Does anyone have an idea of the English genetic makeup? Most of the sources I have seen on the internet are conflicting.
Celts are a lot less inbred than Anglos so the genetic purity of Celts is better.
>>73395676
That wasn't the question, and plus it doesn't even make sense considering the population sizes of Wales and Scotland compared to England.
there have been a lot of population genetics studies done on the british isles lately. look them up.
>>73395968
I have and they aren't clear, I just want a basic idea of the average English persons genetic make up, not regionally.
Celtic, the majority of them are and always have been Britons (Celts) I think around 20 percent are Germanic though. The English think they're all Germanic due to the Anglo-Saxon history overshadowing the original Celtic history and culture. But they're just as Celtic as the Scots, Irish etc.
>>73395676
That makes no sense considering Anglos consist of several tribes that came from the mainland and the celts haven't been part of the mainland for thousands of years. Also, Anglos are mixed with them.
>>73395968
Theres always studies, they change drastically every 5 years or so and are usually dragged out in a newspaper or whatever to cause controversy based on whatever politics are relevant to it at the time. They always return to the same base point though.
Generally Germanic on the east coast, gets more Celtic as you go further West.
>>73395536
English are all fucking Jewish.
>>73396165
This is what I understand, but I see lots of fellow English people that get annoyed at this and claim we are mostly Anglo-Saxon, as well as Welsh and Scots calling us invaders.
>>73395536
They descended from an ancient indigenous population (beaker culture) that was first Celtified and then Germanified
>>73396165
On average it's around 30% Germanic DNA.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/18/genetic-study-30-percent-white-british-dna-german-ancestry
So not really Germanic. Linguistically they might be, but ethnically not much has changed for thousands of years. Normans only replaced the ruling elite. Romans left almost no legacy. The Vikings left a mark on Orkney and nowhere else.
The racial hierarchy of Britain goes like this.
>>73395536
Retarded question in the first place. You aren't simply Germanic. You are Germanic in a certain WAY. In speech, yes, the English are totally Germanic, with next to piss all Celtic influence in their speech. In terms of culture, well, it depends on the part of England. Down in Essex or Norfolk, there's hardly anything surviving from Celtic times. Up in Lancashire and Derbyshire, or in Devon, you're going to encounter more cultural survivals that ultimately predate the English invasions.
But you are referring to blood, i.e. "genetics". Simple scenario: you are an Englishman, a warrior fresh off the boat. Your band takes over a territory with a few British peasants in. Do you take your pick of the girls? Or do you sit in your hit wanking to your fantasies of the future anime that will be imported in one and a half thousand years or so? Obvious enough what went on.
Now, this same warriors' descendants, 200 years later, how Celtic are they in blood? A fair bit. How Celtic in identity? Fuck all. Who wants to be a loser? You help conquer Shropshire. Behind you is Warwickshire, with plenty of villages of Welsh in it. But they all speak English now. Fast forward another 200 years, nobody even remembers that this was Welsh land, even though there are plenty of people in it with barely a fraction of English blood from the first migration.
As for haplogroups and all that crap, well, the Celts ultimately came from southern Germany, so you'd barely be able to tell them apart. The "Celtic" features distinguishing their descendants in the Celtic Fringe nowadays aren't even really Celtic at all, if you take an essentialist point of view. They are the traits of the pre-Celtic natives, on the whole.
Anyway, who cares? If most of your family were English in 1900, this doesn't really matter in terms of modern identity.
^PS, second poster is a mong.
>>73395676
I thought genuine Anglos were distinct from both Germans and Celts.
>>73396538
well meme'd my finngolian friend
>>73396191
Easiest way to describe it.
>>73396495
So the rest is mostly Celtic?
>>73396538
british nobility began to mix with jews in the 1500s and its gone downhill since..
>>73396495
>The Vikings left a mark on Orkney and nowhere else.
Utter bullshit. The findings you refer to just indicate that the researchers concerned didn't know how to go about looking for the Norse impact. Given that I use tons of Norse dialect words every single pissing day of my life, I'm not having some cunt in a white coat tell me that the Norse settlements barely even happened.
>>73396592
Thats a fucking meme
I'm lurking for answers OP
>>73396388
This is true though
The first people to come to the UK crossed the frozen English channel following mammoths, 80% of brits are related to these people.
But how much of an impact did Anglo Saxons have on the English, the language completely changed to a German one
>>73395536
It seems sort of silly to split hairs over your genetic lineage while you allow millions of Muslims to enter your nation and rape your daughters with impunity.
I have family from all corners of the British Isles so I'd appreciate it if you didn't cuck them up with your multicultural bullshit.
>>73396832
Shut the fuck up burger, it's important to learn your roots, something you mutts are always banging on about
>>73396538
Rowan Atkinson is a celt, basically his ancestors came from north spain, that why people in south wales look Mediterranean, (Tom Jones, Cathrine Zeta Jones, half the welsh rugby team)
>>73395536
>Are the English generally more Germanic or more Celtic?
more paki anon.
>>73397126
>t. moor
>>73396495
>On average it's around 30% Germanic DNA.
This might well be something like it. Think of it in terms of the entirety of your ancestors alive in the year 400. Where were they? How many were in Britain, and how many were still back in Scandinavia, Jutland, or the Low Countries? Some will have been in Ireland and Gaul too, indeed. Most of the individuals involved will be your ancestor several times over, however, to mess it up a bit.
