PDA

View Full Version : Who Is English, or Part English?



ćţeling
Saturday, October 1st, 2005, 05:07 PM
Every other bugger has one. So lets do the same for the English.

I'll start. At least three quarters English. All from Derby, Chesterfield both in Derbyshire, South Yorkshire, Manchester, and Newark in Nottinghamshire.

QuietWind
Saturday, October 1st, 2005, 05:46 PM
:fduck:Must I confess?

I'm just kidding. It is not secret and I freely admit that I am 1/16 English. I'm not sure from where and have never traced that line. My grandmother once had it done, but I do not have a copy of the results.

Hagalaz
Saturday, October 1st, 2005, 06:32 PM
:fduck:Must I confess?

I'm just kidding. It is not secret and I freely admit that I am 1/16 English.

I'm somewhere around the same amount English, but I know very little about the exact origins.

Cole Nidray
Saturday, October 1st, 2005, 07:02 PM
My mother is 100% English descended from Anglo-Normans.

:)

Leofric
Saturday, October 1st, 2005, 07:41 PM
My father's father is of pure English origin. My father's mother is one half Welsh, the other half is mostly English but with a strong Scots-Irish strain. My mother's father is almost entirely English, but with some Welsh thrown in. My mother's mother is half English, half Prussian.

The English is mostly from Lincolnshire, the Welsh from Pembrokeshire and Glamorganshire, and the Irish from Ulster.

I'd estimate the following percentages: English 67%; Welsh 15%; Prussian 12.5%; Scots-Irish 5.5%.

Allenson
Monday, October 3rd, 2005, 04:52 PM
A New Worlder here with plenty of English forbearers.... They largely came here to North America in the 1600s and settled in New England and New York. By and large they came from East Anglia (around Norwich, Thetford, Ipswich & Southwold) with surnames such as: Horton, Tuthill, Thurston, Hallock, Terry, Wells & Ingersoll. :)

Sigel
Monday, October 3rd, 2005, 04:55 PM
English with a good dose of Norse and German thrown in.

Imperator X
Monday, October 3rd, 2005, 06:23 PM
Many of my English ancestors arrived in New England with Quincy Adams back in the 1600s. They were from North Hamptonshire, my Norman ancestors, the Westerns came over from Essex England. I also have some Welsh on both parents' sides. My maternal grandfather's grandmother Emilia Stevens was Cornish. Another English family name of mine, Bostwick goes back to the ancient Anglo-Saxons.

Fenris
Monday, October 3rd, 2005, 10:37 PM
my mothers family are originally from Ireland, my dads side are mostly English back till the 11th century, and further back than that they're Germanic - the surname is Scandinavian.

So technically, I'm English by nationality, and Celtic/Nordic ancestrally.

RedJack
Wednesday, October 5th, 2005, 01:03 AM
I am 100% English, so are my parents and all of my grandparents. We are all from Lancashire. My family name is a Saxon one. :thumbup

Esther_Helena
Wednesday, October 5th, 2005, 01:19 AM
I know I am, but darned if I know the percentages.

Requiem
Wednesday, October 5th, 2005, 01:39 AM
My mother is English from Yorkshire area, and my father's mother has a few parts english as well. I'm about 6/8 English, but Swedish surname.

Thruthheim
Wednesday, October 5th, 2005, 01:48 AM
I am English..

Born and Bred...

Although within My Englishness.. i find my pride in our Germanic gene Pool..

Saxons, Angles, Danes, Norse, Frisians, Jutes, Normans :thumbup

abreedapart
Monday, October 17th, 2005, 08:52 AM
100% English, here.

alphaknave
Thursday, November 3rd, 2005, 02:07 AM
Me, how much is not really known. My Grandmother has a bunch of names in a family tree (Curtis, Simpson, Hammill, Webster, Tolson, Ratcliffe, Cole) Those all sound English to me. Then I have an Irishman named Dunn somewhere down the line (more resent). So, English with a small amount of Irish there. My other Grandmother has names like Price in her familty tree. I think there is some Irish mixture there too. I'd say 35%+ English, and I'm lucky to get that... My Grandfather is 100% Italian (from Pescara (http://www.cemar.it/cartine/croazia2.gif)). My other Grandfather is from somewhere in Eastern Europe (last name Reibe). Reibe could be a shortened Americanized version of his true name, though. Any thoughts on what the hell I should call myself? (I won't take "European" for an answer...) or where the Surnames could be from?

Oh BTW, one of my great (don't know howmany "greats" really...) grandfathers was an early English colonist in the New World (AKA America). One of the first over according to my grandmother.

Freydis
Thursday, November 3rd, 2005, 02:09 AM
My entire family (with the exception of my immediate family and an uncle and aunt) live in England.. does that count?

Rune Caster
Thursday, November 3rd, 2005, 05:05 AM
I am on my mum's side of the family who all came here from Newcastle, Sunderland and York. Dad's side is mixed English, Irish and Scot.

Me = Mut of the British Isles ;)

Sigurd Volsung
Friday, December 23rd, 2005, 01:34 AM
As far as I am aware, I'm all English. I relish my heritage and faith.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Friday, December 23rd, 2005, 05:40 AM
My father's side came to America in the 1600s and were English. My father's mother's name was Warner which I am told was someone who warned of the approach of Vikings. Some of my father's ancestors could have been Dutch or even German as one had a last name of Ring. My mother had a German last name. Her side of the family is all mid-western peasant stock. All the females look exactly like Laura Bush and talk like she does.

Vestmannr
Saturday, December 24th, 2005, 03:02 AM
1/4 English, and more that is 'Anglo'.

1/4 English (Yorkshire, Lancashire, Northumberland, Durham, Somerset, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, Kent)
1/4 Scots (Lothian, Fife, Argyll)
1/4 Anglo-Irish (Leinster & Dublin)
1/8 Prussian German (Mecklenberg)
1/16th Ulster Scots (mixed with English and French)
1/16th Palatine German

Pretty much the product of 400 years of English political/military policy as regards North America.

Alpine Storm
Wednesday, December 28th, 2005, 11:20 AM
My father was born in Newcastle Upon Tyne, and moved to the States as a young man.

Vestmannr
Wednesday, December 28th, 2005, 10:59 PM
The best ale is from Newcastle - and I've drank so much of that, maybe it should be considered a Geordie transfusion? ;)

AryanAmerican
Thursday, December 29th, 2005, 06:59 PM
I have alot of English on both sides,not sure what the ratio is though..

Oswiu
Saturday, January 7th, 2006, 07:58 AM
Um, let me see...

Dad
Manchester-Manchester--Manchester-?Cumberland? -Irish by surname
................\.................\Devon-------------------
..................\Tipperary---Kilkenny-Limerick
................................\....... .......\Tipperary
..................................\Tippe rary-Offaly
Mam
Manchester---Newcastle--Newcastle---------------
................\..................\Newc astle---------------
..................\Manchester-Manchester-Irish by surname and religion
...................................\Manc hester-Manchester-England

That makes me roughly 9/16 English and 7/16 Irish. Not a bad blend. Does it make me Welsh on average? ;) "Sosban fach, yn berwi ar y tan..." Ought to entitle me to a retreat on the Isle of Man, at least!

AryanAmerican
Monday, January 9th, 2006, 02:14 PM
Motherside:
Wiggins
Hooks
Sheffield
Lynch(Irish)
Williamson?
Barlow?
Coor/Core(?Possibly Norman de Core)
*Cooper(from Stratford Upon Avon),Relations to James Fenimore Cooper the authur..
Kelly(?most likely from Uslter being that she married a Wiggins in Christchurch,Philadelphia)
*Plantagenant
*Tudor
*Seagrove
*Broase
*Warren
*Canmore(Scottish)
*others through the Cooper line while in England.....

Fathers Side:
Surname-Flemish via Alsatia..later migrated to the Borders and Northumbria around Berwick then to the States...
Lewis(Possibly Scottish from MacLeods of Lewis or Welsh)
Schalles(German)
Will have to do some more research on my fathers side...

Any one know where the Given names Othar or Vora come from?

Ćthelweard
Tuesday, January 10th, 2006, 03:44 PM
All English (Gloucestershire and Lincolnshire) apart from 1 Belgian Great Grandmother (Liege) and 1 Irish Great Grandfather (County Clare).

Damn foreigners ;)

NatRev
Sunday, February 5th, 2006, 12:17 PM
How are we defining English though?

By nation, race or culture?

In all three instances, I'm English :thumbup but in a world where Islamic Terrorists are described in the media as being British, doesn't this need more clarification?

RedJack
Sunday, February 5th, 2006, 07:57 PM
How are we defining English though?

By nation, race or culture?

In all three instances, I'm English :thumbup but in a world where Islamic Terrorists are described in the media as being British, doesn't this need more clarification?

I took it to be by race and nation. No recent immigrants need apply.

SouthernBoy
Sunday, February 5th, 2006, 08:26 PM
I am more than ninety-five percent English. :)

Sigurd Volsung
Sunday, February 5th, 2006, 10:39 PM
I am more than ninety-five percent English. :)

That's probably more than most of the people living in England ;) ha ha.

Agnusdei
Monday, February 6th, 2006, 02:09 AM
Im 1/4 english, also half vietnamese and another 1/4 norwegian. why do u ask?

NatRev
Monday, February 6th, 2006, 06:31 PM
Yeah get ya, but again I'd rather get along with some one that was like 1/4 English and the rest of similar stock (German, Irish, Welsh etc.) and who was AWAKE than some liberal t*sser with 100% English ancestry.:thumbdown

By AWAKE I mean racially and socially aware of the crap going off. I think culture is important, in some cases more than nation. But again these are things which need further definition.

RedJack
Wednesday, February 8th, 2006, 11:00 PM
What you say is true, but some of those tossers could be awakened. :D

SouthernBoy
Wednesday, February 8th, 2006, 11:52 PM
Yeah get ya, but again I'd rather get along with some one that was like 1/4 English and the rest of similar stock (German, Irish, Welsh etc.) and who was AWAKE than some liberal t*sser with 100% English ancestry.:thumbdown

By AWAKE I mean racially and socially aware of the crap going off. I think culture is important, in some cases more than nation. But again these are things which need further definition.Opinion can be reconciled; blood can not. You are making unnessecary compromises. :)

Drakkar
Thursday, February 9th, 2006, 08:10 AM
My paternal grandmother is English by way of Mayflower. All the names of her line can be seen within my post in the "What's Your Geneaology?" thread. Just looking at the names, the majority are English with a few Scottish names thrown in.

Robert286
Thursday, February 9th, 2006, 05:58 PM
I am about 12.5 % english if that counts ?

NatRev
Thursday, February 9th, 2006, 08:16 PM
Opinion can be reconciled; blood can not. You are making unnessecary compromises.

I can see where you're coming from but then again I dated a Finn, a Pole and a Welsh girl at Uni. My partner now is English but frankly, if I'd settled down with any of the others, I don't think it would've changed my perspectives all that much.

IMO, culture, blood and attitude are more important than what it says on your passport. I know that that's a very broad statement and in no way am I belittling Nationalism or Patriotism.

SouthernBoy
Thursday, February 9th, 2006, 11:29 PM
I know that that's a very broad statement and in no way am I belittling Nationalism or Patriotism."Actions speak louder than words." ;)

Angelcynn Beorn
Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, 02:01 PM
Im predominantly English. I have a Welsh surname somewhere in my families past (The families' dark little secret :( ) but that didn't get passed down to me. And i also have a Scottish great-Grandfather, although he was from the lowlands, and had a typically Anglo-Saxon surname, so i'm not sure if i should count that. Other than that, my family are all English, and overwhelmingly from in and around London.

Dying breed, hey? ;)

Weg
Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, 02:13 PM
I'm not, thank God! :-O ;) But I've been told we've some distant relatives who are... :~(

Sigurd Volsung
Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, 04:38 PM
I'm not, thank God! :-O ;) But I've been told we've some distant relatives who are... :~( What is wrong about that? :insulted

Thruthheim
Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, 06:08 PM
I'm not, thank God! :-O ;) But I've been told we've some distant relatives who are... :~(

Ashamed to have some connection to possibly the most successful and influential country ever ;) :D

Or... Ashamed to have some connection to France's historical enemy across the Channel ;)

Or.. Both? :P

Sigurd Volsung
Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, 10:08 PM
Kind of reminds me of the HMS Pinafore by Gilbert and Sullivan ... :wsg


He is an Englishman!
For he himself has said it,
And it's greatly to his credit,
That he is an Englishman!
(ALL) That he is an Englishman!

For he might have been a Roosian,
A French, or Turk, or Proosian,
Or perhaps Itali-an!
(ALL) Or perhaps Itali-an!

But in spite of all temptations
To belong to other nations,
He remains an Englishman!
He remains an Englishman!

Weg
Thursday, March 2nd, 2006, 09:18 AM
What is wrong about that? :insulted

Don't tell me you would like to have Frenchies in your family. :-O :D



Ashamed to have some connection to possibly the most successful and influential country ever ;) :D

Or... Ashamed to have some connection to France's historical enemy across the Channel ;)

Or.. Both? :P


:D Wait. Connection would be a great word. We just have a common ancestor at the third or fourth generation, not a big deal.

I've no reason to be ashamed - the second reason, though... ;) -, since I've no English blood. Them have French blood on the other hand. :D ;)

Klegutati
Sunday, March 26th, 2006, 08:01 PM
My dad is actually descended from Anglo-Saxon invaders, Normans, Norwegian Norse, and Pictish. My mother is Irish, Scottish, English, Mongol/Turkic<TATAR> (from invaders into Ukraine/Poland), Polish, and Ukrainian Slavs..:D :thumbup

Rose of Rohan
Monday, April 3rd, 2006, 01:42 PM
I am 100% English - 25% Kent, 50% Devon 25% Hampshire! No Welsh/Irish/Scots..

Rather Anglo-Saxon really...:D

BritishKnight
Saturday, April 15th, 2006, 07:11 PM
Me is 1/4 English (my grandmother paternally is from Cheshire, England), 1/4 Norman (grandfather paternally from Normandy, France) and 2/4 German from Rhineland!:D

larcher
Thursday, May 11th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Mainly Anglo-Saxon, possibly a touch of Yorkshire Viking.

Joseph
Saturday, July 1st, 2006, 06:22 AM
I'm descended from English colonial settlers who came through Virginia in the 1600's. A few surnames in my family: Bates, Swinford, Westbrook, Aylett, Cox, Whitlow, Crafton. Some of the places my ancestors came from include Kent, Bedfordshire, Leicestershire, Lancashire, Berkshire, just to name a few. A mix from all over really. Maybe a Welshman in the wood pile to but I'll never tell:)

Leofric
Saturday, July 1st, 2006, 06:28 AM
I'm descended from English colonial settlers who came through Virginia in the 1600's. A few surnames in my family: Bates, Swinford, Westbrook, Aylett, Cox, Whitlow, Crafton. Some of the places my ancestors came from include Kent, Bedfordshire, Leicestershire, Lancashire, Berkshire, just to name a few. A mix from all over really. Maybe a Welshman in the wood pile to but I'll never tell:)
Swinford?

That's the surname of the third wife of John of Gaunt, through whom the House of Tudor (and all later royal houses) claims descent from William the Conqueror.

Coincidence?

Joseph
Saturday, July 1st, 2006, 07:03 AM
Swinford?

That's the surname of the third wife of John of Gaunt, through whom the House of Tudor (and all later royal houses) claims descent from William the Conqueror.

Coincidence?

Katherine Roet, daughter of Sir Payn Roët of Guienne, married Hugh Swynford who was her first husband. According to some she conspired to have him poisoned while fighting the French so she could marry John of Gaunt. I think that some people living in or around Hugh Swynford's manor, kettlethorpe, took the name and that's how the name survives today although I'm not certain.

Veritas Ćquitas
Saturday, July 1st, 2006, 12:17 PM
I've got a large chunk of English anscestry myself, from what area I am not sure, but some very English names show up on my family tree.

Oswiu
Sunday, July 2nd, 2006, 09:08 PM
Katherine Roet, daughter of Sir Payn Roët of Guienne, married Hugh Swynford who was her first husband. According to some she conspired to have him poisoned while fighting the French so she could marry John of Gaunt. I think that some people living in or around Hugh Swynford's manor, kettlethorpe, took the name and that's how the name survives today although I'm not certain.
That's usually the case with these noble names. Oliver Cromwell's family had a similar relation to that of Thomas Cromwell a few centuries before.

Either way, it's an incredibly restricted surname geographically;
http://www.spatial-literacy.org/UCLnames/Map.aspx?name=SWINFORD&year=1881&altyear=1998&country=GB&type=name
Located predominantly in Gloucestershire in 1881 and even in 1998.

Hardrada
Monday, July 3rd, 2006, 06:19 PM
Every other bugger has one. So lets do the same for the English.

I'll start. At least three quarters English. All from Derby, Chesterfield both in Derbyshire, South Yorkshire, Manchester, and Newark in Nottinghamshire.

Mostly good Danelaw stock then..!!?

I'm fully English, all four grandparents from Chesterfield, All eight Great -Grand parents from Chesterfield,Derby and South Yorkshire...so it's a small world isn't it...?

We could even be kin...!!

Skol

Hardrada

Theudiskaz
Monday, July 3rd, 2006, 06:28 PM
I'm roughly half English. I wish I knew where my ancestors came from. Unfortunately my family hasn't kept very good records of my English ancestry. The German side however, is not surprisingly, meticulously researched.:D

Joseph
Monday, July 3rd, 2006, 09:52 PM
Unfortunately my family hasn't kept very good records of my English ancestry.
I ran into similar problems researching certain parts of my own family tree, due to poor record keeping during the westward migration of the late 1700's. http://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi is an excellent resource for tracing ones English ancestry. Most of the families represented in the database are decedents of colonial English settlers of New England and Virginia. I hope this helps.

Oswiu
Tuesday, July 4th, 2006, 12:27 AM
I ran into similar problems researching certain parts of my own family tree, due to poor record keeping during the westward migration of the late 1700's. http://wc.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi is an excellent resource for tracing ones English ancestry. Most of the families represented in the database are decedents of colonial English settlers of New England and Virginia. I hope this helps.
THanks for that, Joseph! I just had a little look, and it seems somebody in Ancient America divorced a person of my surname, and then married a Milosevich! :D

Northerner
Saturday, July 8th, 2006, 05:59 AM
I am of predominately German and English ancestry. Most of my English heritage is from my mother's side, though my dad has a little. I also have a small amount of Irish and Scottish. One of my paternal uncles claims that we have a trace of Welsh through one of my great-grandmothers. I was doing some genealogy work awhile back and found that there may also be some Pict through my Scottish forbearers.

Sebastian Archer
Thursday, August 10th, 2006, 01:02 PM
Well i am certainly part English, but as to whether it is a Celtic form or one that originated from the Continent im not sure, i do know that i have some Norman ancestory and i expect that the Scots side of my heritage was partly Nordic as they originated on the East coast whereas the others were from the West. I also have some East Prussian heritage and Welsh-Irish. My estimation is 7/16 scots 4/16 Welsh-Irish 4/16 English and 1/16 East Prussian.

Bridie
Saturday, August 19th, 2006, 03:08 PM
Okay, well since being a member of Skadi, I've been feeling closer to my roots ;) (and yes, a few people here have had a lot to do with me re-discovering my heritage, and re-considering 'who I am' - Leofric, Rhydderch, Osweee.... you've got a lot to answer for!!! :D ), and I don't know yet if that's a good or bad thing.... but anyway, I'm mostly English (I only have one Great-Grandma who was German - the rest of my ancestry is English).

Paternal Grandfather - he was born in Australia, but his parents had only emigrated here from Bradford a year before he was born (that's somewhere around the middle, right?).

Paternal Grandmother - her father was from Shirley, Derbyshire (migrated to Australia as a teen), and her mother was from Essex somewhere.

Maternal Grandmother - her mother was of German, but her Dad's parents were from Ashford, Kent.

Maternal Grandfather - his parents were from London.

Glynd Eastŵd
Saturday, August 19th, 2006, 04:16 PM
ernal Grandfather - he was born in Australia, but his parents had only emigrated here from Bradford a year before he was born (that's somewhere around the middle, right?)..

Yeah, Bradford is located to the North, not too far away from Manchester. It's probably a good thing that your grandfather left, there's been a lot of trouble there in recent years. It's pretty much the epicentre of immigration in the UK, and there's been numerous incidents of race related violence.

But on the plus side I hear the BNP are making progress there. :thumbup

Revanchist
Tuesday, September 5th, 2006, 09:25 PM
Pure English on my mother's side. Pure Scottish on my father's side.

zupantrzyglowa
Tuesday, September 12th, 2006, 09:00 PM
no need for academics, mathematics or politics, three things make you English...RACE-CULTURE-TRADITION. Anyone care to debate the simplest undeniable truth?

:thumbup

germanic
Wednesday, September 20th, 2006, 06:03 PM
I am a true pure blooded Englishman and I thank the lord for that honour every day.

Keep Saint George in my heart keep me English ,
Keep Saint George in my heart I pray,
Keep Saint George in my heart keep me English,
Keep me English till my dying day:)

Stratcat
Wednesday, October 11th, 2006, 04:16 PM
Almost 1/2 paternal English.

PeterThaGreat
Wednesday, October 11th, 2006, 05:26 PM
I'll start. At least three quarters English. All from Derby, Chesterfield both in Derbyshire, South Yorkshire, Manchester, and Newark in Nottinghamshire.


I've visited England, does that count?:|

No seriously, I am spiritually english, an anglophile.

Can't wait to travel back there after couple of weeks.:P

BTW I've been in Newark, Notts. Lovely little city.

Thruthheim
Wednesday, October 11th, 2006, 06:50 PM
I've visited England, does that count?:|

No seriously, I am spiritually english, an anglophile.

Can't wait to travel back there after couple of weeks.:P

BTW I've been in Newark, Notts. Lovely little city.

I'd happily welcome a Hallstatt to England ;)

I'm in a place called Lincoln, near Nottingham, you should make a trip here, it has some lovely historical sites, like travelling back in time.

ćţeling
Wednesday, October 11th, 2006, 08:08 PM
Given further research it appears that most of my ancestry is from north-east Derbyshire, and the bordering part of Nottinghamshire. The Trent valley around Newark and Lowdam provides another source of ancestry.

Incidentally north-east Derbyshire, according to several genetic studies, seems to have been largely untouched by early English settlement, unlike the nearby Peak. It remained substantially a British stronghold until the arrival of the Danes in the 9th century. Chesterfield seems to have around a 10% frequency of markers common to Scandinavia, compared to an average 4.5% for the rest of the former Danelaw.

Hardrada
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:23 PM
Given further research it appears that most of my ancestry is from north-east Derbyshire, and the bordering part of Nottinghamshire. The Trent valley around Newark and Lowdam provides another source of ancestry.

Incidentally north-east Derbyshire, according to several genetic studies, seems to have been largely untouched by early English settlement, unlike the nearby Peak. It remained substantially a British stronghold until the arrival of the Danes in the 9th century. Chesterfield seems to have around a 10% frequency of markers common to Scandinavia, compared to an average 4.5% for the rest of the former Danelaw.

Dear Aetheling,

That's right, a recent epidemiology study revealed a lot of "Danish" DNA in Chesterfield, well above the average for the rest of the Danelaw and suggesting a large settlement.

Chesterfield is my home town, and my own DNA tests reveal that my Male line DNA haplotype is very common in Denmark and NW Germany...suggesting I'm little better than a Germanic immigrant...!!:)

Does that qualify me for assisted housing, and a free rein to sack and pillage...?:D

Kind regards

Hardrada

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:38 PM
Lovely little city.

You even sound like an Englishman! :thumbup

Thruthheim
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:45 PM
I've visited England, does that count?:|

No seriously, I am spiritually english, an anglophile.

Can't wait to travel back there after couple of weeks.:P

BTW I've been in Newark, Notts. Lovely little city.

Out of all the people's, i've found the Finns to be the most numerous in admiration of England. I wonder if there's a greater reason to this, or just plain coincidence?

Oswiu
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:50 PM
Out of all the people's, i've found the Finns to be the most numerous in admiration of England. I wonder if there's a greater reason to this, or just plain coincidence?
Either simple good taste [gets my vote!] or merely as a result of being far enough away from us to not notice our bad side. And aren't they just about the only country in the World we've never been to war with? ;)

PeterThaGreat
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:53 PM
You even sound like an Englishman! :thumbup


Thanks! I take that as a huge compliment ;)

Now I just I need a proper book on english phrases and idioms to further enhance my skills.

Thruthheim
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:53 PM
Either simple good taste [gets my vote!] or merely as a result of being far enough away from us to not notice our bad side. And aren't they just about the only country in the World we've never been to war with? ;)

I think we have had some kind of declaration of war with them in the past, during the Napoleonic wars? I need to find the correct sources though, ofcourse I could be mistaken.

Oswiu
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 07:58 PM
I think we have had some kind of declaration of war with them in the past, during the Napoleonic wars? I need to find the correct sources though, ofcourse I could be mistaken.
Nah, can't have had! Finland has only existed as a sovereign state since 1917.

Thruthheim
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 08:00 PM
Nah, can't have had! Finland has only existed as a sovereign state since 1917.


That's a very good point Oswiu ;)

PeterThaGreat
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 08:18 PM
Either simple good taste [gets my vote!] or merely as a result of being far enough away from us to not notice our bad side. And aren't they just about the only country in the World we've never been to war with? ;)

Well, actually we've been to war with but that was only theoretical. Thanks to extensive pressure from Stalin you waged a war on us after we started to cuddle with the Germans in 1941 :~(

Actually, now that I am thinking about it, finns might admire England more on average than rest of the Europeans. Might be something to do with the dry homour which is very similar to that of finnish.

I've always admired the achievements the Anglo-Saxon culture has produced, unprecedented in the modern history.

A typical english response for me right now would be: "oh, come off it!"

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 08:22 PM
The Finns no doubt have a well-rounded perspective on WW2, having had to seek alliances of convenience, despite being allied with Nazi Germany, emerging from the conflict with intact credibility.

So a lot of grey areas rather than black & white "we won" or "you lost". WW2 in the popular conciousness of France or Germany is much simpler.

------------

I notice that Scandinavians/Nordics whatever are generally amiable to the English, unlike some French or Greeks or Spanish, all of whom have their own grievances.

The Nordic nations are also somewhat on the periphery of Europe, looking outwards over the seas, which is in common with the English. The Belgiums, Austrians, etc, are obviously more orientated inwards to Europe.

Evolved
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 08:28 PM
Part English, on me mum's side. :)

Here's a surname map of my English roots:
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a379/yeahsarah82/GBnames_CETL126002148100542.png

I got @ this site (http://www.spatial-literacy.org/UCLnames/).

PeterThaGreat
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 08:41 PM
------------I notice that Scandinavians/Nordics whatever are generally amiable to the English, unlike some French or Greeks or Spanish, all of whom have their own grievances.

The Nordic nations are also somewhat on the periphery of Europe, looking outwards over the seas, which is in common with the English. The Belgiums, Austrians, etc, are obviously more orientated inwards to Europe.

That is very true.

There is a certain bond with the protestant countries of the north and Britain. As opposed to Catholic continental Europe. ( Dutch being the exception) Manners, customs and the general way how people conduct themselves are somewhat similar in these countries.

Esther_Helena
Wednesday, October 18th, 2006, 09:09 PM
*raises hand* I am.

Carl
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 01:49 PM
I am English...Born and Bred...

Although within My Englishness.. i find my pride in our Germanic gene Pool..

Saxons, Angles, Danes, Norse, Frisians, Jutes, Normans :thumbup


Sounds about right!!! Mostly south . Mother's father from Yorkshire.....!? :-O

dazed&confused
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 02:22 PM
I've once been told I could pass for English because of my cold fish attitude when sober. Does that count?

OneEnglishNorman
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 02:25 PM
I've once been told I could pass for English because of my cold fish attitude when sober. Does that count?

No. Alpinids are shot on sight in England :)

dazed&confused
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 02:52 PM
No. Alpinids are shot on sight in England :)

there are still alive brachycephalic people at large in England http://www.politicaonline.net/forum/images/smile/thumb.gif

http://www.rap.de/gfx/features/560/th_1_teaser_done.jpg

darthantares
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 04:05 PM
I remember when we had to have "multicultural day" in elementary school we had to draw pictures of our ancestors in their ethnic dress and I thought I was very unique and special because I had English ancestors. Even though it is only confirmed to make up maybe a little less than a quarter of my ancestry I thought I was the ultimate WASP because no one else would claim English ancestry. But looking back I believe that its because people considered being English the ultimate non-ethnic since they were the group that had the founding influence on the US. Otherwise somebody has to explain to me where all those foreign born Englishmen went that I see in the census records throughout the 19th century. That or there was some mysterious supernatural event like the Rapture that made them and their descendants disappear.

Alice
Saturday, November 4th, 2006, 04:15 PM
My mother is English (Manchester, yay!), and my father is of predominantly English descent. I feel a strong attachment to Northern England, and though the South of England is glorious, I am more at home in the North. :thumbup

ćţeling
Friday, November 24th, 2006, 11:04 AM
I should better revise mine, knowing far more about my ancestry and being able to chase down some "sources" given by others.

Although I am not big on numbers I would say at least 95% English. Mostly from Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, with one branch in Sheerness/Kent. Another runs to the Salford/Manchester region, where despite an Irish surname this family has been in England from at least the 1840's, before that unsure. Another branch runs back to Flanders, but is resident in England from the 1300's, and married into several English families, so English as far as I am concerned.

There is one definate non-English link going to Ireland in the 1880's, and a possible Irish/Ulster, or Scottish link.

BrunnBeast
Friday, November 24th, 2006, 12:05 PM
I come from a hardcore irish family (my grandfather didn't allow anything colored oreange in the house) but under cover of the internet i can let the secret out we've got some english in the blood. I have nothing against english but am very proud to be an irish cromagnon relic. hell im proud of the english too pretty much took over the world and founded modern power structure, although we have messed it up bad. anyway, pride in white culture and identity is something there needs to be more of. sorry for rambling

darthantares
Saturday, December 23rd, 2006, 03:43 AM
This is the paternal progenitor of my paternal grandmother's family's supposed gravestone. This picture was taken by one of my father's cousins last month. Open up the picture and zoom in on the biography.

90369

Muspellz Synir
Saturday, December 23rd, 2006, 05:34 AM
Proud Orange Anglo-Irish/Swedish Mix :D

Alpine Storm
Tuesday, January 30th, 2007, 08:09 AM
Since this post began I have had some success in my genealogical research

I am Ron's Son
Son of Robert
Son of George
Son of Nathan
Son of Joel
Son of JohnJohn was born in Yorkshire in 1776, 299 Years later I was born in the United States. Being the first in my direct lineage born outside of Yorkshire or Durham.

karolvs
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 06:43 AM
I am a great deal English, all the way back to Aethelred, and William the Conqueror is a grandfather as well, but he is Norman, do you consider him English ? Harold on the other side of the battle was also a grandfather of mine I can look up exact relations if you'd like, but I know Edward I "Longshanks" was 13th great grandfather on my mother's side.

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 08:08 AM
William the Conqueror was the first Englishman




;)

SuuT
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 02:01 PM
I am! - I guess. (Saxon branch in my family): waaaaaaaay back.

*Suut/Svhot- Sudtone/Sudtana/Suthtone/Sutton


Guess we need to define 'English' :D .

RedJack
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007, 11:59 PM
Those are some very illustrious ancestors, Kermeltic. :thumbup


Don't worry about having William the Bastard in your family tree, we all have skeletons in the closet. ;)

ćţeling
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 01:59 AM
As our good friend the Duke of Bourbon proclaims in Henry V, Act 111, scene V:

“Normans, but bastard Normans, Norman bastards!”

Couldn’t have put it better myself, even the French didn’t like them!:D

Carl
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 01:15 PM
William the Conqueror was the first Englishman



Yes , provocative and quite untrue, At that time, there were no English! The AngloSaxons were overrun by a NormanFrench "admixture" as terroristic overlords for a brief period - who did much to finish off the old AS state. In due time, Henry I married 'into' the old Saxon line bringing in a degree of healing ; only after a few more centuries did English finally emerge.

All good people remember only William the bastard - not at all as an Englishman but as son to Robert the Devil, Duke of Normandy! Our ancient parishes remain largely Saxon - pity about the gods....

ćţeling
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 01:49 PM
Originally Posted by Carl
At that time, there were no English!


Alright I’ll bite because I don’t know if you are kidding, or not, so apologies if you are, but you will find that the words English, and England were used to describe our people and land a fair few centuries before the Normans arrived.

The laws of Ine refer to the English race in comparison to the Welsh. The Life of Ceolfriđ c.AD716 uses the words English, and England, and let’s not forget Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People written in AD731. The Life of Guđlac AD 730 referred to King Athelred of Mercia as King of the English. The West Saxon Wynfriđ, or Boniface as he is better known, refers to the English people when discussing the Church and Anglo-Saxons as a whole. The Synod of Clofesho in AD803 referred to the English people. In later Old English Engle, Engla, Englalond, and England, are words used to describe the English and England.

The earliest possible reference we have to the etymological origins of the word English, in England, is Pope Gregory’s letter to Candidus in AD 595 where he refers to King Athelberht of Kent as King of the Angles.

karolvs
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 02:32 PM
Well I can see no fans of William teh Conqueror here, but you have to admit, as much as you dislike him, he did rule england and his ancestors are still ruling you today, maybe thats where the dislike comes from / What are your feelings about the Queen ?

Carl
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 06:47 PM
Alright I’ll bite because I don’t know if you are kidding, or not, so apologies if you are, but you will find that the words English, and England were used to describe our people and land a fair few centuries before the Normans arrived.


You are making such a clever point ;) ; I didn't ever realize that people refered to AngloSaxon as Old English. I didn't know that Bede wrote his famous history in English either....though the search here seems to think that he wrote it in Latin, using very un-Saxon words:

Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum - gained him the title "The father of English history" .:D What, is that what they said at the time? - isn't that interesting!

But at least when they refer to the Chronicles, they have the good grace to call them Anglo-Saxon not English. I am sure the early Saxon kings never thought of themselves as Angles or 'Anglora' or "English". Anyway all this is out of context; it began with the absurd idea that William the bastard was (quote) "an Englishman". It was a very long time before that word existed. But it's a useful point! The Norman in-comers were not AngloSaxon - they went on speaking early French ( I guess). It was some time before the English language finally emerged - and the English people were truely united beneath their new language. Never truer - their language became for them the house of their being!

But , let me finish with Bede , since you have introduced him.

""Those who came over were of the three most powerful nations of Germany : Saxons, Angles, and Jutes :) . From the Jutes are descended the people of Kent, and of the Isle of Wight, and those also in the province of the West Saxons who are to this day called Jutes, seated opposite to the Isle of Wight. From the Saxons, that is, the country which is now called Old Saxony, came the East Saxons, the South Saxons, and the West Saxons. From the Angles, that is, the country which is called Anglia, and which is said, from that time, to remain desert to this day, between the provinces of the Jutes and the Saxons, are descended the East Angles, the Midland Angles, Mercians, all the race of the Northumbrians, that is, of those nations that dwell on the north side of the river Humber, and the other nations of the English"". (again , translated from Latin. I assume that he was an northern Angle.)

Lots of related peoples there already - and its true, we are not (- we did not become) "New Saxony" but the Land of the English, Angleterre! :|
Odd to see him call the Jutes one of the 'most powerful nations of Germany' ; he clearly didn't know some of the others! And German too, now that will please Oswui!

ćţeling
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 08:49 PM
Originally Posted by Carl
But at least when they refer to the Chronicles, they have the good grace to call them Anglo-Saxon not English. I am sure the early Saxon kings never thought of themselves as Angles or 'Anglora' or "English".


The evidence suggests that Angle and Saxon may have been inter-changeable, or confused. A letter from Pope Vitalian to King Oswiu of Northumbria refers to him as “king of the Saxons”. A papal legation of AD786 referred to English Saxony, and the people as Angles. As I posted above King Ine of the West Saxons refers specifically to the English, not Saxons, when comparing them to his Welsh subjects. There is also the possibility that Procopius confused Frisian for Saxon.

As for the chronicles I believe they were first entitled “Anglo-Saxon” in 1912, I might be wrong, but they are nine separate manuscripts, all in Old English, one is translated into Latin, and many later entries show the changes from Old to Middle English. Also Duke William is only ever referred to as King of Englaland, not king of the Angelcynn.



The Norman in-comers were not AngloSaxon - they went on speaking early French ( I guess).


Norman-French, the dialect still survives, especially in the Channel Islands. It is basically Old French with vocabulary influenced by Old Norse, and a few grammatical changes.



It was some time before the English language finally emerged


Before Modern English emerged, yes, but this isn’t the debate. The words Englisc, Angelcynn, Englalande, or Englalond, and England, existed before the arrival of the Normans.


(again , translated from Latin.

Yes he did write in Latin where he refers to the several peoples of England as gens, or populi Anglorum. For Bede the English were quite simply the union of several Germanic peoples under the Christian Church.



I assume that he was an northern Angle.)


Bede was born in AD673 on land owned by the monastery of Wearmouth, so yes he would have been Northumbrian.

ćţeling
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 09:12 PM
Originally Posted by Kermeltic
Well I can see no fans of William teh Conqueror here, but you have to admit, as much as you dislike him, he did rule england and his ancestors are still ruling you today, maybe thats where the dislike comes from.


