I once heard that the pale and blond people of Ireland are Germanic invaders who came following the fall of the Rome in the west, while the darker, more Mediterranean-looking people like Colin Farrell are the Celts who had been there since the very beginning.
Is this actually true, or just some bullshit by someone who didn't know anything?
Other urls found in this thread:
theguardian.com
twitter.com
Doesn't sound very scientific, there are plenty of Scandis with Colin Farrells complexion
It's bullshit, British have been genetically the same since 2000 bc when bronze age people invaded the island and mixed with the local Neolithic farmers
It's bullshit, it doesn't even make any sense. The Irish were prolific historians and none of their sources mention anything like this.
I don't understand why this weird mythology has been built up around swarthy Irish people. It's just standard genetic variation.
>black as bog
According to livy rome sent expedition's to Ireland to deal with the druids.
Ive always wondered if it was actually a roman province at one point in time
I cant find anything on this on google, I'm rereading Livy now , ill make a thread or something when I come across it again
Not sure, I can do some digging in "The Germania" by Tacitus.
I think you've managed to mix up both Ireland with Anglesey and Livy with Tacitus
What sense would that make, Tacitus lived centuries before OP's bullshit hypothetical event occurred
English do have about 1/3 Germanic admixture.
shit nigga your right , my bad
If Tacitus talks about all the Brits as being dark haired and whatnot, won't that help?
Conversely if he talks about a bunch of blondes and redheads it'll disprove the hypothesis.
Tacitus doesn't really talk about Ireland in any great detail though
It's a waste of time man, genetically Irish people are basically the same across the Ireland apart from the north and central east coast.
Plus people from the west of Ireland, where foreign contact occurred least, are more likely to have red hair.
Some Irish people having slightly darker skin doesn't need any weird esoteric explanation, it's just standard variation that happens in any population of a comparable size.
dammit, here I thought I was being helpful
they're getting darker, too
Yeah true, my father has dark skin and hair while my hair is auburn and I have freckles.
That family is Canadian not Irish.
There's an infographic floating around here of a Roman historian's description of the different Celtic tribes in Britain. Some were described as having dark hair, while others were said to have fair or red hair. I'll see if I can find it.
Canadians are mostly Irish and Scottish anyway
canadian is not an ethnicity
whats wrong with the shortest girls face
She's the only daughter of the guy, wife is devorced with children from previous marriage. she's cute though
>A 2013 study revealed that many Irish men may be able to trace their roots back to Turkey. Focusing on the role of the Y chromosome, which is passed from father to son, the research indicates Turkish farmers arrived in Ireland about 6,000 years ago, bringing agriculture with them. And they may have been more attractive than the hunter-gatherers whom they replaced.
Sauce:just search Irish Anatolia celts
There is also a weird story told in Scotland that the kingdom of Scotland was founded by an ancient Egyptian exiled princess called Scotia who married and Irish prince and traveled to Scotland. It is a very old story and I'd like to believe it was a teleological explanation for the what was the typically Scottish look before full on mass Viking admixture I.e short stocky and swarthy. Turns out Scotland was one of the first we wuzzers.
Correct they're British
But we know the celts migrated to Egypt trough Anatolia?
>2013 daily mail study
Nah it's outdated. There was indeed a migration from Anatolia to Ireland but it was via Spain and those people were massively replaced by Indo-Europeans and didn't contribute much to modern Irish.
There is very little viking admixture in either Ireland or Scotland.
I can't speak for Ireland but that is not true for Scotland. It's reflected in family names, place names and genetics. It may not be an absolutely huge mix but it is by no means negligible.
It is by no means an iron clad source but it is I teresting to read how Tacitus describes caledonians and Germanic very differently.
>British have been genetically the same since 2000 bc when bronze age people invaded the island and mixed with the local Neolithic farmers
wew lad
He's 100% right though except that the invaders did about a 90-95% population replacement of the Stonehenge building Iberian farmers.
theguardian.com
...
>it's another "invading forces of a few thousand are able to significantly impact the genetic makeup of a much larger population" thread
Can we give this shit a fucking rest
Spanish in Latin America
Yeah because more than 90% of the population was wiped out by disease.
There wasn't a much larger population, they had mostly died of disease
Diseases and differences in immunity to them have always existed.
Of course, Irish and Vikings had largely the same genes and diseases. While OP is wrong there is nothing too unreasonable with the idea that Vikings could have changed Irish genetics. It didn't happen but it could have if the conditions were different.
thank God, there is still one person on the history board that is not retarded and unbiased,,
If I may add,
the skin complexion differs based on your geographical location,the more you are near the equator, the more Photons, you will get, thus the more your body plus your ancestor's genetics, will determine how much melatonin your largest organ, will generate their defenses,
in this case, All people from the north are whites, while as you go down, you will see a variation.
>the skin complexion differs based on your geographical location
Not necessarily. If your diet is marine and non-agricultural you don't need light skin. It's really farming which makes it impossible to have dark skin at high latitudes.
>no viking admixture in ireland
>there are people to this day with the surnames of norse gallowglass clans
The vast majority of Gallowglasses didn't have any Norse ancestry, especially in later centuries.
OH YO HOL' UP NAO.
IZ YOU SAYIN WE WUZ STARVIN IN SHIEET?
>Turkish
This pisses me off
It should say Anatolian
Or are the Irish like their Finnish cousins and both descendants of the mighty khans?
I'd say most prominent Galloglass families did have some kind of Norse connection if not outright bloodline, no matter how distant. They became distinctly Irish, Norse-Gaelic and Gaelic over time, and you're correct that the majority where probably Gaels but that doesn't discredit user's statement. Families like MacDonald & MacCabe make claim to Norse family ties, even with those adopting the name there's more likely some intermingling than not.
Granted, at least genetically speaking today it wouldn't be prevalent at all in their appearance.
Dark Irishmen are just Black irish like Mr. Brosnan. When the Spanish fleet the whole island
I know that most of the denizens of Iceland are essentially genetically Irish or Scottish so I suppose the opposite is true?
Wasn't Anatolia indo European at the time?
Mix of Indo Europeans in the West and Semitic people in the East
Although maybe the Semitic peoples hadn't moved there yet, I'm not super sure
what is this bollocks?
Tacitus said that the brits are mongrel race of Iberians, Gauls, and Germans
>Anatolia
>Turkish
>anytime before the Turkish invasion
Triggered.
be still dear frogposter, you are still loved.
WHERE IS RED HAIR FROM.
IT IS A MYSTERY.
There were 8 survivors of the Spanish armada in Ireland. Not 8000, not 800. 8. They were sent back to Spain by a local King after a few years.
Yeah, but they must have been getting mad pussy.
Nope. Indo-Europeans originate in the European steppe around 3500 BC.
all Europeans are shitskins, dealwit it yuromoors
Korea master race
Daily mail readers aren't going to know what an "Anatolia" is.
haplogroup r1-b, my dude
It is unreasonable to believe that Vikings changed their genes much more than Arabs changed the genes of the places they conquered.
Population replacements was the rule for all of pre-history.
New people come in, old people die off. That's how it went for fucking ever. A million fucking years.
The places Arabs conquered had huge populations and a level of development comparable to them. If Ireland was in the stone age when Vikings came everything would have been different about their impact there but they weren't, they were in every way comparable to Vikings and often beat them in battle.
what do you mean by this? You been alive for the past 400 years to witness the change or something?