BS: Who are the Welsh?

Subject: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:29 PM

Not being rude: at least not yet.

Recent DNA research has shown that the closest relatives to the Welsh are not the Scots and Irish but the Basques. What I missed was the relationship to the Bretons/Cornish.

For as the Bretons are the descendants of Britons who fled from the Anglo-Saxons, if they are not Basque-linked then we must conclude that "England" was a separate society from "Wales" before the Romans ever turned up. The entire myth of the Welsh as the last survivors of the true Celtic people of (the southern bit of) this island is hogwash. Romantic but wrong, as "1066 And All That" said about something else altogether.

Did anyone catch the full story?

Given the mutual joy of the Welsh and English in taking the p**s out of each other, I look forward to the response.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:35 PM

Well nobody knows just how many Britons popped over to Brittany to escape the Anglo-Saxons. Might have just been a few important ones(with bigger swords than the natives)...enough to import their language, but not enough to make much genetic impact. then again, one theory is that the Welsh actually moved down from scotland into Wales(squeezed by the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons from the south andthe Scots from Ireland who all arrived simulatneously in a rather anti-social fashion. I believe there is a lot of literary eveidence to support this view.
    Gentics in Wales is bound to be a bit confusing anyway, due to the practise of interbreeding with animals.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:39 PM

as I understand it - the celts were themselves "invaders" - as they migrated west across Europe

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:41 PM

So how come they don't speak a language even remotely similar to Basque? And why don't they Pelota?

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: greg stephens
Date: 24 Sep 03 - 02:45 PM

In Basque pubs, they all speak Spanish, until a Spaniard comes in, and then they glare at him and start muttering in Basque. You see? Genetics detrmine everything.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 24 Sep 03 - 05:17 PM

There's certainly evidence that (part of) the literary tradition came from the North Britons, but none of mass migration. Which there is in Brittany. If the genetic traces point to a basque-ish origin, this does imply a long-lasting population. The Beaker people? This reminds me of the recent DNA match between prehistoric man in Somerset and a current inhabitant. (Though none of the people I knew in Bristol would have been in the least surprised at that.)

It has long been argued whether the Celts were a population movement or a cultural one: it seems that in Wales it was mainly cultural, whatever it was in the rest of the country. The Cornish and Breton DNA evidence might add more to this - shame no-one seems to have seen this.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: JJ
Date: 27 Sep 03 - 08:13 AM

I thought the Welsh were the Lost Tribe of Simeon.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: okthen
Date: 27 Sep 03 - 08:32 AM

Can we look forward to a Welsh seperatist group?

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: AliUK
Date: 27 Sep 03 - 11:18 PM

To my dismay, I was reading an article about the origins of the british today and found that CELT is actually an 18th century invention, genetically the british population has not changed ( and by this I mean the white non negroid, non-asian british) substantially since about 3,000 b.c. Infact we Brits tend to just take onb the identity and customs of whatever small force happens to bump into the British Isles from time to time, that the anciant britons had no genetic connection with the mainland gauls but yes took up their customs which were then handily adapted by the locals. So to say that the Welsh and Irish are celts would be wrong, the only real celts are bloody french!!

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Bert
Date: 28 Sep 03 - 10:30 AM

AliUk, are there such beasts as white non negroid, non-asian british?

What with British excursions around the world in the time of the Empire and the complete absorbtion of the black population after slavery was abolished then the new influxes from the remnants of the empire.

Your average Brit is probably as genetically mixed as is the language.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: GUEST,sorefingers
Date: 28 Sep 03 - 02:19 PM

Bert - I agree, and did you ever notice how many people will tell stories of their Ukranian grannys or Italian cousins? I think that migrants have been dribbling into Britain for so long there is no one kind of people there.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: HuwG
Date: 28 Sep 03 - 03:19 PM

Going back as far as Julius Caesar and Tacitus, it was noted that many of the inhabitants of the Western parts of Britain resembled the peoples of Spain (or Hispania, as it was then. Remember that this is before waves of Vandals and Berbers overran the country). The inhabitants of the east and south of Britain were big, red-haired people who resembled the Belgae from what is present day Belgium.

