Thanks Viiksitimali.
Posted on 01/20/2016 7:49:52 AM PST by ek_hornbeck
The present-day English owe about a third of their ancestry to the Anglo-Saxons, according to a new study.
Scientists sequenced genomes from 10 skeletons unearthed in eastern England and dating from the Iron Age through to the Anglo-Saxon period.
Many of the Anglo-Saxon samples appeared closer to modern Dutch and Danish people than the Iron Age Britons did.
The results appear in Nature Communications journal.
According to historical accounts and archaeology, the Anglo-Saxons migrated to Britain from continental Europe from the 5th Century AD. They brought with them a new culture, social structure and language.
Genetic studies have tackled the question of Anglo-Saxon ancestry before, but sometimes gave conflicting results.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
If you maake terms, you get a new boss.
The Anglo-Saxons did not speak Welsh.
Yet as recently as 100 years ago, 40% of Wales did.
Welsh is still a living language today.
Another factor: when you are conquered and you are a low-status native, it will take you longer to find a wife if one is available.
The conquerors will have taken all the youngest and most attractive.
And the one you eventually find will not have as many children.
Looking at the triple burial photo notice that the wife and kid are still talking.
"Ceterum censeo 0bama esse delendam."
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
GGG Ping
They’re still pissed that Henry VII(my ancestor) won the War of the Roses. If I recall, he married a Plantagent so I have the blood of both. Also descended from Louis the XIV, Ferdinand and Isabella, and kings from Scotland, Austria, Hungary, and Germany. Once you’re in the royal club you’re pretty much related every other royal. Even a descendant from the Medici family of Florence.
“Another factor: when you are conquered and you are a low-status native, it will take you longer to find a wife if one is available.”
It’s much simpler than that and mentioned in the Harvard article. Danegeld. The invaders place high taxes and regulations on the native Britons. In five generations they were extinct.
High taxes and regulations resulting in low birth rates. Where do we see that today, aimed at whom?
My first thought on seeing that was the opposite - they had to go abroad to find a second descendant. But maybe the idea was to try to find people who would have no other common ancestor than the Plantagenet line . . .
Thanks Viiksitimali.
>> I wonder if the Normans are sufficiently distinct genetically <<
Their grandfathers were Vikings, so their Y-chromosome DNA should be identical to that of the Vikings — somewhere in the “I” haplogroups.
‘e’s a bloody German, ‘e is!
I have a rather unusual personal connection with this story. In the 1970s I lived for several years in Driffield Terrace, York. The garden where these skeletons were later discovered was also in Driffield Terrace, only a few yards from my house.
The Scandinavians have bigger teeth than do all other Europeans.
I M253, I1A, is the marker.
>> I M253, I1A, is the marker <<
Yep, a typical Viking haplogroup, as I understand such matters.
But there are probably other haplogroups carried by the Vikings and their male-line descendants. I just don’t know.
(And I guess I’m just too lazy or too disinterested to research the matter thoroughly.)
Note: this topic is from 1/20/2016. Thanks ek_hornbeck.
A few related topics from the FRchives:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
