1066-2066

[BurgMeister]

As we draw closer to the Hastings millenia event (ok, we're about 5 decades from there but still), I just wanted to know your view about almost a thousand years of English struggle.

[Méldmir]

It is time that the English take back their country, and yet have a King/Queen or leader that is English and work for his/her people.

In 2066, William shall be known as William the Occupier!

The first can be said about all other Germanic countries.

[Ormus]

I find pride in the fact, and yet great dismay that the native British are being overrun without a fight, after so long of holding their own through their ingenuity.

[Florian Geyer]

In fifty years time, I doubt if the white minority will be celebrating this event, at least not officially anyway. It'll clash with the Muslim Celebration of Eid.

White infidel will probably be washing feet on that day.

[Méldmir]

I'll borrow this poem from Tolkien, I always like to see it as a sort of "prophecy", if you like. It can be applied to any folk/nation.

“All that is gold does not glitter, not all those who wander are lost; the old that is strong does not wither, deep roots are not reached by the frost. From the ashes a fire shall be woken, a light from the shadows shall spring; renenwed shall be blade that was broken, the crownless again shall be king.”

[Ediruc]

It is time that the English take back their country, and yet have a King/Queen or leader that is English and work for his/her people.

Now is the time to take back our countries.

[Sigurd]

It is time that the English take back their country, and yet have a King/Queen or leader that is English and work for his/her people.

In 2066, William shall be known as William the Occupier!

Many English should not take shame in tracing their ancestry back to the Normans. The Normans were a Germanic group as much as the Anglo-Saxons and the Norse (or as commonly referred to in England "The Vikings") were. The "Saxon vs. Norman" issue is largely construed and clearly a little over-rated.

The only major problem with the Norman conquest was that the language was painfully Frenchified as the Normans had at the time of William the Conqueror/Bastard already adopted the language of the neighbouring footfolk; the Scandinavian and thus fundamentally Germanic heritage of the Normans can however not be disputed, a brief venture into architecture in Normandy would suffice.

They didn't bring much else that was new: Christianity had already been adopted in 598, a good measure of chivalry was also known to previous governments of England, and so on and so forth.

Beyond a Frenchification of the language, the highly Latinate character is largely a newer phenomenon though. Whilst there were earlier borrowings (dating to Roman times), Norman borrowings (dating to the centuries after the Norman conquest), much of the Latinisms, actually the lion's share, is essentially attributable to some Romanophile scholars between the 14th-17th ccenturies.

In either instance, terming 1066 as the beginning of an "English struggle" is a highly selective date; one could just as much mention 788/89-793 as a beginning period for an "English struggle", and one could put the late 1600s down as the beginning period for an "English struggle" for readmission of the Jews. And so on and so forth. I think the Normans get way too much scorn and "bad publicity" from the Nationalist movement.

[Méldmir]

I read that William was fiercly anti-English, and enjoyed seeing the English suffer under his reign. I don't think the earlier Norse kings in England had the same view.

[SaxonCeorl]

Technically, the current royal line has blood from Alfred the Great, so all is not lost

[VictorTennyson]

In just six years England will have the millennial anniversary of its invasion and conquest by King Canute of Danmark.