Although it is difficult to trace exact movements of populations during the "Dark Ages" after the fall of Rome, there appears to have been some inter-migration between Wales, Cornwall and Brittany, which explains why Welsh and Breton (and the extinct but reviving Cornish) languages have much in common. Likewise there was migration from Ireland to Scotland, which explains why Erse and Gaelic are similar.

Contrary to what AliUK and Bert have suggested above, that the UK is quite a melting pot for DNA, there is evidence that invading cultures (Anglo-Saxon, Viking) displaced the local population rather than intermingled. Here is a link to the BBC programme, Blood of the Vikings, which suggests that this was the case with the Vikings.

There is much resistance amoung people of non-British culture who have emigrated to the UK (I am thinking mainly of Indian, Bangladeshi and Pakistani people here), to losing any of their own cultural integrity. Thisk makes makes marriage between them and "native" Brits uncommon, at the moment anyway. This may well have been the case with mass immigrations in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: AliUK
Date: 28 Sep 03 - 04:53 PM

Ok...here´s a BBC site that explains better what I was trying to say.BBC Pre- history

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: AliUK
Date: 28 Sep 03 - 04:55 PM

which doesn´t seem to be working...so go to www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/prehistory/peoples_01.shtml

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Bert
Date: 28 Sep 03 - 10:45 PM

As a matter of interest, I read somewhere that the red-hair gene (which runs strong in our family) is a Neanderthal gene. Don't know how they figured that out though.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Malcolm Douglas
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 12:27 AM

Neanderthal would be stretching the point a little, perhaps. Back when I was a student, opinion was that the Basque language was a neolithic survival (it is related to no other known language). The British Isles have been inhabited continuously since at least the neolithic period, and, given the relative geographical isolation of the two areas, it would not seem unreasonable that there might be an identifiable genetic link, significant parts at least of both deriving from aboriginal, pre-Celtic populations. Britain adopted Celtic languages and cultural practices (though, it begins to appear, not a great deal of any "Celtic" genetic inheritance) well before written records began, however. The megalithic artefacts that still cover these islands pre-date any Celtic influence.

It is largely a fallacy to suppose that "the Celts" were driven into the West by invading Germanic tribes; the continuity of place-names throughout what is now England suggests that there was rather less movement than used to be thought, and that the linguistic separateness of Wales and Cornwall reflects simply the fact that the new immigrants (and the Romans, for that matter) just didn't get that far. For what it's worth, red hair in my family seems to come from the "English", not the "Scottish" side; and the French idea of a "typical" Englishman is of a man with a pin-stripe suit and umbrella and red hair and freckles.

Who are the Welsh, then? The descendents, as most of us are, of the varied aboriginal inhabitants of the British Isles, who have sometimes adopted, and sometimes absorbed, the languages and customs of a whole series of immigrant groups over the centuries. We are a mongrel race in Britain, made of quite a mixture ("the gutter-sweepings of Europe", somebody once said) and all the healthier for it, I suspect.

The more I learn about the history and traditional culture of these islands, the more irrelevant and fatuous appear the modern, romantic attempts to separate us into isolated racial or national groupings. Simple regional groupings are another matter, perhaps; one town or village will always want to be different, and better, than its neighbour, and it is perfectly natural for recent immigrants to wish, for the time being, to remain separate. Separateness gives way, in time, to a commonality that still recognises distinctness. We have different patterns, but are all, in the end, made of the same cloth.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Santa
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 04:30 AM

Languages do seem to be a rather poor guide to the mass movement of peoples: however the evidence that a lot of Britons stayed on under the Anglo-Saxons does not contradict the equally strong evidence that quite a lot did not.

