The Scots are a people of Celtic origin. Slavic people have lived in Scotland and Ireland since ancient times. Caledonia among the Romans

Scottish clans

Word clan(English) clan, Gaelic clann) is of Gaelic origin and translates as " children, offspring, descendants"(children, offspring, descendants). Historically, each Scottish clan was a tribal community - large group people who had hypothetical a common ancestor and united under the leadership of a leader or eldest in the family - a leader. The Scottish traditional clan system of the 14th-18th centuries was a unique connection, close to the Irish clans and septs, between the patriarchal-tribal and feudal ways of life, and both systems were inextricably linked and served as a mutual basis and support for each other.

Traditional clan system. The origins of the clan system must be sought in the 13th century, when the structure that preceded it began to collapse. The ancient Scottish tribal regions: Fife, Atholl, Ross, Moray, Buchan, Mar, Angus, Strathearn, Lennox, Galloway, Menteith - gradually began to lose their leaders - mormers - local counts, whose titles and power were either abolished or inherited and concentrated in the hands of the new, predominantly Norman (and Flemish) aristocracy, among which the leaders of the Scottish court and the future Stuart kings were the most successful. As a result, the local population, having lost their old powerful patrons, people from the same lands and indeed to some extent related to themselves, began to unite around new ones - lairds and barons, often strangers and newcomers, but who now had a legal feudal right to the land. At the same time, the renewed diverse elite, descendants of the Gaels, Picts, Britons, Normans, Flemings, Anglo-Saxons, Norwegians, Irish and even Hungarians, for their part, sought, in addition to the legal rights guaranteed by the royal power, to receive “tribal” ones: to become “their own” on the ground and enlist the support of the people under their control and subordination. So, for example, there are legends and partly evidence that early representatives of the Norman and Flemish families, for example, the Comyns, Murrays and Sutherlands, the Inns, as well as the Gaels O'Beolans (ancestors of the Ross clan), who received royal charters for lands in the rebellious counties of Moray and Ross in the 12th-13th centuries, nevertheless became related to the local disgraced nobility, ensuring the loyalty of the indigenous population and securing ancient Gaelic tribal rights.

Feudal-tribal relations, based on mutual affection and dependence, when vassals needed the protection of their lords, and lords needed the support of vassals, their people, classified as one common clan, were formed and strengthened over the centuries from the end of the 13th century and the Wars of Scottish Independence to the first half of the 18th century and the Jacobite uprisings. As surnames arose and spread: from the 12th to the 16th centuries in the Lowlands and up to the 17th century on the islands of the western Highlands, ordinary people took the names of their masters, forming that same clan. As a result, hundreds and even thousands of clan members, regardless of social status and position, from peasants, artisans and merchants to lairds, lords and earls, bore the same surname and claimed descent from a common ancestor and distant kinship, as among themselves, so with their lords and leaders. But this did not mean general equality. The poor peasant was subordinate to his lord, laird, chieftain or chieftain, but while he was subordinate to the highest in the hierarchy, he, unlike his English or French brother, did not harbor hidden hostility or hostility towards his master, because he was a man of his name, his clan, his families. And every commoner, Fraser, Mackintosh or Leslie, rising at the call of the leader, fought not only for the lord, but also for his entire family and directly for his loved ones, knowing that the personal well-being of his family depended on the position of his lord - Baron Fraser, Mackintosh or Leslie. Likewise, every Laird, be it Maclain, Laird of Duart, Lord Ogilvie of Airlie, or Lindsay, Earl of Crawford, was obliged to protect the interests of every member of his clan, because to insult any MacLain, Ogilvy, or Lindsay was to insult one of his family and thus concerned him personally. This mutual dependence, in particular, explains the absence in medieval Scotland of large peasant uprisings, which at one time swept through many European countries, including neighboring England and France, which was close to the Scots.

The rise of the head of the clan meant the rise of the entire clan: along with the leader, his support in the person of relatives, associates and vassals, as a rule, members of his name and clan, received new possessions, privileges and positions. This was the case at one time with the powerful Stuarts and Douglass, who owned lands throughout Scotland, the high-born Hamiltons, numerous MacDonalds, Campbells and Gordons, the rightful masters of their regions, and with the small landed nobles Livingstons and Crichtons who made their way to power. So in the Grant clan, behind the leader, Laird Grant and Freukhi, there were chieftains - the leaders of the branches of the clan, the same lairds: Grant from Gartenbeg, Grant from Auchernack, Grant from Dellachapple, Grant from Tullochgorum. and Grant of Glenmoriston; five main branches of Clan Cameron, also from ancient times led by the Lairds: Cameron of Lochiel, Cameron of Erracht, Cameron of Clunes, Cameron of Glen Nevis and Cameron of Fassifern – are still symbolically depicted as five arrows on the leader’s badge. And vice versa, royal disfavor or defeat from the enemies of the baron and leader certainly affected the people of his clan. In 1562, the disgrace of the influential Earl of Huntly and his posthumous accusation of high treason was followed by the confiscation of possessions and the arrest of two dozen barons named and clan Gordon (including the Earl of Sutherland at that time), but all of them were acquitted and restored to their rights already in 1565 , when Mary Stuart and Earl Bothwell needed the support of the powerful Catholic Gordon clan. In 1603, after a conflict with the Colcahouns, the entire MacGregor clan, whose members had previously been repeatedly convicted of looting and robberies, was outlawed with a ban on pain of death from bearing the surname Gregor or MacGregor; the leader and thirty of his people were executed, the rest of the MacGregors, in order to survive, were forced to take the surnames of their relatives and neighbors; the ban on surnames was only lifted in 1774, and the MacGregor clan was formally restored in 1822.

Note that the power, strength and influence of the clan and its leader were determined not so much by titles, lands and wealth, but by the number of its “clan people”: relatives, vassals and tenants (clients) - those whom he could call under his banners. The English report on the Scottish peers of 1577 says that the power of Graham, Earl of Montrose, is small, as is his income; The Ruthvens and Erskines are few in number, but strong in their connections and alliances; Lord Oliphant's lands are profitable, but he does not have much income and his family is small; The Forbeses, the enemies of the Earls of Huntly, are considerable in number and wealth; and Macleod of Skye and Lewes is respected only in his own lands, but has no influence at the royal court.

The structure of the clans was not uniform throughout Scotland and already in the 15th century there were highland clans and lowland and border families. For the Highlands, which had long been under the influence of the MacDonald Lords of the Isles, and spoke Scottish Gaelic (close to Irish), Gaelic patriarchal-family relations and customs, supported by feudalism, were more characteristic, while for lowland Scotland and the Borders, where The Scots language (a dialect of English) was in use - Norman feudal culture, “softened” by kinship.

But both mountain and lowland clans existed as clan territorial units, forming their own military detachments and often resolving internal conflicts among themselves by armed means. On the basis of these voluntary military formations, regular personal and family Scottish regiments and battalions were created in the 17th-18th centuries, some of which, bearing the names of Gordons, Camerons, and Mackenzies, have existed to this day and managed to glorify themselves on the battlefields of the world wars. Clan conflicts: from “border robbers” (Border reivers) and Rob Roy MacGregor, predatory raids of small detachments or gangs to several dozen people who ravaged the lands of neighbors, stole livestock, stormed the castle-towers of their enemies in the hope of surprise, where losses were more likely to be suffered material character, to the battles of Harlaw, Glendale, Arbroath, Battle of the Shirts, Keiths and Gunns, Forbes and Gordons, Johnstons and Maxwells, MacLeods and Mackenzies, major bloody battles involving several hundred and thousands of people and ruthless blood feuds that lasted for generations and tens or hundreds of years - left an indelible mark on the history and memory of individual Scottish families and the country as a whole.

