Is Wales a Roman successor state?
not in any way, at all, and i'm interested in seeing why you'd possibly think otherwise
>>1324164
Are you fucking shitting me?
What mental contortion do you have to engage in to even ask that question?
>>1324164
Culturally, you could argue that. But the Roman magistrates were expelled in 410 and from that point the area was de jure outside of the Roman Empire so not in technical terms.
The Welsh were still using Latin in their inscriptions for centuries.
>>1324178
>>1324190
>not knowing shit about post-Roman Britain
>>1324164
mfw Dogfeiling
>>1324164
I guess it's technically possible to consider it one, although Llewelyn ap Gruffydd is considered one of the last Romans by some welshaboos, we were annexed by England for a long time though so that sort of takes away some legitimacy from that claim
>>1324439
It is far more likely that Britain was only de facto, not de jure, outside of the Empire. Zosimus 6.2.5's 'Rescript of Honorius' is far more likely to be referring to Bruttium in southern Italy.
Not only that, but the Gallic Chroniclers in the 450s seem to have thought of Britain as Roman still - they record that when Palladius's mission to Ireland was 'to make the barbarian island (Ireland) , and to keep the Roman island (Britain) Catholic'
The written evidence certainly seems to suggest that Britain was thought of as Roman, and that many Britons continued to think of themselves as Roman until at least 450 - the last time (via Gildas) that we are told the Britons were willing, in return for military aid from Aëtius, to be subjected to Rome.
The archaeological profile of northern Gaul into the 440s and beyond looks almost identical to that of Britain, but we have better written evidence and so know that those areas remained de jure Roman territories.
The magistrates and officials cast out are more likely to have been those of Constantine III, than 'Roman' officials in general - mostly because, as I'm sure you know, the Britons were Romans by that point.
Did Britons still give a shit about Rome several generations later when Wessex was on the rise?
welsh do really look iberian
>>1324164
It never really was a state, however it was the last reduct of Britons after the anglo-saxon invasion.
>>1324164
>Afflogion
>It's a dude's arm doing the nazi salute
>>1324164
Lloegyr was, but the British uplands (including Wales) were never really Romanised, but rather preserved Celtic lifestyles. Only surviving "Romans" who would have considered themselves such are the Waloons in Belgium.
>>1325946
Silurians do, as was noted even at the time of the Romans. North Welsh are fair-skinned, black-haired and pale-eyed, and West Welsh are largely of Irish descent.
>>1327382
>Lloegyr
Forgot muh map. Lloegyr would have been the land any historic Arthur ruled / protected, it was heavily Romanised and spoke Latin natively, unlike the highlands which adopted Catholicism but kept their Celtic language and culture.
It's interesting actually. Wales is the direct descendant of the Romano-Celtic territories of Roman Britannia. They for the most part Wales resisted Germanic Anglo-Saxon conquest (unlike their eastern kin) and are something of a rump state in a contorted way.
If that Hellenic as fuck Byzantine gets called Roman while not being Latin at all, Celtic Wales ought to have consideration.
>>1327685
The Welsh don't see themselves as Romans tho, the Romanised Britons lived in what is now England, they're all long gone. The Welsh identified themselves from very early times as autochthones, as distinct from the Belgae who dominated England and who invaded from Gaul ~100 years before the Romans came.
>>1327685
>pic
Scots and Irish Gaelic are mutually intelligible but Manx is weird. Also if Cornwall speaks English, then so should Isle of Man, in fact Norse would be more appropriate for it.
>>1327863
>they're all long gone
They all got killed or what?
>>1327901
Conquered by the English and "Anglified", most likely. Back in the day there was a lot of support for the "genocide and replacement" theory, but the genes don't lie and they show only a small contribution from the English, or from the Celts for that matter, ~75% of British genes have been here since the last ice age.
>>1327904
Huh, kinda like the Arabization of North Africans? Only the elites were ethnically Anglos at first? Or was it gradual?
>>1324164
Ynys Môn = Menapian Belgic colony
>>1327382
Walloons are descended mostly from Romanized Franks.
In fact, genuine Celtic heritage, which they preserved through Roman times, can be found with the proto-Flemish Celtic tribes Menapii and Morini.
The other tribes of late antiquity in Belgium were all Germanic in origin, such as the Nervii.
