When my brother was an officer in the Royal Netherlands Navy, he was assigned for one year to a patrol boat of the navy that was involved in fishery inspection on the North Sea. One day they were at a Scottish fishing town where the local population spoke a language that nobody could understand, except for two Dutch sailors onboard who were... of Frisian descend! 😃
@Hansjoh21 A Scandinavian speaker (without using English skills) can understand some Scots and Frisian if spoken very slowly. I assume the absence of words of French origin helps as well.
@@matthewkent5212 If it was spoken you would understand it a little more than written, but if we were able to have an English today that was not influenced by French or Danish, we would be having a different conversation. They are VERY related, but a lot of the Old English roots are lost to time.
that's a bit of a stretch, none of these videos get 'cancelled' by calling england white or germanic or anglo-saxon, and i've never seen a comment asking for the inclusion of commonwealth migrants into these videos the intro about somewhat-recent migration was spun into a segue towards older migrations i would say this is even more 'cancellable' since it seems like it's implying the recent migrations are anywhere near the scale of the angles, saxons and jutes that reshaped the isles but then again, i imagine since you commented about cancel culture that you're also afraid of naturalised brits
As an (east) Fleming, I can confirm that the West Flemish dialect has similarities with Frisian. With which I do not claim that they are 100% similar, but to me it is clearly audible that there is a Frisian influence in the West Flemish dialect. History also teaches us that the Frisians traveled along the North Sea coast as far as Dunkirk, present-day French Flanders.
You kind of skipped over the Frisians, whose language of the time (Old Frisian) was distinctly differant than Alt-Saxonish, and is in fact the closest relative of Old English. The Frisians lived in the coastal regions of the Jutes, Angles and Saxons, and still do to this day.
They will always skip little details. To this day England is still just pushed by London, it is not a British idea nor do any of the other versions of Britain like it or appreciate it. For Spain our history is told by the London language all distorted, only negatives, still trying to split the country, invade people, consider themselves a empire, yet they will never mention anything negative about themselves, push for their own unity while ruling people on their own Island. It is a curse to the planet that tells the world we would of never had it better with anyone else.
@@aldosigmann419 If you guys push your own identiy underground like Northern Ireland was forced to, the Welsh, the Scots... then they may not skip you in the future, but be prepared to have every aspect of your history told how they want the world to hear it.
When my brother was an officer in the Royal Netherlands Navy, he was assigned for one year to a patrol boat of the navy that was involved in fishery inspection on the North Sea. One day they were at a Scottish fishing town where the local population spoke a language that nobody could understand, except for two Dutch sailors onboard who were... of Frisian descend! 😃
As someone of English ancestry, it feels awesome to learn about my ancestors, just wish we had more sources and a better understanding of the Anglo Saxon period, especially pre-christianity, I wanna see just how similar our ancestors' beliefs were to their cousins across the North Sea
I mean back then Saxons on both sides of the sea weren't mere cousins but saw themselves as the same people or tribe living in seperate kindoms, that's at least what I got from studying early medieval german history
*"Germanic vs Scandinavian Tribes. How different were they?"* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qbMVD1ywf60.html *"Norse/Germanic Ancestry and Religion in the British Isles"* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JH0tWnGYtVk.html *"The Different Germanic Tribes"* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-FYJZqDsY2mY.html&t
All of us. Be it Norse, continental "Germanic" tribes or the Anglo-Saxons of England. We ALL worshipped the same pantheon. Names may alter somewhat by region, i.e. - Wotan/Woden/Odin or Thurisaz/Thunor/Thor and so on. As would rituals and so on. But all believed in the Aesir. I am 48 and have been "Pagan" since 12 yrs old. I am also English and Swedish with a drop of Danish. So I studied all aspects of my Pagan ancestry. So that's that. I hope it helps. I know it's a short answer. But it is what i know to be true. Cheers.
@@ipoopexelence survive the jive is a far right schizophrenic. Although, let’s be honest: I’d expect nothing less from someone who identifies as a devout pagan in the modern day
I'm Dutch but my sister had one of those dna test done and it showed we were 33% northern European and 43% English. This pretty much explains why, they are both from the same area
We're all so closely related in NW Europe, these DNA tests can often give conflicting results. Ancestry DNA seem overly keen to include a lot of NW European DNA into their 'Scottish' group.@@MJW238
Apparently there were a lot of Brythonic tribes that originated from the Belgic people too, that may be a link.. as you are Dutch and Belgium is close by.
bro, even as a slavic person, when i hear the saxon word "sek", i think of the russian (and probably in other slavic languages) the word "sech" which also means "to cut". It is truly crazy how this is either a large coincidence, or, and what I believe to be more accurate, is that our european roots are not as different as we really think...
crazy to think also how words evolve from other words because sek/sech means "to cut" and i thought of the word section which kind of in a way has a similar correlation in meaning
All of them are Indo-european languages! They did in fact come all from the same ""tribe"" so to speak! It too fascinates me to see similarities between languages thought to be so different! It's a constant reminder of their shared roots!
