Aye, recent genetic research has found a break in the lineage around 3000BC if I remember rightly, with the population across the British Isles being largely replaced then. They're still looking for an explanation but likely a disease, perhaps from new peoples (beaker people appear here c.3000-2000bc) bringing something the pre-existing people hadn't resistance to, as seen in S.America upon arrival of the Spanish... that's conjecture though at this stage I believe. By my layman's understanding Dolmen's, Cromlech or Portal Tombs (large stone 'boxes') are generally thought to be the first common pattern for these megalithic constructions, many estimated around 3500BC, then stone circles pop up getting towards the bronze age and stone rows appear comparatively recently in the first millennium BC getting into the iron age. That's my understanding at present, whether that progression is conclusive is another matter as there are so many of these structures dotted around and, as stated, only a small proportion have been given any close attention or been excavated. Also, the notable examples were likely to have been disturbed by antiquarians in the 1800's, treasure hunters and all the rest so, aye, much will likely remain a mystery there. Stone can't be carbon dated so carbon dating is reliant on sampling organic matter beneath set stones which makes results pretty debatable due to possible contamination of samples with material from elsewhere by worms etc. etc.
@@waynemcauliffe2362 Perhaps, though population was very low then so it's not a given i.e. the issue was more likely lack of human resources to get a strong footing than competition for land as today. There's very little evidence for warfare in the neolithic at present which attests to that, though again, that could all change with one discovery, as with most things in that epoch where artefacts beyond lumps of stone are few and far between for obvious reasons.
Everyone doubts I am Irish/Scottish but I got it tested and I am only 2% Scandinavian. There were small amounts of Balkan/Middle Eastern DNA and my grandfather used to say it was our ancestors who built the stone circles.
Thanks for that wander in Kerry, much appreciated. I wonder about these stone rows in relation to astronomical observations... I saw recently an example in South America of a row of stones along a ridge which was thought to allow an observer standing at a point off to one side to be able to measure the progression of the sun through the seasons as it rose between different stones. That makes me think that, if these were used in part to make such observances, that a point from which they were sighted would likely be required - a place to stand so you got the same 'reading' each time you looked. Being as that, if it did exist, would likely be some distance from the stone row itself and nondescript in comparison - i.e. a flat stone to stand on now under the turf - well, that could be a feature very easily missed. Just a thought, obviously. Of all the megalithic structures though, stone rows do shout of something of that kind, since they're somewhat lacking in aesthetic appeal... or substance... as a 'sculptural' creation - at least in comparison to other megalithic structures (riskily subjective statement but all the same). By the way, I suggest you add: *Irish History | Episode Title* or *Historic Ireland | Episode Title* ...to your title as the first words of the title are most important for search engine optimisation and so that will help it define the general bracket to recommend your vids to the right folks... i.e. the title of the monuments themselves are unlikely to register much. Get "history" and "Ireland" in the first paragraph of the description too along with other common search terms for this area such as neolithic/bronze-aged/iron-aged etc. Might be worth adding "megalithic" to those terms too.
Thanks for the hints Jesse. Do you mean I should change this title to Doory Stone Row | Irish History ? I put several hashtags in the description, but I think they don't appear. One of these is megalithic. Thanks again for the hints, I love to get them. Since starting out on this journey, I have learnt a lot, but SEO is something I find difficult!!!
I think the more we learn about these monuments the less we know. I have read several articles on the astronomical orientation of stone rows in this area of Ireland, and I must admit they often leave me confused. I think like all human structures they had many functions (calendars, astronomical, religious, social, and even aesthetic. Maybe that is what is so appealing about them?
