Talk:Gaels: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:11, 4 March 2007 editManopingo (talk \| contribs)200 edits →western Scotland ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 18:47, 6 October 2024 edit undoKowal2701 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users16,696 editsm →top: add wikiproject banner, Added {{WikiProject Anthropology}}, replaced: WikiProject Anthropology\|class= → WikiProject Anthropology\|oral-tradition=yesTag: AWB
(423 intermediate revisions by 93 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header}}
	{{Ethnic groups\|class=Start\|importance=High}}
			{{afd-merged-from\|Gaels of Scotland\|Gaels of Scotland\|14 July 2019}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=B\|1=
			{{WikiProject Ethnic groups\|importance=High}}
			{{WikiProject Celts\|importance=high}}
			{{WikiProject Scotland\|importance=Top\|scotsgaelic=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Ireland\|importance=high \|attention= \|peer-review= \|old-peer-review= }}
			{{WikiProject Isle of Man \|importance=mid}}
			{{WikiProject Anthropology\|oral-tradition=yes
			}}
			}}
			{{ScE}}

			== Ethnic group vs Ethno-Linguistic ==
			Why is someone altering this article to present Gaels as an Ethno-Linguistic group rather than an Ethnic group? This is not at all the norm for other ethnic groups on wikipedia. Gaels are an Ethnic group and should be respected as such. Can someone explain why Gaels are singled out on wikipedia with this term and not other groups? ] (]) 09:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

			:In effect it is one Pazymuk who is changing it into an ethnic group without giving proper evidence. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 10:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	==Definition of a Gael?==

			::Evidence? That the Gaels are an ethnic group? Are you serious? ] (]) 11:21, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	Can anybody come up with one? I would say it is membership of a cultural world and, formerly, of a political world as well. But that is off the top of my head. That way the Muintir Mhic Gearailt in the Fíor-Ghaeltachta in ] and the ] of ] are included, an important fact considering those of'' patrilineal'' Norman stock make up a substantial part of the modern ]. I was reading a book a while ago and it was dedicated by ] to the late ] praising the latter as a 'Fíor-Ghael'(true Gael). This would indicate he shared the same definition. However at a certain point in our history- Dónall Ó Néill's Remonstrance in 1317 springs to mind- a Gael was one who claimed descent along the ''patrilineal'' line to the Milesian invasion of Ireland. So, if your sister married a Mac Gearailt, her children they were no longer Gaeil under Ó Néill's interpretation. In other words, a Gael was defined by blood on the male line by that particular source (and others), although even then this view was nowhere near universal. At any rate, I invariably use the word 'Irish' as it, unfairly or not, still sounds more inclusive and progressive. But I'd still like to know how the rest of you define a Gael, both modern and historical types. ] 02:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

			:::Yes, I am serious. I want proof that what you claim is correct. We work here based on sources, not personal ideas. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 11:26, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	:A Gael is a Gaelic speaker. The dichotomy within Gaelic society is quite simple ; Gael = Gaelic speaker, Gall = Non-Gaelic speaker. There are some other aspects which might be taken into account but this is the basis of it. ] 12:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

			::::What makes US an ethno-linguistic group as opposed to an ethnic group? You are the one using a rather muddled word, the burden is on YOU. There is zero doubt that Gaels are an Ethnic Group. ] (]) 17:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	::If a person learns to speak Gaelic do they become a Gael?
			::::Also, who else is listed as an ethno-linguistic group on wikipedia? Ive seen no others. ] (]) 17:06, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	::] 19:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
			::::An ethnic group is a grouping of humans who identify with each other on the basis of shared attributes such as traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion or social treatment. How exactly are you claiming we ARENT an ethnic group? ] (]) 17:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

			:::::Do youy have any evidence of your claims? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 17:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	I will shortly be visiting the United States. I am interested in experiencing the significant population (0.00879%) of this
			:::::Ow, see also ], ], ], ], ], ], and others, all ethno-linguistic groups. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 17:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	ethno-linguistic group. How do they differ from the rest of the population ethnically and culturally? Where can I find them and how will I recognise them?
	] 10:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

			::::::Gaels are to Persians as Celts are to Iranian peoples. ] (]) 17:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	:According to Misplaced Pages The ] are a nation and an '''ethnic group''' indigenous to Scotland. As an ethnic group, Scots are a composition of several groups such as Picts, Gaels, Brythons and others. Are the ] also an ethnic group? What about ] or ]s?

			:::::::And? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 18:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	:Are the Gaels an ] within an ] within an ] ... or is Misplaced Pages just very silly?
	:] 16:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

			::::::::So why are you classifying us as an ethno-linguistic group rather than an ethnic group? ] (]) 19:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	== Etymology and first record of the Gaeil==

			== Why no mention of the other planation's of Ireland such as the earlier Munster one or the later plantations by the Stuart's outside of Ulster? ==
	I just noticed this, 'The Gaels, during the beginning of the Christian era (at which time Gaelic people were mostly restricted to Ireland)'. I'm open to correction here but wasn't the very identity, Gaeil, a product of incursions into modern day Wales where the the local inhabitants called the arriving Irish 'Gwyddel', or savages, out of which came geídil and goidel and thus the Goidelic tongues? If it is true that the Gaeil were so called due to their very lack of restriction to Ireland, my second question is: what is the earliest known record of an Irish community being referred to as 'Gaeil'? ] 03:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
			Just curious why only the planation's of ulster are mentioned even though the planation's of Ireland in general were horrific especially the 1583 ones or what about the Cromwell planation's? Also the reason given for the ulster planation's isn't accurate, the main reason was because of the nine years war, which ended with the land being confiscated by GB, the Irish were to rebellious to be left unchecked in ulster. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	:The etymology of the name seems to have a Welsh origin but 'identity' is an entirely different matter. ] 12:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
	: : I disagree that the origin is Welsh, I think it's an example of a false cognate - 'G-A-L' roots for certain tribes go back to Proto-Celtic. The regions of Galatia and Galicia have been called a testament to that, although I suppose no one has made the argument that "Galilee" was once Celtic. In any event, one would expect the modern word to be something like Gethil if 'Gwyddel' was the origin of the term. But regardless of all this - this is the English language Misplaced Pages, and "Gael" properly means a native{"Celtic"} inhabitant of Ireland, Scotland, or the Isle of Man quite irrespective of the language spoken. Gael is not the equivalent of Gaeilgeoir. - Caoimhin Roibeard <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 02:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
	::: The "Stair na Gaeilge" (History of Irish) section in my Leaving Cert Irish book gives the 'Gwyddel' explanation, so I'd go so far as to call it the official one, given that it's what's taught to Honours Irish students. Whether or not "Gael" now means the same thing as "Gwyddel" originally did is a different thing. ] 22:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

			== 1,770,000 Irish speakers isn't accurate. ==
	==Iberian origins==
			unless ye count being able to speak Irish as having a vocabulary of 5 words. Less than 2% of the population can speak Irish and even they are fluent in English. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 23:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)</small>
	The possible Iberian origins of the goidelic Celts in Britain, while an interesting hypothesis, is more based in myth than fact and until conclusive evidence is produced that this is historically accurate should not be stated as anything but myth with possible root in actual events.

			:Evidence? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 23:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
	]

			::https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp10esil/p10esil/ilg/
	I disagree. Evidence here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/1256894.stm
			::''Of the 1,761,420 persons who answered yes to being able to speak Irish, 418,420 indicated they never spoke it, while a further 558,608 indicated they only spoke it within the education system. Of the remaining group, 586,535 persons indicated they spoke Irish less often than weekly, 111,473 spoke weekly while just 73,803 persons spoke Irish daily'' No mention of how much Irish they could actually speak, but based on living in Ireland probably less than several words. those with a actual Irish speaking ability is around 73,803 persons <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 17:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	"The Welsh and Irish Celts have been found to be the genetic blood-brothers of Basques, scientists have revealed.
	The gene patterns of the three races passed down through the male line are all "strikingly similar", researchers concluded.

			:::How often you speak something and how well you do speak it when you speak it are not the same thing. I'm sure the high figure includes some rather rusty speakers but then again, not every speaker of English in the UK speaks it a) daily and b) well. This is debated in detail on the ] page, no need to re-iterate everything here. Take it up with the census people. ] (]) 17:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
	Ethnic links: Many races share common bonds

	Basques can trace their roots back to the Stone Age and are one of Europe's most distinct people, fiercely proud of their ancestry and traditions.

			::::Ye are pulling my leg...If someone doesn't speak a language on a monthly or even weekly basis it can be assumed that they probably can't speak that language at all that would be pretty logical assertion to make, the census doesn't ask about the proficiency of their Irish just if they speak it, might as well ask me if I can speak French because I can say "la revolution" doesn't mean I actually speak French and doesn't mean these people can speak Irish. 1,761,420 figure on this article is wrong and misleading on every level. I know I live here no one can speak this language outside of a tiny minority and these are located in Gaeltacht isolated villages and speak English fluently, there are more people in Ireland who speak Polish than Irish. There's a difference between rusty and never being able to speak the language, those ''speakers'' were born speaking English the mother tongue of Ireland and their definition of speaking Irish is knowing 3 words like póg mo thóin. The above source clearly states that ''418,420 indicated they never spoke it'' so they can be removed from the number first of all, those 586,535 who spoke it within the education system only did so because it was mandatory and if their like me they probably failed that class spectacularly with a vocab of only a dozen words. 70,000 is probably a more accurate number but even that seems to high.<!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	The research adds to previous studies which have suggested a possible link between the Celts and Basques, dating back tens of thousands of years.

			:::::And again: evidence? Misplaced Pages is based on sources, not on personal opinions. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 10:39, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
	"The project started with our trying to assess whether the Vikings made an important genetic contribution to the population of Orkney," Professor David Goldstein of University College London (UCL) told BBC News.

			:::::"I know..." "I never" are not evidence, get over yourself. Find reliable sources or you'll get ignored and/or reverted. ] (]) 11:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
	'Statistically indistinguishable'

			== Merger discussion ==
	He and his colleagues looked at Y-chromosomes, passed from father to son, of Celtic and Norwegian populations. They found them to be quite different.
			I don't quite see the point of the ] page and it feels somewhat artificial. While I've occasionally heard the term Scots Gaelic people, I've never come across it quite with that definition (i.e. Scots Gaelic people = Highlander), especially since Gaelic is not exclusive to the Highlands and while the page has sources, it doesn't seem to have one for the definition of the term itself and might be OR? ] (]) 09:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

			:'''Support''' Looks like largely double with Gaels. And it looks like a way to circumvent the earlier merge decided at ]. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 09:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
	"But we also noticed that there's something quite striking about the Celtic populations, and that is that there's not a lot of genetic variation on the Y-chromosome," he said. "

			::(a bit off-topic but since you seem to know a lot about articles in this area, have you seen ] by the same page author, which reads rather similar in style and seems a bit flimsy to me too but it's not my area of expertise. ] (]) 09:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC))
	The study can't be considered conclusive as is noted by the researchers performing the study. Studies on MtDNA and X-chromosomes have yet to be carried out. ] 04:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

			:::With a quick look, I would say it has the same problems. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 10:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
	You are all forgetting the fact that the inhabitants of Britain and Ireland were never Celts; they had a ''culture'' that was ''generally'' Celtic. But it was not a word they ever used for themselves. ] 11:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

			::::'''<s>Support</s>''' per the points already made and I was about to say the same re concerns raised at ]. These articles have the feel of being created to advance a thesis. ] (]) 10:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
	:They were Celts and this ridiculous point - that they never called themselve Celts - is irrelevant and simply ignorant of the nuances of language. The Persians never called themselves Persians - this word is a Western creation of Greek origin derived from the name of a region within Iran but that doesnt for a second change the fact that the Persians are Persians regardless of the fact they did not historically refer to themselves as such in their own language. You think the Indo-European peoples referred to themselves as 'Indo-Europeans'? Do you think the Neandarthals referred to themselves as Neandarthals? Of course not but this doesnt change the fact that both the Indo-European people and the Neandarthals are referred to by those terms in the English language.

