Do you consider the French to be Germanic?

[Loxias]

Following our discussion here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=126299#post126299).
Here is a little poll for you all to vote in, and of course options to discuss. :)
Please explain your choices.

(thanks Aemma for editing :))

[Aemma]

Following our discussion here (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10116).
Here is a little poll for you all to vote in, and of course options to discuss. :)
Please explain your choices.

OH SHIT, I forgot Brittany, if a mod can add it? (otherwise it would let's just include it on Oïl France... Sorry)

Ok I've added it. :)

You're welcome Loxias. :)

And just to be clear, this poll is open to all members of the board then?

[Loxias]

Yes of course, I wrote it in English for that reason.

[Wölfin]

On parle toujours de "nos ancêtres les Gaulois" so I don't think the French themselves consider themselves Germanic. Celts. And linguistically... Romance/Latin. Although there was important influx of Germanic tribes I'm not sure I'd go so far as to calling them Germanic, aside maybe from the Flemish.

I haven't voted yet, I'm still thinking about it, I'm divided on the issue I suppose. If anything I will update when I've voted :)

[Loxias]

Hmm, Soten, you voted Normand but not Mosellan?? The Mosellans still have a Germanic language and were part of Germany during the IIIrd reich!

[Aemma]

Yes of course, I wrote it in English for that reason.

Peut-on aussi indiquer que les postes peuvent être écrit en français comme en anglais svp? Je pense que ceci facilitera la tâche pour quelques personnes qui aimeraient exprimer leurs idées dans leur langue maternelle. :thumbs up

[Loxias]

Oui, aucun problème pour ça. Si il faut que je traduise quoi que ce soit, n'hésitez pas à demander.

[Electronic God-Man]

Hmm, Soten, you voted Normand but not Mosellan?? The Mosellans still have a Germanic language and were part of Germany during the IIIrd reich!

Then I'd vote for them as well. I didn't even know who they were.

[Grey]

I don't know to be honest.

What about French Americans? We have Germanic ancestry and at this point we speak a Germanic language as well. Does this change our meta-ethnicity?

[Loxias]

I don't know, depends what you guys decide to identify with, I guess.

[Eldritch]

[subscribes to thread]

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Frank en Vrij.(Flemish-Dutch)

The Franks were the first ones to use::p
French-kiss
French-fries
French-beans
French-leave
French-letter
French-roof
French-window.

Just to blame Clovis for his Channel 5 made in Cologne.:confused:

[Thulsa Doom]

I would like to vote for Burgundy too, which was occupied by the Paris regime in the 15th century.http://www.theapricity.com/forum/picture.php?pictureid=786&albumid=102&dl=1256884949&thumb=1
Only few regions in France are ethnic French btw.

[Loxias]

I would like to vote for Burgundy too, which was occupied by the Paris regime in the 15th century.http://www.theapricity.com/forum/picture.php?pictureid=786&albumid=102&dl=1256884949&thumb=1
Only few regions in France are ethnic French btw.

What would you call ethnic French, actually?

[Thulsa Doom]

What would you call ethnic French, actually?

The people that was created by fusion of the original inhabitants of Neustria and the Franks.

The rest of France was just different peoples speaking various forms of vulgar Latin. They were later forcefully turned to Frenchmen by the republic.

[Loxias]

Of interest, too, although judging out of people's faces wouldn't be the best thing :
-Moselle sample (http://anthrofrance.blogspot.com/2009/09/bitchebitscherland-moselle-lorraine.html)
-Normandy sample (http://anthrofrance.blogspot.com/search/label/Normandie)
-Brittany sample (http://anthrofrance.blogspot.com/search/label/Bretagne)

(an interesting blog to follow too)

[Ankoù]

I only consider Flemish and Alsacian-Mosellan (Elsass-Lothringen) as Germanic.
Like I said on another forum, a study said Viking blood were more important in Brittany than in Normandy and it's not for this reason I would considered some parts of Brittany as Germanic, just Germanic influence.

[Beorn]

In the words of a random English person being told they are Germanic: "I ain't no fucking German. I am English".

Germanic doesn't exist. Celtic doesn't exist. The only thing that exists is the nation state and the culture which enlivens its population and rejoices the people into a collective union.

Are the French Germanic? Is my arse black with spare heads?

[Murphy]

I am of the opinion that French is its self a meta-ethnicity. Neither Germanic, Romance or Celtic. Rather French is an amalgamation of all these.

Regards,
The Eunuch.

[Treffie]

In the words of a random English person being told they are Germanic: "I ain't no fucking German. I am English".

Germanic doesn't exist. Celtic doesn't exist. The only thing that exists is the nation state and the culture which enlivens its population and rejoices the people into a collective union.

Are the French Germanic? Is my arse black with spare heads?

:twwp:

[Beorn]

If you say 'pwetty pwease', I may consider it. :cam:

[Baron Samedi]

Aren't Flemish people of Dutch descent?

[Treffie]

Aren't Flemish people of Dutch descent?

Or Germanic, yes. ;)

[Loxias]

I see a trend. Only one French person voted for Normands to be Germanic, but he also voted for the rest of Oïl France. While all the French voted for Moselle, while very few non-French did.
Maybe some people are not that well informed :P

[Lahtari]

In the words of a random English person being told they are Germanic: "I ain't no fucking German. I am English".

Germanic doesn't exist. Celtic doesn't exist. The only thing that exists is the nation state and the culture which enlivens its population and rejoices the people into a collective union.

One's ethnic identity is to a surprisingly high degree based on identification - does a Frenchman from region X identify with Germany or another foreign nation, with France, or with just the region? At least my impression is that in most cases it is one of the latter two.

And anything like "Germanic identity" hardly exists outside internet's fringe boards anyway.

[Beorn]

And anything like "Germanic identity" hardly exists outside internet's fringe boards anyway.

Exactly. I should say that I'm not denying that the cultural term 'Germanic' does exist, of course, as that would deny the obvious around here; but, I now believe there shouldn't be such an emphasis upon this largely outdated term that some make it out to be. As you say, outside of the internet the terminology is lost and irrelevant to modern society.

[Kadu]

I see a trend. Only one French person voted for Normands to be Germanic, but he also voted for the rest of Oïl France. While all the French voted for Moselle, while very few non-French did.
Maybe some people are not that well informed :P

I don't see any Frenchman who has voted so far in the Normandy option.

[Comte Arnau]

I don't see any Frenchman who has voted so far in the Normandy option.

Maybe because if Normandy is Germanic, then so are Sicily and Syria. :D


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Normannen.png/800px-Normannen.png

[Stefan]

France pretty much has all three major western groups depending on region. I would say that Romance and Celtic to a lesser extent are much more prevalent than Germanic though.

[Monolith]

Aren't Flemish people of Dutch descent?
My thought exactly.

Or Germanic, yes. ;)
Then why are they in this poll? :confused:

[Óttar]

Flemish, Normand, Alsatian, Moselle-Lorraine, autre (Burgundy).

Les noms allemands de mon cote' paternel sont fortement representes en Moselle

Comment la Flandre est-elle Francais? :confused:

[Kadu]

Maybe because if Normandy is Germanic, then so are Sicily and Syria. :D


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Normannen.png/800px-Normannen.png

Indeed, and as this wise man would say. :D


Ha-ha, ye have been no valkyrie yourself, fair maiden! Your bed is soiled with the juice of the Afroman and your brother is a Turk!

[Elveon]

J'ai voté pour Das Elsass bien sur:thumb001:Qui mieux que les Alsaciens -Lorrains incarnent et sont les dépositaires de la Germanité en France? Et bien les Flamands peut-etre! Et comme ma propre mère est une Flamande de
Duinkerken et que j'ai encore de la famille à Oostende, et bien me voici tiraillé entre deux identités culturelles régionales mais finalement fraternelles car toutes deux issues du monde Germanique; donc pas de soucis pour moi:D

Au fait Aemma, tu pourrais nous dire de la part de qui et pourquoi tu attends des excuses? Sauf si cela est d'ordre privé bien entendu;) Je demande ça car j'ai lu dans ton profil :"Still waiting for an apology!".:)

[Hweinlant]

Honestly, I didnt read this thread. Modern French are no Germanic people (most of modern Germanic speaking people are not genetically Germanic). Franks were once war band, mainly of Germanic stock (but not fully). Gauls (whom still make up the main body of France) were Celtic folks. After the Franks, whom were only ruling class, warriors, came the Normans, whom were just as much a warrior band. It seems like France, or the geographic region known as France has allways been governed by late comers. Perhaps the Caliphate of Frankonistan is logical forthcoming.

[Tabiti]

France has significant Germanic influence, however I don't consider it Germanic nowadays, at least not in all spheres.

[Gooding]

I would definitely consider the Flemish, Alsatian, Lorraine Mosellan, Norman and other Northern French folk Germanic, with the exception of the Bretons, whom I consider to be Celtic. Most of my French ancestry hails from Occitania, which I would most certainly never consider a Germanic area.Until recently, most Occitans never actually spoke Langue d'Oil, but a softer and more Latinate set of dialects unique to the South. They also have a more relaxed lifestyle, I think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occitania

[Atlas]

The Northeast side of France is Germanic. Normands maybe. The rest, no.

The above mentioned regions are the one where you find the more blonde people in France by the way.

[Brännvin]

France is just France, Romance, Celtic or Germanic are usually fictional and haven't any validity in real life.

Although, in fact France is predominantly a Romance-Latin speaking country..

[Murphy]

I will say again, I think it is more appropriate to speak of, for example a Breton ethnicity, and a French meta-ethnicity.

