Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 83

Thread: English Origins: Y Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, November 18th, 2010 @ 09:19 PM
    Ethnicity
    Norwegian
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Norðvegr
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Politics
    National Capitalism
    Posts
    68
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    The Normans were especially Danish Vikings, who began to occupy the northern area of France, now known as Normandy in the latter half of the 9th century.
    Norwegians, Gangr-Hrolf their leader was from Norway, then likely was most of his men Norwegians as well. The Norman nobility was mostly Scandinavian by blood (at least father-to-son speaking), even if they spoke French at the time of the invasion of England.

  2. #22
    Senior Member AryanKrieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Tuesday, December 21st, 2004 @ 08:28 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Wotanist
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontiersman
    The problem is we have no history nor tradition of any such slaughter.

    I refer you to the book "Celt and Saxon The Struggle For Britain AD410-937", in which the author builds an astounding case to support the theory that the Romano-British population was by and large slaughtered by the incoming Saxon invaders. I make no moral judgement myself as I have both Saxon and Anglo-Saxon heritage.However this was the normal way of things and not just in ancient wartime but right upto the present day.
    I quote from Gildas,De Excido et Conquesta Britanniae-"A number of the wretched survivors were caught in the mountains and butchered wholesale. Others, their spirits broken by hunger, went to surrender to the enemy; they were taken to be slaves forever, if indeed they were not killed straight away, the highest boon. Others made for lands beyond the sea, beneath the swelling sails they loudly wailed, singing a psalm that took the place of a shanty. "You have given us like sheep for the eating and scattered us among the haethen.""
    Clearly xtianity had weakened the resolve of the once great warlike Celts to resist the Germanic invaders.
    The extermiantion theory is also supported on the English side by the Anglo-Saxon chronicles.
    Academics are desperate these days to "prove" 2 things-
    That the English are not ethnically Germanic and that a mass invasionof Teutons/extermination of the Celts did not occur. This is entirely because of Jewish pressure upon the educational institutions of England and also the attempt by the English since 2 world wars to distance themselves from their continental German kinsmen.




    The genetics indicate that the Celts stayed there.

    What genetics? Please provide your evidence as this is at variance with the latest evidence that I have seen which indicates a continuity in the Anglo-Saxon population of Englaland down to the present day.


    Archaeologically, we know they continued ... often merging with Saxons,

    No, we do not know that,not to any great degree. An isolated example of peaceful co-existence does not prove that this was the general picture and goes against the historical chronicles of the time.

    and in some cases continuing Roman culture in small villages (complete with the Christian faith) all the way up til the period when the English were entirely Christian.

    Give me some examples please! Brian Bates in "The Real Middle Earth" demonstrates that the incoming Germanic invaders cared nothing for the stone Romano-British towns and cities but dwellt in their wattle and daub huts and settlements, living close to nature as they did in Germania and as the pre-xtian Celts did in Britain prior to the Roman invasion.

    Historically, even many of the Royal lines of various English kingdoms had Celtic admixture as Celtic/Brythonic names were common.

    They were the exception not the rule and this did not reflect what went on at a local level amongst the ordinary people.

    We know many parts of England remained mostly or with high numbers of British, and even had some autonomy til being assimilated (not slaughtered): Kent, Elmet, the Chilterns, Somerset, Devonshire, Cornwall, Bernaccia, Cumbria, the Fens, etc.) We even know of one entire British tribe that was allied with the Anglo-Saxon invasion in SW Britain.

    Again we are talking about the exception and not the rule yet you seem intent on trying to prove a point from meagre evidence.

    The idea of a 'Anglo-Saxon slaughter of Celts' comes primarily from Gildas who was writing a polemical/religious work, not a history.

    All history is written from a polemic persepctive. What one does in such circumstances is balance the evidence,giving due weight to certain types of evidence against others.His account agrees with that of the Anglo-Saxon chronicles.
    Does it not surprise you that virtually nothing remains of Celtic influence upon the pre-Norman Conquest English language? Why is that?
    Why also is there practically no legacy of Celtic place names in England apart from Cornwall and Cumbria? Why is that?

