Anglo-Normans of England

[Anglo-Celtic]

You can defiantly tell in England who has more admixture and what kind, we are fairly mixed for a European nation.

Is that right? I defy anybody to definitely prove that.

[Creoda]

Is that right? I defy anybody to definitely prove that.

Definitely not on an individual level, but it does on a regional level, and some (Oliver) argue it does on a class level. The upper classes do have more Norman ancestry, which in theory should show in phenotype to some degree. However, the Norman aristocracy that conquered England and formed the English elite were not the same as modern Norman French, or of the greater mass of French immigrants they introduced to England.

From Beddoe's Races of Britain

The proportion of Norman or French blood in southern and eastern
England in the time of Edward I. may have equalled 15, or even
approached 20 per cent. It was greater than this in the south-midland
counties, but less in East Anglia, and in the western and northern
counties, especially where free sokemen abounded. It was perhaps
rather small in Kent, taken as a whole, owing to the nature- of the land-
tenures there, which gave little opportunity to foreigners to get on the
land. It was greater in Yorkshire, or at least the north and east of
Yorkshire, than in other counties equally remote, owing to the devasta-
tion of Deira by the Conqueror having left openings for colonisation.

The Scandinavian patronymic terminating in son was already the
favourite form of surname in the North of England in the time of
Edward I. I incline to think that it was not confined in its origin to
the Anglo-Danish districts, but extended to some of the Anglian ones.

Migration from the North of England to the South, and vice versa,
except to great manufacturing centres, was very small until our own
times. The absence of patronymics in son from the rural districts of
the south-west is almost absolute."'

No complete amalgamation of the different social strata, nor even of
the racial elements, has taken place during the past six centuries. In
the thirteenth century the great landowners and the upper class gener-
ally were still mainly Norman, though the foreign element had penetrated
to the lowest strata. The villans, the farming communities, the ances-
tors of the copyholders of later days, were probably the most purely
English class, more purely so than the cottars, labourers, and poorer
class of townsfolk. I Nor do I think that subsequent changes have alto-
gether effaced these distinctions, though they have gone far in that
direction. The small farmers are still, I think, the most Saxon or
Anglian part of the population in the south-east and east of England,
and the most British or Celtic in the south-west.

Was any permanent change in physical type effected by the results
of the Conquest ? and if so, where, and in what direction ?

The addition of fifteen or twenty per cent, of a foreign element, or,
more correctly, the addition of fifteen or twenty of a foreign to eighty-
five or eighty of a native one, might be expected to produce a distinct
and lasting effect if such new element were homogeneous; but homo-
geneous it was not. The prevailing types among the Galato-Merovingian
military aristocracy of France, as well as among the mostly Scandina-
vian aristocracy of Normandy, were still, we have reason to believe,
blond and long-headed ; and the remains of the Anglo-Danish one, with
which they certainly mixed to a considerable extent, were a purer breed
of the same type, which is still the prevailing one among the upper
classes of England.

The bulk of the immigrants, however, especially of the portion of
them who filtered in gradually and peacefully in later times, would
doubtless more resemble the majority of the modern inhabitants of the
north of France ; that is to say, the}- would be in the main a mixture of
the square-browed long-faced type which the French ethnologists call
Kimric, with the short swarthy round-headed type of Broca's Kelts or
Kelto-ligurians. This last, being rather feebly represented here pre-
viously, would not easily merge. I think it continues pretty common in
the districts where my name-tables lead me to think the most French-
men settled. Short, dark, blunt-featured people are commoner, I think,
in the South- Midlands than in most other parts ; and the small, swarthy,
round-faced people whom Phillips ::: met with so frequently along the
Yorkshire Ouse, and who struck him by their contrast to the prevailing
Yorkshire types, may as well be traced to this immigration as to any
early Iberian or Ugrian strain. I have not, unfortunately, measured
many heads from the East of England ; but it is a little curious that of
29, 9 who had dark or darkish hair yielded me a breadth-index of 79'85,
while 20 with red, fair, or chestnut hair gave one of 78*06 only. Now
in the West of England, where my larger experience enables me to
speak more positively, the broader heads go on the whole with lighter
hair. I am disposed to infer that in the East, where French immigrants
were comparatively numerous, they brought in, or at least materially
reinforced, the dark broad-headed type.

[Anglo-Celtic]

Definitely not on an individual level, but it does on a regional level, and some (Oliver) argue it does on a class level. The upper classes do have more Norman ancestry, which in theory should show in phenotype to some degree. However, the Norman aristocracy that conquered England and formed the English elite were not the same as modern Norman French, or of the greater mass of French immigrants they introduced to England.

From Beddoe's Races of Britain

Meh. I see that my word play fell flat.