Regards,
The Eunuch.

[Ankoù]

I will say again, I think it is more appropriate to speak of, for example a Breton ethnicity, and a French meta-ethnicity.

Please, define meta-ethnicity.

[Loxias]

To those who wonder about the inclusioln of Flanders :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Flanders

[Hweinlant]

What are the genetic lineages etc making France Germanic, while at it , what are the genetic lineages etc making Germany near the France Germanic.

[Kadu]

I voted for Alsace and Lorraine because i do think that there's some cultural overlap between these two regions and North Rhine-Westphalia, Rheinland-Pfalz and Saarland.
Identical Architecture and management of the territory, some linguistic affinities and same phenotypes too. But i'm not fully sure about their mindsets as i didn't speak about these matters with any person there.


edit: Almost forgot, choucroute.:D

[Loxias]

What are the genetic lineages etc making France Germanic, while at it , what are the genetic lineages etc making Germany near the France Germanic.

I don't think there is anything that can be called genetically Germanic. On the other hand Germanic is an ethnocultural term understood by many to be linked to population who speak Germanic languages.

[Loyalist]

The inhabitants of Normandy, French Flanders, Alsace-Lorraine (including the ethnic Germans remaining in Elsass-Lothringen), Burgundy, and, to a lesser extent, all Northern France, are largely Germanic. It is also fair to include Wallonia in that camp, as the Walloons will be just another Germanic French group when the artificial construct of Belgium eventually comes crashing down. Brittany is ultimately Celtic, perhaps with a slight Germanic infusions, but closely mirroring the England/Cornwall situation. There is, of course, Germanic influence to some degree in the rest of France as well, but in those cases it takes a secondary position to the Celtic and Romance blood.

[Hweinlant]

I don't think there is anything that can be called genetically Germanic. On the other hand Germanic is an ethnocultural term understood by many to be linked to population who speak Germanic languages.

That is exactly how I see the "Germanicnes" too. Thats why I'm questioning "Germanicnes" of any part of France. Some people think that Y-HG I1* is somewhat Germanic lineage. I dont support the idea as that would make Finland (especially Satakunta) the most Germanic place in the world. We dont speak Germanic so we are not Germanic. Simple imo.

[Loxias]

That is exactly how I see the "Germanicnes" too. Thats why I'm questioning "Germanicnes" of any part of France. Some people think that Y-HG I1* is somewhat Germanic lineage. I dont support the idea as that would make Finland (especially Satakunta) the most Germanic place in the world. We dont speak Germanic so we are not Germanic. Simple imo.

Not even peripheral Germanic? :D j/k

To enlighten you about why I created this thread, please read this thread (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10118).

[Lysander]

Not an expert on the subject but I'm fairly sure the Flemish and Germans in Lothringen are overwhelmingly Germanic while the rest are most likely a soup of this and that with varying degrees of Germanic ancestry.
The French are rather special in that, according to me, their race is just French, not Romance, Germanic or Celtic because of all the invasions they have seen. It's quite safe to say that they are mostly Celt+Germanic however.

We dont speak Germanic so we are not Germanic. Simple imo.
It has been said before, but obviously it can't be said too many times. Language is a poor indicator of race.
Where in Finland is Satakunta? I wouldn't be surprised if there are vast amounts of Germanic blood in Finns seeing as how you share such a long history with Sweden, probably the most Germanic nation in the world.

[Treffie]

The inhabitants of Normandy, French Flanders, Alsace-Lorraine (including the ethnic Germans remaining in Elsass-Lothringen), Burgundy, and, to a lesser extent, all Northern France, are largely Germanic. .

Normandy was under Germanic rule a thousand years ago, but I doubt that it's Germanic now.

[Loxias]

Normandy was probably mainly Germanic a thousand years ago, but I doubt that it's Germanic now.

I don't think Normandy was ever more Germanic than the rest of Northern France. It had a Germanic elite for a while, but that's pretty much all. As it was said before, saying that Normandy is Germanic is like saying that Sicily and Syria are.

[Treffie]

I don't think Normandy was ever more Germanic than the rest of Northern France. It had a Germanic elite for a while, but that's pretty much all. As it was said before, saying that Normandy is Germanic is like saying that Sicily and Syria are.

LOL:D You replied before I carefully edited it

[Kadu]

I don't think Normandy was ever more Germanic than the rest of Northern France. It had a Germanic elite for a while, but that's pretty much all.

Well it had a bit more than just an administrative elite, as the same happened with the Suevi kingdom in Northern Portugal and Northern Spain and yet the phenotypical impact is much greater in Normandy.

[Stefan]

It has been said before, but obviously it can't be said too many times. Language is a poor indicator of race.


"Germanic" isn't a racial term. It is first and foremost a linguistic term, then an ethnic one. Having said that, you should follow the original route that your ancestors were suppose to go if they didn't adopt a new language for whatever reason. For Example(hypothetical), if I had all Celtic ancestry yet three generations back my family adopted English, a Germanic language, would I be Celtic or Germanic? Celtic of course. If you have multiple ethnic groups then choice the one you associate with the most or the one that is the predominant factor in the culture of your country. The easiest way to figure this out is look at the language you speak.

[Loxias]

Well it had a bit more than just an administrative elite, as the same happened with the Suevi kingdom in Northern Portugal and Northern Spain and yet the phenotypical impact is much greater in Normandy.

Because the surrounding population of Normandy is already relatively Germanic looking. I am waiting for Heraus to sample areas like Northern Mayenne, Western Ile-de-France and Picardy. They are all around Normandy, yet didn't have a Normand rule. I am 110% sure they won't look less Germanic than the Normands.

[Mesrine]

Because the surrounding population of Normandy is already relatively Germanic looking. I am waiting for Heraus to sample areas like Northern Mayenne, Western Ile-de-France and Picardy. They are all around Normandy, yet didn't have a Normand rule. I am 110% sure they won't look less Germanic than the Normands.

I'm expecting these morphs too. But from my personal observation, people from Mayenne and Picardy are mostly brunette and relatively stocky, like most people would expect the French to be.

[Loxias]

I'm expecting these morphs too. But from my personal observation, people from Mayenne and Picardy are mostly brunette and relatively stocky, like most people would expect the French to be.

I tend to see the Picard as blond and stocky actually, like Cauet.

[Mesrine]

I tend to see the Picard as blond and stocky actually, like Cauet.

"Brunette" for continental European standards. Medium brown haired, with pinkish skin. Not swarthy Meds, of course. They're definitely not dark in my book.

[Geopagan]

It's interesting. In Rootsi's 2004 case study on Y-DNA marker I, the people of Low Normandy showed a frequency of 11.9% of I1a. Lyons and Southern French showed frequencies of 2.0% and 5.3% respectively.

Germans showed 25.0%, Dutch 16.7%

http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Rootsi2004.pdf

[Loxias]

Interesting, did they do other samples on Northern France?

[Geopagan]

Unfortunately, I don't think so. Which was a shame, if they compared to say, north-westernmost France...or a region that was not historically notorious for receiving lots of Viking migrants.

[Kadu]

I found some AF threads with samples from the regions bordering Flanders, Up North

Hazebrouck/Hazebroek : Nord (French Flanders) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=12621)

Lille/Rijsel : Romance Flanders (N.France) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=6250)

Bergues/Sint-Winoksbergen : French Flanders (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=3246)

Valenciennes : Hainaut (N.France) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=11763)

Alsace

Sundgau : Alsace (Eastern France) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=7082)

Territoire de Belfort (Alsace) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=6054)


Lorraine

Metz : Moselle
(Lorraine) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=11264)

Pays de Bitche/Bitscherland : Moselle part I (Lorraine) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=637)

And for comparison

Saarland, Germany

Saarland/Sarre : Germany (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=6986)

Normandy
Troarn : Calvados (Normandy) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=9828)

Bayeux : Calvados (Normandy) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=5625)

Cotentin : Manche (Normandy) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=3029)

Coutances : Manche (Normandy) (http://anthroforum.com/showthread.php?t=3028)


BTW, the author of these works is our collaborator as a gallery manager on AnthroCivitas forum (http://anthrocivitas.net/forum/index.php)

[Comte Arnau]

If we are to follow the reasoning of some here, not only France, but the whole South-West of Europe and even the African shores would be. Or only Franks and Burgundians were Germanic? Weren't the Goths, the Vandals and the Sueves also Germanic?


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/Europe_526.jpg/761px-Europe_526.jpg


The thing is, had it been really significative, wouldn't the local languages have been replaced by Germanic ones? There is a significative Germanic adstratum in the Romance languages because of those invasions, and yes, obviously more in French/Oilitan than in the rest, but it's mainly based on the lexical influence, not enough to replace the Romanceness. If anything, France, but also much of Iberia, could be considered more Celtic rather than Germanic.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Ir , While all the French voted for Moselle, while very few non-French did.
Maybe some people are not that well informed :P

Ever drank Moselle wine,man that wine had a kick so hard that made your ass become a mule.

[Loxias]

I actually harvested wine (in Burgundy) with a guy from Moselle, and he told us about wine from Moselle called Gris de Toul. And that it's called that way because when you drink it you say : griiiiiiiiii!! :yuck:

[Atlas]

I'm expecting these morphs too. But from my personal observation, people from Mayenne and Picardy are mostly brunette and relatively stocky, like most people would expect the French to be.

There are actually quite a few blonds in Picardy.

[Lysander]

The thing is, had it been really significative, wouldn't the local languages have been replaced by Germanic ones? There is a significative Germanic adstratum in the Romance languages because of those invasions, and yes, obviously more in French/Oilitan than in the rest, but it's mainly based on the lexical influence, not enough to replace the Romanceness. If anything, France, but also much of Iberia, could be considered more Celtic rather than Germanic.
No. Historically they adopted Latin because they wanted to be seen as Romans.

[Hussar]

Okay..........

as i promised to Loxias some weeks ago, i'll report some pages from an essay about French anthropologic composition (from the Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'anthropologie de Paris)

To be sincere it takes time to read the whole essay carefully. It's long and rather complex.
I report just a page (Pigmentation) and the link.
The study was published in the late seventies, but considering tha most of anthropologic publications and data we are used to read are from 30's and 40's (Coon) then these data are very "recents".


"Distances anthropobiologiques entre provinces françaises" ( Henri Tissier, Georges Olivier - 1977)



http://i34.tinypic.com/24g0tfo.jpg




http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/issue/bmsap_0037-8984_1977_num_4_1

[Loxias]

Interesting. They seem to have a quite broad definition of what constitutes black hair though!

[Lahtari]

It has been said before, but obviously it can't be said too many times. Language is a poor indicator of race.
Where in Finland is Satakunta? I wouldn't be surprised if there are vast amounts of Germanic blood in Finns seeing as how you share such a long history with Sweden, probably the most Germanic nation in the world.

Finnish Y-hg "I" is of equally high diversity and of a slightly different vatiety than the Swedish one. That makes it unlikely to originate from Sweden during the last millennium.

Anyway, what makes people assume that hg "I" in France is automatically an indicator of Germanic migrations? As a matter of fact, even hg "I" in most of Germany and other German-speaking areas did not necessarily come with the expansion of proto-Germanic tribes from the small strip of land around Denmark. Assuming some mutation that happens to correlate with a historical expansion to have been previously limited to the expanding populations is simply baseless, at least without a comprehensive archaeogenetic record from the whole area in question.

[Hussar]

Interesting. They seem to have a quite broad definition of what constitutes black hair though!


Hmmm......i think i understand what you mean.

Maybe a 40% of "black hair" is a too much for a region like ALSACE ?

Though the reasearchers who wrote the essay were both french.......so i think they used french perceptive standards of blondness and darkness ?

[Loxias]

Hmmm......i think i understand what you mean.

Maybe a 40% of "black hair" is a too much for a region like ALSACE ?

Though the reasearchers who wrote the essay were both french.......so i think they used french perceptive standards of blondness and darkness ?

If 40% of Alsace has black hair, then I have black hair too, and my hair is not even remotely black. I don't know what standards they use.
Their blond is probably a very pure shade.

[Hussar]

If 40% of Alsace has black hair, then I have black hair too, and my hair is not even remotely black. I don't know what standards they use.
Their blond is probably a very pure shade.


In this cases needs to interpretate data. Maybe we should sum up light brown, blonds (and some fringes of edium brown)) reported in the tab to have a total of blonds for a more conventional standard.

In this case.......ALSACE would have a total of 20-22% of blondism.

[Svipdag]

My immediate reaction to this question is "Of course not." Whatever the French may be genetically, their language and culture are not Germanic. They don't sound Germanic and they don't act Germanic. The stereotypical volatility of the French personality has often been contrasted with the equally stereotypical Germanic stolidity.

[Psychonaut]

I don't think Normandy was ever more Germanic than the rest of Northern France.

Why would you think that? R1a and I1a are certainly more prevalent in Northern France as are French surnames of Germanic origin (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1887).

[Henry]

According to http://www.germantribes.org/:

"The Germans are a great ethnic complex of ancient Europe, a basic stock in the composition of the modern peoples of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, northern Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, north and central France, Lowland Scotland, and England"

I pesonally think that most of France and also most of Italy(not including Sicily or Sardinia) are Germanic in terms of being the same "basic stock" as the other countries they listed on that site. I know neither of them are Germanic in terms of language but they said they're talking about the composition of the people not their language. I think the only reason they didnt include southern France and southern Italy there is because in southern France the people seem more mediterranean just for the fact that they're actually of Spaniard or mixed with Spaniard descent and thats where they get their swarthy dark hair dark eyes from and thats why they're so different from the rest of the french people. Its the same case in Sicily and a few parts of Southern Italy near Sicily they only seem mediterranean just because they're actually of Greek descent and thats where they get their "mediterranean features" which some people mistakingly attribute to Italians even though the majority of non-Greek influenced Italians i've seen dont have anything mediterranean about them just like the majority of French people. I think some people deceptively look at that minority in both countries and mistakingly think that France or Italy is a mostly dark haired and dark eyed country or a "mediterranean country" when in fact in my opinion they actually seem to be generally more similar to Germany or any of the other countries listed at GermanTribes than to typically swarthy dark haired dark eyed mediterranean countries like Spain, Portugal, Albania, Turkey or Greece. Thats just my opinion but it does seem to make sense

[Loxias]

Why would you think that? R1a and I1a are certainly more prevalent in Northern France as are French surnames of Germanic origin (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1887).

That's what I mean, I don't think Normandy stands out from this, except maybe for the most coastal areas.

[Stefan]

According to http://www.germantribes.org/:

"The Germans are a great ethnic complex of ancient Europe, a basic stock in the composition of the modern peoples of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, northern Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, north and central France, Lowland Scotland, and England"

I pesonally think that most of France and also most of Italy(not including Sicily or Sardinia) are Germanic in terms of being the same "basic stock" as the other countries they listed on that site. I know neither of them are Germanic in terms of language but they said they're talking about the composition of the people not their language. I think the only reason they didnt include southern France and southern Italy there is because in southern France the people seem more mediterranean just for the fact that they're actually of Spaniard or mixed with Spaniard descent and thats where they get their swarthy dark hair dark eyes from and thats why they're so different from the rest of the french people. Its the same case in Sicily and a few parts of Southern Italy near Sicily they only seem mediterranean just because they're actually of Greek descent and thats where they get their "mediterranean features" which some people mistakingly attribute to Italians even though the majority of non-Greek influenced Italians i've seen dont have anything mediterranean about them just like the majority of French people. I think some people deceptively look at that minority in both countries and mistakingly think that France or Italy is a mostly dark haired and dark eyed country or a "mediterranean country" when in fact in my opinion they actually seem to be generally more similar to Germany or any of the other countries listed at GermanTribes than to typically swarthy dark haired dark eyed mediterranean countries like Spain, Portugal, Albania, Turkey or Greece. Thats just my opinion but it does seem to make sense

These "swarthy" people have been in Italy and France since roman times and even before that. That was far before any of these countries had the names they have today. Central Europe, obviously being in the center, is the place where different groups would meet. Germany, France, and a few other smaller countries are what I would consider central Europe. There are many ethnic groups, as well as macro ethnic groups in these areas. Spain and France, are pretty much Celtiberic-Romance countries, with few Germanic influences(France more than Spain); Italy a Romance country with some germanic influences, and so on. These "dark" or "swarthy" people have been there so long you can't denote them as coming from anywhere other than the area where their common genetic haplogroup originated.

Also swarthy isn't the equivalent to dark hair and dark eyes. You can have Dark Hair and Eyes, and be less swarthy than somebody who has lighter hair and eyes, and vice versa. Swarthy is mostly a description of Skin Color, or exotic features, and to some hair and eyes are important as well. Swarthiness is found in all European ethnicities, even though it might be more pronounced or common in some more than others.

So to conclude really, you can't really denote one country as one ethnicity these days. A lot of the time, countries are split not so cleanly along the lines of the most common ethnic groups. So it doesn't work out as easy as saying, these people are dark because they came from another dark modern country.

[Luern]

"Arpitan"... Mon Dieu... L'œuvre maçonnique de "dé-construction" de la France est accomplie, sa destruction est en passe de réussir.


Do you consider the French to be Germanic?

Non mais franchement...

Amusant de voir que certaines personnes considèrent les alsacos et les flamands comme étant germaniques mais pas les mosellans, alors que le Platt est bien un dialecte germanique, plus très usité il est vrai mais pas moins que le flamand. J'imagine que la Moselle est moins connue à l'étranger.

[Loxias]

"Arpitan"... Mon Dieu... L'œuvre maçonnique de "dé-construction" de la France est accomplie, sa destruction est en passe de réussir.



Non mais franchement...

Hahahah, je trouve le terme arpitan plutôt rigolo.
Toutes ces questions viennent du fait qu'avant d'arriver ici je ne considérait pas la France comme germanique du tout à part l'Alsace Lorraine pour des raisons culturelles, légales et linguistiques.
Puis, sur l'Apricity je vois des français (lointainement ou pas) s'identifier comme principalement germaniques.
Donc voilà, petit vote pour voir où les gens se situent par rapport à ça. Les résultats sont assez marrants en effet.

Après, les maçons ils sont pas plutôt supposés construire ? :D

[Comte Arnau]

Hahahah, je trouve le terme arpitan plutôt rigolo.

It is indeed. I'd prefer the term Savoyan, even if inaccurate and pars pro toto. There are so many inaccurate terms for toponyms/demonyms that one more wouldn't be out of place.

[Loxias]

I would just call it Central-Eastern French variations. But that lacks the subtle charm of Arpitan.

[Comte Arnau]

I would just call it Central-Eastern French variations. But that lacks the subtle charm of Arpitan.

So you think it is French? Well, then we disagree.