Moving backwards in time, movement throughout the prehistoric Atlantic culture can have spread genes around the whole littoral: in which case we would expect to see such evidence in Ireland, Scotland, Cornwall and Brittany too. If not, then there is an argument for a distinct origin for the Welsh that precedes the traditional Celtic fringe view. It does not necessarily contradict it.

If these genetic markers are not found in Cornwall and Brittany, then this strongly suggests that at some stage in their history, perhaps pre-Roman Britain or (more likely?) even further back, there was a separate people in Wales, leading to the interesting question - why there? We know that Cornwall was trading tin - what else was going on?

As for "whole cloth" arguments - The DAN evidence suggests that this is simply not true, that we are indeed made up from differing strands. Mongrel indeed, but mongrels are rarely identical. Such a commonality may be desirable socially, but I fail to see much evidence of it actually being present. To the contrary, we seem to rejoice in our differences. (As an example, upon moving into Lancashire I was surprised to find that the rivalry between Yorkshire and Lancashire, a pantomime joke to the rest of the country, is still all too real on the ground.) All the more reason to better understand our origins.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Stu
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 04:48 AM

Okthen wrote: Can we look forward to a Welsh seperatist group?

What about the Sons of Glendwr? They bombed powerstations, set fire to English holiday homes etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 04:58 AM

I'm astonished that what Santa says appears to deny the miscegeny that took place all through the 19th and early 20th centuries - the population of Wales doubled (at least!) during this period due to migration (from other parts of the UK) alone - and from experience (i.e. having been born and brought up in industrial south Wales, which is about as 'Welsh' as Tyneside) I can say that English, Scottish, Irish and a surprising number of Italian families seem to have moved lock, stock and barrel during that time (referencing people's anecdotal family histories, mind you) but are now culturally integrated to the extent that they're some of the most steadfast Welsh speakers in that part of the world.

I suppose that if you're looking for DNA markers, you'd be looking somewhere else (some rural backwater, maybe) and I bet you a pound to a penny that you'd get similar results if you looked in similar areas elsewhere in the UK...? ISTR a 'Meet the Ancestors' programme where old Julian had found a bronze age skull in Somerset (?) and on doing their usual facial reconstruction found that the face was the absolute spit of some guy who lived in that very village... Hmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 04:59 AM

I forgot to say, cracking thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 05:55 AM

Also there's some parts of Belgium where a dialect is spoken which is very similar to Welsh.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Pied Piper
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 06:16 AM

All western Europeans have a significantly detectable genetic component whose modern frequency is concentrated on the Basque speaking area.
There are other significant components.
1 Centred on the Middle East, probably representing the spread of agriculture.
2 Centred round the North Mediterranean coast, probably reflecting Bronze Age Greek expansion.
3 Centred on Eastern Baltic possibly originating with the first modern people to enter Europe 35,000 years ago.

TTFN
PP

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Santa
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 06:45 AM

Pied Piper: So when it is said that the Welsh are related to the Basques, does this mean that a similar high frequency is found in Wales as in the Basque-speaking area, but nowhere else? Presumably sufficiently so to note some significance to it. It would be interesting to know the areas where lesser such peaks occur.

Dai: No, I couldn't possibly deny that mixing had occurred, but the old differences do seem to be maintained despite immigration. Environment vs heredity, probably.

I had mentioned the prehistoric/Somerset link earlier. Yes, another example. Surely there are many around in different parts of the country. It occurred to me to wonder whether this particular DNA evidence could be used to provide more evidence for the British wanderings post-Roman pre-Norman. This sort-of linked to other threads about Arthur, thus counting as folklore - well, -ish!

Mr Happy: The comment about Belgium is interesting. Is it specifically Welsh or generally P-Celtic?

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Stu
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 06:48 AM

Dai raises an interesting point about the'Meet the Ancestors', programme where a 4,000 year old man was found to have the same DNA as one of the modern inhabitants - a similar experiment in Cheddar revealed a direct link between a much older Palaeolitic skeleton and a schoolteacher who worked in the town.