In the 15th-16th centuries, clans began to receive official legal status, acquiring symbols and privileges, and becoming an integral part of Scottish heraldry and culture: badges, tartans, symbols, pibrochs, family traditions and customs, legends and traditions - while continuing to exist as closed tribal communities with its own internal structure and subordination to the feudal barons - their leaders and leaders. Constructed in this way, the original semi-feudal semi-tribal system with state-legalized power and the rights of feudal leaders existed in Scotland, and then in Great Britain, without any signs of decline and degeneration until the “Act of Proscription” and the “Act of Hereditary rights" (The Heritable Jurisdictions Act) of 1746. At the mature stage of its existence, the definition of the Scottish clan given by Alexander Nisbet V "System of Heraldry" (1722) : a clan is “a social group consisting of a collection of distinct families actually descended from or claiming to be descendants of a common ancestor, and recognized by the Monarch through his Supreme Officer of Honour, Lord Lyon, the honorary a community, all the members of which, previously entitled or newly entitled to hereditary nobility, bear the coat of arms as established or unestablished branches descended, presumably, from the senior branch of the clan".

Abolition of the clan system. In 1746, after the suppression of the last Jacobite uprising, the British government decided to destroy the Scottish clan system as a constant source of riots and Jacobitism. The “Act of Prohibition” prohibited clan culture: the carrying of weapons by ordinary people, traditional clothing of the Scottish Highlanders and clan symbols, national music and playing the bagpipes, teaching and use of the Scottish Gaelic language; The "Act of Hereditary Rights" abolished the feudal and clan rights and privileges of clan leaders, including the ability to call their people to arms. Backed up by the force of English troops, both laws, as well as further measures directed against the direct participants in the Jacobite uprisings, mainly Scottish highlanders, actually meant the liquidation of clans: lairds, barons and leaders became ordinary landowners, their possessions became a source of income, their people became simple peasants and workers . Former barons, now British aristocrats and gentry, everywhere sold their old clan territories to their former enemy neighbors, allocated them for breeding cattle and sheep in Northern and Western Scotland or for the construction of manufactories, barracks, and industrial enterprises for the growing cities in the south. At the same time, their “clan people”, long-term tenants of these lands, who previously served as a support for the power of their leaders, now became of no use to them. The 18th - first half of the 19th centuries were marked by a black page in the history of the Scottish Highlands - mass emigration and forced deportation of highlanders (Highland Clearances, "Cleansing of the Scottish Highlands") from the lands where they lived for centuries, for which they fought and which their ancestors defended. Expelled or forced out of the fertile regions of the Highlands and Western Isles, the highlanders moved to the cities of the Lowlands, joining the ranks of cheap labor as the British industrial revolution gained momentum, or to free territories North America and Canada, irretrievably losing contact with their homeland.

For quite a long time, the Pictish people were forgotten. Only occasionally did the Picts appear on the pages of fiction, for example in Stevenson (Bather Honey) or Kipling (Puck of the Hills). Official information about the Picts is based on evidence given by the Romans. And they had a very low opinion of the Picts - the Picts were wild barbarians. But the Romans saw the Pictish warriors; the life and customs of the people were unknown to them. Therefore, the world knew about the Picts until recently only that they went into battle naked, painted in bright colors. It’s not a fact that they were completely naked, but apparently there was no armor.

Various theories have been put forward about the origin of the Picts. So they remain theories. It is very likely that the Picts are not Celts, and perhaps not even Indo-Europeans. And if they are Celts, then they are terribly distant relatives of their neighbors, the Britons and Scots. The history of the origin of the Picts is surrounded by many myths, legends and outright fiction.

Personally, I immediately associate it with the word picture. Is this the word in English language comes from the name of the people. Hardly. The Picts were probably not called that before. They had a different name.

What is clear for sure is that the Picts are the ancestors of modern Scots

These Scots are obstinate people, as we are told. Why not the Picts! The earliest traces of human habitation in Scotland date back to approximately 8500 BC. Several thousand years before the advent of the new era, Neolithic people from Spain and France were already crossing into Scotland and raising livestock there. Some archaeologists suggest that these people also built the huge stone burial grounds (cairns) that are scattered throughout Scotland. It is also believed that their descendants later mixed with the “Beaker people” who apparently came from Northern Europe, and this ethnic union gave rise to the pre-Celtic race of Northern Britain.

The clothing of the Picts was not very diverse. As it was written, they didn’t wear much clothing during battle, and they even applied a lot of drawings and even tattoos to their bodies. The rest of the time, clothing consisted of a knee-length shirt. The material used was wool, flax or tow. Over the shirt, the Picts usually wore a cape or cloak that covered the upper body.

The Picts usually walked barefoot, for which they received the slightly offensive nickname “red-footed” from their enemies. However, after many years of searching, archaeologists managed to find several leather shoes, albeit very crudely made. However, the shoes found make it possible to assert that the Picts were not barbarians at all, as is commonly believed in modern culture.

Pictish society was divided into three groups: druids, horsemen and people. The Druids were a priestly class who acted as intermediaries between the people and the gods. In addition, they were endowed with broad political rights and were involved in educating children.

The intermediate class of Pictish society were the horsemen: warriors and representatives of the royal family. In case of danger of an external threat, a military council was urgently assembled, in which all armed men took part. The convening of this council was considered the beginning of the war; By rattling weapons and shouting, the assembled people expressed their agreement with the decisions of the council. The Picts were widely known for their bravery and courage, with women fighting as bravely as men.

The daily life of a Pictish warrior was one of relative luxury and pleasure. The main population was engaged in agriculture and cattle breeding; surplus labor went to support the military aristocracy.

Historically attested (albeit quite late, on the eve of the end of its existence), the kingdom of the Picts occupied a fairly limited territory in the segment between the Moray Firth in the north and the Firth of Forth in the south - approximately its north-eastern two-thirds.

• to the west it bordered the Gaelic kingdom Dal Riada,
• in the southwest - with the British kingdom Strathclyde,
• in the south - with the possessions of the Angles in Northumbria.

At first, the Picts were simply a union of tribes, and only by the 6th century several state entities were formed from them, which later became the kingdoms of the Picts. It is assumed that at an early stage of their existence there were several independent Pictish kingdoms - from two to six. However, it is only confidently called by name Fortriu. But by the middle of the 6th century, a single kingdom of the Picts was established with the first more or less historical king - Bride I, the son of Maelkon. However, this is where geography ends and history begins.

The main difference between the Picts and the surrounding Celtic tribes was the transfer of the throne exclusively through the female line. Thanks to this feature, at different periods of time the Picts were led by representatives of a variety of royal dynasties. The royal throne was occupied by the Gaelic Dal Riads, the British Strathclydes, the English Northumbrians, and the descendants of the Pictish princesses.

In 843, King Kenneth I of Dal Riada became king of the Picts. During his reign, a radical revolution was made in the life of the Picts. Kenneth I united the states of the Picts and Scots into a new Kingdom, which was called Scotland. Gradually, the Gaelic language was able to displace the Pictish dialect. A little later, as a result of assimilation, the Picts completely ceased to exist as a separate people.

Caledonia among the Romans

It is generally accepted that the Picts first appear in Ptolemy’s famous “Geography” and on his map of the entire world known to the ancient Greeks. But its name is not mentioned at all. And they appear in his territory, where the Picts were later recorded (we will conventionally assume that this is Scotland) Caledonia, who gave the country its name, and three more tribes about which nothing more is known.

