- 13 Apr 2010 13:00
#13368934
Nope, not really.
The archaeological and etymological evidence is that what we now designate as Scotland, England and Wales were all raided and settled by nordic and germanic ethnic groups, mixing up the 'native' ethnicity/ies with those of the invading and settling ethnicities.
The differences would originally have been more obvious, I imagine, but the differences wound have become indiscernible within a few generations of intermarriage.
Political Interest wrote:"The Scots cannot be distinguished except by DNA test, and even then it's merely 'indicative'."
But they are still different, are they not? Were Celts not the original inhabitants of the British Isles? Then came the Anglo-Saxons, followed by the Normans, who then intermarried with a great number of Celts and Anglo-Saxons? Still, the Scottish Clans are different from the Anglo-Saxons, as were the Normans from the latter, yes?
Nope, not really.
The archaeological and etymological evidence is that what we now designate as Scotland, England and Wales were all raided and settled by nordic and germanic ethnic groups, mixing up the 'native' ethnicity/ies with those of the invading and settling ethnicities.
The differences would originally have been more obvious, I imagine, but the differences wound have become indiscernible within a few generations of intermarriage.