Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 56

Thread: Saxons in Germany: English?

  1. #1
    Richmondshireman
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Danelaw & Brittany
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2a5a
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Richmond
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Muleskinner / Teamster
    Politics
    Palatine authority / autonomy
    Religion
    Lapsed Recusant / Church Papist
    Posts
    3,999
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,987
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    438
    Thanked in
    384 Posts

    Saxons in Germany: English?

    For all me Angle-folk, do you consider the Saxons still in Germany as part of the English, and furthermore would Americans count Germany as being their folk as much as the English? I know this seems like the reverse question, because it would usually be phrased as if the English are part of the Saxons still, despite moving to Britain, and questions on whether the Americans remain English despite the 1783 Treaty of Paris. It may even be extended as to whether the Americans would be German enough as grandchildren of that nation through England, but Americans speak the same language of England and not Germany, neither does England speak German, unless, of course, English is a German language. Enough Americans are of direct German descent without the English passage in Britain, so there would indeed be a multitude in combination of German heritage there.

    Too often, Continentalists hold grudges against the English and claim that the Anglophone world has betrayed them and other West Germanics apparently, whether by being de-Germanised through the Celts (but Germania was a Roman province under Gaulish administration, so that can't be it), claims of bastardisation by French influences (today's Germany was as much a subdivision of Napoleonic France as she was to begin with from Charlemagne, so that can't be it either), having been Roman (the state of post-Britannia England was Scandinavian and never Roman but Germany was an Augustan Roman province and the core of the Holy Roman Empire), having been Christian and sent missionaries like Boniface to Germany alongside Charlemagne, or having been used by the Jews (let's not get into this because the Yiddish people form a distinct part of the German and not the English world, and the English were responsible for expelling the Jews earlier than Germany [1290] with the Star of David identification invented in England).

    England also has the pound, was until recently imperial and fahrenheit in measurements, and has common law, whereas the Germans went early with the euro, metric, celsius and civil code of Napoleon. The Germans early on formed the modern European community, whilst England remains eurosceptic. I do not see why the Germans think they should judge their offspring so harshly when it is like the pot calling the kettle black; the only reason why the child state of England raises her hand against her parent state of Germany is because of suffering a form of child abuse.

    The German establishment has long looked down on the plattdeutsch (Charles V only spoke hochdeutsch to his horses, and plattdeutsch was lower in acceptance than that!), and when it came to the industrial competition of the Big Three between Berlin, London and Washington, and WWII plans made by Hitler for Anglo-German partnership, Berlin sought to sever Washington from London because Berlin hated her grandchild America as being wayward from her dictates (eugenics' retroactive abortion?). Germany, allied with the Hunnish and Turkish nations (apparently a premonition of the Japanese relationship), previously tried to encourage Hispanic Mexicans to war on Anglo-America, and sided with the Red Indians against their own grandchildren over American lebensraum (Manifest Destiny). Just because all three countries with an Ingaevonic component have been at each other's throats in the past few centuries, does not cancel out their blood--infighting is common with tribalism being suppressed by its development into nation-statism.

    When Hengist and Horsa came to Kent, they considered those still in Germany to be their fellow countrymen, which is why the English bothered to bring Christ to them. When New Englander Benjamin Franklin complained of German influence in Pennsylvania, he did make an exception for the Saxons, as being English like himself and the rest of the American general population.

    We can see that there has been a continuous stream of blood flowing from Germany to Britain to America, and recognition of this from those who look to their ancestors, with judgments by the parent and grandparent nations whether the offspring are still to be seen as something they are proud of.

    The specific question I am most concerned with though, is whether the Saxons form a part of the English people despite having lived under Carolingian rule and the establishment which continued to prevail up until the rise of Austria and Prussia. I know there was a Saxon dynasty in the Holy Roman Empire but Saxons never formed the majority of the country (they were even scattered into Transylvania to dilute their hegemony over their own region--re: also how Otto of Brunswick was treated), and their language of Low German has always been under the heels of hochdeutsch.

    The Ingaevones were obviously chiefly composed of the Angles, of which the English nation in Britain forms the majority, so it would appear to me that those who remained were the minority, detached and at the mercy of larger peoples in Germany. It is something like when the American colonists came sometimes as entire villages or towns, depopulating their homes in England so that none were left, which Bede basically said happened with the Angles in the south of Jutland. Of course, the Jutes and Frisians also largely remained in Germany, although they were part of the English confederation called Ingaevones.

    The Danes partitioned the remaining English people with French/Holy Roman Germany by taking Jutland, whilst Friesland and Saxony went to their southern neighbor, which was in an Italian partnership for the longest time (hmm, a nascent Rome-Berlin Axis?). Denmark also followed the English to Britain and pre-empted a partition with the French likewise, both following England from the Continent to the Island.

    I myself would count the Jutes, Saxons, and Frisians in Germany as the English that didn't cross the North Sea (German Ocean), just as Americans would consider the English to be their blood. Apparently, on the Island as compared with the Continent, the Danes and French in Britain did not have the complete advantage despite their occasional superiority. I would still see a parallel existence with Denmark and Scandinavia in general just as with the Rhineland countries. It would seem that the French and Danes basically pushed the English into Britain and tried to fight over not only the remains on the Continent (divided at the Dannevirke), but also those who had escaped to the Island (and possibly divided at Watling Street as well because of the French alliance held by Wessex which led to the Conquest, and Norman surnames in the West Country).

    One thing I am proud of, is that Germany has a large subdivision named for the Saxons (Sachsen), with a small district named for the Angles (Angeln), whilst Britain reciprocates with the large region of England, along with smaller areas named Sussex, Middlesex and Essex--Wessex no longer exists on paper (save for letters patent resurrecting the Earldom of Wessex), like Mercia (what of the Earldom of March?) and the Danelaw (is the wapentake enough to distinguish from Angle settlement?), I'm afraid. It is too bad that no land was named for the Frisians and Jutes in Britain, nor was there land named for the Norwegians, Swedes, and Geats who accompanied the Danes. America also has the naming tradition with New England, New Hampshire (after West Saxon heartland), New York (if you count that as English instead of Danish), and New Jersey (if you count that as English rather than French). Both were part of the Dominion of New England along with New Hampshire, so why not? Interestingly enough, the Saxon Shores and settlements existed in both Britain (where the Romanised Belgae resided rather than amongst the native Britons) and Gaul (pre-Norman north of Neustria), whilst Saxons became the ruling dynasts of the Scandinavian countries alongside the power of Lubeck's Hanseatic League.

    There are clear connections.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Unity Mitford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, August 24th, 2012 @ 01:03 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    English
    Gender
    Family
    Engaged
    Posts
    516
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10
    Thanked in
    9 Posts
    I do not think of German Saxons as 'English' but yes, we are of the same blood.

    An interesting post

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Unity Mitford For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    Richmondshireman
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Danelaw & Brittany
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2a5a
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Richmond
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Muleskinner / Teamster
    Politics
    Palatine authority / autonomy
    Religion
    Lapsed Recusant / Church Papist
    Posts
    3,999
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,987
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    438
    Thanked in
    384 Posts
    So they are not Ingaevones anymore because of being assimilated by the Franks, and cut off from the Angles?

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Unity Mitford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, August 24th, 2012 @ 01:03 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    English
    Gender
    Family
    Engaged
    Posts
    516
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    10
    Thanked in
    9 Posts
    They're not English, because they are Germans

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Unity Mitford For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Senior Member
    Wræcca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, August 24th, 2012 @ 05:57 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Country
    England England
    State
    Kent Kent
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Occupation
    Student
    Religion
    Anglican
    Posts
    92
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Tolkien thought that England was the original homeland of the English, and that Hengest and Horsa were merely returning home.

    It was the germanic Beaker tribes that built stonehedge; not the Britons.

    The White horse: the ancient symbol of the saxon people (see flag of Kent ≈ flag of Lower Saxony)

    Uffington White horse dates back some 3,000 years

    On a lighter note; would i consider saxons in Germany to be my brothers? Probably not ... completely different sense of humour
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    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.

  8. #6
    Richmondshireman
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Danelaw & Brittany
    Y-DNA
    R-BY30613
    mtDNA
    K2a5a
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Richmond
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Muleskinner / Teamster
    Politics
    Palatine authority / autonomy
    Religion
    Lapsed Recusant / Church Papist
    Posts
    3,999
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    9,987
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    438
    Thanked in
    384 Posts
    I was stating that the original homeland was in Germany, but that not the whole of the Ingaevones moved to Britain, only the majority. The rest which were left behind became absorbed into the Holy Roman Empire, but I was wondering if they could still be seen as English despite this lack of independence that they once had when all of the Ingaevones lived in Germany. It is obvious that the formation of England in Britain severely weakened the group that stayed behind, but I assumed some identity remained. After all, there was the Kingdom of Saxony. There is also a Friesland, and a Jutland in Denmark.

  9. #7
    MidgardPatriot
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimston View Post
    It is too bad that no land was named for the Frisians
    When I drove through Lincolnshire to the North Sea coast during Christmas week I passed through many villages with Germanic names. Frieston (Fries-Town), Asgardby, Thorsby, Wisbech.

  10. #8
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, February 14th, 2012 @ 09:53 AM
    Ethnicity
    Frisian
    Ancestry
    Predominately Frisian
    Country
    Frisia Frisia
    State
    Frisia Frisia
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Religion
    none
    Posts
    165
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Saxons in Germany are German.

    They have their own language, much like the Frisians, it is supposedly closer to English. I have my doubts because Frisian, while related to English is more related to old English. I also believe it is the same with Saxon its related to old English.

    Old English, the tongue they are more closely related to would not even be understood by the average modern English speaker.

    As a native English speaker, living in Friesland, I can not understand hardly a word of Frisian and have been here nearly two years.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to BroBro For This Useful Post:


  12. #9
    Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Online
    Wednesday, March 7th, 2012 @ 01:11 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Minor Irish
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Posts
    19
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Not anymore. I would imagine going back to a certain date we share many of the same ancestors and same history, so I feel there is some connection though it is distant.

    I find Frisian language really interesting, I cant understand it but it sounds very familiar to me, kind of like someone making up words as they go along in english perhaps..

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Onbaernan For This Useful Post:


  14. #10
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    Friday, November 25th, 2016 @ 09:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germany Denmark USA
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Health care
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Heathen/Asatru
    Posts
    237
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7
    Thanked in
    7 Posts
    You've got it turned around. It's not a question of the saxons being still english. They never were. Saxons were saxons and angles were angles. Some of both moved to the british isles and the major portion of their settlement became "Angle Land", "England". You should be asking if the English are still saxons. Some are, some aren't. Since traditionally germanic tribal membership went through the father, you would have to be able to trace a person's male line back to the continent to know for certain if they were. That is for most people impossible.

    The saxons of Dresden do not feel a particular feeling of tribal brotherhood with the british people of saxon descent who firebombed their undefended city exactly 67 years ago as of the day of this writing. The english have forever forfeited any claim to the honour of being saxons of any sort through that shameful and barbarous act. Their continued membership in that tribe is merely a biological fact.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Tom Schnadelbach For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Are there still Saxons living in Northern Germany and Denmark?
    By Engelsk Krigare in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Monday, April 12th, 2021, 05:37 PM
  2. Germany: Conservatives Declare War on Unnecessary English
    By Blutwölfin in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Thursday, March 22nd, 2007, 03:57 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: Sunday, July 2nd, 2006, 09:10 PM
  4. Charlemagne and the Saxons
    By Blutwölfin in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, January 16th, 2006, 01:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •