Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
HistoryGuy
Pretorian
Joined: 08-Sep-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Anglo Saxons Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 17:04 |
Are the Angles, and Jutes Vikings. In this map they seem to come from Denmark. Saxons from around the area of modern Netherlands.
|
هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 17:32 |
They are not Vikings because the concept of Viking belongs to a later
date. But they are no doubt ethnically close and, in fact, in DNA tests
it's almost impossible to diferentiate if Britons have Anglo-Saxon or
Danish-Viking ascendance, when they have it.
The map is correct, though I don't think that Frisians played any role
in that migration. Saxons are actually from the historical region of Saxony
in Germany (modern Niedersaxen plus Westfalen), Angles came from
Schleswig-Holstein (also mostly Germany) and Jutes came from the
peninsular part of Denmark (Jutland). These last were surely the minor
element, as they are normally only related to Kent, while Saxons and
Angles conquered to much larger areas.
Anyhow, that area of Lower Germany is ethnically very close to Denmark and Germans are ultimately original from there (Lower Germany and Scandinavia). Middle and Upper Germany were originally Celtic
territory but Germans took them in the last centuries before our age.
Their expansion was still going on when Caesar intervened in Gaul,
partly because Germans were disturbing the Helvetians.
Modern German, standarized after Luther's Reform, is Upper German, so it's more diferent from English than Frisian or Danish.
Edited by Maju
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 18:33 |
though I don't think that Frisians played any role
in that migration. |
Some of them (saxons?) came from the area where Frisians now live, and
with in the Germanic family, English and Frisian are the closest
relatives.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 19:03 |
Originally posted by Cywr
though I don't think that Frisians played any role
in that migration. |
Some of them (saxons?) came from the area where Frisians now live, and
with in the Germanic family, English and Frisian are the closest
relatives.
|
I don't doubt that Frisian is closely related to English but did
historical Frisians actually formed part of the Germanic migration into
Britain? It is the first time I read about it. It would seem logical
from their geographical situation but you always read Angles, Saxons
and Jutes, no Frisians anywhere. Can you explain?
Are Frisians a subdivision of Saxons? Of Angles? They appear already in
all historical maps, as soon as times in which there might be no
reference on them at all, for instance in this of year 1 CE:
But they are commonly mentioned in early Medieval maps anyhow, like this of the year 500:
But they never seem to play any role is in British conquest.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
HistoryGuy
Pretorian
Joined: 08-Sep-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 20:50 |
What did England look like in the 11th century? I recently bought an Anglo Saxon sword guard from the 11th century. It was found in Suffolk 2003. Could it be Viking? Here is a picture:
|
هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 04:25 |
Probably archaeological remains of British Anglo-Saxons and Danish Vikings are rather diferent. But I can't say much more.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 07:04 |
The Angeli in particular and to a lesser extent the Saxons had virtualy the same language as the Frisians.
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
HistoryGuy
Pretorian
Joined: 08-Sep-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 15:41 |
Does anyone know about my sword guard?
|
هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته.
|
|
Quetzalcoatl
General
Suspended
Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 01:52 |
The anglo-saxons were only a minority on the british isles, they were later displaced by the normans, bretons and Franks who became the ruling minority. Britian remains mostly celtic racially.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 04:37 |
Racially?
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
tadamson
Baron
Joined: 25-Jul-2005
Location: Scotland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 451
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 06:51 |
Originally posted by HistoryGuy
Does anyone know about my sword guard? |
Do you have any provenance for it?
The style isn't Anglo-Saxon or Viking, without provenance my guess would be late 17th C.
|
rgds.
Tom..
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 13:46 |
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl
The anglo-saxons were only a minority on the british isles, they were later displaced by the normans, bretons and Frankswho became the ruling minority. Britian remains mostly celtic racially. |
Y'know, Quetzal, I've been reading your posts in several threads, and I've reached one conclusion; you're celtophile, man.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 16:09 |
And he likes to repeat the word race like if it would have some meaning. Specially, when talking about a Celtic race... Celts come from southern/western Germany: their original type should be more Germanic (Alpine?)
and less Atlantic. As Celtic culture and language spread through a very
wide region from Portugal to Turkey, Celts obviously got mixed with the
locals that they invaded once and again. So talking of a Celtic race is an oxymoron.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Exarchus
General
Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 16:27 |
Yet, the Anglo-Saxons were more a minority and a ruling class indeed. Yet they intermixed with the local people.
