Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-05 > 1020537552

From: "JMB" <>
Subject: Re: Oppida in Irish Culture; was: Ancient Irish 'Pedigrees' (was Re: History & Genealogy or the Mathematical Study of Genealogy?)
Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 19:39:12 +0100
References: <>, <3cd3b63f$>, <>

"Chris and Tom Tinney, Sr." <> wrote in message
> Genealogy has been used in many
> cultures, Ancient and Modern,
> to strengthen the connective
> ties to ancestor belief systems:
> Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Pagan.
> Not to claim written resources
> prior to the monastic Christian
> filter is contrary to known
> evidence of Druids who could
> write in other languages.

I didn't claim there were no written resources prior to christianity, but
the fact remains that none have survived. If you look at real Irish
genealogies (ancient, not modern), they go back about as far as the fourth
century, then there are gaps with the mythological ancestor getting fit in

> There is a key difference between
> stating Celtic peoples did not
> write down sacred things {Caesar)
> and the suggestion they did not
> have the ability to write or did
> not keep other records.

They wrote things down using the Greek alphabet, according to ancient

>The sense
> of family connectedness, or the
> genealogy within Irish history,
> satisfies basic human emotional
> needs that cannot be artificially
> created by a modern theory, that
> historically puts a beginning
> circa A.D. 500; as, the records
> expose to public view, privacy
> and rights of all family members.

No written records survive from prior to the 4th century from Ireland.

> Examples of Ogham date to
> 500 B.C.

No such thing. The earliest known Ogham inscriptions date to the fourth
century AD.

>[Existing examples
> suggest that Ogham was used
> primarily on grave and boundary
> markers. Indeed, most
> inscriptions read "so and so,
> son of so and so, son of so
> and so" and so on. Evidence
> exists, however, supporting
> its' use by Druids for recording
> tales, histories, poetry,
> genealogies, and the like.]

Yep, in the myths of Ireland. However no actual physical proof has yet been
found. That may change soon, due to the increase in wetland archaeology
here over the years, and the amount of building planned for the future, but
as we stand at the moment, no physical evidence exists.

> [The University of Cork has an
> excellent collection of them.]

Collection of poems written in Ogham? Do give a reference.

> Since the very form of [the
> inscriptions contain little more
> than personal names on boundary
> marking megaliths], the
> "diagrammatic representations
> of genealogies" is produced,
> in an ancient format.
> [Similar markings, dating to
> 500 BC, have been found on
> standing stones in Spain
> and Portugal. It is from
> this area of the Iberian
> Peninsula that the Celts
> who colonized Ireland may
> have come.]

There is no evidence that Ireland was ever colonised by the Celts. In fact,
what evidence there is goes against that theory. As far as the link with
Spain, IIRC that was due to early monks wrongly thinking that "Hibernia" was
etymologically linked to "Iberia".

> The poem, Ora Maritima,
> written in the fourth century
> A.D. by the Roman Avienus,
> incorporated information from
> the sixth century B.C. sailing
> manual called the Massiliot
> Periplus. Sea journeys were
> made by Tartessan and
> Carthaginian merchant venturers
> from southern Iberia, northwards
> to Brittany, Albion [Britain]
> and Ireland in order to trade
> with the natives. The Massiliot
> Periplus mentions islands in the
> west -- Oestrymnis -- lying close
> to Britain, whence natives
> sailed in skin boats carrying
> cargoes of tin and lead. This
> is discussed in A People of the
> Sea, The Maritime History of
> the Channel Islands, Edited by
> A. G. Jamieson, first published
> in 1986.

The Irish traded with mainland Europe. We don't need a poem to tell us
that, we have physical evidence.

> Celtic Ireland is noted in the
> Atlas of Irish History,

As one would hope, given the title.

> published 1997, under MacMillan
> USA, Map, page 15. Ptolemy, an
> Alexandrian Greek geographer
> writing after A.D. 100, locates
> tribes.

Yep, especially the ones along the coast. When you look at a drawing
depicting that map it shows that the Romans had a good knowledge of north,
east, and south tribes, but those of the west are practically unknown.

>One of them is the
> Tribe of Auteini [alternative
> name: Uaithne], {using modern
> terms}, at the intersection
> of 53 degrees latitude with 9
> degrees longitude, in what
> is now County Clare.

Actually, the Uaithne would have been more Limerick than Clare.

> This tribal designation can
> be compared with Ogham [Tinne
> (CHIN-yuh), holly - The
> holly (Ilex aquifolium L.)
> is a shrub growing to 35
> feet in open woodlands
> and along clearings in
> forests.]

??? What has this got to do with the Uaithne?

> Respectfully yours,
> Tom Tinney, Sr.
> Genealogy and Family History
> Internet Web Directory
> "Free Coverage of the Genealogy
> World in a Nutshell"
> Who's Who in America,
> Millennium Edition [54th] - on
> Who's Who In Genealogy and Heraldry,
> [both editions]
> ------------------------------------
> JMB wrote:
> > "Chris and Tom Tinney, Sr." <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> > --snip--
> >
> >>In a nutshell, for events earlier
> >>than the fifth century, the case
> >>for historical verification of
> >>Irish events in the annals is
> >>compelling. Early Milesian
> >>chronicles that appear in the
> >>latest of the annalistic
> >>compilations (The Annals of
> >>the Four Masters), suggests
> >>only that the compilers were
> >>more thorough and had more
> >>access to original records.
> >>
> >
> > Are you claiming that there were actual annals prior to the fifth
> > Do you even know what the annals actually were? None were written prior
> > the fifth century, the one or two earlier dates provided by them are
> > estimates, nothing more.
> >
> >
> >>The Irish Mil genealogies are
> >>military, ship census and family
> >>data, connected by historical time
> >>period after the Battle of Carchemish,
> >>circa 605 B.C.,
> >>
> >
> > Irish genealogies are simply family data, used to justify claims to the
> > various kingships. As all historians know, not all the genealogies are
> > accurate. For example, Brian Boru's clan were not entitled to any
> > kingships, so they had to edit their genealogies to suit, as did many
> > clans. Any genealogies that go back prior to the fifth century are
> > in nature. They are not complete, and usually just skip back to the
> > mythical ancestor of the clan.
> >
> > --snip--
> >
> >
> >

This thread: