Britons Still Live in Anglo-Saxon Tribal Kingdoms, Oxford University Finds

Sarah Knapton, Telegraph, March 18, 2015

Britons are still living in the same ‘tribes’ that they did in the 7th Century, Oxford University has found after an astonishing study into our genetic make-up.

Archaeologists and geneticists were amazed to find that genetically similar individuals inhabit the same areas they did following the Anglo-Saxon invasion, following the fall of the Roman Empire.

In fact, a map showing tribes of Britain in 600AD is almost identical to a new chart showing genetic variability throughout the UK, suggesting that local communities have stayed put for the past 1415 years.

Map

Many people in Britain claim to feel a strong sense of regional identity and scientists say they the new study proves that the link to birthplace is DNA deep.

The most striking genetic split can be seen between people living in Cornwall and Devon, where the division lies exactly along the county border. It means that people living on either side of the River Tamar, which separates the two counties, have different DNA.

Similarly there is a large area in southern and central England with a shared genetic heritage which coincides with the boundaries of Anglo-Saxon England. Likewise, separate genetic groups can be found in areas of North and South Wales corresponding to the ancient kingdoms of Gwynedd and Dyfed.

In the North, specific groups were found in the North East, tallying with the area of Bernicia which was colonised by the Angles from Southern Denmark. And, intriguingly, a small genetic cluster was spotted in the West Riding of Yorkshire, which coincides with the former small kingdom of Elmet, one of the last strongholds of the ancient Britons.

Geneticist Professor Sir Walter Bodmer of Oxford University said: “What it shows is the extraordinary stability of the British population. Britain hasn’t changed much since 600AD.

“When we plotted the genetics on a map we got this fantastic parallel between areas and genetic similarity.

“It was an extraordinary result, one which was much more than I expected. We see areas like Devon and Cornwall where the difference lies directly on the boundary.”

Professor Mark Robinson, of Oxford University’s department of archaeology added: “The genetic make-up we see is really one of perhaps 1400 years ago.”

The ‘People of the British Isles’ study analysed the DNA of 2,039 people from rural areas of the UK, whose four grandparents were all born within 80km of each other.

Because a quarter of our genome comes from each of our grandparents, the researchers were effectively sampling DNA from these ancestors, allowing a snapshot of UK genetics in the late 19th Century before mass migration events caused by the industrial revolution.

They then analysed DNA differences at over 500,000 positions within the genome and plotted each person onto a map of the British Isles, using the centre point of their grandparents’ birth places, they were able to see how this distribution correlated with their genetic groupings.

Professor Peter Donnelly, Director of the Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics said: “It has long been known that human populations differ genetically but never before have we been able to observe such exquisite and fascinating detail.

“We used the genetic material to really tease apart the subtle differences in DNA. And we’re able to zoom in and see which areas are closer genetically.

“In a certain sense there are more genetic differences between North and South Wales than between Kent and Scotland.

“And in a certain sense there is more similarity between people in the North of England and Scotland than people in the south of England.”

The findings also showed that there is not a single ‘Celtic’ genetic group. In fact the Celtic parts of the UK (Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and Cornwall) are among the most different from each other genetically.

And the research has finally answered the question of whether the Romans, Vikings and Anglo-Saxons interbred with the Brits or wiped out communities.

The team found that people in central and southern England have a significant DNA contribution from the Anglo-Saxons showing that the invaders intermarried with, rather than replaced, the existing population.

But there is no genetic signature from the Danish Vikings even though they controlled large parts of England–The Danelaw–from the 9th century, suggesting they conquered, kept largely to themselves, and then left. Only Orkney residents were found to have Viking DNA.

“We found that 25 per cent of the DNA of someone living in Orkney is from Norse ancestry which suggests that when the Vikings arrived the intermingled with the local population rather than wiping them out,” added Prof Peter Donnelly.

“Similarly the Saxons in Germany have contributed DNA to some of the English groups but not to some of the others. We can see not only the differences in the UK but the reasons for those differences in terms of population movements.”

There is also little Roman DNA in the British genetic make-up.

The research, which was also carried out by University College London and the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute in Australia, was published in the journal Nature.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • LHathaway

    I hope those living in Britain like Scotland and Wales despite how backward, uneducated and rustic those living there can be. Because that’s all Whites in the UK are going to be left with.