[Loxias]

If Jura, Dauphiné, Lyon and Bresse are not French, then is there such a thing as French?
France as we know it was built out of those areas (among others), not by colonising/annexing them.
The case of Savoie might be a bit different, but even then, it's still very much France. And I don't think there is much of a Savoyard independentist feeling.

[Tony]

I am of the opinion that French is its self a meta-ethnicity. Neither Germanic, Romance or Celtic. Rather French is an amalgamation of all these.

Regards,
The Eunuch.
Really hit the nails , France is a melting pot of European subraces , as America is overseas.
Voted for the Flemish and Alsace by the way , been there , in Lille I mean and found out people are pretty jelous/proud of their Flemish identity and feel Flemish rather than French , really.
In the north eastern France who studied history has to know there's been rivalries going on for centuries between the French Kings and the Holy Roman Empire , it's a blurred area and Germanness fade slowly away as you you leave the Rhyne and venture into Lorraine , so I'd consider Alsace being part of that so called Renania , a germanized region once knew as (part of) Burgundy.

[Comte Arnau]

If Jura, Dauphiné, Lyon and Bresse are not French, then is there such a thing as French?

Indeed. The core of the modern French language, which is north of Orleans, not around Lyon, even if first Gallo-Romance divergence could be traced there.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Langues_d%27o%C3%AFl.PNG


The case of Savoie might be a bit different, but even then, it's still very much France. And I don't think there is much of a Savoyard independentist feeling.

Well, I don't live there but they have a presence in the net. Anyway, I was not talking about politics but from a linguistic POV.

Notice I'm not saying that it is vigorously maintained. I'm perfectly aware that what most people speak there now is plain French with a regional influence. Just like with Gascon in Spain, it is in Italy where the language is kept more vigorously, in the Aosta Valley.

Would you call this French? ;)

VeCuuwPMmHs

[Ankoù]

Quel est le rapport avec la Franc-maconnerie et l'Arpitan ?

[Loxias]

Indeed. The core of the modern French language, which is north of Orleans, not around Lyon, even if first Gallo-Romance divergence could be traced there.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Langues_d%27o%C3%AFl.PNG

They are languages of France, that's what I mean, and their cultural impact on France makes them unseparable from France.




Well, I don't live there but they have a presence in the net. Anyway, I was not talking about politics but from a linguistic POV.

Notice I'm not saying that it is vigorously maintained. I'm perfectly aware that what most people speak there now is plain French with a regional influence. Just like with Gascon in Spain, it is in Italy where the language is kept more vigorously, in the Aosta Valley.

Would you call this French? ;)

VeCuuwPMmHs

Not really, I can't understand what she says, but I would rather listen to someone talking to tell.

[Comte Arnau]

They are languages of France, that's what I mean, and their cultural impact on France makes them unseparable from France.

I see. But would you also call the Basque varieties spoken in France South-Western French variations? ;)



Not really, I can't understand what she says, but I would rather listen to someone talking to tell.

This should be easy, as it is quite standard, apparently. :)

VTgJTe6FDsg

[Hussar]

If Jura, Dauphiné, Lyon and Bresse are not French, then is there such a thing as French?


"Dauphinè" is the cultural entity (called "Delfinat" on my profile), once extended up to western Piedmont.
This entity is now under the control of french national state since the middle ages, but the fact that a fringe of that is out of its control (the little belt in Italy), shows that "Italianization" "Frenchization" or other, are political phenomenons.




The case of Savoie might be a bit different, but even then, it's still very much France. And I don't think there is much of a Savoyard independentist feeling.


That's the most significative sentence of how much we're going to debate here.

Savoie is very french for the annexion to France of 150 yrs ago. These 150 yrs within France constitute the "frenchness" of Savoyard peoples, and not some pecial cultural affinity prior the annexion. If not so........why don't you consider "french" even Valleè D'Aote and western Piedmont ?

[Luern]

Puis, sur l'Apricity je vois des français (lointainement ou pas) s'identifier comme principalement germaniques.

Lointainement?

Ces français auraient fait de parfaits collaborateurs. Doriot aussi était germanique. :wink


Après, les maçons ils sont pas plutôt supposés construire ? :D

Je te l'accorde, c'est assez ironique.


So you think it is French? Well, then we disagree.

Qu'est-ce que tu veux que ça nous foute?

[Comte Arnau]

Qu'est-ce que tu veux que ça nous foute?

Si ça t'intéresse pas, tant pis pour toi. C'est pas avec toi que je parlais.

[Luern]

Quel est le rapport avec la Franc-maconnerie et l'Arpitan ?

Je ne crois pas aux coïncidences. Rien n'est innocent. Cette initiative "arpitane" et tous ces mouvements reçoivent des coups de pouce.

Là où on reconnaissait une simple différence linguistique, on a maintenant une entité baptisée "Arpitanie" (nom farfelu qu'on croirait tout droit sorti d'un album de Tintin et signifie, si j'ai bien compris la chose, montagnard) qui se veut différente de la France et en dehors du territoire français.

Le Franco-provençal qui ne correspondait qu'à une simple zone linguistique, est maintenant devenu Arpitan. Un néologisme bien entendu, ce qui tend à prouver que cette pseudo identité vient d'être forgée. En outre, l'Arpitanie n'est qu'une construction tout à fait récente qui n'a aucun fondement historique et regroupe des pays français, suisses et italiens.

Pousser sur le devant de la scène ce genre de bidules identitaires n'est qu'un moyen détourné de détruire la France. Mais ce n'est pas à l'anti-français (pourtant à moitié français et complètement autophobe) que tu es que je vais faire comprendre ça, à supposer que tu comprennes quoi que ce soit. Mais si, tu sais bien, les francs-maçons, comme Patrick Le Lay. (:


Si ça t'intéresse pas, tant pis pour toi. C'est pas avec toi que je parlais.

Non, pas l'avis d'un catalan sur la France... Ce qui m'intéresse c'est, avant tout, ce qu'ont à dire les principaux intéressés, à savoir les "arpitans" eux-mêmes. Et crois-moi, leurs préoccupations quotidiennes sont éloignées des délires arpitans d'une poignée d'excités du séparatisme même pas présents sur le terrain.

[The Black Prince]

Keltic and Latin I here use as core populations. In this post I don't use the linguistic definition which is much wider and also includes f.i. for the Kelts areas that never (or only minimal) had input from the La Tène population.
Kelts are here the population Caesar encountered and Roman/Latin the population from Central-Italy of whom a part moved to nowadays France during the time of the Roman Empire.

Caesar described three core population for nowadays France. North of the Seine and the Marne there were the Belgae, south of the Garonne where the Aquitanians and the rest was filled with Gauls (who themself call Celtae). The last are the true Kelts of whom also the Gauls came whichs sacked Rome and who invaded Greece (Galatoi/Keltoi). The Belgae are mostly also seen as Gauls, but some are regarded as possible Germanic (since they said themselfes) and are therefore often give the designation of Germanokelten or Celto-Germanic.

During the time nowadays France fell under the Roman Empire new population elements entered, especially Roman veterans and their families who founded numerous colonii. At the same time a part of the local tribes where exterminated or otherwise sold to slavery. The other local tribes romanized and, especially in the south and middle of nowady France, blended with the newcomers during those centuries. The northern and western part of France had less input from newcomers I think (not sure).

After the fall of the Roman empire, Germanic warbands entered France and started their own petty kingdoms. Most known are the Franks and the Burgundians. But also f.i. the Saxons created a petty kingdom along the region of Normandy (less known, but many of the villages allegedly claimed to be of Norse origin could very well be of Saxon origin). Personally I think the Germanic didn't had a strong influence on the local Gallo-Roman population, they became the new elite (who married mostly inbetween) and stayed so throughout the Middle-Ages. The only four parts of France that could deviate from this pattern are Normandy, Bretagne, Lotharingen and a French-Flemish part.

Normandy after being ruled by Saxons (Neustria) it became ruled by a Norse elite. Don't think that their influence was high enough for a predominant Germanic input. However probably on a whole Normandy has much more Germanic input because of this as the rest of France (see Rootsi et al, 2004 (http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2004_v75_Semino.pdf)).

Concerning Bretagne: Britons from Britain entered in quite the numbers and they replaced the local language with a Briton language, later some Norse entered.

The Flemish part, previous Keltic and Kelto-Germanic got extra Germanic input. No doubt about it. but I think it is still rather Celto-Germanic than Germanic imho. Same accounts for Elzas-Lotharingen, it has propably extra influx during the age of migration from nowadays Germany, but from what regions I don't know. I'm unsure about it since Germany could also for a part be seen as being Celto-Germanic in population make-up.

Afaik this is the situation.:)

Though France is mostly Gallo-Roman (mix of Keltic and Latin people) in population make-up, certain regions have an higher input from other populations. But to be honest I would not call any population from any of the regions named in this poll as being 'Germanic'. Normandy, French-Flemish and Elzas-Lotharingen having the highest Germanic input but would not see them as predominant Germanic.

[Ankoù]

Rien n'est innocent. Cette initiative "arpitane" et tous ces mouvements reçoivent des coups de pouce.

Mais quel coup de pouce ? Le mouvement "Arpitan" est mort, le seul endroit dans la zone Francaise où on doit le parler encore à la limite c'est en Savoie et si tu étais un minimum au courant tu devrais savoir que même les mouvements politiques Savoisiens (où ce qu'il en reste) ne s'occupent pas vraiment de leur langue.


Pousser sur le devant de la scène ce genre de bidules identitaires n'est qu'un moyen détourné de détruire la France.La France sous monarchie fédéral aurait été encore plus morcelé (à l'image du Royaume Unis, Belgique ou Espagne) qu'elle ne l'est actuellement et ca ne serait certainement pas dû à la Franc-maconnerie.