This didn't happen with the Normans/Franks/Bretons who not only squatted the place but made a lot of mess up there.
|
Vae victis!
|
|
Kuu-ukko
Shogun
Joined: 02-Dec-2004
Location: Finland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 204
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 12:52 |
Quetzalcoatl, London Univeristy College made a sutdy a few years ago
comparing British, Danish, Norwegian and German y-chromosomes. It was
found out, that all of the 1700 tested British men had
Anglo-Saxon/Viking ancestry. Also, about 60% of the male population of
the Scottish Isles had Norwegian blood, while people more south had
Anglo-Saxon and Danish blood. So basically, the Germanic people who
came to modern England weren't just a ruling minority, but a
mass-migration more like?
|
|
tadamson
Baron
Joined: 25-Jul-2005
Location: Scotland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 451
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 07:52 |
Originally posted by Kuu-ukko
Quetzalcoatl, London Univeristy College made a sutdy a few years ago
comparing British, Danish, Norwegian and German y-chromosomes. It was
found out, that all of the 1700 tested British men had
Anglo-Saxon/Viking ancestry. Also, about 60% of the male population of
the Scottish Isles had Norwegian blood, while people more south had
Anglo-Saxon and Danish blood. So basically, the Germanic people who
came to modern England weren't just a ruling minority, but a
mass-migration more like?
|
The study tested for a specific genetic trait that is common in modern
Norway and thus assumed to be a tag for 'Norwgian' the fact that
it is found to be common in Scotland, England and Frisia could also
mean that the assumption was wrong..
Genetics is a science that has to be carefully interpreted.
|
rgds.
Tom..
|
|
beorna
General
Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Dec-2007 at 13:36 |
It is said that Saxons, Anglian and Jutes came to Britain. If you look at maps like abouve you'll get the impression they sailed right across the northern sea an settled everyone in their own region. This is completely wrong. The most group sailed along the coast and settled in the Netherlands, the coast of Belgium and France. From there they sailed to Britain. These groups appear as saxons. But this is just a term for a unknown group of germanc tribes. So you have Saxones Eutii but Eutii, you have Saxon kouadoi and Saxon Ambrones but also Ambrones... So if you have Essex, Wessex and Sussex you can be sure that the germanic people there did not only came from Lower Saxony and the people in the Anglia territories didn't come only from the german region of Anglia. There were people we call Old Saxons, Anglians, Frisians, Franks, Ambrones, Jutes and more. Probably there were even people from Skandinavia wo joined Britain, if you look at Sutton Hoo e.g.
Edited by beorna - 04-Dec-2007 at 13:37
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Dec-2007 at 14:01 |
Very interesting, I was wondering what actual contemporary evidence (EG: physical evidence, not writings 300 years later) there is of the Germanic tribes settlement in post Roman Britain.
|
|
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1943
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Dec-2007 at 16:54 |
Amateur historians are very fond of saying "this was so!", when in fact the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain is a highly disputed matter and not in any way set in stone. There are two main theories (with slight variations between scholars): one; the Anglo-Saxons imposed themselves as a small ruling elite over the Romano-British, and two; the Anglo-Saxons genocided and drove away the natives on a large scale, and more or less resettled the land, while the Romano-British were confined to the western and northern fringes.
One of my old profs from Oxford, whose specialty was linguistics, was a firm believer in the latter theory, as ruling elites that are not seen as culturally superior nearly always adopt the language of the conquered, and it is hard to imagine the Romano-British would have considered the Anglo-Saxons culturally superior. This is of course a strictly linguistic approach to the problem, but even as a historian I have difficulties arguing against it.
James Campbell supports the theory in his book "The Anglo-Saxons".
The Anglo-Saxons on Amazon
Other good books on the topic are F.M. Stenton's old but massive "Anglo-Saxon England" and Peter Blair's more accessible "An Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England". Both of them are standard works at university courses.
|
|
beorna
General
Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Dec-2007 at 17:31 |
Well, Reginmund, but then you have to explain why the Turks in Turkey don't speak Greek or the Slavs on the Balkans don't do speak Greek, why do the English don't speak French. I don't think it is as simple as that. There was no intact Roman civilisation in Britannia. If it would be so, we had to expect an Roman speaking Wales and Cornwall today. But we havn't. Perhaps one cause is that the people in Britain at those times were neither Romans nor Celts. So they were lacking of an common integration figure after the Romans left the island. When the Saxons came they didn't wipe out all the Britains as soon as possible. It lasts till the beginning or the middle of the 7th century untill they overruled the British kingdoms exept Wales and Cornwall. And it was as least only possible because there were several waves of Germnanic groups that moved to Britain over decades or centuries. There were definitely no mass invasion but no genocide as well.
|
|