Wizzley
PopularLatestDiscussedEditor's Choice
AuthorsForum
Wizzley

A community of writers publishing stories worth your time — on the topics they know and love.

Explore

  • Popular
  • Latest
  • Discussed
  • Editor's Choice

Community

  • Top authors
  • New authors

Service

  • Help
  • Contact
  • Imprint
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy

Check out our other international Webhaus communities!

Explore another site:English·Deutsch

© 2026 Webhaus LLC. All rights reserved.

Culture & SocietyHistory, Religion, PoliticsBeauty & FashionClothes, Hair, BodyCelebrationHolidays and OccasionsTravelVacations and ExcursionsWeddingsEverything but the groom
Article

The Origins of the Irish: a review

This is a well-written book that delivers its message in a concise style, and is interesting to read.

Those of us who are of some degree of Irish heritage naturally take an interest in the history and origins of the Irish people and their culture and language. This book by J.P. Mallory, a professor of archaeology, makes a serious endeavour to satisfy this need. The book sets the story of the Irish people in the geology of Ireland, but also sets it in the wider culture of the British Isles and its shared ethnic heritage.This may upset some people of nationalist inclinations, but he is correct to make a few significant digs at those who still cling to the outdated error of the belief that the Irish, or any other people for that matter, are a pure race. Photo of a Dolmen on the Burren, County Clare, courtesy of Rajah from Pixabey.

The Beginnings

The author seems to have a strong urge to bust myths,one of which is the notion that any nation has a claim to be special. Britain did not rise from the azure main with an imperial mission, and Ireland did not arise in a glorious Celtic dreamtime with a clear sense of  its role in the world. In fact, he begins with a foray through geological time showing how the island was for eons part of supercontinents that meandered through plate tectonics until it found its present location. Mallory skilfully works his narrative through the Ice Ages to lead to the introduction of humans. But the skilful weaving of the narrative leads to the question of who counts as an Irish person, and he discounts claims that the stone age visitor many  millennia ago who left a trace of a transient hunting visit to the ice-locked isle could be classed as an Irishman. He finally settles on the sixth century Niall of the Nine Hostages, who anyway was half British, the son of  an abducted princess got on her by an Irish king.

The book pays serious attention to the initial stages of the peopling of the land and the establishment of its fauna. This is welcome because this issue is oft-neglected. The glaciers destroyed all life on the island, both animal and fish, meaning that the early settlers came to a land which was prone to famine. The fact that Ireland was sundered from the European mainland earlier than Britain was led to a paucity of large mammalian food resources. Wild pigs came early and  the Irish elk followed, but cattle are not native to Erin. Badgers were imported as a food source and migratory fish, such as salmon and eels, were able to arrive on their own. 

But the peopling was a source of doubt. Palaeolithic hunters almost certainly came to Ireland on passing visits as hunters ventured north seeking meat. But they were transient. Only in the early Mesolithic period about 8000 BC  did small groups make the venture from Britain to Ireland. The issue is how they crossed the Irish Sea  How did they cross? Some scholars have suggested that there were several shallow crossing points in the Irish Sea,but this is unlikely as  the Irish Sea is deep and even if not flooded it would have been boggy, even if it was then shallow enough. The shortest crossing is from South West Scotland to North East Ireland, but the channel between the two islands there is deepened by the Beaufort Dyke, a glacially gouged channel of significant depth. Boats would have been needed. Another possibility  is that there were shallow  patches and islets spreading from the Mull of Kintyre to the Irish coast that made short hops to Ireland, but this has not been proved. What seems to be a viable hypothesis is that the peopling of Ireland initially came from the Isle of Man. As sea levels rose the already populated Isle of Man lost land to the sea, creating population pressure among the Mesolithic inhabitants of the Isle. A boat trip from the Isle of Man to Ireland is short and as safe as sea travel can be, so this looks like a viable route. As an explanation of the crossing route it fits with the fact that most early inhabitation sites  are in the North. 

 

The Settlers

Mallory makes the point that it is most likely that Ireland's Mesolithic settlers migrated via Britain, and he regards the relationship between the two islands as locked in a long-standing though often less than amicable relationship.  He follows the norm for prehistorians in thinking that  the Mesolithic inhabitants of both isles as having made little contribution to the genetics of Ireland,  but he sees more contribution in the genetic history provided by the Neolithic farmers, who came to the British Isles from the Middle East bearing agriculture with them. It is these who made the great neolithic monuments of the two isles. Significant trade routes emerged and there was a common culture between Britain and Ireland, though in the later Neolithic some cultural divergences  arose. Mallory does not analyse cultural divergences in detail, as he is more concerned with origins. However, he discusses the significance of the third group of incomers, the Beaker Folk, a group who introduced metallurgy and possibly brewing to the British Isles. 

