Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A BROOCH BELIEVED to have been looted by Vikings over a millennium ago has been found in the storeroom of a London museum.
The treasure, a gold disc brooch, dates back to the eighth or ninth century. Its existence was only discovered recently.
A lump of soil dug up at a Viking burial site in Norway was acquired by the British Museum in 1891, with the brooch buried deep inside.
British Museum curator and Viking expert Barry Ager said his eye was caught by some metal sticking out of the soil and asked for it to be x-rayed, calling the discovery a ‘staggering find’.
He told The Observer that it ‘shows the contact between the British Isles and Norway in the Viking period’.
It had been buried in the grave of a prominent Viking woman and is believed to have been looted and brought back to Norway.
Ager says that the craft shown in making the brooch was ‘very fine’.
The British Museum found the brooch in preparing for a major Viking artefact display, which begins in March.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
They had a habit of acquiring soil belonging to others
‘British Isles’ – I know know its a geographic term, could he not though have least acknowledged the country of origin.
The country of origin is unknown – the celts weren’t exclusive to Ireland.
avina your stopppiiiidddddd!!!!!!!!
Avina you are 100% correct.
http://fsos.com/celtic_history.htm
If it doesn’t say where it was made, it was made in China
The Celts weren’t exclusive to the “British Isles” either.
Care to explain why Steven?
There are six recognised celtic ‘nations’ – Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Isle of Man, Cornwall and Brittany. Galicia and Asturias in Spain are also regarded by many as having celtic roots.
Celtic or not, the brooch is Irish.
If you follow think in the article Conor you’ll see that the experts believe it is most likely either Scottish or Irish but they’re unable to determine which.
* the link
Stupid comment try reading article.
Conor I suppose you think The Book Of Kells is Irish too ?
Yes it was written by Irish monks on Iona.
“There are at least five competing theories about the manuscript’s place of origin and time of completion. First, the book, or perhaps just the text, may have been created at Iona, then brought to Kells, where the illuminations were perhaps added, and never finished. Second, the book may have been produced entirely at Iona.[8] Third, the manuscript may have been produced entirely in the scriptorium at Kells. Fourth, it may have been produced in the north of England, perhaps at Lindisfarne, then brought to Iona and from there to Kells. Finally, it may have been the product of an unknown monastery in Pictish Scotland, though there is no actual evidence for this theory, especially considering the absence of any surviving manuscript from Pictland”
As per the rest of this thread, celtic monks doesn’t necessarily mean Irish monks.
Rubbish
Since you claim to know so much more than the experts would you care to outline your credentials?
What experts? Wikipedia? lol
Which part of it do you think is incorrect?
Feel free to follow the links to the references contained in the wiki and post your own alternative references if you disagree with them.
Really cant be bothered , references look pretty dodgy btw
I believe it was illuminated and written in Ireland, the book of Kells that is.
They believed so much in their deity that they wrote and illustrated a magnificent book for all to see.
The Celts, they came from past Germany and travelled across and ended up in Ireland and we held onto it.
Thankfully.
This is taken directly from the TCD website if it makes you happier Conor:
“The date and place of origin of the Book of Kells have attracted a great deal of scholarly controversy. The majority academic opinion now tends to attribute it to the scriptorium of Iona (Argyllshire), but conflicting claims have located it in Northumbria or in Pictland in eastern Scotland. A monastery founded around 561 by St Colum Cille on Iona, an island off Mull in western Scotland, became the principal house of a large monastic confederation. In 806, following a Viking raid on the island which left 68 of the community dead, the Columban monks took refuge in a new monastery at Kells, County Meath, and for many years the two monasteries were governed as a single community. It must have been close to the year 800 that the Book of Kells was written, although there is no way of knowing if the book was produced wholly at Iona or at Kells, or partially at each location.”
Avina, sometimes raw emotion is all that governs the ideas of others. There may be ample academic evidence to suggest that the Book of Kells was probably created in either Scotland or Northern England, but as that doesn’t suit the agenda of those inventing a history of an Irish people circa 800CE they don’t want to hear it. All cultures invent histories for themselves and Ireland is no different. One would have hoped though that they would at least try to incorporate the historical and scientific evidence as to the origin of the book rather than just dismissing any possibility if it being produced abroad because this doesn’t suit their agenda.
Spot on Bernard :-)
Most of the monks on Iona would have been Irish including St Colum Cille. Western Scotland was controlled by the Gaelic Irish. Lindisvarne was also set up by an Irish monk. Its an Irish book.
I never disputed that it wasnt made in Iona. Where have I said that
Bernard Cantillon , that comment is some piece of work, wow. What is your agenda?
