Anglos?

Anglo Saxons hail from modern day northwestern Germany and southwestern Denmark. They probably both originated in Denmark because the Franks set up shop in what is now the Netherlands after having been pressed out of northern Germany by the Saxons.

File: Anglo Saxon migration.jpg (234KB, 691x465px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 691x465px

They were Germanic.

>>1267664
Also
>Did they have connections to ancient Romans/Greeks?
If they did, only through trade. The territory of Angles, Saxons and Jutes did not border the Roman empire directly, only some foederati.

>>1267664
Where did the franks come from before that?
>>1267668
Why don't modern day Anglos look like other germanics?

>>1267664
The Franks didn't really set up shop in what is now the Netherlands though, Frisia as it was then known only became part of the Frankish empire by the reign of Charles Martel.

>>1267683
Germanic admixture isn't 100%, in some areas it's quite low actually.

>>1267683
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35344663

>>1267675
How genetically similar would those ancient Anglo Saxons be if you could compared them to the ancient roman/Greeks?

They were an ecclectic blend of Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and the odd Frisian from west germanic speaking lands in northern europe

>>1267664
>because the Franks set up shop in what is now the Netherlands after having been pressed out of northern Germany by the Saxons.
can I get some source on that? It sounds quite bullshity from a geographical standpoint

>>1267690
Toxandria is in what's nowadays the Netherlands and Belgium

>>1267699
In the article it talks about re indigenous Britons. Do you know more about where they originated from?

Also, do you know what they mean by "roman Briton"?

>>1267713
We don't even know that for sure though, in terms of DNA they are the same so we can't really say which group was the majority. I believe Bede is the only source and he lived 200 years after the migrations.

>>1267683
Because not all Germanics look the same, there were still Celts leftover, the Saxons probably mixed with the local Romano-Celtic brits or whoever was left when the Rome collapsed, and Britain would be invaded by both the Danes and Normans afterward.

>>1267730
They meant the native Brittonic/celtic population and by roman Briton they meant the same group after the Romans had left.

>>1267734
>Romano-Celtic brits

Who were they?

>>1267740
So they weren't genetically roman, just temporarily under roman control?

>>1267714
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripuarian_Franks
I think it's in here somewhere.
>>1267690
Toxandra as >>1267721 pointed out would have been a better term, I agree. Batavians for instance were absorbed into the Frankish confederation.
>>1267683
Franks are a confederation of tribes from what is now a chunk of western germany (I believe Tencteren, Sugambriërs, Cherusken and Chatten were a few) These were known as Ripuarian Franks

>>1267747
Romanized celts living in Britain

File: Frisia_716-la.svg.png (549KB, 2000x2065px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 2000x2065px

>>1267760
Allow me to show you a map.

>>1267747
The people left over when Rome left.

>>1267767
Not entirely sure which answer this is regarding, sorry I'm autistic, please elaborate.

>>1267780
Oh sorry I meant that the Franks didn't really set up shop in the Netherlands until two or three hundred years after the migration Era.

>When we compared our data with an additional 177 samples collected in Friesland and Norway, we found that the Central English and Frisian samples were statistically indistinguishable. Using novel population genetic models that incorporate both mass migration and continuous gene flow, we conclude that these striking patterns are best explained by a substantial migration of Anglo-Saxon Y chromosomes into Central England (contributing 50%–100% to the gene pool at that time) but not into North Wales.

>>1267767
Thank you

>>1267703
>How genetically similar would those ancient Anglo Saxons be if you could compared them to the ancient roman/Greeks
We're talking PIE immigration were the last genetic event that contributed genes to both

>>1267760
But the Franks in Toxandria were Salians, not Ripurians. in the article the Saxon attack on Ripurian lands was in the mid 500's while Saxon settlement of England started in the 400's somewhere

>>1267759
Roman wasn't anymore of a genetic grouping than "American" is

It was a way of life and nationality

>>1267793
Ah, I see, thank you for pointing that out. I believe to have read somewhere that our country had been mostly underwate for about two ages prior to the migration period. Which leads me to ask, are our modern day Frisians of the same stock as those the Romans encountered around say the 1st century?

>>1267817
I thought at one point there was an "original" roman people. And as time went on it become more of a culture

>>1267822
Well 7th century Magna Frisia covers areas inhabited by the Frisii, Batavians and Cananefates and while the area did indeed flood it's possible a small group remained. To be honest no one really knows.

>>1267839
>while the area did indeed flood it's possible a small group remained.

That would make sense, Frisians had been living on terps for quite a while.

Thanks for answering my question, I'm a major Frisio-Franco-Saxoboo and wish this time-period would have been taught more in schools.

>>1267852
Well the thing is that we don't really know enough about it to make bold claims, recent DNA research managed to put a dent in many things previously held true.

>>1267870
Ah, nineteenth century historical memery debunked by science?

>>1267834
You mean Latin?

>>1267834
How?

Rome started out as a confederation of latin outcasts and "screw you guys, I'll make my own city with blackjack and hookers" tier italic tribes and etruscans

File: Haplogroups_europe.jpg (85KB, 743x764px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 743x764px

The Saxons settled in the agriculturally productive south east then extended their rule over much of England, various sources such as this >>1267699 show Anglo-Saxons are not 100% Angle and Saxon but mostly Briton. After generations the Britons adopted the Germanic system which had proved to be the way to get ahead in life. In the past no one cared about "muh heritage".

>>1267942
Seconding this

>Who were they before they were called Anglo Saxons?
angles and saxons

>>1268064
>In the past no one cared about "muh heritage".

Actually Anglo-Saxons retained their wooden buildings in england despite being exposed to more advanced/sedentary buildings, and set up a caste system with celts in the lower castes, so they most certainly did care about "muh heritage"

>>1267703

quite high compared to romans

>>1267683
>Why don't modern day Anglos look like other germanics?
i really doubt you'd be able to tell whether someone was english or german just by looking at them.

>>1271209

I can easily..any european can. They don't look anything alike

>>1271892
bullshit you can. i bet you're an ameriburger who thinks all germans look like nazi propaganda posters. maybe for the occasional person who is extremely stereotypically british or extremely stereotypically german you'd be able to place their origin, but for the vast majority of the population i don't believe you'd be able to tell the difference.

>>1271952
Not him, but a lot end I mean a lot of Brits have a facial structure that's pretty rare on the continent. It's a particular kind of horse-faced

>>1271952
I live in Amsterdam, you can pick out Brits with ease.

>>1271972
horse face is a germanic trait. native britons have more of a round face.

>>1271980
maybe from how they dress you could.

>>1271986
Nah they're about a feet shorter, got round heads and seem to bald ever faster than us. Bonus points for floppy wide ears.

>>1271986
>horse face is a germanic trait
Yet no continental looks like Rob Brydon

File: 1200x-1.jpg (199KB, 1200x1515px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1200x1515px

>>1272069
long, thin skulls are stereotypically germanic trait. the archetypal nordic has a long, thin face.

>>1271952

no, I can tell the difference, and no they don't look like german propaganda posters. British people have very distinctive looks. When I see the vast majority of british people's faces there's no way they could be german.

If anything, you're an american if you can't easily tell apart a german from a brit. They seriously do not look anything alike. The eyes are the giveaway for telling european nationalities

File: 1.jpg (347KB, 982x790px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 982x790px

>>1272288
mark which you think are german and which you think are english.

>>1272792

They're all german

>>1272104
That's a Saxon face.
Scandians or Nordics have squared heads and jawlines.
Saxons and west Germanics (the real master race) have long thin faces.

>>1273082
>>1272792
They're all ugly fuckers with shit hair

>>1273082
nope