    His intention was not to record some holocaust but to call the folk of Britain to repentance. Exaggeration of 'evangelistically speaking' is the norm with this sort of writing. We know Gildas exaggerated: there are no piles of bones. Some deaths did happen, but nothing more serious than the depredations of the Vikings upon the English and Celts (the Vikings also were primarily settlers, not plunderers/rapists/murderers). The only other bit of evidence that is served up is a law from Offa's Mercia about killing any 'wild Welsh' found over the dyke. However, we do not find Offa purging the native Britons in his own kingdom, or turning on Elmet or those Britons still in the south or cities. With the term 'Wild Welsh', the term 'Wild' is key: it was not describing anyone of Britonnic race, but rather anyone from the mountain tribes to the West: IOW, those living in the old tribal manner... not the civilized and now 'Anglicized' Britons of the former Roman provinces.
    The Welsh chronicles and Anglo-Saxon Chronicles report of a state of more or less continuous warfare between the Anglo-Saxons and the Wealas as the Anglo-Saxon settlements gradually spread over 150 years to cover entirely what is now known as England.
    "In Llongborth Geraint was slain. Heroes of the land of Dumnonia,before they were slaughtered, they slew"[Anon, ninth century Welsh]

    "Ecgfrith, the king led an army to ravage the kingdom of the Picts...."[Bede,Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum]

    "Aelle and Cyssa beseiged Anderida,near Pevensey,and killed all who who were inside,so there was not one Briton left."[Year 491,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles]

    "There came two ealdormen to Britain: Cerdic and Cynric his son, with five ships,to the place called Cerdicesora; on the same day they fought the Welsh."[Year 495,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles]

    "Port came to Britain with his two sons,Bleda and Maegla,and two ships, to the place called Portsmouth,and killed a young British man,a very noble man."[Year 501,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles]

    "Cerdic and Cynric killed a British king named Natanlaod,and five thousand men with him. After that the land was known as Natanleag up to Cerdicesford."[Year 508,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles.

  3. #23
    Senior Member AryanKrieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Tuesday, December 21st, 2004 @ 08:28 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Wotanist
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    Quote Originally Posted by atlanto-med
    Well, documentary evidence would seem to disprove this idea, because it shows that there was mixing between the Anglo-Saxons and the native Britons. For example in Anglo-Saxon law there were many clauses for the Welsh.
    Perhaps you could cite some examples please!
    Having specific clauses within a law code for a subject and slave population proves nothing,certainly not mixing.

  4. #24
    Senior Member AryanKrieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Tuesday, December 21st, 2004 @ 08:28 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Wotanist
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    Quote Originally Posted by atlanto-med
    The words England and Anglia are thought to come from Ing, which is thought to be another name for Freyr, a Germanic deity. If this is correct, then until the cult of Freyr arrived there wouldn't have been any "English".
    This is incorrect: there is nothing to substantiate a direct etymological connection between the name of the god and rune "Ing" and "English".
    England means "land of the Angles" and the Angles who were the Germanic tribe to give their name to the land of the Anglo-Saxons originally came from Angeln in Denmark in the northern part of the Jutland peninsula. Their latin name is "Anglii". Archaeological evidence indicates that Angeln was completely depopulated at the time of the Germanic invasions of Britain which suggests that the Angles came to Britain en masse.
    The god Ing may be the Anglo-Saxon equivalent of Frey and means "lord".
    There is nothing to suggest that Germanics apart from the Angles did not also honour this god.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, April 28th, 2011 @ 05:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Berlin Berlin
    Location
    Berlin
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Occupation
    student
    Politics
    deutschnational
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    70
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Post Re: English origins

    @AryanKrieger

    Angeln in Denmark

    In fact, it´s Angeln (Danish: Angel, OE: Ongel, Proto-Germanic: *Angliz) in Germany since 1864. I must know.

    completely depopulated

    There stayed a few remainder settlements, especially in the SW corner of the landscape (Moldenit, Behrend, Winning etc.). But as to the overall picture I must concede that the bulk of the place names (-trup/-rup,-by) and the remark made by Beda Venerabilis indicate the depopulation and Viking time re-colonization of Angeln as well as poll analysis and archaeologic studies about ancient fields and villages which discontinue in the 5th century (see e.g. Willroth 1992).

    Ing>Angles can be regarded as a folk etymology. It´s much more probable that the Angles traced themeselves back to Wodan as it is indicated by family trees of the Old-Anglian king houses which start with Wodan.

    BTW these family trees show another interesting connection: Swaefdag (which is a mythical person of the Swaebian tradition) is mentioned as an ancestor of the houses of Kent and Deira of Northumbria.

    S.Gutenbrunner counts with further Swaebian traditions in the Anglian kingdoms.

    And some findings indicate a relationship between the continental Anglish holy district of the Thorburnsberg moorland in Angeln and the holy shrine of the Swaebes/Semnones in the Mark Brandenburg.

    As I stated above:

    It´s been proven that the Angles and probably also the Wanes and Jutes
    were of Elb-Germanic origin (Nerthus amphyctony, Jastorf culture).

    The Angles migrated northward into the by then sparsely populated Schleswig area in the last centuries BC which coincedes with the expansion of the Jastorf culture.

    The Jastorf culture was the most important, technically progressive and aggressively expanding of the Iron Age Germanic cultures. It´s roots lie in the middle Elbe region (Altmark, Mittelmark respectively Saxony-Anhalt and Brandenburg). One can tell the Jastorf culture "proto-Swaebic" not only but also because of the geographic congruence.

    Nerthus is an earth/fertility goddess, terra mater in the interpretatio Romana, the famine form of Njörd. The Germanic tribes in Jutland and Schleswig-Holstein formed the holy community of Nerthus.

    Tacitus states
    XL. Contra Langobardos paucitas nobilitat: plurimis ac valentissimis nationibus cincti non per obsequium, sed proeliis ac periclitando tuti sunt.

    Reudigni deinde et Aviones et Anglii et Varini et Eudoses et Suardones et Nuithones fluminibus aut silvis muniuntur.

    The tribes are sorted from south to north. So it´s clear that the Angles must have settled in the midst of the Cimbrian peninsula.

    Reudigni (German "roden") = the Holstes (German Holsten="Holz-sassen") which both designate forest inhabitants
    Aviones = island inhabitants (Fehmarn/*Fembre???)
    Anglii = Angles (means people of the landscape Angeln which has an arched form (like e.g. in Ankara, Angora)
    Varini = Varnes, German "Warnen"
    Eudoses = Jutes
    The Suardones (German "schwarz") and the Nuithones (the Nerthus admirer), seem to be two smaller tribes in northern Jutland which are not mentioned elsewhere (maybe as Eowan in the Beowulf) and laterwards possibly were absorbed by the Jutes.
    Last edited by beowulf_; Saturday, September 25th, 2004 at 05:22 PM.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, April 28th, 2011 @ 05:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Berlin Berlin
    Location
    Berlin
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Occupation
    student
    Politics
    deutschnational
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    70
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Post Re: English origins

    The Offa legend (~300 AD) as a witness of an interior Swaebian controversy
    in the Widsith, an OE mnemonic poem:

    (Fifeldor=Eider)

    35 Offa ruled the Angle, Alewih the Danes;
    he was that man who was the bravest of all;
    however he over Offa in valor did not pass,
    for Offa forged first among men,
    when he was but a boy, most of his nation.
    40 No one of his time was in valor mightier
    on the battlefield. Once with his sword
    he gained the mark of excellence with Myrgings
    by Fifeldor; his ground held afterwards
    by Angles and Swaefe, so Offa could strike.