It has also been suggested the 'Celtic' invasion, or the influx of the Beaker people 2000 b.c. was more of a cultural one than the actual arrival of continental settlers - a sweeping westward of artistic skills and religious thought. The ready assimilation of our indigenous religion to that of what would become Druidism certainly hints at a sea change in people's thought at those times (this is of course, largely speculation).

What both of these example illustrate is the possiblility that our ancestors simply didn't move about as much as perhaps was thought, and perhaps weren't displaced by subsequent invasions of the Germanic tribes as simply stayed put and kept their mouths shut - after all, King Alfred did make allowance for the Britons that still lived in Wessex at the time of his kingship.

Ichyd Da!

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 06:49 AM

don't kno- could be walloonish or flemish.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Pied Piper
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 06:59 AM

The gene distribution maps I've seen only show 1 peak for the Basque component.
The Icinii only came to Britain 200 years before the Roman invasion.
PP

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 07:05 AM

seems welsh language also has similarities with Galician (Spain)

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 07:36 AM

The trouble with saying that languages are similar is that you run the risk of re-discovering the fact that we all speak Indo-European. "Good gracious, Jeavons, you mean to say that the fuzzy-wuzzies say 'udar', we say 'water', the Germans say 'wasser', and the Welsh, thieving troublesome scoundrels, say 'dwr'? What do you think we might have a common ancestral tongue, what what?"

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 07:39 AM

but we don't allspeak Indo-European.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 08:04 AM

but we don't all speak Indo-European. Not if we're Basque or Finnish maybe. But most of us do, I suspect, whether we speak English, Welsh, Russian, Urdu, Gujarati, Farsi, Spanish... and so forth.

"Also there's some parts of Belgium where a dialect is spoken which is very similar to Welsh...could be walloonish or flemish."

Walloon is closely related to Frrench, and Flemish is closely related to Dutch. If there is a part of Belgium where they do speak a language similar to Welsh it'd be interesting to have some details. On the face of it is seems unlikely.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 08:17 AM

Perhaps Sydney Carter was saying something similiar in his song EROS even if it does refer to Londoners.

Me father was a cupid and me mother pushed a barrer
I was born in Piccadilly, with a bow and arrer

One leg up and one leg down
Like an old cock sparrer
Flying over Piccadilly
With me bow and arrer

Caesar came to London Town, thought the girls were pretty
Look at all those Roman noses, walking round the City

Up the river came a load of whiskers long and flaxen
If your eyes are china blue, then blame it on a Saxon

Up the river came a Viking, out for blood and thunder
Saw a lady to his liking, then began to plunder

William came to conquer us, then we got the Yanks, sir
So, if you look like Georgie Bush, then you know who to thank, sir

I've got feathers on me back, and arrers in me quiver
Just because me father came a-flying up the river

Where's your Cockney pedigree? I'm surprised you asked it
Everybody's been and put a bun into the basket

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 08:36 AM

McGrath, you forgot Ugric, the 'other' member of hte Finno-Ugric family of languages... now where's that website... had it a minute ago... http://www.localization-translation.com/globalization-guide/localization-languages/globalization-localization-language-families.html, or http://bamse.ling.su.se/~ljuba/maps.shtml if you fancy.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 08:53 AM

i read some where that finnish & japanese are linked languages.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 09:18 AM

Well I didn't mention French or Italian or German either or any number of other Indo-European. Or Arabic, Hungarian (also Finno-Ugraic), Hebrew, Chinese or Navaho or any number of other non-Indo-European languages. I didn't think it was necessary to insert the "e.gs.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Santa
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 09:33 AM

One of the Norman Kings (Henry II?) differentiated penalties for his English and Welsh subjects, implying separate communities in England into early medieval times. This is before the conquest of Wales, as such. So that particular integration certainly took some time. (Source Morris: The Age of Arthur)   

It would seem logical that the take-over by one culture of another would sometimes be violent and sometimes reasonably "civilised", and likely both side-by-side depending upon local circumstances and characters, and of course time. The Anglo-Saxon conquest of England shows features of both - I don't know, but doubt, that the evidence is in for the Iceni/Parisi/Belgae and other late "Celtic" invasions, let alone further back. As much of the evidence seems to rely on ritual such as funeral customs, a change of religion would be as likely an explanation as a movement of peoples.

