Gallic appearance

[Aryaman2]

Aryaman2,
Would the other 40% be a mix of Frankish, Visigothic and maybe Roman(Italic) blood..?
Thanks,
Johnny

Genetic markers can´t really distinguish historical populations. All that can be said is that the genetic marker R1b (called before HG1) according to latest studies would make almost 100% of French Paleolithic population (exceptions the "Basque" genetic marker EU18, and probably some degree of the "Central European I" in the borders with Germany and Belgium. Today France has 60% of R1b, 20%of I, 10% of J Eastern Mediterranen marker and E3b North African marker nad 10% of R1a eastern European marker. Some of the latest could be Neolithic, or maybe Roman colonization. I would bet on this last one, as the North African marker is also significantly present in England

Who would these Eastern Europoeans be? North Africans?
Johnny

R1a marker is present in all Eastern and Central Europe and absent in Western Europe, it is derived from Paleolithic inhabitants of Europe and they have been linked to the Kurgan population and to Indoeuropeans, but I don´t think that link is very convincing
North Africans would be from Egypt/Eastern Mediterranean cultures arrived to Europe by the sea in Neolithic times

[Johnny Shumate]

My name originated around the Massif Central of France. Any idea what my lineage my be..?
Thanks,
Johnny

[Aryaman2]

So why would the 'wild' Germanics be taller than the 'civilized' ones? Because it fits the poet, that's why. It would be prepostrous to even assume that Germanics shrunk upon becoming civilized.. D

There is an anthropometric study in ancient Raetia that shows just that, average size of people diminishing after Roman conquest. That is not to deny the particular example given by Ammianus being a poetic convention, I am myself convinced that is the case in many ancient sources, but it seems that Roman social system being more unequal than "barbarian" system actually have the effect of lowering the average size of population

Aditional thoughts on the subject
I recall a passage of Orosius in which Roman legionaires are scared of the size of tall Lusitanian warriors, that looks like a literary tropos, after all modern portuguese are hardly among the tallest Europeans.
OTOH I recall a passage of Caesar, I think it is in the siege of Avaricum, in which Gauls mock Roman legionaires, because they are so short they will not be able to move the large siege machines they had built. This comment however rings true, doesn´t look like the literary tropos but like a personal anecdote. I have posted before how Gallic warriors as a class were taller than average Gallic population, and I think that Roman legionaires of Caesar time would be mainly lower class, Wellington´s scum of earth, so it is possible they were shorter than average. I have read some statistics of European conscripts in XIX century and they were really short, suffering all kind of undernutrition evidence, for instance the average Danish recruit in mid XIX century was just 1.68 mts, while the average Spaniard was a diminutive 1.57 mts. So after all, while a literary tropos, could have some true in it.

[Aryaman2]

My name originated around the Massif Central of France. Any idea what my lineage my be..?
Thanks,
Johnny

I don´t know of any research specifically done over that region, but if you are interested in your personal lineage I think there are sites on the net you can send a sample to be analized, so you get your genetic lineage

[Artorius1960]

Genetic research doesn´t support the idea of a "Germanic" race dominating England and pushing aside Britons, England genetic pool is remarkably similar to that of France and quite different from Germany or Norway. There is a certainly a lower presence of R1b haplogroup and a higher of I haplogroup than in Wales or Ireland, but still it is above 50%, so the original population of England since the last ice age is still the main contributor to its genetic pool.

The genetic evidence is fascinating. I recall a TV show where genetic researchers discovered a direct descendent of Cheddar Man living in Cheddar, where his family has lived ab origine as far as anyone knows.

But apart from genetics, there was certainly a cultural and linguistic distinction between the Saxon bits of Britain and the Celtic bits. The genetics indicate that there was considerable intermarriage between the conquerors and the conquered, but the Saxons came to Britain in sufficient numbers to culturally overwhelm the pre-existing population.

It goes to my original point that the Franks had little lasting impact on the Romano-Gallic culture they conquered because they became Gallic themselves rather than making the Gauls become Germanic.

[Aryaman2]

Genetic research doesn´t support the idea of a "Germanic" race dominating England and pushing aside Britons, England genetic pool is remarkably similar to that of France and quite different from Germany or Norway. There is a certainly a lower presence of R1b haplogroup and a higher of I haplogroup than in Wales or Ireland, but still it is above 50%, so the original population of England since the last ice age is still the main contributor to its genetic pool.

The genetic evidence is fascinating. I recall a TV show where genetic researchers discovered a direct descendent of Cheddar Man living in Cheddar, where his family has lived ab origine as far as anyone knows.

But apart from genetics, there was certainly a cultural and linguistic distinction between the Saxon bits of Britain and the Celtic bits. The genetics indicate that there was considerable intermarriage between the conquerors and the conquered, but the Saxons came to Britain in sufficient numbers to culturally overwhelm the pre-existing population.

It goes to my original point that the Franks had little lasting impact on the Romano-Gallic culture they conquered because they became Gallic themselves rather than making the Gauls become Germanic.