It is this group who were to give him the kind of bad luck that bedevils historical authors, for he concluded his work only for archaeologists discovered that the Beaker Folk, or a related culture, may have been the beneficiaries of a major pandemic, possibly Yersinia pestis, the Black Death, which swept through the British Isles subsequent to the construction of Stonehenge, possibly killing ninety per cent of the Neolithic inhabitants of Britain and eighty per cent of the Irish population.    A hasty amendment had to be made to the book. Unlike the Neolithic folk, who were almost certainly brown, these folk originating in the steppes were white and they were responsible for the white skin of the British and Irish up to our time.   

Mallory is luckier in his dealing with the Celtic Invasion, which did not happen. Nineteenth century historians postulated a Celtic invasion of Ireland to account for Celtic cultural elements in Irish art, but later scholars have replaced the invasion with cultural influences in the first century BC. The Irish were not ever a Celtic people, though there were probably cultural affinities with the Celtic tribes of Gall and Spain.

The book deals well with one puzzling element in the relationship between the two islands. Why were there on the East coast of Ireland a few tribes with British names, such as the Brigantes, a tribe from North East England corresponding to the Brigantes of South East Ireland. Mallory raises the issue  in the context of political relationships in the British Isles in the pre-Roman period, but the issue is not resolved. He also relates this question to the issue of the languages spoken in Ireland.

One subject that Mallory deals with is the issue of the Romans in Ireland. There was a Roman presence in the isle, but it was not one of conquest, but rather of trade. The author does well to highlight this subject, which has hardly been a topic for popular history. It is known that Rome had cultural impact beyond its boundaries in states outside the empire, so it is not beyond belief that Roman cultural elements occur in Ireland. 

Language

A language is integral to a people's identity and this is so with Irish, which has survived against the odds despite at times being written off for extinction.The puzzle is when did the Gaelic language come to Ireland.It seems that the Celtic tongues are members of the Indo-European family, but the origins of this family, which seems to have expanded with the spread of agriculture, seem to lie in modern day Turkey, though Turkish is not one of them. Maĺlory discounts any statement that Gaelic arose from the Mesolithic population of Ireland, as they were pre-agricultural. But he also rejects the belief that these languages came with the Neolithic settlers .A theory is that the Neolithic folk spoke a Northwest African tongue, but this does not meet Mallory's approval, and he gives short shrift to the claim, though I believe that the issue has not been satisfactorily resolved yet.

One theory is that it arose as a patois for those working and trading along the coasts of Western Europe, but Mallory dismisses this as it does  not have some of the linguistic signs of a language that arose as a trading medium. Instead, Mallory opts for a late date in the Irish Iron Age. This does not convince me and I think that  the issue is resolved yet and it may never be.

The palaeogenetic discovery  of the disruption of European populations in Britain and Ireland, probably by plague, which is revealed near the end of the book, may have an answer. The new population who swamped the earlier settlers, were almost certainly part of an Indo-European speaking population  and thus would most certainly have introduced their language to the British Isles. It  is not necessary to postulate that Gaelic arose there and then, but its roots certainly lie there. There was certainly more linguistic evolution to go on, especially the phonetic development which saw the Celtic tongues evolve in the linguistic split between P Celtic and Q Celtic tongues, to the latter of which Gaelic belongs. But there is more work remaining to be done. 

This was an informative, enjoyable and well written work well worth reading and available at a reasonable price. I commend it to readers. 

 

I am an Amazon associate and earn money from qualifying purchases on this page. 

Updated June 30, 2023

Comments

frankbeswickAug 6, 2023

I do not think that there is currently any difference between the diets.

DerdriuMarrinerAug 5, 2023

The land and the sea animal populations of ancient and modern Ireland intrigue me.

Would you say that the northern and the republican Irish get their protein more from land or from sea life? In other words, would I find more land- or more sea-based protein sources if I would access northern and republican Irish recipes throughout time?

frankbeswickAug 3, 2023

The land was short of animals for food, but the ocean was stocked with fish that swam where they chose.

