Always a very emotive subject, nationality and ethnic origins. It's always best to think over carefully before jumping in with both size 9s.

So that said, over the ledge we go!!

Who we would like to believe that we are descended from and who we are actually descended from may be quite separate and possibly quite shocking for most of us.

This brings me back to Britain. Originally only a name used by the Romans for this land and it did not come into general usage again until James VI of Scotland took over the English throne and wanted to shorten his title of King of Scotland and King of England, he chose something snappy, that had only ever been associated with antiquity, and became known as the British monarch, and we then became the British people for the first time since the Romans.

The term Celts is only a generic term for the loosely associated tribes that inhabited Europe for the 1st millennium BC and I never find the term useful except for classifying artifacts. I find that there is usually a bit of confusion between the Gaels a specific people (who were Celts) and the Celts in general.

Anyway, to my point, those tribes that the Anglo-Saxons displaced were the original British or to use their correct term the Romano- British. These people were not wiped out but bowed to the superior arms of the Anglo Saxons but a huge amount of their culture and genes was carried forward, a lot of it still surviving to this day.

One argument is that there is a lot more Roman blood, especially in the 'English', than most of the English are aware of, and this is why that I am usually shocked by the antipathy towards Rome by their descendants!