No Saxon invasion?

[Ghostmojo]

If there was no invasion why would the peoples of Britain adopt the tribal names of the continental Germanics? Why would they rename their British tribal areas as (e.g.) East Anglia, Sussex, Wessex for Angles and Saxons?

Why didn't the takeovers of Germanic tribes in the rest of the Western Roman Empire have the same linguistic effect: Franks in Gaul, Visigoths in SW Gaul and Hispania, Suebi in NW Hispania, and Vandals in Africa? Of course these invasions may be just as ficitional as Saxon invasions.

In the case of Britain (and I am speculating not preaching) I suppose it depends upon what exactly you mean by invasion. A mass swamping/over-running in a very short time - or a series of notable and significant (albeit smaller) limited incursions. As both Romans and Normans demonstrated - you do not need overwhelming numbers to subjugate an established populace - nor to make your mark upon the land.

Regarding the names - well, that is surely more complicated, but again links to the notion of dominance. Why is Scotland called Scotland? The vast majority of its people are descended from groups other than the Scots (who were after all not a race themselves but immigrant Irish bands ([size=85:31jxh8cn]Scot in a similar way to the term Viking, meaning raider[/size])) such as Picts, Angles, Strathclyde Britons, Norse etc. France is so-named despite the fact that its people draw heavily from Gauls as well as Franks. America is seemingly named because of either Amerigo Vespucci or John Ammerick (take your pick). The nomenclature of tribal territories or otherwise is not nearly so neat as you might suggest. These areas of England came to receive those names surely because of dominance rather than total displacement?

No, there was an invasion. This study was based on female skeletons, which just means that the British women stayed alive, which makes complete sense.

Does it? Don't mass bloody invasions that wipe out a preceding people usually involve rape and murder of all the inhabitants rather than just the menfolk? I accept there may have been an element of slavery or co-opting but invasions are rarely so gender-prescribed as you suggest.