perhaps this might help on the reasoning of the dating you mention- i don't know if this is where Ranika was coming from, i can only guess:
"General archaeological and linguistic opinion assigns the intrusions which carried the Celtic languages into Britain and Ireland to sometime during the first millennium BC, although some scholars still hold to an earlier date. Certainly the similarity between the earliest evidence of Brittonic and Ogham Irish are too close to permit them a long separation in time, and they share the same Late Bronze Age and Iron Age vocabularies of their continental relations" (106). J.P. Mallory. In Search of the Indo-Europeans.
I definitely agree that the Beaker invasion is still not widely accepted whatsoever (heck, most people have never heard of it)- ironically I have always been impressed that the Iberian/Britain connection (Megalithic?) was maintained in this mod- as you describe, scholars seem to avoid that area completely nowadays... pre-WW2 there seemed to be much more interest in that sort of thing.
it is commonly held that Picts (indigenous) are definitely of a different influence than standard Brythonic Celts. Wikipedia says Picts probably spoke Brythonic (for which it states no evidence whatsoever)- wow, that's ignorant. the Picts might have been assimilated into Brythonic culture/speakers, but then they're not Pictish anymore are they?
Genetic markers prove nothing. We haven't mapped and defined all our genomes, so it's basically hype (much like AI- how can we create intelligence like our own when we don't even understand a great deal of how our brains work (neither psychologically or physiologically)?? not gonna happen).
race theory is just that- theory. i enjoy the theories of pre-peoples across Europe though since widely accepted academia is typically boring and unwilling to risk being called unscholarly so they discuss trivial things like when the p became a f or some such uninteresting thing.
Bookmarks