But Tacitus’s information can be dated quite accurately: it goes back to the three British campaigns of his father-in-law Julius Agricola, which took place in the 70s and 80s. Tacitus names the population of the future Scotland in general terms - Caledonians, without division into tribes.

Cornelius Tacitus, son-in-law of the commander Agricola, the first Roman to invade the lands of the Picts, calls them Caledonians. But he himself notes that this is only one of the tribes, part of the coalition that opposed the Romans - Caledonia, Meatae and others.

The name “Caledonia” also seems to be Latin, but it is still unlikely that Tacitus invented it out of nowhere. Most likely, this is a distorted (Latinized) self-name. But, again, not all the Picts en masse, but one of the tribes.

One of the main evidence of the non-Celtic origin of the Picts is their custom of inheritance through the female line, which is rare among Western societies, as already mentioned in this article. None of the Celtic tribes had such a custom. Apparently, the royal crown was inherited by members of the seven royal houses within which marriages took place. However, it was this rare form of inheritance that brought the crown of Pictia to the Scot by blood, Kenneth Mac Alpin, in 843, who destroyed the remaining members of the seven ruling houses. After this there was an extraordinary disappearance from history of both the Pictish people and their culture. In fact, after only three generations of kings of the Mac Alpin dynasty, their name became legendary.

Almost the entire known history of the Picts is a struggle with Rome

The Romans came to Scotland and even defeated the Picts in battle, but were never able to conquer them and the lands belonging to them. In the 3rd century, the Roman commander Agricola destroyed the Pictish army led by Calgacus (according to Roman sources, 10,000 Picts and 340 Romans were killed). Agricola's legions stopped near Abergardy in Perthshire, where they built a fortification. To keep Agricola's conquest under control, seven fortresses were built from Callander (near Stirling) to Perth.

For 30 years the Picts burned and destroyed Roman fortifications, and according to Victorian legend, the famous IX Legion was sent north from Inkhtutil, probably to contain their pressure. Legend says that the legion was completely destroyed and disappeared forever in an unknown battle with the painted people of the north. However, history shows us that the IX Legion later appears in Judea.

Emperor Hadrian decided that Scotland was not worth sending more legions there, and pushed the empire's borders back to the Tyne and Solway. Here he built the famous wall, 70 miles long from sea to sea, which bears his name.

In 208, the ruler of Britain was forced to turn to the emperor for help against the barbarians, and Septimius Severus decided to go to Britain with his sons. The old soldier led the Roman fleet with 40,000 legionnaires to the Firth of Forth and landed the army on shore. Although he defeated all the Pictish armies he encountered and beheaded all the Pictish leaders he captured, he was unable to conquer the country he called Caledonia and died soon after. However, the cruel lesson taught by the Romans and the executions led to the fact that peace was maintained here for almost a century. The Romans fortified themselves on Hadrian's Wall, and the northern tribes, stopped by their cruelty, inhabited the hills to the north of it.

At the end of 367, the Picts, Scots, Attacottas and Saxons invaded Roman Britain in large forces and reached almost to Londinium. At the same time, the Franks and also the Saxons invaded Roman Gaul. For almost a year they all wandered around the Roman provinces, but did not particularly try to gain a foothold. There is no doubt that the simultaneous attack was prepared in advance and carefully coordinated. It is likely that Roman legionnaires also took part in the conspiracy - an uprising broke out in the garrisons of Hadrian's Wall at a suspicious time. This incident is called, depending on the point of view, the “Barbarian Conspiracy” or the “Great Conspiracy.”

By studying the Roman accounts of the Pictish wars, as well as later sources, it becomes clear that the Pictish lands were mainly located north of the Forth-Clyde line, i.e. north of the Antonine Wall. Roman pacification, as well as Celtic and Saxon migrations from the south, eliminated any possible Pictish claims to lands south of the wall.

In the west, the Pictish presence in Argyll was to quickly disappear with the arrival of the Scots of Dalriada around 500, but a megalith at the entrance to Inveraray Castle in Campbell country suggests that they were there at one time.

In the north, Pictish influence extended as far as northern islands, and their megaliths have been found on almost every one of them. This country continued to defend itself for a long time after the departure of the Roman legions. The Picts fought the Scots in the west, the Britons and Angles in the south, and the Vikings in the north.

Sometimes they lost great battles and lost vast territories, only to gain them back in the terrible wars of the Dark Age. In the 7th century, the Scots pushed their borders far to the north, and a victorious Celtic army marched half a day to the Pictish capital of Inverness in the north, destroying it. In the south, the Angles led their Germanic armies north and captured Pictish lands and held them for 30 years before being defeated and routed south by a united Pictish army.

Christianity

Initially the Picts probably practiced Druidic paganism. We know their beliefs thanks to the stories of Irish monks. The Picts had their own pantheon of gods, the underworld. They lived in a world where all rivers and trees were sacred, the islands were stones scattered by giants, and springs flowed exclusively from those places where the elder struck with his staff.

Clashes between the Druids and Christians were sharp, but on the whole the Picts accepted Christianity quite peacefully.

The only surviving connection with Pictish beliefs is the work of "horse gossips" who were famous among rural population. Muttering in an incomprehensible language into a horse's ear was used along with incantations, potions and aromatherapy. Sacrifice was widely developed. Moreover, along with animal sacrifice (for example, bulls), human sacrifice was also common. The Church fought against this, but the executions of the Picts were purely ritual in nature.

Pictish folklore has not reached us, but scholars suggest that some episodes in Scottish and Irish tales contain Pictish beliefs.

Saint Ninian (360-432) also quite successfully preached Christianity among the Picts. There were converts, otherwise who would build churches? And churches were built.

For about two hundred years, freedom of religion existed among the Picts; if you want, be a Christian, or if you want, worship the ancient Pictish gods.

Sometime between 570 and 580, Saint Columba persuaded Breede, the most powerful and probably supreme king of the northern Picts, to make Christianity the state religion. From this time on, the Picts were already quite real Christians.

While Rome and Constantinople were developing principles and creeds, preachers preached. They preached without yet knowing which theories would be recognized as orthodox and which would be declared heresy. So it turned out that the Celtic, and after it the Pictish churches, were strikingly different from the orthodox Catholic one.

Peoples of Alba. Part 1. Picts and Scots

Scotland. The ancient homeland of the Picts, a vanished people who were completely assimilated into the Scots, from whom the country took its name. A country in which the equally mysterious Celtic people left a very noticeable mark, dissolved in linguistic traditions, ancient buildings and DNA local population, becoming the spirit of Scotland.

A country of warlike Highlanders and peaceful Lowlanders. The land of kilts, whiskey and bagpipes. The country of the wind - it blows constantly, sometimes gently, sometimes harshly, never tired. Scotland is a country that will remain in your heart if your heart is open enough to it. Anyone who has visited Scotland, no matter in reality or through books, forever leaves a piece of their heart in it.

It is impossible to describe Scotland in a few words. It needs to be heard, felt, realized. Listen to the sound of bagpipes, taste real Scotch whiskey with a taste of peat smoke and plunge into the warlike past of this country.

Picts

The Scottish king has come,

Merciless towards enemies.

He drove the poor Picts

To the rocky trees.

R.L.Stevenson

Translation by S.Ya.Marshak

Even as a child, when we “got through” this poem at school, I was very interested: who are these Picts who, judging by the text, local residents, and the Scots are invaders. And why did the ruthless king need a recipe for heather honey so much? With the advent of the computer and the Internet, it became possible to get answers to all questions.

My article is not some kind of serious research, I just tried to summarize all the most interesting things that I found on the Internet.