    035 "Offa weold Ongle, Alewih Denum;
    036 "se wæs þara manna modgast ealra,
    037 "no hwæþre he ofer Offan eorlscype fremede,
    038 "ac Offa geslog ærest monna,
    039 "cnihtwesende, cynerica mæst.
    040 "Nænig efeneald him eorlscype maran
    041 "on orette. Ane sweorde
    042 "merce gemærde wið Myrgingum
    043 "bi Fifeldore; heoldon forð siþþan
    044 "Engle ond Swæfe, swa hit Offa geslog.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Vestmannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, June 16th, 2011 @ 10:39 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oklahoma Oklahoma
    Gender
    Age
    48
    Posts
    727
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    Quote Originally Posted by King Yngvar
    Norwegians, Gangr-Hrolf their leader was from Norway, then likely was most of his men Norwegians as well. The Norman nobility was mostly Scandinavian by blood (at least father-to-son speaking), even if they spoke French at the time of the invasion of England.
    Well, if you want to get technical, he was from Orkney (his father was Earl of Orkney). The Norman nobility was mixed from the beginning with the local Romanized Gauls (Neustrians), hence the rather 'dark' character of Norman families in Britain. We are speaking of course of the Normans who invaded England, which again were only 1/3rd Normans - the others were Flemish (mixed Frank and Belgae), and Bretons (pure Celts). The reason they spoke French was because they had *mixed* with the Romano-Gauls, and had taken on the local culture and language.
    --------------------------------------------------------
    There is nothing the matter with Americans except their ideals. The real American is all right; it is the ideal American who is all wrong. ~G.K. Chesterton

  8. #28
    Senior Member Vestmannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Thursday, June 16th, 2011 @ 10:39 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oklahoma Oklahoma
    Gender
    Age
    48
    Posts
    727
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/934748/posts

    There is something to begin with, to note the continuity of Celtic genes in England.

    Quote Originally Posted by AryanKrieger
    I refer you to the book "Celt and Saxon The Struggle For Britain AD410-937", in which the author builds an astounding case to support the theory that the Romano-British population was by and large slaughtered by the incoming Saxon invaders.
    Yes, you are quoting from a book by the famous psedo-historian and Celtophile Peter Berresford Ellis. His writings are rife with Celtic (anti-English) propaganda, conspiracy theories, and ignorance of the subject he pretends to. A *real* scholar, Prof. Charles Thomas (who taught at Exeter U., as well as at Edinburgh) produced several studies through the 70s and 80s showing the continuity of Celtic and Roman communities in England up through Anglo-Saxon, Viking, Dane, and Norman times. Some of his work was dealing with urban centers (like York), that have had continuous occupation (London is conspicuous as one of the few without continuity), some of his work was on the continuity of Christianity from Roman times til Christian Saxon times - Thomas proved that there was a roughly triangular zone that stayed Christian throughout the period of 'pagan resurgence', roughly from Bristol out to and encompassing Essex and Kent. Smaller communities such as Shepton Mallet (near Wells and Bath) have been continuously occupied and Christian (and Roman Celtic) since those times.

    The truth is: the Anglo-Saxons were *invited* by Romans/Britons, and settled amongst them.

    I quote from Gildas,De Excido et Conquesta Britanniae
    Yes, and I have already covered what Gildas' intentions as a writer were. Gildas' description is not witnessed to by contemporaries in other places, and from the archeological record can only be an exaggeration. I say this, as Gildas is a focus of my academic studies (through University of Wales.) Gildas produced other works, primarily instructions for monastics and canon law - his writing 'De Excidio...' was not meant as a history, but as a spiritual polemic. To treat it otherwise is academically irresponsible.

    Clearly xtianity had weakened the resolve of the once great warlike Celts to resist the Germanic invaders.
    The extermiantion theory is also supported on the English side by the Anglo-Saxon chronicles.
    The 'extermination' theory is not supported by the Anglo-Saxon chronicles. The fact is that in some Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (such as Wessex and Northumbria) the royal lines include individuals with Celtic names. We know they married Celtic royal brides.