Living thousands of kilometers away but I can relate that word with Indian Arya language words cērā, cheraa, sinnya which all mean "to cut" "divide" etc. We also use "Kartan" "Kata" "Katna" etc words for cut in different Arya languages in India. It's no such a big thing that's because of the Aryan invasion of Euro Native population and their displacement.
The term seax is used specifically for a type of small sword, knife or dagger typical of the Germanic peoples of the Migration Period and the Early Middle Ages, especially the Saxons, whose name derives from the weapon. Before the Migration Period the Romans also fought the Germanic Dacians on the Danube. The Dacian falx came in two sizes: one-handed and two-handed. The shorter variant was called sica (sickle) in the Dacian language. The blade was sharpened only on the inside and was reputed to be devastatingly effective.
In England when I was growing up we learned about the Angles and Saxons but never really were taught about the Jutes (as far as I remember, maybe a small mention), this period ended in 1066 when William the Conquer beat Harold Godwinson at the battle of Hastings
The modern German state of Saxony has nothing to do with the Saxons of ancient past. It just got the name because of some noblility which transferred the name onto this region. Only the modern day "Lower Saxony" can be called real Saxons.
Yes, Lower Saxony, a small part of western Saxony-Anhalt, the northeast of the Netherlands and the southwest of Holstein form the former Saxony. The border between the Saxon people and the Angle people is the river Eider. Today's Free State of Saxony, historically also known as the Electorate of Saxony or Upper Saxony, has nothing in common with the historical Saxon people in the Low German-speaking area - apart from the name: the ancestors of the inhabitants of today's Free State of Saxony spoke Central German or Sorbian dialects.
Thank you for stating that you don’t know the difference between ethnicity and nationality. For example, if someone British emigrates to the US, they do not become Native American. This is akin to saying that a Japanese person moving to South Africa would become Bantu. Nationality can change through emigration, but ethnicity, which is based on ancestral and cultural heritage, does not. Therefore, you cannot be considered part of an ethnic group by moving to a different country, only your nationality can change.
@4:07 it's worth pointing that the most likely correct pronunciation of the 'Jutes' would be 'Yutes' as the Germans pronounce the letter 'J' with the 'Y' sound
English are Germanic not British or Brits the original Brits are the Welsh even the Picts in today's Scotland were a Scandinavian tribe 2300 years ago. It was the Picts that raided today's Ireland in the 2nd century working with the Scotii ❤
Yep! Unfortunately due to the way the video is structured (and the forthcoming series, there will be more parts!) the Frisians have had to take a backseat somewhat in this one. They will certainly appear in the next episodes, especially when we cover Frisian settlement in Kent. Given as the 'heptarchy' is generally thought of as predominantly Angle, Saxon and Jute dominated and the Frisians had no Kingdom of their own in England, they'll be treated more of an 'accessory' to the others - Specifically the Jutes who the Frisians often mingled with and lived alongside. It certainly confuses it more that the Jutes may have indeed come from Frisia, meaning that many Jutes may have been Frisian and visa versa. - the Narrator 😊
Assassin's Creed Valhalla makes a joke about that ahah the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings are commenting how their words for certain things are very similar "as if they were cousins or something" ahah
No, that was like 300 years later! During that time, the Anglo-Saxons had fused together with the native Britons to create an entirely new language and culture; also, Christianity had since made its way to England and the Anglo-Saxons were completely Christianised; the days of worshipping Woden, Thor and Freya were long gone. You have to think, 300 years is an incredibly long time, for example: just think of how much has changed since the year 1724 to 2024.
Even though sounds are spelled differently in modern English and Low German, there are still many words in English and Low German that are similar or even identical. Languages change over the centuries, so it is still better to compare Old Low German with Old English than with the modern languages we speak today. Angles, Saxons and Jutes spoke the same West Germanic language at that time. The Danish language only came to Jutland 200 years after the settlement of England, when Danes assimilated with Jutes.
