Anglo-Saxon Invasion Theory

[Copperknickers II]

Anglo-Saxon Invasion Theory

In Britain, we are all taught how during the Dark Ages, after the last mysterious Celtic Kings, most famously King Arthur, had gone, England was settled by a people known as the Anglo-Saxons, who invaded, pillaged and raped their way to the top of the British food chain, thereby ending the Celtic Age and founding what can be considered modern England. This is a story perpetuated by many great people, from Bede, Geoffry of Monmouth and countless others. But how much truth is there in the old stories?

'Anglo-Saxons' refers to a culture in the Dark Ages in the area now known as England. It is derived from the Angles and Saxons, some of a number of tribes who resided in geographical areas currently designated Denmark and Germany, some of whom migrated to Britain. There were never any 'Anglo-Saxons' outside of Britain.

Before the Romans arrived, the Brits were as Celtic as any inbred Irishman from Donegal today, with only small parts of Roman soldiers who had settled here from Belgium, Italy, and some even further afield. Since England and the Southeast was the entry point for foreign powers, immigrants and settlers had most impact there, and progressively lesser and lesser until today, where we have small extant communities in the northwest of Scotland, west of Wales, and Ireland, speaking Celtic languages. In London, we have huge proportions of foreign languages, from immigrants of course. This was always the case. I myself do not speak a Celtic language, i speak a Germanic language (2 in fact, English and Scots).

If we do genetic tests, we see that there are Germanic influences on our population, but not nearly the amount one would expect of an invasion that wiped out most of the Celts. Tests done on Anglo-Saxon items showed that although they were in a Germanic style, they were made in Britain. This was at a time supposedly at the beginning of the migrations.



Therefore, in my and several others' opinions, the cultural shift was largely due to Germanic vogue becoming the mode in Britain, especially among noble Celts and some Noble Saxons who did take up some lands in Britain.

So why do we not speak Celtic still, if we are all Celts? Celtic died out as a first language in England 1000 years ago. It makes perfect sense that English should show little signs of Celtic. Although having said that, English has more similarity with Celtic than you might have thought. To me, and to many other historians, that indicates not that a load of Germanic people came over, but that a couple of Germanic people came over and gave their culture and language to Celts, who adopted them in their own specific style. That has become a characeristic of the Brits - absorbing other people's culture but keeping a distinct British idendity. Something that we must keep in mind in today's world of multiculturality. If we look into the past, we see that the latter has a long history in our country, and it should not be looked down upon or prevented, but seen as an integral part of us as a nation.


To be continued...

[hellheaven1987]

Well, I fail to see how Anglo-Saxon had anything to do with Celts, who were in northern Britainnia at that time.

By the way, I always find interesting about Saxon, especially how they fought against Franks.

[Watchman]

Uh, the populace-at-large of the British Isles was more or less "Celtic" (albeit heavily Romanised) when the Anglo-Saxons started turning up. 'Course, they'd originally gotten into the whole "Celt" franchise pretty much the exact same way, through cultural transfer and in all likelihood a fair few new arrivals from across the Channel making their way into the ruling class.

[Copperknickers II]

Prior to the Anglo-Saxon period, everyone in Britain was a Briton, ie culturally a Celt. The Romano-British were diglossic Celtic peoples, (who had some Roman garrison influences, as i said).There were no other ethnicities in the British isles (except the Goidhaels in Ireland and Scotland, anyway, who were supposedly Iberian).

[Barry Ferguson]

Prior to the Anglo-Saxon period, everyone in Britain was a Celt. The Romano-British were diglossic Celtic peoples, (who had some Roman garrison influences, as i said).There were no other ethnicities in the British isles (except the Goidhaels in Ireland and Scotland, anyway, who were supposedly Iberian).

According to something I read, a new theory is Britain never had a Celtic population. It was inhabited by it's ice Age settlers. Later they copied Celtic styles as they became dominant in Europe, but the inhabitants were not Celtic.
The Saxons arrived and replace the ruing class, but did not completly root out the natives as was once thought, and much the same happened with the vikings and the Normans. The impact of these invasion was in terms of language and the names of people and places.
Compare Germanic/Scandinavian Old English with more French Modern English.
Genetically today's Britons are near identical to the Ice Age population

[Saxon wårolord]

Prior to the Anglo-Saxon period, everyone in Britain was a Celt. The Romano-British were diglossic Celtic peoples, (who had some Roman garrison influences, as i said).There were no other ethnicities in the British isles (except the Goidhaels in Ireland and Scotland, anyway, who were supposedly Iberian).

Not everyone, Julius Caesar's Belgic tribes are a classic example of Germanic culture and language allied with Celtic interferences.

[Copperknickers II]

Not everyone, Julius Caesar's Belgic tribes are a classic example of Germanic culture and language allied with Celtic interferences.

Belgic whats? What has that got to do with Britain? A couple of Belgian soldiers were stationed here and most of them went home afterwards, or am i missing something?

[Saxon wårolord]

Belgic whats? What has that got to do with Britain? A couple of Belgian soldiers were stationed here and most of them went home afterwards, or am i missing something?

I am not talking about Belgian soldiers, when Caesar invaded Gaul, he wrote that there were three types of Gauls:

-The Celto-Ligurians
-The Celts
-The Belgic Gauls

He said that the latter had many relatives in Britannia.
Tacitus' writing tell us more about their appearance and confirm Caesar's claims.

[Copperknickers II]

I am not talking about Belgian soldiers, when Caesar invaded Gaul, he wrote that there were three types of Gauls:

-The Celto-Ligurians
-The Celts
-The Belgic Gauls

He said that the latter had many relatives in Britannia.
Tacitus' writing tell us more about their appearance and confirm Caesar's claims.

I'm sure he did. What is your point again?

[zarlok]

I am not talking about Belgian soldiers, when Caesar invaded Gaul, he wrote that there were three types of Gauls:

-The Celto-Ligurians
-The Celts
-The Belgic Gauls

He said that the latter had many relatives in Britannia.
Tacitus' writing tell us more about their appearance and confirm Caesar's claims.

Umm, Ceasar said the Belgians were Germanic. Where did you read this alternative fantasy of "belgic gauls"? As I said already, the term Celt is useless because it has been mis-applied so many times, just like "scytian".

[Copperknickers II]

Exactly my point! Britain has always been absorbing its settlers, not being invaded by them. Although that study is slightly off on its diagnosis, we are not near identical to the ice-age population in the sense of being the same genetic stock as them.

[Barry Ferguson]

By far the majority of male gene types in Britain and Ireland derive from Iberia (modern Spain and Portugal), ranging from a low of 59% in Fakenham, Norfolk to highs of 96% in Llangefni, north Wales and 93% Castlerea, Ireland. On average 30% of gene types in England derive from north-west Europe. Even without dating the earlier waves of north-west European immigration, this invalidates the Anglo-Saxon wipeout theory …
… 75-95% of Britain and Ireland (genetic) matches derive from Iberia … Ireland, coastal Wales, and central and west-coast Scotland are almost entirely made up from Iberian founders, while the rest of the non-English parts of Britain and Ireland have similarly high rates. England does have lower rates of Iberian types with marked heterogeneity, but no English sample has less than 58% of Iberian samples …

—Stephen Oppenheimer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_the_British_Isles

[hellheaven1987]

Personally I find Celt is more a culture rather than ethnic. Clearly, even Celts themselves absorbed many non-Celts.

Overall, I still unable to see what is the point of OP.

[Barry Ferguson]

Personally I find Celt is more a culture rather than ethnic. Clearly, even Celts themselves absorbed many non-Celts.

Overall, I still unable to see what is the point of OP.

I think e's trying to dispel the myth of all English being Saxon and everyone else in the British Isles being Celts

EDIT: it's worth pointing out that the peoples of antiquity did not view ethnicity as narrowly as ourselves, as hellheaven points out. People like the Huns, Franks and Saxons were federations of many tribes

[justinius]

Today I must say that most Englishmen have Germanic blood and not Celtic blood. Intermarriage was for the most port prohibited for the Saxons. Out of all the places invaded by Germanic peoples, England was the only one where the invading forces' language and blood would persist throughout the ages.

[Manco]

Today I must say that most Englishmen have Germanic blood and not Celtic blood. Intermarriage was for the most port prohibited for the Saxons. Out of all the places invaded by Germanic peoples, England was the only one where the invading forces' language and blood would persist throughout the ages.

Any proof for that? Most studies show clearly that the main group is still Brythonic.

And if England was the only place where that happened, please explain to me why I, as a Fleming, speak a Germanic language? Even Austria was mostly Celtic, and it's pretty damn sure speaking a Germanic language too. Oh and Switzerland as well.

[Ardruire Iacób]

Any proof for that? Most studies show clearly that the main group is still Brythonic.

What? Welsh is the most spoken Brythonic language, and I somehow doubt that's the dominant language in England.

[Copperknickers II]

I've always wondered about one thing:

Why is it that the masses came to speak English, largely forgetting their Celtic language and culture? Were they forced, or did they simply speak whatever the elite favoured?

If the latter is true, why did Norman French not replace English eventually?

It did. For a while, only peasants spoke English and French was the national language. But then the father of the English nation (Edward III) came along and revived English as the national language.

Today I must say that most Englishmen have Germanic blood and not Celtic blood. Intermarriage was for the most port prohibited for the Saxons. Out of all the places invaded by Germanic peoples, England was the only one where the invading forces' language and blood would persist throughout the ages.

As i have been trying to tell you, that is wrong. There were simply not enough Ingaevonic invaders, they did not replace the native populations. Only their culture and language replaced the native culture and language.

Personally I find Celt is more a culture rather than ethnic. Clearly, even Celts themselves absorbed many non-Celts.

Indeed. The Celts in Britain i refer to as Celts because they were a Celtic culture with Celtic blood. They were in fact more or less absorbed by the Iberian and ice-age populations that were there before them, but that is irrelevent to this discussion.

Overall, I still unable to see what is the point of OP.

To stop people from thinking that thousands upon thousands of Germans decided to uproot, kill everyone in England and set up here, when what actually happened was that a few Germans migrated and brought their language and culture with them.

[Yorkshireman]

Copperknickers; I'm not challenging your view on this because I'm a builder not an historian, this is a genuine question. (I learn't the old version of history at school ie Anglo-Saxons came and beat up the sheep shagger Brits etc but that was 27 years ago at 'O' level only)

My question.

We have areas of England called Wessex/Essex/Sussex/East Anglia etc surely then there must have been enough of them to completely dominate British society to cause a complete change in the language/customs/place names etc ?

[ivan_the_terrible]

It did. For a while, only peasants spoke English and French was the national language. But then the father of the English nation (Edward III) came along and revived English as the national language.

Why did the peasants not forget English then, over some two and half centuries? The Anglo-Saxons managed to make them forget Gaelic over an only sligthly longer time.