chances of changing their minds is small.
However, from what i've read, the term Celtic is described as a
linguistic classification, and i've even sent e-mails to websites where
they call it an ethnic difference, to change. If it is linguistic
though, I don't see how this includes Scotland as a whole - if Cornwall
which is knowingly possessive of a Celtic language is broken off from
England in Celtic terms, then considering the vast majority of Scots
have no Gaelic connections breaking off the Gaelic speaking areas would
be just as fair and non-discriminating.
I think though that with music, that Celtic influence is large. It is
possible that like our blood lines, we get a lot of musical heritage
from the ancient Britons too, but the folk music of Britain today is
very different from that of Germany, France and Scandinavia, which means
that whatever our style 'is', then it is certainly unique to Britain and
most probably very Celtic.
I'd like to use your reference to build on - could you please quote the
source for me? Cheers!
*****
"FFarwel fy annwyl gariad,
Nid wyf yn enwi neb."
http://mysite.xtra.co.nz/~britannia/
Allan-John Marsh
Okay, that's bullshit - if the English aren't Celtic, then neither are
the Scottish - ever heard of Pen-y-ghent, Cumbria, Northumbrian Tartan,
Morris Dancing, the London order of Druids??? To name but a few of
NOTABLE and visible remains of England's strong Celtic heritage. Your
attitude that English people aren't Celtic would only knowingly be
believed by a hard-hearted Anglophobe.
Alan Crozier
>As was explained to me, the term "Celtic" refers to a family of languages,
not a
>race of people.
Quite right, Celtic is a linguistic term. In the musical context, "Celtic
music" mostly refers to music sung or presented in non-Celtic languages like
English, French or Spanish.
Curious, isn't it?
Alan
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Alan Crozier
Lund, Sweden
e-mail alan.c...@telia.com
kestrel speruoc
>The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
>melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
>England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
>little celtic genetic inheritance here.
>
>Indeed - if there really was any 'celtic' blood lines left in
>these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
>together.
>
>But the other interesting result from the research is that there
>is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
>
>This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English,
>i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
>invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
>political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
>true state of things.
>
>And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
>give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
>described as being 'celtic' today.
>
>Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
>
>C.J.Brady.
>
>--
>Email: 10034...@compuserve.com
>Homepage: http://ourworld/compuserve.com/homepages/ChrisBrady/
I think some of us live in reality far more than you do.
Reality: Celtic has been adopted as a generic term for music that has
"inherited" musical traits from the traditional folk music that
developed in lands where Celtic language and culture or peoples once
flourished. You can break it down into a great many sub-categories
that are far more accurate, from sean nos all the way to modern
fusions and composed music (frankly, I'm waiting for someone to
develop Breton Bebop ;-> )
It is as generic a term as Rock and Roll. (I'm also waiting for some
long distant generation poster to explain how rock and roll developed
from the rhythm of falling boulders when they have long forgotten
Elvis Presley and Buddy Holly). It is convenient for labelling a group
as a whole. In my case, as a musician who plays many different forms
inside the genre, I prefer to be called a Celtic musician when
referring to the music. I'm a bit leery of someone who calls themself
an Irish musician when they are not Irish, for example. But the kind
of music that is played within the genre is of many kinds and parts
of it are always changing even as we try to keep as much as possible
unchanged. There is room for both.
Sandra
Cunningham
>Rube Lloyd wrote:
>>
>> Gentlemen, this "Header", is just about as stupid as it could get!! You
>> seem to know nothing about History, and even less about the people who
>> settled Briton!!
>>
>> English are as much Celtic as they are Eskimo!! You really should not
>> have droped out of school, you know?
>
>Okay, that's bullshit
[snip]
No, its a troll.
--
Gerard
abardubh at wwa dot com
"Drong mor do ridirib do techt tar muir 'cum Maic Murcudha."
Translation: "They started it!"
Kingsley Matthews
<10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
>melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
>England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
>little celtic genetic inheritance here.
>
Please, don't keep it to yourself, there are others who would like to
see this research too, where can we find it?
>Indeed - if there really was any 'celtic' blood lines left in
>these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
>together.
>
What is a "'celtic' blood line"?
>But the other interesting result from the research is that there
>is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
>
There never has been, I've never heard of anyone, outside of a few
cranks, refer to 'celtic' as genetic. It is a cultural term.
>This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English,
>i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
>invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
>political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
>true state of things.
>
Not invention, fact. I grew up with Celtic culture in Wales, I am
surrounded by it now in Scotland where I live. I can assure you it is
a reality. BTW, where do you live?
>And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
>give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
>described as being 'celtic' today.
>
How do you know that? Do you have any recordings of the music they
actually did make.
>Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
>
The fantasy is your head, did you make up this troll all by yourself,
or did you get help from your nursemaid?
Kingsley
Douglas M. Jole
> The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
> melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
> England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
> little celtic genetic inheritance here.
Oh yeah...I read that National Enquirer article too.
(for those not from N.America: that's a trashy tabloid)
> Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
And therefore I am but a figment of my imagination.
____________________
/ Douglas Jole \
| Folklore Dept | What we don't need is a fountain of youth;
| Memorial University | what we really need is a fountain of smart.
| Of Newfoundland |
| | Thig crioch air an t-saoghal,
\_____________________/ Ach mairidh ceol agus gaol.
Homepage-- http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~g76dmj/
Barry
> Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
It's true... In fact, I don't even exist!
Stephen Heron
>the Scottish - ever heard of Pen-y-ghent, Cumbria, Northumbrian Tartan,
>Morris Dancing, the London order of Druids??? To name but a few of
>NOTABLE and visible remains of England's strong Celtic heritage. Your
>attitude that English people aren't Celtic would only knowingly be
>believed by a hard-hearted Anglophobe.
>
mosques that have been there longer.
--
Heron?
Allan-John Marsh
Aye, and they've probably been there longer than Gaelic in the south
east of Scotland too.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> In article <37424F...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
> <day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
> >I'd like to use your reference to build on - could you please quote the
> >source for me? Cheers!
>
> the folk/celtic newsgroups' own resident troll who is probably wetting
> himself laughing right now ...
>
> most trolls are pretty hopeless ... Conrad is actually very, very good
> at it and occasionally his trolls can end up being quite funny,
> depending on who he manages to hook ... this is already looking like
> being one of those :)
>
> --
> Mairi MacDonald
Troll or no, what he said is true and i've read it myself. I can't
imagine how anything so refreshingly accurate could be funny.
Allan-John Marsh
<wedi torri>
There are many people who would refer to themselves as Celtic as an
ethnic group or cultural group. What he posted is nothing new - that
this is an inaccurate description. We know of the musical and cultural
influences, but for those who see the term Celtic as a welcome barrier
to being English, it just doesn't wash.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
>
> >Rube Lloyd wrote:
> >>
> >> Gentlemen, this "Header", is just about as stupid as it could get!! You
> >> seem to know nothing about History, and even less about the people who
> >> settled Briton!!
> >>
> >> English are as much Celtic as they are Eskimo!! You really should not
> >> have droped out of school, you know?
> >
> >Okay, that's bullshit
> [snip]
>
> No, its a troll.
Phew, i'm pleased this Rube is a troll - I can't believe how anyone
would actually believe that the English weren't Celtic.
C McDermott
CJBrady <10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
> The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
> melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
> England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
> little celtic genetic inheritance here.
Wow. Where'd all the Celts go?
> Indeed - if there really was any 'celtic' blood lines left in
> these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
> together.
Despite the massive influx of other cultures that made the English what they
are today?
> But the other interesting result from the research is that there
> is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
Celtic isn't genetic so much as cultural.
> This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English, > i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
> invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
> political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
> true state of things.
And the true state of things is known only to you and your anonymous source?
> And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
> give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
> described as being 'celtic' today.
Hush, troll.
> Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
They seem real to me...
==================================
Irish-America, the best of both...
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Cunningham
>Troll or no, what he said is true and i've read it myself. I can't
>imagine how anything so refreshingly accurate could be funny.
When exactly did scientists identify the gene sequence for linguistic
grouping then?
Nigel & Nancy Sellars
>
>
> Celtic isn't genetic so much as cultural.
>
Linguistic, really, which technically means only the Highland Gaelic
speakers, the Irish of the Gaeltacht, Welsh and Breton speakers are
Celts as they have the only surviving -- not revived -- languages.