IMO the problem with your argument is numbers, there are other factors more important than numbers, for instance the Arabian conquest in the VII and VIII centuries changed culturally North Africa and Spain, however the Arabs themselves were very few. The Spaniards also were very few in numbers, but they changed the culture of a whole continent, South America. IMO should the Britons have had a firm romano/christian culture they would have absorbed the Saxon invaders as it happened with other Germanic invaders in Gallia, Italy or Spain.

[Artorius1960]

IMO the problem with your argument is numbers, there are other factors more important than numbers.

Numbers are only a part of it. I think the of the Frankish overrun of Gaul, the Visigothic overrun of Spain--like the rapidity of the Norman conquest--have a lot to do with the pre-existing culture remaining intact.

The Arabian conquest in the VII and VIII centuries changed culturally North Africa and Spain, however the Arabs themselves were very few.

The Arab conquests were also rapid, but Islamic culture is more all-embracing than the other conquering cultures. The Muslim Arabs were not content with merely having governmental power over their conquests, they wanted to transform the societies they conquered. The spread of Islam by coercion was the reason for the conquests.

IMO should the Britons have had a firm romano/christian culture they would have absorbed the Saxon invaders as it happened with other Germanic invaders in Gallia, Italy or Spain.

I think that the Romano-British culture in Britain was firm. It managed to resist the Anglo-Saxons for several generations--unlike the cultures in these other places. The length of the conflict ultimately ended with the destruction of the Romano-British culture in large sections of Britain. The culture only survived in the fringes of the island.

[Robert Vermaat]

The Franks did not overrun Gaul. They got Roman jobs and kept these. the only Roman that was finally defeated was Syagrius in his 'kingdom of Soissons'. Clovis did that, he was of the Toxandrian Franks, and his father Childeric had been staunch Roman ally and even magister militum per Gallias. Arbogast, comes of Belgica II, then gave up his lands to Clovis, who then went on to defeat the non-Roman Rhine Franks (we can call them that I think) and the Alamanni.

The Burgundians had been settled in the Rhone Valley by the Romans.
The Visigoths had been settled by the Romans in souther Gaul, and used to quell uprisings and inavions in Spain. Most lands that Euric controlled were given to him by the Romans, part of these as part of the settlement, part in a drive to counter Aegidius, father (or predesessor) of Syagrius.

Burgundians and Goths also harassed the good citizens of Gaul, sometimes controlled by the Romans and sometimes not. Until the last bit of Roman control was no longer good enough..

But never any overrunning.

[Artorius1960]

Code:

The Franks did not overrun Gaul.

I must be thinking of 12.31.406 when the Franks, the Allemanni, et al. crossed the frozen Rhine and ran amok in Gaul.

It's hard sometimes to keep track of barbarian incursions when you get into the 3rd, 4th, and 5th centuries. It seems like every other year as regular as clockwork, some tribe or another was running amok in Gaul--it was a lot like going on holiday.

[Robert Vermaat]

Code:

The Franks did not overrun Gaul.

I must be thinking of 12.31.406 when the Franks, the Allemanni, et al. crossed the frozen Rhine and ran amok in Gaul.

Ah, that one. Yes, I suppose that this happened more than one, although the 'path of destruction' must have been relatively narrow. There was a lot of fighting and rebuilding, but the impact was negligable.

Ah, that Frozen Rhine... Some folks (me included) did some research about where it came from.
I started a new thread about it.

[Aryaman2]

The Arab conquests were also rapid, but Islamic culture is more all-embracing than the other conquering cultures. The Muslim Arabs were not content with merely having governmental power over their conquests, they wanted to transform the societies they conquered. The spread of Islam by coercion was the reason for the conquests.


I think that the Romano-British culture in Britain was firm. It managed to resist the Anglo-Saxons for several generations--unlike the cultures in these other places. The length of the conflict ultimately ended with the destruction of the Romano-British culture in large sections of Britain. The culture only survived in the fringes of the island.

I think you are basically in agreement with me, as you point out that Islamic culture was more important that the number of Arab invaders. As for the weakness of Roman & Christian British culture, I think the end of urban life and the need of Christian missions from Ireland are good examples. IMO Gene research and historical development are coincidents,in England they point to a minor migration of population with a major cultural change.

[tlclark]

Vortigern Studies\\n[quote]The Franks did not overrun Gaul. They got Roman jobs and kept these. the only Roman that was finally defeated was Syagrius in his 'kingdom of Soissons'. Clovis did that, he was of the Toxandrian Franks, and his father Childeric had been staunch Roman ally and even magister militum per Gallias.

Exactly right.

Clovis was the last person to have been accorded a triumph in the West as far as we know.

It's hard to think of these guys as usurpers if they are granted triumphs and wear "Roman clothes" in triumph ceremonies.

Heck! Charlemagne wore "Roman Clothes" when he went to Rome. It really isn't until then that they acknowledge the break with the past, even then there is the recognition that this is "Roman lands" hence the marriage of Otto I to Theophanu in an attempt to re-unite the Roman Empire. They never really let the idea of empire go, long after the empire has ceased to exist.

That's a pretty strong cultural prediliction and it's born out of the fact that there is no real 'end' of the empire. It's cultural institutions just fade away, but everyone remembers that they should be there and what it was like before.

I love Averil Cameron's take on this and highly recommend Cameron's book as a the best overview of the Late Antique period.

Travis