The Romans called these people Pictii, that is, “colored”. It is unknown whether the Picts tattooed their bodies or simply painted them before the battle.

“We are the most remote inhabitants of the earth, the last of the free, protected by our remoteness and the obscurity surrounding our name. There are no nations behind us, nothing but waves and rocks.” These are the words of the Pictish leader Calgacus, recorded by Tacitus. It is clear that even in those days this tribe was mysterious.

There are several versions about the origin of the Picts.

Version 1. Indigenous population

There is an assumption that the Picts were the indigenous, pre-Celtic population of Britain and were direct descendants of the builders. Naturally, this hypothesis is not supported by anything, because it is completely unknown who these megalith builders were.

Version 2. Scythians

The Anglo-Saxon monk and chronicler Bede the Venerable wrote in 731 that the Picts were Scythians who landed in the north of Ireland and claimed the land. The Irish sent them to Scotland and gave all the men Irish wives, but with the condition that inheritance would pass through the female line. If there were only men on the Pictish ships, without women, then this is more like the retreat of one of the detachments of the defeated army than the resettlement of the people.

Neighboring peoples were surprised by the Pictish custom of covering their bodies with numerous multi-colored tattoos. That is why the Picts were called “the painted people.” Tattoos were more than just decoration. They carried information - for example, about the social status of their owner - and symbolically depicted various representatives of the animal world or fantastic creatures - the same as on the surviving Pictish stone slabs. In these images one can easily discern some similarity with the Scythian animal style.

Contemporaries were also amazed by the sexual freedoms that existed among the Picts. The Roman writer Dio Cassius said that Empress Julia Domna, the wife of Emperor Septimius Severus, reproached a certain Pictish woman for depravity, but she replied that Roman women secretly became mistresses of the most miserable men, while Pictish women openly dated the best men of their people. by your own choice. This custom is also very similar to the Scythian one.Or maybe the Picts had some kind of local custom of polygamy?

Version 3. Iberians

The Iberians lived on the east coast of Spain and later settled throughout the Iberian Peninsula.

The Picts who fought the army of the Roman general Julius Agricola were described as tall and fair-haired. However, the Romans then encountered another tribe of barbarians, whom they described as dark-skinned and similar to the Iberians they had conquered in Spain.

The physical appearance of the Scots, who are mostly of the light Caucasian type, sometimes includes individuals with dark hair and dark skin, such as the British actor Sean Connery. These are probably the descendants of part of the Picts, whose ancestors were the Iberians.

The link between this ancient population of Scotland and their Iberian ancestors can be found in the many spiral patterns carved into the rocks and rocks of the northern lands of Britain, which can also be found in Spain, France and Ireland.

But there are also enough arguments against this version. For example, the names of Iberia (Spain) and Ibernia (the medieval name for Ireland) - Iberia and Hybernia - are spelled differently, but pronounced similarly. It is quite possible that they meant not the Iberians, but the Irish.

Version 4. Basque

Modern Basques live in northern Spain and southwestern France. The Basque language resembles the language of the Iberians. Recent genetic studies have confirmed that many Western Europeans, including significant numbers of Spaniards, Portuguese, English, Irish and French, share common ancestry with modern Basques.

In the book “Basques” by the Spanish researcher Julio Caro Baroch, there is a link where it is said that the 12th century French traveler Aymeric Pico cites the fact of a curious connection between Basque and Scottish men's clothing. But it is not specified specifically what details are being discussed.

Version 5. Celts

The British Isles received several invasions of Celtic tribes that occupied most of the Central and Western Europe. Their invasion began around the 10th century. BC. The most intensive resettlement of the Celts occurred in the 6th century. BC. As a result of this migration, two branches of the Celtic group of peoples established themselves in the British Isles - the Britons, who settled in Britain, and the Goidels (Gaels), who settled mainly in the territory of Ireland. Tribes of Britons came from the south to Scotland. Perhaps the Picts were descendants of the first Celtic settlers.

Version 6. All together

Most scientists consider the Picts to be a people who emerged as a result of the mixing of the Celts who came to the north and the local aboriginal population (for example, the Caledonian tribe). The Celts came to this area (north of the Forth - Clyde line) around 100 AD. This happened, apparently, as a result of the salvation of the Celtic tribes from Roman rule. In turn, this local element was not ethnically united. One of its components was possibly Iberian.

Version 7. Unknown who

Whether the Picts were actually called Picts, or just a Roman nickname, is not very clear. Actually the Scotts called them cruitney. Some people also appeared on the historical arena shade, but whether they are Picts, and if they are Picts, then all of them, or a separate part, is also not very clear.

The Pictish language was somewhat similar to Celtic, but the Scots needed a translator to communicate with them. That is, either the Celtic language is veryl is far removed from the related Scottish and British, or is not Celtic at all, but has many borrowings.

Writing. A list of Pictish kings in chronological order, written in Latin, has reached us, and in addition - some obscure fragmentary records that do not make it possible to properly decipher them. That is, there was definitely writing, but it was not preserved.

One of the main proofs of the non-Celtic origin of the Picts is their custom of inheritance through the female line, which is rare among Western societies. None of the Celtic tribes had such a custom. Women were not the rulers of the throne, but supreme power passed not from father to son, but, for example, from brother to brother, or sister's son. Apparently, the royal crown was inherited by members of the seven royal houses within which marriages took place. However, it was this rare form of inheritance that brought the crown of Pictia to Scots by blood in 843, who destroyed the remaining members of the seven ruling houses. After this there was an extraordinary disappearance from history of both the Pictish people and their culture. In fact, after only three generations of kings of the MacAlpine dynasty, their name became legendary.

But this custom of inheritance leads us to the most curious version of the origin of the Picts.

Version 8. Semites

So, among the Picts, the inheritance of power occurred through the female line, unlike all neighboring peoples. But among other Semites, Jews, nationality is still transmitted through the maternal line.

In the 7th century, active resettlement of Semitic tribes began from the region of the Armenian Highlands to neighboring lands. Significantly ahead in knowledge of other tribes and peoples of the world who were still living in the material culture of the Bronze Age, using iron weapons and advanced technologies for those times, the aliens were able to capture significant territories of Western Asia, North Africa and Europe in a short period of time. An attentive reader will immediately detect a temporary discrepancy. And here it’s time for us to turn to an alternative version of human history.

The history of Britain begins in 55 BC. e. Traditional history names this date on the basis of the established chronology, where all Roman rulers are lined up in a single chronological chain, and events are scheduled by year. That is, if we recognize 2 BC. the year of birth of Jesus Christ, we get that 53 years before his birth, Roman troops led by Julius Caesar invaded Britain. But let’s not forget that traditional chronology was compiled only in the Middle Ages on the basis of reports from various ancient authors, who often turned out to be only medieval historians or writers who fantasized about historical topics.

Albert Maksimov, oDean, one of the authors of alternative history, believes that Jesus Christ was born in 720 AD. e., and was crucified in 753. Julius Caesar conquered Britain 53 years before the birth of Christ. According to an alternative version, the year is 667. So we come to the same 7th century, when the Semitic hordes swept through Celtic Europe with fire and sword, eventually destroying the Great Roman Empire. And then, according to version No. 2, the battle-worn Semitic detachment ended up off the coast of Ireland, where the aliens took wives and went to settle on the shores of Caledonia.

This alternative history is interesting! According to this version, world history turned out to be as much as 6 centuries younger! But this is another topic; those who are interested can read the relevant literature themselves.

What other peoples lived on the territory of ancient Scotland?

