Picts and Scots, whats the difference?

[Brother Derfel]

Having always believed them to be one and the same, i did some searching round the net for some info on the picts and found this from http://www-personal.umich.edu/~merrie/Arthur/Picts.html :

The Picts
Information on the Picts, the "barbarians" who so often ravaged the Britons from the north, is somewhat scarce. The only text left to us by the Picts is their king-list, which gives the names and the lengths of the reigns of 60 or more Pictish kings. The list ends with Causantin mac Cinaeda, who died in 876. Thereafter, this record of the Picts was no longer used. The only other written source from around the Arthurian era is Adomnan's Life of Columba. Archaeological evidence for their lifestyles is also scarce.
The domain of the Picts was what we consider today to be Scotland. The terms "Picts" and "Pictland" were used in speaking of the inhabitants and the area up until 900, when the country began to be called "Alba."

The Picts had a warrior society, "and warlords needed strongholds. When Columba visited the Pictish king, Bridei, son of Maelchon, in 565, he went to one of the royal fortresses; it was 'near the river Ness' and the most widely accepted identification is Castle Urguhart on Loch Ness... where the medieval castle overlies earlier occupation..." (Nicoll 23) Several Pictish forts have been excavated, revealing that the warlords lived in style, wearing great silver chains and beautiful jewelry. A Pict's life was not altogether different than that of his southern Celtic neighbors; they all spoke a very similar language, as the Pictish language is convincingly argued to have been P-Celtic or Brittonic.

Some archaeological information comes from uncovered Pictish hoards (prior to safe-deposit boxes and banks, a method used to protect valuales was to bury them; inevitably, some remained unclaimed). Brooches and dress-pins have survived from these hoards. The absence of grave-goods, indicating that the Picts did not think much of the practice of burying valuables with the dead, "presumably has implications for their pagan concept of death" (Nicoll 25).

Small painted stones used as charms, distinctively Pictish, have also been found.




This article seems to back up my belief that they were the same. However then I thought about it harder and I seem to remember something about the scots originaly coming from Ireland and pushing the picts out, or something like that.
Can anyone help me on this?

[Brother Derfel]

Doh

As usual a little more searching has answered my own question.

Go here for an excellent history of the two tribes:
http://www.fifeweb.net/durieweb/picts.htm

It turns out I was correct in that the scots were from ireland and originaly known as the scotti. It seems that they eventualy drove the Picts out.

Anyway the info is there for anybody else who was stuck on this point.

[1master1wakibiki]

It was quite obvious the difference - ones had blue faces while the others had not...

[Theodoret]

At one point 'Scotland' was part owned by the Scots, part owned by the Angles of Northumbria (who had a fortress at Edinburgh which means 'Edwin's Fortress' ), part owned by the Picts and part owned by the Strathclyde Welsh (the Glaswegians are Welsh in origin, not Scottish, as many East coast Scots are quick to point out). The Scots gained supremacy by engaging in a healthy bit of divide and conquer politics. For a time it looked like the Angles were set to be rulers of Caledonia, they had conquered everything except a small portion of the Highlands, but the Anglian Kingdom of Northumbria went into self-destruct mode as the nobility engaged in all sorts of Byzantine intrigue. The Strathclyde Welsh were conquered by the Scots and the rest is history. BTW Macbeth was of Pictish origin, that is probably why he is so vilified in Shakespeare's play which was written for James I whose ancestor had usurped Macbeth.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Good research Brother Derfel. I too was curious about this origin of Picts and Scots, thanks for the article. Imagine the Irish and Scots being so closely related http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif who'd a thunk it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif And while they were busy fighting amongst themselves the English snuck right up on them, using their tribal feuds to eventually split and conquer them. Sounds like one of my family reunions, don't forget your complimentary boxing gloves at the door. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[solypsist]

please remember the MH is for game discussions. Moved to the Monastery.

