BBC News : Britain 'had apartheid society'
Quite interesting, isn't it ? I wonder how common this kind of passive genocide has been in history. We know that in Japan's case the Korean invadors (about 2000 years ago) mostly replaced the indigenous Ainu population is a similar way. But if Ainu language had now almost completely disappeared, like some British indigenous languages (e.g. Cornish Gaelic), DNA test show that the modern Japanese have inherited about 30% of their genes from the "Jomon" Ainu and 70% from the "Yayoi" Koreans. So in Britain's case, genes survived to a similar extent, but language a bit better thanks to the recent revival of Welsh Gaelic in schools.Originally Posted by BBC
Another case is that of the Arabian invasion of North Africa. I have explained in the thread Is there such thing as an Arab race ? that the Maghreban population which now speaks mostly Arabic and is is generally considered as ethnically Arabic, is in fact only very little genetical trace of Arabic blood. So the Arabs mostly converted the indigenes to their religion, and made them adopt their culture and language, but they didn't replace them genetically. (at least not in North Africa).
On a side note, I wonder what proportion of Frankish or Celto-Roman blood the Belgians inherited, as the Franks invaded, settled and dominated the region politically and economically much in the same way as the Anglo-Saxon did in Britain, and both regions' indigenous population were mostly Latinised Celts. What would be interesting to research in Belgium's case is how the linguistic border between the Flemish (Germanic speakers) and Walloons (Latin speakers) came into existence after the Frankish invasion.