Mais ce n'est pas à l'anti-français (pourtant à moitié français et complètement autophobe)Ah oui c'est vrai... Je souhaite la destruction ethnique de la France par les maghrebins ! Continuez les mecs, c'est de la bonne !


à supposer que tu comprennes quoi que ce soit.Si, je comprend surtout que tu vois ta France idéalisé qui s'éffrite et que tu va chercher des excuses je ne sais où alors que les causes sont simples : La France depuis même la Gaule n'a jamais été unifié réellement.


Mais si, tu sais bien, les francs-maçons, comme Patrick Le Lay. (:Allez vas y balance ! T'en as gros sur la patate, j'le sens.

[Crimson Guard]

Well you had Italic and Gallic tribes along with Brythonic, Iberians, Vascones, Gallo-Germanic(Belgae) and well of course Greeks settling in what is modern France in ancient times(Bronze and Iron Ages respectively). I consider modern (current immigration/cultural factors aside and all)France to be mainly Gallo-Latin culturally and ethnically. Germanic influence is negligible and more limited to North East I'd say on any ethnic/genetic level.

[Comte Arnau]

Non, pas l'avis d'un catalan sur la France... Ce qui m'intéresse c'est, avant tout, ce qu'ont à dire les principaux intéressés, à savoir les "arpitans" eux-mêmes. Et crois-moi, leurs préoccupations quotidiennes sont éloignées des délires arpitans d'une poignée d'excités du séparatisme même pas présents sur le terrain.

C'est pas l'avis d'un catalan sur la France, mais celui d'un romaniste sur une question lingüistique. C'est toi qui parle de politique. Mais bon, je parlais pas avec toi et ton avis ne m'intéresse pas non plus. I saps què, llepa'm la fava una estona.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by The Eunach
I am of the opinion that French is its self a meta-ethnicity. Neither Germanic, Romance or Celtic. Rather French is an amalgamation of all these.

Good point, but I think that counts for most modern nations anyway, I certainly don’t consider England to be “Germanic” I consider it to be English, it has it’s own identity that cannot really be pigeon holed.

[Loxias]

"Dauphinè" is the cultural entity (called "Delfinat" on my profile), once extended up to western Piedmont.
This entity is now under the control of french national state since the middle ages, but the fact that a fringe of that is out of its control (the little belt in Italy), shows that "Italianization" "Frenchization" or other, are political phenomenons.

It has been part of France for several centuries, even from before the revolution. Do you really think people in Grenoble think that they are anything else than French??


That's the most significative sentence of how much we're going to debate here.

Savoie is very french for the annexion to France of 150 yrs ago. These 150 yrs within France constitute the "frenchness" of Savoyard peoples, and not some pecial cultural affinity prior the annexion. If not so........why don't you consider "french" even Valleè D'Aote and western Piedmont ?

Savoie was added to France later than Dauphiné, its regional identity is stronger. However I don't consider le Val d'Aoste to be French, although I do feel a stronger linguistic affinity to it.
I don't know much about Wester Piedmont. We are often told in France that Val d'Aoste is part of Francophonie and blablabla, while we aren't told much about the Western Piedmont.


Lointainement?

Oui, les cousins d'outre-atlantique.

[Hussar]

Savoie was added to France later than Dauphiné, its regional identity is stronger. However I don't consider le Val d'Aoste to be French, although I do feel a stronger linguistic affinity to it.
I don't know much about Wester Piedmont. We are often told in France that Val d'Aoste is part of Francophonie and blablabla, while we aren't told much about the Western Piedmont.


Loxias..........this is the problem (everyone can recognize it reading behind your last 2 lines) : you tend to believe what it's as been told to you. The supreme essence of everything it's inside the : "We are often told that...." and "we aren't told...."

Do you understand ? We're shaped by our respective governments and culture to consider what is (o isn't) "French" or "Italian". THEY told us what we should believe or not. THEY decide if you will think that a region is "French" or "Occitan" or "Piedmontese" or "Italian", just shaping your mind through education and istruction since the elmentary level.

Of course i don't believe in "conspiracies theories" and "mind control on the peoples" or other idiocies, but for SURE what we believe isn't totally based on a objective reality but even (partially), on what our recpiroc national politic systems decide it's better.


More specifically about Savoie, Valeè D'Aoste and western Piedmont : youlike it or not.......before 1860 they constituted a very cohese national state togheter : then......after Plombières treaties (1859-60) Savoie was given to France , but NOT Valeè D'Aote ; the treaty was clear : Cavour promised to Napoleon III to give Savoie, but France goverment had to renounce to any political claim about Valeè D'Aote for the future. And this meant to avoid the birth of annexionist feelings amongst the french population.
So......in the french cultural/instruction system was introduced a generical forbid to define Valeè D'Aote "french land" (politically) to avoid the development of any nationalistic pretense over it. This "tradition" lasted in the french instruction system until these days

THIS is the reason why a young french like you thinks that Savoie is French and and doesn't think the same about Valeè d'Aote or other parts.


You see......what we deeply feel as spiritual or historical truth, often isn't the result of an historical truth, but of what the political power wants to be believed by common population.



This is a map of original Savoy Kingdom :

http://i37.tinypic.com/1oqhr8.jpg

http://i36.tinypic.com/oka1aa.gif

[Falkata]

According to http://www.germantribes.org/:

"The Germans are a great ethnic complex of ancient Europe, a basic stock in the composition of the modern peoples of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, northern Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, north and central France, Lowland Scotland, and England"

I pesonally think that most of France and also most of Italy(not including Sicily or Sardinia) are Germanic in terms of being the same "basic stock" as the other countries they listed on that site. I know neither of them are Germanic in terms of language but they said they're talking about the composition of the people not their language. I think the only reason they didnt include southern France and southern Italy there is because in southern France the people seem more mediterranean just for the fact that they're actually of Spaniard or mixed with Spaniard descent and thats where they get their swarthy dark hair dark eyes from and thats why they're so different from the rest of the french people. Its the same case in Sicily and a few parts of Southern Italy near Sicily they only seem mediterranean just because they're actually of Greek descent and thats where they get their "mediterranean features" which some people mistakingly attribute to Italians even though the majority of non-Greek influenced Italians i've seen dont have anything mediterranean about them just like the majority of French people. I think some people deceptively look at that minority in both countries and mistakingly think that France or Italy is a mostly dark haired and dark eyed country or a "mediterranean country" when in fact in my opinion they actually seem to be generally more similar to Germany or any of the other countries listed at GermanTribes than to typically swarthy dark haired dark eyed mediterranean countries like Spain, Portugal, Albania, Turkey or Greece. Thats just my opinion but it does seem to make sense

France is way lighter than Italy. Italy is a mediterranean country with full of black haired mafioso types. France has tons of blondes. If you travel to Europe once in your life you gonna check it :tongue

[Stefan]

France is way lighter than Italy. Italy is a mediterranean country with full of black haired mafioso types. France has tons of blondes. If you travel to Europe once in your life you gonna check it :tongue

Really there are a lot of blondes? I know it isn't uncommon, but I never really got the impression of France having a "ton". Medium/Dark Brown seems to be the average from my lesser educated observations, but it seems to vary greatly by region. I always considered France to be mostly an Atlantid country on the west. By that I mean there is a transition from Atlanto-Med to North Atlantid and other Nordish/semi-Nordish races the more North you go. There also seems to be a lot of Alpinids and a few Dinarids. I'm sure you are at a better position to judge though. Here in the United States though, not even German/English Americans can boast ton of natural Blondes. I'd say it is probably around 5-35%, depending on the area and it is only so high in areas with lower populations and therefore a higher incidence of recessive genes due to less diversity.

Regardless of the technicalities of that discussion, I agree on the comparisons you made with Italy.


Something I would like to bring up that is a little unrelated. Would you agree that Iberia has a higher prevalence of red hair while Italy has more blondes? That is what it seems to me, although in both countries brown of varying shades is the massive majority. I ask this question to all Europeans, since I never been to Europe and all of my observations are based off of Americans with ancestry from these countries, as well as the Internet.

[Fred]

The Gauls/Franks are Germanic and the Teutons/Germans are Romans. Each equally applies. There ain't a lick of difference between the two. When the shoe is on the other foot all of the time, who cares?

[Falkata]

Really there are a lot of blondes? I know it isn't uncommon, but I never really got the impression of France having a "ton". Medium/Dark Brown seems to be the average from my lesser educated observations, but it seems to vary greatly by region. I always considered France to be mostly an Atlantid country on the west. By that I mean there is a transition from Atlanto-Med to North Atlantid and other Nordish/semi-Nordish races the more North you go. There also seems to be a lot of Alpinids and a few Dinarids. I'm sure you are at a better position to judge though. Here in the United States though, not even German/English Americans can boast ton of natural Blondes. I'd say it is probably around 5-35%, depending on the area and it is only so high in areas with lower populations and therefore a higher incidence of recessive genes due to less diversity.

Regardless of the technicalities of that discussion, I agree on the comparisons you made with Italy.


Something I would like to bring up that is a little unrelated. Would you agree that Iberia has a higher prevalence of red hair while Italy has more blondes? That is what it seems to me, although in both countries brown of varying shades is the massive majority. I ask this question to all Europeans, since I never been to Europe and all of my observations are based off of Americans with ancestry from these countries, as well as the Internet.

