I am talking specifically about the native language of Britain, before the English. For some reason it simply disappeared when the Anglo-Saxons arrived on the coast of the North Sea in the 5th century AD. The Welsh and Scottish tongue survived, but the main of Britain has passed into history with not even a trace. What is the reason for this mysterious vanishing?
 
Dialects of it evolved into Cornish and Welsh. Neither are the exact continuations of British, just insular dialects of it in the long dialect continuum known as British. But Welsh and Cornish (and Breton for that matter) are probably as comparable to British as Portuguese is to Spanish.

The reason? A little thing called the Anglo-Saxons.
 
It isn't that mysterious. Many of the world's ancient languages have become extinct. Gallic died out in France at approximately the same time. Language extinction usually follows the same pattern: the speakers of a language are completely subjugated by a more powerful group, and eventually they begin speaking the more powerful group's native language, as a way of ascending the social ladder in their new society.

The people of what is now England were conquered by Germanic tribes (the Anglo-Saxons) that conquered them, and ultimately adopted their language. Wales was not conquered, and so its dialect of British survived.
 
It isn't that mysterious. Many of the world's ancient languages have become extinct. Gallic died out in France at approximately the same time. Language extinction usually follows the same pattern: the speakers of a language are completely subjugated by a more powerful group, and eventually they begin speaking the more powerful group's native language, as a way of ascending the social ladder in their new society.

The people of what is now England were conquered by Germanic tribes (the Anglo-Saxons) that conquered them, and ultimately adopted their language. Wales was not conquered, and so its dialect of British survived.

Honestly, it's a bit odd that Anglo-Saxon supplanted both the English Romance language AND British itself. There's pretty few occurrences in history where that happened as far as I can recall, aside from MAYBE the Slavs which evidently was because Slavic was a lingua franca amongst a variety of Germanic, Turkic, and other tongues. We know for a fact that the English people remained predominantly Celtic, they just all ended up speaking English. And that this was something a group of barbarians were able to do which the Roman Empire failed to.
 
Honestly, it's a bit odd that Anglo-Saxon supplanted both the English Romance language AND British itself. There's pretty few occurrences in history where that happened as far as I can recall, aside from MAYBE the Slavs which evidently was because Slavic was a lingua franca amongst a variety of Germanic, Turkic, and other tongues. We know for a fact that the English people remained predominantly Celtic, they just all ended up speaking English. And that this was something a group of barbarians were able to do which the Roman Empire failed to.

My understanding is that there was much more societal upheaval in fifth-century Britain than elsewhere - that the social structure set up by the Romans did not survive their withdrawal, whereas in other former regions of the Empire it basically did, just with new leaders on top. The Anglo-Saxons stepped into an anarchic situation and rebuilt their society along their own Germanic lines.
 
Honestly, it's a bit odd that Anglo-Saxon supplanted both the English Romance language AND British itself. There's pretty few occurrences in history where that happened as far as I can recall, aside from MAYBE the Slavs which evidently was because Slavic was a lingua franca amongst a variety of Germanic, Turkic, and other tongues. We know for a fact that the English people remained predominantly Celtic, they just all ended up speaking English. And that this was something a group of barbarians were able to do which the Roman Empire failed to.
Slavs replaced Avars, Pannonia latins and Dacians. Turks replaced both Greeks and western Armenians. It has happened a couple of times although you are right that it is rare.
 
The British language actually survives as three separate languages today: Welsh, Cornish, and Breton.

Welsh remained the predominant language in Wales because it wasn't incorporated into an English-speaking state until more than 1,000 years after the Anglo-Saxon arrival in Britain. Cornish held out in Cornwall for much the same reason, although it eventually went extinct in the 20th century (it's currently undergoing a Hebrew-style revival). Finally, a group of British-speaking refugees from the Anglo-Saxon incursions migrated across the channel to the Gaulish region of Armorica, where they became the Bretons and the region became Brittany.

There was a fourth British-derived language in what is now northwestern England, Cumbric. It appears to have gone extinct by about the 12th century, but Cumbric-derived counting systems and other influences survive in the English dialects of the region.
 
Slavs replaced Avars, Pannonia latins and Dacians. Turks replaced both Greeks and western Armenians. It has happened a couple of times although you are right that it is rare.

Yes, I suppose Pannonia is comparable, although it has the disadvantage that it was in the middle of invasion routes to Europe unlike Britain which is the uninvadable island. The Turks is also a valid example, since I doubt the Turks came in particularly big numbers.
 
It isn't that mysterious. Many of the world's ancient languages have become extinct. Gallic died out in France at approximately the same time. Language extinction usually follows the same pattern: the speakers of a language are completely subjugated by a more powerful group, and eventually they begin speaking the more powerful group's native language, as a way of ascending the social ladder in their new society.

The people of what is now England were conquered by Germanic tribes (the Anglo-Saxons) that conquered them, and ultimately adopted their language. Wales was not conquered, and so its dialect of British survived.

After all, how many Irishmen today still speak Erse?