			::::I'm ] that there is no material worth retaining for a merger and the artice should simply be deleted. ] (]) 12:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
	:As for the DNA evidence Epf i read about it at the time but completely forgot about it. Very interesting and very pertinent.]

			== Origin myth ==
	:No Celts ever called themselves by that name. Instead, we generally referred to ourselves in reference to our tribes, or families. Hell, "Gael," or whatever the root of that word is, originally meant "outsider," or "foreigner," yet today I'm damned proud to call myself a Gael. <span style="background-color: #008000"><font color="#ffffff">]</font></span> 06:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

			This segment:
	== Neutrality of article ==

			{{talkquote\|1=In their own national epic contained within medieval works such as the Lebor Gabála Érenn, the Gaels trace the origin of their people to an eponymous ancestor named Goídel Glas. He is described as a Scythian prince (the grandson of Fénius Farsaid), who is credited with creating the Gaelic languages. Goídel's mother is called Scota, described as an Egyptian princess. The Gaels are depicted as wandering from place to place for hundreds of years; they spend time in Egypt, Crete, Scythia, the Caspian Sea and Getulia, before arriving in Iberia, where their king, Breogán, is said to have founded Galicia.}}
	This article involves more the lingusitic group of Gaelic speakers and these people are not officially unified in any sense other than language. The article is also largely original research and mostly POV without any valid sources or citations stating the existence of a "Gaelic ethnic group" or people. If it deals with the ancient Gaels, then there is no issue but the current article does not represent that and is referring to groups of people who can currently speak the Gaelic languages. There is already an article on the Gaelic language elsewhere and this article may soon be nominated for deletion if not cleaned up. ] 04:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

			needs clarification that modern scholars do not take this origin myth (of a Middle/Near Eastern origin of the Gaels) seriously.
	:This is quite untrue im afraid Epf. Your suggestion that there is no gaelic 'unity' (offical or not, whatever you mean by this is unclear ) beyond language or any links between gaels is quite simply ignorant of the reality. As for accusations of POV and 'original research' i notice little in this article which is not historical fact,widely accepted theory or clearly qualified ( as mythological or whatever). ] 09:43, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

			See, e.g., ] for how WP should handle the "Scythian myth". <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — ] ] ] 😼 </span> 18:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
	:Erm ... the article is in an early form, and hasn't had much attention; so people have written about the ancient Gaels, but the modern Gaels are spoken about; if not enough, then the correct status for the article is stub. But the Gaels are an ethnic group, and that is orthodoxy. The article is in no way POV, so I'm removing the tag. - ] 16:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

			== Gael/Irish/Scottish ==
	Unverified statement: "large proportions of Gaelic speakers live in the cities of Glasgow and Edinburgh in Scotland". If we take the Census 2001 as a good indicator, I don't think most people would regard 1.2% and 0.9% respectively as "large" proportions of these cities. Alternatively, this statement might mean that large proportions of Scotland's Gaelic speakers live in Edinburgh and Glasgow. This is much more plausible, with respective proportions of c. 10% and 5%.--] 19:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
	: It clearly means proportion of Gaelic speakers rather than proportion of city-dwellers in Glasgow and Edinburgh, hence "large proportions of Gaelic speakers live in the cities of Glasgow and Edinburgh in Scotland". '''] ('']'')''' 20:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
	:: Hehe. It's about as clear as Mel Gibson's driving licence! Can I suggest "although large proportions of Scotland's Gaelic speakers live in the cities of Glasgow (c. 10%) and Edinburgh (c. 5%), as is the case in Galway and Dublin in Ireland." ?

			<del>It's completely inappropriate to claim/assume that every person identifying as 'Irish' or (especially) 'Scottish' today is 'ancestrally Gaelic', as this article seems to at times suggest. These terms do not correlate with Gaelic ancestry at all today. It is true that the gradual fusing of the Gaelic world with the English world in these regions has led to a blurring of the lines and a repeated watering down of what 'Irish' or 'Scottish' means to the point of near total irrelevance by this point, but there are large amounts of people identifying as Irish in Ireland today with Norse, Norman, English, Brittonic or other types of ancestry (full or partial). Even many prominent Irish nationalists who identified only as Irish were, at best, half 'Gaelic' by descent.
	==Anglo-Scots/Irish==
			In the case of Scotland, it's just absolutely beyond ludicrous. As they were overwhelmingly of non-Gaelic ancestry even at the time Gaelic's zenith in the region and many of the Gaelic-speakers themselves at that time were of Pictish or Norse descent.</del>
	An alternative, if strictly speaking more ambiguous and less accurate, term is available for tha Anglo-Scottish population - that of 'Lowland Scots' but what possible alternative is there for the Irish? The Anglo-Irish speaking population may well find it offensive to be class as such (though that is what they are ) but how else would one refer to them to distinguish them from the Irish Gaels? I need an answer because having 'Scots' and 'Irish' as related ethnic groups to the Gaels is simply ridiculous and needs to be altered.]
	: It is. Lowland Scot is silly though, since it implies that such a group of people actually exist (which they don't), and moreover, implies that all "Highland Scots" (and Galwegian Scots if these aren't lowland Scots) are Gaels, which they aren't. It'd be fine if we lived in the 18th century, but of course we do not. The only choice is to remove them from the list (as it is at least), or just say Anglo-Scots/Irish; but again, since the links are to "Scottish people" and "Irish people", this has the disadvantage that ethnic-Scots and ethnic-Irish are actually Scottish people and Irish people too. - ] 19:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
	::I think the easiest thing to do would simply be to revert the 'related ethnic groups' section simply to those directly related to the Gaels as other sub-groups of the Celtic language family/Celtic civilization ; the Breton French, Cornish English and Welsh. If we take the Anglo Scots and Irish into account because of the Gaelic influences then using the same rationale we should place the Australians, Canadians, Americans,Native Americans (especially in Canada : ]) New Zealanders, Norwegians, Icelanders etc etc as 'related' ethnic groups as well as they all have varying levels of Gaelic/Celtic influence as well? Where does it end? The simplest thing is simply to stick to those who have a direct relationship as part of the same grouping or family imo. ]
	::: Oldest sons always prefer primogeniture, don't they?! ;) Or perhaps I'm being cynical. You are correct though, to some extent at least. But there remains the problem that, no matter how ever much language use ought to be prescribed, you yourself once argued on the Scottish Gaelic language talk page that on wiki one has to slavishly reflect popular usage. Moreove, culture is not the same as language, and in both Ireland and Scotland, the principle, and in Scotland (outside Lothian) virtually the only means of language transition was through native Gaelic-speakers simply changing language (rather than immigration) through a process of which you yourself have experience, which I'm sure you'd admit allows their descendents to get classified as slightly closer to current speakers of the language than native American "Indians". - ] 20:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
	You make a totally valid point ( though i most point out that the American "Indians" referred to were as close, if not closer, to being 'Scottish' than many anglicized Scots given that their language was/is a Scottish Gaelic creole, that they were/are directly descended from Scots and that their culture was/is also, consequently, notably Scottish ) but the reason i propose a language qualifier is quite simply that its easier. As i said if we take 'influence' etc into account then where does it end? Its not really the most tangible of criteria/qualifiers while language is fairly easy. Perhaps we could have sub-categories within the 'related ethnicity' section such as Celtic: Breton, Welsh,Cornish and also 'Germanic' or 'Other' and then any people who also have close links or have been notably influenced by the Gaels? ]
	: If you put the ethnicity model used for most of the rest of the world on Scotland, then all of this makes sense. But most books on the topic avoid the awkward points that you make, for the obvious reason that this would eliminate most of the authors from Scottishness, of which they are generally immensely proud (as their society, whose structures and identity are of Gaelic origin, has made them out to be). Hence most users, who fall much lower down the intellectual food chain that these authors, will give you grief for your views. But anyways, I don't know how alterable the template is. It's probably best for the minute to delete Scots and Irish from the group, as most Gaels are either Scottish or Irish, and, as you say, keep it linguistic, permitting only the inclusion of the Welsh and Bretons (the modern Cornish are totally English, and have no place there according to the arguments you have outlined). - ] 21:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

			<del>When people identify as 'Scottish' today, they absolutely are not identifying as Gaelic. I can 100% assure you of this. Now you can absolutely make the case the term Scottish has been culturally appropriated by the vast majority of people using it today and how inappropriate it is (I firmly agree with that), especially considering many of the people using the term 'Scottish' today as a self-identifier are ancestrally descended from the people responsible for the near total, forced ethnocide of Gaels within Scotland historically.
	Tell that to a Roman in Caledonia and hed treat you with the derision you deserve, say it to a twentieth century nazi and he/she would probably agree that the "pure race" theory you propose makes Nazi sense (unless he was aware of the truth about the origines of Scotland's population being Britons and not Gaels, as the Roman would have told you between laughing and having you check out a map of where the Gaels come from in his era, and who lived in Scotland before it came under Irish influence and gained the name and confusion you seem to play on to condemn those you see as beneath you (going by what you have written here)] 04:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
			But this article is effectively lending validity and credence to that ethnocide of Gaels historically within northern Britain by suggesting what it at times does throughout this article. ] (]) 08:31, 5 August 2023 (UTC)</del> <small>Blocked sock. ] (]) 11:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)</small>
			:Do you have reliable sources for this or is it just your personal opinion? <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 10:17, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
			::He's sort of right regarding Scottish vs Gaelic identity, less so on the Irish one. There are sources for the disassociation between Gael(ic)ness and Scottishness but I don't have them to hand. I'm also not sure which bit of the article the IP is taking exception to, it would be helpful to know in rather less sweeping terms. ] (]) 11:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

			== Relatedness ==

			@] in your , you said: "...''why? Looks like a completely different ancestry''", does that logic not also apply to Norse-Gaels, Gaelicised Normans, Celtic Britons, Scottish Romani Travellers? ] (]) 00:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
			:Read the article about English people, I would suggest. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 00:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
			::I'm reading this one at present; can you explain your reasoning behind your edit? ] (]) 00:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
			:::English people, also called Anglo-Saxons, derive most of their Ancestry from German/Danish tribes. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 09:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
			::::Those are two assertions that require sources: 1.) Where's the source that says English people and Anglo-Saxons are synonymous? 2.) Where's the source that says that English people as a whole "''derive most of their Ancestry from German/Danish tribes''"? You also haven't explain the logic behind the: Norse-Gaels, Gaelicised Normans, Celtic Britons, and Scottish Romani Travellers. ] (]) 23:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
			:::::Please read the article about English people. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 00:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
			::::::I have, it doesn't support the claims you've made; hence the request for reliable sources to support your claims... ] (]) 09:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
			::::::@]: I see you've just undone the of the ] stuff. Would you be able to provide the sources that back the inclusion, or would it be better to take it to arbitration? ] (]) 11:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
			:::::::Did you actually read those articles? But yes, if you want a ], I would like that. <span style="border:1px solid green; padding:0 2px">] ]</span> 12:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
			::::::::Did I read them? Yes. Now do you have the sources? ] (]) 12:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
			What's the fuss suddenly about the "related groups"? Yes, it lacks sources in the infobox but the pages linked themselves contain numerous sources and none of them are controversial
			* Norse-Gaels/Gaelicised Normans: this is so uncontroversial it gives me a nosebleed, there were periods of intense Norse/Norman settlement and intermarriage with Gaels over many centuries to the extent that looking at a map of Lewis, one of the most Gaelic speaking islands today looks like a map of Iceland in funny spelling.
			* Celtic Britons: also uncontroverisal, there were centuries of toing and froing between the Gaels of ] and the Picts/Britons across the central belt of Scotland
			* Scottish Romani Travellers - if in doubt of a link between Gaels and travellers, research ]
			Yes, in an ideal world we source everything, but the reality is that nobody has that much time and that a lot of uncontroversial stuff is left unsourced for long periods. Which is where subject experts are due more weight than policy lawyers, so I'm with the Banner here. ] (]) 12:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