I don’t particularly dislike William, he was a bastard in the non-literal sense of the word, but so were many men of his time. I admire William for a number of his characteristics, he was courageous, and he was quite tender towards Mathilda, he was also an opportunist, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. But he was also ruthless to the point of being psychotic, although even he supposedly admitted on his death bed that he went to far in his northern genocide that was nice of him wasn’t it…

He was also supernaturally lucky, and it was this as well as the force of his personality that enabled him to conquer England. It seems that, at first, he was really keen to be seen as Edward’s legitimate successor, and intended, initially, to keep much of the English aristocracy in place. Only after the English bid for freedom did he decide to get rid of the charade and probably do what he had in mind all along anyway.

The Normans are crucial to modern English identity, for good or bad, but William is still a bastard.



What are your feelings about the Queen ?

Rubbish since Freddy died, Bryan May tries, but it’s not the same really….ah you meant Her Majesty. Indifferent really.

CaptainHook
Thursday, February 15th, 2007, 10:23 PM
I think I am like 1/16 English. Would you count this as part English? I am am also about 1/32 German, would you still count me as part German or is it too insignificant?

ćţeling
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 12:09 AM
Originally Posted by CaptainHook
I think I am like 1/16 English. Would you count this as part English? I am am also about 1/32 German, would you still count me as part German or is it too insignificant?


Well you would have some English, and some German ancestry, regardless of how long ago. The rest depends on you whether you emphasis it, or not, I have some Irish, and possibly Scottish blood. It is part of my ancestry, but I don’t have any particular interest in following it up, it’s not relevant to my identity.

What is your main ancestral roots?

RedJack
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 03:35 AM
It was said that William could vault into the saddle wearing his full suit of armour. It is very interesting to speculate what the world would be like if Harold, the last English King, had won at Senlac Hill.

Bridie
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 05:24 AM
I think I am like 1/16 English. Would you count this as part English? I am am also about 1/32 German, would you still count me as part German or is it too insignificant?
Hmmm... this is only my opinion... but I think that with such small degrees of both English and German ancestry, it would be strange for one to consider you ethnically or racially either English or German.

I wouldn't ever call someone's ancestral background "insignificant" though. :)



It is part of my ancestry, but I don’t have any particular interest in following it up, it’s not relevant to my identity. I'm 1/8 German ancestry, but I don't consider myself ethnically German at all because I feel that it is too small of a percentage of my racial/cultural background. For me it has nothing to do with having no interest in this part of my ancestry... I actually do... but I would feel "fake" or pretentious claiming to be part German. And besides that, I don't "feel" as though I'm ethnically German (but this, of course, would have a lot to do with the way I was raised, and the environment in which I was raised :) ).

I guess it just goes to show that we all judge these sorts of things differently.

karolvs
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 01:44 PM
I consider all of my ancestral history important. Everyday I think of all my ancestors and my roots not putting one in front of another but all beside each other. Of course I am 100% Northern European and I see them as equal, but I think everyone should consider each of their ancestral roots as important as each other and celebrate them all with equal pride.

Carl
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 02:02 PM
Guess we need to define 'English' :D .

- in a nutshell ! It hardly falls to me to argue with you, AEtheling , about the beginning of the English. The AS certainly absorbed some of the earlier Brito-Romano-Celts - and later the Danes ?? ( - or not yet perhaps) - as I imagine the English had finally absorbed the Norman incomers - including their new "aristocracy"!! I myself prefer to think of the old English as AngloSaxons , a people after all defeated - in effect - by Danish conquest even before the Norman onslaught. The AS had been much weakened by the church and fell into disunity. Things could have been different. William the B. invaded under a papal banner. At least we can remember that!

OneEnglishNorman
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 07:00 PM
Is there an element by which the Norman conquest reinforces the Anglo-Saxon consciousness of the English at the expense of the Celtic ancestry. It seems that Englishness becomes encapsulated by the battle of Hastings, whereas without that battle, the English would look at how the various waves of immigration melded together.

sheriff skullface
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 07:10 PM
I'm about a third english, I think, you don't get much whiter than anglo-saxon and part german:thumbup

OneEnglishNorman
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 07:32 PM
I am 5/8 English, 4 of these are from Yorkshire and Oxfordshire. 1 is from Norfolk.

Probably 1/8 Scottish (name Hamilton, red hair). 1/8 Guernsey. 1/8 French :thumbdown:) from Paris. Interestingly, had a French version of an old Germanic name.

CaptainHook
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 07:47 PM
Well you would have some English, and some German ancestry, regardless of how long ago. The rest depends on you whether you emphasis it, or not, I have some Irish, and possibly Scottish blood. It is part of my ancestry, but I don’t have any particular interest in following it up, it’s not relevant to my identity.

What is your main ancestral roots?

My main ancestral roots are Armenian on my mothers side and Irish on my fathers side.

ćţeling
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 08:43 PM
Originally Posted by Carl
in a nutshell ! It hardly falls to me to argue with you, AEtheling , about the beginning of the English.
Were not arguing, it’s a difference of opinion, that’s all.:)



The AS certainly absorbed some of the earlier Brito-Romano-Celts - and later the Danes ?? ( - or not yet perhaps) –
Well it’s beyond reasonable doubt that most of the British population survived in the English kingdoms. As for the Danes it is open to debate how much of an impact they had, genetically, on the English population.


as I imagine the English had finally absorbed the Norman incomers - including their new "aristocracy"!!

Certainly.

Again it is debatable how many Normans actually migrated to England, I would hazard that the Norman army at Hastings would have been about 7,500 men, we could probably stretch the occupation force to 10-12,000 men, plus aristocrats, merchants, maybe 20-30,000 all told, that’s just my figure, though. I know there was a “French quarter” in Nottingham not long after the occupation, and we also know that Bretons and Flemish arrived in England.


I myself prefer to think of the old English as AngloSaxons , a people after all defeated - in effect - by Danish conquest even before the Norman onslaught.

Well Harold Godwinson was half Danish, and the kingdom he led was largely Anglo-Danish in influences. The Huscarls were certainly Scandinavian influenced arriving with Cnut. Alfred, of course, saved Wessex, and by extension England, from Danish conquest, and his son, and grandson completed the re-conquest of England. And let us not forget Brunanburh AD937 where Athelstan leading what we can probably call the first united English army, Wessex and Mercian, crushed the Strathclyde Welsh, Scots, and Hiberno-Norse armies.

The English kingdom on the eve of Hastings was probably the richest state north of the Alps, and Hastings was a very, very close call for William. The assault that broke the English shield wall really was his last throw of the dice, an hour later and it would have been getting dark…


The AS had been much weakened by the church and fell into disunity.

Much as I am Heathen, the EnglishChurch of the AS period is not comparable to the CofE. I am always slightly torn reading about the Danish wars between my people and the sons of Odin who invaded our lands.

The old church fathers were very fire and brimstone, but they didn’t crush the old religion completely, and we are still here today. In some of us the old Gods still live, and they always will as long as some Englishman hold true to our ancestral faith.


Things could have been different.

Oh yes, still if you believe in the “trousers of time” then somewhere things were very different.


William the B. invaded under a papal banner. At least we can remember that!

We can indeed.

The winds of wisdom lash my face
As I hail this open space
Under the burning midday sun
I sense the power that makes us one
This stretch of land before I see
Lies symbolic of history
An Angleman, I am of many
I am of their spirit, I am of them

I hear their ancient voice

Forefather, an excellent band I would recommend, I think you would like them.

http://www.forefather.net/frame.htm



Originally Posted by OneEnglishNorman
Is there an element by which the Norman conquest reinforces the Anglo-Saxon consciousness of the English at the expense of the Celtic ancestry. It seems that Englishness becomes encapsulated by the battle of Hastings, whereas without that battle, the English would look at how the various waves of immigration melded together.

I am not sure I understand what you mean here. Could you elaborate for me?

Carl
Friday, February 16th, 2007, 11:45 PM
Well it’s beyond reasonable doubt that most of the British population survived in the English kingdoms. As for the Danes it is open to debate how much of an impact they had, genetically, on the English population. [/COLOR]


yes thanks for that. I am sure its all a matter of degree - but my thinking is much conditioned by being in the 'Saxon' south ! :)

But that Aethelred went out of his way to kill the Danes ( Brice day massacre) - 1002 CE - part of my own ill feeling for that period wherein I see the ASaxon state beginning its failure in a serious way....Aethelred finally fled and married into Normandy ( - so onward to doom). The Danes had settled fairly well in the east and were already good farmers (it is said). He should have been more tactful!! He didn't know how it seems. Pity. I certainly thought by then that there were quite a lot of Danish settlers ( in Anglia, in the north east ?) - who clearly were subsequently absorbed in due course into the glorious assembly :D .

Carl
Monday, February 19th, 2007, 12:15 AM
Well - a nice idea to invite Oswiu to comment on Bede's calling the Angles 'german' (he'd love that :D ) in -

http://forums.skadi.net/showpost.php?p=756352&postcount=101

.... but as we now know Oswiu was into other things.:

http://forums.skadi.net/showpost.php?p=755540&postcount=70

Let's hope the Russians look after him and not lead him astray - in that way they sometimes have..... :|

Angelcynn Beorn
Monday, February 19th, 2007, 01:59 AM
Well it’s beyond reasonable doubt that most of the British population survived in the English kingdoms.

Actually quite a lot of people doubt this very thing, including most of those who were alive at the time to witness it.

;)

Rhydderch
Monday, February 19th, 2007, 12:16 PM
Actually quite a lot of people doubt this very thing, including most of those who were alive at the time to witness it.

;)That's only if they're interpreted uncritically. I don't think the writings of say Bede are at all inconsistent with the idea of the Britons being conquered rather than being largely slaughtered.

Carl
Monday, February 19th, 2007, 07:36 PM
concerning the British celts - some fled west , some fought back - of which nodoubt some died - and some were married into :D . How on earth anyone can comment on percentages is beyond me... and of little interest! :-O

Angelcynn Beorn
Tuesday, February 20th, 2007, 08:07 PM
That's only if they're interpreted uncritically. I don't think the writings of say Bede are at all inconsistent with the idea of the Britons being conquered rather than being largely slaughtered.

Bede:

Those who came over were of the three most powerful nations of Germany * Saxons, Angles, and Jutes. From the Jutes are descended the people of Kent, and of the Isle of Wight, and those also in the province of the West Saxons who are to this day called Jutes, seated opposite to the Isle of Wight. From the Saxons, that is, the country which is now called Old Saxony, came the East Saxons, the South Saxons, and the West Saxons. From the Angles, that is, the country which is called Anglia, and which is said, from that time, to remain desert to this day, between the provinces of the Jutes and the Saxons, are descended the East Angles, the Midland Angles, Mercians, all the race of the Northumbrians, that is, of those nations that dwell on the north side of the river Humber, and the other nations of the English. The two first commanders are said to have been Hengist and Horsa. Of whom Horsa, being afterwards slain in battle by the Britons, was buried in the eastern parts of Kent, where a monument, bearing his name, is still in existence. They were the sons of Victgilsus, whose father was Vecta, son of Woden; from whose stock the royal race of many provinces deduce their original. In a short time, swarms of the aforesaid nations came over into the island, and they began to increase so much, that they became terrible to the natives themselves who had invited them. Then, having on a sudden entered into league with the Picts, whom they had by this time repelled by the force of their arms, they began to turn their weapons against their confederates. At first, they obliged them to furnish a greater quantity of provisions; and, seeking an occasion to quarrel, protested, that unless more plentiful supplies were brought them, they would break the confederacy, and ravage all the island; nor were they backward in putting their threats in execution. In short, the fire kindled by the hands of these pagans proved God's just revenge for the crimes of the people; not unlike that which, being once lighted by the Chaldeans, consumed the walls and city of Jerusalem. For the barbarous conquerors acting here in the same manner, or rather the just Judge ordaining that they should so act, they plundered all the neighbouring cities and country, spread the conflagration from the eastern to the western sea, without any opposition, and covered almost every part of the devoted island. Public as well as private structures were overturned; the priests were everywhere slain before the altars; the prelates and the people, without any respect of persons, were destroyed with fire and sword; nor was there any to bury those who had been thus cruelly slaughtered. Some of the miserable remainder, being taken in the mountains, were butchered in heaps; others, spent with hunger, came forth and submitted themselves to the enemy for food, being destined to undergo perpetual servitude, if they were not killed even upon the spot some, with sorrowful hearts, fled beyond the seas. Others, continuing in their own country, led a miserable life among the woods, rocks, and mountains, with scarcely enough food to support life, and expecting every moment to be their last.

I have to say that seems fairly straight forward to me, especially taken in conjucture with the writings of Nennius and Gildas which also talk of ethnic cleansing and mass exodus.

Galahad
Tuesday, February 20th, 2007, 11:07 PM
I'm of English ancestry.


Every other bugger has one. So lets do the same for the English.

I'll start. At least three quarters English. All from Derby, Chesterfield both in Derbyshire, South Yorkshire, Manchester, and Newark in Nottinghamshire.


I am 100% English, so are my parents and all of my grandparents. We are all from Lancashire. My family name is a Saxon one. :thumbup

Hey, that's where my ancestors are from. My name's Saxon too. The rest of my family names are either Anglo-Saxon or Norman. :knight

Rhydderch
Wednesday, February 21st, 2007, 03:51 AM
I have to say that seems fairly straight forward to me, especially taken in conjucture with the writings of Nennius and Gildas which also talk of ethnic cleansing and mass exodus.Bede's source for that information was clearly Gildas; it's almost word for word.

In any case this is a reference to a raid which occured quite early on; if I remember rightly, he says after this that the raiders returned to their settlements (on the isle of Thanet). Continental writers describe barbarian raids in the same way, yet no-one argues that most of the population of Spain, Italy and Gaul were slaughtered or driven out. I think they're referring to the fate of those who were, to put it simply, adversely affected by the raid, who were in the raiders' path. Many were actually slaughtered, many ran into hiding (in mountains and forests etc.) and led a life of hardship; that is, until the danger passed presumably. Many would of course come back to find their source of livelihood destroyed, and so have to move elsewhere, possibly overseas.

What I think is being read into the text is the idea that this was on a massive scale; I don't see any reason to believe that it even directly affected any more than a small minority of the population.

Added to this, in some cases is exaggeration for effect (rather than with the intention of misleading the readers). A writer describing an attack in Italy (I think) makes mention of "tiny remnants of the human race" in the context of those who survived the attack.

Another Anglo-Saxon writer (Alcuin?) mentions that the Britons were unable to regain (after the A-S conquests) the liberty they had gained with the Roman departure. And Bede himself implies near the end of his History of the English Church, that most of the Britons in his day were under the rule of Anglo-Saxons. I don't think there is any indication that the Britons themselves had been eradicated (either wholly or partially) from any part of Britain, just that in most parts they were now under foreign (to them) rule.

My opinion is that there is no fundamental difference between the Germanic conquest of Britain and the conquests on the continent (including the relative proportions of invaders to conquered), and that the difference in the outcome is primarily a result of Britain having been rather superficially Romanised in comparison to the continent.

ćţeling
Wednesday, February 21st, 2007, 09:55 PM
Originally Posted by Jamopy
Actually quite a lot of people doubt this very thing, including most of those who were alive at the time to witness it.


Most of?

Perhaps you can enlighten me about first hand accounts of the arrival of the Germanic peoples to Britain?