DerdriuMarrinerAug 2, 2023

The second paragraph to your first subheading, The Beginnings, considers that "The book pays serious attention to the initial stages of the peopling of the land and the establishment of its fauna. This is welcome because this issue is oft-neglected. The glaciers destroyed all life on the island, both animal and fish, meaning that the early settlers came to a land which was prone to famine."

Is the sea world around Ireland inhabited only by non-native fishes? If so, who might have introduced them from where?

frankbeswickJul 22, 2023

The Tocharian and Gaelic languages belong to the Indo European group which originated in Anatolia, so there is ban affinity, but they do not have a specially definable connection.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 22, 2023

I do not have access to the Barber book at this moment.

But my memory is that she listed among the mysteries of the light-eyed, light-skinned, slender, tall Urumchi mummies of the Tarim River Basin between India and China that they speak a language most related to the group to which Gaelic belongs even as they seem to have an ancient Iranian connection.

Would that suggest some predecessory kinship with the ancestors of the Irish or would it suggest that perhaps Tocharian was not their native language?

frankbeswickJul 21, 2023

Horses are an Irish passion, but the geographical distance between the Irish and the
Tarim river people's implies a large difference in time between the contacts between the people's.I think that the Trojan connection is a red herring, as Trojans were not a distinct race or culture, they were a town in the broader cultural life of Anatolia that was destroyed.. no connections with Ireland can be discerned

DerdriuMarrinerJul 21, 2023

Elizabeth Wayland Barber associates ancient Irish, Tarim River Basin peoples and Trojans with perfecters of horse-raising and textile-making, with residents near salt licks and with settlers of strategic sites with stunning views.

She identifies Tarim River Basin peoples, known as the Urumchi mummies, as speaking the Tocharian language, close to no language apart the group to which Gaelic belongs.

Would you say that her associations of horses, salt, sites and textiles apply to what we know to be true of the ancient Irish?

frankbeswickJul 21, 2023

Your suggestion that a folk memory is augmented by subsequent memories is absolutely correct. Several different ones become fused into one single memory.

There is no memory of a giant flood in the British Isles, we had the story of Noah for that. Anyway, the story of Atlantis tells of a spectacular and unique event. However we have tales of localized flooding. There is a folk memory of flooding in Cardigan Bay which is supported by evidence from oceanography , and in Cornwalll legend speaks of the drowning of the land of Lyonesse

DerdriuMarrinerJul 20, 2023

I like that suggestion of a folk memory.

Might there be a folk memory of such destruction in the British Isles or would such destruction be unthinkable in the context of how the waters around the British Isles behave?

Regarding Atlantis, would it be a case of one folk beginning that memory and others adding to it? Or would it be just the one memory and, if so, with what ancient country or ancient continental area?

frankbeswickJul 19, 2023

I am not a believer in Plato's Atlantis story. I think Atla6ntis is a folk memory of towns destroyed by water

DerdriuMarrinerJul 19, 2023

Black and red are supposed to have been the colors of Atlantis.

Perhaps that can be equivalent to saying that green is the color of Ireland or that gray, green, orange, pink, purple, red, white and yellow respectively invoke Kahoolawe, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, Kauai, Hawaii (island not state), Niihau and Oahu.

My brother could read fast and photographically. He found, among the Family History Library books when we were genealogizing in Salt Lake City, two unusual books.

One book, by James Taylor (not the singer), gave Lake Titicaca as the true setting for Argonauts, Golden Fleece and Jason. Another book gave black and red, based on sources from the ancientest to the recentest, as the colors of Atlantis.

My brother said, without concluding or suggesting anything, that the only, strongest association he knew for those colors is Germany.

frankbeswickJul 18, 2023

I don't know anyone who believes in Atlantis or its supposed connection with Ireland. I did not know of the significance of black and red.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 18, 2023

Online sources as newspaper articles predominantly from the early 2000s attempt to link Irish ancestors with Atlantis.

One source considers Hy-Brasil -- upon which the musical Brigadoon is based -- as Atlantis sinking beneath the waves after one day of visibility every 7 years.

Another source correlates Atlantis with Ireland because the former and the latter flaunt middle areas as thickest.

On this, western-pond side a tradition from Edgar Cayce and another from European-ancestored Mexicans respectively deposit Atlantis off Biimini -- where humanmade structures have been identified -- and as a place recreated as Tenochtitlan in what is now central Mexican City. The latter identify black and red as Atlantis colors.