First rule of archaeology: if you don't understand it, call it ritual.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 10:55 AM

Whatever, current thinking these days, based on the old DNA, is that the Neanderthalers never made it through into the current gene pool.

I hope someday they find that's a mistake. Aside from everything else, earliest evidence of musicians has them as Neanderthal - See here. And the pictures of them in the books tend to look very familar from the folk scene.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Gareth
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 07:24 PM

Kevin - Was there not a recent DNA study that linked some present day inhabitants of Sommerset to bone of prehistoric man ???

Hmmm ! having sunk many a pint in Sommerset, and Bristol in my time, and observed some of the inhabitants - Is that link that far away ???

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 07:34 PM

But I think that link was just to Cro-Magnons, which is what we are all supposed to be. Including the Welsh. That's the official line anyway. Cro-Magnon propaganda, I think it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: AliUK
Date: 29 Sep 03 - 10:01 PM

Druidism....yet another modern-ish contraption. Invented in the 19th century. There didn´t seem to be any unifying religion at the time of early historic peoples of Europe, unless you were Roman of course. The pagan religions ( those not Roman) had no unifying pantheon or theology ( unless nature worship was the unifying force). So British Celts were a 17th century invention ( as was Morris Dancing) Druids were sort of made up in the 19th Century and folk musicians are desended from neandertals...my world lies shattered around my feet.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 30 Sep 03 - 03:45 AM

There have been separate penalties in different parts of the British isles since at least the middle Saxon period, and not because those different areas had different kings... Fines, penalities, and even what's illegal were all completely at odds depending on where you were born. For example in Kent in the 8th century, you could get off the charge of murder by paying the Bloodgeld of the dead man, whereas in Mercia they had an immutable tradition for trial by witness for the same crime... So, no surprise there. Furthermore, in case you hadn't noticed, Wales is not part of England. They are both parts of Britain, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Santa
Date: 30 Sep 03 - 04:22 AM

Dai; here we not talking about penalties in different parts of the British Isles - though you are right there, of course. These were local rules for the people of England. Separate penalties - only half the fine if you killed a Welshman. The term "welsh" was used for Britons living alongside the English, not just the inhabitants of Wales.

In context, Henry was updating long-established laws to allow for inflation. Some things don't change.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 30 Sep 03 - 05:42 AM

There was also a penalty imposed on Welsh school children in the 18th century who were caught speaking their native language, I believe it was in the form of a wooden board hung around the nesk of the offending child. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: LadyJean
Date: 01 Oct 03 - 12:52 AM

In "The Dream Of Macsen Wledig" the Welsh offer their own explanation of the origins of the Bretons. You can find that wonderful story in "The Mabinogion" and I reccomend it. The Mabinogion makes the Welsh and the Bretons kin.
What I know about the good people of Cornwall is that, they were the nicest people I met in England.
What I know about the Basques is what my sister, who visited the Payes Basque said, "Basque men are very good looking, and some gestures are universal."

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 01 Oct 03 - 07:29 AM

If ever there was a thread that made me want to get together in the pub with its contributors, this is it. As ever, Mudcat Improves The Mind(TM)

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: Santa
Date: 01 Oct 03 - 10:51 AM

Dai: sounds as though you've reached the mellow stage already. Oh happy man at that time of the morning.