I dont live in France, but i was there, and what is more important, i´ve met many french exchange students here in Madrid (two girls from Paris are my flatmates now btw,a dark brown haired-eyed and a redhead- blue eyed) . While the great majority of the italians were brown or black haired, i´ve met many blond and redhead frenchs. In my opinion, i think the blondism in France is "underrated", just because they speak a latin language. IMO, Germany is just slightly lighther in average than France. "Tons" was an exageration , that´s true

[Fred]

Good point, but I think that counts for most modern nations anyway, I certainly don’t consider England to be “Germanic” I consider it to be English, it has it’s own identity that cannot really be pigeon holed.THANK YOU!!!


Well you had Italic and Gallic tribes along with Brythonic, Iberians, Vascones, Gallo-Germanic(Belgae) and well of course Greeks settling in what is modern France in ancient times(Bronze and Iron Ages respectively). I consider modern (current immigration/cultural factors aside and all)France to be mainly Gallo-Latin culturally and ethnically. Germanic influence is negligible and more limited to North East I'd say on any ethnic/genetic level.The thing is, Romance covers all of these anyway. There's no point including Romance in with distinct types of Roman!:DRomance is the umbrella that we all fit under!


I dont live in France, but i was there, and what is more important, i´ve met many french exchange students here in Madrid (two girls from Paris are my flatmates now btw,a dark brown haired-eyed and a redhead- blue eyed) . While the great majority of the italians were brown or black haired, i´ve met many blond and redhead frenchs. In my opinion, i think the blondism in France is "underrated", just because they speak a latin language. IMO, Germany is just slightly lighther in average than France. "Tons" was an exageration , that´s trueThere are several nasty and ugly Germans who don't fit the stereotype that Hitler put out there. I find an attractive German to be rare, most of them in the west and along the borders. Of course, Claudia Schiffer could put on some weight and she might look better.

Now that Apricity has a Hungarian member in the Beautiful European Women thread, I have come to appreciate them and never thought I would, because women from out there, the Soviet lands, look ugly and I base my views on beauty from West European women in a belt that is mostly close to water, from the Baltic in some areas on the west, around the Atlantic coast to the Mediterranean and Black Sea. It must be the water that ties the NATO countries together, but it also does so for the women too.

[Mesrine]

I find an attractive German to be rare, most of them in the west and along the borders.

I couldn't agree more.

http://a.bricout.free.fr/images/wallpapers/11000/11021__profil_bas_1993_reference.jpg

[Stefan]

IMO, Germany is just slightly lighther in average than France. "Tons" was an exageration , that´s true

Nut uh! Being Germanic automatically makes you Nordic. :P Everything else is due to race mixing with those swarthy Iberians, Greeks, and Turks. Everybody else who didn't mix is Nordic and White. Just look at Italy for example. A perfect example of a Nordic country. :D The French mixed with Iberians so much, so they can't be Nordic like the Germans are. :rolleyes:

[Kadu]

I dont live in France, but i was there, and what is more important, i´ve met many french exchange students here in Madrid (two girls from Paris are my flatmates now btw,a dark brown haired-eyed and a redhead- blue eyed) . While the great majority of the italians were brown or black haired, i´ve met many blond and redhead frenchs. In my opinion, i think the blondism in France is "underrated", just because they speak a latin language. IMO, Germany is just slightly lighther in average than France. "Tons" was an exageration , that´s true

It depends very much on the region, i must say that Paris has alot of "darkies", and i'm not talking about Magrebians. On the other hand regions like Alsace, Lorraine fit pretty much your description from my experience.

[Mesrine]

It depends very much on the region, i must say that Paris has alot of "darkies", and i'm not talking about Magrebians.

Frankly, what do I look like (knowing that I'm of southeastern French and northeastern Italian stock)?

[Kadu]

Frankly, what do I look like (knowing that I'm of southeastern French and northeastern Italian stock)?

Don't make me say it:D... Kraut

[Mesrine]

Don't make me say it:D... Kraut

Bastard. :D

[Kadu]

Bastard. :D

Not only though. You're very Mittel European using Hussar's expression.

[Mesrine]

Not only though. You're very Mittel European using Hussar's expression.

I look more Mitteleuropean than him, that's for sure... sadly. :(

[Pierre]

Not as a whole, but some regions, yes.

Most of people of Alsace and Lorraine are of German origin. German tv and other media has big modern cultural influence on this region too.

[Cail]

"Germanic" is a linguistic term. Thus, only those minorities who speak germanic dialects (mostly in the border areas).

[MarcvSS]

Why is Flanders/Flemmish included amongst the French regions...

Are you people retarded or what?

[Jarl]

Why is Flanders/Flemmish included amongst the French regions...

Are you people retarded or what?


Ask the same question those who voted for Germanic Brittany ;)

[Gooding]

Why is Flanders/Flemmish included amongst the French regions...

Are you people retarded or what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_(department) The department of Nord in Northeastern France actually has a population that speaks Flemish.

[Luern]

Why is Flanders/Flemmish included amongst the French regions...

Are you people retarded or what?

Dunkerk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Flanders)

[Detfri]

Most French are Latins, the Celtic substratus of France is the same of Spain and northern Italy. The nordid type is France is only 25-30%, while in Italy/Spain 20%.

[Korbis]

Most French are Latins, the Celtic substratus of France is the same of Spain and northern Italy. The nordid type is France is only 25-30%, while in Italy/Spain 20%.

Find a flashy blonde blue-eyed nordid is WAY easier in France than in Spain...even if we focus solely on central-southern France.

[The Lawspeaker]

Find a flashy blonde blue-eyed nordid is WAY easier in France than in Spain...even if we focus solely on central-southern France.
Not during the summer holiday.

[Vasconcelos]

Not really a good question considering the diversity of people in France.
Some are (like my uncle), some are not (like my classmate). It entirely depends on the region.

[Tomasz]

Most French are Latins, the Celtic substratus of France is the same of Spain and northern Italy. The nordid type is France is only 25-30%, while in Italy/Spain 20%.

:eek:

20% of Nordids in Italy/Spain and 25-30% in France is large exagerration. Nordids in France are definitely less than 5% of population. I speak of "pure" (Hallstatt- and East-) forms here. If we consider Sub-Nordids and Norids to be "Nordid" then I agree with you.

[Mordid]

20% of Nordids in Italy/Spain and 25-30% in France is large exagerration. Nordids in France are definitely less than 5% of population. I speak of "pure" (Hallstatt- and East-) forms here. If we consider Sub-Nordids and Norids to be "Nordid" then I agree with you.
I agree! Are Nordid(East Nordid and Scando-Nordid) more common in Poland than in France ?

[Peasant]

Considering Poland is more North and more east, most likely.

[Psychonaut]

To all of you who are citing percentages of craniofacial morphotypes in various nations (i.e. 20% Nordid in France), either provide a source for your statistic or don't post it. Pulling a number out of your ass does more harm than good.

[Tomasz]

I agree! Are Nordid(East Nordid and Scando-Nordid) more common in Poland than in France ?

Yes, definitely - proper Nordids are more common here.

In France, Nordids are often mixed with Alpinids or Dinarids thus forming Sub-Nordids and Norids. In Poland it happens as well but I'd estimate number of "pure" Polish Nordids as about 8%.


To all of you who are citing percentages of craniofacial morphotypes in various nations (i.e. 20% Nordid in France), either provide a source for your statistic or don't post it. Pulling a number out of your ass does more harm than good.

Exactly.

I base my percentages on some anthropological statistics of Poland found long time ago. I can't give exact source but - living in Poland - I see it as rather accurate. In contrary to Coon's fairytales. ;)

[ikki]

they used to be, then they started breeding with negroes.. to be reduced into a mongrel race. The old paintings can be quite revealing.. a wholly different population lived there a mere 400 years ago.

[Mordid]

Yes, definitely - proper Nordids are more common here.

In France, Nordids are often mixed with Alpinids or Dinarids thus forming Sub-Nordids and Norids. In Poland it happens as well but I'd estimate number of "pure" Polish Nordids as about 8%.
As far as i've seen that many Poles have Nordid influence (North Pontid, Sub-Nordid, West Baltid and Noric).


Are Corded Nordid rare in France ?

[Detfri]

Find a flashy blonde blue-eyed nordid is WAY easier in France than in Spain...even if we focus solely on central-southern France.

I dunno in Spain, but in Italy (exept in the South) it's not rare to find a blonde-light eyes person.


:eek:

20% of Nordids in Italy/Spain and 25-30% in France is large exagerration. Nordids in France are definitely less than 5% of population. I speak of "pure" (Hallstatt- and East-) forms here. If we consider Sub-Nordids and Norids to be "Nordid" then I agree with you.

Surely I speak of sub-nordids too.
Anyway most Frenchs are mediterranids. I have been in France variouse times (in Provence, Paris, Bretagne and Nordmandy) and French look identical to northern Italians, with the difference that tan skin is rarer. But not doubt that they are latins.

[Tomasz]

Are Corded Nordid rare in France ?

I'd say that they are very rare. From Nordid spectrum I would rather see more "Western" types in this country.


Surely I speak of sub-nordids too.

Well, by saying Nordid I usually mean either Skando-Nordid or East-Nordid. Sub-Nordids are basically Alpinid/Nordid mix so I wouldn't classify them as "Nordid" but rather Nordoid. So it's matter of terminology.

I think Sub-Nordid diverges too much from Nordid proper to be considered part of the same race.

[Detfri]

I'd say that they are very rare. From Nordid spectrum I would rather see more "Western" types in this country.