Is the Atlantis-Hy-Brasil-Ireland suggestion still in vogue on your eastern Atlantic pond side?

Would there by any historic association, extant or extinct, between the Irish and the colors black and red?

frankbeswickJul 17, 2023

Wise woman, as you ever are.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 17, 2023

Thank you!

Me too, I like Wizzley without this aggressive, oft incorrect spell checker. I must read my comments maintes fois before I submit and then another maintes fois to make sure of the submission!

frankbeswickJul 17, 2023

The Beaufort Dyke is .named after Admiral Beaufort, a royal naval oceanographer who mapped the seabed round the British Isles. The Dyke does not intentionally sabotage the crossings,but is a natural impediment to engineering projects, as the Dyke deepens the sea and makes potential bridge building inviable. But the other problem is that after world war two it became a dumping ground for unwanted ammunition,including poison gas and bombs. These are sometimes washed ashore.

Some confusion has been caused by the spell checker, which has converted my proper English from D y k e, which refers to a trench, to d u k e.

Wizzley, when are you going to get rid of this destructive programme?

DerdriuMarrinerJul 17, 2023

Your first comment on blackspanielgallery's questions considers the problematic Beaufort Dyke.

Does anyone, anything anywhere furnish the when, where and why of the naming of such a problematic area? Its anti-environmentalism and its sabotaging Irish Sea and Ireland-Scotland crossings lead me to think of this as not a naming that one would want to be associated with.

Online sources mention Henry Somerset as 12th Duke of Somerset and current head of the House of Beaufort parented by the House of Plantagenet. They note his involvement, as The Listening Device rock group singer/songwriter, with Highclere -- known for "locally and sustainably sourced products" -- Rocks concert 2006. They also observe his first marriage to environmentalist Tracy Louise Ward.

Would it be possible for the current duke to try to do something about Beaufort Dyke? Would Beaufort Dyke be a possibility for an Earthshot prize?

frankbeswickJul 17, 2023

There is evidence of animals crossing the Irish Sea. The common shrew, which burrows with its snout, is found in Britain but not Ireland, and this points to its limitation that it cannot successfully forage in wet ground; whereas the pygmy shrew, which forages on the surface and can find food on wet ground, is native to Britain and Ireland. It must have made its way to Ireland without human intervention, so there must have been a landbridge, but it must have been very wet.

frankbeswickJul 17, 2023

The precise depth of glacial ice and the fullness of coverage is not clear. But between Scotland and Northern Ireland lies the Beaufort Dyke, which is deep and probably filled with Atlantic water quite quickly. Whether the ice above this trench was at crossing time capable of sustaining a crossing is not known. As you get further south the problems do not disappear, and it is likely that the Irish Sea filled up from the south with Atlantic water. We cannot rule out an Irish Sea crossing, but where it would have been we know not.

blackspanielgalleryJul 17, 2023

I see no reference to any Viking influence. Since the Vikings have left traces of early visits as far as North America, and have certainly gone into England, France and even Russian rivers, it seems unlikely they did not have some contact with Ireland.

As for the path of settlers, glaciers provide excellent bridges. Perhaps the depth of the Irish Sea was a result of glaciers. When an ice sheet is thick its weight depresses the land underneath it. That land often remains a depression after the glacier melts, as is the case with the Great Lakes in north America. Perhaps the glacier caused the depth of the Irish Sea. As the ice melted its density would have caused it to float, maintaining a bridge.

There would have been organic material below the glacier, caused by the remains of plants and animals. Glacial runoff could have swept these nutrients into the sea, attracting sea life. Sea life could have easily arrived via the Gulf Stream, which may not have been in its exact current position.

frankbeswickJul 9, 2023

None at all.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 8, 2023

It had to have been quite overwhelming to lose inheritances in so many ways, even through forced marriages.

It's a bit surprising to me that such a measure was not thought of before King John. King William I and -- particularly if the worst turns out true regarding Brihtric Meaw -- his wife looked like they had thought invasion through takeover out most carefully.

Might there be any rumors or traditions about which Saxon names were involved in the lost royal treasury?

frankbeswickJul 7, 2023

John initiated a system whereby Saxon heiresses were forced to marry Normans, which shows that Saxons were not entirely spent. But people were thinking of themselves as English. But that did not prevent Saxon resentments, hence Saxon participation in the loss of the treasury.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 7, 2023

Matilda was considered Norman even as her husband Geoffrey, who always wore broom blossom (planta genista), was Angevin, correct?

