The English and the Celts - no genocide?

[ambrosius]

You assume that the population crash takes place before the Anglo-Saxon arrival.

Not at all. I see no population crash at, never have.

Okay. I guess you were paraphrasing Autun, paraphrasing Harke (or
something) instead.

I see a decline that set in during Late Roman times, as in much of the West, causing all kinds of trouble to the Roman tax-gatherers. It’s very difficult to see how fast or slow this decline actually was, so I don’t presume to say anything about ‘population crashes’ or things like that. But there were for sure a good deal less Britons by 600 AD than there were in 300 AD, for all kinds of reasons, war, climate, plague being surely among them.

Well we can agree on that.

Indeedy! Harke thinks that's why the Anglo-Saxons came here in such large numbers - deluging of their coastal farmlands. And although some may claim that not as many as 1-2 million could have come here in the 5th & 6th centuries, if you include all the coastal farmland in a zone from the Pas de Calais up through Holland and Denmark and include Sweden and Norway as being likely origins of some migrants, that is an enormous area.

I find it odd that all those who see these folks taking to their ships when their fields get wet, never even assume that these folks would look for higher ground first, instead of seeking out a hostile island that was even more prone to flooding! :lol:
After all, we see the first traces of these migrants all along the coast – not just British, but also Gallic shores. Strange, if you’re fleeing from the flood. Aren’t we just looking at migrants who seek out new shores for altogether different reasons, as the Vikings did later?

It's a question of evidence, though, Robert, not assumptions. Nobody
should be assuming anything. The evidence shows a depopulation of the
coastal regions of Holland, Germany, Denmark etc. There is no
corresponding evidence for migration inland - towards the migrating
Huns and Franks (and nor should that surprise us). There IS
evidence for English speakers arriving here, though. A lot of them.
In such numbers as to be the majority speakers. Also, what is your
evidence for Britain being even more liable to flooding? That's a new
one to me. :lol:

And I see you go on then to admit that we see the first traces of these
migrants on the British and Gallic shores. Thanks for the admission. 8)
And why should it surprise you that their first landfall is on the coastline?
If their travelling by boat, then how would you suggest they reach their
next landfall - by flying inland 100 miles to the nearest mountain? :lol:
As to your comparrison between Anglo-Saxons and Vikings... that sounds
like what I've been saying for years: that they were the virtual
prototypes of the Vikings, in many, many ways. 8)

As Harke, himself points out: We know that these regions became depopulated at this time. If they weren't all coming to Britain, then there must be many thousands of longboats lying at the bottom of the North sea! :lol:

“There must beâ€