Breton, I gather, is, sadly, slowly dying out and dialects apparently
vary from village to village making preservation a bit of a problem.
Stretching a bit, Manx Gaelic and Cornish have been revived -- a bit
easier for Manx as the last surviving traditional speaker was tape-
recorded in late 1960s. Cornish died out in the 18th century. The rest
(save for the Bretons, of course and the Galicians, who now speak
something between Spanish and Portuguese) are as much part of the
English speaking tradition as anything. Heck, the Scots speech is
closer to original Anglo-Saxon than is mainstream English.
As for culture, well, Scots and Irish culture are closer to English
culture than they to Breton or Galician. Frankly, I think the term is
increasing irrelevent, especially as some much is borrowed from other
groups and the rest is increasingly being homogenized by "pop" culture
-- witness "B*witched" for example.
As for the genetic bit, there was a recent Discover Magazine feature on
the Discovery Channel regarding a village in England where genetic
sampling revealed a local schoolteacher was a direct descendant of a
_pre-Celtic_ man whose body was preserved in a salt-mine. Indeed, this
suggests that the common roots of the islands are really old. I suspect
what occurred is that the Celts -- latecomers to Britain themselves --
imposed their "culture" on the earlier settlers and intermarried with
them, then the Romans imposed their culture on the Britons, who in turn
blended with the Anglo-Saxons, who then had Viking and Norman French
traditions thrust upon and added to their own. I'd guess the Saxons
were merely the "luckier" group because over time their language turned
out to be more flexible and perhaps more syncretic than the others.
So maybe the residents of Ireland and the British Isles have the right
to say they are the original multicultural society?
Nigel Sellars
Craig Cockburn
Alan Crozier <alan.c...@telia.com>
>Jeri Corlew wrote in message <37470761...@news.tds.net>...
>>As was explained to me, the term "Celtic" refers to a family of languages,
>not a
>>race of people.
>
>
>
>Quite right, Celtic is a linguistic term. In the musical context, "Celtic
>music" mostly refers to music sung or presented in non-Celtic languages like
>English, French or Spanish.
>
soc.culture.celtic FAQ at
http://www.scot.demon.co.uk/celtfaq.html
--
Craig Cockburn ("coburn"), soc.culture.scottish FAQ author.
Find it at http://www.scot.demon.co.uk or http://scotland.home-page.org
Port na Banrighinn, Alba. (Queensferry, Scotland) PGP key available.
Sgri\obh thugam 'sa Gha\idhlig ma 'se do thoil e.
Craig Cockburn
sgriobh Rube Lloyd <Rube...@webtv.net>
>Gentlemen, this "Header", is just about as stupid as it could get!! You
>seem to know nothing about History, and even less about the people who
>settled Briton!!
>
>English are as much Celtic as they are Eskimo!! You really should not
>have droped out of school, you know?
Are you speaking culturally or generically?
Brett R. Mitchell
people, but I do have a few thoughts on the matter, based on a book called
"The Ancient Celts" by Barry Cunliffe, published in 1997 by the Oxford
University Press. This text is well documented and quite thorough, not to
mention well written.
This book puts various tribes of Celts residing in areas of Germany,
France, England, Northern Italy, Ireland and parts of Asia. The language is
indeed a large part of what ties these Celtic tribes together. Q-Celtic or
Goidelic and P-Celtic or Brythonic being the main two groups. There are
many historical references to the oral traditions of the Celts as well as
many archaeological sites that give us indications as to who these people
were.
I don't want to bore you with the minute details so I'll end this here.
Read this book, it will help you to understand how small the world really
is, and oh yes, the English are Celts too!
Kingsley Matthews <kan...@net.ntl.com> wrote in message
news:3742d51b...@news.net.ntl.com...
> On Tue, 18 May 1999 18:32:08 -0400, CJBrady
> <10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>
> >The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
> >melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
> >England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
> >little celtic genetic inheritance here.
> >
> see this research too, where can we find it?
>
> >these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
> >together.
> >
>
> >is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
> >
> cranks, refer to 'celtic' as genetic. It is a cultural term.
>
> >i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
> >invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
> >political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
> >true state of things.
> >
> surrounded by it now in Scotland where I live. I can assure you it is
> a reality. BTW, where do you live?
>
> >give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
> >described as being 'celtic' today.
> >
> actually did make.
>
> >
Shanti Basauri
But if Basques were famous because of their culture....surely Spanish and
French would feel very "basquy" soon.
Imperial feelings.....oh!
Cunningham escribió:
Allan-John Marsh
>
> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
>
> >Troll or no, what he said is true and i've read it myself. I can't
> >imagine how anything so refreshingly accurate could be funny.
>
> When exactly did scientists identify the gene sequence for linguistic
> grouping then?
I didn't know they had - what i'm getting from this guy is what so many
people don't want to hear - that you can't hide between the term Celtic
to differentiate yourself from the "Anglo-Saxon" English.
Rebecca Hazlehurst
>>
>> >Okay, that's bullshit - if the English aren't Celtic, then neither
>are
>> >the Scottish - ever heard
Morris dancing is not Celtic. It comes from the Moors of Spain/North
Africa and was adopted by the English later on.
Anyway what does it all matter the whole human race roughly originated
in southern Africa.
FRAJM
Anent the origin of morris dancing: I was looking at a website about Morris
dancing (http://www.npac.syr.edu/homepages/njm/morris/morrisinfo.html). The
intro to "What is Morris Dancing" opens with the following:
"Morris dancing is a form of ritual folkdance which comes from the Cotswold
region in western England, between Oxford and the Welsh border. It is ritual as
opposed to social dance, that is, it is danced with purposes beyond fun,
although it also fun."
In the section The History of Morris Dancing, it says in part:
"Even the name Morris is a mystery. Some claim that it is a corruption of
Moorish, indicating that the dances may have had their origins somewhere in
Africa. Or it may simply refer to the dancers practice of blackening their
faces with cork as a simple disguise (as in much ritual dance, the dancers were
considered to be someone other than their usual selves while they were
dancing). Or it may be derived from the Latin moris, meaning custom or
tradition. Or maybe it has something to do with some guy named Maurice. We have
no idea."
Neither do I have any idea, but the poster seemed so sure of her facts that my
curiosity was aroused.
Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney
http://members.aol.com/frajm/
"All over the room throats were being strained and minds broadened."
-- P. G. Wodehouse, Piccadilly Jim
Mick Tems
> >Jeri Corlew wrote in message <37470761...@news.tds.net>...
> >>As was explained to me, the term "Celtic" refers to a family of
> languages,
> >not a
> >>race of people.
> >
> >
> >
> >Quite right, Celtic is a linguistic term. In the musical context, "Celtic
> >music" mostly refers to music sung or presented in non-Celtic languages
> like
> >English, French or Spanish.
> >
> Hilarious!
Celtic is linguistic in that three nations share Goidelic Celtic languages
(Ireland, Scotland, Mann) and three share Brittonic Celtic languages (Wales,
Cornwall and Brittany).
Yet even though only 20 per cent of people in Wales speak Welsh (a
proportion which varies hugely depending on location, from 90 per cent plus
in parts of Gwynedd to less than five per cent in parts of Gwent), the whole
nation regards itself as proudly Celtic, just as the Irish, Scots, Manx,
Bretons and to an ever-increasing extent - the Cornish do too.
Welsh is much stronger here than Irish is in Ireland... does that make Wales
more Celtic than Ireland? Of course it doesn't.
Like the Irish, and a huge proportion of the Scots, we see our way forward
as small nations within Europe, working together with other small nations
Celtic and non-Celtic. We don't necessarily feel that control and rule from
London will be relevant in the future, even though we will be perfectly
happy to work with London as partners in the Europe of the next century.
So as far as the music goes, anything coming from Wales, Ireland, Brittany,
Scotland, Mann, Cornwall and our distant cousins in Galicia (as long as it
is rooted in the traditions of those countries) is Celtic.
What is *not* Celtic, however, is music from England, which seems to clog up
a huge amount of space on this ng. If it involves England, discuss it
elsewhere!
--
Mick Tems & Pat Smith: Calennig/Celfyddydau Mari Arts/
Clwb Gwerin Llantrisant FC Phone/fax: 01443 226892 Mobile 07979 055577
e-mail mari...@argonet.co.uk website: www.folkwales.org.uk
Bythynnod Ty Clwyta, Tafarn-y-Groes, Llantrisant, Rhondda Cynon Taf CF728AZ
Mick Tems
<orei...@bezeroak.euskaltel.es> wrote:
> I´m so happy being a Basque guy....
> But if Basques were famous because of their culture....surely Spanish and
> French would feel very "basquy" soon.
> Imperial feelings.....oh!
So you should... Kepa Junkera, all that fantastic music, your own Euskadi
language. Come and join us Welsh in the Council of the Small Nations Of
Europe!
I think the answer to your point is that "the Spanish" and "the French"
don't really exist except in the minds of politicians in Madrid and Paris.
On one side of the Pyrenees you have Cantabrians, Asturians, Galicians,
Castillians etc, while on the other you have Gascons, Bretons, Provencals,
all of them very proud of their own culture, music and traditions... with
you Basques and the Catalunyans on both sides!
It's like trying to define a British person - you can't do it.
What you clearly need to do, to achieve global cred, is spread Basque theme
pubs across the world.
Ashley Yakeley
Rebecca_H...@first-class.open.ac.uk (Rebecca Hazlehurst) wrote:
> Morris dancing is not Celtic.
Indeed not.
> It comes from the Moors of Spain/North
> Africa and was adopted by the English later on.
This is but one of many theories...
--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle Morris
Seattle WA
Jeri Corlew
Cunningham
>Cunningham wrote:
>>
>> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
>>
>> >Troll or no, what he said is true and i've read it myself. I can't
>> >imagine how anything so refreshingly accurate could be funny.
>>
>> When exactly did scientists identify the gene sequence for linguistic
>> grouping then?
>
>I didn't know they had - what i'm getting from this guy is what so many
>people don't want to hear - that you can't hide between the term Celtic
>to differentiate yourself from the "Anglo-Saxon" English.
Sure you can, unless you're going to maintain that culture is genetic.
Conrad Jay Bladey
behind most folk who study
geneology.
Sure they are celtic....with coke e cola
in one hand and hot dog
in the other at the baseball game.
If you do not do celtic or irish in your
lifeway to a significant
extent you are still an ordinary
suburban simpson.
If celticness is only kilt deep its best
to go naked!
Conrad
--
$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%%
N E W ! !
9 AKC Longhaired Dachshund Pups Soon to
be for sale!
Write for details- cbl...@mail.bcpl.net
Stop in and see them at:
http://www.toad.net/~sticker/bladodox.html
Main Business Pages:
http://www.bcpl.lib.md.us/~cbladey/hutman.html
%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%$%%%$$$%$%$%$%$
Darach Beirne
I read recently that a particular nasty illness - something to do with
a build up of iron in the blood - akin to sickle cell, that can to severe
damage to the liver etc.. was found to be most often in Celtic people or
people of Celtic descent. It's funny that some people on this newsgroup
don't recognize Celtic genes when clearly the medical profession does....
CJBrady (10034...@CompuServe.COM) wrote:
: The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
: melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
: England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
: little celtic genetic inheritance here.
: Indeed - if there really was any 'celtic' blood lines left in
: these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
: together.
: But the other interesting result from the research is that there
: is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
: This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English,
: i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
: invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
: political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
: true state of things.
: And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
: give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
: described as being 'celtic' today.
: Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
: C.J.Brady.
: --
: Email: 10034...@compuserve.com
: Homepage: http://ourworld/compuserve.com/homepages/ChrisBrady/
Cunningham
>I read recently that a particular nasty illness - something to do with
>a build up of iron in the blood - akin to sickle cell, that can to severe
>damage to the liver etc.. was found to be most often in Celtic people or
>people of Celtic descent. It's funny that some people on this newsgroup
>don't recognize Celtic genes when clearly the medical profession does....
Can you point me in the direction of this article?
Darach Beirne
which is available in California (I got it at an Irish goods store) , it
was either the April or May edition. Being a good Californian, I have
already recycled the newspaper unfortunately.
Cunningham (Ger@r.d) wrote:
Conrad Jay Bladey
genes but most should
recognize that culture is learned. You
can not just put on a kilt
you have got to live the live.
Conrad
Darach Beirne wrote:
>
> I read recently that a particular nasty illness - something to do with
> a build up of iron in the blood - akin to sickle cell, that can to severe
> damage to the liver etc.. was found to be most often in Celtic people or
> people of Celtic descent. It's funny that some people on this newsgroup
> don't recognize Celtic genes when clearly the medical profession does....
>
> CJBrady (10034...@CompuServe.COM) wrote:
> : The latest genetic research has proved that in the historical
> : melting pot of the peoples of the British Isles - including
> : England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, etc. - that there is
> : little celtic genetic inheritance here.
>
> : Indeed - if there really was any 'celtic' blood lines left in
> : these Islands - the English would be as 'celtic' as the rest put
> : together.
>
> : But the other interesting result from the research is that there
> : is very little 'celtic' genetic inheritance here anyway - period.
>
> : This makes the huge marketing concept of everything non-English,
> : i.e. Irish, Scottish or Welsh as being 'celtic' to be pure
> : invention, an attempt at rewriting history for commercial or
> : political ends, but one which bears no relation whatsoever to the
> : true state of things.
>
> : And the historic celts - whoever they were - certainly did NOT
> : give rise to any of the music, song, or dances, etc., that are
> : described as being 'celtic' today.
>
> : Even these newsgroups are a pure fantasy.
>
> : C.J.Brady.
>
> : --
> : Email: 10034...@compuserve.com
> : Homepage: http://ourworld/compuserve.com/homepages/ChrisBrady/
--
Allan-John Marsh
>
> I read recently that a particular nasty illness - something to do with
> a build up of iron in the blood - akin to sickle cell, that can to severe
> damage to the liver etc.. was found to be most often in Celtic people or
> people of Celtic descent. It's funny that some people on this newsgroup
> don't recognize Celtic genes when clearly the medical profession does....
...so...are you saying that the cases of this magically stop at the
Severn or the Tweed by chance?
CJBrady
"inherited" musical traits from the traditional folk music that
developed in lands where Celtic language and culture or peoples
once flourished.<<
In which case why is it that the vast majority of folk songs from
the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
languages? Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
that is? Why use 'celtic' as the generic term - which is a myth?
Why not use Gaelic - which is far nearer the reality? Also how
does this explain why much of the folk music derives from the
dance music of the English court and countryside? The old 'sean
nos' singers of the Gaeltach (sorry - spelling?) in Western
Ireland would certainly not relate their singing to anything
'celtic' - indeed the Irish in Ireland do not think of their folk
culture as being 'celtic' at all - it is Irish and they are damned
proud of the fact (even though much of it is related historically
to the English which they prefer not to acknowledge).
So I think you are right in what you say - 'celtic' is a racist,
i.e. anti-English, term that is increasingly being used as a
marketing label. There is no substanciated historical evidence
that the 'Celts' ever gave rise to what is now termed 'celtic'
song and music. The term is a myth. Its a rewriting of history.
Its a marketing ploy.
CJBrady
like to see this research too, where can we find it? <<
See the new posting Celtic Myth?
CJBrady
now in Scotland where I live. I can assure you it is a reality. <
No, you grew up in an Anglo-Gaelic culture, instanced by the
native secondary language of gaelic whose origins were shared
between the Scots, Irish, Manx, and Cornish. Why do you - like
thousands - want to deny your true origins by redefining them as
coming from some mythological race called 'celtic'?
You say that you are surrounded by true 'celtic' culture in
Scotland. That's rubbish. Don't the Scots ever acknowledge their
Gaelic, Pictish and Scandinavian origins too? Of course they do!!
But I bet the vast majority of native Scots and incidently native
Irish wouldn't even know what 'celtic' culture was. 'Celtish' is a
marketing term to mislead American tourists into buying tat from
souvenier shops. Sadly it is also used as a marketing term to
describe folk music and other folk activities ... Shame on you for
not acknowledging your true anglo-gaelic roots!!
Cunningham
>In which case why is it that the vast majority of folk songs from
>the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
>languages?
Got a problem with P-Celts? & what do you think Gaelic is?
>Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
>that is?
Why aren't Christian hymns in Olde Hebrew?
Cunningham
>> I grew up with Celtic culture in Wales, I am surrounded by it
>now in Scotland where I live. I can assure you it is a reality. <
>
>No, you grew up in an Anglo-Gaelic culture
Psst Conrad, they don't speak Gaelic in Wales...
mmcdon
<#BMM4Pqp#GA...@nih2naaf.prod2.compuserve.com>...
> >>Celtic has been adopted as a generic term for music that has
> "inherited" musical traits from the traditional folk music that
> developed in lands where Celtic language and culture or peoples
> once flourished.<<
>
> the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
> languages?
One reason why so many Irish\Scottish\Welsh folk songs are in English is
that a large proportion of those countries have spoken English for a long
time, and thus tended to write their songs in English. This really
shouldn't come as a surprise. As for the Gaelic languages (Irish, Scottish
and Manx), they *are* Celtic languages, Q-Celtic to be precise. Welsh,
Breton and Cornish are not Gaelic languages, but *are* Celtic languages, of
the P-Celtic branch.
> Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
> that is?
Why are you not speaking Indo-European - whatever that is? These songs are
in the branches of the Celtic language family which were spoken in the time
and place they were written.
> Why use 'celtic' as the generic term - which is a myth?
How precisely is it a myth?
> Why not use Gaelic - which is far nearer the reality?
Gaelic is a term used for the Q-Celtic languages of the "British" isles.
There are other Celtic languages, such as Welsh and Cornish, on these
islands which are not Q-Celtic or Gaelic. Therefore to categorise all of
these languages as Gaelic rather than Celtic would be to loose accuracy.
Also how
> does this explain why much of the folk music derives from the
> dance music of the English court and countryside?
"Derives" from? I'd like to see your evidence. As far as influencing each
other, it would be miraculous if the songs from close neighbours didn't
spill over.
The old 'sean
> nos' singers of the Gaeltach (sorry - spelling?) in Western
> Ireland would certainly not relate their singing to anything
> 'celtic'
You'd be surprised.
Is mise le meas,
Brian Cahill
Conrad Jay Bladey
- the world is agog with sin!
Conrad
Cunningham wrote:
>
> CJBrady wrote:
>
> >In which case why is it that the vast majority of folk songs from
> >the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
> >languages?
>
> Got a problem with P-Celts? & what do you think Gaelic is?
>
> >Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
> >that is?
>
> Why aren't Christian hymns in Olde Hebrew?
>
> --
> Gerard
> abardubh at wwa dot com
> "Drong mor do ridirib do techt tar muir 'cum Maic Murcudha."
> Translation: "They started it!"
--
Kingsley Matthews
<10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>>>Celtic has been adopted as a generic term for music that has
>"inherited" musical traits from the traditional folk music that
>developed in lands where Celtic language and culture or peoples
>once flourished.<<
>
>In which case why is it that the vast majority of folk songs from
>the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
>languages? Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
>that is? Why use 'celtic' as the generic term - which is a myth?
>Why not use Gaelic - which is far nearer the reality? Also how
>does this explain why much of the folk music derives from the
>dance music of the English court and countryside? The old 'sean
>nos' singers of the Gaeltach (sorry - spelling?) in Western
>Ireland would certainly not relate their singing to anything
>'celtic' - indeed the Irish in Ireland do not think of their folk
>culture as being 'celtic' at all - it is Irish and they are damned
>proud of the fact (even though much of it is related historically
>to the English which they prefer not to acknowledge).
>
>So I think you are right in what you say - 'celtic' is a racist,
>i.e. anti-English, term that is increasingly being used as a
>marketing label. There is no substanciated historical evidence
>that the 'Celts' ever gave rise to what is now termed 'celtic'
>song and music. The term is a myth. Its a rewriting of history.
>Its a marketing ploy.
>
This marketing ploy has been going for an awful long time. However,
whether it is or not, most of us are comfortable ig we have a cultural
identity, which for me is Celtic. I feel Celtic and I'm happy to go
along with it. You may not want an identity, but I doubt that, you
probably have something to hang on to which is a lot more slender than
my identity. However, having said that, please stop putting mine
down.
Kingsley Matthews
<10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>> I grew up with Celtic culture in Wales, I am surrounded by it
>now in Scotland where I live. I can assure you it is a reality. <
>
>No, you grew up in an Anglo-Gaelic culture,
Please, I know where I grew up, it had nothing to do with
Anglo-Gaelic, whatever that is.
>instanced by the
>native secondary language of gaelic whose origins were shared
>between the Scots, Irish, Manx, and Cornish.
Nobody in my community spoke Gaelic. Some spoke English as a first
language, most spoke Welsh.
>Why do you - like
>thousands - want to deny your true origins by redefining them as
>coming from some mythological race called 'celtic'?
Because I prefer it to that mythological race called 'anglo'. Before
you correct me, I was having a little joke, of course neither are
mythological.
>
>You say that you are surrounded by true 'celtic' culture in
>Scotland. That's rubbish.
My neighbours don't think so.
>Don't the Scots ever acknowledge their
>Gaelic, Pictish and Scandinavian origins too? Of course they do!!
Yes, they do, but the majority refer to themselves as 'Celtic'.
>But I bet the vast majority of native Scots and incidently native
>Irish wouldn't even know what 'celtic' culture was. 'Celtish' is a
>marketing term to mislead American tourists into buying tat from
>souvenier shops. Sadly it is also used as a marketing term to
>describe folk music and other folk activities ... Shame on you for
>not acknowledging your true anglo-gaelic roots!!
>
Why should I acknowledge roots that have nothing to do with me.
Now please stop rubbishing my culture and do something about your own,
whatever that is.
Kingsley
Janet M. Ryan
>
Chris, you are responsible for the cross-posting of this thread to
non-relevant newsgroups, thereby crossing the line of respect and
common decency in Usenet newsgroups. Take your "Celtic" race and genetic
arguments back to the newsgroup that originated this racist, bigoted
thread--soc.culture.celtic--and keep it there.
Please folks, note that my follow-up has trimmed Chris' newsgroup list to
rec.music.celtic *only*--he cross-posted this thread to soc.culture.irish
(which is full of bigoted, intolerant flamers) and to rec.music.folk,
where it has no relevance. He is looking to bring in people he knows
have no interest in Celtic music, but gladly join him in his bigoted
flamewar, and shove it down the throats of those of us in
rec.music.celtic. This is a new low, even for you Chris--but its one
I'll remember you for, to be sure.
Folks--we can douse the flames Chris is intentionally trying to fuel by
limiting our follow-ups carefully to our own newsgroup, and keeping the
discussion on-topic: Celtic music.
Janet Ryan
M.R. Heningham
> > the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
> > languages?
>
> that a large proportion of those countries have spoken English for a long
> time, and thus tended to write their songs in English.
There were also times when it was forbidden by order of the crown to speak,
sing or write in those native languages. A majority of traditional tunes
are known under different titles with different lyrics. They are also
performed as different forms as in jig, reel, hornpipe and so on. Many of
the melodies from Ireland and Scotland heard by English soldiers and
merchants were popularised back in England as well along with Anglisised
phrases that were taken from Gaelic and Irish.
When pipes where illegal in Scotland the music was saved through vocal
tradition using a system of sounds that related to different fingerings
applied to the chanter. There are a few scholars that can still sing the
tunes using this method today.
> > Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
> > that is?
Probably the same reason that Snoop Dogey doesn't rap in Shakesperian dated
English, home.
> > Why use 'celtic' as the generic term - which is a myth?
Hardly. There are still words in modern Gaelic that have their roots in
older Celtic languages. Is Ancient Greek all a myth as well? Same
relevance to modern Greek via Medieval Greek.
> Also how
> > does this explain why much of the folk music derives from the
> > dance music of the English court and countryside?
Because it was adopted far after the Celts were hunting boar and collecting
heads in the same neighborhood. There is no written legacy of ancient
Celtic music. Courtly music and folk tunes are horns on the same goat, and
don't forget many sacred tunes as well (Oh Wally Wally, The Gravel Road, The
Water Is Deep) since folk tunes in the British and Irish Isles were handed
down by performance rather than in script.
>> The old 'sean
> > nos' singers of the Gaeltach (sorry - spelling?) in Western
> > Ireland would certainly not relate their singing to anything
> > 'celtic'
I'm not sure where you reference your info from, but you are incorrect. The
Gaelic vocal traditions share the same original source.
Conrad Jay Bladey
ryan queen of this news group
and that she has unnecessarily brought
me in to this discussion in the first
place. If folk want to cross post that
is their business not hers.
Cross posting is a very useful function.
CB
--
Ronnie & Leslie West
Thank You!!
Tom McQuade
The Normans then take over the running of Ireland the Irish pick up songs
from the Normans although they already have plenty of there own and
surprisingly the Normans being French were therefore part of the Gaelic
culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
CJBrady <10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote in message
<#BMM4Pqp#GA...@nih2naaf.prod2.compuserve.com>...
>>>Celtic has been adopted as a generic term for music that has
>"inherited" musical traits from the traditional folk music that
>developed in lands where Celtic language and culture or peoples
>once flourished.<<
>
>the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
>that is? Why use 'celtic' as the generic term - which is a myth?
>Why not use Gaelic - which is far nearer the reality? Also how
>does this explain why much of the folk music derives from the
>nos' singers of the Gaeltach (sorry - spelling?) in Western
>Ireland would certainly not relate their singing to anything
>culture as being 'celtic' at all - it is Irish and they are damned
>proud of the fact (even though much of it is related historically
>to the English which they prefer not to acknowledge).
>
>So I think you are right in what you say - 'celtic' is a racist,
>i.e. anti-English, term that is increasingly being used as a
>marketing label. There is no substanciated historical evidence
>that the 'Celts' ever gave rise to what is now termed 'celtic'
>song and music. The term is a myth. Its a rewriting of history.
>Its a marketing ploy.
>
Cunningham
>The article was in a free newspaper called something like "The Gael"
>which is available in California (I got it at an Irish goods store) , it
>was either the April or May edition. Being a good Californian, I have
>already recycled the newspaper unfortunately.
Found it. See http://www.lundberg.com/products/qceliac.html
Nigel & Nancy Sellars
>
> No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
> The Normans then take over the running of Ireland the Irish pick up songs
> from the Normans although they already have plenty of there own and
> surprisingly the Normans being French were therefore part of the Gaelic
> culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
Uh, Thom, hate to break this to you, but the Normans are originally
Scandanavians who settled along the coast of France and apparently
adopted French (Frankish) traditions, although it is contended their
spokne French was horrible. The French themselves are descended from
the Franks, an initially Germanic group who are also not Celtic. Only
the Bretons , originally from Cornwall, can be classed as "Celtic." And
given that the Anglo-Saxons intermarried with the Romanized Celts of
Britain, they have "claim" at being partly Celtic -- as well as Danish
(Viking), Pictish, whatever. But since the idea of the "Celt" as now
used is essentially a 19th century invention by such groups as the
Gaelic League of Ireland, etc. (See Eric Hobsbawm and Hugh Trevor-Roper,
editors, _Inventing the Tradition_) The term becomes pointless. Please
see the postings on the book _The Atlantic Celts_.
Additionally, since the original language of some of the Irish was
English (speaking an English dialect called Yola, IIRC, from around the
Pale) and in some cases brought over or adopted wholesale Enlgish
traditions, and since lowland Scots have a dialect closer to original
Anglo-Saxon than do most of the English, I contend they are also not
Celtic (except generically) and are part of the English speaking
tradition or, horrors!, _Anglo-Saxon_ culture (itself an imprecise
thing.)
This does not, of course, deny that there is a distinct Irish culture or
a distinct Scots, Welsh, Breton culture -- there is of course -- but
that the pigeonhole of Celtic "culture" is really more a black hole down
which far too much has already been lost.
Nigel Sellars
Si
> surprisingly the Normans being French were therefore part of the Gaelic
> culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
>
Um I am almost sure of the following: The Normans weren't indigenous to
north france as such. They were decendants of settled Vikings who tried to
raid Paris and were persuaded not to by the settlement of lands on them.
Which curiously enough were between the coast and Paris, thus twarting any
of their comrades efforts. So I don't think you can readily classify them
as "Gaelic". Not unless Vikings qualify in that regard.
I could be wrong but that little nugget bobbed to the surface of my
hangover this morning.
Si,
"Bog Snorkler Extrordinaire"
Conrad Jay Bladey
if you dont like a thread just dont open
messages in it!
thats whay messages have titles and
threads exist.
If you dont have anything to say simply
dont say anything.
There is a racial and genetically
defined dimension practiced
by the Irish in regard to what they see
is their music and their
culture. This is a valid area of
discussion both in the areas
of music and culture.
It is important to define the way many
use race to define themselves
and their cultural productions. It
exists and is quite prominent and needs
exploration. If it is not explored and
highlighted we can not move to help to
get rid of it. Surely all who learn a
culture or the music of a culture should
be admitted on equal terms with those
who carry the genes of a group. As far
as the Irish are concerned although of
course there are exceptions, a genetic
barrier is generally in place which
limits or at least qualifies the
participation of those not sharing the
genes. This is done openly and talked of
openly. This should not be the case. We
all have an obligation to help the Irish
become less clannish(read genetically
racially oriented) and more open an
accepting of others.
Conrad
Ronnie & Leslie West wrote:
>
> Can we please get off this subject. It is wasting space and time.
>
> Thank You!!
--
Conrad Jay Bladey
first invaded by
the church. It was conquered and later
as a result of the
synod of whitby handed over to the
church of rome.
The church conquerors are still there
and still quite dominant.
The church brought a foreign language
and foreign musical styles.
The early church had north african
roots.
Next you get the vikings- 10th century
they had music too and
that with their art mixed well with the
celtic. They also intermarried... (some
of the churchmen invaders probably did
too)
Next you get the normans which as we all
know were vikings who happened to be
living in france for a while. The
normans brought more latin church music
as well as many ballad styles. They also
intermarried.
Note also that many of the normans had a
heritage of their welsh location prior
to going to ireland.
Let us not also forget the black Irish-
many many folk crossed from
northern Iberian peninsula to spend
nights in ireland- they may have
brought the arabic traditions.
Let us not forget that there is no irish
gaelic word for dance
both words are foreign.
Let us also remember that the great
harper o carrolan was severely
influenced by the music of baroque
europe.
So Ireland is quite a stew musically
and genetically.
Culture is infact learned but the
culture known as celtic
is as much our own creation as it is a
reality. I would suggest
that what irish and celtic is is infact
an intensification of a
pan european dimension common to some
degree in the cultural productions of
many peoples- it is just drawn out and
exagerated in the productions of the
Irish.
Conrad
Tom McQuade wrote:
>
> No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
> The Normans then take over the running of Ireland the Irish pick up songs
> from the Normans although they already have plenty of there own and
> surprisingly the Normans being French were therefore part of the Gaelic
> culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
--
Royce Lerwick
wrote:
>
>
>I read recently that a particular nasty illness - something to do with
>a build up of iron in the blood - akin to sickle cell, that can to severe
>damage to the liver etc.. was found to be most often in Celtic people or
>people of Celtic descent. It's funny that some people on this newsgroup
>don't recognize Celtic genes when clearly the medical profession does....
I don't think those findings traced liver damage in Celtic peoples to
a buildup of iron.
Royce
Royce Lerwick
<10034...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
>In which case why is it that the vast majority of folk songs from
>the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
>languages? Why are they not in the old celtic langauge - whatever
>that is?
It's Gaelic dipshit.
>Why use 'celtic' as the generic term - which is a myth?
Because we feel like it. Why not use "daffodil"?
>Why not use Gaelic - which is far nearer the reality?
Because that's not what stuck.
> Also how
>does this explain why much of the folk music derives from the
>dance music of the English court and countryside?
Nice 20/20 revisionist hindsight there Nimrod.
>The old 'sean
>nos' singers of the Gaeltach (sorry - spelling?) in Western
>Ireland would certainly not relate their singing to anything
>'celtic' - indeed the Irish in Ireland do not think of their folk
>culture as being 'celtic' at all - it is Irish and they are damned
>proud of the fact (even though much of it is related historically
>to the English which they prefer not to acknowledge).
No, they relate it to Nordic. And they think of themselves as "Irish"
only since Brian Boru created the first national concept in the 10th
century.
>So I think you are right in what you say - 'celtic' is a racist,
>i.e. anti-English, term that is increasingly being used as a
>marketing label.
By the Committee of 300 and the Insiders, who's chairman is the Queen
of England.
>There is no substanciated historical evidence
>that the 'Celts' ever gave rise to what is now termed 'celtic'
>song and music. The term is a myth. Its a rewriting of history.
>Its a marketing ploy.
By the Japanese industrialists who control the music industry.