How were the Angevins/Plantagenets viewed by the Normans, and how were the Normans viewed by the Angevins/Plantagenets? And were the Saxons equally upset by both Angevins/Plantagenets and Normans or were they more upset by one than another?

Were the Angevin Plantagenets impressed that Normans -- whom they otherwise might have looked down on as bucolic and rustic -- managed to wrestle England from the Saxons?

VeronicaJul 7, 2023

Whilst I agree with the corruption theory, I disagree about the idea of Saxon involvement. The Saxons were a spent force by this time. It was 150 years after the Norman invasion and in fact, John was John Plantagenet, a Plantagenet King. Not Norman. SAXONS were largely assimilated.

Also, as Monarch, they were John 's jewels so whilst his nobles might have stolen them, John had no need to.

frankbeswickJul 7, 2023

Certainly, but thevwholevstory reeks of corruption.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 6, 2023

It can be elucidatingly pertinent to consider what the sources are for the loss of the Royal Treasure as King John was crossing the Wash.

How do we know about that loss? Is the source King John or someone within his coterie? Might it not therefore not be true that it was lost but instead was taken by him and his Normans at a different place and time?

If the Saxons took the treasure, would not King John and his supporters have been immediately suspicious and lividly vindictive?

frankbeswickJul 6, 2023

The Wash is shallow. The wreckage of wagons would easily stand out, but there was no wreckage found and no treasure.It had been, in colloquial English, nicked.

frankbeswickJul 6, 2023

I have always thought that the treasure was looted. Maybe by Normans, but the oppressed Saxons were not averse to stealing from their Norman oppressors.

frankbeswickJul 6, 2023

A continental origin in Europe makes the most sense, butIrish mythology tends to think of Spain or of places in classical myth. A British Homeland was never considered.

VeronicaJul 5, 2023

Derdriu
that is far more likely. :)

DerdriuMarrinerJul 5, 2023

Veronica, Thank you for all the tallies of how briefly Norman monarchs ruled England in England.

Not only was King John rude to the Irish nobility but also he was careless about the royal treasure, "lost" in his crossing the Wash.

Or would it be possible that the Normans took the treasury to the south Channel side that they loved so much and merely represented it as being lost in the Wash?

DerdriuMarrinerJul 5, 2023

There's a theory among emigration/immigration/migration researchers -- of whom I can be considered one with graduate work on comparative German and Japanese migration to Latin America -- that people who leave one place preferentially seek another place like what they know.

Theory supporters -- of whom I'm neither an opponent or a proponent -- mention in support of that theory such examples as the Dutch in Indonesia and in Surinam.

Generally, I relate Irish ancestors to continental homelands.

Would you consider that island-homeland possibility for ancientest Irish?

frankbeswickJul 3, 2023

It varies withbthe individual monarch. The Tudors were very intelligent, but the Stuarts and Hanoverians were none too clever.

frankbeswickJul 3, 2023

The Normans were landgrabbers, they needed to boost the supply of land to boost the rewards given to noblemen, who used to be given land in return for military service.so they plundered Ireland. This reminds me of a saying by the writer John Seymour, "The conflict is not between nations but between people and masters".

VeronicaJul 3, 2023

I doubt the British monarchs are intelligent enough to learn Irish Gaelic.

VeronicaJul 3, 2023

Even if Henry 11 did spend longer than other Norman kings in England, it was still only 14 years out of 34 .
The Normans merely wanted to own England and plunder its wealth. They were more interested in France. They did not even bother to learn English. Ireland was fairly inconsequential to the Norman Kings. King John visited Ireland and was very rude to the Irish nobility.

frankbeswickJul 3, 2023

The Norman kings spoke French but not English. The only time a British monarch used Irish was when she, El.Izabeth the Second, visited Ireland and spoke some prepared phrases.
The Normans did not need telling that Ireland was there, people knew of it for centuries before the Romans.

frankbeswickJul 3, 2023

Fishing grounds in the Irish Sea are shared between th.e European Union and The UK according to international law. The large eels are in inland waters and therefore belong to the country in whose territory the lake is. A really big eel might be sold to a fishmonger.

DerdriuMarrinerJul 3, 2023

The computer crashed before I could continue to my next question about the Irish Sea.

Who gets to fish in the Irish Sea? Would there be fishers specifically interested in the huge eels there? And what would one do with a really big eel?

