Talk:Ewan Campbell

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Ewan Campbell. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/archive/11-6-19101-0-51-36.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 18:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Criticism of the Theory
So I find myself quite supportive of the theory, personally, having studied the matter quite a deal and also am quite convinced the Goidelic languages most likely survived in rural pockets of Pictish areas as well, if not as pure Goidelic tongues then at least as hybrids between Goidelic and Brythonic, perhaps with pure Brythonic languages also in place in much of the Pictish areas, this would certainly explain why so Goidelic languages spread so completely through Pictish areas, because there was perhaps simply less divergence between Pictish languages and Goidelic in comparison to Goidelic languages and Brythonic.

But anyway, I was just wondering about academic criticism of Ewan Campbell's theories. Obviously his paper has been around for a while, it has some support in academic and archaeological circles but the orthodox view still seems to be that Goidelic languages were brought to western Scotland through invasion or colonisation.

So surely academics and historians have come out in their droves to shut down Campbell's theories and tear them to shreds, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.178.222 (talk) 03:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


 * It's widely known from the historical record that the Lowlands Campbell house, of Norman origin, are notoriously vitriolic in their anti-Gaelic and anti-Highlands agendas, displayed over the past few hundred years in clan repression. That this man's bias in the article should continue to prove that house so bloody-minded shouldn't be seen as NPOV in the slightest, since it is not interested in truth, but an ax to grind against the culture of clans his kind has hated forever now, despite having been the reality for Alba since before the first Campbell set foot there.
 * To be candid about myself:
 * 1) My most recent known Scottish descent is in fact Campbell, but detest their overwhelmingly negative attitudes and behaviors towards 'their fellow Scots'. Campbells are no 'true Scots' anyway, because Scots have a Gaelic origin by definition, no matter the later umbrella use by civic nationalists to say anyone else that was north of Berwick and espoused Anglophobia was equally Scottish, even though they were merely Northumbrians of Lothian at odds with the rulers of England and of Germanic origin.
 * 2) I have dislike for both the Braveheart fantasy politics of secession from the UK and Anglophobia because my family is on the English side of the Wall and the Auld Alliance left our region devastated. Let's say that my feelings on this matter are intense enough to convey the impression of extremist passions against those interests, if only out of a sense of self-preservation and concerns about the welfare of my kinfolk at the hands of professional victims who have convenient memory lapses for the injuries their 'heroes' have done to my region of England.
 * 3) To be NPOV and fair, I am perfectly willing and able to not add insult to injury to the Scottish tribe from Ulster that colonised Caledonia and remade it Scotland seems to have returned to form Northern Ireland since the Plantations were tied to the Clearances. In a parallel example, Angles colonised Britannia and remade it England, but somehow, in the uneducated minds of today, this didn't happen, according to certain, highly vocal misanthropic activists.
 * It is the dark agendas of some to abolish both Scotland and England, for the purpose of a single, ahistorical and nebulous Great Britain, although their aims are claimed to be lofty and in consideration of the lives lost by having Borders leading them to erase all barriers everywhere. Still, historical revisionism that negates actuality and serves modern ideals is not truth... 76.177.11.75 (talk) 07:36, 5 October 2023 (UTC)