GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-09 > 1159121373
From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Oppenheimer article on Celtic prehistory - on preRomanScandivians to England
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 12:09:33 -0600
And you forgot to mention that the "Danelaw" was in place already in the
time of Beowulf.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dora Smith" <>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Oppenheimer article on Celtic prehistory - on pre
RomanScandivians to England
> The article I just cited says this.
> "Apart from the Belgian connection in the south, my analysis of the
> evidence also shows that there were major Scandinavian incursions into
> northern and eastern Britain, from Shetland to Anglia, during the
> period and before the Romans. These are consistent with the intense
> interchanges across the North sea during the Neolithic and bronze age.
> Anglian dialects, such as found in the old English saga Beowulf, owe much
> their vocabulary to Scandinavian languages. This is consistent with the
> that Beowulf was set in Denmark and Sweden and that the cultural
> affiliations of the early Anglian kingdoms, such as found in the Sutton
> boat burial, derive from Scandinavia. "
> On that, I guess I will get his book.
> One thing - Beowulf dates to something like the 10th century AD.
> Old English came from Saxon. Not pre-Roman cultural exchange.
> Oppenheimer clearly goes to far extremes trying to project current reality
> into history. Here he is arguing that the Saxon settlement of England
> little impact on Britain's history. Everyone we need to be concerned
> about in England was there when God created Adam, or atleast, he seems to
> merely fail to put it that way. In his efforts, he comes across as as
> confused as those who think Brits are "The Celts".
> It sounds like he intersperses valuable actual information here and there.
> I see that Oppenheimer is at Oxford. No surprise there. The upper crust
> the British intelligensia have a vituperative style of argument that
> seriously tends to bypass concern with reality. Its key point appears
> be to say outrageous but intesting sounding things, on interesting topics,
> in the strongest terms possible, and shoot down other people.
> Teh theory of transpermia, that life evolved in outerspace and was brought
> to earth by asteroids, is an example of this style. Its proponents,
> Oxford, Cambridge, and Cardiff University, are the life of British upper
> class parties and conferences with that idea. There is little concern
> with why life should not have evolved on Earth, nor of why on any
> planet in the universe it would be more likley to have been transported
> through the cold depths of space than to be indigenous. Since life is so
> likely to develop in the right circumstances that it could even develop in
> outer space, can it only have developed once, and is outer space a
> friendlier environment for it than the home planet!
> Maybe on second thought I'd better try to find out how and if his data
> supports a sizable pre-Roman scandinavian incursion into Britain before I
> invest money and scarce bookshelf space in his book.
> People are right on with the possibility that the Romans brought some of
> that DNA, and I believe that actually the Norse and Danes were major
> contributors. Not to mention that the Saxons came from southern
> Dora Smith
> Austin, TX
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dora Smith" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:17 PM
> Subject: [DNA] Oppenheimer article on Celtic prehistory and more
> questionsabout his new book
>> Someone posted a link to this article by Oppenheimer to a British history
>> list. People here may be interested in it.
>> I don't agree with everything he says. That there was life in Europe
>> before the Celts and Celtic history has been way oversimplified does not
>> mean there were no actual Celts, nor that an Indo-European migration did
>> bring their languages to Europe, and I find the evidence overwhelming
>> probably not genetically overwhelming set of Indo-European migrations
>> are probably partially concealed behind their tendency to carry Neolithic
>> Middle Eastern haplogroups, did bring Indo-European languages to Europe.
>> However, Oppenheimer makes critically important points that there was
>> in Europe before a small group of Scythian and Cimmerian aristocrats, who
>> himself may think never existed, took control of the tribes of central
>> Europe between 800 and 600 BCE, and also that the people we now call "The
>> Celts" were not "The Celts", but a mixture of preexisting peoples and
>> already advanced cultures, and later migrations.
>> I am concerned that his new book that someone mentioned on this list
>> tell me little that I already know. I know for instance about teh LaTene
>> culture of Central Europe. Does the new book do an actual historical
>> haplogroup analysis of the contributions of the different migrations into
>> Britain to its history and its current makeup? If he doesn't want to
>> there were Indo-Europeans, maybe he neglects or denies much of the rest
>> history as well.
>> Is his entire book about what did not happen, or does it present actual
>> information about who the people of Britain are?
>> Dora Smith
>> Austin, TX
>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/395 - Release Date: 7/21/2006
>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
>> with the word 'unsubscribe' without
>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/395 - Release Date: 7/21/2006
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
|Re: [DNA] Oppenheimer article on Celtic prehistory - on preRomanScandivians to England by "Ken Nordtvedt" <>|