The Origins Of The British: A Genetic Detective Story (2006) - Plot & Excerpts
Wow, where to begin? I picked up Origins of the British firstly because I’m British and interested in learning more about my own ancient ancestry, but also on the strength of the author’s previous work. Out of Eden, Oppenheimer’s previous book, used population genetics as well as archaeology to trace the expansion of Homo sapiens out of Africa and the routes they took to eventually spread across the planet. Though it was a challenging read, Oppenheimer considerately sought to explain difficult concepts in genetics that the layman might not immediately grasp, and wrote in a lucid and coherent manner that I found ultimately informative and rewarding. Origins of the British is an entirely different kettle of fish.Since Oppenheimer is dealing with a much smaller group this time, to untangle the genetic history of the British requires going into much greater detail than he did in Out of Eden, with sub-groups and off-shoots galore. Maybe it’s just me but I felt like he didn’t take the time this time round to break it down and explain the data to the benefit of those of us who aren’t geneticists. The second element that Oppenheimer discusses is philology. Where did the various languages of the British Isles come from? How old are they? What languages are they closest to in the rest of the world? These are interesting questions, but again Oppenheimer goes into such extreme detail, of what he himself admits is an obfuscating subject, that it was no easy read, at least for me. The terminology used seems suitable for a specialist in the field. The third element that Oppenheimer delves into to support the genetics and the philology is archaeology, seeking to answer the question; do recognisable cultural artefacts signify the migration of peoples, or did ideas spread without people? Another interesting question, and one I admit I was at a much greater advantage understanding with post-graduate archaeology under my belt.I’m not sure I would recommend this book to others unless you have a good existing knowledge of at least one of the three subject areas tackled. Oppenheimer’s research and critical analysis are impeccable, and I definitely credit the quality of the work, but it’s a challenging read and I’m not sure it’s designed to be easily understandable by the non-specialist.The summary of Oppenheimer’s findings, for those of you who might find reading the actual book too dry? Around 50% of modern British genetic lines come from Palaeolithic migration after the ice sheet covering Britain retreated, from the Pyrenees up the Atlantic coast and from the region that is now Belgium, circa 15,000 BCE. Around 25% of lines derive from Mesolithic and Neolithic migrations, circa 9000 – 6000 BCE, from internal migration of existing Britons, migration from the Balkans via two routes – one across the Alps and Pyrenees and once again up the Atlantic coast, and the other north through Scandinavia – and migration from the ancient Near East. Regionally, these Stone Age migrations account for 88% of Irish, 81% of Welsh, 79% of Cornish, 70% of Scottish, and 68% of English.The “Anglo-Saxon invasion” of the Dark Ages did not exist in the way we might think, as most of those bloodlines date to much earlier, some time between c. 3000 BCE and 300 CE, but there was a small migration of Angles and Jutes at the time, whose genetic markers are closely related to Scandinavia, but it was not a wholesale replacement of the native Britons – the “Anglo-Saxon” migration accounts for only 3.8% of modern British genetic make up, increasing to 5% in England and at it’s highest in some parts of Norfolk at 15% - this seems to have been a case of elite takeover and adoption of culture, not a mass migration. The Viking genetic contribution of the dark ages – again, not counting the migrations from Scandinavia that date to much earlier – account for 5% of modern Britons, with the signal stronger around the northern coastlines. As for William the Conqueror and the Normans in 1066? It seems the Normans, being descended from Vikings themselves, as yet cannot be distinguished in the genetic record, but Oppenheimer estimates from the documentary evidence that they account for at least 3%, weighted amongst the landowning classes.Moreover, the Celtic and English languages date to much earlier than you might expect. The Celtic languages are more distant from each other than the Romance languages, suggesting a deep origin in the Neolithic or even earlier. Meanwhile, English, Oppenheimer demonstrates, shows extraordinarily old roots with Scandinavian that pre-date the so-called “Viking invasion” and instead of being evolved from West Germanic is arguably its own branch of the Germanic family, dating to somewhere between 3600 BCE and 300 CE.In conclusion, if you’re British or Irish, your roots in the Sceptred and Emerald Isles probably go back much deeper than you expect, with 75% of genetic lines originating in Stone Age hunter-gatherers who settled here when the ice age retreated. You might have a few Angles or Vikings in your family tree somewhere, but none of the later migrations account for more than 10% of modern genetic lines, dispelling the myths of mass migration and replacement of the native Britons and re-writing the history books in favour of a story of elite take-overs and cultural adoption, rather than genocide.A worthy read, but a challenge for the non-specialist.8 out of 10
This was both more interesting and more satisfying than I expected. I had anticipated a good, but mostly satisfies-idle-curiosity-about-{subject} type of book, but Oppenheimer did far more than a geneticist's gazeeter guide to prehistory and early British history. If you happened to read Cunliffe's Facing the Ocean, and wanted more on how genetics affects the story, then Oppenheimer's book is for you. He deals with the archaeology and historical evidence for the subject, synthesizing them with the genetics - but letting each strand of inquiry stand on its own merits before seeing what picture(s) they paint together. I cannot assess his handling of the genetics (my eyes glaze over when anything more than news-article-level discussion of genetics is going on), but I am much more familiar with the historical and archaelogical evidence, and his handling of those struck me as balanced, reasonable, and in search of how much the evidence can support and what alternative interpretations are possible - so I'm assuming he's done the same with the genetic evidence and in the genetic analyses he used, as well as how he interpreted them. To the extent I followed the genetics, his handling of it felt right to me, at least.If you have any investment in the history of the British Isles, on either the Celtic or the Germanic sides of the story (or both) - or if you're fascinated by the monumental cultures of the Neolithic - or if questions about the spread of Indo-European languages and/or the prehistoric movements of people within Europe catches your attention - then pick up this book. Oppenheimer' Origins of the British not only offers a layman's summary of the available evidence (up to when the book was published), it also offers some interesting theories, with supporting evidence, for things that I've never felt (until reading this book) had adequate explanations, such as: the origin of the Celtic languages, cultural continuity/discontinuity along the Atlantic fringes of Europe from the Mesolithic onward, the establishment of Germanic-speaking cultures in England, the apparent replacement of indigenous peoples in Orkney and the Shetlands, the age of cultural contacts both along the Atlantic coasts and across the North sea, and quite possibly more I'm not thinking of.
What do You think about The Origins Of The British: A Genetic Detective Story (2006)?
I liked this book as I was wanting to connect places with family stories from long ago. It was very technical and wordy at times so I had to skip around a little to stay focused. But over all great education on where I came from and what it may have been like for my family, mostly in Scotland and Ireland in the 1400's through 1700. Worth the read.Some reviews have said this is all old news...well I never knew much about it, so its new to me and I loved learning about it! That's what books are for right!
—Linda Trionfo
With this book, I continue delving into my current obsession with genetics and deep ancestry. It uses genetics, archeology, linguistics, and classical sources to argue that most Brits are descended from people who arrived in the British Isles a long, long time ago -- basically right after the ice receded -- and that the traditional division between Celt and Anglo-Saxon does not go as deep as generally believed. The good part about this book is that the subject matter is interesting; the bad part is that much of the text (esp. the genetics section) is very dry.
—Alina
The book "The Origins of the British" by Stephen Oppenheimer is not a light read. At 628 pages, it is not a book man would read just to amuse himself. It is a book that one reads to to gain new insight into the history. Book is filled with detailed descriptions of the genetic methods used. It is very scholarly work that is aimed squarely at the class of professional historians.However, even if I am not a professional historian, I did quite enjoy this book. It is fun to watch when old established ideas are questioned also in the field of history. I have amused myself chiefly in my spare time with reading history for the past 40 years. The kind of new insight that this book does really bring is extremely welcome.Stephen Oppenheimer is out to prove that the invasion of Angles and Saxons at the end of the Roman period in Britain did not simply wipe out the then current Celtic population in England. He argues that there had been a distinct Germanic population in England even at the time of Roman invasion.There perhaps was just the arrival of new small ruling elite at the end Roman times. That new elite already had direct linguistic relationships with the people living in England already. Stephen Oppenheimer has a lot of true research in genetic outlook of the inhabitants of the British isles to back him up. Many findings in archaeology and new interpretations of historic texts do also clearly support his theories.I laid this book down even more convinced than ever on the fact that the alleged great Germanic human migrations at the end of Roman empire were not true upheavals and migrations of real nations. They just might have been more of predatory excursions of armed groups. They just took the power to extract money from the locals away from the former Roman elite.On a similar note, I must wonder how rarely the real predatory nature of the Roman Empire is brought to light. In the end, this was a nation that did grow and flourish by stealing the results of the hard work of others. Unfathomable riches were gathered first as plunder and then as protection money for hundreds of years. This happened as a result of predatory assaults on all of the neighboring nations that could not defend themselves from the hordes of soldiers Rome could muster to fight for plunder and slaves.Of course, Rome did bring also the Roman peace or Pax Romana, the good roads and the Roman justice. However, this empire was also a robber nation. It did bring a new parasitic upper class to lands it conquered to live off work and toil of the conquered.However, I must stress that these ideas are mine and not from this book by Stephen Oppenheimer. He concentrates on the flow of genetic markers and the like and like many other modern historians he does refrain himself from judging the events he tells about in any way.I just can not stop myself from bringing up this issue. The nature of human conquests is a central one even in this book. Stephen Oppenheimer does show how the alleged great human migrations in the history of Britain just could be shifts in small elites. Stephen Oppenheimer shows that the main body of the population of the British Isles could, in fact, been quite the same for the whole of the time after the end of the last Ice Age.According to him Britain was at that time first populated, on the other hand, by people coming from the direction of the Iberian peninsula on the west coast and from the Ice Age refuge in Ukraine area in the west of Britain.Stephen Oppenheimer does not say this in these words. There just is not enough scientific proof for this idea, but the central trend is quite clear. The human population in a certain area is not renewed at conquests. Newcomers just bring a new set of genes to play and in the end mingle happily with the old inhabitants.The culture and even language may change, but the basic human genetic makeup may remain very much the same millenniums after millennium- It is just enriched by new waves of immigrants. They may come as slaves or rulers; in the end, this does not make a big difference in the long run.
—Jaakko J.