I’m not sure that people whose families have been on this island for less than 50 years can claim to be equally British as those who have called it home for over 1000.
@@ollietedd295 It's not just the passage of time, (which does play a factor btw) its also the case, in my view, that assimilating ethnic foreigners of European descent is possible if done in small enough numbers to assimilate them genetically and culturally, but importing alien races to Europe from completely different cultures in large numbers is non-sustainable and they can't be "made" British, rather they begin to change British identity to a multi-racial one, the Brazilifcation of Britain.
@@ollietedd295 Integration, which requires the passage of time. By that I mean the shared values, culture, sense of home. It doesn’t need to take 50 years, but when you live in an ethnic enclave, speaking a different language, watching different TV, supporting foreign sports teams, following different cultural norms to the majority of the population, that’s not British.
@@buddhachimp9226 how would you describe the Anglo Saxon migration to England then? Was that non-sustainable? There's no fixed idea of British there never has and there never will be. Modern migrations are just the latest and may I add as far as migrations go they have been peaceful and rather successful. You said it yourself time is needed for proper integration and we are still in the early days so just be patient.
When you refer to the German state of Saxony ( Sachsen) which is a lot further south than the original homeland of the Saxons, it's may be interesting to know that there are 3 states in modern Germany which are called Saxony. ( Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Lower Saxony ) The latter two span all over northern Germany and are more or less identical with the historic duchy of Saxony and cover also parts of the original homeland of the early saxons.
"Britain to day is a multicultural island............" That's where you have failed, miserably. There is no such thing as 'muticulturalism', as one culture needs to be the defining leader in any situation. If you don't define yourself as at the very least 'British', you will soon be calling yourselves 'muslim' by default. I'm embarrassed to say that I was born on that island. I'm not British...I'm ENGLISH,. and there is no other 'culture' that belongs on that island, other than Irish and Scottish.
The British are an AngloCeltic nation of people. It’s preposterous to call Africans and Asians British. Ethnically and culturally they are entirely different.
The Saxons, Frisians, Jutes and Angles are sometimes collectively called the 'Ingaevones' and this may be a derivative of Angles. Some sources have even claimed that there is an island near southern Denmark called Anglen where the Angles originated from.
No, Angel [Ang-el] or Angeln is actually a peninsula just South of the present (!) day Danish - German border in Southern Slesvig / Schleswig - facing the Baltic Sea towards the East. It is situated at the East coast of the most Southern part of the much larger Jutland peninsula.
The German state of "Saxony" in the east of Gemany has nothing whatsoever to do with the Saxons. It is a name-borowing by August the Strong. The Saxons lived in the North West of Germany (Schleswig-Holstein, Lower Saxony and Westphalia). They were besieged by the Franks, who lived in the Netherlands, Belgium and Rhineland, . The real Saxons spoke Low German. The Franks spoke Franconian from which Dutch and the German dialects along the Rhine originate from. Today's people of Saxony speak a high German dialect while the people in the Franconian region speak a German that did not undergo the High German Sound Shift-
Well done with the wokery, but I take exception to your facile declaration that "the past, of course, was no different... The British have a proud heritage of being made up of migratory people..." The immigration of the Angle. Saxon and Jutes totally destroyed the Celtic culture of, what became, England. The invasion of the Anglo-Saxons and Jutes was, in effect, an ethnic genocide pushing the Celts to the extremities of the British Isles. After this there was no mass immigration to the British Isles for over 1,000 years. True, there were minor settlements that included the Normans (who were, of course, Viking/Norsemen, a group that had already settled parts of the British Isles,) Huguenot French and other smaller groups up to the settlement of West Indians and people of the Indian subcontinent in the late twentieth century. But none of these peoples formed a big enough group to change the ethnicity or culture of the British Isles. My main point is that the mass immigration of the last fifteen years is of a totally different scale to anything that has happened in the last thousand years or more. It is simply not true that the "British have a proud heritage of being made up of migratory people." The culture/s of the British Isle have been settled for over a thousand years.
We have had 1000 years to consolidate into our own ethnicity and have proved we are a powerful tribe. The mass immigration since WW2 is irrelevant to our ethnicity as they have formed themselves into autonomous communities with no mixing with the indigenous. We have voluntary apartheid.
And at least the immigrants in the past, Celts, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Jutes, Vikings and Normans were all native to the continent of Europe, unlike the immigrants of the present time.
Yes, sort of in a sense - and East Anglia in England really ought to be renamed West Anglia, since we already have an Anglia over here 😂 ( Angel / Anglen - a peninsula just South of the present (!) day Danish - German border - facing the Baltic Sea to the East ).
What? No. The Danes invaded England like 300 years later; during that time, the invading Anglo-Saxons - with the native Britons - had fused together to create an entirely new culture and language. England had also underwent full Christianisation. The people the invading Dane’s encountered were VERY different people to the ones that had left Denmark 300 years later.
@@chrisstucker1813 I mean on genetic level, not cultural level. Do Saxon & Danes have common genetic markers? I would say yes as they all originated from the area.
@@thepiratepenguin4465 Saxons were from northern Germany weren’t they? Some were from southern Scandinavia, but the Angles and Jutes were definitely from Scandinavia.
@@MiloManning05 You know nothing, Spanish tribes got to England between 6,000 and 7,000 years ago. A bit of simple research and you'll find out. Google "Iberians in Britain" for a start.
@@MiloManning05 The Google search result, and that's confirmed from various sources. About 2000 years B.C. pre-celtic people had already settled in Great Britain. These were called the Iberians. Probably they came from Spain, which was also called the Iberian penisula.
That is a common misunderstanding. There were no Iberians who migrated to Britain, but the Neolithic peoples who migrated into Britain from northern France did carry the Iberian DNA signatures. BTW most of the British and Irish peoples are decended from the Bell Beaker Folk of the early Bronze Age and they eventually replaced the Neolithic population to 10% of its original level. Very few Continental Celts came to Britain during the Iron Age and of course the Anglo-Saxon migrations were the second largest migration into Britain. Roughly 40% of English DNA derives from the combined Anglo-Saxon and Danish migrations into Britain.
You can’t be both ! If you were born in England you are English. British is not a nationality. I am not British as I am a Scot so that makes me Scottish. Where you are born decides your nationality.
I live in the German state of Saxony (Sachsen). Some people around here think that means the Anglo-Saxons had some connection to this region. And they find linguistic examples to make it sound possible, such as the fact that "water" is said here in the local dialects instead of "wasser" (from high German). There are many other examples. Some of it is about the accent, such as the vowel pronunciations. .
1) Saxons migrated from Lower Saxony and later united new England (Old England was in Germany, in modern peninsula Anglia), the first king of new England was Saxon. 2) Plautdietsch language in Germany comes from the Old Saxon language, it's related to Frisian, Anglic because of their Ingvaeonic roots. Old Jutish also was related, but we don't have modern speakers (assimilated by Danes) and language records. Plautdietsch: ik lev di English: i love thee
Unfortunately the Saxons in question would have been Saxons from the State now known as Lower Saxony. The Historic borders of "saxony" has shifted around, yet Lower Saxony specifically is where the Saxons who migrated to Britain would have been from.
No, there are no linguistic connections to today's "new" Saxony. Today's Saxony has nothing to do with the old Saxony in northern Germany. The ancient Saxons spoke the old Low German language, which was very closely related to Old English. The land of the ancient Saxons lay in what are now the German states of Lower Saxony, southern Schleswig-Holstein, western Saxony-Anhalt and, to a lesser extent, the north-eastern Netherlands. Today's "new" Saxony got its name from the Wettins, whose family roots go back to old Saxony. The tribes that settled in the "new" Saxony were mainly Frankish tribes and assimilated Slavs.
Cool video - I've always wondered what my genetic makeup actually is. DNA results just show 99% Western European and 1% Finnish. It was unsurprising as I have always deeply loved steam rooms so it was just verification some Viking snuck in at some point
@@allu3853 "Finns originate between the Volga, Oka and Kama rivers in what is now Russia. The genetic basis of future Finns also emerged in this area. There have been at least two noticeable waves of migration to the west by the ancestors of Finns, which is also shared by Turks and Mongols"
This is a great video! It's very informative and to the point. It's also interesting to see you using the CK3 map and characters, I haven't seen a history video do that before but it gives it a very unique feel which I think more people need to use. It's interesting for me to see just how different modern-day English culture is to continental Germanic cultures such as German, Norwegian, and Danish, assumedly due to the Norman takeover of the Kingdom. I wonder what it'd be like if England repelled the Normans, or even if the Norwegians took over. English culture and language today would probably be much more similar to their Germanic cousins, and the language more like Anglish. (The purely Germanic form of English)
Thank you so much! The game assets are too good to be wasted, they make the content 100x better! I've once seen a youtube video comparing modern english to a creole language from the amount of non-germanic vocabulary it uses, IIRC it's like only 26% germanic? which is even lower than the % of latin borrowed words! The british melting pot culture is such an interesting concept!
@@KnowHistory Really? I heard it was around 50% Germanic but only around 25-30% pure English with the rest of the Germanic words coming from Norse and Danish. I'll have to look into it more, but if it really is only 26% Germanic it definitely would lean closer to a creole language.
@@KnowHistory Ah well I'm a bit embarrassed now, English is only 26% percent Germanic! Bit of a shock to me, although I think it is interesting to note the divide between when Germanic words are used and when French/Latin words are used. 80 of the 100 most commonly used English words are Germanic in origin, and I've noticed most of the words used in normal conversation are largely Germanic. However, things such a professions, titles, new inventions and country names come from either French or Latin origin, which could be a remnant of the divide between the largely Anglo-Saxon lower class of the medieval ages contrasted with the Norman French nobility which spoke only French until around the late 1400's. Interesting to think about!
@@DonFlufflesPrime Accordng to some graphs i saw yes! they might be biased the the fact that it might be more latin than german is very impressive on its own right!
A fun thing to consider is that although the word Saxon almost definitely refers to the “seax”, it’s also later the case that Saxon became a racial pejorative word in Celtic languages. Sasunnach was used by the Scots, Sasanach by the Irish, Saeson by the Welsh, and Sawsnek by the Cornish.
In only a little longer than five minutes this historical lesson capsulates the absurdity when AH☠️ failed to end hostile action against England after Dunkirk. He KNEW enough that they were.. 'family'! He had the 'land'.. they had the 'sea'. "Let's settle"🤘 Coulda, Woulda, SHOULDA....
The jocks forget that Robert the Bruce was of Norman descent, but being originated from the Vikings the whole Anglo Saxon & Norse settlers in the U.K. & Ireland are genetically the same
Now the colored hebrew israelite movement is going around telling a straight up lie about how the Anglo Saxons were black along with the Emperors of Japan and Norse Jarls. History revisionist need to be stopped.
@@Haijwsyz51846 Wrong, where did you get that from? English is a Germanic language which only uses the Latin ALPHABET. French also, but it is more influenced by Latin in the language itself
Thank you for showing the coastlines of my homeland (the German-Danish border region) as they probably were 1500 years ago. Floods, rising water level and human activity such as dike-building and regaining land from the sea (by catchig and withholding the silt in the water during ebb tide with bundles of twigs) have changed them so much. About the present use of the geographical name "Sachsen". In the early days of the West-Frankish and then later German Kingdom we had several territorial dukes or earls who finally came to the conclusion that one of them should be King to defend the realm against the Magyars (Hungarians) whch were then the biggest threat. Saxony was one of them. The Saxon rulers expanded their territory gradually across the Elbe river and upstream into the region that holds the name "Sachsen" to the present day. And that is why we make the distinction between "Obersachsen"= "Upper Saxony" further inland and "Lower Saxony" ="Niedersachsen" in the North German plains towards the sea. After WW II "Niedersachsen" was chosen as a name for the newly formed "Land" that had once been the territory of the House of Hanover plus other smaller bits and pieces that had become mostly Prussian territory after 1866. The state of Prussia was dissolved by the Allies after 1945 and the geographical term "Niedersachsen" was chosen instead of some historical expression. Well, and there is still "Sachsen-Anhalt" in between with Magdeburg at its capital.
Are you sure of your facts here. In an upcoming BBC drama half of them are black or asian and most of their head people and bravest warriors are women.
Sorry but I don't know why you put those other cultures in the beginning of the video first they're not even English and they don't even belong in England
Your haplogroup is: I Born between 35 and 28 thousand years ago, haplogroup I represents one of the first peoples of Europe, having several descendant lineages that spread throughout the European territory during the last Ice Age, having its maximum frequency in the Balkans. It is one of the most numerous haplogroups among European males, being the second largest paternal lineage found on the continent (second only to the R lineage). Its I1 branch is related to Nordic Europe, ancestor of Germanic tribes and Vikings, while I2 is strongly related to Neolithic cultures. Y-chromosomal Adam 160 to 120 thousand years A: Africa 140 to 90 thousand years BT: Africa 85 to 60 thousand years CT: Africa 80 to 60 thousand years CF: Leaving Africa 75 to 60 thousand years F: Leaving Africa 62 to 57 thousand years IJ: Haplogroup parent of I and J 45 to 30 thousand years I: Eastern Eurasia 35 to 28 thousand years.
An Angle is a name for a Bull Calf - ero the Bull Men hence cometh the name the British Bull Dog which was used to bring the Bull or cow down to the ground! The Angel derives from the Hebrew N- GL - Sh, therefore, by adding the vowels we get the name EN- GAL-ISH = English Don't you know that God is an Englishman! The Saxons are Isacc-son or Sons of Isacc. The Jutes from the Tribe of Judah
Angarion isthe roman word used for the despatch riders of Germanic tribal origin who maintained the imperial postal and haulage system in Roman Britain that is where the name Angle originates These kinfolk settled in England but maintained links with the germanic tribes who were their kin. Some retired back to their kin folk in Angeln. Angeln is named after the people not the other way round
Cultural migration study is where it's at. I think we get too caught up on political bounderies. I began doing more human migration studies after I got my DNA results. I'm a Euro-Mut, but there were surprises...and I have done genealogy for 15+ years now, so they aren't *those* kinds of surprises either.
@@KnowHistory I meant to reply to this earlier...but Checkout the Geneavlogger RU-vid Channel. He does a series on RU-vidrs who want to explore their DNA/Genealogy. His day job is in forensic DNA analysis. I bet he'd be up for a callab!
A lot of current "multi-cultural" and "diversity and inclusion" ideological nonsense spouted in the opening remarks to this video. I had to switch it off.
Oh dear, a woke history of Anglo Saxons that somehow includes Caribbeans😂, immigration from India and the Carribbean are recent and only a tiny part of our long history
Most of the kings of Europe are from Germany, but they fought each other in the Middle Ages, and in modern times, such as World War I and II, they seem to hate each other
Anglo-Norman. That is quite insulting. Anglo-Saxon and Norman. Not one group. And the Vikings? Were they down the pub or something. As for multicultural, we are 87.5 white Germanic Viking or Celt. No, not very multicultural, really.
@@johnbattle7518 western Denmark is the jutland peninsula. And the people here are called jutes in English. In Danish we say its Jylland, and the People living here are Jyder. It's kinda funny for me to think that the danes originated in southern sweden/Sealand and then took over the jutes and angles. Then later lost 50% of the Danes homeland to the swedes
first the name saxon don´t come from a knife its from a Axe and they still life in the same region with the Name lower saxony. The other part called saxon today is only the place where the Duke of Saxony build a new capital.
I'm from Wexford in Ireland and we have an extinct language called "Yola" its also called the Forth and Bargy dialect, is a mix of Flemish, Welsh, Irish Gaelic, and of course, English. These influences come from the many colonists that have occupied the areas over the many centuries
Something I’ve been thinking about, you talk about how Britain is now home to a host of other ethnic groups as if it were a good thing, but when the britains/celts were pushed out of their home by the anglos, saxons, and jutes, it was certainly a violent process that left the natives disenfranchised. Considering this, why should we be happy about migrants replacing native Brits?
It wasn't always violent. Of course, there was savage warfare and atrocities - after all - this is the medieval period. But there was also heavy intermixing between the Briton and Germanic migrators. Do you think it was just the Britons vs Anglo-Saxons? Haha, no, Britons were also fighting each other for whatever power and authority they could get their hands on. The Anglo-Saxons simply came out on top, then language and culture flourished. Some of the Anglo-Saxon kings even had Brythonic names, hell, the founder of the kingdom of the WEST SAXONS (Wessex) had a name which of Celtic origin - Cerdic - thought to originate from the Brythonic word "Caradoc". Penda of Mercia - one of the greatest Anglo-Saxon kings of the Dark Ages - had a name of Welsh origin! What does all this tell you?
But one thing: please don't write North-Germany all over the Danish part of the Angles. That for sure was only for a short time in history when Bismark took a part from Denmark in 1864. We got some of it back again in 1920. Some 1500 years ago, you can't even name Germany as a country at all. When we talk about Germanic, it is a language thing. English is West-Germanic, Scandinavian is North-Germanic. East-Germanic practically vanished. You would never never never, in the UK, show a map of the UK and write GERMANY all over that area. Please don't do that on the map of my country :)
I would love to see a video on the early Anglo Saxon kings and the Normans... and kings with descriptive name titles like Edward the confessor...(and the times these people lived). Early English kings are such a puzzle and fascinating I think because they are so distant from our own time
