What happened to the Latin speaking peoples of southern Britain...

Most of the Latin looking words in English come from French (because of the 1066 invasion)

And the few that came directly through Latin did so in the Middle Age when Latin was the lingua franca of the Church

Rome left zero influence in Britain as the Anglo-Saxon invasion erased it all

>tfw no grimdark hyperrealistic film set in subroman britain about romano-british "dux arturius" fighting against the saesneg

>historical record
You mean that fearmongering fiction written by Gildas.

>fearmongering fiction
>"jesus fucking christ these godless heathen saxons are fucking raping and killing everyone and taking all the good land will someone please help us holy shit"

mass scale genodice wasnt really possible and we have no mass graves , everyone was just assimilated

Only 'correct' came directly from Latin. The rest are English. Any similarities are from the much older pre-Germanic.

Or driven away.

There were never any 'Latin-speaking peoples' of Britain. Roman power was too weak in Britain. At best there were Romano-British sorts.

It was a mixture. Some britons were slaughtered, some driven away, some assimilated.

>There were never any 'Latin-speaking peoples' of Britain
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Latin

> However, it never substantially replaced the Brittonic language of the indigenous Britons,
Read your own articles, moron.

>[citation needed]

>[citation needed]

...

they survived in pockets of wales and western and north-western england until the late-7th or early-8th centuries
then it petered out

Millar, Robert McColl (2012). English Historical Sociolinguistics. p. 142. ISBN 0748641815.

That retard Gildas failed to consider that maybe the Anglo-Saxon elites also vassalized and had many native Britons subjects, which basically made them semi-civil wars, on top of the already-ongoing civil wars among the British kingdoms. I mean, the first Wessex kang was named Cerdic, which was most likely a Brittonic name.

this is my favorite band

Did the Saxons adopt the symbol of white dragon just to piss off the British? Sounds too good to be just a coincidence.

>That retard Gildas failed to consider that maybe the Anglo-Saxon elites also vassalized and had many native Britons subject
All the sources and archaeology point to the southeast of britain being a slaughtering ground against the Romano-British, nobility and lowerclass included.
>I mean, the first Wessex kang was named Cerdic, which was most likely a Brittonic name
Certain Foederati were settled long enough to absorb roman culture, Cerdic is a germanic form for Caesar

Actually Gildas is not as hard as on the Saxons as you would think. He presents them more like a force of nature that was punishing the Welsh leaders (particularly Vortigern) for their sins and corruption. It's ironic because Bede draws much of his story from Gildas including the moral charge, so it's almost like a simple switch in perspective

They gradually adopted Anglo-Saxon language and customs. The in-group, tribal nature of the Germanic Kingdoms probably meant they would have considered Latin and Briton speakers as second class citizens and so the Latins and Britons under Anglo-Saxon rule adopted their conquerors ways.

The Western side of Britain was never heavily Romanized and so the fact that they didn't adopt Latin later (despite using it sparingly for centuries) means the Latin speakers from the East weren't driven off by the invaders. This is what happened in Gaul to an extent, invaders targeting larger cities caused the Roman inhabitants to flee in to the countryside which still spoke celtic dialects, this wave of migration caused the death of continental celtic languages in Gaul.

Romans living in cities in Britain probably fled to the villas that covered eastern Britain where the Roman aristocrats were either replaced by Germanic warlords or they adopted Germanic culture over several generations. Remember that by this point most villa probably had a security force that consisted of Anglo-Saxon warriors.

You have it the other way around. The Welsh used a white dragon to symbolize the saxons, Saxons primarily used the white stallion to represent themselves.

Damn, why is Wikipedia so cucked? They pretty much tell you the revisionist view of the invasion.

>people don't believe stories of kangs sailing up rivers and founding kingdoms where they land
>wtf so cucked

>stories
It's true

Father comes from old English fæder

>What they found is the genetic pool can rise from less than 5% to more than 50% in as little as 200 years with the addition of a slight increase in reproduction advantage of 1.8 (meaning a ratio 51.8 to 50) and restricting the amount of female (migrant genes) and male (indigenous genes) inter-breeding to at most 10%.[151]
They killed males, raped their women and took their land. Wikipedia is full of cucks with agendas.

This.

The amount of truth-bending to get away from these facts is amazing. The Anglo-Saxons were warriors: brutal, fierce warriors. Period.

>the anglo-Saxons just immigranted to England peacefully and there was no violence:)

Chad Anglo-Saxons made harems and impregnated British women (they loved it), while cuck virgin British men ran away into the forest while shitting their pants out.

