(no subject)
Jul. 18th, 2006 09:33 pmNow, this is really interesting. (I got it from Warren Ellis.)
I knew that Anglo-Saxons soon outnumbered the Briton population of England, but I didn't know how it happened. And I'm not sure what the article implies, but it's interesting; not just for the information, but for the use of computer simulation to study historical situations.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:39 am (UTC)German genes are overrepresented *on the Y chromosome*. That doesn't mean that Britons aren't walking around with a big whopping heap of Anglo-Saxon genes transmitted through the female line.
"We believe that they also prevented the native British genes getting into the Anglo-Saxon population by restricting intermarriage in a system of apartheid that left the country culturally and genetically Germanised.
Right. Because conquerors never, ever rape the women of the invaded country. No, if you forbid marriage, you guarantee genetic purity.
*spits*
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:49 am (UTC)Still, I find it interesting that they are doing this sort of study. It reminds me a little of the 'statistical studies' I've seen in southern France, where all the data they have on a small community is studied - never mind that they have only a small amount of information about a small percentage of the population, and no way of knowing anything about the remainder, or even whether they are studying a tiny minority or a majority.
But information is information, and the more they poke at it, the more we might learn something useful.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:51 am (UTC)I know nothing about British history pre-Wars of the Roses. Everything I know about Picts comes from Pink Floyd.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:53 am (UTC)Besides being very cool, of course. And having fascinating spiral art and amazing castle-like fortresses called brochs that are still sitting there in Orkney.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 02:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 03:43 am (UTC)Reminds me of a guy who thinks he's a descendant of Chingis Khan on the basis of y-chromosomal links ... http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/06/science/06genghis.html?ex=1153368000&en=d61fea5f655cb03e&ei=5070
Anyway, I do question whether the British population was that high; we do have indirect evidence of epidemics in the sub-Roman period in the Annales Cambriae (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annales_Cambriae), do we not? (I'm thinking of the Yellow Plague of 547 AD that carried off Maelgwn ap Cadwallon, king of Gwynnedd, and a third of the population with him.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 10:44 am (UTC)SOunds like Douglas Adams... When you go that far back, aren't we all related to everyone? Just about? Do you're my cousin a zillion times removed.
I had thought the population was very low, but I don't know what the estimates are, or how accurate they could be.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 05:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 09:02 am (UTC)Yes - it's nigh impossible to differentiate Danes from the other incomers via DNA, and also a fair number of people from various places would have been bobbing around in the Roman era. Plus the fact that some of the tribes in pre-Roman times also had links with mainland Europe.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 10:46 am (UTC)The more I think about it, the more confusing it becomes; I'm not sure what can be distinguisted from the DNA but surely there was nothing to differentiate the European Celts from the British Celts except location and culture?
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 11:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 12:49 pm (UTC)Don't start me ranting about the state of journalism today! It's all sensationalism, shock tactics and nonsense. You're lucky if there's an atom of truth, let alone a grain. The fact that they used a politically-loaded modern word like 'apartheid' is a tip-off.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 10:41 am (UTC)So it wasn't that the people changed, but that the culture changed? That makes sense. It happened when the Normans came too, didn't it?
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 11:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 12:54 pm (UTC)BIte your tongue, woman! That's every Canadian's unspoken nightmare - not that the Americans might take us over, but that they already have.
judging by Blair's Yankee-Poodle act... they might have a point.
Trade you a Blair for a Harper!
On second thought... maybe not.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:06 pm (UTC)It's ours, too.
In 2004, I wrote an article for the St As alumnus magazine. The article was vetoed. I was asking why we didn't make more of the guys who had served their country in the American War - not just militarily, but also the Secretary to the Peace Commission - as well as one of the Rebels (a crooked lawyer, as a matter of fact!). The article , which was far from being an angry polemic, and outlined the stories of Nisbet Balfour, Rev. James MacLagan (regimental chaplain and noted Gaelic scholar), and Adam Ferguson, was thought to be too controversial, however. This was the reply I had:
"it was the sensitive nature of the content of the article rather than its academic style that gave rise to the Committee's decision. The Committee felt that they had to be cautious about the possible reaction to your article of a potentially significant proportion of our alumni".
Which translates as, it might piss off the rich Americans on whom the university is excessively dependent re: fees and alumnus donations. We are bought and sold for US dollars...
I don't regard myself as having a country. Since 1979 (the dawn of Thatcherism) I have seen the social fabric of the UK torn to shreds. I feel totally alienated from the whole culture which has developed as a result. When we should have been aspiring to European social models, we've become a cut-price offshore territory of the US.
I am a European.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-19 01:40 pm (UTC)This does not imply an apartheid society; merely that the children followed the condition of the mother even though descent was patrilineal. Your heirs were the children of your wife, the daughter or sister of another conquistador. Any Southwesterner could fill in the blanks on that Saxon Britain study down to the latest telenovela plot.
Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-19 02:04 pm (UTC)I'd like to see that one!
It's an interesting reminder (at least to me) that the reality of inheritance doesn't follow any culturally-based line. The tangle of it all doesn't make for simple analysis even in one tiny segment of time or place.
The Celtic influence genetically, I am sure, was huge - even among the Romans. The Cults were a large, widespread population. Rome was a big empire, but it was also only one city - the genetic mix must have been phenomenal.
Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-19 02:25 pm (UTC)I can't help but think this story is being trotted out because of a new interest in English nationalism/resenting Scots in the government at the moment.
Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-19 04:46 pm (UTC)True, and the relationship between genetics, culture and language interests me. I tend to talk loosely about Celts as if they were a tribal grouping, even though I know they weren't - I do the same with Indo-Europeans. I know it isn't literally justified, but I wish I knew what the correspondences were. Yeah, right, I wish I knew everything, down to what Conrad liked to eat for breakfast and what Richard really thought of his parents...
Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-19 05:43 pm (UTC)"The brown girl, she has house and lands. Fair Elinor, she has none...."
Telenovela plot #2: I think this one was done as Grand Opera several times. The high-ranking native woman thinks her invader lover has married her or is her consort. Until she (a) finds herself called a whore and a traitor or (b) meets Fair Elinor and realizes she was just the "Native Mistress" and (i) vows revenge complete with killing their children or (ii) commits a spectacular and public suicide in front of hubby and new lady.
Telenovela Plot #3: their daughter, burning with resentment, vows to Show Them All and climbs - by deceit and judicious choice of lovers and plain ruthlessness - to the top of society and (1) overturns it .... or (2) Gets her Comeuppance and is bounced back into poverty...
I'll burn you some CDs if you can name the plots in question
Enough to get you started?
Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-20 04:31 pm (UTC)Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-20 05:13 pm (UTC)Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
Date: 2006-07-20 07:12 pm (UTC)Pat 'Kill da wabbit'
Re: Saxon Britain and the Southwest
From: