Upcoming paper on Anglo-Saxon migration period??

[Straboo]

Of course, but on this chart those people would form part of the British IA and English EMA components. Plus it just doesn't add up, if we are looking at a 75% replacement, how can areas like East Anglia which we know were some of the most heavily colonised by Anglo-Saxons, then have what looks like 35 or 40% French IA surviving from the pre-Roman period. Has to be a later introduction?

Attachment 50230

Its not 75% replacement across the board though. Every region and sub region is nuanced. Its like viewing election results by region rather than by parish or municipality. The geographic picture will look different.

And as Agamennon said, the number is probably inflated and more realistically around 50-60% which would actually fit with 35-45% French IA

[Straboo]

Think I figured out what I was missing.
The map on left is showing pre 400 AD CNE=Anglo Saxon ancestry origins, not British Isles ancestry origins.

This would imply a genetic similarity between the traditional home of the Anglo Saxons and folks from Poland, Ukraine, and Czechoslovakia.

Edit jonvikW is saying something similar in post 384.

So map on left isn’t telling us anything about pre 400 ad immigrates to Britain.

Why is nobody picking up on the fact they dumped poland full of CNE like ancestry, despite ZERO SAMPLES FROM THE PRZEWORSK CULTURE that we know off. Also, they've highlighted south central poland over the eastern germany and Pomerania, which pre 400 AD were absolutely flooded with Germanics. So basically half the Wielbark culture area is left out, The entire Przworsk culture is included, but vast areas of eastern Jastorf culture colonization are also left out. Not to mention south west ukraine, classicaly known as GOTHIA. So many asumptions based on what? Traditional narrative of history? Archaeology? I should not say left out, but rather admixed? With who? Locals? Are these supposed to be slavs? Balts?

How can they release a paper about england, release a map showing poland-ukraine, and then say anything about it!!! I mean this is absolutely huge news for eastern central europe.

[V-X]

I don't see how that adds up, especially when the Patterson bronze age paper basically said there wasn't a great deal of change after 800 BC.

The one exception being "later streams of migration specifically affecting East Yorkshire" which is undoubtedly the Arras culture/Parisi. That's the complete opposite of this since Yorkshire is relatively low in French IA here.
Really what we need is more information rather than squinting at that tiny chart.

[Finn]

Think I figured out what I was missing.
The map on left is showing pre 400 AD CNE=Anglo Saxon ancestry origins, not British Isles ancestry origins.

This would imply a genetic similarity between the traditional home of the Anglo Saxons and folks from Poland, Ukraine, and Czechoslovakia.

Edit jonvikW is saying something similar in post 384.

So map on left isn’t telling us anything about pre 400 ad immigrates to Britain.

And an add:



http://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa5576%200x003437fd.pdf

[Straboo]

I don't see how that adds up, especially when the Patterson bronze age paper basically said there wasn't a great deal of change after 800 BC.

The one exception being "later streams of migration specifically affecting East Yorkshire" which is undoubtedly the Arras culture/Parisi. That's the complete opposite of this since Yorkshire is relatively low in French IA here.
Really what we need is more information rather than squinting at that tiny chart.

Perhaps. But I wouldnt call 50% replacement in iron age england "not a great deal of change"

[V-X]

I tried to turn the pie chart map into 3 individual maps.

British IA
image.jpg

England_EMA
image (1).jpg

France_IA
image (2).jpg

[V-X]

Perhaps. But I wouldnt call 50% replacement in iron age england "not a great deal of change"

That took place before 800 BC. The Belgic etc tribes arrived approx 200 BC to 44 AD.

[Straboo]

And an add:



http://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa5576%200x003437fd.pdf

Finn, you make it out as if the previous late lusatian/Pomeranian culture just vanished of the face of the earth with no trace (which is total you know what)

Any post about Jastorf-Bastarnae in the 3rd century BC Poland need to be contrasted with maps that show indicators of native, non germanic local peoples for the iron age Poland.

The Jastorf migrants went through greater Poland, west to east, and then headed south east via the Bug river. Remaining Jastorf in central poland were swallowed up by early heavily celtic influenced Preworsk culture.

[Finn]

Why is nobody picking up on the fact they dumped poland full of CNE like ancestry, despite ZERO SAMPLES FROM THE PRZEWORSK CULTURE that we know off. Also, they've highlighted south central poland over the eastern germany and Pomerania, which pre 400 AD were absolutely flooded with Germanics. So basically half the Wielbark culture area is left out, The entire Przworsk culture is included, but vast areas of eastern Jastorf culture colonization are also left out. Not to mention south west ukraine, classicaly known as GOTHIA. So many asumptions based on what? Traditional narrative of history? Archaeology? I should not say left out, but rather admixed? With who? Locals? Are these supposed to be slavs? Balts?

How can they release a paper about england, release a map showing poland-ukraine, and then say anything about it!!! I mean this is absolutely huge news for eastern central europe.

[Straboo]

That took place before 800 BC. The Belgic etc tribes arrived approx 200 BC to 44 AD.

Before 800bc? So when does the iron age begin in england?

So your saying there was no flow at all from 800 to 200 bc across the channel? That does not sound realistic