Ogham

[Phi]

There has been some discussion regarding the dearth of extant writing in the ancient Irish world. Many things were destroyed. However, these were writ in stone!

http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/ogam/

Should prove once and for everyone that these peoples were not illiterate!

Even if you cannot read German (as I cannot) you may find these photos of interest.
Apparently many of the writings on these stones have been translated? Wish they offered an English translation from the Deutch...Anybody want to translate any of the text from this site?:)

[Myrddyn Emrys]

Way cool Phi! GOnna bookmark that one!

[Ladyvi]

well if you get an idea of what its saying. let me know. good pics. someone has talent with a camera but i cant figure out a darn thing

[Nantonos]

There has been some discussion regarding the dearth of extant writing in the ancient Irish world. Many things were destroyed. However, these were writ in stone!

http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/ogam/

Should prove once and for everyone that these peoples were not illiterate!

Its well known that the Irish were not illiterate. Where are you finding arguments that say they were?

Same for the British, there are inscriptions from the first to the 12th centuries CE in both Ogham and Roman scripts; these are important also for tracing the development of the language from British to Old Welsh.

And same again for Gaulish, there is an increasing corpus of inscriptions from the 3rd century BCE to the fourth century CE.

[mothwench]

Same for the British, there are inscriptions from the first to the 12th centuries CE in both Ogham and Roman scripts; these are important also for tracing the development of the language from British to Old Welsh.
that's interesting. i read several times that ogham was completely unique to ireland. but i've not read much about it anyway, and the little i have was probably from questionable sources.

And same again for Gaulish, there is an increasing corpus of inscriptions from the 3rd century BCE to the fourth century CE.
but not oghams, in gaul... right? they used roman script, surely.

[Nantonos]

that's interesting. i read several times that ogham was completely unique to ireland. but i've not read much about it anyway, and the little i have was probably from questionable sources.

Ogham is found in Britain too, some of which is in Irish and some of which is in British transitioning to Old Welsh.

A good reference for the British inscriptions (Ogham and latin) is

Sims-Williams, Patrick (2003) The Celtic Inscriptions of Britain: phonology and chronology, c. 400-1200. Oxford, Blackwell. ISBN 1-4051-0903-3

For an example of a British ogham inscription, see
http://www.silchester.rdg.ac.uk/victorians/vic_ogham.php


but not oghams, in gaul... right? they used roman script, surely.

Right. Ogham was not in use in the time period in which Gaulish was written. So it uses Latin script, yes, except for the earlier inscriptions in the south, in the Rhone valey, which use Greek script, and also in Gallia Cisalpina (modern north Italy) where it uses the Etruscan-derived Lepontic script.

[Nantonos]

Even if you cannot read German (as I cannot) you may find these photos of interest.
Apparently many of the writings on these stones have been translated? Wish they offered an English translation from the Deutch...Anybody want to translate any of the text from this site?:)

They also have pages with english text:

http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/kelt/ogamabb.htm

[mothwench]

Ogham is found in Britain too, some of which is in Irish and some of which is in British transitioning to Old Welsh.

A good reference for the British inscriptions (Ogham and latin) is

Sims-Williams, Patrick (2003) The Celtic Inscriptions of Britain: phonology and chronology, c. 400-1200. Oxford, Blackwell. ISBN 1-4051-0903-3

For an example of a British ogham inscription, see
http://www.silchester.rdg.ac.uk/victorians/vic_ogham.php
cool. :kooky: thanks.
what does "british transtioning to old welsh" mean? that old welsh was a later development of british?

[Nantonos]

Ogham was not in use in the time period in which Gaulish was written. So it uses Latin script, yes, except for the earlier inscriptions in the south, in the Rhone valey, which use Greek script, and also in Gallia Cisalpina (modern north Italy) where it uses the Etruscan-derived Lepontic script.

For an overview of the different writing systems used to write old Celtic languages (Gaulish, British, Old Irish, Old Welsh, Celtiberian) see
http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/kelt/keltalph.pdf

[Nantonos]

cool. :kooky: thanks.
what does "british transtioning to old welsh" mean? that old welsh was a later development of british?
(transitioning) sorry about the typo.