Well, by saying Nordid I usually mean either Skando-Nordid or East-Nordid. Sub-Nordids are basically Alpinid/Nordid mix so I wouldn't classify them as "Nordid" but rather Nordoid. So it's matter of terminology.

I think Sub-Nordid diverges too much from Nordid proper to be considered part of the same race.

It seems to me to stay in a veterinarium studium sometimes....
:rolleyes2:

[esaima]

I don´t know very much about French but the country´s name in German sounds very meaningful.

[Detfri]

I don´t know very much about French but the country´s name in German sounds very meaningful.

To say that French ppl are germanic only becouse they have a germanic name is like to say that Lombardians are an eastern germanic people.

[Falkata]

For what I´ve seen during my life, blondism + light eyes is much more common between french people than between italian and spanish people. As I´ve said before, I think Germany is not really much lighter than France imo. Germany is not as nordid as many people think and France is not as mediterranean.

[Detfri]

For what I´ve seen during my life, blondism + light eyes is much more common between french people than between italian and spanish people. As I´ve said before, I think Germany is not really much lighter than France imo. Germany is not as nordid as many people think and France is not as mediterranean.

False, I have been in both France and Germany and there is an abyss. Germany is not only northernmore than France, but also more east located and has a different history.
Besides Italians (northern and central) are not as dark as Spaniards from what I have seen with my eyes. But I don't want to open an old dispute. Italy is northernmore and easternmore than Spain too.

[Curtis24]

No, I don't consider them to be Germanic, though the French and German peoples may have some racial similarities. Germanic is a cultural-lingustic term, not racial one. Clearly, French speek an Italic language and not a Germanic one.

Culturally, I don't have enough experience to say for sure, but popular culture such as TV and movies portrays the two countries having quite different cultures, France being more "Latin" and Germany Germanic. My father has visited both countries as a pilot and he backs this up.

EDIT: I don't really know about the reigionalism in France, but in the modern era it seems that would probably have been ameliorated to an extent.

[Falkata]

False, I have been in both France and Germany and there is an abyss. Germany is not only northernmore than France, but also more east located and has a different history.
Besides Italians (northern and central) are not as dark as Spaniards from what I have seen with my eyes. But I don't want to open an old dispute. Italy is northernmore and easternmore than Spain too.

As I´ve said before, I´m saying this based on my )experience in those countries and on all the people (erasmus students) that I´ve met in Madrid since I´ve lived during years with foreign flatmate.
I´m not saying germans are some kind of swarthy people at all, but I´d say that the 70% that I´ve met were brown haired and not really nordid looking. For example compared with the dutch people, germans are darker,imo. Blondism in the Netherlands is quite high.
As for Italy and Spain, well I´ve never noticed any difference. As I´ve said I dont buy this tale about North Italy being particulary nordid or light and I was often mistaken by a native . I´m not sure about your standards of what is light or not , I mean after all you consider yourself somehow light and you would be a standard brunette mediterranean here in Spain :confused: Actually, with an eastern exotic vibe not very common around here.

[Detfri]

As I´ve said before, I´m saying this based on my )experience in those countries and on all the people (erasmus students) that I´ve met in Madrid since I´ve lived during years with foreign flatmate.
I´m not saying germans are some kind of swarthy people at all, but I´d say that the 70% that I´ve met were brown haired and not really nordid looking. For example compared with the dutch people, germans are darker,imo. Blondism in the Netherlands is quite high.
As for Italy and Spain, well I´ve never noticed any difference. As I´ve said I dont buy this tale about North Italy being particulary nordid or light and I was often mistaken by a native . I´m not sure about your standards of what is light or not , I mean after all you consider yourself somehow light and you would be a standard brunette mediterranean here in Spain :confused: Actually, with an eastern exotic vibe not very common around here.

No, I am not light, except for the skintone.
About the eastern vibe... what do you mean?

[Korbis]

Besides Italians (northern and central) are not as dark as Spaniards from what I have seen with my eyes. But I don't want to open an old dispute. Italy is northernmore and easternmore than Spain too.

In my experience is the other way around -hope youre not counting the half gypsies and the latino muds who are offcially full spanish citizens and disregarding the sicilians.

But well, since Italy have lot of northerners of Swiss ancestry that would be an unfair match for Spain. ;)

[Falkata]

No, I am not light, except for the skintone.
About the eastern vibe... what do you mean?

Dinarid, something like that. I´m not calling you arab, dont worry :D

[manu]

As for Italy and Spain, well I´ve never noticed any difference. As I´ve said I dont buy this tale about North Italy being particulary nordid or light and I was often mistaken by a native

if you mean dark like these people in the photo then I get your point

http://i46.tinypic.com/27x46ty.jpg

[Falkata]

if you mean dark like these people in the photo then I get your point

http://i46.tinypic.com/27x46ty.jpg

? What do you mean?

[Detfri]

Dinarid, something like that. I´m not calling you arab, dont worry :D

Dinarid is ok. My grandmother was a dinarid type and I think my cheeks and jaw are dinarid and also the rounding face. I catched what you mean. A Russian friend of mine once said that I could pass also for a Russian brunette.

[manu]

? What do you mean?
it's an amateurial team from North Italy and they are pred. brown haired.

[Lithium]

I consider Bretagne to be celtic

[Thraex]

Who cares about where your country is located? What matters is the genetic influence. The original population of Gaul was Celtic which later mixed with Roman immigrants and after the fall they received a lot of Germanic immigrants, especially Franks. France today is a combination of the three groups.

[Portukalos]

Most French are Latins, the Celtic substratus of France is the same of Spain and northern Italy. The nordid type is France is only 25-30%, while in Italy/Spain 20%. Huh --' ? France is way more Celtic (Gaulish) than Italy or any other. I don't know what kind of herbs you have smoked but if there was no Rome conquest of Gaul then France would be the most Celtic nation on earth.

[Curtis24]

Who cares about where your country is located? What matters is the genetic influence. The original population of Gaul was Celtic which later mixed with Roman immigrants and after the fall they received a lot of Germanic immigrants, especially Franks. France today is a combination of the three groups.

But the genetic influence of France is mostly Mesolithic and Neolithic peoples who were unrelated to the Celts, Romans, or Germanics.

[Portukalos]

But the genetic influence of France is mostly Mesolithic and Neolithic peoples who were unrelated to the Celts, Romans, or Germanics.

Didn't the Gauls settled what is now France during the Mesolithic times :icon_neutral:?

[Curtis24]

Didn't the Gauls settled what is now France during the Mesolithic times :icon_neutral:?

No, the ethnic Gauls invaded during the Iron Age, and "Celticized" the people that were already living in France.

[Portukalos]

No, the ethnic Gauls invaded during the Iron Age, and "Celticized" the people that were already living in France.

Is there any archeological proof of this ?

[Curtis24]

Is there any archeological proof of this ?

Yeah, the progression of the Corded Ware culture from Eastern Europe into Central Europe and France...

[Sikeliot]

I only consider Alsatians to be Germanic, of the French.

[The Lawspeaker]

I only consider Alsatians to be Germanic, of the French.
That's because they aren't French. They are German. And the Flemish aren't French either: they are a Netherlandic people. Dutch. France has a real history of waging wars (whether militarily or culturally) against the German peoples, whether they are Flemish or belonging to the High Germans.

[Sikeliot]

That's because they aren't French. They are German. And the Flemish aren't French either: they are a Netherlandic people. Dutch. France has a real history of waging wars (whether militarily or culturally) against the German peoples, whether they are Flemish or belonging to the High Germans.

Which is why I didn't choose Flemish on the poll. :D

But I consider Germanic to be indicative of culture as well, and due to France being Romance-speaking and Catholic, I don't associate their culture with the Germanic countries overall.

[gandalf]

There is no germanic culture .

There are germanic languages ,
and English is the less germanic of them ,
there are romance languages ,
and French is the less romanised of them .
Both are in the border in their own way .

As to speak of genetics , original french are Celts mainly ,
( homeland of celts : the east of France to the Danube )
then german ( especially north and east ),
then all people from the south , witch are also mixed ,
but with a bigger percentage of mediteraneans .

I suppose this is not a novelty !

You can find in all Europe people with the same features ,
the only difference is the percentages ,
and the culture .

[The Lawspeaker]

There is no germanic culture .

.
Vlaanderen, Artesië en het Walenland Nederlands. Elsaß-Lothringen Deutsch !
France started South of the Somme. Whatever is North of it are lands that have been stolen by the French that need to be liberated.

[gandalf]

Oh you can't "liberate" those
because France is a ROCK ,
French people from north to south , east to west ,
do love their country , and what a country !

I have been recently to Amsterdam ,
I was amased by it , and especially the people ,
beautiful , and familiar .

[The Lawspeaker]

France a rock ? Nah.. six weeks in 1940.

[Mordid]

French are Latinised Celt. :coffee:

[gandalf]

At this time we didn't want a remake of the great butchery 14-18 .

French army generals were uncompetents ,
and the people didn't want to die for no reason ...

Well we did like Netherland , and all western Europe didn't we ?

[gandalf]

French are Latinised Celt. :coffee:

I prefer this than to look like your avatar !

[Don]

Do you consider the French to be Germanic?

Of course NOT.

If so, they would not be so Special (in the good sense)... despite, as spaniard, I dislike them in many many ways.

[Mordid]

Do you consider the French to be Germanic?

Of course NOT.

If so, they would not be so Special (in the good sense)... despite, as spaniard, I dislike them in many many ways.

4B1ySY6TQRA

[Peyrol]

France is the only country in Europe that have a balanced mix of latin, german and celtic blood.