The closest we have to a contemporary account is Gildas, and we are not even sure of the exact dates he lived, his life being placed between c.AD490-570, and he is hardly reliable. De Excidio is more a rant against the un-godliness of the British, the Saxons are a punishment from God, which is why Bede adopted many of Gildas’ writings when he wrote his history of the English people. The idea of the advent of the Saxons being a punishment from God was an excellent piece of propaganda to incorporate into the history, especially as Bede berates the Britons for failing to convert the English.

Angelcynn Beorn
Thursday, February 22nd, 2007, 12:49 AM
Bede's source for that information was clearly Gildas; it's almost word for word.

I would imagine that Bede had access to many of the accounts of the Anglo-Saxon invasion that no longer survive, and that if his remarks had been so far off the mark as you are saying they are, that at least somebody would have noticed the fact.


In any case this is a reference to a raid which occured quite early on; if I remember rightly, he says after this that the raiders returned to their settlements (on the isle of Thanet).

I'm not sure exactly where you're reading this? Bede says quite clearly that the populations of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms are desended fom the invaders. That they Anglo-Saxons ravaged 'all the island' in the way he described. That 'they plundered all the neighbouring cities and country, spread the conflagration from the eastern to the western sea, without any opposition, and covered almost every part of the devoted island'. No mention at all of a small raid, but plenty of reference to a mass invasion.


Continental writers describe barbarian raids in the same way, yet no-one argues that most of the population of Spain, Italy and Gaul were slaughtered or driven out.

Because no replacement of the natives ever took place in those countries, which is why the native culture and language reasserted itself so quickly. Similarly to the way the Norman invaders were absorbed by the English. They had an effect, but in no way did they replace the original populations in the way that happened with the Anglo-Saxons.


What I think is being read into the text is the idea that this was on a massive scale; I don't see any reason to believe that it even directly affected any more than a small minority of the population.

Bede himself says it was on a massive scale, there's nothing being 'read into' that at all.




Most of?

Perhaps you can enlighten me about first hand accounts of the arrival of the Germanic peoples to Britain?

Unfortunately not, although it would be quite a coup if i could find some. ;)



The closest we have to a contemporary account is Gildas, and we are not even sure of the exact dates he lived, his life being placed between c.AD490-570, and he is hardly reliable. De Excidio is more a rant against the un-godliness of the British, the Saxons are a punishment from God, which is why Bede adopted many of Gildas’ writings when he wrote his history of the English people. The idea of the advent of the Saxons being a punishment from God was an excellent piece of propaganda to incorporate into the history, especially as Bede berates the Britons for failing to convert the English.

I tend to ignore much of the hype and propaganda in the sources, and simply look for any factual information contained within. Take out all the references to God and holy punishments, and all the accounts of the Anglo-Saxon invasion give a similar account. That of replacemnt by the Anglo-Saxons, with the Britons fleeing westward and across the sea.

Rhydderch
Thursday, February 22nd, 2007, 05:38 AM
I would imagine that Bede had access to many of the accounts of the Anglo-Saxon invasion that no longer survive, and that if his remarks had been so far off the mark as you are saying they are, that at least somebody would have noticed the fact.I don't think Bede is off the mark, it's a particular interpretation of his writing that I believe is off the mark.


Bede says quite clearly that the populations of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms are desended fom the invaders.I don't think he does. It should be born in mind that this is a history of the English church and people. Given this context, it's clear to me at least that he's referring to the English inhabitants of those kingdoms (and after all, they were the race from whom the kings themselves were derived), not to the population in general.


That they Anglo-Saxons ravaged 'all the island' in the way he described. That 'they plundered all the neighbouring cities and country, spread the conflagration from the eastern to the western sea, without any opposition, and covered almost every part of the devoted island'. No mention at all of a small raid, but plenty of reference to a mass invasion.Well I wouldn't call it a small raid, but I would say expressions like "all the island", and "every part" are being used in the same way that we often use similar expressions. In other words it was not restricted to one isolated corner, but occured "everywhere", i.e. in the east, the west, the center and so on. If I had driven through Northern England, the Midlands, West country, East Anglia, the south-east etc, I wouldn't be incorrect in saying I'd been on a trip "all over" England. In the same way I think a raid which spread "all over" the island of Britain needn't have directly affected more than a small fraction of the population.


Because no replacement of the natives ever took place in those countriesIf we interpret the Continental accounts, using the same assumptions you're using, we would be led to conclude that most of the population was replaced.


which is why the native culture and language reasserted itself so quickly.It's more that the two languages co-existed, and then one finally overcame the other. I think the difference lies in the fact that on the continent, Latin had, by the eve of the Germanic conquests, replaced local languages at least among the ruling classes. But my opinion is that although Latin was widely spoken in Britain as a second language, it had not actually replaced Brythonic even in the uppermost levels of society. I also think it stands to reason that many of the A-S were fluent in Latin, given the fact that there was extensive trade with the Roman world, and that they sometimes served as mercenaries in Roman armies.

If these points are accurate (and I'm pretty well convinced that they are), I'd say it actually follows that Old English would eventually replace Brythonic.

I can explain why if you're interested, or anyone else for that matter (I've explained it elsewhere, though perhaps not very clearly).


That of replacemnt by the Anglo-Saxons, with the Britons fleeing westward and across the sea.Are you referring to the A-S Chronicle? Those references in the Chronicle to Britons "fleeing" are plainly in the context of battles, in which case the "Britons" are obviously not the inhabitants in general of an area, but an army against whom the West Saxons were fighting. Presumably an army which had come out to defend a kingdom under threat of conquest.

ćţeling
Thursday, February 22nd, 2007, 03:09 PM
Originally Posted by Jamopy
I tend to ignore much of the hype and propaganda in the sources, and simply look for any factual information contained within. Take out all the references to God and holy punishments, and all the accounts of the Anglo-Saxon invasion give a similar account. That of replacemnt by the Anglo-Saxons, with the Britons fleeing westward and across the sea.


But only one of the accounts were written around the time, and as I wrote Gildas is not a certain eye witness to events, and several later accounts Bede, Nennius, and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are based on Gildas.

I am not stating that all of Gildas can be discounted, but taking the content of his only surviving work this was a man who comes across, to me, as hysterical in many of his comments and given to hyperbole. Plus when compared with the archaeological record, and the increasing consensus in genetic investigation, the case for “wipe out” falls apart. The evidence for a substantial Germanic migration is there, just not the evidence for the genocide that some would preach.

Kith of woden
Tuesday, March 13th, 2007, 01:18 AM
My Mothers side desended from Anglo-Saxons, my fathers Grandmother was Welsh (surname Evans), but the rest English.Waes Hael!

Reynard
Saturday, March 17th, 2007, 10:34 PM
Guilty as charged!!!

Half Lancashire, Half Yorkshire!!!

Fenris-SF
Saturday, March 17th, 2007, 11:23 PM
Half English. Virginia colonists and farmers. :thumbup

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, March 18th, 2007, 06:45 AM
I am about half English. My father's side is old Anglo-Saxon Yankee, WASP. They were in New England for 300 years. I have a first, middle and last name which scream Anglo-Saxon. Even the questionables in that side of the family tree all have plausable Anglo-Saxon names. When I say questionable, these are names like "Ring" which might be English or might be Dutch or German, perhaps. On my mother's side are the Germans. They have a real earthy German name. Somewhere on her side I have an alleged Irish ancestor. He entered the family in the mid 1800's and apparently was not Catholic (but on the western frontier, religion was the first thing to change). Actually, we just have his word that he was Irish, his name does not sound especially Irish, but he looked Irish.

Torquil
Wednesday, March 28th, 2007, 06:47 PM
I'm 1/8 English, with ancestors coming mostly from Yorkshire and the Borders region.