The Genomic Legacy of the Norman Conquest in Rural England

[AngloEd]

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...04.10.716983v1

[J. Ketch]

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...04.10.716983v1

Excellent, been waiting for a study on this for years, ever since the Gretzinger Anglo-Saxon paper left us with the mystery of how so much Gaulish ancestry ended up in Medieval England.

It's one cemetery in Surrey but more evidence that the Norman conquest had a modest genetic impact. I increasingly believe that the long-term Anglo-Saxon invasions were largely Germanic people who were already heavily Celtic mixed, and Frankish influence is understated.

[AngloEd]

Excellent, been waiting for a study on this for years, ever since the Gretzinger Anglo-Saxon paper left us with the mystery of how so much Gaulish ancestry ended up in Medieval England.

It's one cemetery in Surrey but more evidence that the Norman conquest had a modest genetic impact. I increasingly believe that the long-term Anglo-Saxon invasions were largely Germanic people who were already heavily Celtic mixed, and Frankish influence is understated.

There's definitely a lot of question marks over the Gretzinger paper.

Though the Gretzinger paper did mention that that the French IA admixture coming into England continued after the early middle ages. The result of the Norman invasion is that it made England affairs shift to France. Thus, the genetic influence from this invasion is not necessarily from the initial invasion from the Normans, but from migrants that came to England during the middle ages.

[J. Ketch]

There's definitely a lot of question marks over the Gretzinger paper.

Though the Gretzinger paper did mention that that the French IA admixture coming into England continued after the early middle ages. The result of the Norman invasion is that it made England affairs shift to France. Thus, the genetic influence from this invasion is not necessarily from the initial invasion from the Normans, but from migrants that came to England during the middle ages.

What's your view on the provenance of most of the French IA ancestry? I'm still torn for a number of reasons.

[Orion Arm]

I increasingly believe that the long-term Anglo-Saxon invasions were largely Germanic people who were already heavily Celtic mixed, and Frankish influence is understated.

Because the Frankish ancestry being divided between 5 sovereign states (Netherlands, Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Germany) clearly wasn't enough, there has to be a sixth one for a better banter. The French will start riots and declare a national emergency if studies confirm that the English have more Frankish ancestry than them.

[Flashball]

Because the Frankish ancestry being divided between 5 sovereign states (Netherlands, Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Germany) clearly wasn't enough, there has to be a sixth one for a better banter. The French will start riots and declare a national emergency if studies confirm that the English have more Frankish ancestry than them.

Nop,because modern French are mostly Gaulish, not Frankish.
Next.

[AngloEd]

What's your view on the provenance of most of the French IA ancestry? I'm still torn for a number of reasons.

If it was due to post early middle ages migration then I feel like the French IA percentage would vary more between regions, and show stronger in other places we know there was migration. i.e why does Pembrokeshire have no/little French IA, or southern Scotland (mostly from flemish migrants). The amount seems to roughly marry up with the amount of CNE in England.

The study does mention the second ancestry component similar to modern day west Germany, Belgium and France. So, it could simply be that a good proportion of those who migrated during the early middle age to England, where from these regions who were mixed heavily with 'Celts' along the coast. So not all just from Southern Denmark, northern Germany, and Netherlands, but further west, and south.

Interestingly from this study on Germany. You can see that the regional differences in Britain seem to marry up between the map, indicating that the ancestry components came at the same time.

So, includes Germanic people who carried significant dna that correlates with German EIA (probably from the Halsatt culture that spread into Northern France and Belgium).

Therefore, yes I think alot of this French IA ancestry came during the early medieval period from Germanic people who were mixed with Celts.

[J. Ketch]

If it was due to post early middle ages migration then I feel like the French IA percentage would vary more between regions, and show stronger in other places we know there was migration. i.e why does Pembrokeshire have no/little French IA, or southern Scotland (mostly from flemish migrants). The amount seems to roughly marry up with the amount of CNE in England.

The study does mention the second ancestry component similar to modern day west Germany, Belgium and France. So, it could simply be that a good proportion of those who migrated during the early middle age to England, where from these regions who were mixed heavily with 'Celts' along the coast. So not all just from Southern Denmark, northern Germany, and Netherlands, but further west, and south.

Interestingly from this study on Germany. You can see that the regional differences in Britain seem to marry up between the map, indicating that the ancestry components came at the same time.

So, includes Germanic people who carried significant dna that correlates with German EIA (probably from the Halsatt culture that spread into Northern France and Belgium).

Therefore, yes I think alot of this French IA ancestry came during the early medieval period from Germanic people who were mixed with Celts.

Thanks, that was my logic as well, that the CWE seems uniformally proportionate to the CNE all over the British Isles, pointing to it arriving earlier rather than later. I can only guess that the Saxon Shore must have been teeming with Franks who came over with the Saxons, were bunched together and forgotten about in the records. And England being closer to Francia than Saxony the continued migration came mostly from there for centuries perhaps.

There's also the fact that nearly all 'French' origin surnames in England are Norman, if there was a large scale French migration in the late middle ages you would expect more names from across France.

Still a bit puzzling why Early Medieval cemeteries in East Anglia and the North are lacking in CWE but those areas have loads of it today, and in the case of East Anglia more than anywhere else.

[Peterski]

I think that French_IA ancestry was already in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons came. Probably since Celtic times. Later Anglo-Saxons mixed with French_IA somewhere in Southern England, and eventually this ancestry spread across all of England (also in Northern, Western and Eastern England) due to population movements and intermarriages within the Anglo-Saxon world.

Remember that most of England forms one genetic cluster, which means that it homogenized over time.

[J. Ketch]

I think that French_IA ancestry was already in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons came. Probably since Celtic times. Later Anglo-Saxons mixed with French_IA somewhere in Southern England, and eventually this ancestry spread across all of England (also in Northern, Western and Eastern England) due to population movements and intermarriages within the Anglo-Saxon world.

Remember that most of England forms one genetic cluster, which means that it homogenized over time.

That was my keen belief too before the Gretzinger paper came out, but the authors seemed to rule that out as a major factor, so

Despite that I couldn't help notice that the large amount of French IA ancestry on the south coast of Early Medieval England coincides exactly with Caesar's distinction between the Britons of the South Coast and those of the interior, and the areas of the apparent Belgic settlement in Southern England.

The inland portions of Britain are inhabited by those who themselves say that according to tradition they are natives of the soil; the coast regions are peopled by those who crossed from Belgium for the purpose of making war. Almost all of these are called by the names of those states from which they are descended and from which they came hither. After they had waged war they remained there and began to cultivate the soil. The island has a large population, with many buildings constructed after the fashion of the Gauls, and abounds in flocks. For money they use either gold coins or bars of iron of a certain weight. Tin is found in the inland regions, iron on the seacoast; but the latter is not plentiful. They use imported bronze. All kinds of wood are found here, as in Gaul, except the beech and fir trees. They consider it contrary to divine law to eat the hare, the chicken, or the goose. They raise these, however, for their own amusement and pleasure. The climate is more temperate than in Gaul, since there are fewer periods of cold. . . .

By far the most civilized are those who dwell in Kent. Their entire country borders on the sea, and they do not differ much from the Gauls in customs. Very many who dwell farther inland do not sow grain but live on milk and flesh, clothing themselves in skins.