AliUK: Archeology gets a bit wavy on theology and pantheons, but can detect changes such as burying as opposed to burning, individual graves as opposed to communal mounds, grave goods or plain burials. By tracing such you can see that rituals do change, much as changes in agricultural practice can be seen, and these can be credited to invasion, culture spreading, or just plain change. According to taste, current fashion, and individual interpretation.

Finding a skeleton with a Roman ballista bolt in the spine does rather confirm the written evidence that the Roman take-over was a conquest: finding a skull caved in by a flint axe could simply mean a domestic altercation.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Oct 03 - 07:04 PM

I hope that was get together in a pub for a friendly a drink, Dai, rather than get together in the pub to kick the shit out of...

"Finding a skeleton with a Roman ballista bolt in the spine does rather confirm the written evidence that the Roman take-over was a conquest: finding a skull caved in by a flint axe could simply mean a domestic altercation.

Still might be a domestic altercation, involving some jealous husband with acces to hi-tech weaponry. Or a regrettable firing range accident. Or both, according to whose story you believed.

But so far as the Romans are concerned, the question isn't whether it was a conquest, but rather it is, how far was there any significant immigration from other parts of the Roman Empire, and population displacement.

I believe there was quite a lot of coming and going between Wales and Ireland in the post Roman period, with a fair amount of population exchange, voluntary or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 02 Oct 03 - 04:05 AM

Good heavens McGrath, you misunderestimatise me. I do, of course, mean a friendly drink, accompanied by the kind of educated debate where I might actually learn something... I've never been one for talking about football.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 02 Oct 03 - 04:49 AM

I didn't think that the Romans went into population movements much - probably thought it a bit too expensive. They were more into absorbing local elites and just running the bureaucracies. There were the settlement of retired veterans in colonies, and the import of auxiliaries for border control, but mainly they seem to have used their borders to prevent population movements rather than encourage it. Immediately post-Roman is quite another matter.

The initial settlement of Britons in Armorica was said to be as the result of legions, taken from Britain to support one side in a civil war, never quite getting back home again. The stories (not quite history, not quite myth) don't seem to make clear the position of the womenfolk nor locals in this.

Presumably in Imperial societies it was quite normal for young men to be soaked up in the Army and disappear off. Only to be replaced by a new contingent. "Green cuffs have gone away, Doli, doli...."

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 02 Oct 03 - 07:48 AM

I thought it was actually policy that as soon as a legion was raised, they were moved to the opposite corner of the empire... Quite a good way of avoiding having a large number of heavily armed locals with ideas above theirstation? I point to Legio II Augusta (barracked upon Caerleon in Wales) who had been raised in Iberia only a few years before the commencement of their active service in Britannia. And I think Legio XX Valeria Victrix came from Syria? Possibly? The point is, they certainly never went 'home' again...

Subject: RE: BS: Who are the Welsh?
From: GUEST,Santa
Date: 02 Oct 03 - 09:56 AM

Yes, I forget which cavalry unit was in Ribchester just up the road, but maybe from Samaria?

However, it seems that the legions would be kept up to strength with local recruiting, and the auxiliaries could be locally raised (no-one quite so useful in keeping down the neighbours). Once settled, the legions would "embed" so uprooting them to move would bring along a motley collection of locals. Could be, of course, that things got slacker as the Empire matured?

Maximus (if it was he) intended using the British armies to set himself up as Emperor, rather than just transferring legions from one front to another. Having lost, the winner had to do something with all these soldiers/hangers-on and apparently pointed them in a north-westerley direction. It's not clear whether they were specifically put in Armorica (And Stay There!) or simply ran out of steam on the journey back. You can see why some might consider it more appealing than a return to the Wall.

So, as I see it, the legions were raised in one place and moved to another, but then settled in and became at least semi-permanent. Moving legions about did occur but was a significant event, not as regular as the the shuffling about of more modern army units.

In the records that have been found in Vindoland, aren't there comments about the poor quality and untrainability of the British recruits? Demned wogs, I say, can't do a thing with 'em.