More stuff on IRELAND

[chairface]

www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/1372

Ancient Irish mythology refers to the original inhabitants of the island as being a giant, sea-faring people called the Fomorians (Fomors), which means "dark of the sea". They are said to be of Hamitic stock. These demons, as they are portrayed as, defeated the first few incoming waves of invaders, but could not defeat the Firbolgs, who settled the land and lived side-by-side with the native Fomors.
Two more invasions, the first led by the godly Tuatha de Danaan, and the second by the Celtic Milesians, took control of Ireland, mixing together with the Fomorians until they were no more. Today, it is regarded that these myths may, to some extent, be explaining actual history.
My theory is that the Fomorians were a real people, and that they were sailers from Africa, probably Negroid. I have three suspicions as to who they were exactly.
The most likely of these is that they were Phoenicians. The Phoenicians were Canaanites, which came from the line of Ham. They were also well-known for their sailing skills, and are said to have traveled to the British Isles, which they called the "Tin Islands". Perhaps, before Ireland was a Celtic domain, which it wasn't until a few centuries BCE, the Phoenicians colonized it. The names of these two people even sound similar.
Another idea is that they were Taureg Berbers. The Berber language is Hamitic, and the Berber people live in an area from which travel to Ireland would be easily accessible. The Berbers perhaps set sail from western Morocco, and settled on Ireland before the Celts, making it their new home.
Another Irish legend, similar to that of the Fomorians, tells of Selkies, a sort-of "wereseal" that is a seal during day, but a human by nightfall. Sometimes, in an Irish family of fair-skinned, light-haired people, a child is born with dark hair eyes, and skin, and is called a Selkie.
I believe that those of present-day Irish descent, including myself, an Irish-American, have black roots, and that these features can still be seen in the people and in the culture. In Southern Ireland, some people, refered to as "Black Irish", are noted for their strikingly dark features, as opposed to the fair-skinned, light-haired north.
Although I have pale skin that does not tan well under the sun, I do have negroid facail features, as well as dark brown eyes, and dark brown hair that is sort-of kinky, especailly in moist conditions.
There is also a subrace in Ireland called the Brünn, said to be of the original Irish stock, which have Meditteranean features, especailly their hair.
In addition to all of this, Celtic music is distictly different from the rest of Europe, and comparable to that of African music. There is a legend that an Egyptian princess, Scota, left Egypt with some followers and journeyed to Ireland, as well. Moorish Science Temple founder Drew Ali teaches that Ireland was once part of a Moorish empire, and that the Irish are a Moorish people. Perhaps there is a common root between the "moor" sound in Fomor and the word Moor?
Because of all of this, I am convinced that there is at least some black admixture in the Irish population. What do you think?

[Samhain]

I'm guessing, or hoping rather, you chose that source for it's eccentric qualities and not as an educational and research reference?

[chairface]

Yeah, it's a strange theory on Ireland, but it is pretty interesting.

[Faelcind]

There is no theory there at all nothing but ill informed speculation. Just to point out one glaring error the phonecians were semetic not hamitic, and most certainly not of negroid type.

[Milesian]

Some points:

1) I haven't read anywhere that the Fomorians were Hamitic, certainly not from any primary sources such as the medieval Irish texts

2) The Fomorians didn't live in Ireland, they merely had a base on Tory Island, off the coast

3) The Fir Bolg, Tuatha De Danaan and the Milesians were all said to be Celts

4) Celtic music shares similarities with Middle Eastern, Indian, Chinese ,usic, etc. This is because Europe in the first millenia standardised it's music and used mainly certain scales. Ireland still uses older scales in it's folk music such as the Myxolodian and others in common with other areas. This merely represents an older scale which survived the selective preferences which occured throughout Europe in the past, likely as a result of geographical remoteness.

5) It's worth remembering in the Irish legends that Egypt was only a stop off point. The Gaels were there as mercenaries but came from the region of Scythia and the Balkans previous to that. There were Celtic migration into that area in historical record.

If you have truly negroid features then either they are not really negroid in origin, or they do not come from your Irish heritage

[geo]

chairface said:

Celtic music is distictly different from the rest of Europe, and comparable to that of African music.

I dont think thats the case. The two kinds celtic and african have been met, but it was done more on the basis of experimentation. Also, many use to think of european music in terms of a classical orchestra. Like before vivaldi there was no music in europe..

chairface said:

Ancient Irish mythology refers to the original inhabitants of the island as being a giant, sea-faring people called the Fomorians (Fomors).

Actually they were the third to invade Ireland.

[Milesian]

geo said:

I dont think thats the case. The two kinds celtic and african have been met, but it was done more on the basis of experimentation. Also, many use to think of european music in terms of a classical orchestra. Like before vivaldi there was no music in europe..

Yes, if by Celtic one is referring to the modern, New Age, World Music sort of stuff like Clannad or such-like. That isn't really authentic traditional music though.

Actually they were the third to invade Ireland.

I'm not sure we are told specifically when the Fomorians arrive. As I remember they just kind of crop up without much explanation.

The list goes:

Cessair
Parthalonians
Nemedians
Fir Bolg
Tuatha De Danaan
Milesians

The Fomorians are certainly around dueirng the time of the Fir Bolg, and if memory serves correct then perhaps also during the time of the Nemedians. However, I don't recall if it says when they actually arrived in Ireland.
They aren't included in the list because they didn't settle the mainland, but rather based themselves off the coast in the islands

[Zapiens]

...sailers from Africa, probably Negroid. I have three suspicions as to who they were exactly.
The most likely of these is that they were Phoenicians. The Phoenicians were Canaanites, which came from the line of Ham

Just happened to read a Nat'l Geographic article on the genetic studies of people around the mediterranean who may be descendants of the Phoenicians. There is little if any "Negroid" (i.e., associated with most of modern sub-Saharan Africa) genetic ancestry in these.

[Baladi]

5) It's worth remembering in the Irish legends that Egypt was only a stop off point. The Gaels were there as mercenaries but came from the region of Scythia and the Balkans previous to that. There were Celtic migration into that area in historical record.

Tell me more about Celtic mercenaries in ancient Egypt. I had heard their before but can't place any ancient Egyptian documentation on this. Could you please elaborate on this.

[Milesian]

Baladi said:

Tell me more about Celtic mercenaries in ancient Egypt. I had heard their before but can't place any ancient Egyptian documentation on this. Could you please elaborate on this.

I'm not sure if you will find any mention in ancient Egyptian documentation. You will find it in medieval Irish texts, which were recorded by Irish monks from an earlier oral tradition, which likely pre-dates Christianity.


For example, The Irish version of the Historia Britonum of Nennius states:

"The learned of the Gaels give the following account of theadventures of their ancient chiefs.

There was a certain nobleman in exile in Egypt, after he had been banished out of the kingdom of Scythia, at the time when the children of Israel passed through the Red Sea, and Forann Pharoah, with his host, was drowned. The army that escaped without being drowned, banished out of Egypt the aforesaid noble exile, because he was the son-in-law of the Forann that was drowned there; i. e. Forann Cincris.

Afterwards the Scythians went, with their children, into Africa, to the altars of the Philistines, to the wells of Salmara, and between the Ruiseagde, and Mount Iasdaire, and across the River Mba1b, through the Mediterranean to the pillars of Hercules, beyond the sea of Gadidon to Spain; and they dwelt in Spain afterwards, until the sons of Miled Milesius of Spain came to Eri, with thirty boats, with thirty couples in each boat, at the end of a thousand and two years after Forann was drowned in the Red Sea. Rex autem eorum mersus est, i. e. the king, viz., Donn, was
drowned at Tigh-Duinn. Three goddesses at that time held the sovereignty of Eri, namely, Folla, and Banba, and Eire, until three battles were gained over them by the sons of Milead, so that the sons of Milead afterwards took the kingdom."


The Annals of the Four Masters goes into less detail but still alludes to an Egyptian connection as well with it's mention that the daughter of the Pharaoh is the wife of the Milesian (Gaelic) King -


"Annal M3500
M3500.0

The Age of the World , 3500.
M3500.1

The fleet of the sone of Milidh came to Ireland at the end of this year, to take it from the Tuatha De Dananns; and they fought the battle of Sliabh Mis with them on the third day after landing. In this battle fell Scota, the daughter of Pharaoh, wife of Milidh; and the grave of Scota is to be seen between Sliabh Mis and the sea. Therein also fell Fas, the wife of Un, son of Uige, from whom is named Gleann Faisi. After this the sons of Milidh fought a battle at Tailtinn, against the three kinge of the Tuatha De Dananns, Mac Cuill, Mac Ceacht, and Mac Greine. The battle lasted for a long time, until Mac Ceacht fell by Eiremhon, Mac Cuill by Eimhear, and Mac Greine by Amhergin. "

[geo]

Milesian said:

Yes, if by Celtic one is referring to the modern, New Age, World Music sort of stuff like Clannad or such-like. That isn't really authentic traditional music though.

I agree.

Milesian said:

The Fomorians are certainly around dueirng the time of the Fir Bolg, and if memory serves correct then perhaps also during the time of the Nemedians. However, I don't recall if it says when they actually arrived in Ireland.
They aren't included in the list because they didn't settle the mainland, but rather based themselves off the coast in the islands

The nemedians encountered them shortly after their invasion. The fir-bolg were the returning descendants of those defeated nemedians that fled the harsh fomor rule. It's obvious in Irish myth that fomorians are treated as 'alien' to ireland, they were more the oppressors of nemedians than an invading clan themselves.

Milesian said:

were recorded by Irish monks from an earlier oral tradition, which likely pre-dates Christianity.

That it predates christianity is a fact, the speculation is how old is it. I personally see every reference in celtic myths to biblical-like themes (egypt/ red sea/ noah/ the children of israel and the like) as an arbitrary insertion and a monkish insult to irish civilization itself.

[Milesian]

geo said:

The nemedians encountered them shortly after their invasion. The fir-bolg were the returning descendants of those defeated nemedians that fled the harsh fomor rule. It's obvious in Irish myth that fomorians are treated as 'alien' to ireland, they were more the oppressors of nemedians than an invading clan themselves.

Indeed. Interesting also that the Tuatha De Danaan are allegedly also descendents of the Nemedians who return, but subject their Fir Bolg kinsmen

That it predates christianity is a fact, the speculation is how old is it.

Well, it allegedly comes from an earlier, pre-Christian oral tradition. I see no reason to doubt that.

I personally see every reference in celtic myths to biblical-like themes (egypt/ red sea/ noah/ the children of israel and the like) as an arbitrary insertion and a monkish insult to irish civilization itself.

It's also a possibility that these themes were present in the oral traditions. Travelling from Scythia and the Eastern Med, to Egypt, to Iberia and finally Ireland is backed up with circumstantial evidence.

The "Gael/Gal" prefix is found in all these regions from Ukrainian Galicia, to Turkish Galatia, to Spanish Galatia.
This is pretty much the route taken by the Milesians according to the legends. Also some cultural artifacts too. The bagpipe was allegedly an Egyptian instrument.

Also, the Goidelic language is said to have links to Berber language in it's syntax. I'm not sure how true that is though.

It is possible the monks embellished the tales with references to biblical characters, then again perhaps not. I don't see it as an insult as such. I'm sure the preceding pagan cultures added their own stories and legends to those of the previous inhabitants as well.
It's just one of those things

[geo]

Thank you for the interesting info I only disagree on the last paragraph. The bards were meticulous in preserving their traditions, but the christian monks typically sought to change them.

Not only that, but they did it the 'ugly' way, if you know what I mean. That's what matters most imo.

Here are two examples from the book of Leinster. In the first one, the ancient rhyme goes on recording the genealogies in a genuine folkish way. Watch how the (inserted) last line relates with the rest:

Seventeen Bith took, with Bairrfhind - Sella, Della, Duib,
Addeos, Fotra, Traige, Nera, Buana, Tamall, Tanna, Nathra,
Leos, Fodarg, Rodarg, Dos, Clos: be it heard - those were our people further.

Sixteen thereafter with Ladra: Alba, Bona, Albor, Ail, Gothiam,
German, Aithne, Inde, Rodarg, Rinne, Inchor, Ain, Irrand, Espa,
Sine, Samoll: that was our fair company.
None of the seed of Adam took Ireland before the Flood but those.

See? Second example:

Now Ireland was waste [thereafter], for a space of three hundred years, [or three hundred and twelve, quod uerius est] till Partholon s. Sera s. Sru came to it. He is the first who took Ireland after the Flood, on a Tuesday, on the fourteenth of the moon, in Inber Scene: [for three times was Ireland taken in Inber Scene]. Of the progeny of Magog son of Iafeth was he, [ut dixi supra]: in the sixtieth year of the age of Abraham, Partholon took Ireland.