Map showing the approximate areas of the Pictish kingdoms Fortriu(800 AD) and Alba(900 AD)

Historically attested (albeit quite late, on the eve of the end of its existence), the kingdom of the Picts occupied a fairly limited territory in the segment between the Moray Firth in the north and the Firth of Forth in the south - approximately its north-eastern two-thirds.

To the west it bordered the Gaelic kingdom Dal Riada, in the southwest - with the British kingdom Strathclyde, and in the south - with the possessions of the Angles in Northumbria.

It is assumed that at an early stage of their existence there were several independent Pictish kingdoms - from two to six. However, it is only confidently called by name Fortriu. But by the middle of the 6th century, a single kingdom of the Picts was established with the first more or less historical king - Bride I, the son of Maelkon. However, this is where geography ends and history begins.

It is generally accepted that the Picts first appear in Ptolemy’s famous “Geography” and on his map of the entire world known to the ancient Greeks. But the name Picts he doesn't mention it at all. And they appear in his territory, where the Picts were later recorded (we will conventionally assume that this is Scotland) Caledonia, who gave the country its name, and three more tribes about which nothing more is known.

But Tacitus’s information can be dated quite accurately: it goes back to the three British campaigns of his father-in-law Julius Agricola, which took place in the 70s and 80s. Tacitus names the population of the future Scotland in general terms - Caledonians, without division into tribes.

Roman period

Rome, simultaneously turning into an Empire, began active expansion. Caesar did not reach the region of interest to us; he was stuck somewhere in Wessex. The Britons put up a cunningly organized resistance: war chariots and coordinated actions of small detachments. The legions, well trained and equipped, with the support of cavalry, were still able to cross the Thames; they were not enough for more.

About 90 years later, in 1943, the Romans took Britain seriously. They landed a large army, conquered almost all of England, and invaded Wales. True, they spent 10 years fiddling with Wales, but they got it done. However, at that time nothing stronger than legions had been invented, so in the mid-60s the southern half of the island became completely Roman.

In 77, Gnaeus Julius Agricola was appointed consular legate (governor) of Britain. In 1982, Agricola decided it was time and invaded Pictavia. The Romans beat up the Picts a little, the Romans beat the Picts a little, all as reconnaissance in force. The main battle took place the following year, 1983.

The Picts at that time were about a dozen tribes. But by and large they were united into two tribal unions (kingdoms, if you will) - Meathia (Veniconia) And Caledonia. Apparently, everyone took part in the Battle of the Grampians. How else could an army of 30,000 be assembled?

True, it was Agricola and his beloved son-in-law Tacitus who counted so much, by what method is unknown. The Romans defeated the Picts. And they had better training, and weapons, and Agricola was by all means a talented commander. But it is clearly visible that they did not fight with an armed crowd, but with an army, controlled by a single will and not without tactical refinements. And the Picts retreated in an orderly manner. In addition, a very inspiring speech by the commander of the Pictish army Kalgak, delivered by him before the battle and, apparently, recorded by Tacitus from the words of prisoners, has been partially preserved. “We are the most remote inhabitants of the earth, the last of the free. There are no nations behind us, nothing but waves and rocks.”

Roman soldiers later said that the Picts fought naked and painted. They may have lied, but the fact is a fact - a Pictish warrior, even in pants and a shirt, is legally considered naked compared to a Roman in bronze armor.

The Caledonians and other Meats retreated. The Romans occupied most of lowland Scotland, building seven fortresses from Stirling to Perth and leaving garrisons. However, middle Scotland was not honestly included on the maps of that time as part of Roman Britain. The Picts did not give a quiet life; the newly built fortifications were periodically set on fire.

Having won a glorious victory at the Battle of the Grampian Mountains (especially glorious in the description of Tacitus), the Romans were faced with an interesting logical problem. Keeping an army in Pictavia is expensive, inconvenient and absolutely pointless. To abandon everything and go south is, on the one hand, somehow indecent, but on the other hand, the Picts can enter Northumbria, and even Mercia (Mercia and Northumbria did not exist yet, but these territories need to be named somehow). The warrior emperors could not solve this problem, but Adrian, a purely peaceful man, did not give a damn about all conventions, withdrew the army and ordered to build a chain of fortifications in a narrow place, sit behind them and keep the Picts out.

Hadrian's Wall was a fairly serious structure, mostly made of stone, 5-6 meters high, with towers, forts and garrisons. Another emperor would have been embarrassed; it turns out that the Romans, who conquer everyone and everything, erected such a colossus with the goal that the Picts would not offend them too much. The shaft was built in 122–126.

But after 16 years, in 142, it was decided to snatch another piece of Pictland. It is unlikely that Emperor Antoninus Pius himself would have thought of such a thing, but the new fortification was called Val Antonina. The rampart cut off Lothian and its adjacent territories for Roman Britain, incl. and Edinburgh (the city and castle may not have existed yet, but the rock definitely existed). They did it in vain: on new border The fortification is not really completed, and the quality is worse, and no one is repairing or protecting what’s on the old one. It was then that the Picts pulled away. Val Antonina(earthen) were overcome without any problems, Hadrian's Wall(stone) – in desolation, you can terrorize the Roman garrisons in the future Northumbria. In general, the Romans kept 3 (three!) legions on the Antoninus Wall for forty years, without any effect. The Picts wandered wherever they wanted, and to their shame, of course, plundered as much as they saw fit.

In 193, problems began in Rome with the imperial throne, i.e. Anyone and everyone declared themselves emperor. The Caledonians decided that it was time for the Romans to show their place. In alliance with the Meates and Brigantes (these are already Britons), they drove out the Roman garrisons from Hadrian's Wall, not to mention Antonin's. The Roman governor, however, managed to somehow come to an agreement with them all, since he had money. The border was again established along Hadrian's Wall and became more or less peaceful.

Hadrian's Wall Val Antonina

In 209, Roman troops under the command of Emperor Septimius Severus invaded the lands of the Picts, as it was proclaimed, in search of a glorious victory and the subjugation of the barbarians. Everything, however, simply resulted in looting and destruction of the territory.

INIn the year 297, when the next list of enemies of Rome was compiled, the Picts and Scots took an honorable place in it. It seems that all these gentlemen periodically caused trouble for the Romans to the best of their ability. Probably, they got it after all; in 306, Constantius Chlorus and his son Constantine, the future Great Emperor, undertook a punitive campaign to the north, in the direction of modern Aberdeenshire. The Romans do not mention any glorious victories in this regard.

In the 4th century, the Romans had enough other problems; legions began to slowly withdraw from Britain. The Picts were not particularly embarrassed by the presence of Hadrian's Wall if the need arose to plunder Northumbria (in Roman terms - Britain Second).

In 367, a strategic, perfectly coordinated operation was carried out by the Romans, however, it was contemptuously called the “Conspiracy of the Barbarians.” True, in modern Wikipedia it is already called “The Great Conspiracy.” The Picts, Scots and Saxons simultaneously attacked Roman Britain, passing through it with fire and sword all the way to London. London, however, could not be taken; the Romans were not yet as weak as they would like. It also didn’t work out to gain a foothold in the conquered territories, although most likely there were no such plans. The Roman commander Theodosius pushed the Picts (burdened with trophies) back beyond the Antonine Wall. The area between the ramparts was once again declared a Roman province. The Picts, it seems, did not know about the new status of this area, and they did not consider the Antoninus Wall (if there was anything left of it) at all.

In 383, the Duke of Britain (such titles already existed then) Magnus Maximus declared himself emperor and went to fight for a great goal on the continent, taking with him all the more or less combat-ready troops. He did not achieve the imperial crown and was executed in 388 in Rome. But he gained extraordinary popularity in British legends. It is believed, among other things, that Magnus Maximus was the first owner of Excalibur, the sword of the great Arthur.

