Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you think all the people of the British Isles could be considered a meta-ethnicity now, much in the same sense Danes, Swedes and Norwegians are very much subgroups of the same Scandinavian people in certain ways, or in the way Czechs and Slovaks and Germans and Austrians are close blood?
According to the POBI project, the people of central and southern England form a homogenous population, but all around the Celtic periphery, in Cornwall, Wales, Scotland lie small clusters of genetically different populations that have maintaned their identity for generations. Now we know for sure that Celtic peoples were never homogenous. The difference between north and south Wales genetically is much greater than that between those of northern and southern England.
Yes, I agree with Anhytik, Britain ( and Eire) feels the same, mainly on looks and interests, history and attitude. The Celts, Gaels, Saxons, Norse, Danes, Picts have all merged, generally, % terms depends on where you live. But a true Briton would be dark brown haired, blue/green eyed. Or, Dark brown haired and brown eyed. But there is a look... which since massive Polish immigration makes native Brits stand out by a mile.
Contrary to your beliefs, the Southern France/Iberian genetical contributions to the earliest British indigenous populace is minimal according to the recent studies done!
Sorry but I just have to reply. An indigenous Briton would be someone who has long term ancestry in the UK on both sides. They would have all known ancestry in Britain going back generations. Even someone with an Italian Grandmother would not be an indigenous Briton. I think a lot of dna studies are being done at the moment because in the future it will be very difficult to find people in countries without recent ancestry from other areas.
They are doing a dna study in Ireland called the Irish DNA Atlas and it will be the same as the People of the British Isles Project. To participate in the Irish DNA Atlas you have to have all 8 Great Grandparents from the same county not just Irish. So someone like me wouldn't be able to participate in this because while I'm fully Irish I have 3 grandparents from 3 different counties in Ireland.
They are very stringent because otherwise they wouldn't get an accurate snapshot of the "indigenous population" and be able to look at ancient population movements. There are of course all types of different people in Europe from the last 60 years but someone who was half English and half Nigerian wouldn't be used as an English or Nigerian example because they have obvious mixed ancestry. It has nothing to do with being racist or exclusionary but obviously for population genetics and other studies they have to have examples of "native or indigenous people" to be able to see where these people plot in relation to their neighbours etc. The PoBI study was not only used for studying the genetics of the British people but will also be used for health studies and medications.
I think you do know what is meant by "indigenous" easthome and this is not criteria from any poster here but what geneticists label as indigenous. The reason why they use people with all grandparents or great grandparents in an area is because there was very little population movement about 100 years ago and many people didn't even leave their villages so they hope to get an accurate result of the genetics of the population they are studying. They check these people's paperwork to make sure it is accurate.
Any reasonable person knows what is meant by indigenous. The indigenous population of where I live are the Australian Aborigine. An Australian of European descent is not an indigenous Australian. This doesn't mean they can't be called Australian but an indigenous Australian can only be an Australian Aboriginal.
You can read about the criteria for the Irish DNA Atlas here.
"It's difficult to find participants who fit this tight criterion," Dr Gianpiero Cavalleri, who leads the project at the RCSI, told Irish Genealogy News. "But the logic behind it is to make an individual's genetic signature representative of a particular part of Ireland. It takes us back to what the genetic structure might have looked like in the 1850s, when people tended to be born, marry and die within restricted geographical boundaries." - See more at: Irish Genealogy News: Irish DNA Atlas project enters analysis phase
Fair enough, but ALL people in Britain have immigrant ancestry, so how long does a persons family have to be born in Britain before they can call themselves indigenous? Could a black skinned person say they are indigenous to Britain after 100 years of having pure British ancestors? 200 years? 5000 years? 1.5 million years? Or will it never be so because their skin is not the 'right' colour?
Fair enough, but ALL people in Britain have immigrant ancestry, so how long does a persons family have to be born in Britain before they can call themselves indigenous? Could a black skinned person say they are indigenous to Britain after 100 years of having pure British ancestors? 200 years? 5000 years? 1.5 million years? Or will it never be so because their skin is not the 'right' colour?
Hello! Wake-up! Britain, Ireland and the rest of Northern Europe were repopulated only 11,000 years ago after the last Glacial Age. Those first inhabitants were the indigenous people, to this day, the majority of British and Irish are their descendants. Now do you even know, what's meant by a Black person, is someone who has full or partial ancestry African ancestry, so how can they have pure British ancestry? They cannot and that's a fact. A person who has both Black and White ancestry is not indigenous to either Europe or Africa, but represents both, which is actually very beautiful. Now they can be British/Irish citizens but this doesn't mean that they're indigenous. Stop playing the "racial" card, when facing the facts.
Mind you that girl looks Polish to me. He looks like Alex Higgins
You know what's funny if this girl is look "Polish" according to you. Which I know, she looks so Celtic (her features).
Then these Irish rugby players from Cork in southwest Ireland, look what to you?. Remember that part of Ireland most likely has the lowest Germanic genetic input of the British Isles.
Fair enough, but ALL people in Britain have immigrant ancestry, so how long does a persons family have to be born in Britain before they can call themselves indigenous? Could a black skinned person say they are indigenous to Britain after 100 years of having pure British ancestors? 200 years? 5000 years? 1.5 million years? Or will it never be so because their skin is not the 'right' colour?
All people everywhere have moved around if you look back into history but most populations haven't had a significant enough population replacement to change their genetics. The biggest population replacement in Europe occurred approximately 5,000 years ago with people from the Steppes called Yamnaya making a significant change in European genetics.
Anyone can call themselves British if they were born there but most people know what indigenous means. I don't use terminology like "pure" but they can look at your genetic profile and tell very accurately what ancestry you have. The majority of populations have been quite stable for significant periods of times to develop certain traits.
The questions you ask are more social or cultural questions. When people are talking about sciences like Anthropology or Genetics they are using a different criteria.
Hello! Wake-up! Britain, Ireland and the rest of Northern Europe were repopulated only 11,000 years ago after the last Glacial Age. Those first inhabitants were the indigenous people, to this day, the majority of British and Irish are their descendants. Now do you even know, what's meant by a Black person, is someone who has full or partial ancestry African ancestry, so how can they have pure British ancestry? They cannot and that's a fact. A person who has both Black and White ancestry is not indigenous to either Europe or Africa, but represents both, which is actually very beautiful. Now they can be British/Irish citizens but this doesn't mean that they're indigenous. Stop playing the "racial" card, when facing the facts.
This is nonsense EVERY single person in Britain has at some point had an ancestor from elsewhere, whether in Europe or in the wider world. Do you seriously think that the majority of British people can trace a 'pure' British bloodline back 11,000 years! That's crazy! So if ALL British people have had an ancestor from elsewhere OTHER than the British Isles in the last 11,000 years are they still 'pure' British as long as they're white? Are they indigenous as long as their forefathers came from the islands for at least 11,000 years!!! What about if at some point 2000 years ago a Roman impregnated my great great great great great great grandmother am I still 'indigenous' British? Am I no longer a 'pure' Anglo-Saxon? You simply look at people in terms of colour and then make outrages claims about their whole heritage - its ridiculous, people in this world (particularly Europe) are VERY VERY mixed and you simply CANNOT claim that if somebody is blond then they are more Swedish than somebody who is dark and living in Sweden IT IS NOT THAT SIMPLE.
This is nonsense EVERY single person in Britain has at some point had an ancestor from elsewhere, whether in Europe or in the wider world. Do you seriously think that the majority of British people can trace a 'pure' British bloodline back 11,000 years! That's crazy! So if ALL British people have had an ancestor from elsewhere OTHER than the British Isles in the last 11,000 years are they still 'pure' British as long as they're white? Are they indigenous as long as their forefathers came from the islands for at least 11,000 years!!! What about if at some point 2000 years ago a Roman impregnated my great great great great great great grandmother am I still 'indigenous' British? Am I no longer a 'pure' Anglo-Saxon? You simply look at people in terms of colour and then make outrages claims about their whole heritage - its ridiculous, people in this world (particularly Europe) are VERY VERY mixed and you simply CANNOT claim that if somebody is blond then they are more Swedish than somebody who is dark and living in Sweden IT IS NOT THAT SIMPLE.
If I can put it as clearly as I can. The British indigenous population are the population that lived in the UK mostly before the 2nd World War before there was mass immigration. You are labouring on the topic. Yes indeed now Britain is very mixed with populations from all corners of the globe but to be "indigenous" you would have to have long term ancestry and have all British Grandparents and Great Grandparents born in Britain of British descent. I don't know how easier I can make it.
I have some ancestry from outside Ireland going back about 250 years ago with Huguenot and Scots and yes I do agree most people will have some other ancestry if they go back far enough and can search their ancestry but I'm overwhelmingly Irish and just plot with other Irish people. Most of Europe has been very stable as far as populations for thousands of years. It is only in the last 50 years that there has been a huge change in Europe with populations from all over the world going there.
If I can put it as clearly as I can. The British indigenous population are the population that lived in the UK mostly before the 2nd World War before there was mass immigration. You are labouring on the topic. Yes indeed now Britain is very mixed with populations from all corners of the globe but to be "indigenous" you would have to have long term ancestry and have all British Grandparents and Great Grandparents born in Britain of British descent. I don't know how easier I can make it.
I have some ancestry from outside Ireland going back about 250 years ago with Huguenot and Scots and yes I do agree most people will have some other ancestry if they go back far enough and can search their ancestry but I'm overwhelmingly Irish and just plot with other Irish people. Most of Europe has been very stable as far as populations for thousands of years. It is only in the last 50 years that there has been a huge change in Europe with populations from all over the world going there.
So the children of my (black) kids will be indigenous then? After all all of their Great Grandparents would have been born here? How many people (percentage wise) in the UK would you say have 'pure' British lineage going back 250 years?
So the children of my (black) kids will be indigenous then? After all all of their Great Grandparents would have been born here? How many people (percentage wise) in the UK would you say have 'pure' British lineage going back 250 years?
This is just going around in circles. Why do you keep using a loaded word like 'pure'? What I'm saying is in the context of population genetics and should not be taken personally.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.jpg/220px-Saoirse_Ronan_at_2014_Berlin_Film_Festival_(cropped).jpg)