    "Xtianity" had nothing to do with it. (Typically, someone who uses the term 'Xtianity' is attempting to be offensive, being the mark of neo-pagans with a chip on their shoulder against Christianity. In their own ignorance, they do not realize that 'X' is an initial/symbol for Christ 'Xristos'. I'm used to dealing with neo-pagans, however, even if they take up my time at BritArch and elsewhere waiting for pats on the back, or raving because the evidence destroys their precious beliefs. ) Christianity did not 'weaken the resolve' as the Britons who had the greatest success resisting the invaders *were* the Christianized Britons. The continuity of the Celtic Christians in Briton is proven and obvious, even as far east as Kent. The Celtic pagans, however, were wiped out both by Saxon paganism and Christian evangelisation (Britain being one of the few places were the native pagan religion and Christianity were never 'at war'.)

    Academics are desperate these days to "prove" 2 things-
    That the English are not ethnically Germanic and that a mass invasionof Teutons/extermination of the Celts did not occur. This is entirely because of Jewish pressure upon the educational institutions of England and also the attempt by the English since 2 world wars to distance themselves from their continental German kinsmen.
    It has nothing to do with Jewish pressure, and we aren't "desparate" - we just know better. The fact is that the English *are* ethnically German, because being German also means being part Celtic. The same subraces found amongst Celtic groups are the *exact same* subraces found amongst Germanic groups. The two 'meta-ethnicities' are intertwined, as they have been since the beginning of the historical period. There are no 'Jews' in my field, nor anyone giving a care what they think - we only care about the evidence. If only the geneticists were so apolitical! If you want to clean up a field of academia, start with fellows like Cavalli-Sforza and his un-academic 'no race' idea.


    What genetics? Please provide your evidence as this is at variance with the latest evidence that I have seen which indicates a continuity in the Anglo-Saxon population of Englaland down to the present day.
    The link above and the work of UCL, probably the best genetics lab in the UK. The fact of Romano-Celtic continuity has nothing to do with 'Anglo-Saxon continuity'. Of course the Anglo-Saxons are still there, just mixed in to various degrees. The fact is: the English are not *purely* Anglo-Saxon, nor *purely* Celtic. Same goes with Germany - so many Germans are of Celtic ancestry, and even many of Slavic or Scandinavian. The Christianization of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (most often on their own initiative) led to only more synthesis between Saxon and Celt in England. Some places in England today are *still* bastions of Celtic genes: Elmet (in W. Yorkshire), the Chiltern hills, Cornwall, Dumnonia, Somerset, Gloucestershire, Kent, the Fens, the Pennines, Cumbria and Westmoreland, and other areas. The 'most Anglo-Saxon' part of England really is East Anglia, that's about as close to 'pure Anglo-Saxon' one can get in England.

    Give me some examples please! Brian Bates in "The Real Middle Earth" demonstrates that the incoming Germanic invaders cared nothing for the stone Romano-British towns and cities but dwellt in their wattle and daub huts and settlements, living close to nature as they did in Germania and as the pre-xtian Celts did in Britain prior to the Roman invasion.
    Again, Brian Bates primarily teaches 'Shamanism' - he is neither historian nor archaeologist. As I understand, he is a *Psychologist*. I would depend upon him for information on Psychology, but obviously he has not delved in depth to what we know about British archaeology and Medieval history. Prof. Charles Thomas, as I noted before, had demonstrated the continuity from Roman times up through Norman times. Shepton Mallet is one place I know for certain as I have *visited* the site, York is the largest city that was continuous. Most of Kent was continuous, even to the point that the Celtic/Roman churches were still doing 'business as usual' at the arrival of St. Augustine of Canterbury. Silchester and Wroxeter *absolutely* had continuity through that period, as is demonstrated by our digs, by land records, folk-lore and folk-customs, place names, and finally : genetics. An extremely large percentage of English have genetic continuity in Britain since the Stone Age!