Yes. British, a P-Celtic language which at this stage in our understanding was identical to Gaulish, developed into Old Welsh.

[mothwench]

i didn't even see the typo. :spinner: is that old british celtic the language that was spoken by tribes like the iceni, cantii and brigantia (sp?)

edited to add: and it was my typo, not yours :p ;)

[Nantonos]

is that old british celtic the language that was spoken by tribes like the iceni, cantii and brigantia (sp?)

Brigantes. Yes, it is.

[Phi]

They also have pages with english text:

http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/kelt/ogamabb.htm

Thank you, Nantonos!

[Nantonos]

Thank you, Nantonos!

No problem. Also, have a look at this

Celtic Inscribed Stones Project (CISP)
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/

intro at
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/

[Phi]

Its well known that the Irish were not illiterate. Where are you finding arguments that say they were?Sorry, my error. I had also been studying stones with Ogham from the "Pictish" territories of north and eastern Scotland and should have given a link to those too. I will check back and see if I can find the site links for you all.

I have often come across the idea that the "Picts" were painted illiterate savages. (Probably from the writings of Classicists. Yet it is a general rule that whomever in history is defeated does not get to write the history, and is almost always the "barbarian." )

As a recent but serious student of these cultures, I am just discovering evidence that the "Picts" too, were apparently literate, and left many traces! Including ogham inscriptions.

Okay, I didn't save them all, and will have to re-research to find some more, but here's one for ya!
http://www.shetland-museum.org.uk/collections/archaeology/ogham_and_runic.htm

[Nantonos]

Sorry, my error. I had also been studying stones with Ogham from the "Pictish" territories of north and eastern Scotland and should have given a link to those too. I will check back and see if I can find the site links for you all.

Thanks, appreciated. The books I have don't list any ogham stones from those areas. Pictish symbol stones, yes.

I have often come across the idea that the "Picts" were painted illiterate savages. (Probably from the writings of Classicists. Yet it is a general rule that whomever in history is defeated does not get to write the history, and is almost always the "barbarian." )

I come across similar statement sthat the Gauls had no writing. Usually based on partial quotations from Caesar, who says that the druidical teachings are not written down. The other hals of that sentence says that they use greek script for all their day to day writings, but people seem not to quote that part :(

As a recent but serious student of these cultures, I am just discovering evidence that the "Picts" too, were apparently literate, and left many traces! Including ogham inscriptions.

Okay, I didn't save them all, and will have to re-research to find some more, but here's one for ya!
http://www.shetland-museum.org.uk/collections/archaeology/ogham_and_runic.htm

Thanks for the link checking it out now. Thanks for starting this thread!

[Nantonos]

Okay, I didn't save them all, and will have to re-research to find some more, but here's one for ya!
http://www.shetland-museum.org.uk/collections/archaeology/ogham_and_runic.htm

Here is a link to the inscription on that stone:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/site/breay.html
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/stone/breay_1.html
(linked from here)
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/

Note that the language used there is Irish and Norse.

[Nantonos]

Interesting inscription from Ballaqueeney, Rushen, Isle of Man

 ᚇᚑᚃᚐᚔᚇᚑᚅᚐᚋᚐ ᚊᚔ   ᚇᚏᚑᚐᚈᚐ 
DOVAIDONA-MA QI | DROATA
"Of Dovaido, son of Droata"
[Some authorities take droata as an error for druada "druid".]

