|August 8th, 2005||#1|
British genetic makeup much the same as 12,000 years ago
Is it true? Interesting if it is. One thing is clear from mere observation: Britons do have their own phenotype.
|August 10th, 2005||#2|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Interesting article DC but too many people are attempting to make too sweeping statements about the ethnic make up of the British Isles on too small a sample group,although admittedly the article doesn`t reveal the size of the sample group.But it is fashionable for "researchers" to set out to "prove" a theory by selecting the evidence that meets with their preconceived politically correct indoctrination.
It has become fashionable for "researchers" to make statements discrediting the historical fact of the Anglo-Saxon invasions as being a mass colonisation of southern Britain.It isn`t pc to be Teutonic anymore,not since 1945!
It would not have been impossible for just a warrior elite to have imposed their language,naming system,culture and mythology onto a larger mass of subject people.History teaches us that warrior elites who impose a new state system eventually become swallowed up by their conquered subject peoples,eg the Franks in France amongst the indigenous Gallo-Roman population and the Normans in England and Wales.
Rarely would a conquering elite be able to impose their own language lock, stock and barrel in this way.From my studies of Old English I can tell you that there are very few foreign loan words in Old English and hardly any non Anglo-Saxon place names.If the Anglo-Saxons were merely a warrior minority who intermarried with native Britains and imposed their culture upon them then we would expect this to be reflected in the language and it isn`t.
The only thing that is pre Anglo-Saxon are Celtic river names but this is common in other parts of Germanic Europe too.In Austro-Germany there are rivers that have retained their Celtic names,eg the Donau[Danube].Nobody can satifactorily explain how the English managed to wipe out any trace of the indigenous population by invading with only a few thousand warriors.The archaoological evidence is consistent with a long colonisation of what eventually became England from about the mid 5th to 7th centuries.Certain areas in Germanic Europe were completely depopulated,ie Angeln which would suggest not merely a military invasion but a large scale mass colonisation.
The Venerable Bede writing in the 7th century made it quite clear that the English people were the descendants of the colonising Germanic tribes.
"These new-comers were from the three most formiddable races of Germany,the Saxons,Angles,and Jutes."[A History of the English Church and People"] He was almost contemporary with the Voelkerwanderung into Britain so why don`t we accept his testimony? He was closer,much closer in time to the Anglo-Saxon invasions than we are!