Anglo-Saxon legacy

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
zauberdachs
Post Centurion
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:38 pm

Anglo-Saxon legacy

Post by zauberdachs »

I was reading this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3514756.stm

And was wondering about the implications of what is suggested. Particularly that there was no huge Saxon invasion but rather that native Briton adopted Saxon culture.

This is the first time I've come accross this and was wondering what those more well read in this period thought about it.
Do not be loath, diligent reader, to winnow my chaff, and lay up the wheat in the storehouse of your memory. For truth regards not who is the speaker, nor in what manner it is spoken, but that the thing be true - Nennius, 8th century

Sigurd
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 8:17 am

Post by Sigurd »

Tooth enamel evidence is totally irrelevant. Tooth enamel isotopes only show where a person spent their childhood rather than their ethnic/genetic origin, so a modern day British Asian for example, born in Britain but of Indian immigrant parents will have exactly the same tooth enamel isotopes as someone from generations of purely British ancestry. The only people who would show up in such a survey as ‘Anglo Saxons’ would be the first settlers from the continent, their children would be indistinguishable from native Britons.

The genetic surveys are interesting but genetic studies are in an early stage of development and is quite controversial, as is the scale of the Anglo Saxon migration. But it is controversial, not the cut and dried closed subject the BBC article suggests

User avatar
zauberdachs
Post Centurion
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:38 pm

Post by zauberdachs »

thanks for replying. What you say makes sense :) Do you happen to know anywhere I could find more information about this? The genetic stuff seems quite interesting.
Do not be loath, diligent reader, to winnow my chaff, and lay up the wheat in the storehouse of your memory. For truth regards not who is the speaker, nor in what manner it is spoken, but that the thing be true - Nennius, 8th century

User avatar
Neil of Ormsheim
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:37 pm
Location: Deepest Darkest Leeds

Post by Neil of Ormsheim »

was wondering about the implications of what is suggested. Particularly that there was no huge Saxon invasion but rather that native Briton adopted Saxon culture.

This is the first time I've come accross this and was wondering what those more well read in this period thought about it.
Most invading armies of the period would have been predominantly male and males are well known for their ample restraint and decorum when dealing with captured females - especially when you special lady is over the sea. Now, during fertilisation, only the nucleus of the sperm enters the egg cell and so all the DNA in cell structures, like Mitochondria, in an individual MUST come from their mother. I would love to see a survey done on Mitochondrial DNA to see if there are "ethnic" differences and, if there are, to see where invaders brought their women with them.

The idea here is that if the invaders did NOT bring their women, then all the Mitochondrial DNA would be from the "native" stock but if the women did come, then their ought to be detectable differences between the populations descended from "natives" and "invaders".

An army that is landing to raid, trade then go home is less likely to have a significant female component than an army that is here to conquer and stay.
Lurv 'n' Kizzez

Post Reply