Inscription from
http://www.babelstone.co.uk/Ogham/index.html

If the text in navy doesn't show Ogham then you need a suitable font, like Code 2000 from http://home.att.net/~jameskass/code2000_page.htm or Everson Mono Ogham from ftp://dkuug.dk/CEN/TC304/EversonMono10646/Mac/MacOS/ or one of the fonts listed here: http://www.evertype.com/celtscript/ogfont.html

[Phi]

another link

http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3F_adv_prop%3Dimages%26imgsz%3Dall% 26vf%3Dphoto%26va%3Dbrodie%2Bcastle%26ei%3DUTF-8%26fr%3DFP-tab-web-t-239%26b%3D21&h=566&w=700&imgcurl=www.lithos-graphics.com%2Fpicts%2Fpict%2520images%2Fbrodie.jpg&imgurl=www.lithos-graphics.com%2Fpicts%2Fpict%2520images%2Fbrodie.jpg&size=135.1kB&name=brodie.jpg&rcurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lithos-graphics.com%2Fpicts%2FBrodie%2520Castle.html&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lithos-graphics.com%2Fpicts%2FBrodie%2520Castle.html&p=brodie+castle&type=jpeg&no=29&tt=136
WOW! that was a long link!

I have a book by Duncan Jones, a small guidebook to finding stones in the Pictish area of Scotland, called A Wee Guide to the Picts.

For some reason, my history button on my computer only took me back to Monday. I was looking at the stones and looked some up on my computer on Sunday after buying the booklet at a Celtic fair. So I just now referred back to the book to try to find some new photos of some of the stones photographed and described in the booklet.
At the link above I found a beautiful photo of one of the stones that is said to have Ogham writing "carved all around it, but only a small part on the lower right hand side can be read, spelling out what may be a personal name: EDDARRNONN Q. A." It was found in the graveyard of the old church of Dyke and Moy and now stands at the side of the road leading to Brodie castle.

Also according to the guidebook, at Auquhollie Farmhouse is a stonewhich bears an Ogham inscription "VOUNON TEDEV." This stone, 2.5 metres tall, is in a field beside a minor road off A957 northwest of Stonehaven, Kincardine and Deeside.

At Dunrobin Museum/Dunrobin Castle, on a minor road off A9, 1.5 miles east of Golspie, Scotland there are a collection of Pictish stones from the area, one of which has Pictish symbols and an Ogham inscription.

Another stone now at Fordoun Church, has the word PIDARNOIN on it.

The booklet lists 135 stones, some of which are "sinking into the ground" and many of which are on farmland off of secondary roads. These are not being studied, it seems. Before too much longer whatever is upon them may be lost to history for no one seems to be taking a serious effort to translate the pictish symbols which may be a sort of written language too.
After all, wasn't Egyptian a symbol language, too?

Okay, a bit of wondering here: could it be that different knots mean different things as well, and as such are a part of the language/meaning too?

The booklet, should anyone want a copy, is published by GOBLINSHEAD, 130B Inversek Road,
Musselburgh, EH21 7AY Scotland,
or on a tag on it, the US Distributor is DuFour Editions @ 610-458-5005
DUFOUREDITIONS.COM

It has great photos in it, and is well worth the price I paid of $7.95
The Pictish symbols are fascinating, and some of them are repeated over and over from the very earliest stones to the latest...

[Nantonos]

http://www.evertype.com/standards/og/leabhair.html

[Twig]

Should prove once and for everyone that these peoples were not illiterate!


Us Druids is not illiterate neither!
:bouncysmi :hehehehe: :colorful:

Peace!

[ap Dafydd]

i didn't even see the typo. :spinner: is that old british celtic the language that was spoken by tribes like the iceni, cantii and brigantia (sp?)


Sort of. Pictish was a p-celtic language but a seperate one. There was also a dialect split which ran across the middle of Britain (and indeed the middle of Wales). There are features in some of the South Wales dialects which are grammatically closer to Cornish than to North Walian

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[Nantonos]

Sort of. Pictish was a p-celtic language but a seperate one.

I take it you mean British, there, since

a) we don't know with any certainty what language the Picts spoke and we do know with great certainty what language the British tribes spoke.
b) The Iceni, Canti, and Brigates that mothwench mentioned were not Picts

There was also a dialect split which ran across the middle of Britain (and indeed the middle of Wales). There are features in some of the South Wales dialects which are grammatically closer to Cornish than to North Walian

When did that develop, do you know? What are the characteristics of it?

