bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
What about if you can trace your lineage back to Roman Britain and you are a descendent of a Roman Legionnaire who actually hails from Gaul? Still native?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What about if you can trace your lineage back to Roman Britain and you are a descendent of a Roman Legionnaire who actually hails from Gaul? Still native?
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,218
Hey hang on, that’s a huge jump and not what I’ve said at all.
I’ve defined Native already, Amir Khan would be welcome in my area and I’ve specifically said British citizens should be treated exactly the same, regardless of background.
So why the post above mate?
Oh, I don't know...
I’ve described how I’d define native population above. A lineage that stretches back centuries to that part of the world is native in my eyes.
I don’t think it unreasonable to be welcoming to immigrants but to hold a view that the native population of this country remain the majority number.
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,218
You’ve got a wild imagination Bob.
I’d probably just ask him about his boxing career.
Is that before or after you tell him he is not a native of this country?
west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 31,919
Just read the last few pages and noted that native Americans are used as an example. Interestingly native Americans make up roughly 1% of the US population. Similarly indigenous Australians make up 3% of the Australian population. If we define native English as Anglo Saxon we're on about 37%, so there can't be many places in this country that has a majority native population so it's all a bit pointless even mentioning it.
And weren't the Angles and Saxons German?
And weren't the Angles and Saxons German?
D
D
Deleted member 77198
Guest
You’re just making stuff up now. The lad said “traced her ancestry back to Norman England”, that is a period in time. He never said “traced her Ancestry and found out she has Norman genes”.This is a great thread btw. Trans discussion yesterday. You can only be English ‘if you have French blood’ today.
Top stuff.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well if my lineage has been on this island since the days of Roman Britain then that’s nearly 2000 years.What about if you can trace your lineage back to Roman Britain and you are a descendent of a Roman Legionnaire who actually hails from Gaul? Still native?
D
D
Deleted member 77198
Guest
You can’t really be native English because English isn’t an ethnicity, it’s a language. Anglo-Saxons are not native Britons. Angles and Saxons are from two separate areas that are not really anywhere near each other as well. One is where Southern Denmark is now and the other is where Central Germany is now.Just read the last few pages and noted that native Americans are used as an example. Interestingly native Americans make up roughly 1% of the US population. Similarly indigenous Australians make up 3% of the Australian population. If we define native English as Anglo Saxon we're on about 37%, so there can't be many places in this country that has a majority native population so it's all a bit pointless even mentioning it.
People doing their DNA over the last decade or more are finding that we have a lot less Angle Saxon Frisian Jute or Norse genes than we thought we did anyway, we are finding that our DNA is very strong with ancient Britons. You’d probably be more scientifically/genealogically accurate to call an Englishman a Welsh-Scot than an Anglo-Saxon.
BobKowalski
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2007
- Messages
- 20,218
You’re just making stuff up now. The lad said “traced her ancestry back to Norman England”, that is a period in time. He never said “traced her Ancebrry and found out she has Norman genes”.
Yeah, because that is sooo much better...not.
A disingenuous point regarding Anglo Saxons.Just read the last few pages and noted that native Americans are used as an example. Interestingly native Americans make up roughly 1% of the US population. Similarly indigenous Australians make up 3% of the Australian population. If we define native English as Anglo Saxon we're on about 37%, so there can't be many places in this country that has a majority native population so it's all a bit pointless even mentioning it.
And weren't the Angles and Saxons German?
That figure is the percentage of Anglo Saxon DNA is in modern English people, not how many Anglo Saxons there are in the population.
It’s the most significant DNA group in English people in 2021.
PannickAtTheDisco
Well-Known Member
Now?You’re just making stuff up now. The lad said “traced her ancestry back to Norman England”, that is a period in time. He never said “traced her Ancestry and found out she has Norman genes”.