by Schadenfreude » Mon 14 Apr 2008, 02:35:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'T')he story goes that when the Romans left and said "defend yourselves" in 410 AD, that England was invaded by Anglo Saxons from northern Europe. Recent sophisticated massive archeology shows that England was not invaded by Anglo Saxons. Linguistic evidence shows that Celtic speaking British natives adopted Northern European fashions and language. The time had come for Northern Europe to assert itself and the Eastern Brits were right on board. The so called Dark Ages were nothing of the kind in that country. Pollen evidence shows that the land did not become forested in a great collapse. They kept right on farming. Meanwhile, Western England kept up the old Classical Tradition and had ties with Constantinople. History is not what is written in books it seems.
It's pretty well-established that England suffered a quite number of invasions from different Norse and Germanic tribes over periods of centuries, some large, some smaller. The ultimate effect of the invasions was to completely overwhelm the native culture and language multiple times over. Even the Celts, which were pushed all the way over into Wales, were, by that time, a mixture of the original inhabitants with bloodlines from previous Norse or Germanic invaders.
It's likely that such invasions from that region of Europe had been going on for a long time even before the Romans conquered the area. The Romans may have simply disrupted the pattern for as long as they held the area. Don't forget; it was a lot easier to invade England when sea levels were shallower.
One gets the impression from reading early British history, that Norse and Germanic peoples were more dynamic, more innovative, more war-like and more acquisitive in general; and peoples native to the Isles were more peaceful and less able to withstand the numerous onslaughts from the Continent. They always seemed to become "ripe for the taking".