Royce
Royce Lerwick
<cbl...@mail.bcpl.net> wrote:
>you probably mean aramaic!
>- the world is agog with sin!
>Conrad
The world is a Gog and Megog in sin.
Royce
Royce Lerwick
<t...@thebhoys01.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
>The Normans then take over the running of Ireland the Irish pick up songs
>from the Normans although they already have plenty of there own and
>surprisingly the Normans being French were therefore part of the Gaelic
>culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
Let's get this straight. The Normans were not "French." The were
Normans, and had only just cut off cultural and political ties with
the Norwegians from whence they originated. Their interest in both
England and Scotland and Ireland went well back to the start of the
Viking Era, and thus they returned to their old haunts where there
once cousins were now calling themselves "Irish" or "Scottish," or in
the case of Northumberland etc., "English." The Normans in fact, then
became "English."
Royce
Royce Lerwick
<nsel...@telepath.com> wrote:
>...ally, since the original language of some of the Irish was
>English (speaking an English dialect called Yola, IIRC, from around the
>Pale) and in some cases brought over or adopted wholesale Enlgish
>traditions, and since lowland Scots have a dialect closer to original
>Anglo-Saxon than do most of the English, I contend they are also not
>Celtic (except generically) and are part of the English speaking
>tradition or, horrors!, _Anglo-Saxon_ culture (itself an imprecise
>thing.)
>
>This does not, of course, deny that there is a distinct Irish culture or
>a distinct Scots, Welsh, Breton culture -- there is of course -- but
>that the pigeonhole of Celtic "culture" is really more a black hole down
>which far too much has already been lost.
And there you have this "historical" problem in a nutshell, because
"Celtic" works pretty well as a generic classification for a modern
cluster of related music just as a handle or lable for convenience,
but what really busts my gut is to hear Lowlanders or for that matter
anyone now just "Scottish" lay claim to some great Celtic heritage, or
Highland/Gaelic legacy, when in fact their very existence in Scotland
is testiment that they were the ones who eradicated that great
Celtic/Gaelic/Highland legacy.
Royce
Rebecca Hazlehurst
>This is but one of many theories...
Yes the OU (Open Univesity) put it in their course A205 -Culture &
Belief in Europe
Cunningham
http://www.lundberg.com/products/qceliac.html
Celiac Disease (CD), is also known as Celiac Sprue and
Gluten-Sensitive Enteropathy. CD is a chronic digestive disorder
caused by a toxic reaction to the ingestion of "gluten". Gluten is
group of proteins that is found in all forms of wheat, including
durum, semolina, spelt), rye, oats, barley, and related grain hybrids
such as triticale and kamut. CD has also been called "The Irish
Disease" because it is genetic and most commonly found in those of
Celtic[*] origin. This disease affects about 1:50 persons in Ireland
and recent studies show that it affects 1:250 in the United States."
[*] Although there's no moention of above average incidence in say,
Scotland & Wales, so I don't know how they went from Irish to Celtic.
See also http://www.celiac.org which gives the much lower figures of
1:300 in Ireland, 1:500 in Europe generally.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> > > In which case why is it that the vast majority of folk songs from
> > > the so-called ex-celtic nations are in the English or Gaelic
> > > languages?
> >
> > that a large proportion of those countries have spoken English for a long
> > time, and thus tended to write their songs in English.
>
> There were also times when it was forbidden by order of the crown to speak,
> sing or write in those native languages.
I find it quite funny that you refer to Scottish (Gaelic of course) as
being native to Scotland, when it has only existed there for so long as
English has. English is the language of Scotland because of Scotland's
Anglo-Saxon ancestors - it is not the language of some evil foreign
oppressor, and for those Scots who actually spoke Gaelic, proscribing
the language was, to the rulers of the time, more in a way of
encouraging progression more than anything else.
*****
"FFarwel fy annwyl gariad,
Nid wyf yn enwi neb."
http://mysite.xtra.co.nz/~britannia/
Allan-John Marsh
>
> No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
The Normans who also conquered Wales, Ireland and tried to defeat
Scotland...
> The Normans then take over the running of Ireland the Irish pick up songs
> from the Normans although they already have plenty of there own and
> surprisingly the Normans being French were therefore part of the Gaelic
> culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
Wales Gaelic? But, if the Normans came from France and France is
magically Gaelic now, wouldn't that make the English Gaelic too?
Brett R. Mitchell
Celtic to the exclusion of all others is this correct? What puzzles me is
that people tend to look at "culture" as an identifier of their existence.
Culture is strictly a contemporary notion of social custom, which varies
depending upon the whim of the society involved. You and others speak of a
marketing scheme using the "Celtic culture" as a means of cashing in on the
beliefs of all those who think that they may in some distant fashion be a
Celt. You quote references to information that sounds quite compelling on
the surface but is quite superficial when it is put into the proper context.
The context of which I speak of is simply this; Time, Existence and
Historical Impact.
The terms that you are throwing about are perhaps relevant if you ignore
the time frame in which the Celts actually lived and thrived. The Celts, as
they existed, where of major importance up until the beginning of what is
now known as the common era (AD). They were primarily raiders and
mercenaries and where quite nomadic as well. There are tribes of Celts
Known to have existed in areas all across Asia and Europe (yes even in
Germany!). Their impact was made early on and exemplified by the art work
that was left by them in their burial sites and in the river Thames (a known
site for deposits of ritual offerings by the Celts). Now if anyone doubts
that these people ever existed or that they were invented by some marketing
agent to sell music, I suggest as I have before that they read, and I do
mean read ( there is no movie, no tape!) about them in a serious book of
some repute such as the one I mentioned before; "The Ancient Celts" by the
author Barry Cunliffe. This is not the only text I have studied on the
matter, but it is the most concise as to place, time, language, and their
contributions to history.
On the matter of the French and the Norse/Vikings and whether or not
the French/English are related to the Celts. Keep in mind the Vikings were
also raiders and that they also invaded England as well as France on more
than one occasion. Those that stayed either became French or they
influenced the French culture with their own way of doing things. What I
am saying is that I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone with a
pure blood line so to speak. We all share a certain history, and how far
back we take it depends on how well history is preserved. It is not our
culture that is defined by such research but our "heritage". Our heritage
is what we use to help us find a sense of place and time and existence. We
take pride in the how such a heritage has had an impact on the advancement
of the world. The English have a right to claim ancestral heritage as far
back as can be determined (as does everyone else), and as far as I can
determine, through my research, includes the Celts and all they had to
offer.
Does this mean that some quick witted marketing consultant might use it
to his or her advantage? Of course it does. It does muddy the water's for
those who are just beginning to delve into their past heritage, but it also
inspires them to look past their own noses at the world around them, often
to find it's much smaller than they thought. Indeed, for those who are
willing (and quite determined I might add) to work their way through the
muck and mire of popular myth will find the truth, and it's sad to say, they
will be somewhat aghast at the lack of grandiose or noble personages that
they will find there. So is it any wonder then that we should look beyond
our immediate ancestors, and instead focus on the people and customs that
surrounded them?
The Irish, when it comes to heraldry at least, have a rather open minded
way of thinking (as opposed to the English). If you can determine a link
through your heritage to any particular family crest, you are allowed to
display that crest as your own (as indeed it is). I would suggest then that
we, as intelligent and compassionate beings, adopt this same philosophy and
include the English as having a right to there heritage, however it may turn
out.
I leave you with this question; Is it racist to know from whence you
came and take pride in that knowledge, or is it merely ignorance to deny it
to others?
Brett
.
Conrad Jay Bladey <cbl...@mail.bcpl.net> wrote in message
news:374BD8D5...@mail.bcpl.net...
Alan Hardie
Cunningham wrote:
>
> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
>
> >Tom McQuade wrote:
> >>
> >> No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
> >
> >The Normans who also conquered Wales, Ireland and tried to defeat
> >Scotland...
>
> & pretty much succeeded, placing de Bruce on the throne...
Except that Robert de Brus has no living descendants.
His understanding of Norman society will have come from his father but
there seems little doubt that he sided with the "natives" after the
death of his father. Actually the way to understand Robert the Bruce is
to understand that his mother was a native born Scot and that he was his
mother's son.
--
regards
Alan Hardie
remove *X* to reply
Conrad Jay Bladey
their heritage they qualify it with
genetic/family name/location references.
This should be discarded
For examples of this useage se the works
of Ms. Ryan queen of sci or is she high
priestess of remission?