    • VVV

      How are they backward, uneducated and rustic? Maybe you are the type that prefers modern, cosmopolitan and liberal?

      • LHathaway

        Oh, the Scottish are quite liberal. This sets them apart from the British. They’re better than those cold, impersonal British.

        • Cold and impersonal? Or quiet and dignified? I will take that over our loud, obnoxious, and pushy black people. “Knomesayin?”

        • IBWHITE

          I’ve met several British people through the years and found them anything but cold and impersonal. In fact I’ve enjoyed spending time with many of them and love the accent.

  • Susannah

    As a person of predominantly British ancestry, this is fascinating to me. And it angers and worries me that all of the government-imposed diversity is going to wreak havoc with that ancient and noble DNA.

    • Truthseeker

      Perfectly stated. This is the DNA that must eventually arise to defend its very existence. How tragic it would be if it were ever lost to the ages, as our enemies openly wish.

    • The best Whites are still American Whites. Gosh, when you mix English, Irish and German together, WOW!

    • Singingbird1

      I am from North east England. I have worked in other parts of England throughout my life. When I have been to other areas/regions I have noticed how some people treated me as an outsider and some have been quite hostile. It is true, people do not like outsiders as a rule even if they are of the same Nation. Realising this fact a long time ago, I thought to myself ‘What a cheek to import of these third world foreigners and expect the British to accept them’ It will never happen not in a thousand years.

    • Quido

      Has there ever been a study of the amount of Roman DNA among the British?
      I would imagine there is some inasmuch as Britain was a Roman colony for 400 tears. Curious.

      • Susannah

        I’ve read that there is apparently only a small amount of Roman DNA present in the British population, and that many have none at all.

  • D.B. Cooper

    It doesn’t mean a da#%ed thing anymore. Guess who’s crossing the Bay of Biscay, the English Channel, and the Celtic Sea on their way to their ultimate destination?
    Don’t like it? When they call you racists for not wanting them there, you shiver like it’s freezing outside. British boy, here they come! I’d like you to do something about it before your daughter gets “groomed”.

    • Jason Lewis

      Jeb Bush says they’re doing it out of love.

      • John Smith

        Love for white women and white man’s money.

    • JohnEngelman

      Third world people bring with them the social dysfunctions they escape from. Their problems are caused ultimately by bad DNA.

      • David Ashton

        Now, now, Nazi talk.

        • JohnEngelman

          I am so ashamed.

          • Fr. John+

            Don’t be. (I know, your comment was sarcasm. But nevertheless….)

  • USofAntiWhite

    They will need to start mapping DNA in Britain for Pakistani, Punjab and Bangladeshi signatures. What a tragedy.

    • D.B. Cooper

      That map above is RAYYYSISS because it has nothing but white people tribes on it! We must change that!

      • Yes, no “diversity.” We know all White people are the same and aren’t really a race at all right?

  • IstvanIN

    This is great news because it shows indisputably who the indigenous people of Great Britain are.

    • DonReynolds

      Yes, the original inhabitants were pushed to the west coast. The invading Saxons called them Welsh…..Saxon word for “foreigner”, but that is not what the Welsh call themselves. Seems ironic that the invader would name the indigenous.

      • John Smith

        Indians anyone?

        • DonReynolds

          Yes, John Smith. I was thinking of Indians too. But in the case of American Indians, the invader adopted or adapted many of the Indian place names. Quite a few of the names of states are actually Indian place names. The number of cities, mountains, rivers with the original Indian name is pretty amazing….even sports teams. But I do not see that with the Anglo-Saxon invasion of England, except that the Roman place names seem to have been retained. Probably the Welsh language was as difficult to the Saxons as the varied Indian languages were to the English in America.

  • Hilis Hatki

    Having a last name of one of the few AngloSaxon names to survive the Normanization Iam glad of this news. However, I believe England is now under the biggest threat she has ever faced.

    • DonReynolds

      Reynolds is a common enough English name today that did not exist before the Norman conquest. Why? Because they crossed the Channel with William and their Swiss name (Reginwald) was Anglicized.

      • Hilis Hatki

        Do you know if that name was at the Battle of Hastings? Were they mercenaries? Church officials?

    • Irish

      Looks like the whole of the Western-White world is under it’s most dire threat ever.

  • DonReynolds

    My own relatives are from Devon (and Somerset). Some of them moved to Leitrim (in Ireland) before coming to British America (Fairfax County, Virginia) in 1687.