>>1327910
The Britons of Lloegyr were urbanised, like the Gallo-Romans, but the English invaders eschewed cities and lived in villages. With the end of Rome, the cities died out, some faster than others, and the people living in them either died or emigrated to the countryside. Once away from the cities and the high culture they support, the use of Latin was no longer an advantage so it died out faster than you might expect, perhaps in just a few generations. By the Norman invasion, all the Romano-Britons were Anglicised and only the Celtic-speaking Britons survived, and them only in Wales, Cumbria and Dyfeint.
>>1327923
>Walloons are descended mostly from Romanized Franks.
This seems very unlikely given their name, which is a cognate of "Wales" and "Gaul" and which denotes Romano-Celtic populations everywhere else it is found.
>>1327891
>then so should Isle of Man, in fact Norse would be more appropriate for it.
Are you kidding? The settlers were the glorious Menapian sea-farers.
>>1327929
The original settlers perhaps but that was a long time ago. The Norse are the most recent conquerors, and the Celtic Manx language died out before Cornish did.
>>1327925
Their name is the name of the land, just like Flanders. Wallonia means "land of the (Gallo-Roman) strangers".
The previous population of antiquity, Belgae and Romans, got flooded with invading Franks. The Salian Franks pretty much made Belgium their homeland.
Phylogenetic research today confirms this. Actually, most R1b-L21* subclades (insular Celtic) are found up to 15% in the westermost Flemish province.
Wallonia is mainly Frankish and Italic, but so is Flanders, up to 20% R1b-U152* (which came with the Romans mostly) in the city of Antwerp.
PS: Tested populations could prove their paternal ancestry in the area until the early 19th century.
>>1327935
The Anglos were their most recent conquerors, that is why they speak English today :-)
>>1327929
>Menapian
>It is commonly suggested that the Menapii share the same name as (and may indeed be related to) the ancient Irish tribe Manapi (for whom County Fermanagh is named), first mentioned by Ptolemy.[21][22] Both names are considered P-Celtic and may be derived from a Proto-Celtic root *mano- (alternately *meno- or *mono-) meaning either "thought" or "treading" (another possibility being a derivative of another root *mono-, from Proto-Indo-European *men- meaning "to tower", which gives us the Brythonic words for "mountain")
>In 2015, a genetic correlation[1] has certified the link between continental and Irish Menapii. Since then, Menapii are definitely considered as Celtic.
I can't find any reference to them settling the Isle of Man, which simply means "mountainous" and is unrelated to the tribal name of Menapii.
>>1327942
Actually no, it ended up part of the UK via inheritance, not conquest.
>>1327945
Not at all, the name refers to Manannan mac Lir, their sea-god, so does their tribal name. Just look at the toponymy, there are plenty of place-names referring to them, same on the Welsh and Irish coast btw, comparable to the town of Menen in West-Flanders, their main centre in late antiquity/early middle ages in West-Flanders.
BTW the highest elevation on the Isle of Man is 672 meter high.
>>1327945
Also they are definitely related.
On the Irish coast Ptolemy mentions Manapii and Cauci living next to each other.
From other sources we know that in Belgium/NL the Menapii and Chauci lived next to each other.
One is Celtic, the other Germanic, they were both sea-faring tribes. A part likely left after Caesar's conquest to establish Roman-free living on the Irish coast (Menapia, the name of their colony, is today Wexford).
>>1327971
I'm not disputing that the Menappi were Celts, nor that they lived in both Ireland and Belgium. There's no evidence they ever lived on the Isle of Man, tho.
>>1327964
The association with Manannan may have come about because of the coincidental similarity of the names, but the etymology is generally agreed to be from "manu", meaning "mountain".
>>1327945
The Isle of Man's heritage is very Norse-Gael, essentially what Dublin was like before the back of Viking rule was broken in Ireland
Of course though today it means nothing when there are very few indiginous folk left on the island, they're mostly descended from recent British migrants
>>1327685
roman is not latin.roman is above all law,christianity and imperial tradition and politics.Justinian was roman so was Heraclius.the later Byzantine state had clear traditional ties with them.Britain was the least romanized(not latinized,mind you)part of the Roman State.
>>1328106
>
All their settlements (I can give you ten each for the Isle of Man, Ireland and Wales) refer to this name (Manannan). It is not coincidence at all.
Also the triskelion, read up on what it is. The god Manannan once changed itself into it when falling off a hill. "No matter how you throw it, it always falls on its feet" motto of Isle of Man
>>1327904
>~75% of British genes have been here since the last ice age
and humans on average easily share 90% of their genetic makeup with chimps.
>>1327396
Lloegyr is just Welsh for England, anon
t. Welshman