[Knight_Yellow]

Dammit solly leave things where they r for christ sake.

any way ive been wondering this too i thought the scotti where actualy the scotts and the picts where the original guys.

so in basic terms i get to play the scottish and the picts so in essance there r 2 scottish factions. woohoo.

god bless trainspotting its inspired an american university to pay scottish ppl to go to america and get this Give the students verbal abuse lol. so that hopefully all the students will pick up scottish accents hahaha

imajin Bush wae a scottish accent

"awright fannybaws this birds been glessed and nae cunt's leavin till we find oot who dunnit"

*grabs belly and rolls about uncontrably*

now that would be funny

[Alrowan]

i wrote up a bit on this in the Viking invasion threa in the EH, breifly explains all this, go figure

[Cardinal]

I read years back, and don't ask me where, that like mentioned, that the Picts inhabited NE Scotland when the Scots came over from Ireland and settled on the west coast. Although the Picts outnumbered the Scots, they (or so I am told) inherited through the female line, so one strategic marriage between a Pict princess and a Scottish prince, an the Picts where wiped off the map as a nation.

[Longshanks]

Many of the Pictish tribes, unlike the Scots...may not have been Celtic. There is some evidence that they have been remnants of the original peoples who populated Europe before the Indo-Europeans migrated westward.(Celts, Mediterraneans, Germanic peoples ect.)

[DojoRat]

Longshanks, I heard that too. The picts might of been remants that were pushed into the hills like gaelic tribes later were pushed by the germanics. The Celts came to the Isles as a warrior aristocracy around 4-500 bce. They took over but didn't wipe out the original inhabitants. Cu Chulainn the Irish mythological hero was small and dark, not your stereotypical Celt.

I read somewhere that they did a DNA test on some 6,000 year old bones found in a cave in the south of england. His direct descendent was found in a nearby modern village. Things change. Things remain the same.

[Toda Nebuchadnezzar]

Now thats cool. I would laugh if the family from 6,000 years before had never moved. That would be amazing, but also quite lame.

Imagine never moving from your own village. Naturally back then it was the thing to do - stay in your own village - but now, with modern practices this is becoming less and less common.

Thanx for the info guys, being of Scottish origin, I wonder if i'm pictish or Irish. Or neither, 6'3" blonde hair and blue eyes. Flippin' heck im a VIKING

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (Toda Nebuchadnezzar @ Feb. 08 2003,14:02)]Thanx for the info guys, being of Scottish origin, I wonder if i'm pictish or Irish. Or neither, 6'3" blonde hair and blue eyes. Flippin' heck im a VIKING
Well technically you wouldn't be Irish. The Scotti weren't the only ethnic group in ancient Ireland...there were also the Hiberni and the Brigantes.(The Brigantes also lived in England,in the Roman province)

The Romans called Ireland either Hibernia or Scotia depending on the source, as they were the two largest groups in Ireland.

The modern day Scots would for the most part a mixture Pictish and Scotti, perhaps in some cases with a bit of Anglo-Saxon, or Viking thrown in.

The modern day Irish for the most part would be a mixture of Hiberni and Brigante, perhaps inw some cases Anglo-Saxon, Norman or Viking thrown in.

[Gallowglass]

Most Scots today are a mixture of different peoples. We are principally a mix of Celts (The Scots, Picts and Britons/Welsh) and Scandinavians (Angles, Norwegians, Danes). Also we can't forget the Normans, Bretons and Flemings. Many of them settled here.

We are basically a mongrel nation.

[Toda Nebuchadnezzar]

mongrel nation, and still the best http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Longshanks]

All of the ethnic groups in Western and Central Europe are mongrels, with the possible exception of the Basque.

One more reason why the Nazi's theories on racial purity and racial superiority were a bunch of nonsense.

[Knight_Yellow]

i think im french sumwhere down the line how bloody sad is that http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif


joke http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif dont take it seriously froggies

[Teutonic Knight]

hahaha I love Scots http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Gallowglass]

Longshanks

Funny that you mentioned the Basques. Do you know that the Basques, Scots, Irish and Corsicans all have very high incidences of 'O' Level blood groups among their populations. There was a theory I read a while ago that had the idea that all these peoples must have a had a common heritage in the far distant past. Funny if it is true.

