That 50% was for a smaller area but was confirmed when reexamined in the subsequent wider study - ranged between 24.4 and 72.5% (mean 54.1%). But, these are males only and based on modern populations. Mark Thomas, who was on Mike Weale's team tells me that treatment of data is robust and it certainly has never been challenged on technical grounds. People have questioned interpretation, ie, how we arrive at that data. Weale makes this clear:We still need to be cautious because these are studies and not conclusive, that is not written in stainless steel. The Weale, Weiss study of 2002 was interesting, suggesting a possible mass migration of much more than 50%.
"We note, however, that our data do not allow us to distinguish an event that simply added to the indigenous Central English male gene pool from one where indigenous males were displaced elsewhere or one where indigenous males were reduced in number." It still leaves therefore 3 possible models open. Each one needs to be interrogated.
Although the article is dated 2017, it refers to the Leslie study of 2015, which is the one I quoted:
"We estimate the proportion of Saxon ancestry in C./S England as very likely to be under 50%, and most likely in the range 10% ‐ 40%." The point about this is that is across the entire genome. If an anglo saxon male had a son with a british female, the son looks 100% anglo saxon if you look at the male specific part. If you look at all of it, it is 50:50.
That's true and the modern data is not disputed. It's the mechanism by which the transition happened that is interesting because it isn't uniform throughout England.Anyway, in my opinion the invasion/migration of Germanic peoples from the continent had to be large enough to cause the native population, whatever their number, not only to change their language, but also their religion and culture.
There never was a war When new data contradicts old models, we create new models which can be tested. That data can then be interrogated for suitedness of fit. If the new data is a bad fit for the model, the model is rejected and new models must be created and they, in turn, tested.Anyway, Authun , our views are converging and seem to be close. Is our little war over?