EXCELLENT VIDEO!!! Many MANY good points about the Germanic settlers placed in Britain by Roman design during the late occupation of the Roman Empire in Britain. Nobody else seems to be talking about this! 410 is just the year that Constantine III took all the Comitatenses (probably not the Limitanii) on expedition to help defend the Rhine frontier, and ultimately to take the throne of Rome (which he did - sort of). But that doesn't mean that it was the "End of Roman Britain". Even when the Honorius told the Britons to look to their own defences "Romanitas" need not have ended. In my view The reason for the proximity of the "Anglo Saxon tribes" to Roman sites is obvious. The Roman administration in Britain (which was in all likelihood ethnically BRITISH, not from Rome) "outsourced their defence and policing needs" to the various Frisian tribes the Empire had always turned to for this purpose (Batavians and Tungrians etc). "Vortgiern" was simply following a well trodden path inviting in these Germanic tribes. Especially since Honorius had made it explicit that bona-fide Imperial troops would not be forthcoming. The 'myths' tell us what happened then; the mercenaries rebelled for want of better remuneration! And the reason for the wholesale take-over of the now English part of the island of Britain was simply due mainly to the flooding that happened in the North Sea, along the coast of what is now the Netherlands, during that time. A good deal of the population of Magna Frisia was innundated, and it's population set sail for refuge in Britain. Hence, mass IMMIGRATION. Leading to the language change from Brythonic to Old English.

Brilliant and really comprehensive - I was lucky enough. To be taught by Richard Bailey at Newcastle Uni in the 1980s - a champion of Northumbrian culture - his course the art and archeology of. Anglo Saxon and Viking England was a real treat and these talks take me back…

Saxon 'invasion' has been out of fashion as a concept for some time . No great battles or destruction , yet how was it that Roman Britain became Anglo-Saxon? Here again Alex you give a very clear concise account of a complex period of cultural transition . Always a pleasure to watch .Thanks.

We at Woden's Folk have been saying this for years now, that there were Germanic Tribes here in England even before the Romans, and that these were akin to the English. There are records of a tribe called the Tegeingl who moved from the South-West of Ireland to Wales, and ended up in Flintshire at an area they called 'Englefield'. The name 'Tegeingl' is Welsh and means 'Fair Ingl'; the Romans called them Deceangli - what other tribe is called by the name 'Angles'. The Tegeingl lived up in Gwynedd, North Wales and Anglesey (Angle's Island) and they came over with the Gangani (Germanic - 'Wanderers'). These moved from Ireland around 100BCE! For those who do not believe there was this Germanic presence a tribe called the Cauci - a Germanic Tribe akin to the Saxons - lived where Leinster is. In 1999 the 'Irish Times' ran a piece where an archaeological dig in Dublin on a Viking site found a SAXON DWELLING under the Viking ruins!

That was interesting. Shows societies are always more complex than we think.

Great stuff Alex. Heard the theory too that the Saxon Shore was not forts guarding against AS but manned by them. Maybe as usual a little of both . Cheers

That sounds much more plausible as to how Britannia transitioned into the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. It never quite rang true that there was a sudden Saxon Advent in 450 AD, and they drove the natives before them, as they occupied and settled the land. That sounded far too simplistic. There has never been any evidence discovered of the kind of death and destruction caused by a marauding invading army of Angles, Jutes and Saxons, of the kind that was obvious from the Boudican revolt.

One small thing. Carausius was not the Gallic Empire or the Crisis of the Third Century. That was Postumus. Carausius rebelled in Britain against Diocletian after all that had happened.

Very interesting approach

Enjoyed that, okay there is a little confirmation bias on my part but the argument that there were already germanic peoples present in Britain prior to 410, mechanisms for such articulated well by your good self, is an argument that holds much water in my opinion. In, The Gododdin of Aneurin - by John T Koch, Koch, whilst starting a big argument among historians over the context of the era in question, in his reanalysis of the text makes some interesting observations, in that some of the names commemorated may have been germanic in origin. Plays into the Pendragon/Gildas mercenary jape, but also leaves the door open to the resettlement theme aired in this presentation.

Extremely interesting historical narrative and research!! I very much enjoyed this video! It makes a lot of sense to me when you look at the big picture of Germanic influences in the British and how it was more a gradual change in culture starting in Roman Brittanica! Thank you!! Subscribe!

Really enjoyed this! Was rewatching Francis Prior recently & while his case against a Saxon invasion is quite compelling, the individual arguments to the contrary seem to hang on quite slender threads, but having a large presence of Germanic warriors already in place before 410 does draw a lot of the threads together

Admixtur is how "Iberia" was created. Inhabitants were called Iberians, Celts and Celtiberian. That signifies the various grades of admixture even back then. But we are not sure who Iberians are; that they came from the East or the Caucassus is more than probable, but from where exactly? There is another Iberia in Caucassus; not to mention that the terminology seems to relate to Eber Finn, the Milesian / Hebron, Palestine / Hebrides islands / Ebro river and, who knows if it is sound to venture a connection to "Hebrew". I'm not even adding in Greeks, Phoenicians, Romans, Alans, Vandals or Visigoths. Etymology is fascinanting, it is a substract as well. Have you seen all those Tur- related places? It could be ventured that it accounts for one particular time that the 'Turks' or 'Turkic' people were there. I mean Turdetani / Santurce, Basque Country / Kanturk, Ireland / Turku, Finland / Thurso, Scotland / Tharsis, Spain / Turin, Italy / Turingia, Germany, etc.

FANTASTIC. Love your presentations. Your getting better and better!

This is brilliant Alex, it helps to explain so much.

Errrm, well thats thought provoking. kinda adds up as well.

Interesting.Thanks

Just because there are Germanic speakers there does not mean that they are Saxons. They could be Goths. They could be Lombards. Any number of other Germanic tribes. Franks. I suspect the truth is much more complex than what is presented in the Anglo-Saxon chronicle and what is being discovered here by archaeologists. Perhaps there was already an established population of Germanic people which were then joined by non-romanized Germanic people from the north sea coast of what is now Germany and Denmark.

Great video with original content. Maybe it will be explained in another video, but even with a gradual increase in Germanic peoples over centuries, how is it that the native British language and place-names were so thoroughly eliminated from the landscape? Do you buy into the Justinian plague theory wiping out the Britons or anything like that?

Interesting theory.

Could you do something on the 367 Conspiracy sometime please mate

Thiago você assistiu o ICL de onde? Denúncia

This was a really good video. It makes a lot more Sence than the invasion theory

Was it full of pks

It is Germanus, not Germanicus who came to Britain, he had been a military officer. Pelagianism was not anti-Christ, but postulated that good deeds were enough for personal salvation, rather than being dependent upon Grace given by God, as the Catholic Church insisted. I have always thought that the Roman Auxiliaries had a large part in the British population, from the first century the garrisons of Vindolanda were already Germanic, & more Germanic troops constantly were employed as time went on. Around Hadrian's Wall were Swavian, Vangones etc etc. In fact it was these Auxiliaries that were the 'Romans' that most Britons would have known throughout the Roman period. Their presence would have made the Germanic proto-English language common within 'England' at least, easing the way for it to become the dominant language, Therefore there was no need for a dramatic. rapid adoption of a foreign tongue by the Britons in the migration period, because a large part of them were already of Germanic ancestry. At last some people are beginning to see what I have suspected for years, the 'English' were already in Britain in the Roman period, & possibly before that with their close ancestral ties across the surrounding seas, including to none Celtic parts of NW Europe, recorded by Caesar & Tacitus etc. The way of life of all these peoples, including the islands iron age peoples, was very similar, being mostly a warrior elite led society, so their habitations etc would be fairly similar. It was the Mediterranean civic building style, in stone etc, that was anomylous, once this collapsed both native & 'newcomers' habitations would look much alike.

Is there a Saxon-African finance ?

Several times in the video you say "Germans", rather than for example "Germanic people" or "Germanic tribes". I wonder why? I find it a bit grating, as these people, afaik, were _not_ "German" in any ordinary sense of that word? Can you provide some explanation?

England has been opposite Holland and Germany for a very long time, not just during the Roman period. Intermarriage and migration must have been constant. Of course under Rome, Britain and western Europe were a single province which would have accelerated freedom of movement. This is more than enough to account for DNA similarities with eastern England and for the germination and importation of new (pidgin) languages when Rome's importance declined. When can we drop the phoney stories about "anglosaxon" and "viking" invasions?

Anglo-Judean.