P.S. Toda Nebuchadnezzar, you are right that we are best. At drinking anyway. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[JANOSIK007]

Quote[/b] (Theodoret @ Jan. 09 2003,18:28)]At one point 'Scotland' was part owned by the Scots, part owned by the Angles of Northumbria (who had a fortress at Edinburgh which means 'Edwin's Fortress' ), part owned by the Picts and part owned by the Strathclyde Welsh (the Glaswegians are Welsh in origin, not Scottish, as many East coast Scots are quick to point out). The Scots gained supremacy by engaging in a healthy bit of divide and conquer politics. For a time it looked like the Angles were set to be rulers of Caledonia, they had conquered everything except a small portion of the Highlands, but the Anglian Kingdom of Northumbria went into self-destruct mode as the nobility engaged in all sorts of Byzantine intrigue. The Strathclyde Welsh were conquered by the Scots and the rest is history. BTW Macbeth was of Pictish origin, that is probably why he is so vilified in Shakespeare's play which was written for James I whose ancestor had usurped Macbeth.
About Macbeth: James' ancestor, Banquo, was in reality Macbeth's ally and helped him kill Duncan.
Shakespeare just made Banquo into a hero to appeal to James I. He also included lots about witchcraft for the same reason. James I was a self-proclaimed witchcraft expert. He's also wrote a book about it.

[Stefan the Berserker]

Easy diffrence:

Picts were the Celts who lived in Scotland until the Dark Age begun. They later invaded nowdays England and sized controll over the celtic/roman poulation in the south of Britain.

When the main core of the Population went south, the Scoti, an Irish Tribe, invaded Scotland and developed to the Scots.

The Rests of the Picts have mixed up with the southern Celts. Later puished into Wales and Cornwall.

[Longshanks]

Actually that is debateable. There is considerable evidence that most of the Pictish tribes were not Celts, but pre-dated Celtic migrations to Britain. Most were probably non-Indo-European peoples like the Iberians.

[Orda Khan]

I was going to say something about basques then I realised you meant the people http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

.....Orda

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

This is a strange fact but the Basque language is one of the most individual languages in the world and people have had trouble with comparing it with any other languages. But it said that Basque has a very close relation to the Finnish language. Strange but apparently true. Please respond if you think this is complete S**t.

[Sigurd]

Strangely, that none of my fellow Scandinavians has commented on this.
I seem to remember from history lessons at secondary school that the Picts was nearly eradicated by Viking raiders and that the Scots moved in for the final blow,leaving the Picts extinguished.
I might remember it wrong, but this is what my brain tells me is the answer to the question of Picts vs. Scots.

[edit]:
Again from secondary: Finnish is related with Hungarian and is called: the Finskugrisk language.
Supposedly, it is only those two countries that have this language base.
But do not take my word for it (it is what my teacher told me, and we know the history books have been rewritten since 1989).
Estonia might also have language similarities to Finland and Hungary.

[Parmenion]

My Irish friend is from Donegal on the NW coast and comes from a long-line of socially isolated Irish crofters and fishermen. The thing is he is quite dark-skinned, almost meditteranean, with dark hair and brown eyes. All of his family are the same too. I asked him about this seeing as all my other Irish mates are pasty-faced redheads with freckles, and he told me that it's because a lot of Donegal people have Spanish ancestry. Apparently some of the Spanish galleons from the destroyed Armada made it as far north as Donegal and were shipwrecked there. They stayed there and integrated with the local people until they spoke the language and basically became Irish. Thus, 400 years later, my mate is an Irishman who looks like a Spaniard.


I always wondered why he was called Enrique O'Reilly ....?(kiddin&#39http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Galestrum]

I have a book called The Age of the Picts by WA Cummins. The books is short and basically an overview of pictish history and traces the pictish history through names, of people, places etc.

Firstly, all sources that I have seen point to a non-celtic origination of the picts.

Secondly, the picts didnt disappear or die out the kingdoms of dalriada (scots from ireland) and the picts merged, and one king ruled noth peoples and countries. The kingdom of the Picts didnt die out it merely changed its name, its language but the people and the country remained. The mystery is a result of poor medieval historians trying to solve answers to questions hundreds of years after the fact.

[Parmenion]

Quote[/b] (Galestrum @ April 12 2003,10:25)]Firstly, all sources that I have seen point to a non-celtic origination of the picts.
I remember a tabletop RPG called Pendragon, which was a game about King Arthur's Knights. You could actually be a Pictish Knight in that game, and it said that the Picts actually originated from Russia and came across the sea at the same time as the Celtic migrations.
I can't vouch for this theory though as it was only an RPG.

