To what degree are English people descended from Brythonic peoples

[Creoda]

But again we are not sure that the 'French' component was not entirely lacking in Germanic admixture? It could be possible that said 'Frankish' population was of mixed 'Celtic' and Germanic descent. The evidence you have of the 'Celtic' element concerning France is the emphasization of the Iron Age?

Well yeah...Iron Age France wasn't Germanic. The paper made no reference to Franks as far as I remember. But it's puzzling how so much of that ancestry could end up in Anglo-Saxon England if not coming as mixed Celto-Germanic Franks, in which case the Frankish ancestry in England would be significant, rewriting history with the Franks as one of the primary founding groups, alongside Angles and Saxons.

Well aware of that, in fact, if anything, when one thinks of an 'Englishy' look it usually concerns those of a KN/Nordo-Med persuasion, one where Germanic admixture is not noticeable.

That's subjective though, that's not what I think of first.

[Watersater79]

Well yeah...Iron Age France wasn't Germanic. The paper made no reference to Franks as far as I remember. But it's puzzling how so much of that ancestry could end up in Anglo-Saxon England if not coming as mixed Celto-Germanic Franks, in which case the Frankish ancestry in England would be significant, rewriting history with the Franks as one of the primary founding groups, alongside Angles and Saxons.


That's subjective though, that's not what I think of first.

I apologise, hahaha. What I mean is that when I think of the archetypical 'English' look, I think of Peter Cushing.

[Creoda]

I apologise, hahaha. What I mean is that when I think of the archetypical 'English' look, I think of Peter Cushing.

No need to apologise, but really? He looked weird as fuck.

On the Star Wars theme I'd say Ian McDiarmid has a much more regular British Keltic look.

[Watersater79]

No need to apologise, but really? He looked weird as fuck.

On the Star Wars theme I'd say Ian McDiarmid has a much more regular British Keltic look.

One must reiterate how the NE England is seemingly indistinguishable from Cornwall on the Brythonic front. Why would Cornwall remain linguistically Brythonic in comparison to the NE? It is interesting how the non-Brythonic component amongst the Cornish is far more weighed towards the 'French' side of things than the Anglo-Saxon. It's 'French' component is the same as the SE English average, but it's AS admixture is unsurprisingly half of that. On the other hand of the non-Pictish admixture in NE Scotland, the 'French' component is negligible, but the Anglo-Saxon component (whilst still being moderately higher than Cornwall) bears the same proportional difference to the former as is the case with SE England. I guess we could also assume that southern Scots are predominantly of Brythonic ancestry with Gaelic and Anglo-Saxon (and distant Iron Age French) admixture. SW Scotland seemingly has some Gaelic admixture, but most of the rest of central Scotland (running in a sort of diagonal line from Renfrewshire through Lanarkshire to the border) spoke a Cumbric language until the 12th century, at a time when Gaelic was spoken in Galloway/Ayrshire and 'English' had become the native tongue of those in the east. The majority of the place names in eastern Scotland (above the Firth) are of Gaelic origin, although eastern Scots don't seem to have much overlap with the Irish, so I guess there wasn't much actual 'Gael' settlement in said area, with the population remaining firmly Pictish (with this additional 'English' component thrown into the mix, courtesy of later migrations).

[Creoda]

One must reiterate how the NE England is seemingly indistinguishable from Cornwall on the Brythonic front. Why would Cornwall remain linguistically Brythonic in comparison to the NE? It is interesting how the non-Brythonic component amongst the Cornish is far more weighed towards the 'French' side of things than the Anglo-Saxon. It's 'French' component is the same as the SE English average, but it's AS admixture is unsurprisingly half of that. On the other hand of the non-Pictish admixture in NE Scotland), the 'French' component is negligible, but the Anglo-Saxon component (whilst still being moderately higher than Cornwall) bears the same proportional difference to the former as is the case with SE England. I guess we could also assume that southern Scots are predominantly of Brythonic ancestry with Gaelic and Anglo-Saxon admixture. SW Scotland seemingly has some Gaelic admixture, but most of the rest of central Scotland (running in a sort of diagonal line from Renfrewshire, through Lanarkshire to the border) spoke a Cumbric language until the 12th century, at a time when Gaelic was spoken in Galloway/Ayrshire and 'English' had become the native tongue of those in the east. The majority of the place names in eastern Scotland are of Gaelic origin, although eastern Scots don't seem to have much overlap with the Irish, so I guess there wasn't much actual 'Gael' settlement in said area, with the population remaining firmly Pictish (with this additional 'English' component thrown into the mix, courtesy of later migrations).

English and Anglo-Norman colonisation of Cornwall since the 11th century? There's a good chance that the Cornish were more like the Welsh genetically in the late Middle Ages, when they were still majority Celtic speakers.

[Creoda]

Look at this genetic map of Early Medieval England, and the staggeringly high amounts of France IA on the South Coast, alongside discovered Frankish artefacts


If we take the study's claims that this component didn't exist before the Medieval era at face value (and I still have niggling doubts), it's implausible that a bunch of Roman Gauls migrated to Britain alongside the Anglo-Saxons, at the same time that Roman Britons were fleeing from them (largely to Gaul). It would surely have to come from Celto-Germanic Franks, who would have at least been culturally compatible with Anglo-Saxons.

[Creoda]

If Iceland was compared in the same paper it might have more 'WBI' than England, and it seems the Faroese are close to half Insular Celtic, yet still look quite Norse.

And I meant to say yesterday, but consider this strange fact, that Icelanders and Faroese are in a way more ancestrally native to the British Isles than the English are (at least Southeastern and Midlands English).

[rothaer]

Look at this genetic map of Early Medieval England, and the staggeringly high amounts of France IA on the South Coast, alongside discovered Frankish artefacts


If we take the study's claims that this component didn't exist before the Medieval era at face value (and I still have niggling doubts), it's implausible that a bunch of Roman Gauls migrated to Britain alongside the Anglo-Saxons, at the same time that Roman Britons were fleeing from them (largely to Gaul). It would surely have to come from Celto-Germanic Franks, who would have at least been culturally compatible with Anglo-Saxons.

Nice map. This is well in line with the fact that a notable number of Saxons came from just across the English Channel, where they had settled for generations all the way from the Rhine mouth to Armorica (later Brittany).

At the time of the main arrival of Saxons, abt. 450 AD, the Franks expanded to the sea shores. It can only be speculated about a combination of push factors for Saxons that Franks expanded and pull factors for Franks that Saxons left. I don`t see "Frankish objects" indicative of tribal Franks but rather of Saxons from Northern Gaul in contrast to Saxons from Lower Saxony.

English (Germanic) place names typologically are mostly connected to those in Flanders, not to those in Lower Saxony.

[rothaer]

And I meant to say yesterday, but consider this strange fact, that Icelanders and Faroese are in a way more ancestrally native to the British Isles than the English are (at least Southeastern and Midlands English).

Yep. I'd guess Icelanders having 40% and Faroese 50% British Isles ancestry.

It`s remarkable that in the perception of many people those populations are considered even particularly original Norse (which they well may be culturally).

It`s like Germans by many are perceived core Germanic while they - taken as a whole - in fact are fringe Germanic if we refer to the origin of ancestry.

[Russki]

Look at this genetic map of Early Medieval England, and the staggeringly high amounts of France IA on the South Coast, alongside discovered Frankish artefacts


If we take the study's claims that this component didn't exist before the Medieval era at face value (and I still have niggling doubts), it's implausible that a bunch of Roman Gauls migrated to Britain alongside the Anglo-Saxons, at the same time that Roman Britons were fleeing from them (largely to Gaul). It would surely have to come from Celto-Germanic Franks, who would have at least been culturally compatible with Anglo-Saxons.

Don't take these France_IA proportions at face value - at least yet. The same model should be attempted with the Roman samples. If the model is a success, even a small proportion of it will reduce France_IA significantly, while the England_LIA and/or LowerSaxony_EMA will go up.

I can try this 4-way model with the English samples from the Reich Lab, but I need to know how to set the right list for this model (outgroup populations).