[Oliver109]

Definitely not on an individual level, but it does on a regional level, and some (Oliver) argue it does on a class level. The upper classes do have more Norman ancestry, which in theory should show in phenotype to some degree. However, the Norman aristocracy that conquered England and formed the English elite were not the same as modern Norman French, or of the greater mass of French immigrants they introduced to England.

From Beddoe's Races of Britain

That is very interesting, i did read that book before and i would say that if any Norman element found it's way to Yorkshire it would be the brunet round headed type though i would personally argue that it is possibly more ancient than the Norman invasion as such elements can be found all over the UK and Ireland. East Anglia and certainly Essex doesn't seem to have much in the way of Norman blood, very pale people seem more common in east Anglian counties and quite commonly in Essex but in counties to the west of London there does seem to be a more darker type as well as very blonde hair in affluent people in Berkshire, Surrey etc. Normans that came across in the 11th century would have looked very different to the current day Normans who seem to be overwhelmingly of basic French stock.

[Mopi Licinius Crassus]

Every native English person or person of part English descent has Norman blood
We all descend from a comparatively v small founded population. All our bloodlines intertwin if you go back far enough

I went through my ancestry on Ancestry DNA, and along one line I descend from the aristocratic Lowther family of Northern England (if you go back far enough along enough lines of ancestry you will find an aristocratic lineage almost guaranteed....it took me around 30 generations back)

This family, like all aristocratic families of England ultimately descend from Normans

[Beowulf]

Every native English person or person of part English descent has Norman blood
We all descend from a comparatively v small founded population. All our bloodlines intertwin if you go back far enough

I went through my ancestry on Ancestry DNA, and along one line I descend from the aristocratic Lowther family of Northern England (if you go back far enough along enough lines of ancestry you will find an aristocratic lineage almost guaranteed....it took me around 30 generations back)

This family, like all aristocratic families of England ultimately descend from Normans

That's true also in my English side although most of them were peasants there were few i found in my tree Who were also aristocratic and had a norman surname for example Fitzhamon for saying one.

[Mopi Licinius Crassus]

That's true also in my English side although most of them were peasants there were few i found in my tree Who were also aristocratic and had a norman surname for example Fitzhamon for saying one.

Yes surnames that begin with Fitz are of Norman origin I believe

[Oliver109]

Every native English person or person of part English descent has Norman blood
We all descend from a comparatively v small founded population. All our bloodlines intertwin if you go back far enough

I went through my ancestry on Ancestry DNA, and along one line I descend from the aristocratic Lowther family of Northern England (if you go back far enough along enough lines of ancestry you will find an aristocratic lineage almost guaranteed....it took me around 30 generations back)

This family, like all aristocratic families of England ultimately descend from Normans

I did post a few threads here on people with rare Norman surnames, most people said that they do look slightly different from Brits with more British surnames i.e there seemed to be more atlantids, kelto saxons, subnordics and nordics. Many upper class families while obviously not purely Norman(it's impossible really) have more Norman in their lineage, also what i have noticed is that working class people actually tend to have surnames with single or double syllables i.e Price, Bull, Clarke, Walker, Dean, Green and Cox.

[Creoda]

That is very interesting, i did read that book before and i would say that if any Norman element found it's way to Yorkshire it would be the brunet round headed type though i would personally argue that it is possibly more ancient than the Norman invasion as such elements can be found all over the UK and Ireland. East Anglia and certainly Essex doesn't seem to have much in the way of Norman blood, very pale people seem more common in east Anglian counties and quite commonly in Essex but in counties to the west of London there does seem to be a more darker type as well as very blonde hair in affluent people in Berkshire, Surrey etc. Normans that came across in the 11th century would have looked very different to the current day Normans who seem to be overwhelmingly of basic French stock.

It's a fascinating book with lots to ponder, and he was broadly right on many things regarding ancestry, including the South Midlands having much French admixture (more than the Southeast), but it's perplexing that he concluded from medieval records that East Anglia doesn't have much French-like ancestry, as we now know that it in fact has the most in England. The relative lack of Norman/French names there would suggest that it mostly came before the Normans, but all the genetic evidence suggests that East Anglia was 75-80% Anglo-Saxon with almost no French blood until at least the 7th or 8th centuries.

There's no point talking about 'Norman' blood/ancestry/phenotypes in England, as has been said the Norman elites were likely heavily Norse/Germanic and maybe not much different to the English they conquered, and there is still a part of Normandy (the Cotentin pensinsula) that is genetically similar to Southern English, due to the Saxon settlement there. It's only worthwhile talking about the greater mass of general French/Gaulish blood that came with them and before them to England, which is actually discernable.

[Beowulf]

Yes surnames that begin with Fitz are of Norman origin I believe

I think so. I also have another one in that side wich sounds very french (i believe normans introduced it) wich appears in some parts of England, it's Devereux, pretty interesting i think it was a toponimyc.