This is defining culture by racial
references hence racist.
There can obviously be no genetic ties
to music- or claim for that matter.
Cultural productions are accessable to
all who take them up.
It is simply this when Irish for example
describe a tradition as
"ours" (refering to the traditions of
the irish) they are using a genetic
reference to their ancestory and are in
this case describing
a tradition in racial or genetically
linked terms.
It is far better to talk of a tradition
not as "our" but "the"
I like to define traditions in time and
space-
It is easier to reference and a tighter
description-
for example-
The Traditions of the Island of Ireland
The Dublin Music Hall Tradition of 1944
The Folk Rock Tradition of Balladry on
the Island of Ireland 1969
There should be openness in all
descriptions- no mine or our. The
traditions can be possessed by the world
and should be.
And while we know the ancient Celts
existed and we know that they had music
we have no pieces of music nor composers
from the celtic period.
We dont even no of any performers
except perhaps Marbhan the inventor of
the Harp and the Daghda player of a
living harp....
To be useful again the broad term should
be more closely defined-
where in celtia?
when in time?
What form of music?
Instrumentation...?
Unless you define things more closely
Celtic can be a mighty big
ocean. From Hothouse flowers to the
chieftains to pat troy from clannad to
the dubliners....
Yes you will at times know you
are in the ocean just by being there but
you wont know where in it you are
without more definition.
Conrad
Cunningham
OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
into it.
MacHamish
>Alan Hardie wrote:
>
>>Cunningham wrote:
>>> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
>>> >Tom McQuade wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
>>> >
>>> >The Normans who also conquered Wales, Ireland and tried to defeat
>>> >Scotland...
>>>
>>> & pretty much succeeded, placing de Bruce on the throne...
>>
>>Except that Robert de Brus has no living descendants.
>>
>>His understanding of Norman society will have come from his father but
>>there seems little doubt that he sided with the "natives" after the
>>death of his father. Actually the way to understand Robert the Bruce is
>>to understand that his mother was a native born Scot and that he was his
>>mother's son.
>
>OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
>lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
>I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
>into it.
I think from the quotes it was Allan-John Marsh who wrote that the Normans
"placed" Robert Bruce on the throne of Scotland. He'll have to explain that
one to me. Perhaps he means that some Scottish lords of Norman origin
supported him, but, OTOH, there were many Norman lords who energetically
opposed him (the Comyns, for example), and besides, the Scottish lords of
Norman origin had been is Scotland for around 200 years or more when Bruce
took the throne of Scotland and could hardly be considered Normans any
longer.
Also, it is insupportable to say the Bruce was "placed" on the throne. He
literally seized it in 1306 when he had a mere handful of supporters, and
then he made it stick through his own will and determination to defeat the
English, which he did most notably at Bannockburn in 1314.
Bruce's mother was the daughter of the Celtic earl of Carrick. Bruce would
have had as much Gaelic culture in his upbringing as Anglo-Norman influence.
He was both supported and opposed by various Celtic nobles and clans of
Argyll, Galloway, and the Western Isles.
He may not have had any special feelings of Gaelic patriotism, but then,
when his brother Edward invaded Ireland and declared himself the Irish king
in 1315, Robert Bruce sent letters to the Celtic chiefs of Ireland and the
Celtic nobles of Wales suggesting a pan-Celtic alliance against the English.
So, even though these letters may have been self-serving in their intent,
they also show that Robert Bruce was aware of Scotland's, and his own,
Celtic heritage.
As for Scottish patriotism, he may not have started out with any sense of
it, but I think his actions as king show that he developed it after he was
secure on the throne. He did his best to weld Scotland into a unified
country, not an easy task considering the disparate groups that made up the
population. I like to think that the words of the Declaration of Abroath
had as much or more effect on Bruce as they had on Pope John XXII. Robert
was considered a good king for the times in which he lived. He was very
forgiving toward those who opposed him in the early days, except, of course,
for the Comyns, the Balliols, and the members of the Soules plot. Who can
blame his for wanting to be king? He had a legitimate claim by blood
going back to the days of the Celtic kings of Scotland.
MacHamish
Doug Weller
day....@xtra.co.nz said...
>
> Cunningham wrote:
> >
> > Allan-John Marsh wrote:
> >
> > >imagine how anything so refreshingly accurate could be funny.
> >
> > When exactly did scientists identify the gene sequence for linguistic
> > grouping then?
>
> I didn't know they had - what i'm getting from this guy is what so many
> people don't want to hear - that you can't hide between the term Celtic
> to differentiate yourself from the "Anglo-Saxon" English.
Who are hardly Anglo-Saxon, in any case. A few tens of thousands among
several millions wouldn't have made THAT much difference!
Doug
--
Doug Weller Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to: sci-archaeol...@medieval.org
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details
Doug Weller
100...@paris.pegasus.cranfield.ac.uk>, on Wed, 26 May 1999 08:36:09 +0100,
ec94...@cranfield.ac.uk said...
> On Wed, 26 May 1999, Tom McQuade wrote:
>
> > culture which consists of Scotland,Ireland,France and Wales.
> >
>
> north france as such. They were decendants of settled Vikings who tried to
> raid Paris and were persuaded not to by the settlement of lands on them.
> Which curiously enough were between the coast and Paris, thus twarting any
> of their comrades efforts. So I don't think you can readily classify them
> as "Gaelic". Not unless Vikings qualify in that regard.
>
ancestors but were not Viking culturally.
Brett R. Mitchell
believe that the traditions that arise out of any particular culture are
open to all who wish to practice them. When these traditions, in respect to
music, are put into the realm of mass media however, it becomes necessary to
note from whence they originated ( no matter how distant the connection). It
also should be noted in some fashion (and generally is if it is not already
common knowledge) whether or not the particular presentation is of an
original composition by a group with ties to that tradition, or an
interpretation of the original by an otherwise disassociated group.
I am very reluctant to use the term racist in connection with this
issue, since I see it as a matter of one group of people who claim ties to a
tradition crying foul at the indiscriminate use of that tradition without
regard as to its origin, or its primary practitioners.
I' am also more than a little taken aback by the use of "genetics" when
referring to genealogy. We are talking about the links of our individual
family histories here, not DNA tracing. There were in the past, as there
are in this current time frame, instances of adoption of children into
childless families who then went on to inherit the family name and fortune.
There were times when this was an acknowledged practice and times when it
was done with no ones knowledge put the participating adults. What matters
in the end is the continuity that is provided for the cultural values that
we hold to be necessary for the growth of our particular branch of society.
Therefore there are times when we can be too specific in our quest for
definition and because of it lose sight of our own humanity in the process.
Conrad Jay Bladey <cbl...@mail.bcpl.net> wrote in message
news:374FC231...@mail.bcpl.net...
Alan Hardie
Cunningham wrote:
>
> Alan Hardie wrote:
>
> >Cunningham wrote:
> >> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
> >> >Tom McQuade wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> No they are not. A short history lesson, England is conquered by France.
> >> >
> >> >The Normans who also conquered Wales, Ireland and tried to defeat
> >> >Scotland...
> >>
> >> & pretty much succeeded, placing de Bruce on the throne...
> >
> >Except that Robert de Brus has no living descendants.
> >
> >His understanding of Norman society will have come from his father but
> >there seems little doubt that he sided with the "natives" after the
> >death of his father. Actually the way to understand Robert the Bruce is
> >to understand that his mother was a native born Scot and that he was his
> >mother's son.
>
> OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
> lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
> I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
> into it.
>
Sure, that's one of at least two options which explain his motives and
character, but in truth, if naked ambition and power was all that
motivated him he would have taken the easiest option open to him and
sided with Edward I, as Comyn did. Why *choose* what would have seemed
to be the losing side in 1306.
Cunningham
>> OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
>> lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
>> I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
>> into it.
>>
>
>Sure, that's one of at least two options which explain his motives and
>character, but in truth, if naked ambition and power was all that
>motivated him he would have taken the easiest option open to him and
>sided with Edward I, as Comyn did. Why *choose* what would have seemed
>to be the losing side in 1306.
Better to live one day as a hero than a lifetime as a slave?
Allan-John Marsh
>
> Alan Hardie wrote:
>
> >> OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
> >> lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
> >> I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
> >> into it.
> >>
> >
> >Sure, that's one of at least two options which explain his motives and
> >character, but in truth, if naked ambition and power was all that
> >motivated him he would have taken the easiest option open to him and
> >sided with Edward I, as Comyn did. Why *choose* what would have seemed
> >to be the losing side in 1306.
>
> Better to live one day as a hero than a lifetime as a slave?
You insult the millions of people who actually were slaves to make such
a heartless comparisson.
*****
"FFarwel fy annwyl garaid,
Cunningham
>Cunningham wrote:
>>
>> Alan Hardie wrote:
>>
>> >> OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
>> >> lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
>> >> I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
>> >> into it.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Sure, that's one of at least two options which explain his motives and
>> >character, but in truth, if naked ambition and power was all that
>> >motivated him he would have taken the easiest option open to him and
>> >sided with Edward I, as Comyn did. Why *choose* what would have seemed
>> >to be the losing side in 1306.
>>
>> Better to live one day as a hero than a lifetime as a slave?
>
>You insult the millions of people who actually were slaves to make such
>a heartless comparisson.
Aah get over yerself.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> Allan-John Marsh wrote:
>
> >Cunningham wrote:
> >>
> >> Alan Hardie wrote:
> >>
> >> >> OTOH, the way to understand the Bruce is that he was an ambitious
> >> >> lord, who eventually picked the team likely to give him most power, &
> >> >> I doubt any feeling of Gaelic or Scottish patriotism entered overly
> >> >> into it.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Sure, that's one of at least two options which explain his motives and
> >> >character, but in truth, if naked ambition and power was all that
> >> >motivated him he would have taken the easiest option open to him and
> >> >sided with Edward I, as Comyn did. Why *choose* what would have seemed
> >> >to be the losing side in 1306.
> >>
> >> Better to live one day as a hero than a lifetime as a slave?
> >
> >You insult the millions of people who actually were slaves to make such
> >a heartless comparisson.
>
> Aah get over yerself.
Go boil your head
Madra Dubh
-Conway
--
"Pos bean on sliabh agus posfaidh tu an sliabh"
To confer with the dear man, please remove "md@" and replace with "ccaine@")
Ashley Yakeley
Rebecca_H...@first-class.open.ac.uk (Rebecca Hazlehurst) wrote:
Well there you go, 'Culture and Belief'. Some people BELIEVE that morris
dancing comes from the Moors of Spain/North Africa and was adopted by the
English later on.
--
Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA
Tesco News
Brief Origin Note
chief Britan - Firbolgs (Men of rags) - Origin Spain - Celtic - what we call
to Today Britain - encompassing the 3 Celtic provinces Scotland, Wale's and
England. Ireland being the so to speak Cambridge of Europe the centre of
learning and knowledge. (Thousands of years before AD)
Provincial Names
Fomorians
Nemedians
Partholanians
Vikings
Norse
etc etc all Celtic races.
The Celtic - a race of people in Europe
The past may be forgotten, but it never dies. The elements which in most
remote times have entered into a nations's composition endure through all
it's history, and help to mould that history, and stamp the character and
genius of the people.
The examination, therefore, of these elements, and the recognition, as far
as possible, of the part they have actually contributed to the warp and weft
of a nations life, must be a matter of no small interest and importance to
those who realise that the present is the child of the past and the future
of the present; who will not regard themselves, their kinsfolk and their
fellow-citizens as mere transitory phantom's, hurrying in to darkness
(racism) but who know that in the vast historic stream of national life is
passing from its distant and mysterious origin towards a future which is
largely conditioned by all the past wanderings of that human stream, but
which is also, in no small degree, what they, by their courage, their
patriotism, their knowledge and their understanding, choose to make.
The part played by the Celtic race as a formative influence in the history,
the literature and the part of the people inhabiting the British Isles - a
people which from that centre has spread it's dominion's over so vast an
area of the earth's surface has been unduly obscured in popular thought.
Kieran
PS racism is nothing more and nothing less, than having no understanding of
peoples culture. Ignorance, small minded ness.
Doug Weller
ciar...@tesco.net said...
>
> If I can be of assistance in this disaluded discussion.
It was a troll.
> Brief Origin Note
>
> chief Britan - Firbolgs (Men of rags) - Origin Spain - Celtic - what we call
> to Today Britain - encompassing the 3 Celtic provinces Scotland, Wale's and
> England. Ireland being the so to speak Cambridge of Europe the centre of
> learning and knowledge. (Thousands of years before AD)
This is no better. Although Newgrange is an extremely impressive structure,
your comments on Ireland have no factual basis.
And the myth of ethnic Celts in the British Isles is simply that, a myth.
He's not the only one, but Simon James in The Atlantic Celts makes this clear:
James points out that in the 19th c in particular Caesar's words were taken as
gospel, especially when added to the evidence of hill forts, martial finds
like the Battersea shield, and 'Celtic art', and well into the 20th century
archaeologists believed in massive Celtic immigration.
"But these archaeological interpretations are now discredited, with serious
implications for the rest of the Celtic construct. In British archaeology,
particularly, major new discoveries after the 2nd World War threw the whole
invasion model of the insular Iron Age into serious doubt. More generally, the
lawt few decades have seen a collapse in long-established theories and
assumptions about how human groups develop, function and change. The idea
that change in early landscapes is best explained by waves of invaders has
been completely discredited." (p. 36).
He then comments that we no longer have just a few fine art objects, hillforts
and graves of a few rich people, but have found the Iron Age rural population
(in Britain, not Ireland). What we do not have is "plenty of identical, or
near-identical art and artefacts, but we should also see extensive signs of
wholsale transfers of farming regimes and of beliefs and social practices,
such as imported burial rites (like the 'flat cemeteries' common in the
'homelands') and, we might surely expect, rectangular continental house
types." Such as have been found in other areas which texts tell us were
colonized by Celts, eg the Po Valley of Northern Italy.
He says that there are "many powerful resonances in the artistic styles of the
Middle and Later Iron Age, and in the types of artefacts on which they are
found....Yet they are far from being the same: actual imports are rare, and
the examples we have are clearly distinctive insular versions -
reinterpretations of continental fashions...There is also clear evidence for
continental influence in burial rites, notably in the square ditched burial
mounds of East Yorkshire (a handful of which contain chariots), but such are
highly localized. Across most of the archipelago, people did not bury the dead
at all....Interestingly, while the Yorkshire burials are clearly connected
with similar fenerary practices in parts of Gaul, the details of burial are
very different (the body is curled up in the 'foetal position' in Yorkshire,
but stretched out in Gaul), and the Yorkshire burial goods are local in style,
not imports. It seems to have been the *idea* of such burials that was
imported (perhaps as part of a religious belief system), not the population
practising it."
Contact took place, individuals, perhaps small communities, moved back and
forth across the Channel. "But there are no traces of whole-sale migrations.
On the contrary, the major message of the archaeology of the Iron Age is not
one of continental connection, but of local continuity from the preceding
Bronze Age. The major characteristics of British Iron Age archaeology - for
example, circular or ovid houses, domestic pottery traditions, farming
regimes, anda the 'disappearing dead' - are patterns which were laid down
during the local Late Bronze Age, long before the supposed Iron Age
invasions." James also notes that "Caesar recorded thaqt British groups
considered themselves to be indigenous'.
WILLIAM HARRINGTON
Cunningham <Ger@r.d> wrote in message
news:374fe584....@news.wwa.com...
> Royce Lerwick wrote:
Well, queted anyway
> http://www.lundberg.com/products/qceliac.html
> Celiac Disease (CD), is also known as Celiac Sprue and
> Gluten-Sensitive Enteropathy. CD is a chronic digestive disorder
> caused by a toxic reaction to the ingestion of "gluten". Gluten is
> group of proteins that is found in all forms of wheat, including
> durum, semolina, spelt), rye, oats, barley, and related grain hybrids
> such as triticale and kamut. CD has also been called "The Irish
> Disease" because it is genetic and most commonly found in those of
> Celtic[*] origin. This disease affects about 1:50 persons in Ireland
> and recent studies show that it affects 1:250 in the United States."
>
So, am I to believe that a reporter or medical doctor (Whichever one decided
to use the word "Celtic") is an authority on what defines celticness?
Sorry, I don't buy it. Is this disease prominent in Brittany, Galicia, and
Cornwall? It is a disease that is prominent in Ireland and people of Irish
descent. It is genetic, not cultural. Lets not get the two confused just
because the reporter, or doctor, did..
Will Harrington