[Galestrum]

hehe i remember that rpg, it was kinda nifty but never got too into it, dont recall the russia theory from it

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (Galestrum @ April 12 2003,10:25)]I have a book called The Age of the Picts by WA Cummins. The books is short and basically an overview of pictish history and traces the pictish history through names, of people, places etc.

Firstly, all sources that I have seen point to a non-celtic origination of the picts.

Secondly, the picts didnt disappear or die out the kingdoms of dalriada (scots from ireland) and the picts merged, and one king ruled noth peoples and countries. The kingdom of the Picts didnt die out it merely changed its name, its language but the people and the country remained. The mystery is a result of poor medieval historians trying to solve answers to questions hundreds of years after the fact.
I'm going to have to check that book out. I happen to agree with that theory as well. I think it is more likely that the Pictish tribes were the original inhabitants of Britain, pushed to the Northern extremes during the Celtic invasion/migration. The more Southern Pictish tribes may have been ethnic Celts though, although culturally they had become Pictish.

[ShadesWolf]

The Picts were the original people of Northern Scotland.

TheScotti were Irish from Ulster who came and settled in southern Scotland, Hence the name SCOTLAND.

During Viking times, the two kingdoms became one, and the picts started to die out either threw conquest, inter marriage etc....

Scotti - http://www.shadesmtw.com/viking/scottihistory.htm

Picts - http://www.shadesmtw.com/viking/picthistory.htm

The links are quite good at the bottom of both pags for more information.

[Axelthorpe]

Quote[/b] (Sigurd Fafnesbane @ April 07 2003,13:13)]Strangely, that none of my fellow Scandinavians has commented on this.
I seem to remember from history lessons at secondary school that the Picts was nearly eradicated by Viking raiders and that the Scots moved in for the final blow,leaving the Picts extinguished.
I might remember it wrong, but this is what my brain tells me is the answer to the question of Picts vs. Scots.

[edit]:
Again from secondary: Finnish is related with Hungarian and is called: the Finskugrisk language.
Supposedly, it is only those two countries that have this language base.
But do not take my word for it (it is what my teacher told me, and we know the history books have been rewritten since 1989).
Estonia might also have language similarities to Finland and Hungary.
Yep

Finnish and Hungarian belongs to the same language group, Finno-Ugric languages.
Finsk-Ugriska languages in Swedish.
But Finnish people and Hungarians don't understand each other. Estonian belongs to the same group, so does the saami language, spoken by the original population in northern Scandinavia and northern Russia (far, far related to the Eskimos).

Read about Minority languages of Russia:
http://members.tripod.com/~anttikoski/eng_finnougr.html

I had written a long text about the relation between all the indo-european languages (ie. Germanic, slavic, Indian). And what's different with the Finnish language group. But I got logged out and it all disapeared.

BTW, Vikings, the Scandinavian conquers, and most people in Scandinavia today, are related to the Germanic tribes that settled here, very early. And the Normans were former Vikings settled in northern france. That's the origin of the name Normandy; Normans=people from the North. The normans at Hastings was 2nd or 3rd generation Vikings from Norway, (I think).

[Knight_Yellow]

from what auld tam tells me the scots and picts intertwined somutch they became one nation and whent on to ruke the world.

of course old tam is a nutter http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ShadesWolf]

It would be interesting to trace the DNA of each country to see what % of each population belong to which group.

In English history, we have

Celts
Roman
Saxons
Viking
Norman

all within the space of 1000 years, then for the next 1000 years almost untouched.

[DojoRat]

About the Spanish Armada and dark haired Irishmen. I recall reading that most if not all of those washed ashore were turned in for the bounty. Not all of the Irish are fair. The Celts took control of the Isles but didnt eradicate the original inhabitants but pushed them aside. Many of the folk legends of the 'little people' originate from the Celts interactions with the remains of the old culture. One of the most important figures in Irish legends, the warrior hero Cucuhlain, is always described as small, fiery, and dark.

And about DNA, a recent history called The Isles (I think, sorry) begins with a story about some remains found in a cave in the south of England. They were 4,000 years old but when they tested for any traces of this DNA in the surrounding area they found a direct descendant

It was never brought up in the book but what I want to know is whether the local's ancesters had stayed put the whole time or had left and come back a few times.

It's Sad. I basically wrote the same post 3 months ago in this thread. Can you say loser.