Why Anglo-Saxon?

[bimbo123456]

Anglo is normally linked with Saxon. However the race involved was actually the Angles. Does anyone know why we say Anglo-Saxon rather than Angle-Saxon? Many thanks.

[jackthehat]

Ease of pronunciation...

[bimbo123456]

Maybe...but who decided???

[jackthehat]

See the original thread where bookbinder explains........

[sandyRoe]

Maybe there were 2 groups settled in England, the Angles and the Saxons?

[bookbinder]

Thanks for that, jackthehat! I was just about to retype my answer here, and you've saved me the trouble!

[bimbo123456]

Ah I see.. thanks jack and bookie... all becomes clear. :)

[bookbinder]

Glad I could help.

[heathfield]

To expand slightly on Bookbinder's explanation, see the 4th post here...

http://forum.wordrefe...wthread.php?t=2018988

[boxtops]

It's the same principle as "Franco-Germanic" when talking about things to do with France and Germany (e.g.)

[mike11111]

Similarly one speaks of the Franco-Prussian war, rather than the French-Prussian war.

[jno]

it's a common way of linking two words by ending the first one with an O - Sino-Russian conflict, Indochina.

In America "Anglos" are Europeans in contrast to "Latins" (people from Latin America). So it can be a noun.

I don't know why the Jutes got left out. They got here at the same time as the Angles and Saxons, but nobody remembers them. It should really be Anglo-Juto-Saxon (unless you want to squeeze Frisians in as well).

[Mosaic]

You can dodge the whole issue by calling them Germanic settlers - this takes into account their linguistic grouping, rather than trying to tell t'other from which in terms of Jutes, Frisians, Saxons, Angles.
I think Anglo-Saxon just rolls off the tongue....there's no deep academic significance behind it.