Ultimately, look at Stilton - how much of it is mould, and how much is white cheese? There's probably about 30% mould, but it runs ALL through the chunk on the plate, and gives the whole its distinct character.
>>73396980
Seems sort of like counting the deck chairs on the Titanic, no? The good news is that when you feel the scimitar slicing through your jugular you can think to yourself, my Saxon ancestors wouldn't have stood for this. Too bad they produced you.
In any case, we'll be around after a while to clean up your mess. Be sure to bury your national treasures so their rightful heirs can reclaim them following the crusade.
>>73395536
Anglo-SAXON.
We're descendants of the Germanic peoples; with a touch of Celtic and a sprinkle of Norse.
It really depends on the region. Some areas have high settlements of Anglos, some have high settlements of vikings, some the french/normans, and others are indigenous and relatively untouched.
It's much easier to just look at genetic maps to see all of the country's relation to eachother.
>>73397496
Source? Others here have argued that we are at the most 30% germanic
>>73395536
I'd say they're honestly about evenly Celtic and Germanic, genetically-speaking. This could be completely wrong, but we can't tell just yet. Looking at uniparental markers proves they're both, but any number of events/dynamics could have resulted in the proportions we see today.
>>73397588
To put it another way, imagine a little boy in 700 AD. Chances are that eleven of his sixteen great great grandparents were ethnic Britons (though all would have been bilingual, if not totally Germanic speaking), against five "proper" English. And yet, this little kid wouldn't even have been able to communicate with his Celtic forebears. A major cut in continuity had taken place. Talk of biological percentages is pretty meaningless when faced with this sociocultural reality. It's mere trivia from a political point of view.
And this same little boy, a few of his own great grandkids would have been marrying Danes and Norwegians, adding a little more Germanic to the ingredients. Then Normans (themselves Germano-Celtic in a similar way), Flemings (mostly Germanic in deep ancestry), etc. in mediaeval times. Then, with railways and internal migration of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, it will have been churned up some more. Add some Irish (themselves with a fair bit of Norman and straight Norwegian, as well as English proper in their veins) and whatever, and you get us today.
>Anglos
>white
Pick one
One thing is certain:
The English are genetically subhuman
>>73398485
>t. turkroach
>>73398643
>>73395536
Since only a portion of the saxon population came to celtic populated england i can imagine that englishmen are germanized celts.
Don't know for sure though
anyone get sad that the celtic langauge and culture is kinda ded?
it'd be fucking sweet to have another ayran group around rather than another germano clone
lets be honest most of the shit in the world is from the germanics and their turbo-absolutist autism
>>73395676
>>73399283
Rather have Germanic turbo-autism than British whore-traitor cuck traits desu senpai.
It depends on the part of the country from my experience. Northern English tend to look more Scandi whereas Southern English look more Anglo. The West coast of England and Wales had a lot of Irish immigration so they might look more Celtic. Scots tend to have darker hair than the English but also have the highest rate of gingers in the world. The three distinct populations that made up the White population have become interbred over time so nobody is purely one group unless their family has been isolated for centuries.
>>73398485
>>73399060
>>73399097
It's actually thought that "Saxon" was a bit of a misnomer, really. This dates to late Imperial times, when the Roman administration seems to have carelessly referred to all North Sea raiders as "Saxones". From the linguistic evidence, it's clear that your Sachsen were more like inland cousins of our English ancestors. "Anglo-Frisians" would probably make more sense than "Anglo-Saxons", really, but it's too late to change established terminology now.
As for portions of peoples, both Bede and Alfred note that Angeln in southern Jutland was emptied of people following the migrations. In other words, all the old Engle came to Britain, bringing many Frisians, Jutes, and probably a few Saxons with them. As such, that's a big bunch of people, and enough to change a country forever. Unfortunately, this may be a good parallel for the Pakis and Turks in our respective homelands now...
>>73400136
Are you an expat/Brit on holiday or just a Spaniard that's knowledgeable on English genealogy?
>>73400136
I would imagine that more than a few Saxons came along, given the Saxon polities of medieval southern England.
I imagine that, much like the Frisians, they simply didn't abandon the continent wholesale, as the Angles seem to have done, given that we've still Frisians and Saxons there today, but Angles only continued in Angleland.
>>73396191
This would agree with your statement
>>73395536
Celtic and native.
Germanic blood is around 40% in southeast
>>73396592
If you consider modern anglos yes, because they have blood of 3 people in them. But the original anglos were nordics
70% Angloid, 30% Aryan
>>73400507
An exile. ;o)
>>73400775
I was reluctant to accept it myself, at first, but it really does make a lot of sense. East Saxons, West Saxons and South Saxons all spoke English, though. There's no record of anyone ever calling their speech "Seaxisc". The conclusion to be drawn is that the early incomers accepted the name the natives gave them. Though they were Engle, they were mercenaries for people who called them Saxones. Even when they toppled their old paymasters (or came to more equitable terms with them - there's plenty of evidence for accommodations between native and Germanic at the highest level of the dynastic founders), they continued to use the name, at least for formal things like the names of kingdoms. There may have been a certain amount of wider prestige attached to the name, more than to the less well-known English name at that point.
Fact is, the Sachsen of the Continent speak a different variety of Germanic. They don't live by the coast, for the most part, and have no maritime tradition. The Frisians speak our closest language, what's left of em.