In 396–398, the regent of the Western Empire, Stilicho, organized a long campaign to Pictavia, for which a real legion was even transported to Britain. It is not clear what he achieved, but this was the last expedition of this kind. In 401, the legion was in demand on the continent, and within a decade all Roman units and units went there. In 410, Emperor Honorius officially announced to the leaders of the Britons that Rome was abandoning its interests in Britain. The Britons were forced to independently repel raids from the north.

Forced to defend themselves against the barbarian Pictish and Scots hordes, the Britons, who spoke a Celtic language very similar to the language of their kindred Celts in Wales, created a new kingdom Strathclyde.

Scotts (Gaels)

By the end of the 3rd century AD. Detachments of the Irish - Scots - begin to penetrate into northern Scotland. This word in Irish means a warrior who went on a campaign to plunder and conquer new lands.

From Ireland to Scotland - only 15 miles by sea. Some of the Scotts, for various reasons, moved to the other side of the strait and lived there quietly.

At the very end of the 5th century, the ruler of one of the small kingdoms of Northern Ireland Dal Riads Fergus Mor mac Earca decided to include these colonies in his possessions. And take some territory away from the Pictish kingdoms. The Picts were not a single nation. To conquer Caledonia, you need to have an army stronger than that of the Roman Empire, and to marry a Caledonian princess, the Scots did not come out with their snout. The small Pictish kingdom of Epidia is a completely different matter. Both methods work here. Epidia became part of Dal Riada. The metropolis was still in Ireland at that time. This is the 498th year.

Fergus More was firmly entrenched on the banks of the Firth of Clyde, one might say, forever. In 501, his son already rightfully inherited the territory on the island of Great Britain, in addition to the domain in Ireland. By the way, all subsequent rulers of Scotland are considered to be descendants of Fergus (and were proud of this), right up to the living queen (through the McAlpins, Bruces and Stuarts).

The Germanic tribes of the Angles and Saxons begin to penetrate from the south. An Anglo-Saxon state appears in the southeast of Scotland in the 7th century. Northumbria. The Anglo-Saxons waged wars to seize lands for settlement. They settled on some and eventually moved on to a peaceful life - as far as it was possible in that not very peaceful time. The Picts did not pursue aggressive goals, but they did not show any inclination towards pacification.

Having entered the arena of history at the turn of the 3rd and 4th centuries as a gang of thugs, they amazed all the surrounding peoples with their ferocity. Including fellow craftsmen - the Scots, Anglo-Saxons and Franks, who themselves were not distinguished by their angelic character. Their predatory raids covered almost all of Britain: let us remember that in 367 they, together with the mentioned comrades, reached London.

Moreover, judging by the sources, these were precisely predatory raids - they did not pursue any aggressive or resettlement goals. And they continued for centuries: the Christianization of the Picts in the 6th century did not change anything.

The pressure of the Scots on the Picts led to armed conflicts between them, as a result the Picts gained the upper hand. Dal Riada became a vassal possession of the Picts.

The Picts fought the Scots in the west, the Britons and Angles in the south, and the Vikings in the north. Sometimes they lost great battles and lost vast territories, only to gain them back in the terrible wars of the Dark Age. In the 7th century, the Scots pushed their borders far to the north, and a victorious Celtic army marched half a day's journey to the Pictish capital of Inverness in the north, destroying it.

In the south, the Angles led their German armies north, captured the southern Pictish lands and held them for 30 years. On 20 May 685, a united Pictish army led by King Breede III met a huge force of Anglo-Saxon invaders on the plains of Dunnichen in Angus. The ensuing battle is known to the English as the Battle of Nechtansmeer, and to the Caledonians as Battle of Dunnichen, became one of the most significant turning points in ancient history and determined the character of the country for the next 1300 years. What happened under Nechtansmere made the name of Breede III great. The Picts destroyed the Anglo-Saxon army, along with the king, killing or enslaving the remnants of the Northumbrians who settled in Pictia. If Brida had lost this great battle, Scotland would not exist today, and all of Britain would be English.

After the Picts adopted Christianity around the 6th century, they began to marry more frequently with the Scots. In addition, the main preachers of Christianity among the Picts were Irish monks, which means that the Pictish kingdom was under strong influence of the Irish. This allowed the Irish to settle in northern Scotland almost without obstacles. And yet, the battles between the Scots and Picts continued.

As a result of all these wars, robberies and relocations, by the 8th century a status quo had been established between the four kingdoms - the British Strathclyde, Gaelic (or, if you prefer, Scots) Dal Riada, Northumbria Angles and the Kingdom of the Picts Fortriu.

The mentioned status quo, not excluding all kinds of border robberies and other outrages, also presupposes some kind of peaceful relations, as they would say today - diplomatic. And the main form of diplomatic relations at that time were dynastic marriages between kings, princes and princesses.

What goals did the Picts pursue? Probably the same as the beks of the Turkic nomadic tribes, passing off their daughters as rulers of surrounding states - that is, introducing their agents of influence. But with regard to the Picts, we can only guess about this.

But the goals of the second party to the marriage, that is, the rulers of the surrounding kingdoms, are clearly visible. The fact is that the Picts established maternal inheritance of royal power. It appears that this was not so much a law as an established practice. But, in any case, in a line of about fifty Pictish kings who ruled according to the so-called Pictish Chronicle, a monument supposedly from the 10th century, from the 5th to the mid-10th century the facts of the son’s inheritance of his father’s royal title are noted literally a few times.

In the kingdoms of the Scots, Britons and Angles, the patrilineal tradition of inheriting power had long been established - if not de jure (the legal justification of the dynastic principle was still far away), then de facro. So for their rulers, marriage to Pictish princesses was a real opportunity to place their younger sons in power. Indeed, most of the Pictish kings were, from the point of view of their neighbors, Gaelic or Briton by origin. And Pictish blood flowed in the veins of all the dynasties of northern Britain.

Mixed marriages became the order of the day, this applies not only to kings and princes, but to all residents of the future Scotland. Moreover, the following scheme emerges - the son of a Scott and a Pictish woman is the heir of both families, if the parents of the royal family are the king of two kingdoms. The son of a Pict and a Scots woman is a nobody.

The end of the Pictish kingdom was caused precisely by dynastic reasons: one fine day in 843, the king of the Gaelic Dal Riada turned out to be Kenneth McAlpine, grandson of a Pictish princess. Which gave him grounds to claim power in the kingdom of the Picts after the death of their king. Having won victories over other applicants for the royal title, he realized something like a personal union of the two kingdoms: together they received the name Alba. “n’Alban” is roughly what it sounds like in Gaelic. Perhaps the Britons and Angles were a little darker in contrast to the white-skinned Picts and Scots.

Kenneth moved the administrative center to the east, to (near Perth) - the place where the Pictish kings were crowned. The consequence of the territorial unification of the two ethnic communities was the spread of the Gaelic language and Celtic culture in areas long inhabited by the historical Picts.

However, if Kenneth himself were asked about his title, he would first of all say that he was the King of the Picts, and then everything else. And Kenneth's closest heirs were called, first of all, the kings of the Picts.

