Why did The Anglo Saxons Migrate to Britain?

Today, if something has been altered by the English language or culture, we refer to it as anglicized, a term used quite often given the vast amount of peoples that the English have anglicized to some degree or another. But when, how, and why were the English anglicized? The process of making England itself an Anglo-Saxon land and people saw its start within the mid-5th century, as Rome was saying its goodbyes to the British Isles and had propped open the door for other continental Europeans to take their place. It's believed that this was the time when groups of Germanic peoples, referred to more exclusively from the 8th century on as Angles and Saxons, decided to enter the vacant landscape. There was still an indigenous population across England, namely the Britons, with the neighboring Picts and Scots from Scotland and Ireland, but the withdrawal of the Romans left a prominent hole waiting to be filled. The story of exactly how this played out, however, is a bit fuzzy. Historical sources on the matter are scant and convincingly unreliable, but a few do exist. If the Chronica Gallica of 452 is to be believed, as of 441, the British provinces had suffered various defeats and misfortunes and were reduced to Saxon rule. Others, such as a cleric by the name of Hildas who wrote during the 6th century, talks of the Romans leaving English lands and making way for savage assailants who entered in their place with the goal of violent conquest and the utter suppression of the indigenous population. The problem here is that Hildas' is viewed as at least partially unreliable by many historians. And, curiously, one of the only other detailed sources on the matter, the Ecclesiastical History of the English People, written by a different cleric of the 8th century, Bede, relies heavily on the writings of Hildas for a timeline of events, but gives an entirely different perspective. According to Bede, the Anglo-Saxons, from which his own ancestors came, were not bloodthirsty conquestors, but were in fact enacting God's vengeance on the people of England. Bede tells us that these invaders came from Anglia, or possibly modern-day Angln in the case of the Angles, Old Saxony in the case of the Saxons, and a third group, the Jutes, arriving from Jutland. He explains that these Germanic peoples arrived in today's England first as explorers, then as migrants, and then as conquerors. He clarifies that any violence enacted against the Britons, as also mentioned by Hildas, was the work of God punishing the indigenous population for falling out of favor with him. This thought-provoking interpretation of what actually played out leads us to the theories that have carried over into the modern era. The predominant ideas concerning the Anglicization of England can be split into two groups, the Conquest Theory and the Migration Theory. An early belief, as seen in historical sources, was that the Anglo-Saxons entered Britain as invaders and used violence to conquer the region and force the locals to adopt their culture and language. This concept is opposed by many modern historians, however, as many points to archaeological and genealogical evidence as showing that the Anglo-Saxons arrived in England at a much slower pace, often arriving as families and simply hoping to migrate to new lands for a new start on life. Farming may have been a significant motive for many, as floods may have been a common issue for agriculture in the migrants' homelands. Other times, the appeal of starting a new life in a new land may have been appeal enough. In this theory, regardless of what brought on the migration to begin with, historians feel that the local Britons went on to adopt Anglo-Saxon culture by choice, not by force. Another suggestion by historians today falls somewhere in between the leading theories. It posits that the Anglo-Saxons were invited onto English soil by the Britons to aid them in fighting off the neighbouring Picts and Scots, and then they simply chose to stay. The evidence as of now might hold the key to what really happened. A recent genomic study published in Nature may have opened one of the locks keeping shut the door to the truth. The study utilised hundreds of DNA samples from English corpses dating back to the time of the proposed Anglo-Saxon invasion, and the genetics suggest that some form of migration must have occurred as Bede and Hildas told. Three-fourths of the body tested had ancestry from Northern Europe, from outside the British Isles. Furthermore, even of the bodies with mixed DNA or no foreign blood at all, many were buried in similar or identical ways to the ethnic Anglo-Saxons. Additionally, many of the remains buried in the cemeteries examined for studies appeared to have had familial ties to one another. All of this genetic evidence can thus be evaluated alongside both archaeological and linguistic evidence. In the case of the former, Anglo-Saxon houses, jewellery, weapons and burial sites have all been found, some even in close proximity to Romano-British settlements or sharing mixed burial items. As for the linguistic evidence, it's clear that over time, Old English became the predominant language, pushing aside its Latin and Celtic counterparts. After the collapse of the Roman presence in Britain, the use of British Latin was becoming less sturdy, although those who spoke Latin and British Celtic were the dominant speakers of the region still. The Germanic-speaking Anglo-Saxons would have been the minority, and yet, only a few centuries after their arrival, Old English had taken hold and was still on the steady rise, pushing Latin and the local British Celtic language to the side, a stark contrast in comparison to the way the Celtic peoples in other former Roman holdings tended to influence the Germanic migrants and their linguistics. It's clear from all the historical evidence that in some way or another, a mass migration of Anglo-Saxons into Britain occurred, and greatly influenced the culture and language of the local population. The DNA, archaeology, and linguistics tell a story, but whether that story is clear or not is still up for debate. Many argue the ambiguity of it all, although one theory seems to have gained a lot of traction thanks to the ever-growing evidence. The Anglo-Saxons probably weren't armed invaders, or at least, not most of them. Some discoveries, such as a handful of Anglo-Saxon bodies buried with Roman-style military necessities, suggest that at least a small portion of the migrants may have been invited in after all, to aid the Romano-Britons in their clashes with other invaders. This, however, still doesn't explain the majority of the evidence. The finding of Anglo-Saxon families buried together in cemeteries for one manor advocates that a large portion of the migrants came as family units, to begin new lives together in Britain. The existence of many Britons buried in the same manor and with the same possessions as the Anglo-Saxons suggests that there may have, in fact, been voluntary adoption of Anglo-Saxon culture by the locals, leading to a slow shift of beliefs, traditions, and artifacts. Such a theory would also explain why the Germanic language seems to have overtaken both pre-existing Britannic tongues. In different regions of Roman Gaul, the Germanic peoples often adopted the cultures and languages of the locals, indicating that the opposite taking place in Britain can be due to a choice by the Celtic and Latin-speaking natives to adopt the new Germanic tongue. All of this, in addition to the genetic makeup of the corpses tested, might point to a slow, civilian migration process and innocent intermingling of local and foreign peoples. What it seems not to point to is the idea that a vast wave of invaders suddenly stepped ashore to spread violence and conquest across the English lands. This isn't to say that Hildas and Bede were entirely wrong, but it would be fair to say that they may not have been entirely right either. Thus, the answer to why the Anglo-Saxons made their way to the British Isles through Rome's open door is nuanced and partially unsolved. But in summation, the main reasons why they may have wanted to migrate to Britain might have been due to a direct invite by the Romano-Britons or because of the great agricultural possibilities, or maybe just to start a new life. And for the reason of conquest cannot be unequivocally ruled out across the board, it's likely that a combination of multiple of these motives led to the Anglicization of England, and in turn, many other nations. After arriving, the new world of the Anglo-Saxons seemed to have flocked to their sides and mimicked their every move. It wouldn't be long before these newcomers would become the leaders of the kingdom that would make up what we know today as the English nation. With the Romans gone, the Britons at their side, the Scots and Picts at bay, and new kingdoms at their feet, we may not know why the Anglo-Saxons went to Britain in the first place, but it's pretty clear why they never left.