    • Hilis Hatki

      My mother’s maiden name is Gill, Irish I believe, from around Richmond Va. Haven’t found anything beyond that. Fairfax County….Mosby Country.

  • Race Heretic

    But I thought Britain was a nation of immigrants just like the USA and all other white countries.

    • John Smith

      White immigrants, it used to be, back when Britain was Great.

      • Singingbird1

        Yes all white immigrants from common Western European stock not third world immigrants.

    • rightrightright

      Blair’s gang loved to say “The British are a mongrel race”. (ie being forced to soak up millions of blacks and browns won’t make any difference so shut up and put up).

    • Singingbird1

      Left Wing propaganda by Tony the Traitor Blair and his gang of Nation wreckers.

  • Lion’s Mane

    “Many people in Britain claim to feel a strong sense of regional identity and scientists say they the new study proves that the link to birthplace is DNA deep.”

    Blood and soil do have mutual relation. It is not “Nature’s intention” that human beings be utterly rootless. That’s why it is said, “There’s no place like home.” This means the territorial home as well.

  • Usually Much Calmer

    This is fascinating and encouraging.

    I wonder what a similar analysis in France would show. “The most striking genetic split can be seen between people living in Cornwall and Devon, where the division lies exactly along the county border. It means that people living on either side of the River Tamar, which separates the two counties, have different DNA.” I knew the county boundary would be a river before I read that, as it is England. Continental political boundaries would tend to follow the boundaries of the watershed areas instead, and I wonder if the genetic map boundaries would follow political boundaries there, too.

    D.B. Cooper, above, has posted a photo of a skiff full of refugees as though they are a threat to England. Can you imagine anyone on that boat performing any of the analysis that lead to the results in this story? Inconceivable. They are like a fly on a bull, a nuisance is all. The bull must flick his tail when he would not otherwise be inclined to.

  • Bob

    The same thing happened in the U.S. Despite the groups settling all from the same British isles, they have not really mixed that much together. See: Albion’s seed.

    Assimilation is a joke. The only reason there’s not much division within these British is because people can choose to consciously ignore it. You can’t ignore it when somebody looks completely alien from you.

    • Good point. And that is why it is just so against Nature for a person of West African ancestry to intermarry with a person of Anglo Saxon ancestry. Disgusting. They really seem to be close to different species.

  • Bossman

    The British sent their people to colonize a great portion of the world but received few immigrants because they’ve got a very depressing climate and tasteless food.

    • Don’t worry, they have plenty now.

    • Yeah, very few WHITE immigrants for those reasons. But to a non-White, ANY area with a White population is better than back home. Yeah, if only that was all it took to keep the darker hordes away, if only.

    • InAFreeCountry

      I rather liked their fish and chips and they have a great selection of beer. The angus steak was good, also.

  • Petronius

    I once shared a train ride through the East Midlands with a woman from Cornwall. She told me it was the first time she had been to England.

  • Hilis Hatki

    Thanks, very interesting . I would love to visit England someday.

  • Xerxes22

    That map is inaccurate. Irish and Goidelic were the same language back in the sixth century AD. These people can’t write a news article without reinforcing some political agenda.

  • So there is little Roman DNA among the Britons? But some areas have Germanic DNA and not others? Makes sense. Did you ever notice that British people are either drop dead gorgeous looking, or ugly, but rarely in between? Yep, that explains it. Also, on a more obvious side note, it gives the lie to “Black Britons” and “British Muslims” and all that bull.

  • Whiteplight

    No mention of or consideration of Norman influences? Hardly a complete study.

    • John Smith

      I read somewhere else in reference to this same study that indicated the Normans also had little influence on UK genetics.

      • InAFreeCountry

        Less likely to marry the commoners, perhaps?

  • Whiteplight

    The Walter Reynolds piece on Wiki you link here refers to the 14th century, 1066 is a 300 year difference. I know the situation of William the Conqueror as well as can be known as it figures in my own direct ancestry from a knight who was with William at Hastings and had been one of his guardians before he was the Duke. William used no mercenaries at the Battle of Hastings, but did have many volunteers from Germany, France as well as Flanders joining him. There were not even any Swiss volunteers. The discussion of this issue can be found in Conquest 1066 by Rupert Furneaux. The Knights Templar formed at the time the first Crusade after it reached Jerusalem which was after Duke William had died. The son of my eldest ancestor was on that crusade.

    I have checked the following genealogical source books that I own, which are THE source texts; The Falaise Roll and The Norman People. No one named Reynolds (or Reynold) was involved in The Battle of Hastings. The Norman People does list what appears to be four brothers who came from Normandy to settle in England in 1198 with Reynold as their surname and it mentions a Sir Joshua Reynolds as a known great painter later. I don’t know why your Archbishop Walter Reynolds is not listed, but it could have something to do with assumed names, not names linked by clear genealogical records. It sounds like some power play was involved in Walter’s appointment. Since he likely had no issue (that was admitted to at least), you are most likely descended from the legitimate Reynold family listed in the genealogical texts I refer to here.

    • HE2

      White, we may be related.
      One of my ancestors was the Standard Bearer for William I, Duke of Normandy. For his part in the “Battle of Hastings,” our ancestor was rewarded with Saxon lands in Herefordshire and Wales.
      This is documented in history and validated genealogical papers in our possession.
      There is also a small civil parish in southeast Shropshire named for my early ancestors, [and still my mother’s maiden name].
      It is a beautiful, historical area with a dense, mystical forest nearby.

  • Irish

    Yeah Im gonna go ahead and reject that idea out of hand. And yes I’ve seen it posited on a few other occasions..Just because the Church has seemingly signed onto the Social Marxist bandwagon like the rest of the Western world over the last 40-50 years, doesn’t make the Church the problem. Most all of the Great Men of the 18th & 19th century were both God fearing Christians, and Race Realist..

    • Hilis Hatki

      Irish and Whiteplight you are both insightfully right.

    • anony

      It goes much deeper than ” Most all of the Great Men of the 18th & 19th century were both God fearing Christians, and Race Realist..”

      If one accepts that culture flows from genes, then it seems hard to accept as a religion for a Western man, one that flowed from the genes of an Oriental. After all, “Christianity” is an Oriental religion having come from western Asia.

    • Hilis Hatki

      Why the removal of my post? I merely stated that I could agree with both views. Is that too short, too radical or disrespectful ? You should at least tell someone the reason for removing their post.

  • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

    Sad that the DNA of Britons will now be polluted by turd world DNA all thanks to the libs and the tribes men that just want to destroy it.

    • bv

      They’ve just got to destroy something that’s been working for thousands of years. I read about one of these guardian writers who was impregnated by a Hindu for her second marriage.

      She wrote a whole article about feeling estranged from this alien looking spawn. The kid didn’t resemble her white children at all and she felt that the kid wasn’t kin for her.

      Takes getting impregnated by alien races to realize their errors in judgement. The real tragedy is English society has to pay for her mental illness.

      • Americaandthewestshouldbewhite

        Hmm, I must look into the guardian woman. Well some brits do have Indian blood. Singer Cliff Richards is one of them, Diana Rigg, Inglebert Humpendick, and some famous brits have Indian. Some say even Vivienne Leigh was part Indian, although that was not confirmed. I read a report the other day that Princess Diana possible could have some. Indians some of them are Caucasians, but the lowest level. Better than having Asian, negro and South American Indian blood I guess. Even some Arabs are Caucasians.

  • John Smith

    Norman is less about being French than Viking.

    • HE2

      That is right. Norman refers to “north men.”

      • anony

        Sure; that part of France called Normandy was settled/conquered by Norse Men, Vikings, etc.

  • Weisheit77

    B,b,b,b,b,but I saw on the BBC that Great Britain is a Nation of Immigrants! Surely, someone is mistaken. Mother nature is a not a racist!

  • Singingbird1

    I think that there is a lot of truth in this research by Oxford University. I also think that the different accents in Britain are a manifestation of this. England is made up of the following Regions;
    1.North East,
    2. North West,
    3. Yorkshire,
    4. East Midlands,
    5. West Midlands,
    6. East Anglia,
    7. South East,
    8. South West.
    Each of these Regions has a distinct dialect which is recognisable to a person from another region. For example, people from Yorkshire share common traits of dialect whether they come from East, West, North or South Yorkshire. Of course to each other they will sound different but it is still Yorkshire. The same can be said for any other part of England. I have not mentioned Wales or Scotland but the same applies.
    I once watched a T.V. documentary about anthropological studies of apes in central Africa. Researchers were studying the linguistic patterns of apes in the Congo and they found that apes from different areas also had dialects so it may not be exclusive to humans. Furthermore, hardwood trees of the same species but from different Countries are a different colour because they grow in different environments e.g. American oak is a reddish colour while English oak is a darker brown colour. German beech is a different colour to English beech. I think that this conversation could go on for a long time.

  • Singingbird1

    It is interesting that Oxford University mention a division between Cornwall and Devon in DNA when these two Counties are juxtaposed in the South West of England. I once met a Spaniard who was from Galencia in North west Spain. His name was Jose and he said he was a Celt. He said that Galencia was the original home of all Celts and he sounded very proud of this. I told him that I did not understand how Celts in the British Isles were so dispersed i.e. Brittany in France,Cornwall, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland and he told me that it was because the Celts from Galencia were seafaring raiders like the Vikings who sailed around conquering different lands near to the sea. I thought that this was very interesting. He told me all of this because when we were introduced I told him that my name was a celtic name.

  • Hilis Hatki

    The Falaise Roll and The Norman People … sound familiar, how do they differ? I will have look my books covering that period. The Doomsday Book… what a awesome title.
    One of my professors always called the Norman conquest “the 2nd Romanization of Britain”.
    my name is Goodwin, historical versions Goodwyn, Goodwins, Godwin, Godwinson. Ive been told that all link back to the House of Godwinson – Harold I, last AngloSaxon king of England. Directly Ive only traced lines back to the Goodwin kids of the Salem witch trials.

    Those wiki articles can be tricking. And I bring up the Cofahatchiqui wiki not as a personal attack on you, only because of my fascination of the subject. The maps of the expedition are way off. The Pearl Lady controlled the provinces of Cofa, Cofaqui and Cofahatchiqui and how she convinced DeSoto of their hardships is masterful. Her mother hid the entire time and DeSoto could never bribe her to show herself or find her no matter how hard he tired. The mother was called “the widow”. I believe the male ruler was in front of DeSoto the entire time, looking like just another servant. I would update wiki however, I have possible Phd material and I did enough work in college that other people got credit for. I believe very strongly in what you have proclaimed- Europeans were here before Columbus. This is why I believe the NAmerican Indians were viewed differently than the others. They were different.

  • Singingbird1

    Don’t get me wrong, most of the people I have met have been friendly when I have worked away from home and I have met some lovely people in the South of England. But some have made me feel unwelcome. Some people can be quite ‘clannish’ in their regard for fellow English people.

  • Singingbird1

    Yes, it is very interesting and thank you for telling me of this. What I find puzzling is how Viking sea faring plunder was taught to me in school but ‘Celtic’ sea farers were never a part of the curriculum. Well, I will have to ‘Google’ this to see if I can find out more.

    • superlloyd

      Galicia, Spain, Gaul, France, Galatia, Anatolia, Gaelic, Ireland and Scotland all share the same entomological root referring to Celtic peoples. All the Celtic fringe in Britain and Ireland originally came from Spain and or South Eastern France. These people were also in North Italy – they sacked Rome and in Anatolia. Paul’s letter to the Galatians is the Celtic community that once lived in Anatolia – mode day Turkey.

      • Singingbird1

        But ‘Gaelic’ is a language spoken in Ireland and Scotland. Gaelic is not a race. Do not lose the subject by mixing language with race.

        • Xerxes22

          The Irish are called Gaels. So it is close.

          • Hilis Hatki

            checkout “The Gael” on youtube, search

            “Luca Stricagnoli – The Last of the Mohicans (Acoustic Guitar)”
            it shivers me timbers!

        • superlloyd

          Jeez, I was elaborating your point not conflating it. Read your first post. Gaelic is a Celtic language that was only spoken by Celtic peoples. It was not a lingua franca.

          • Singingbird1

            Yes,very sorry if I misunderstood you. Apologies.

  • Singingbird1

    Yes, I agree with you. There is nothing more depressing than a defeatist.

    • LHathaway

      There’s nothing more depressing than a defeatist. Except perhaps for the defeated themselves . . . So I assume you will be less than welcoming when English flee there to Scotland or Wales. There just isn’t room enough for all Whites, only for us.

      • Singingbird1

        Oh I get it you are an invader aren’t you?

  • anony

    Divide and conquer.

  • David Ashton

    “Britain hasn’t changed much since 600 AD” says old Bodmer. Until 1980 AD.