King Arthur and Pharaoe ?

[BIAD]

...So, who are the "real" Scottish People?
The original "Upper Paleolithic" hunter gatherers?
The later Picts, Angles and Britons?
Viking Raiders?
The Scotti from Ireland?

Truth is, we are a mixture of them all and more.
G

@Surya also.

It's often said that the victors or oppressors get to write history and I'm sure that in the
case of this particular subject, it'll be found that this is the truth.

England has oppressed Scotland and Ireland for centuries and even now within the powerful
media system, it continues -but admittedly at a far lesser direct amount. I live nearer Scotland
than the English capital and I can vouch that these days, London is seen as England to many
of the counties around it.

The movement of people to find a home is only limited by geography and their ability to travel.
The use of ships is still not fully understood in the past and with the need to to stay within the
boundaries of religious and preferred historical disciplines, we are taught that our kingdoms
were basically populated with peoples who currently dominate that nation.

Irish, Scottish and Nordic folk sailed the Atlantic long before Mr. Columbus did from Spain -and
even then, he only did it because his Father-in-law gave him the maps to do so.
So where did his wife's dad get the maps from...?!

If one looks into how the Vikings fared in their incursions into Britain, it will be seen that they
rarely ventured from access to their boats. It was only after discussions with Elders of the
villages that were close to the estuaries and rivers that they had raided,  it was agreed that they
wouldn't pillage these places in return of a base of sorts.

Humans are social animals and so, the raids became fewer. Those from other lands eventually
bring their families over and focus on settling. That's how it's always been.
It's only when vast oceans are involved that this natural progress is slower... bit it still happens.

I can understand that the history we're offered is only interpreted by present-day scholars and
with that, we get the scholar's perception of how he 'wished' history to be. But, we don't truly
know who went where and what they did.

The ordeals of the Dorset peoples that traversed the northern areas of Alaska eastwards can show
the distances humans were travelling and even the legend that they encountered giants -which
are presumed to be actually Norse folk, again hints that many races were out-and-about across
the world.
....................

My personal favourite is the remains of the stone wall between myself and Gordi.
Hadrian's Wall, a Roman defensive construction to supposedly keep 'The Empire' safe from invading
Picts, is an ideal instance of what we're talking about here.

Roman armies were mainly made up of countries they conquered and that alone, guaranteed people
from other lands would be living in places not normally discerned as regular.
On the back of the this, this instance of travel is late in the world's history, so who truly knows if a
Egyptian female was in Ireland?

If we agree that if Romans can travel from Rome to the rainy climes of Britain, then so could
anyone else!

Also, we must accept that the vessels they used were invented long before this powerful empire
decided to use them, then the logical next step would be that earlier races that used boats travelled
and travelled far.

History is written by the victors and will always favour them for many reasons. My own family live
in England, but my surname can be traced to warring alongside Gordi's gang under the title of the
Gunn clan!
So am I Scottish or just a descendant of a person who lived slightly north of me?!!

I believed that South America was visited by peoples of the Mediterranean and vias-versa.
I believe that North America had white-skinned priests appearing in the deserts of Arizona and
bearded Norsemen found it stifling hot on the coasts of northern Africa.

This, even before we get to the Australian Aborigines paddling towards the home of Kangaroo!!

Good thread.