GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-09 > 1159121267
From: "Dora Smith" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Oppenheimer article on Celtic prehistory - on preRomanScandivians to England
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:07:47 -0500
More on the point, from Wikipedia (where I went to see if Oppenheimer is
really at Oxford):
"The Real Eve: Modern Man's Journey Out of Africa. The latter focuses on his
hypothesis that modern humans emerged from East Africa in a single major
exodus, numbering no more than a few hundred individuals. This lone group of
wanderers is ancestral to all non-Africans and most North Africans, their
descendants having since radiated into a plurality of physical
characteristics, languages, ethnicities and cultures today."
a.. " In his book The Real Eve, Oppenheimer hypothesizes that Eurasians
descend from a South Asian origin, with the founding population of
Caucasoids (Western Eurasians) originating in Northwest India and the
founding population of Mongoloids (Eastern Eurasians) originating in
Northeast India/Nepal. Caucasoids spread West into Central Asia, West Asia,
North Africa and Europe, while Mongoloids spread East into Siberia, East
Asia, Southeast Asia, Oceania, the Americas and Greenland. "
See what I mean? Transpermia pretty well characterizes it.
Now, putting aside the clear genetic divergence of populations depending on
whether they went East or West from the only land bridge between Africa and
the rest of the world, and putting aside the lack of an evolutionary path
from southeast Asia, why would it make any sense to think that if a certain
haplogroup is now found in western Europe, they went FROM Africa TO
southeast Asia, evolved there, and (leaving no genetic trail) went all the
way to Europe, instead of evolved on a shorter and traceable path of
migration from the Middle Eastern land bridge to Europe? As for American
Indians, their ancestors did not cross the Aleutian land bridge and follow a
proven path down the Pacific coast. They took the far more difficult route
across the Atlantic in rafts and canoes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dora Smith" <>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:45 PM
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
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
|Re: [DNA] Oppenheimer article on Celtic prehistory - on preRomanScandivians to England by "Dora Smith" <>|