That is, there was no conquest of the Picts by the Gaels, and there was no genocide of the Picts either. The ruthless king of Scotland did not exterminate the poor Picts on the heather field, did not drive them to the ends of the earth to the rocky shores. The most common assimilation took place. The Pictish language, at that time already reliably Celtic, was gradually replaced by Gaelic. Both peoples made up the population of a single state. Contrary to statements found in the literature, the Picts did not occupy a degraded position in it. Many noble families of Alba traced their origins to the Picts, and this was remembered centuries after the disappearance of a separate kingdom. Thus, the Pictish line is recorded in the genealogy of Macbeth and his wife Gruoch - moreover, it was she who determined his rights to the throne, contrary to Shakespeare, much more significant than those of King Duncan. However, the true, not Shakespearean, story of Macbeth - a noble man, a fearless fighter and a wise ruler, is.

The name "Picts" was used only until the end of the 9th century. However, certain features from the public administration of the Picts passed into state system Alba. Thus, the term “mormaer” was still used in relation to those representatives of the clan nobility who headed the districts in the territory of the former Pictish state.

Some of the customs of the Scots are reminiscent of their Pictish past. This, for example, is a more equal position for women compared to the British. Women had equal rights of inheritance with men. Until the 19th century, a woman could not change her last name upon marriage. Until 1939, the Scots maintained a unique form of marriage. To do this, it was enough to announce the desire to get married, and after a handshake the marriage became valid.

Heather Ale

Everyone only knows Marshak's translation. But the ballad of R.L. Stevenson "Heather Ale" (ale, and not honey at all) was first translated by N.K. Chukovsky in 1935.The modern translation of the ballad belongs to Andrei Korotkov.

All translations are good in their own way, but Marshak’s version is clearly adapted for children. Little mead makers drink honey instead of beer, and most importantly, they don’t get drunk on homemade alcohol until the whole family loses consciousness.

Alexey Fedorchuk, in his study “The Picts and Their Ale,” made a reconstruction of the events that formed the basis of Stevenson’s ballad. This reconstruction seemed very plausible to me.

The Picts, throughout their history, most likely adhered largely to their beliefs, customs and rituals - regardless of whether those around them considered them pagans or Christians. We can only guess about beliefs. But you can try to reconstruct some customs and rituals by analogy with the Celts, from whom they originated, and with the Germans, who throughout their early history were under strong Celtic influence.

So, an integral part of all religious rites of both the Celts and the Germans was... a very big drinking session. On it they drank to peace and the harvest, they drank in memory of their ancestors, they drank to the health and good fortune of the king or another representative of the government. who, in fact, led this drinking party.

They drank with horns and other large containers; each container brought to them was supposed to be emptied. Otherwise, the table conversation turned into disrespect for the gods and rulers. That is, it was interpreted as blasphemy and high treason. On the other hand, if a ruler neglected his duties as the organizer and head of a drinking party, this could well serve as the basis for his overthrow, and such cases are known in the history of, for example, ancient Scandinavia.

In general, the Scandinavian sagas have preserved very colorful descriptions of such sacred drinking bouts, sometimes, like all crowded drinking bouts, leading to dire political consequences. For example, in "The Saga of Egil Skallagrimson" the latter’s unwanted participation in a sacred feast with copious libations leads to his murder of the host of the feast and, subsequently, to his enmity with the Norwegian kings, which lasts for decades.

By the way, if highly moral Slavophiles believe that our ancestors were somehow different in this respect from the Celts and Germans, they are deeply mistaken. It is not for nothing that the chronicle ascribes to Prince Vladimir, the future Saint, the words: "The joy of Rus' is drinking" .

So what did they drink during such sacred drinking sessions? Wines in northern countries was not found due to the lack of grapes. The notorious grandfather's honeys required raw materials, which were not always in abundance, complex manufacturing technology, and a process duration that lasted for decades, with a very small yield of finished products. That is, they were in no way suitable as a mass popular drink.

What remained were alcoholic drinks produced by fermenting grains - primarily barley, as the most common crop at that time in the north, sometimes with the addition of rye or wheat. In Scandinavia, most of the grain was not used for baking bread, but for the preparation of such drinks.

In Russian translations of primary sources, such drinks are often called beer. However, this is wrong. Real beer must be made with the addition of hops. And it became widespread in Europe no earlier than the 12th century, first in Southern Germany and Bohemia, since then the glory of Bavarian and Czech brewers has been going on.

Throughout the rest of Europe, since ancient times, alcoholic beverages were obtained by simply fermenting grain or, at best, malt. It was for them that the names were assigned - mash and ale.

Modern ale is made from the same materials as beer - barley malt and hops, differing only in fermentation technology. And even then, ale differs quite clearly in taste from beer. And to imagine what that ancient ale (or mash) was like, it’s enough to try a semi-finished product for making high-quality, as they say, “for yourself,” village moonshine. The taste, I must say, is specific...

Another thing is that this semi-finished product is not intended for internal use - only for distillation. But the distillation process was not yet known in the north during the times of the Picts, Scots and other Vikings...

So the above-mentioned citizens drank ale and home brew, which were far from exquisite in taste and of dubious benefit to the body. And they were supposed to be consumed in large quantities, so that subjects would not be suspected of disloyalty to the gods and rulers, and the latter would avoid reproaches of disrespect for their comrades-in-arms and breadwinners.

In ancient Norway, the amount of beer that each full-fledged bond had to brew per Religious holidays, such as the Midwinter Festival, was regulated by law. And, according to the sources that have reached us, this amount was overwhelming.

So the problem of developing a technology for preparing high-quality alcoholic beverages from scrap materials at the dawn of the Northern Middle Ages was very urgent. And isn’t this where the legend of Pictish heather ale came from?

I can hardly imagine what kind of drink can be made from heather. Moreover, heather, regardless of its properties, is a very common plant in the Scottish heaths. And if it could be used as an “ennobling” additive to ale (which, I repeat, was an ordinary grain mash) - this technology would quickly be mastered by the Scotts, the Angles, and later the Norwegians. And there would be no secret about it.

But it is easy to assume that the servants of the Pictish gods, responsible, along with the rulers, for organizing sacred feasts, being experts in flora native land, found some herbs that can perform the functions of continental hops. And it was these ingredients that formed the subject of their secret knowledge, passed down from generation to generation.

As for the name - "heather ale" , then it is most likely nothing more than a symbol: an ale not made from heather, but originating in the Moorland. A kind of trademark, like cognac, armagnac or champagne.

It is also impossible to exclude the possibility of deliberate misinformation on the part of the Pictish priests in relation to hostile neighbors, designed to hide the true technology of preparing the drink and its ingredients.

Further, the fate of heather ale could develop in this way. Living surrounded by peoples, albeit superficially, but Christianized, the Picts could not help but be subject to Christian influence. Moreover, most of their kings were Picts only on the maternal side and were brought up at the courts of the Christian rulers of Dal Riada, Strathclyde or Northumbria. The secret of “heather” ale belonged to the bearers of the traditions of the old faith, and most likely did not go beyond their circle.

With the unification of Dal Riada and the kingdom of the Picts into a single state, the Christian tradition finally prevailed. The Pictish nobility joined the ranks of the Christianized Gaelic nobility, and lost the secret knowledge of their ancestors. Just as King Kenneth, although a descendant of a Pictish princess, was not a Christian, did not have access to her.

Of course, bearers of the pagan tradition, in particular, and experts in the technology of “heather” ale, continued to exist. And, most likely, for obvious reasons, they were in opposition to the central government. Which the latter, just as obviously, did not want to put up with.

And although there was no genocide against the Picts by the Scots, an irreconcilable war with the pagan opposition seems quite real. And it was she who was reflected in the very legend in which

Came to the Scottish mountains

The king is merciless and dashing.

He defeated the Picts in battle,

The raid went on them.

The position of King Kenneth is clear:

The region submitted to him,

But he brought no gifts.

And he, apparently, had the opportunity to try “heather” ale, and he understood the difference with the swill that the Scotts prepared. Therefore, having caught the last surviving carriers of technology,

He ordered them to be taken to the sea,

On a terrible steep cliff:

“Save your life, bastards,

Revealing the secret of ale to me.”

However, it didn't work out. The eldest of the Picts, having provoked the murder of the boy, says:

“And I’m not afraid of your torture -

Burn, scorch with fire.

The Mystery of Sweet Ale

It will die in my heart."

Having lost everything, including the meaning of life, he takes revenge on his enemy, condemning him to slurp lousy barley mash all his life...

To be continued...

According to recent genetic research, the British, Scots and Irish are almost identical in terms of their genomes. For the inhabitants of the British Isles, this discovery came as a shock. All three peoples have always positioned themselves as something ethnically completely separate. Neither in language, nor in culture, nor in characteristic features they have nothing in common with each other and are proud of it.

Brutus, the legendary grandson of Aeneas, an even more legendary member Trojan War, accidentally killed his father while hunting and was expelled from Italy, after which he ended up on a certain luxurious island, later named after him - Britain. He and his army gave rise to the current main population of the island - the British. So says Geoffrey of Monmouth in his famous History of the Britons.

The Scots, otherwise known as Scots, have a completely different origin. They emerged as a nation between the 6th and 14th centuries, moving to north coast Foggy Albion from Ireland. And they got there, according to one version, from the Middle East.

The Irish are descendants of the Celts who settled Ireland in the 4th century BC. Subsequently, by some miracle they escaped Roman influence and, as we know, they preserve this isolation to this day.

According to Stephen Oppenheimer, a medical geneticist at the University of Oxford, historical records about the origins of these three peoples are wrong in almost every detail. He claims that the ancestors of all three of these peoples arrived on the islands from Spain about 16 thousand years ago and spoke a language close to the Basque language. At that time, the British Isles were not inhabited, because before that, for 4 thousand years, glaciers reigned there, expelling the former inhabitants to Spain and Italy. And the descendants of these ancestors make up the majority of the population of the British Isles today, having adopted only to a small extent the genes of later occupiers - the Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Vikings and Normans.

Yes, the genes were common, but not the culture. About six thousand years ago, Dr. Oppenheimer believes, the practice of agriculture reached the islands from the Middle East - with the help of people speaking the Celtic dialect and settling Ireland and the west coast of Britain. On the eastern and southern shores, the influence of newcomers from northern Europe was stronger; they brought here a language close to Germanic, but were clearly inferior in number to the main population of the island.

What’s interesting is that both of these aliens were too small in number and disappeared into the indigenous population of the islands, but they managed to convey both their languages ​​and their skills to the inhabitants of England, completely changing their way of life.

These weren't islands then. At that time, there were bridges between Ireland, Britain and the mainland, but then, due to rising sea levels, they disappeared, and getting there became more difficult.

According to Oppenheimer's estimates, today's genetic situation is as follows: the Irish have only 12% Irish genes, the inhabitants of Wales have 20% Welsh, the Scots boast 30% of their Scottishness, and the British have approximately the same amount of Britishness. Everything else is general. Despite the stunning differences in habits, customs, cultures and languages.

In support of his genetic research, Dr. Oppenheimer cites data from archaeologist Heinrich Hörke, according to which the Anglo-Saxon invasion in the 4th century AD added 250 thousand newcomers to the 1-2 million population of the islands, and the Norman invasion in 1066 added no more than 10 thousand people.

👁 4.7k (24 per week) Approximate time to read the article: 3 minutes.

Around the 12th-13th centuries, the clan system began to emerge in Scotland as an independent structure. Society during this period was seriously reformed, royal power became absolute, and it required many service people to provide for it. The royal power could not be satisfied with the traditional tribal system, so it was doomed. The clan system that replaced it was intermediate, a bridge between the tribal and modern organization of society.
A Scottish clan, meaning "family" in Gaelic, a "clan" is a group of consanguineous relatives who descend from a common ancestor. Originally a tribe or family, the clan gradually became the most important political and social unit in the Scottish Highlands until the clan system was banned in the 17th century. The clan consisted of two main groups of members - "relatives" and "outsiders". The first included:

• persons related by blood through the male line;
• all illegitimate children recognized by their fathers;
• children fostered or adopted;
• children from a foreigner and women from the clan, including their descendants;
• persons who have rendered a serious service to the clan;
• members of another (usually extinct) clan who are accepted into the clan.

The “newcomers” were a motley crowd- vassals, slaves, prisoners, foreigners living on the territory of the clan and their descendants.
At the head of any clan was a leader, who in peacetime ruled the territory of his clan, administered justice, established laws, and during war he led the clan’s army. Members of the clan were obliged to pay him tribute, provide hospitality and accompany the leader on campaigns.
Often clans had related branches - the so-called septs, which were formed from the children, grandchildren, sons-in-law, and brothers of the leader. The septs also had their own leader. Such branches did not always leave the name of the family that gave birth to them; they could modify it (for example, from MacDonell to MacDonald), however, they recognized its supremacy. During campaigns or wars, members of the senior branch were given the most honorable positions, and if the leader of the main clan was lost, it could be headed by the leader of the sept.

At the end of the 5th century on the west coast of Scotland in the county of Argyll was formed Dal Riada tribal union. But in the 7th-8th centuries it experienced fragmentation and decline. Its collapse was accompanied by countless bloody feuds, but it is believed that it was he who marked the beginning of the formation of a clear clan system in Scotland. At that very time, many powerful Scottish clans were formed from the powerful rulers of the islands and Argyll - MacDonalds, Campbells and others. Later, clans began to form and spread throughout the rest of Scotland. Regional rulers - Mormers, who owned most of the Scottish counties from ancient times, founded many Pictish and Celtic dynasties and clans. The counties of Atholl, Mar, Lennox, Ross, Caithness, Carrick, Fife, Strathern and March were in their possession until the 13th century, and only later passed to other houses through marriages.
There were many clans of foreign origin in Scotland. For example, when in 1066 William the Conqueror invaded Britain with a countless Norman army, many knights from it subsequently settled in Scotland and became related to noble Celtic families. In the end, they became the ancestors of the Scottish families, which played a significant role in the history of Scotland. Among these we can mention Barklayev, Boylov, Bryusov, Baliolov. Clans and genera Montgomery, Hay, Beaton (Bethune) are of French origin, Sutherlands, Murrays and Leslie- Flemish, and the first two have a common ancestor - Freskin. Ruthvens descended from the Scandinavians Hamiltons and Stuarts- from the Welsh, MacLachlans, MacNeills and MacLellans- from the Irish. Dynasty of Stuart kings reigned with short interruptions from 1371 to 1707 in Scotland, from 1603 to 1707 in England and from 1603 to 1714 in Ireland, and from 1707 to 1714 in Great Britain.
Many Scottish surnames are based on geographical names areas that were owned by the corresponding families or clans for a long time. At first, the members of the clan were called that way - “such and such from such and such a place.” Later, family names were formed from this name:

• Colquhoun- that was the name of the area in Dunbartonshire;
• Crawford- from the lands of the barony of Crawford, when these lands went to the Lindsays, the latter secured the title of Earls of Crawford;
• Drummond- from the area of ​​Dryman or Drummond in Stirlingshire.

Many more similar examples can be given.
The clan system was overgrown with beautiful attributes, which were indispensable in the early Middle Ages. First of all, these were the coat of arms, motto and tartan (plaid with a certain color). As they say, there is no clan without a tartan...