    They were the exception not the rule and this did not reflect what went on at a local level amongst the ordinary people.
    They were only the exception in that there were Romano-Celtic folk retaining enough status to marry in with the ruling Anglo-Saxon families. They Anglo-Saxon kingdoms had large numbers of 'thralls' (serfs) of Romano-Celtic origin, wives taken, and in some areas whole Romano-Celtic tribes as equals (the Hwicce, Elmet, etc.) Our whole knowledge of the period shows no 'racial bias' as to Anglo-Saxons vs. Celts, but rather that Celtic kingdoms would ally with Germanic kingdoms vs. other Celtic and Germanic kingdoms. The idea of Germanic racial hatred of Celts and vice versa is *unknown*, so much so that even the Irish monasteries were full of Saxons, Frisians, and others who were not 'Gaelic' or 'Briton'.

    All history is written from a polemic persepctive. What one does in such circumstances is balance the evidence,giving due weight to certain types of evidence against others.His account agrees with that of the Anglo-Saxon chronicles.
    Does it not surprise you that virtually nothing remains of Celtic influence upon the pre-Norman Conquest English language? Why is that?
    Why also is there practically no legacy of Celtic place names in England apart from Cornwall and Cumbria? Why is that?
    First off: no, not all history is written from a polemic perspective. In fact, if you write polemically in modern academic circles, you aren't likely to take a degree in history. Gildas' account does *not* agree with the Anglo-Saxon chronicles, as the chronicles give no account of a wholesale 'holocaust' of Britons across the island. In fact, the idea of a 'holocaust' of Britons was resurrected by a modern selective reading of Gildas (outside of his genre) with the intention of making a 'Celtic victimhood' based upon the Jewish holocaust mythos. This is so much so, that to buy into a 'Celtic Holocaust' is to buy into the whole Holocaust Industry. Congratulations!

    As for Celtic place names in England? They are *legion*, beginning with river names (most river names throughout England are just so.) Most of the major cities kept their same names. They did go through a process of development as the culture was Anglicized (both by presence of Anglo-Saxons, and their culture being predominant in economic/political/military power.) So, York, Silchester, Gloucester, London, Canterbury - so many names are simply anglicized continuations of the Romano-Celtic names of those places. Often the Anglo-Saxons *did* build their settlements right next to the Roman cities, but the fact is *someone* told them what those places were called, and they accepted those names as a body.

    The Welsh chronicles and Anglo-Saxon Chronicles report of a state of more or less continuous warfare between the Anglo-Saxons and the Wealas as the Anglo-Saxon settlements gradually spread over 150 years to cover entirely what is now known as England.
    "Wealas" properly only referred to those in the West of the country. The "Wealas" were not Romanized as the Britons in other regions. This idea continued later with the idea of 'Wild Welsh'. The Britons of southern Scotland were not considered 'Wild Welsh' for instance, neither were the folk of the West country (Somerset, Salisbury, Devonshire.) Only Mercia had laws about 'Wealas' not being allowed to cross into that country - none of the other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms did, even those we *know* were adjacent to or included Celtic areas like Elmet or the Chilterns.

    "In Llongborth Geraint was slain. Heroes of the land of Dumnonia,before they were slaughtered, they slew"[Anon, ninth century Welsh]
    Yes, which proves a battle - not a genocide. In fact, they often did take prisoners; for ransom, and as slaves, and sometimes as wives or adopted sons. Only in a few historical cases is it recorded that 'they killed them all', and only in reference to certain fortresses.

    "Ecgfrith, the king led an army to ravage the kingdom of the Picts...."[Bede,Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum]
    Bede's history is a polemic, but in any case you notice it is *Picts* we are speaking of here. Picts were north of the Edinburgh line, and were enemies of the Britons. The area between Northumbria and the Pictish kingdoms remained (and still remains) primarily Brythonic in ancestry.

    "Aelle and Cyssa beseiged Anderida,near Pevensey,and killed all who who were inside,so there was not one Briton left."[Year 491,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles]
    Yes, all those in Anderida, not all in the region.

