Comments by "John Brereton" (@johnbrereton5229) on "English DNA: The Genetic (DNA) History of England" video.

@realitywins9020 Not actually Welsh speaking, Brythonic speaking.
3
@johnpatrick5307 Though they all developed from Brythonic they had regional differences Cumbrian was different to Welsh, as was Cornish. In fact Brythonic, is as different to Welsh as Old English is to English.
3
 @michaelking1091 No there is no Latin, only in the language not in the dna.
3
@johnpatrick5307 The neolithic Anatolian farmers or Beaker people arrived in Britain around 4,000 years BC, it was they who built Stonehenge. It was the so called 'Celts' ,who were in fact not a people, but a language group, who arrived here around 1000 BC from central Europe from the area now known as Germany, Austria and Switzerland replacing the previous peoples. It's not known if they first brought the Celtic language to Briton, or if it was already spoken here.
2
@johnpatrick5307 Anatolian's like the Celts were both indo Europeans.
1
@johnpatrick5307 Well, your opinion is at odds with all the expert's and published studies on the subject.
1
@michaelking1091 The original commentator was talking about English genetics, not Italian. Therefore I think his description of Celtic/Germanic is quite accurate. Your comment claimed their was Latin dna present too, but there isnt, the Romans left no DNA in England only their language.
1
@michaelking1091 Im aware of the claims by Wilson's & Blackett . However, neither Wilson or Blackett are qualified historians, Wilson is a retired Shipping expert and Blackett a retired businessman. No one takes them seriously, they are more akin to work of fantasy, than historical research. Personally, I'm open to questioning established opinions but they need to have sound research to justify it, unfortunately Wilson & Blackett don't.
1
@michaelking1091 No it's a appeal for facts, not authority. When I first came across Wilson and Blackett I really thought they had uncovered some very interesting and groundbreaking facts. However, the more I read the more cracks started to appear in their work, so I dug deeper and found I wasn't the only one who had come to this conclusion. You can even find some exposeś here online. As I said previously, I'm quite open to hearing theories that are not mainstream, but they have to be credible and backed up by proper factual references, not bias wishful thinking.
1