Re: French genetics

Ray wrote :

At 5:46 pm -0500 28/10/98, John Cowan wrote:
> >Josh Brandt-Young wrote:
> .......
> >>  If so, what happened to all
> >> the Romans living there?
> >
> >You mean Romanized Gauls.  These make up the bulk of the French
> >stock, in all probability.
>
> Yep - but by the time our friend Julius C. Caesar added the three Gauls to
> the Roman Empire, the Romans themselves had become pretty mixed - nor were
> the Celts all of the same stock at that time.
>
The Gauls were the most populated part of the Empire at the time of the conquest,
which explains why they became so influent (with personalities like Osone)
afterwards when the Senate was open to all regions of the Empire.
As later tells Gregoire de Tours the Gallic nobility was already tightly
intermarried with Roman notables in the fourth century and Roman soldiers were
alloted domains throughout Gauls when they retired. This is why there are so
many ruins and terrains of villae in France.
It's a pity the 'Gauls' are not well known. Some historians say they were not pure
Celts and try to classify them into Celtic, Belgian and Germanic tribes. Romans
forced them to remain in the respective regions were they found them upon the
conquest and to settle their 'capitals' there. For example : Limoges in the
capital of the Lemovices, Vannes is capital of the Venetes, Paris of the
Parisii, etc. A famous episode goes that the Helvetes in the Alps wanted to
move and join their 'cousins' in the region of La Rochelle on the Ocean. The
Romans ran after them and defeated them and forced them to go back to Helvetia.
I think the Romans were right to do so because otherwise Switzerland would be
on the Ocean by now. That would be pretty messy :-)

> >> In the same vein, where did the Normans come from?
> >
> >Again, there is a thin overlay of Nordics, but the bulk of
> >Normans are the same stock as the rest of France.
> >
'Normandie' was so named after the legendary Viking earl Rollon (Rolf) was made duke by
the king (Louis le Gros I think). This was the best way to have a Viking
protect the Seine Valley from all other Vikings. After two generations the
Normands had completely lost their Norse language mainly because they were only
a few males and married local women as French historians say. This may be a
straightforward explanation but I would believe it : French women are so made
they would have you forget anything, you know :-) However the local toponymy
still reminds of that nordic settlement.

> >Short of ancient DNA samples, there's no working all this out
> >in detail, because there are no "pure stocks" anywhere: all are
> >a result of mixing and remixing and re-remixing.
>
> Producing a delightful blend - just like French cuisine  :)
>
> And at 6:50 am -0800 29/10/98, Josh Brandt-Young wrote:
> .......
> >One more question along the same lines: when Duke William of Normandy
> >took over England in 1066, would his men have been of ancestry as mixed
> >as what you just described, or were they purer Nordics?
>
> Hardly, or they'd have been speaking Old Norse.  The fact that they brought
> Norman French to this island where, as AngloNorman, it was the official
> language of England for the next 3 centuries, surely suggests Duke William
> (certainly not a thoroughbred) brought over mixed ancentry Normans.
>
> Ray.
>
>
Mathias

-----
See the original message at http://www.egroups.com/list/conlang/?start=17821
--
Free e-mail group hosting at http://www.eGroups.com/