That may very well be true Bernard, that is why I rely on reading published works by renowned and respected scholars in this field.
May I recommend some works by John T Koch a well respected professor of Celtic studies.
Celtic culture: A historical encyclopaedia.
The early chronology for St Patrick.
Celtic from the west, edited by J. T. Koch.
Although the internet can be invaluable in sourcing information on such matters, however, in cases such as these it is always best to read works by those who are very well informed on the matter.
Conor, I think Bernard’s point is that its just not possible to state definitively whether the Book of Kells is “Irish”, “Scottish”, “English” or anything else. In fact even these terms become somewhat meaningless in the context of the time.
I have massive problems with the terms ‘Celt’ and ‘Celtic’ been identified with Ireland. As far as I can understand, the ancient Irish never identified themselves as such.
Of course the ancient Irish did not refer to themselves as Celts Adrian, it is a term used by historians and artists in recent times to identify a specific style and influence over a protracted period.
There was no massive influx of celts, just small groups over time.
If I mention celtic art, a certain style or image immediately springs to mind. This was a gentle and slow influence of style, which the Irish adopted and being such fine craftspeople made their own and excelled at.
An Armenian architect friend of mine recently sent me some photos of symbolic carvings he found in Lebanon recently, they have a striking similarity to step and key patterns found in celtic artwork.
As Aidan Meehan, an author and lecturer once said
“Celtic art is not ethnic. It is a classical abstract art, as accessible as classical music for instance. It is a way of making visual music”
and the Irish are the Iris , the Ayrish with different DNA to Celts
“The research at Trinity College Dublin (TCD) into the origins of Ireland’s population found no substantial evidence of the Celts in Irish DNA, and concludes they never settled here en masse.”
.http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1091789/pg1
Dare we examine the evidence for the Irish origins of civilization?
http://www.irishoriginsofcivilization.com/irishoriginsexcerpts/ch10.html
It’s only yours as long as you can keep it …. Britain was once Celtic then it was Saxon.
We are talking about Ireland, not Britain.
With respect Conor, I think you’re the only one on here talking exclusively about Ireland.
not exsclusively my good troll.
Conor everone else on here is talking about the celts. In your posts you seem to fail to acknowledge that the celtic world is much broader than Ireland.
Have a nice day.
100% Adrian!
Looted treasure in a British museum isn’t exactly unique is it!
They bought it.
Why was a lump of soil acquired by the British museum?
For science. Duh!
Good soil for spud growing
Perfect chance to put in a lump of muck ‘posed by model’ pic and you missed it Paul!
Where are these islands called the british isles, i certainly don’t live in them.
There are people who do not know where they live. Do you know where the Irish Sea is?
It is a term that is no longer used in maps etc. It is fading away as an echo of a time long ago.
The british isles are somewhere between Ireland and Europe, though you could mistake them for somewhere east of istanbul
Can’t beat a moany ‘little Irelander’
Similarly can’t beat an ‘exceptional peoples’ American.
Yawn…….
The British Isles is a geographic term. These two islands (Great Britain and Ireland) are the main islands. There are two independent countries on these islands however, one being the Republic of Ireland, which is located on 80% of the territory of the smaller island. Pretending that something isn’t so, because you don’t like the word does not make it disappear. People need to grow up. We can be Irish and independent, yet live on 80% of the smaller of the two British Isles. Our overseas embassies have engaged in a stupid exercise in trying to get people to pretend that two small islands off the west coast of Europe should not be seen as part of a group of geographically contiguous islands. Geographically we are contiguous, but that doesn’t suit the petty nationalists. If we at least proposed an alternative, there would be some logic, but we never do that. We want people to uniquely describe these islands in a way that no islands elsewhere are described. We could call ourselves the Western European Islands or Anglo-Celtic Isles, whatever, but suggesting nothing and nit picking when the correct term, British Isles, is used, is pathetic.
Why is British Isles the “correct term” ? The Britons only ever resided in Britain. Why is Ireland included? Lets hope you dont make up history to support your agenda?
As far as I know, its the earliest attested form, dating back to at least the time of Pythias of Marsaille, who lived in the 4th century BC and sailed around Ireland and Britain.
That museum is built on looting more so than most.
There are many items they got in somewhat dodgy circumstances, however they bought this
Fecking Brits stealing our stuff as usual.
Is it possible that you didn’t read the article?
Emily, it is possible that he may not be able to read at all.
Its possible I was being ironic
Possible, but it’s more likely that someone picked you up on a silly comment and you pleaded irony.
@ Stephen.. ha ha
@ Craven .. double ha ha
What a lucky find, pity there’s no picture of it.
