At 14:53 04/10/2005, you wrote:
>Roger wrote:
> > Joerg wrote:
> > > But you offered
> > > an explanation by yourself above.  Thomas Wier says that it was
> > > "more or less now accepted that the Anglo-Saxons exterminated most
> > > of the Romano-Celtic population in Britain".  I am doubtful of that;
> >
> > Me too; given sufficient numbers, the A-S could simply marginalize the
> > natives-- grabbing their lands, competing in the trades, etc.
>
>Look, what I was saying was the opinion of people who've looked
>at the question a great deal harder than any of us.  And I did
>also include ethnic cleansing as a possibility cited in the literature.
>But it would be nice (and polite) if instead of simply denying the
>claim, people would, you know, give a reasoned argument against it,
>preferably including citations such as I have done.

One interesting historical fact to add into the mix here - according to 
Bede, the Angles migrated to England in such numbers that their original 
homeland was left empty to his day. We also know that the Romano-British 
were militarily weak, since they originally invited Hengest and Horsa to 
their country as mercenaries. It's quite possible that the majority of them 
simply fled before the Anglo-Saxon advance.

Pete