These are obvious insertations and entirely alien to the celtic tradition. The monks who wrote these down cared not to enrich the celtic tradition but to make it dependent on biblical chronologies.

[Milesian]

Fair point, however might we not find the same thing occurred repeatedly with the pre-Christian tribes?

I'm sure the Fir Bolg had their own pantheon before the Tuatha De arrived. I think it quite probable that their own myths and legends were superimposed on top of earlier ones.

I don't see much malicious with it in terms of some sinister Christian objective to taint previous myths. I think they likely modified pre-existing mythology to fit in with their own.
It would be hard to imagine them deffering their own beliefs to something else.

They could just have easily erased all trace of the myths.
Rather they copied them down and modified them somewhat to tie up with their own beliefs.
I think it actually shows that they had a large degree of respect in order to preserve those traditions in any shape or form. Without these medieval texts, it is arguable whether we would even have the knowledge we have of them just now.

It would have been nice to hear them in a pristine state, but to have survived for millenia in any state is pretty good going. I don't think we should be too hard on the monks.


As for the bards, or rather the "filidh" to be more accurate, I'm not sure if I would use the word "meticulous". They didn't preserve the stories in an exact fashion. What they did was learn the bare skeletal structure of the story and the important points, then embelished them accordingly with their own imagination.
The stories were therefore often quite different in the details, but as you rightly pointed out, the main points of the tales tended to tie together nicely between the different version.
Considering the huge repetoire that the filidh had to memorise, it is really the only viable way they could have commited their material to memory

[geo]

milesian said:

Fair point, however might we not find the same thing occurred repeatedly with the pre-Christian tribes?

I'm sure the Fir Bolg had their own pantheon before the Tuatha De arrived. I think it quite probable that their own myths and legends were superimposed on top of earlier ones.

I don't think it's the same. Looking at the celtic tradition we find a continuity passing through several waves of invaders. The tradition was 'living', preserved and enriched by the folk and nearly common to the invaders themselves. Watching them battle each-other, we may see druids casting magic and heroes fighting demons but all-in-all it is a war between men, not a war between religions and (perhaps with the exception of the Fomor) not a war between cultures.

What do we have with the coming of christianity? The tradition is written down but -in the same time- becomes a dead tradition, a recording of 'histories' for the scholars, a memory of 'fairy-tales' for children of the middle-ages.

Is this the same my friend?

milesian said:

They could just have easily erased all trace of the myths.
Rather they copied them down and modified them somewhat to tie up with their own beliefs.
I think it actually shows that they had a large degree of respect in order to preserve those traditions in any shape or form. Without these medieval texts, it is arguable whether we would even have the knowledge we have of them just now.

That is unfair. Hadn't been for the monks, there would have been no need for the tradition to be recorded in the first place. So we don't need to thank them.

The major part was not played by the monks, but by the keepers of the irish tradition themselves, whoever they were and whenever they lived.

By the 5th century christianity had followed the roman empire into britain. South & central europe had it's greatest religions, roman, hellenic & gaelic outlawed by successive imperial decrees. In many occassions there was open violence by both church and the state.

The religious battle had been lost for Europe. The irish priesthood saw this and took their decision - dead and preserved rather than dead and vanished. They accepted the foreign religion peacefully and through it, attempted to preserve as much of their own as possible. The monks were told the tradition not by the first man off the street, but by the one(s) who 1) knew it and 2) knew they had to tell it over.

So, if we have to be thankful to someone, imo that should be the one(s) who took the above decision.

milesian said:

As for the bards, or rather the "filidh" to be more accurate, I'm not sure if I would use the word "meticulous". They didn't preserve the stories in an exact fashion. What they did was learn the bare skeletal structure of the story and the important points, then embelished them accordingly with their own imagination.
The stories were therefore often quite different in the details, but as you rightly pointed out, the main points of the tales tended to tie together nicely between the different version.
Considering the huge repetoire that the filidh had to memorise, it is really the only viable way they could have commited their material to memory

Once more, thank you for your info. Oral tradition is common-place throughout Europe. We have our own share with the troyan epics and odyssey - to some homer was the man who wrote down a long-preserved oral history while to others 'homerists' was the name of a whole priesthood accounted with the task of passing it through.