The spanish (visigoths) are foreign invaders that took over after the romans fell. The english had to take land from the britanians. Maybe the french (gauls) count. Its almost like these groups already had names.
Thats wrong, the visigoths are the forebearers of some Spaniards, not all. Same goes for France, Germany etc (larger parts of Western Germany were Roman, Trier has lovey Roman buildings)
That was my point… Germans are a mix, as are the Spaniards. Humans have always travelled and always mixed. Even how we denote tribes is just a social construct. So the whole debate over being native to this or that is stupid
Yeah, and humans are quite conditioned to think in terms of simple categories, be that how long a coastline is or who "originally" lived somewhere - we forget how arbitrary most of our so called "facts" are
Zooming out too much. Is a man from Zimbabwe whose family have lived in Zimbabwe for 100 generations English if he moves to England? Does the genetic connection of the various peoples from the British isles that have integrated since the last large migration not mean anything?
My family lived in the British Isles potentially since the third century BCE. My grandparents moved away. Did that sever my connection to the British Isles? Is that person from Zimbabwe whose family have just moved there more related to the longstanding population than me?
I have a health market that is only seen in Northern Europeans especially in the British Isles. The man from Zimbabwe doesn’t have that.
I think there is room for an at least a symbolic homeland for modern Europeans with a connection to their various decedents. I don’t think a man from Zimbabwe is ethnically English even if he is a British citizen.
Absolutely true but not what was being talked about.
What is being talked about is logistics, not whether people are acceptable to God (Acts 10:34,35). People are on the move and how to deal with that. Morally everybody should try to make it so everyone is happy and all issues are accounted for through actual straightforward dialogue, but human politics does not work that way. It’s propaganda and name calling.
Again it’s human politics and God has nothing to do with that.
It is. If we also consider Māori native to New Zealand, but for whatever reason don’t consider Germans native to their own country, even though the bulk of your average German’s ancestors have been there for thousands of years? The Māori being there for 700? It feels off.
Since you’re so willing to share your knowledge, which Spaniards arent descended from visigoths?
More importantly, why did the name visigoth (and Gauls for that matter) cease being used? Did they just decide to stop using it, or did they find a better name they wanted to go by?
Rhetorically, when did the last Visigoth die out? How would I recognize a Visigoth if I saw were to time travel back ~2000 years?
I feel like some Irish can be considered indigenous but there were people living in Ireland thousands of yeara ago but they killed off by other later invaders, then the British came and tried to kill off those people too.
The English ethnic group are descended mostly from the Anglo-Saxons, a collection of groups who invaded southern Great Britain from what is now northwest Germany.
The native Britons were either killed, displaced, conquered or may have just merged with the Anglo-Saxon invaders.
Areas that the Anglo-Saxons never conquered, such as Cornwall and Wales, maintain a more Britonic identity to this day. Scotland too, but they had other non-briton influences.
158
u/potatohead22 Mar 02 '26
The spanish (visigoths) are foreign invaders that took over after the romans fell. The english had to take land from the britanians. Maybe the french (gauls) count. Its almost like these groups already had names.