			:There is a bit of context that's being missed somewhat. The Banner removed an edit that was justified by an unsourced assertion that isn't in keeping with other pages on the subject matter (including what's cited on the English people page). If one is going to undo an edit based upon: "''...Looks like a completely different ancestry''" then that should surely apply to the groups listed there. As for ], that is a language; is it your position that 'relatedness' is defined by language? ] (]) 12:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
			::Sorry, say that again? I don't quite get what you're trying to say.
			::Regarding Beurla Reagaird, I have not read anything which unpicks whether the speakers of BR are travellers who somehow become fully Gaelic speaking OR whether they're Gaels who became travellers or both, but you cannot have a traveller group speaking an X-language based variant without intense/extended contact, so there's clearly a strong link, even though we cannot be sure at this stage (and perhaps not ever) about which way round this happened. ] (]) 13:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

			== Gaelic influenced areas ==
	Fair enough. Yes i agree with regard to the Cornish and normally wouldnt have placed them there but seeing as Manx was also involved i thought it would be consistent. ]

			The picture shown does not communicate the influence that Gaelic culture has on the non-Gaelic parts of Scotland like Orkney and Shetland. ] (]) 03:36, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
	The Scottish and Irish have been significantly influenced by Gaelic culture and language but you can not compare this influence with that on Canadians, Australians, Americans, etc as they are not ethnic groups in any shape or form and are merely citizens of those countries. I really do debate the Gaels as an existing modern ethnic group and the Gaels of Scotland are different than the Gaels of Ireland in both language and cultural terms. The Gaels of Ireland are very much Irish just as the Gaels of Scotland are Scottish. The Gaelic-speakers do have a linguistic connection with each other but can not be considered a single ethnic entity. I my opinion, as well as many others, they can't even be considered a modern "ethnic group" in its current accepted definition. I mean under the idea of this article, if someone just deicdes to learn a Gaelic language, whether it be Scots Gaelic or Irish, that deems a person a member of some non-existent "Gaelic ethnic group". Both non-Gaelic speaking Irish and Scottish people have a large degree of Gaelic influence in all aspects of their language, culture and origins, especially with the Irish who for example in Ireland have to learn Gaelic in school till a certain grade level. ] 05:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

			== Mythology ==

			It has been years since I was last on the page, but it seems that actual, important recorded history has been erased under the history page,and a section form mythology has been places as the first segment of history? Prior the rise in Irish identity, or nationality, there was never a mention that Gaels were related to egypt or Scythia, yet for 100s of years the Gaels amd Romans wrote mamy things.
	First of all the Gaels are an ethnic group. Ties between them are strong with official organizations existing to further and maintain links and there are significant levels of co-operation between them. I recommend you read up on the situation before making these arbitrary, incorrect, changes and statements. Secondly your attitude towards the Gaels as an ethnic group is entirely inconsistent with the attitudes expressed to me regarding ethnicity previously. Thirdly you cannot list "Irish" and "Scottish" peoples here as both terms includes the Gaels. If you wish to signify the influence on Anglo-Irish or Anglo-Scottish culture and peoples you have to qualify the peoples as such although their inclusion, as previously pointed out, means there are numerous others we should include. Are you seriously going to argue that Canada, with its historical population of hundreds of thousands of Gaels and existing population of Gaels, does not merit inclusion ? Similarly parts of the USA, notably the Carolinas, had huge populations of Gaels - are you going to argue that it has not been influenced to any significant degree by them? By restricting the 'related ethnic groups' to those directly related to the Gaels as part of the same greater language family or celtic civilization we avoid these pitfalls. ]

			This section should be under mythology and not history, as it is not history, its an Irish myth with no evidence to be history. ] (]) 15:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
	I don't see how my views regarding Gaels disagrees with my previous arguments with you on ethnic groups. I don't see them as a unified ethnic group though and although there are Gaelic speakers in both Scotland and Ireland, the people speak different Gaelic languages and are just as much part of indigenous Scottish and Irish peoples as to their own group of people. Canada and the USA can be said to be countries where Gaelic culture and language may had influence but there is no Canadian or American, etc. ethnic groups and they are not distinct peoples. Pretty muc hevery known ethnic group in the places like Canada and the US has had an impact on the identity there and on all of the citizens. Since the page shows them as a current lingusitic group anyway, I understand that their only "related groups" would be other Celtic speakers, regardless of origins or ethnicity. ] 16:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
	: As An Siarach says, they are an ethnic group. Moreover, even if you could succesfully argue they are not, you could not argue they never were. - ] 16:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
	:I do not believe Epf is arguing that they never existed, but that their existence now is merely of some similar linguistic ties and a few similar cultural traits. If the modern "Gaels" are an existing unified ethnic group then you could say the same for the Frisians, Dutch/Flemish and the English as some "West Germanics" ethnic group, and this is obviously not the case. ] 20:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
	:: The analogy doesn't work at all, saying modern Gaels constitute an existing ethnic group is less of a stretch than saying Norwegians Danes and Swedes constitute an ethnic group. The split between the different Gaelic communities has only really developed since outside domination, prior to that there was a common literary dialect and culture.. and today Gaels still haven't abandoned the idea of a common identity (also, there's nothing too different about their cultures, and the languages form a dialect continuum more than anything, much differant than the "West Germanic" situation).--] 06:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
	The existence of things such as IonadColmCille, the Sruth na Maoile radio program etc also demonstrate the existing unity between the groups. Worth considering as an example of the perception of 'brotherhood' or the Gaels as a single race is a line from the Runrig song "Fuaim a' Bhlair" :