DerdriuMarrinerJul 3, 2023

It intrigues me that the Irish Sea is so-called when it just as easily could have been called the English Sea or the Welsh Sea. Is it an enduring reminder -- perhaps lost apart on Isles biogeography buffs -- that people such as Henry II knew Ireland was there and hardly could wait to become king to do something about it?

It seems to me that of the first Norman kings, Henry II spent more time in England than his predecessors. What would have been the language that he spoke when on the north side of the Channel and west side of the Irish Sea?

Wouldn't befriending and then opposing Thomas Becket and fighting the Irish have been big reasons for spending quite a bit of time in England (and Ireland)?

frankbeswickJul 1, 2023

His death was a supposed accident, but there are suspicions that Rufus' younger brother wanted the throne and that there were many barons who did not like Rufus. Does any more need saying?

VeronicaJun 30, 2023

Derdriu,
Like the other Norman kings, William Rufus spent much of his time in Normandy, France. He went hunting with his noble men in England and one of them shot him with an arrow and left his body where it fell. His brother Henry took over IMMEDIATELY. William is believed to have been lured there to be murdered.

The waterway was not called English Channel at this point in time. The word "Channel " is a later French influence on our language.

DerdriuMarrinerJun 30, 2023

Thank you, Veronica!

In a somewhat related, somewhat unrelated direction, how was it that William Rufus managed to get himself killed in New Forest, Hampshire, England even though he was ruling as William II (between father William I and brother Henry I)? Was it that he found English forests more of an untapped resource -- worth traveling back and forth over the English Channel (I wonder why the Normans didn't change it to the Norman Channel!) for --than Norman woodlands?

frankbeswickJun 30, 2023

Well said Veronica.

frankbeswickJun 30, 2023

Eels and lampreys have always been distinguished from each other.Irish lakes are rich in eels, as indeed are the waters of the British Isles.

VeronicaJun 30, 2023

Derdriu,
There are some massive eels in Irish waters.

I would doubt that Henry 1st ever tasted British eels. Norman kings hardly visited Britain. They preferred France,: William 1st died there as did Henry 1st himself. The Normans had no interest in England other than taking money out of it. King Richard the Lionheart, a descendant of the Norman kings, only spent a few months in England during a 10 year reign and did not even speak English.

DerdriuMarrinerJun 30, 2023

Two questions arise in a somewhat related, somewhat unrelated direction from your comment in that second paragraph to The Beginnings subheading.

The last sentence in that paragraph comments that "migratory fish, such as salmon and eels, were able to arrive on their own." British Isle eels always make me think of our understanding on this, western-pond side that King Henry I died of a "surfeit of lampreys."

Might that be the cause of death generally accepted on your, western-pond side?

Also, would lampreys be the eels in Irish waters and would they have historic through contemporary appeal to the Irish (hopefully, not to the point of a "surfeit" ;-{)?

frankbeswickJun 30, 2023

Veronica, I have promised Carl that I wiĺl lend him the book, but you can be next after him to borrow it. But readers might be impressed to know that whenever I have lent you a book it always returns in perfect condition.

frankbeswickJun 30, 2023

The Irish elk was extincted probably due to hunting, but it was an evolutionary failure because its antlers were too heavy and because they used up far too much calcium, certainly more than was gòod for their overall nutrition.

frankbeswickJun 30, 2023

We are uncertain as to whether pigs were transported or whether wild pigs made their way across, but there are neither historical accounts nor legends as to who brought cattle and bangers. The events occurred too long ago, to be known to history.

DerdriuMarrinerJun 30, 2023

The second paragraph to your first subheading, The Beginnings, ends with mention of early animal imports as badgers, cattle and pigs.

The Hawaiian archipelago is not endemic and native animal-rich because of its beginnings in lava flows. Research is quite impressive about what was there and what was a canoe animal or canoe plant thanks to the Polynesians or a fly-by or a swim-by.

Might there have been similar research about who brought all those badgers, cattle and pigs from where and when to the Emerald Isle?

VeronicaJun 30, 2023

A fascinating article and you make several points which certainly dispel many myths, namely the use of the term Celts, the method and starting points for crossing the Irish Sea and the language origin.

I am delighted you like your book !
frankbeswick
frankbeswick
436 articles
★ Editor's Choice
FollowMessage

Related articles

  • A Strong Woman's Story
  • Sarn Helen. Through Wales on foot
  • Surprise at Stonehenge
  • Between Britain: A Review