@@forasfeasa I'm no expert but have looked at quite a bit over the last year on it whilst I've been trying to grow my own wee channel, to debatable success... As far as I understand it, and it is hard to define exactly as different folk say different things but the presiding wisdom seems to be... Title is the most important factor - the words are prioritised first to last seemingly, so I suggest your 'category title' goes first with strong general terms - history and Ireland being the two most obvious I could think of that covered all your content. [You can put an alternative title or hook that's just for human eyes on the thumbnail where it won't confuse the search terms.] Then the description itself is scanned for tag words so the first paragraph needs to have good search terms in e.g. Exploring the *history* of *County Kerry* in *Ireland*, I visit a *Stone Row* likely dated to the *Bronze Age* ...Etc. The actual search terms box is apparently not of great importance, most useful to put in different spellings of the previous terms. I used to put in the broadest terms there I could think of but that's a bad idea as you want it targeted to folks who will watch it through, not click bait terms that are not relevant. Lastly the transcript (autosubs) are scanned apparently to see if the content matches up - I've noticed my films that do not have narration at the start do poorly - I think that may be partly for this reason. I haven't really worked out where #tags fit in but, I think the general idea throughout all of the points above is repetition - so the algorithm scans all those fields and comes out certain that this is a video about history in Ireland, maybe specifically megalithic stone works. With that, it will recommend it to suitable viewers hopefully under videos on the sane topic - that's your main source of exposure - not direct searches in the search box. There's a couple of other things you may or may not be aware of - viewer retention is the biggest factor - how long they watch after clicking. That's how your video quality is ranked. For that reason, it's important to target it right - "Megalithic" might actually be a bad idea for example if that means loads of Atlantean High Technology Hancockians flood over, watch 30 seconds and leave because you don't mention sonic Amazonian bird spit energy wave theory 😉 - you might get high viewers on one video but it won't be good in the long run. I think I probably messed up on that with my "Megaliths of The Emerald Isle" short series. In other words, it's as important to put off the wrong people as it is to attract the right people... because they'll mess up your viewer retention figures, even if you do get the initial click. Lastly... and perhaps most importantly, after a few videos on the same topic the algorithm will, with a bit of luck, decide you are "an authority" on the subject (in its eyes) and will then start recommending your videos more on that topic. That's again why I think you could try putting "Irish History" at the start of all your titles in the future so you get ranked on that topic and, with a bit of luck, get recommended when someone types that in the search box. You could specialise more and make it Kerry History if there's already big channels dominating "Irish History". Whether or not you are an authority isn't the point (sure that will give you a pang of doubt) - it's about the algorithm deciding this is a topic you have a long-running interest in and your videos on that are rated highly by viewers - so it will give you the benefit of the doubt when you release a new one on the same topic and put it to the top of the list of recommendations. - That's where my channel falls down as I tend to hop between subjects... but that's me. Hope that helps as I'd like to see your channel grow. ...Now whether of not that stuff works is another thing - it's really hard defining what's getting results with our levels of viewers. If you try that, I'd say try one tactic for maybe 4 or 5 videos - I got a surge in viewers on the topic of megaliths (I think) after 4 or 5 videos on the topic - which I think meant the algorithm decided I was "an authority" of some description at that point. ...I then switched to a video on van living and my growth evaporated, obviously. ...Murphy's Law wins out. Ah, and avoid editing wording shortly after release, I've done that on videos that were gathering momentum and they've immediately flat-lined afterwards. All the best.
@@forasfeasa My pleasure, hope that brings some results in time - by no means a given as it's such an awkward system today, I've spoken with folks who are involved professionally in the deep end of that and even they say it's almost impossible to predict what will take off and work out why it happened, so, aye... above all else, do it for the love of it I say. All the best.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 83 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "พันฤทธิ์ vs ซุปเปอร์บอล วันของโอม MBK"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1b4pkKHa_Fk/mqdefault.jpg)
I heard that the older people built things like Newgrange around 3,000 BC but the newer people that came in centuries later built the rings like here
Aye, recent genetic research has found a break in the lineage around 3000BC if I remember rightly, with the population across the British Isles being largely replaced then. They're still looking for an explanation but likely a disease, perhaps from new peoples (beaker people appear here c.3000-2000bc) bringing something the pre-existing people hadn't resistance to, as seen in S.America upon arrival of the Spanish... that's conjecture though at this stage I believe.
By my layman's understanding Dolmen's, Cromlech or Portal Tombs (large stone 'boxes') are generally thought to be the first common pattern for these megalithic constructions, many estimated around 3500BC, then stone circles pop up getting towards the bronze age and stone rows appear comparatively recently in the first millennium BC getting into the iron age. That's my understanding at present, whether that progression is conclusive is another matter as there are so many of these structures dotted around and, as stated, only a small proportion have been given any close attention or been excavated. Also, the notable examples were likely to have been disturbed by antiquarians in the 1800's, treasure hunters and all the rest so, aye, much will likely remain a mystery there. Stone can't be carbon dated so carbon dating is reliant on sampling organic matter beneath set stones which makes results pretty debatable due to possible contamination of samples with material from elsewhere by worms etc. etc.
@@JesseP.Watson Thanks for the great summary Jesse!
@@JesseP.Watson I think the new people were a warrior culture and wiped them out sadly
@@waynemcauliffe2362 Perhaps, though population was very low then so it's not a given i.e. the issue was more likely lack of human resources to get a strong footing than competition for land as today. There's very little evidence for warfare in the neolithic at present which attests to that, though again, that could all change with one discovery, as with most things in that epoch where artefacts beyond lumps of stone are few and far between for obvious reasons.
Everyone doubts I am Irish/Scottish but I got it tested and I am only 2% Scandinavian. There were small amounts of Balkan/Middle Eastern DNA and my grandfather used to say it was our ancestors who built the stone circles.
Thanks for that wander in Kerry, much appreciated. I wonder about these stone rows in relation to astronomical observations... I saw recently an example in South America of a row of stones along a ridge which was thought to allow an observer standing at a point off to one side to be able to measure the progression of the sun through the seasons as it rose between different stones. That makes me think that, if these were used in part to make such observances, that a point from which they were sighted would likely be required - a place to stand so you got the same 'reading' each time you looked. Being as that, if it did exist, would likely be some distance from the stone row itself and nondescript in comparison - i.e. a flat stone to stand on now under the turf - well, that could be a feature very easily missed.