			:Agreed. Especially now that DNA analysis provides a more reliable history than the opinions of medieval scribes. ] (]) 09:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
	:''Saidhdear mi sa' Fhraing 's sa Ghearmailt''
	:''Saidhdear mi air raointean Chanada''
	:''Saidhdear mi san Spàinn san Eadailt''
	:''Saidhdear mi ''''nam aghaidh fhein an Eirinn''' ''

	]

	==Ambiguous phrase==
	The last sentence in the section "Current Distribution" is extremely vague, it states: "There are between 500-2,000 Canadian Gaels although they are generally of a very advanced age...". What does the author mean here? That the mean age of this population is old? That they have been settled there for a long time now? If so, it should be stated in unambiguous terms.

	:I dont see whats ambiguous about it tbh. "they are generally of a very advanced age" seems to refer quite clearly to the fact that the age of the population is old. ]

	==Qualifications for Famous Gaels==
	Hi everyone, I though it might be a nice supplement to the article if we were to add a list of famous Gaels. I drafted a preliminary list of about 30 Gaels when, struck down by the weight of the disproportionate number of Irish Gaels I had included, I began frantically supplementing the list with as many famous Scottish Gaels as I could think of off the top of my head(The current list has a head count of around 45 or there abouts). It was only when An Siarach pointed out that including a member of Oi Polloi on the list was a bit silly that I was awakened from this frenzied trance.(: However, this does raise an interesting question regarding the qualifications for the list of Famous Gaels. i.e. what exactly are they?
	Example A: Seamus Heaney learned Irish during his school years and is a fluent speaker of Gaeilge. Seamus Heaney writes in English. Seamus Heaney has often translated works of Irish literature such as the Buile Shuibhne into English. Does He count as a 'famous gael?'
	Example B: Liam O'Flaherty was raised in the Aran Islands and spoke Irish as a first language. Like Heaney, Liam O'Flaherty also wrote almost exclusively in English. Does he not count as a 'Famous Gael?'
	Any opinions on what should be the qualification for inclusion? A generally accepted consensus would be handy before we go on to develop the list. Cheers. ] 16:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
	:Im not too big a fan of these "Famous X" type lists anyway and i think its especially gonna be troublesome creating/maintaining one for an ethnic group which is so clearly defined on the basis of language. King James IV spoke Gaelic fluently, yet few if any would class him or any of his immediately preceeding monarchs as Gaels. Perhaps the solution would simply to be to keep the list short and very elite - say 5-10 Gaels from the "Middle Gaelic" period when there was a single language from each of Scotland and Ireland and then a further 5-10 speakers of Irish/Scottish Gaelic respectively from more modern times ( this would of course take in a great many possible candidates from the colonial expansion - bear in mind the huge presence of Gaels in Northern America ). Perhaps it might be best to move the section from the article proper to a development user page until a proper criteria for inclusion is decided upon? ] 17:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

	==Misc Stuff that shouldn't be at the top of the page==
	What happened here?

	] 01:32, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


	Here's a question for our more learned types. Is there a connection between the English word Gale and Gael? It's not as silly as it sounds, at least not to me at this particular moment! Gael is apparently etymologically rooted in the Old irish, Goidel which itself comes from the Welsh word for the Irish, Gwyddel. Gwyddel in turn derives from the Welsh name for wild, which apparently the Irish raiders were in the 6th century. Any link?

	Gee, first I've heard of it! You have the orign of the term right, so, who knows?] 11:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


	==The List of Gaels==

	By what justification is Enda Kenny a Gael moreso than anyone else born in Ireland from the beginning of Gaelic culture to now? ] 00:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

	==Ethnic groups\|class is Start\|importance is High==
	Hi,
	I rated this article Start class. The sections it has have been expanded, but it is missing many sections such as language, culture, etc.
	--] 02:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

	== western Scotland ==
	I put western Scotland, instead of Scotland in the opening sentence. The Picts inhabited the eastern parts. ] 03:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

	:That doesn't make any sense ... Gaelic spread to eastern Scotland too. '''] ('']'')''' 03:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

	::What happened to the Picts? Or was it just language shift? ] 20:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:47, 6 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gaels article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2

Gaels of Scotland was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 July 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Gaels. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ethnic groups High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Celts High‑importance

	Gaels is within the scope of WikiProject Celts, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the ancient Celts and the modern day Celtic nations. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks or take part in the discussion. Please Join, Create, and Assess.CeltsWikipedia:WikiProject CeltsTemplate:WikiProject CeltsCelts
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland: Scottish Gaelic Top‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Scottish Gaelic task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Ireland High‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Isle of Man Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Isle of Man, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Isle of Man on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Isle of ManWikipedia:WikiProject Isle of ManTemplate:WikiProject Isle of ManIsle of Man
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Ethnic group vs Ethno-Linguistic

Why is someone altering this article to present Gaels as an Ethno-Linguistic group rather than an Ethnic group? This is not at all the norm for other ethnic groups on wikipedia. Gaels are an Ethnic group and should be respected as such. Can someone explain why Gaels are singled out on wikipedia with this term and not other groups? Pazymuk (talk) 09:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

In effect it is one Pazymuk who is changing it into an ethnic group without giving proper evidence. The Banner talk 10:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence? That the Gaels are an ethnic group? Are you serious? Pazymuk (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I am serious. I want proof that what you claim is correct. We work here based on sources, not personal ideas. The Banner talk 11:26, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

What makes US an ethno-linguistic group as opposed to an ethnic group? You are the one using a rather muddled word, the burden is on YOU. There is zero doubt that Gaels are an Ethnic Group. Pazymuk (talk) 17:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, who else is listed as an ethno-linguistic group on wikipedia? Ive seen no others. Pazymuk (talk) 17:06, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

An ethnic group is a grouping of humans who identify with each other on the basis of shared attributes such as traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion or social treatment. How exactly are you claiming we ARENT an ethnic group? Pazymuk (talk) 17:11, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Do youy have any evidence of your claims? The Banner talk 17:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Ow, see also Igorot people, Iranian peoples, Wanda people, Konongo people, Maithils, Kamrupi people, and others, all ethno-linguistic groups. The Banner talk 17:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Gaels are to Persians as Celts are to Iranian peoples. Pazymuk (talk) 17:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

And? The Banner talk 18:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

So why are you classifying us as an ethno-linguistic group rather than an ethnic group? Pazymuk (talk) 19:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Why no mention of the other planation's of Ireland such as the earlier Munster one or the later plantations by the Stuart's outside of Ulster?

Just curious why only the planation's of ulster are mentioned even though the planation's of Ireland in general were horrific especially the 1583 ones or what about the Cromwell planation's? Also the reason given for the ulster planation's isn't accurate, the main reason was because of the nine years war, which ended with the land being confiscated by GB, the Irish were to rebellious to be left unchecked in ulster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newfellower (talk • contribs) 23:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

1,770,000 Irish speakers isn't accurate.

unless ye count being able to speak Irish as having a vocabulary of 5 words. Less than 2% of the population can speak Irish and even they are fluent in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newfellower (talk • contribs) 23:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Evidence? The Banner talk 23:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp10esil/p10esil/ilg/

Of the 1,761,420 persons who answered yes to being able to speak Irish, 418,420 indicated they never spoke it, while a further 558,608 indicated they only spoke it within the education system. Of the remaining group, 586,535 persons indicated they spoke Irish less often than weekly, 111,473 spoke weekly while just 73,803 persons spoke Irish daily No mention of how much Irish they could actually speak, but based on living in Ireland probably less than several words. those with a actual Irish speaking ability is around 73,803 persons — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newfellower (talk • contribs) 17:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

How often you speak something and how well you do speak it when you speak it are not the same thing. I'm sure the high figure includes some rather rusty speakers but then again, not every speaker of English in the UK speaks it a) daily and b) well. This is debated in detail on the Irish language page, no need to re-iterate everything here. Take it up with the census people. Akerbeltz (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Ye are pulling my leg...If someone doesn't speak a language on a monthly or even weekly basis it can be assumed that they probably can't speak that language at all that would be pretty logical assertion to make, the census doesn't ask about the proficiency of their Irish just if they speak it, might as well ask me if I can speak French because I can say "la revolution" doesn't mean I actually speak French and doesn't mean these people can speak Irish. 1,761,420 figure on this article is wrong and misleading on every level. I know I live here no one can speak this language outside of a tiny minority and these are located in Gaeltacht isolated villages and speak English fluently, there are more people in Ireland who speak Polish than Irish. There's a difference between rusty and never being able to speak the language, those speakers were born speaking English the mother tongue of Ireland and their definition of speaking Irish is knowing 3 words like póg mo thóin. The above source clearly states that 418,420 indicated they never spoke it so they can be removed from the number first of all, those 586,535 who spoke it within the education system only did so because it was mandatory and if their like me they probably failed that class spectacularly with a vocab of only a dozen words. 70,000 is probably a more accurate number but even that seems to high.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Newfellower (talk • contribs) 00:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

And again: evidence? Misplaced Pages is based on sources, not on personal opinions. The Banner talk 10:39, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

"I know..." "I never" are not evidence, get over yourself. Find reliable sources or you'll get ignored and/or reverted. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Merger discussion

I don't quite see the point of the Scots Gaelic people page and it feels somewhat artificial. While I've occasionally heard the term Scots Gaelic people, I've never come across it quite with that definition (i.e. Scots Gaelic people = Highlander), especially since Gaelic is not exclusive to the Highlands and while the page has sources, it doesn't seem to have one for the definition of the term itself and might be OR? Akerbeltz (talk) 09:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Support Looks like largely double with Gaels. And it looks like a way to circumvent the earlier merge decided at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Gaels of Scotland. The Banner talk 09:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

(a bit off-topic but since you seem to know a lot about articles in this area, have you seen Lowland Scots people by the same page author, which reads rather similar in style and seems a bit flimsy to me too but it's not my area of expertise. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC))

With a quick look, I would say it has the same problems. The Banner talk 10:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

~~Support~~ per the points already made and I was about to say the same re concerns raised at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scotland#Lowland_Scots_people. These articles have the feel of being created to advance a thesis. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm now of the opinion that there is no material worth retaining for a merger and the artice should simply be deleted. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Origin myth

This segment:

In their own national epic contained within medieval works such as the Lebor Gabála Érenn, the Gaels trace the origin of their people to an eponymous ancestor named Goídel Glas. He is described as a Scythian prince (the grandson of Fénius Farsaid), who is credited with creating the Gaelic languages. Goídel's mother is called Scota, described as an Egyptian princess. The Gaels are depicted as wandering from place to place for hundreds of years; they spend time in Egypt, Crete, Scythia, the Caspian Sea and Getulia, before arriving in Iberia, where their king, Breogán, is said to have founded Galicia.

needs clarification that modern scholars do not take this origin myth (of a Middle/Near Eastern origin of the Gaels) seriously.

See, e.g., Pictish language#Discredited theories for how WP should handle the "Scythian myth". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Gael/Irish/Scottish

It's completely inappropriate to claim/assume that every person identifying as 'Irish' or (especially) 'Scottish' today is 'ancestrally Gaelic', as this article seems to at times suggest. These terms do not correlate with Gaelic ancestry at all today. It is true that the gradual fusing of the Gaelic world with the English world in these regions has led to a blurring of the lines and a repeated watering down of what 'Irish' or 'Scottish' means to the point of near total irrelevance by this point, but there are large amounts of people identifying as Irish in Ireland today with Norse, Norman, English, Brittonic or other types of ancestry (full or partial). Even many prominent Irish nationalists who identified only as Irish were, at best, half 'Gaelic' by descent. In the case of Scotland, it's just absolutely beyond ludicrous. As they were overwhelmingly of non-Gaelic ancestry even at the time Gaelic's zenith in the region and many of the Gaelic-speakers themselves at that time were of Pictish or Norse descent.

When people identify as 'Scottish' today, they absolutely are not identifying as Gaelic. I can 100% assure you of this. Now you can absolutely make the case the term Scottish has been culturally appropriated by the vast majority of people using it today and how inappropriate it is (I firmly agree with that), especially considering many of the people using the term 'Scottish' today as a self-identifier are ancestrally descended from the people responsible for the near total, forced ethnocide of Gaels within Scotland historically. But this article is effectively lending validity and credence to that ethnocide of Gaels historically within northern Britain by suggesting what it at times does throughout this article. 2.99.72.43 (talk) 08:31, 5 August 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:24, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Do you have reliable sources for this or is it just your personal opinion? The Banner talk 10:17, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

He's sort of right regarding Scottish vs Gaelic identity, less so on the Irish one. There are sources for the disassociation between Gael(ic)ness and Scottishness but I don't have them to hand. I'm also not sure which bit of the article the IP is taking exception to, it would be helpful to know in rather less sweeping terms. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:08, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Relatedness

@The Banner in your recent edit, you said: "...why? Looks like a completely different ancestry", does that logic not also apply to Norse-Gaels, Gaelicised Normans, Celtic Britons, Scottish Romani Travellers? Alssa1 (talk) 00:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Read the article about English people, I would suggest. The Banner talk 00:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm reading this one at present; can you explain your reasoning behind your edit? Alssa1 (talk) 00:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

English people, also called Anglo-Saxons, derive most of their Ancestry from German/Danish tribes. The Banner talk 09:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Those are two assertions that require sources: 1.) Where's the source that says English people and Anglo-Saxons are synonymous? 2.) Where's the source that says that English people as a whole "derive most of their Ancestry from German/Danish tribes"? You also haven't explain the logic behind the: Norse-Gaels, Gaelicised Normans, Celtic Britons, and Scottish Romani Travellers. Alssa1 (talk) 23:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Please read the article about English people. The Banner talk 00:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

I have, it doesn't support the claims you've made; hence the request for reliable sources to support your claims... Alssa1 (talk) 09:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

@The Banner: I see you've just undone the removal of the WP:UNSOURCED stuff. Would you be able to provide the sources that back the inclusion, or would it be better to take it to arbitration? Alssa1 (talk) 11:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Did you actually read those articles? But yes, if you want a Misplaced Pages:Third opinion, I would like that. The Banner talk 12:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Did I read them? Yes. Now do you have the sources? Alssa1 (talk) 12:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

What's the fuss suddenly about the "related groups"? Yes, it lacks sources in the infobox but the pages linked themselves contain numerous sources and none of them are controversial

Norse-Gaels/Gaelicised Normans: this is so uncontroversial it gives me a nosebleed, there were periods of intense Norse/Norman settlement and intermarriage with Gaels over many centuries to the extent that looking at a map of Lewis, one of the most Gaelic speaking islands today looks like a map of Iceland in funny spelling.
Celtic Britons: also uncontroverisal, there were centuries of toing and froing between the Gaels of Dalriada and the Picts/Britons across the central belt of Scotland
Scottish Romani Travellers - if in doubt of a link between Gaels and travellers, research Beurla Reagaird

Yes, in an ideal world we source everything, but the reality is that nobody has that much time and that a lot of uncontroversial stuff is left unsourced for long periods. Which is where subject experts are due more weight than policy lawyers, so I'm with the Banner here. Akerbeltz (talk) 12:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

There is a bit of context that's being missed somewhat. The Banner removed an edit that was justified by an unsourced assertion that isn't in keeping with other pages on the subject matter (including what's cited on the English people page). If one is going to undo an edit based upon: "...Looks like a completely different ancestry" then that should surely apply to the groups listed there. As for Beurla Reagaird, that is a language; is it your position that 'relatedness' is defined by language? Alssa1 (talk) 12:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, say that again? I don't quite get what you're trying to say.

Regarding Beurla Reagaird, I have not read anything which unpicks whether the speakers of BR are travellers who somehow become fully Gaelic speaking OR whether they're Gaels who became travellers or both, but you cannot have a traveller group speaking an X-language based variant without intense/extended contact, so there's clearly a strong link, even though we cannot be sure at this stage (and perhaps not ever) about which way round this happened. Akerbeltz (talk) 13:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Gaelic influenced areas

The picture shown does not communicate the influence that Gaelic culture has on the non-Gaelic parts of Scotland like Orkney and Shetland. 84.203.151.5 (talk) 03:36, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Mythology

It has been years since I was last on the page, but it seems that actual, important recorded history has been erased under the history page,and a section form mythology has been places as the first segment of history? Prior the rise in Irish identity, or nationality, there was never a mention that Gaels were related to egypt or Scythia, yet for 100s of years the Gaels amd Romans wrote mamy things.

This section should be under mythology and not history, as it is not history, its an Irish myth with no evidence to be history. 2A02:C7F:C7A:4A00:81E1:550A:D9EC:2ABE (talk) 15:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Especially now that DNA analysis provides a more reliable history than the opinions of medieval scribes. Gortaleen (talk) 09:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Categories: