by "allan connochie" <allan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sep 20, 2005 at 01:22 PM
"Bob and Doris Jones" <bobianjones@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:5KSXe.647$0E5.171@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> hawker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > "Bob and Doris Jones" <bobianjones@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:v%UWe.51066$FA3.15094@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >>allan connochie wrote:
> >>>The land of the Brigantes was way to the south
> >>>in northern England.
> >
> >
> > Complete and utter rubbish.
>
> This is Alan's comment , not mine.
The Brigantes were centred on northern England. The Pictish kingdoms were
north of the Forth/Clyde/Antonine line. In between were the Britonnic
tribes of what is now southern Scotland. This is accepted historical
fact.
If you are going to change the whole passage of British history then you
have to come up with some kind of reliable evidence.
> > Angles-Frisians? Absolute rubbish!
>
> DNA evidence sup****ts an ethnic cleansing event in Middle England but
> this may indeed be the Belgae Celts as well as the Angles (Frisians).
> Other DNA studies have shown survival of indigenous peoples in the
> North, South and West.
DNA evidence sup****ts no such thing. There have been several studies and
they sometimes totally contradict each other. If you are talking about the
UCL Viking genetic studies of the Y-chromosome then folk have made all
kinds
of claims as to what it does or doesn't prove. The survey results
actually
seemed to show that there was a mixed population both British and
incomers.
However the whole thing was based on preconceptions anyway and those who
carried out the survey admitted that it didn't even prove that a mass
influx
of incomers happened never mind proving that they replaced the existing
population. The results were based on the idea that the genetic make up
of
the pre-Roman British in central England was the same as certain specific
points in modern Ireland and Wales. They don't actually know if that was
so, and if it wasn't, then the whole thing was a useless exercise as far
as
that goes. Even if their preconception was correct they admitted that the
genetic difference could have been caused by gradual influx of peoples
through the centuries rather than any mass displacement of people. Even
if
there was a mass influx of people they admitted that there was no evidence
from the study to prove that the existing population was removed. Besides
that Goldstein himself, when asked about people using his evidence to back
up pre-conceived ideas, said that any genetic difference was so
insignificant that it could in no way be used to produce a them and us
scenario.
Allan
