Wow, this is quite freaky. I was reading something similar to this earlier today and then I clicked on the link and found it was the same article, only the one I looked at was a little more recent based on comments from readers of the article. The only reason I was reading this was because I was looking at a book in Waterstones called The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story by the same author of article.I want to understand where the British peoples really came from and how far back that goes. Everyone has come from somewhere and with so many theories it is difficult not to feel dizzy with all the data that is spewed out. It sounds like this author has some intriguing theories but my initial repsonse to the Basque region being the brithplace of our ancestors is totally alien to me and breaks away from the theories I was more familiar with years ago. I was also looking at The Tribes Of Britain by David Miles but I honestly don't know how good either of these will be.I am reading Britain AD at the moment but I will have to get down to the nitty gritty of Britain BC as Jamie's recommendation of this is something I can't ignore.Getting back to the whole Anglo-Saxon thing though, the whole subject is controvertial in different ways because just to use the word 'invade' evokes lots of different responses. Did they invade, encroaching upon the local population by force because they knew the island was fertile with plenty of space for the taking or did they 'migrate' for different reason? Invade and migrate are two very different words and I believe they did both extremely well but I really haven't read enough to form a clear decision as yet. I do believe that it is possible they probably didn't affect the celtic gene pool as much as we might have thought but a mass of migratory peoples are certainly going to have an impact on mixing those genes to some degree.