Just a thought, obviously. Of all the megalithic structures though, stone rows do shout of something of that kind, since they're somewhat lacking in aesthetic appeal... or substance... as a 'sculptural' creation - at least in comparison to other megalithic structures (riskily subjective statement but all the same).
By the way, I suggest you add:
*Irish History | Episode Title*
or
*Historic Ireland | Episode Title*
...to your title as the first words of the title are most important for search engine optimisation and so that will help it define the general bracket to recommend your vids to the right folks... i.e. the title of the monuments themselves are unlikely to register much. Get "history" and "Ireland" in the first paragraph of the description too along with other common search terms for this area such as neolithic/bronze-aged/iron-aged etc. Might be worth adding "megalithic" to those terms too.
Thanks for the hints Jesse. Do you mean I should change this title to Doory Stone Row | Irish History ? I put several hashtags in the description, but I think they don't appear. One of these is megalithic. Thanks again for the hints, I love to get them. Since starting out on this journey, I have learnt a lot, but SEO is something I find difficult!!!
I think the more we learn about these monuments the less we know. I have read several articles on the astronomical orientation of stone rows in this area of Ireland, and I must admit they often leave me confused. I think like all human structures they had many functions (calendars, astronomical, religious, social, and even aesthetic. Maybe that is what is so appealing about them?
@@forasfeasa I'm no expert but have looked at quite a bit over the last year on it whilst I've been trying to grow my own wee channel, to debatable success...
As far as I understand it, and it is hard to define exactly as different folk say different things but the presiding wisdom seems to be...
Title is the most important factor - the words are prioritised first to last seemingly, so I suggest your 'category title' goes first with strong general terms - history and Ireland being the two most obvious I could think of that covered all your content.
[You can put an alternative title or hook that's just for human eyes on the thumbnail where it won't confuse the search terms.]
Then the description itself is scanned for tag words so the first paragraph needs to have good search terms in e.g. Exploring the *history* of *County Kerry* in *Ireland*, I visit a *Stone Row* likely dated to the *Bronze Age* ...Etc.
The actual search terms box is apparently not of great importance, most useful to put in different spellings of the previous terms. I used to put in the broadest terms there I could think of but that's a bad idea as you want it targeted to folks who will watch it through, not click bait terms that are not relevant.
Lastly the transcript (autosubs) are scanned apparently to see if the content matches up - I've noticed my films that do not have narration at the start do poorly - I think that may be partly for this reason.
I haven't really worked out where #tags fit in but, I think the general idea throughout all of the points above is repetition - so the algorithm scans all those fields and comes out certain that this is a video about history in Ireland, maybe specifically megalithic stone works. With that, it will recommend it to suitable viewers hopefully under videos on the sane topic - that's your main source of exposure - not direct searches in the search box.
There's a couple of other things you may or may not be aware of - viewer retention is the biggest factor - how long they watch after clicking. That's how your video quality is ranked. For that reason, it's important to target it right - "Megalithic" might actually be a bad idea for example if that means loads of Atlantean High Technology Hancockians flood over, watch 30 seconds and leave because you don't mention sonic Amazonian bird spit energy wave theory 😉 - you might get high viewers on one video but it won't be good in the long run. I think I probably messed up on that with my "Megaliths of The Emerald Isle" short series. In other words, it's as important to put off the wrong people as it is to attract the right people... because they'll mess up your viewer retention figures, even if you do get the initial click.
Lastly... and perhaps most importantly, after a few videos on the same topic the algorithm will, with a bit of luck, decide you are "an authority" on the subject (in its eyes) and will then start recommending your videos more on that topic. That's again why I think you could try putting "Irish History" at the start of all your titles in the future so you get ranked on that topic and, with a bit of luck, get recommended when someone types that in the search box. You could specialise more and make it Kerry History if there's already big channels dominating "Irish History". Whether or not you are an authority isn't the point (sure that will give you a pang of doubt) - it's about the algorithm deciding this is a topic you have a long-running interest in and your videos on that are rated highly by viewers - so it will give you the benefit of the doubt when you release a new one on the same topic and put it to the top of the list of recommendations. - That's where my channel falls down as I tend to hop between subjects... but that's me.
Hope that helps as I'd like to see your channel grow. ...Now whether of not that stuff works is another thing - it's really hard defining what's getting results with our levels of viewers. If you try that, I'd say try one tactic for maybe 4 or 5 videos - I got a surge in viewers on the topic of megaliths (I think) after 4 or 5 videos on the topic - which I think meant the algorithm decided I was "an authority" of some description at that point. ...I then switched to a video on van living and my growth evaporated, obviously. ...Murphy's Law wins out. Ah, and avoid editing wording shortly after release, I've done that on videos that were gathering momentum and they've immediately flat-lined afterwards.
All the best.
@@JesseP.Watson Thanks a million, it really helps. I think I will re-read your message several times :-)
@@forasfeasa My pleasure, hope that brings some results in time - by no means a given as it's such an awkward system today, I've spoken with folks who are involved professionally in the deep end of that and even they say it's almost impossible to predict what will take off and work out why it happened, so, aye... above all else, do it for the love of it I say.
All the best.