Quote:Well I'm glad you agree that you cannot prove anything. Personally,
I have a good deal of evidence backing me. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Ambrosius/ Mike
Actually, you seem to completely disregard evidence presented to you in favor of talking in a giant circle...not sure that constitutes evidence or being right, but as long as you're happy. :?
Quote:Aryaman2:7jvd82xp Wrote:Thus there is no need to dismiss, entirely, the evidence for Anglo-
Saxon hostility to native Britons simply because we cannot prove
some kind of 'holocaust' of the natives. And the various genetic
studies certainly do imply the possibility of 25-50% population
replacement in the East. Though they cannot be sure about how long
ago that happened, and the studies, so far, have been limited in scope.
As I pointed-out, before, simply because we may have a reasonably homogenous genetic composition to the population of England, today,
it does not, at all, figure that this situation pertained 1,500 years ago. Wales, on the other hand, definitely is genetically distinct from England (most probably for the reason we're discussing, since they
were the original Britons).
Ambrosius / Mike
Certainly, there would be hostility, but in replacing populations to that extend some kind of systematic process should be employed. However the key point is the genetic evidence, which is lacking, because as you point out Wales is genetically different from England (although those differences are only significative at low scale resolution, basically they are very similar genetic populations at world scale) but those differences are significative in 2 haplogroups missing in Wales, E3B and R1a, that you can´t logically link to Anglo-Saxons. E3B is linked to neolithic North African migration, and R1a to Eastern Europeans, the "Germanic" haplogroup I is present in Wales at not much lower degree than in England. As I have posted several times, if you discount politically biased interpretations the more logic explanation is the SE England belongs to the same genetic province that Northern France, a border province of the Western European Genetic Region, and that is probably the case well before the Anglo-Saxon migrations.
Quote:As I have posted several times, if you discount politically biased interpretations the more logic explanation is the SE England belongs to the same genetic province that Northern France, a border province of the Western European Genetic Region, and that is probably the case well before the Anglo-Saxon migrations.
I wouldn't be surprised the higher levels of R1b1c in the south of england are a result of Belgic groups migrating there during the late pre roman iron age. The newer finer scaled analysis shows that the south has a lot in common with the low countries. However, it could also be that those referred to as Saxons' were Belgic peoples who became acculturated into the Merovingian world. The problem is, we simply don't know who those people who were called Saxons in the Pas de Calais region or in Amorica actually were.
best
Harry Amphlett
Quote:... because we may have a reasonably homogenous genetic composition to the population of England, today ...
That is not correct. The Capelli study clearly demonstrates that there is considerable heterogeneity in England today.
best
Harry Amphlett