>10%
>1.8 advantage

Its fucking nothing lad. If you take in to account political marriages to secure the loyalty or friendship of the Germanic Foederati and the fact that many of Britain's younger soldiers left with Constantine never to return such numbers are lessened. Stop imagining some mad max tier slaughter and rape, the Romans and Anglo-Saxons had been in contact and had been working together for decades

They ran and crossed the strait leaving their women and children ripe for Saxon cocks.

Literally this

Wait, lemme correct this a little bit. They made slave harems on top of taking wives. Kinda like you're usual favorite isekai novels.

How do you explain the nonexistant influence of native british language or culture on the Saxons? How do you explain all the writings and evidence of slaughter, flight, and slavery? Why are so many Briton stories based on the historically attested to bloody struggle between the Britons and the Saxons, Jutes, Anglians, and Frisians?

>n-no i swear it wasn't an invasion those dirty saxon barbarians peacefully assimilated with the romans!
>w-why is everyone laughing at me???

I'm not the user you're replying to but I think the existence of a native "British" language is spurious at best. It's not like Gaulish where we have a fairly good amount of hard evidence, "British" just flat out doesn't exist outside of comparative analysis.

The flower of Anglo nobility was wasted on the field at Hastings by BRETONS.
Victorious FRENCH knights sired legitimate FRENCH heirs with the widows, daughters, and sisters of slain Anglos.

>Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Volume 1

I wasn't referring to one uniform brittonic language

>FRENCH
I think you mean NORMAN knights descended from NORDIC warlords who impregnated their pathetic romano-gallic-frankish subjects with superior potent NORDIC semen

dude cuck lmao

>they spoke FRENCH and taught their Anglo wives to speak FRENCH
>their heirs spoke FRENCH
>FRENCH loanwords salvaged old English

The NORDIC NORMANS stole fr*nch from their pathetic subjects and used it only because it was politically convenient. They were however still culturally NORDIC not pathetic little dick fr*nch

they swore fealty to a FRENCH king
rollotfl

Except the Anglo-Saxons were influenced by the Romans and Britons, they adopted Latin (written more than spoken) and copied Late-Roman weapons, armour and tactics. They would also come to adopt Christianity, their surviving architecture is also Late-Roman in style, their metal work and jewelry has many Celtic influences as well. Their legal systems are also built upon Roman systems that existed before their arrival.

Because slaughter and slavery was common during he period? Anglo-Saxon kingdoms fought the British ones sure, but they weren't actively slaughtering the Britons and Romans they ruled over. Their numbers are simply too small for this to be sustainable. People likely actively avoided behaving like a Roman or Briton in Anglo-Saxon kingdoms because they would be discriminated against and so they tried to fit in as best they could. There was a hierarchy and if you wanted to move up the chain you needed to act the part.

yes after the NORDIC Göngu-Hrólfr besieged paris the pathetic fr*nch weeny king surrendered the duchy of NORmandy

>Because slaughter and slavery was common during he period
You admit this but still insist that their was zero large population change or movement

>200 men-at-arms
>300–700 ships, 30–40,000 men
>Decisive FRENCH victory[1]

you were saying?

>gained reinforcements during the summer; Charles the Fat arrived with his army in October[2]
checkmate fr*nch weenie :^)

The absolute state of this board

I never said that. The population of Roman Britain was 3.5 million, this took centuries to recover after the fall of Rome. I am saying that its impossible for 5% of the population to genocide the other 95% and still maintain a functioning society. They would slaughter and enslave the Britons to the west while allowing their Romano-Briton subjects to live in relative peace. This allowed their subjects to adopt the language and customs of the Anglo-Saxons.

The areas where the Anglo-Saxons established their Kingdoms were the most heavily Romanized areas of Britain, if they were committing wanton acts of violence upon everyone inside their own dominions it would effect their own prosperity and the resulting migrations of the Roman people to the eastern side of Britain would have left a much larger cultural mark of the Celts similar to what was seen in Gaul.

They ran away to Britanny, not westward.

Bede said there were troops composed of both ethnicity, but I don't know how common they were according to him.

Either way they didn't flee in significant enough numbers to stamp out the Breton language. It should also be noted that in the case of all refugees it is usually the stronger and more wealthy that have the opportunity to flee so the majority of the population had to stay where they were. The flight of Roman aristocracy would have only made Anglo-ization easier.

It left a little, and the Victorians loved that shit and turned it into massive memes. Public baths were bretty gud.

Uh, yes they did, which is why Bretons speak British Celtic, and not their native Amorican.

his point was talking about romano british migrations, which had they immigrated to armorica wouldve essentially done the same thing as in gaul, where they stamped out the gallic tongue with romano-gallic
imstead the armoricans were replaced by celtic britons, which calls into question the idea of a mass romano british exodus

...