Sorry there is on the Observer link.. nice piece, similar in design to the Tara Brooch.
Wonder could the composition of the brooch be analysed to give an age and probable location of manufacture?..Celtic covered Ireland..Scotland..Wales..and parts of France and maybe even southern Spain..be good to know.
The composition of the brooch wouldn’t work, gold and precious gems were traded from all over the known world at the time. The gold would have been melted down and reused many times while semi precious stones like garnets found in the 8th century Sutton Hoo hoard have been shown to come from as far away as Sri Lanka, they were traded frequently.
That doesn’t mean such a brooch could not be dated, in fact it could possibly be dated quite easily and accurately by its style and decoration. The decorative styling, the knotwork and zoomamorphic design used on such brooches changed with the influence of the Vikings, so depending on its styling it could be easily dated to pre or post VIkings being in Ireland. There are many other tiny factors that can be used to date such artefacts with a reasonable degree of accuracy and other that can say if it is Irish or from mainland Britain. It would be a real pleasure to actually se the brooch of course.
There are indeed similarities, the dolphins head but one example. The vikings were hoors for bling the feckers. Not to mention the oul blood-thirstiness..
*zoomorphic.
Sorry for being a bit pedantic Jedi :)
Jamie, they are snakes heads. Celtic knotwork of that period had very strict criteria, particularly zoomorphic patterns. Birds and snakes.
molly you know your stuff.. i tip my hat.
It’s mine, where do I fill in the forms?
Immediately as I read the headline I thought it was an Irish Celtic broach. Thankyou Journal again for your sensationalist headlines. You guys really know how to spin topics.
And before I thought about it being returned to Ireland (??) I thought that the English take good care of ancient stuff and they should probably hold on to it as part of well maintained catalogue of world history.
The English aren’t all that bad. They do have some good qualities.
And in saying that they should still apologise for forcing their culture on ours and all the pain they’ve caused.
That’s a sensationalist headline?
Sensationalist in the sense it’s trying to create an ‘Irish Pride’ story out of a non-story.
Who cares about a brooch found in Norway that’s in an English museum.
It’s sensationalist and you’re a fool.
Well lets not get bogged down in name calling and what not.
It’s just a headline. I am sorry that you are so wound about it.
Sorry, I got a little pi$$ed off when you criticised me. I really think I’m right on this one.
It’s an obvious shill article . The people behind this paper love stirring the pot and I like pulling them up on it. They do it all the time and they do it good.
This is a non story and only a chance to point out the obvious cr@p that these people slip into genuine news.
Nigel,
It’s a completely factual headline.
Paul
Hi Paul.
It is a factual headline. Well done.
It is however as relevant as child miners in Bolivia.
Its likely an Irish brooch and is of interest. Calm down man, you sound ridiculous.
Nigel, I have to say that I agree with what you say.
Its most likely an Irish brooch, we should get it back
Why is it most likely? Celts lived all over Northern Europe.
Conor
Why should we get it back. The only certainty we have in ownership terms is that the grave owner had possession of it. Until you can give me more than that ….get lost!
Read the observer article people.
Yes, it could have come from Scotland. So your point?
What is your point?
The brooch could be from Scotland. Even if it were from the island of Ireland, why should “we get it back”?
My point: its origin cannot be definitely determined. It now belongs to the British Museum.
It is only just found and is most likely Irish, it is similar to the Tara Brooch. In time it will be shown to be Irish.
We should get it back because its part of our heritage that was looted by the Vikings
What is your problem, wow there are some strange people on this site.
Conor, just a suggestion. If you’re going to post a comment, have a think about what it is you want to say, then post a succint, well thought out comment. We may disagree with you, but it looks better and helps your argument. Posting multiple comments just makes you look like one of the “some strange people on this site”
PS It’s probably Scottish lol!
Some of the “well thought out” lenghty comments above are complete rubbish. You are right though, maybe my comments have been to short but at least I am talking sense.
National treasure? Eamonn Dunphy.
Its the last all ireland medal won by a meath man
It’s only 14 and a half years old?? Huh, I thought the article said it was obtained in the 1890s. I must be going mad.
Odd seeing the confusion of many posters on this site. There is little genetic evidence of celts ever colonising Ireland to any degree. Whatever the Irish are, celts they are not.
Eric, shh you’ll upset people!
But here’s a link that backs your comment http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=119605
I’d love to see it.
If it’s detail work is as fine as is claimed, then it is most likely Irish.
Back in that era Ireland had the finest craftsmen.
Yoink!
Can… can we have it?
The British museum will take good care of it not like the irish one leave wear it is
Smart kid avina
Why? because he copy/pastes from other websites? or puts words in peoples mouths?
have your say