Istr a passage in Toynbee's Study of History, about an incident during the Anglo-Irish negotiations in 1921. When Lloyd George wanted to talk to his aides privately, he did so by switching into his native Welsh, knowing that the Irish delegates spoke only English and would not be able to understand hm.
 
The British language actually survives as three separate languages today: Welsh, Cornish, and Breton.

Welsh remained the predominant language in Wales because it wasn't incorporated into an English-speaking state until more than 1,000 years after the Anglo-Saxon arrival in Britain. Cornish held out in Cornwall for much the same reason, although it eventually went extinct in the 20th century (it's currently undergoing a Hebrew-style revival). Finally, a group of British-speaking refugees from the Anglo-Saxon incursions migrated across the channel to the Gaulish region of Armorica, where they became the Bretons and the region became Brittany.

There was a fourth British-derived language in what is now northwestern England, Cumbric. It appears to have gone extinct by about the 12th century, but Cumbric-derived counting systems and other influences survive in the English dialects of the region.

There were also related languages in Scotland eg Kingdom of Strathclyde, until they were overrun by invaders from Ireland.
 
It depends, there were a number of British languages and cultures - Briton, Cumbric, Pict, etc. Briton became Welsh/Cornish. Cumbric was an element that makes Northumbrian so interesting. Pict became subsumed by the Scots (AFAIK).

Although I think I'm just repeating @Qhapaq Inka now
 
Some people think there were already a lot of Germanic people in what is now SE England back a long ways back before the fall of the Romans.
 

Artaxerxes

Banned
Some people think there were already a lot of Germanic people in what is now SE England back a long ways back before the fall of the Romans.

Indeed, if you read a few book it appears that the SE was very close to the continent for a long time, much more so than the North and West. You also had a lot of Germanic auxiliaries, veterans and experts moved over by the Roman Empire.

With Britain being exceptionally rural its easy to imagine a scenario where after the break down of the empire you see the more rural areas return to rural life and gradually build a unique identity while the SE coalesces around more Germanic influenced areas of settlement.
 
Indeed, if you read a few book it appears that the SE was very close to the continent for a long time, much more so than the North and West. You also had a lot of Germanic auxiliaries, veterans and experts moved over by the Roman Empire.

With Britain being exceptionally rural its easy to imagine a scenario where after the break down of the empire you see the more rural areas return to rural life and gradually build a unique identity while the SE coalesces around more Germanic influenced areas of settlement.

Germanic-influenced, but not quite Germanic, since SE England was also the heartland of the British Romance language. Though they might as well adopt the name of a Germanic tribe like some Romance-speaking groups did.
 
It isn't that mysterious. Many of the world's ancient languages have become extinct. Gallic died out in France at approximately the same time. Language extinction usually follows the same pattern: the speakers of a language are completely subjugated by a more powerful group, and eventually they begin speaking the more powerful group's native language, as a way of ascending the social ladder in their new society.

The people of what is now England were conquered by Germanic tribes (the Anglo-Saxons) that conquered them, and ultimately adopted their language. Wales was not conquered, and so its dialect of British survived.

I guess the mysterious part is the question why this happened in Great Britain but not in Iberia, France and Italy. All these areas were also conquered by Germanic tribes, but in there the conquerors adapted the language of the native population.
 
I guess the mysterious part is the question why this happened in Great Britain but not in Iberia, France and Italy. All these areas were also conquered by Germanic tribes, but in there the conquerors adapted the language of the native population.
Let's see:
-British Romance was weaker than the ancestors of Italian, French and Spanish since a lot of the local people in the countryside didn't speak it, much moreso than on the continent.
-Non-Latin British languages were weaker than continental Latin dialects because they had less prestige, were not associated with cities, administration and religion and were not uniform.
-Germanic conquest was muuuuch slower than on the continent so the Germanic invaders didn't bite off more than theycould assimilate.
-Less urban population.
-Many Germanic people already there.
-More contact with the Germanic homeland.
-Some stuff I've read says that a lot of the continental Germanic armies were pretty diverge grab bags of mercenaries.

If there was a single uniform British language it would've survived but there wasn't.
 
Last edited:
I guess the mysterious part is the question why this happened in Great Britain but not in Iberia, France and Italy. All these areas were also conquered by Germanic tribes, but in there the conquerors adapted the language of the native population.

That assumes that the native population remains; lowland Britain seems different, with migration to Brittany etc
 
This topic remains controversial among linguists and geneticists, if you read Origins of the British by Stephen Oppenheimer he thinks that it is possible that the Saxons or another Germanic tribe were already in mainland Britain when the Romans left and they had absorbed ,most, but not all of the Brythonic culture and then when the Saxons came they themselves were absorbed. It is remarkable that only a dozen Celtic derived words remain in the English language though - I guess some strange thinks happened back then that no one fully understands , hence why it's called the dark ages.;)
 
Is it odd the Anglo-Saxon name is associated with the Germanic assimilation of Britain, but the modern English is closer to Frisian than Saxon? Or am I misreadin here?
 
Top