I partly agree with your points, Heraklia, but I also disagree with some as well.

Alfred definately did a major restructuring of Britain when he came into power, but I don't think it was in the traditional Roman way, as Rome in his day was much different than the Rome in the latter part of the Empire. His Britain was most likely a mutation of earlier Rome. What is different in the case of the Angles (I use Angles to designate the conquerors of this time) than the Romans. The Romans more or less used tribal chiefs to govern many of the provinces on the outskirts of the land. In the time of the English, Britain had already fallen into chaos. There were probably small pockets of resistance to Alfred, as it wasn't until Athelstan came to power that all of England was under the rule of just one man.

This shows that since there was still Celtic nobility, all be it probably self-proclaimed, in areas of Wales and Cornwall.

As far as comparing it to the south during reconstruction, it may have been in areas around central and east Britain, but there were still areas that remained completely Celtic up until the 11th and 12th centuries with their own nobility.

I agree with you that when the Danes came, first, there was a total replacement of the indigenous people, but when the English came, I believe it was more of a seperation of the Danes and the English.