[Dave the Druid]

Dialectic diffrences?
Like the diffrence between someone in Bournemouth and say New Castle? or lingual differences of words being linguistically different but having the same meaning?

just asking for clarity...

[ap Dafydd]

I take it you mean British, there, since

a) we don't know with any certainty what language the Picts spoke and we do know with great certainty what language the British tribes spoke.
b) The Iceni, Canti, and Brigates that mothwench mentioned were not Picts

When did that develop, do you know? What are the characteristics of it?

I think the current consensus based on what we do know about the Picts is that their language was p-celtic though it may have been different from British.

I haven't seen any theories about the date of the dialect split in British but one of the keys is the 3rd person singular verb in the past tense.

eg "he saw"

has an -odd ending in Standard Welsh (and North Walian) - "gwelodd"

but has an -ws ending in South East Walian - "gwelws"

which is similar to the -os ending in Cornish - "gwelos"

gwyn eich byd

Ffred

[Nantonos]

I think the current consensus based on what we do know about the Picts is that their language was p-celtic though it may have been different from British.

Yes, its certainly possible, although the amount of evidence is slight. As against that, the placename evidence such as "pit" in place names, has been used to argue for an aboriginal, non-IE language.

I haven't seen any theories about the date of the dialect split in British but one of the keys is the 3rd person singular verb in the past tense.

eg "he saw"

has an -odd ending in Standard Welsh (and North Walian) - "gwelodd"

but has an -ws ending in South East Walian - "gwelws"

which is similar to the -os ending in Cornish - "gwelos"

Thanks! I guess it would be similar in Breton, then?

[Seren_]

Yes, its certainly possible, although the amount of evidence is slight. As against that, the placename evidence such as "pit" in place names, has been used to argue for an aboriginal, non-IE language.

Not from what I've heard...although the placename element is exclusive to the Picts, "pit" is often seen written as "pett" or "pet" in native sources according to genitive/accusative form. It's been suggested on this basis that "pit" is in fact cognate with the Welsh peth, Cornish peth, Breton pez and the Low Latin petia, which itself is thought to be a Latinised Gaulish word. They all invariably translate to meaning a "piece" - in this case presumably of land. It's also likely that the majority of "pit" placenames were coined after the ninth century in a mixed Gaelic-Pictish speaking population. (WFH Nicolaisen, Scottish Placenames, 1979).

[Nantonos]

Not from what I've heard...although the placename element is exclusive to the Picts, "pit" is often seen written as "pett" or "pet" in native sources according to genitive/accusative form.
Interesting. That's also how it is pronounced, in modern Scots, in Fife.

It's been suggested on this basis that "pit" is in fact cognate with the Welsh peth, Cornish peth, Breton pez and the Low Latin petia, which itself is thought to be a Latinised Gaulish word. They all invariably translate to meaning a "piece" - in this case presumably of land. It's also likely that the majority of "pit" placenames were coined after the ninth century in a mixed Gaelic-Pictish speaking population. (WFH Nicolaisen, Scottish Placenames, 1979).

Thanks for that. My info was a bit outdated there.

Yes, Delmarre (2003) Dictionnaire de la langue gauloise pp 249-50 lists

pettia pièce, morceau, part

The PIE root is given as *kwesdi̭ā from which, by a different evolution, old Irish cuit.

[Phi]

A bit more on the recent archaeological finds regarding Picts...
One of these seems to think that the Pictish art forms were from Medieval times;
http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/history/0,,1376662,00.html (http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/history/0,,1376662,00.html)

However, recent (2002 report of ongoing dig) finds show that Pictish art can date back to the Bronze Age and perhaps even to the Stone Age? This report shows a smithy, a Pictish boar-carving, a Pictish Bear Carving, and a Pictish round-house with straw floor still extant that dates to 2000 years ago.
http://www.shetland-heritage.co.uk/amenitytrust/archaeology/scatness/scatness2002%20report.html

I did see somewhere in my searches regarding archaeology and Picts that a torque was found on one "Pictish" site, but will have to continue to search for it again. I found that an interesting tidbit.

Now, I know it has nothing to do with Ogham, except that it might be beginning to show that these people were there for quite a long time and that their animal carvings (found on ?later?Ogham-inscribed stones in other areas) had been done in recognizable form since the Bronze Age.
If I can find the link with the torque...well it might be at least a tantalizing clue if they wore the same classic jewelry as the Celts, whether or not they spoke the same dialect, no? Okay I'll keep looking... :)
Also some of the Pictish stones include a salmon...
http://www.darkisle.com/g/glamis2/glamis2.html
just one more possible evidence that Picts were Celts too?

Oh, BTW, I recall reading somewhere online that the Picts originally called themselves Cruithen? Or similar spelling...

[Nantonos]

A bit more on the recent archaeological finds regarding Picts...
One of these seems to think that the Pictish art forms were from Medieval times;
http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/history/0,,1376662,00.html (http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/history/0,,1376662,00.html)

Bearing in mind that the middle ages start with 'post-Roman Britain' ie 5th century onwards, then this is correct. The dates mentioned there are 6th to 9th centuries, so yes, early mediaeval. Isabel Henderson is probably the most well-known scholar in the field of Pictish studies.

However, recent (2002 report of ongoing dig) finds show that Pictish art can date back to the Bronze Age and perhaps even to the Stone Age? This report shows a smithy, a Pictish boar-carving, a Pictish Bear Carving, and a Pictish round-house with straw floor still extant that dates to 2000 years ago.
http://www.shetland-heritage.co.uk/amenitytrust/archaeology/scatness/scatness2002%20report.html


Where do you get 'Bronze age or stone age' from? That site mentions a variety of dates from 400 BCE (ie, Iron Age) to 'viking' times (say, 900 CE). This is a long way from the bronze age. It also mentions rebuilding, so the Pictish bear could date from any time in that range. It is thus not inconsistent with an early mediaeval date, allthough it could certainly be earlier.

Oh, BTW, I recall reading somewhere online that the Picts originally called themselves Cruithen? Or similar spelling...

Cruithne, was the Irish name for the Picts.

[Phi]

Where do you get 'Bronze age or stone age' from? That site mentions a variety of dates from 400 BCE (ie, Iron Age) to 'viking' times (say, 900 CE). This is a long way from the bronze age. It also mentions rebuilding, so the Pictish bear could date from any time in that range. It is thus not inconsistent with an early mediaeval date, allthough it could certainly be earlier.

First, note the question marks I placed in that line, indicating that this was in question to me as well. However, in explanation of my reasoning in making the questioned comment:

"In the first season we discovered evidence for over 3,000 years of occupation on the site.”
(This is from an earlier year's report, however, 1998 or 1999.)

3000-900(current era Viking)=2100 BC.

What I said is not meant to be a proof of "Pictish" occupation since 3000 years ago, but the continuous use of the site for 3000 years with mention of abandonment only in the era just before the Viking finds could be consistent with peoples settling and staying through many generations, could it not?
Conclusions regarding the Pictish symbols have not been published, however from what is given in all of the reports available online, the several symbols were found at different layers, and on different yearly reports. They include not only the bear, but also a boar, and a crescent with v-rod.
Again:

"In the first season we discovered evidence for over 3,000 years of occupation on the site.”
Also:
“Bronze, a mixture of copper and tin, was in use in Scotland by about 2500 BC. It was relatively easy to work by hammering or melting and casting. When iron working was introduced in Scotland, around 700 BC, new skills, those of the blacksmith, had to be learnt.”

http://www.nms.ac.uk/scotland/index.asp?m=3&s=2&ss=2 (http://www.nms.ac.uk/scotland/index.asp?m=3&s=2&ss=2)



Given that bronze was in use in Scotland by 2500 BC, and that there is evidence of 3000 years of occupation of the site,the latest being the Viking age, thus "Stone to Bronze Age" is not inconsistent with the evidence recognizing that the change of "Ages" is not delineated with an exactness of date.

There was, after all, no"Official" announcement that said "Today, the first day of 2500BC, we begin the 'Bronze Age' and henceforth the making of stone tools is outlawed, and anyone still living in a 'Stone Age' way must immediately begin living in a 'Bronze age' way." :lol:

There must have been, and indeed there was, overlapping of these ages, and in fact there were peoples living "in the Stone Age" in remote areas in this century... So in our thinking about these ages, we need to remember that they are not firmly set by a calendar date, but that the year-dates assigned are generalizations, and that these year-dates will vary from place to place, according to the relative advancement in technologies of the peoples...

While I do not doubt that the lady you mention is "the foremost expert" even the foremost expert is using the current dating system for the Pictish stones that relies upon whether the stones do or do not have a cross upon them, and how carefully they are dressed.(I have noted that she is a "Medieval" scholar, but thanks for the name as it has led me to new sites of interest.)
Those carvings found at this site show no crosses nor careful dressing.
At any rate, class I Pictish stones are said to date from late stone age to early bronze age even by the experts, no? I am not saying that the small stones will be classified with the standing stones, yet hopefully you can follow my logic and see at least that I am not totally off base...:smileroll

As to some other interesting tidbits that might be more helpful: ;)


There are, according to Duncan James, recorded versions of their own origin myth.

“One tells of a great warrior and king, Cruithne, who ruled over Alba…for 100 years.

He had seven sons, and after his death each son each son ruled over a portion of their father’s kingdom. The names of these sons are still preserved today in some Scottish placenames, Fib who ruled over Fife; Cat, who ruled Caithness; and Fortriu, who ruled the lands around the Forth. The other sons were Fidach who held Moray; Ce, Aberdeenshire, Banff and Buchan; Circenn, Angus; and Fotlaig, Atholl and Strathearn.”

Another prefix, "Aber-"


James also states “What little evidence we have of the Pictish language strongly suggests that it was a Brythonic Celtic tongue: Compare, for example, the number of towns beginning Aber-( meaning a confluence or a river mouth) in eastern Scotland with those in Wales.:vanish:

I'll throw in some other interesting tidbits again once I have found anything that might be of interest or of help to you scholars. :)

[Phi]

Here's a good website with research on Pictish names and words:
http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/tangwystyl/pictnames/pict1.html
Be sure to click on the resources at the bottom of this page for more in
depth word-by-word evidence...
:)

[odubhain]

There has been some discussion regarding the dearth of extant writing in the ancient Irish world. Many things were destroyed. However, these were writ in stone!

http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/ogam/

Should prove once and for everyone that these peoples were not illiterate!

Even if you cannot read German (as I cannot) you may find these photos of interest.
Apparently many of the writings on these stones have been translated? Wish they offered an English translation from the Deutch...Anybody want to translate any of the text from this site?:)You should get a copy of Corpus Inscriptionum Insularum Celticorum by R.A.S. Macalister. It is the seminal work on Ogam inscriptions. There is also a fine site at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/. I also thought that Titus Ogamica had an English version of the project: http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/ogam/frame.htm The inscription links are in the top frames. One scrolls down and the actual info appears in the side frame for all Ogam inscriptions that have been linked. There's quite a few of them available.

Searles

[Phi]

You should get a copy of Corpus Inscriptionum Insularum Celticorum by R.A.S. Macalister. It is the seminal work on Ogam inscriptions. There is also a fine site at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/cisp/database/. I also thought that Titus Ogamica had an English version of the project: http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/ogam/frame.htm The inscription links are in the top frames. One scrolls down and the actual info appears in the side frame for all Ogam inscriptions that have been linked. There's quite a few of them available.

Searles
Thank you! I have looked over some of the comments on the first site, and am beginning to navigate it with some success.

(I do find it tiresome when, in a supposedly scholarly site, a comment says that a natural spring at one site has
"always" :confused:
been called the well of Mary. How could anyone possibly know that, assuming that a natural spring may have been around before Mary was even born?...:nuhuh: )

However, attempting to overlook such a non-scholarly and ridiculous comment, I do think the site is a good one, and quite informative.

The other translation site is not available anymore, apparently. At least it will not come up for me.