On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:53:48 +0200 "Milos Bogdanovic" <
milos@...>
writes:
> Picts are natives, non-Indoeuropeans. Genetic reveals that there are
> only
> two native populations on their area (antigens HLA-B12 and HLA-B7).
> These are Atlantic Mediterraneans (Megalitic culture of western
> Europe),
> and Finno-Ugric population. The first are very tall, the second are
> very
> small,
> etc. Picts are either of the first or of the second origin. ...
Hi Milos, Indo-European is a cultral-linguistic grouping though, not a
racial one, and it seems that no non-Indo-European language survived for
our analysis in Britain.
As for the Picts themselves, Nennius, Bede, Gildas and archaeology all
indicate the Orkneys as the place that the Picts first settled, later
moving further south, which explains why the Romans don't mention them
earlier than 298 AD. All the medieval chroniclers mention the Picts as
INTRUSIVE, not indigenous. We can trace them to the Broch Dwellers in
the Orkneys beginning in the first century B.C.,
and this time fits well, as by the late 3rd century when they are
mentioned by Romans they had spread this far south from the north. They
certainly must have absorbed mcuh of the indigenous population, though.
-Michael
> Milos Bogdanovic
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!