    "There came two ealdormen to Britain: Cerdic and Cynric his son, with five ships,to the place called Cerdicesora; on the same day they fought the Welsh."[Year 495,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles]
    Yes, because there were still Welsh in the area of Wessex. Not that Cerdic 'killed every Briton', but that they fought one of their armies. Note: there were already Anglo-Saxons settled there, whom Cerdic became king of (the Oxford basin area on the upper Thames.)

    "Port came to Britain with his two sons,Bleda and Maegla,and two ships, to the place called Portsmouth,and killed a young British man,a very noble man."[Year 501,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles]
    Yes, "A man", notice the singular case. One does kill the ruler if one wants to rule in his place, yes? Portsmouth, in any case, is one area that still has Celtic genetics along with the Saxon, Frisian and Jute settlers in the same area (and later Vikings.)

    "Cerdic and Cynric killed a British king named Natanlaod,and five thousand men with him. After that the land was known as Natanleag up to Cerdicesford."[Year 508,Anglo-Saxon Chronicles.
    Yes, and as you'll note this happens before Cerdic and Cynric's battles with other Britons of the same region, and before they became the kings of Wessex. In fact, 44 years later they fight another Briton army at *Sarum* (one of those places with continuity?) The fact is, English *are* hybrids of Celtics and Germanics, just as are most southern and western Germans, Scots, eastern Irish, northern French, Swiss, Austrians, northern Italians, Catalans, Galicians/Asturians, Dutch, Belgians, and Danes. Which is why, again: the diversity of haplotypes amongst English (including many R1b), the great diversity of subraces in England proper, and why many English counties are distinct in their own way as to looks, language, and customs.
    --------------------------------------------------------
    There is nothing the matter with Americans except their ideals. The real American is all right; it is the ideal American who is all wrong. ~G.K. Chesterton

  9. #29
    Senior Member AryanKrieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Tuesday, December 21st, 2004 @ 08:28 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Wotanist
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    Quote Originally Posted by beowulf
    @AryanKrieger
    Quote Originally Posted by beowulf

    Angeln in Denmark

    In fact, it´s Angeln (Danish: Angel, OE: Ongel, Proto-Germanic: *Angliz)
    in Germany since 1864. I must know.
    I feel strongly that it is dangerous to attach too much credance to Tacitus attempts at naming the various Germanic tribes and their geographical location unless supported by independant additional evidence.

  10. #30
    Senior Member AryanKrieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    Tuesday, December 21st, 2004 @ 08:28 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Wotanist
    Posts
    756
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: English origins

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontiersman
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/934748/posts

    There is something to begin with, to note the continuity of Celtic genes in England.

    Oh not that little chessnut again.This has already been debated on Sormfront and I am not going to repeat the arguments here.Goldstein,in case it has escaped you is a Jew. I cannot therefore as an Aryan nationalist accept his findings on this subject.
    I am surprised that you cant find something published by an Aryan.


    Yes, you are quoting from a book by the famous psedo-historian and Celtophile Peter Berresford Ellis. His writings are rife with Celtic (anti-English) propaganda, conspiracy theories, and ignorance of the subject he pretends to.
    You are splitting at genetic hairs in your attempt to deny an English identity. Even Ellis doesnt do that.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Anglo-Saxon Origins: The Reality of the Myth
    By Glenlivet in forum Anthropogeny & Ethnogenesis
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: Monday, May 28th, 2018, 05:29 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Saturday, May 26th, 2018, 03:17 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, April 23rd, 2018, 06:35 AM
  4. The Origins of the Anglo-Saxon Church
    By Dagna in forum Christianity
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Sunday, April 22nd, 2018, 05:52 AM
  5. Y-Chromosome Evidence for Anglo-Saxon Mass Migration
    By Euclides in forum Y-Chromosome (Y-DNA) Haplogroups
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Wednesday, May 26th, 2004, 02:38 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •