Southeast England was 80% replaced by Anglo-Saxons in the Early Middle Ages

[J. Ketch]

Do we have any idea of Pre-Celtic migration populaiton of Brittanny? There were a massive replacement for shure, but probably locals were not so different still.

Never seen a study on it, but unless they were mostly replaced by Britons (which I'd consider unlikely), they must have already been similar to Insular Celts, and much less affected by proto-Celtic and/or Roman genetic influence than North Central and Northeastern France.

Bretons also don't look that British despite clustering very near them, which suggests to me that they've been mostly isolated for longer, and like Insular Celts are probably mostly descended from the local Bronze Age population.

[RyoHazuki]

Never seen a study on it, but unless they were mostly replaced by Britons (which I'd consider unlikely), they must have already been similar to Insular Celts, and much less affected by proto-Celtic and/or Roman genetic influence than North Central and Northeastern France.

Bretons also don't look that British despite clustering very near them, which suggests to me that they've been mostly isolated for longer, and like Insular Celts are probably mostly descended from the local Bronze Age population.

Which ethnicities do the Bretons mostly resemble most, in your opinion? It's interesting to consider how much phenotypes can vary within even closely related groups.

[J. Ketch]

Which ethnicities do the Bretons mostly resemble most, in your opinion? It's interesting to consider how much phenotypes can vary within even closely related groups.

I'm not the person to ask as I'm not very familiar with them, you should ask a French person, but my impression is that they're more similar in looks to other Northern French, although shifted towards more Celtic British/Irish looks. On the other hand my impression is that Normans look a little more English (though still closer to other French), perhaps because of the Germanic element and other shared ancestral components.

[J. Ketch]

Study on cranial bases from this month with similar conclusions:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0252477

Abstract
The settlement of Great Britain by Germanic-speaking people from continental northwest Europe in the Early Medieval period (early 5th to mid 11th centuries CE) has long been recognised as an important event, but uncertainty remains about the number of settlers and the nature of their relationship with the preexisting inhabitants of the island. In the study reported here, we sought to shed light on these issues by using 3D shape analysis techniques to compare the cranial bases of Anglo-Saxon skeletons to those of skeletons from Great Britain that pre-date the Early Medieval period and skeletons from Denmark that date to the Iron Age. Analyses that focused on Early Anglo-Saxon skeletons indicated that between two-thirds and three-quarters of Anglo-Saxon individuals were of continental northwest Europe ancestry, while between a quarter and one-third were of local ancestry. In contrast, analyses that focused on Middle Anglo-Saxon skeletons suggested that 50–70% were of local ancestry, while 30–50% were of continental northwest Europe ancestry. Our study suggests, therefore, that ancestry in Early Medieval Britain was similar to what it is today—mixed and mutable.

The early Anglo-Saxon period is identified as 410-660 AD, while the Middle Anglo-Saxon period is identified as 660-889 AD. The Middle Anglo-Saxon English ancestry is similar to today, so that's a more precise idea of when the ethnogenesis occurred. The English of Alfred, Alcuin, Bede, Offa etc were practically modern English genetically (although not necessarily those individuals).

[Ayetooey]

Any how idea how long till this study is available?

[Flashball]

I'm not the person to ask as I'm not very familiar with them, you should ask a French person, but my impression is that they're more similar in looks to other Northern French, although shifted towards more Celtic British/Irish looks. On the other hand my impression is that Normans look a little more English (though still closer to other French), perhaps because of the Germanic element and other shared ancestral components.

Western Breton are more close to English/Irish and more distant to Northern France (Picardie), genetically.

And no, Normand don't look "more English".

A good caricatural breton face, you can find that in every part of France :
https://lvdneng.rosselcdn.net/sites/...BUW_1494176805

English look Anglo-saxon, they looks like Swedish or other people.

French it's another thing = Western Euro phenotype. Gaulish phenotype = neither levantine, neither "nordo-baltic". Native, local.

[J.S.]

There were a massive replacement for shure, but probably locals were not so different still.

Massive replacement "for sure"? Not so sure about it.

[J. Ketch]

Massive replacement "for sure"? Not so sure about it.

It depends how you define massive. Generally language change accompanies significant replacement though, at least in those circumstances.

[celticdragongod]

It depends how you define massive. Generally language change accompanies significant replacement though, at least in those circumstances.

There was probably a massive replacement of the male population with the survivors being mostly young females.

[J. Ketch]

There was probably a massive replacement of the male population with the survivors being mostly young females.

Yeah, but I was talking about Brittany, the founding of which is cloaked in more mystery than England.