[Sikeliot]

France is the only country in Europe that have a balanced mix of latin, german and celtic blood.

The west (Brittany down to Aquitaine) would be more Celtic, the northeast more Germanic (Normandy down to Alsace) and the southeast (Provence, Nice etc.) more Latin, correct? With most of the country being somewhat of a blend I'd think.

[Grumpy Cat]

Don't tell my mom if you do. :lol:

[Laubach]

The west (Brittany down to Aquitaine) would be more Celtic, the northeast more Germanic (Normandy down to Alsace) and the southeast (Provence, Nice etc.) more Latin, correct? With most of the country being somewhat of a blend I'd think.

and, what about Burgundy? I'm amazed that a person who has never been to France, she likes to make so many comments.

Britain has a Germanic influence since the Anglo-Saxons invaded the area and brought their customs.Aquitaine is celtic? During the Roman conquest of Gaul by Julius Caesar, the people who lived there was called by the Iberian Roman emperor. Indeed were the Vascones, probable ancestors of the Basques.

Franks, Normans, Burgundians, Flemish,Alsatians, are Germanic People. Everyone had a great impact on the French population. France is more Nothern than Southern.

Like Gandalf said, France is more Celtic tha Germanic, but one can,t disregard the strong Germanic presence and say that Alsace is the only

[Portukalos]

The west (Brittany down to Aquitaine) would be more Celtic, the northeast more Germanic (Normandy down to Alsace) and the southeast (Provence, Nice etc.) more Latin, correct? With most of the country being somewhat of a blend I'd think.Only Britanny is still culturally Celtic. Aquitaine used to be the home of a proto-Basque language. Most of France (from Provence to Normandy) was Gallo-Romance (Romanized Gauls) at first.

[Portukalos]

France is the only country in Europe that have a balanced mix of latin, german and celtic blood.

I personally don't think Romans ever had any genetic influence on their Empire. Then it's debatefull.

[Ouistreham]

I personally don't think Romans ever had any genetic influence on their Empire.

Yep, they had no influence at all.

The expression "Latin blood" sounds quite weird, flat out irrelevant. Roman troops outside of Italy consisted primarily of men recruited on the spot. Except for some documented Roman military colonies in Languedoc (Southernmost Frence), the only known example of a permanent Roman settlement in Gaul was between the Rhine and Mosel, where troops were deployed in the area facing Germanic territories, for obvious strategical reasons. But those areas (present day Lorraine, Palatinate and Western Rhineland) are now German speaking.

Indeed, Roman genetic influence was close to nil. In the genetic map of Europe there is remarkably no overlap at all between France and Italy:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/figure1a_600.jpg

There is some overlapping between France and Spain, which is quite logical since since there are Basque and Catalan minorities on both sides of the Pyrenean range.

You may note also that despite the importance of Greek colonies in Southern Italy, The Italian and Hellenic areas are not contiguous.

All the more surprising is the large overlap of Italy with Spain and even more Portugal. But I think this might be due to population movements that took place in pre-Roman times.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/europevariation-752360.jpg

[Peyrol]

You're true.
About 30% of modern italian population is directly descendents of the greek colonist in "Magna Grecia", as you can see in this map.

http://s1.wdstatic.com/images/it/ll/b/b6/Mappageneticaitalia.jpg

[Laubach]

I agree with Ouistreham!

[Mordid]

France is Africa. End of discussion.

[Peyrol]

France is Africa. End of discussion.

nhFYnkjg0EI

[Laubach]

"La Marseillaise " est l'hymne national des plus belles que je sais!!!!!

[gandalf]

Mordid ,

if you talk of present population
some areas are strongly africanised for sure .

But these are not french .

[Jack B]

lol I've seen people with no interest in preservationist ideas look at that "French" team with puzzled looks.

[Ouistreham]

lol I've seen people with no interest in preservationist ideas look at that "French" team with puzzled looks.

Kickball wears a stigma in France, cause it has always been an immigrant thing.

Once upon a time French players were called Platini (Italian) or Domenech (Spanish), things didn't look too bad yet.

But now...

[Ibericus]

Franks, Normans, Burgundians, Flemish,Alsatians, are Germanic People. Everyone had a great impact on the French population. France is more Nothern than Southern.

Like Gandalf said, France is more Celtic tha Germanic, but one can,t disregard the strong Germanic presence and say that Alsace is the only
LOL, Normans ARE NOT germanic.


There is some overlapping between France and Spain, which is quite logical since since there are Basque and Catalan minorities on both sides of the Pyrenean range.
Actually the french sample is from Lyon.


All the more surprising is the large overlap of Italy with Spain and even more Portugal. But I think this might be due to population movements that took place in pre-Roman times.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/europevariation-752360.jpg
Actually in that map there is more overlapping between french and spaniards, as you can see clearly, see the pink circles close to France are also spanish (ES2) it's from the same study actually. Btw the italians close to Spain are North-Italians.

[Laubach]

LOL, Normans ARE NOT germanic.


Actually the french sample is from Lyon.


Actually in that map there is more overlapping between french and spaniards, as you can see clearly, see the pink circles close to France are also spanish (ES2) it's from the same study actually. Btw the italians close to Spain are North-Italians.

I've talked on another topic and I will not argue with a person who does not even set foot in Normandy. And besides, I was referring to the ancient Normans and Franks, who inhabited the region. Currently, the Germanic influence is clear

[Ouistreham]

LOL, Normans ARE NOT germanic.

Of course, the Norse language was extinct there by the end of the 11th century. But Normandy often shows a significant frequency of phenotypes commonly deemed as Germanic, more so than many Germanic speaking districts of Switzerland, Alsace, or the Black Forest.


Actually the french sample is from Lyon.

That's right. This explains the exagerate overlap with Switzerland, given the geographical proximity, and the sizeable overlap with Spain, since Lyons has long been a magnet for all Southern France (up to mid-19th century there was no other mentionsworthy industrial center for the South).

But it makes the absence of overlap with Italy even more stunning. I can't explain it. There should be some. Maybe some bias in the sample selection.

[Ibericus]

I've talked on another topic and I will not argue with a person who does not even set foot in Normandy. And besides, I was referring to the ancient Normans and Franks, who inhabited the region. Currently, the Germanic influence is clear
lol, what the heck do you know if I set a foot there ? Besides, Normandy has ALWAYS been majority of native gaulish stock, the Franks or Norse were always a minority, normans are not germanic by any means, and Norman language is Romance and very close to french. Stop with these stupid aryan fantasies. Normandy is 100% french.


Of course, the Norse language was extinct there by the end of the 11th century. But Normandy often shows a significant frequency of phenotypes commonly deemed as Germanic, more so than many Germanic speaking districts of Switzerland, Alsace, or the Black Forest.
And what the fuck has having germanic phenotypes with being a germanic country ? Besides what is a germanic phenotype ? There are many different phenotypes in germanic countries. And it's not true that Normans resemble to germanics by any stretch.


But it makes the absence of overlap with Italy even more stunning. I can't explain it. There should be some. Maybe some bias in the sample selection.The Alps has been a much stronger barrier than the pyreness. There is much more overlapping with Iberians, specially in Aquitanie, Midi-Pyrenees, and Roussillon.

[Laubach]

lol, what the heck do you know if I set a foot there ? Besides, Normandy has ALWAYS been majority of native gaulish stock, the Franks or Norse were always a minority, normans are not germanic by any means, and Norman language is Romance and very close to french. Stop with these stupid aryan fantasies. Normandy is 100% french.


Bullshit!!! for your answer, note that you have never been in Normandy. So, please describe me about the cities of low and high normandy and how are the local population.

When Norse invaders arrived in the then-province of Neustria and settled the land that became Normandy, they gradually adopted the Gallo-Romance speech of the existing populations – much as Norman rulers in England later adopted the speech of the administered people. However, in both cases, the élites contributed elements of their own language to the newly enriched languages that developed in the territories.

In Normandy, the new Norman language inherited vocabulary from Norse. The influence on phonology is more disputed, although it is argued that the retention of aspirated /h/ and /k/ in Norman is due to Norse influence. If you were in Normandy you would know that

Normans were Vikings and Franks were a Germanic Tribe.

The duchy of Normandy was founded by the Normans in the 10th century in the former kingdom of Neustria. Geographically, it was approximately the same region as the old church province of Rouen and what was called Brittania Nova as well as western Flanders. It had no natural frontiers and was previously merely an administrative unit. Historically, its population was mostly Frankish. It included Viking settlers, who had begun arriving in the 880s, divided between a small colony in Upper (or eastern) Normandy and a larger one in Lower (or western) Normandy. The Viking contingents who raided, and ultimately settled Normandy and some parts of the Atlantic coast, included Danes, Norwegians, Hiberno-Norse, Orkney Vikings, as well as Anglo-Danes from the English Danelaw, under Viking control.


In the course of the 10th century, the initial destructive incursions of Norse war bands into the rivers of France evolved into permanent encampments that included women and chattel. The pagan culture was driven underground by the Christian faith and Gallo-Romance language of the local people. The large groups of Vikings that settled there adopted the language and culture of the French into their own customs to create a unique "Norman" culture.


Your Spanish complexed, stop talking nonsense and disturbing a forum dedicated to france. I don´t need to have ideas Aryan to feel superior to someone. The problem is that, a Spaniard who need to assert themselves, only interpret it that way.

[Ibericus]

Bullshit!!! for your answer, note that you have never been in Normandy. So, please describe me about the cities of low and high normandy and how are the local population.
Yes, I've been there, but that's irrelevant to what I was saying, that normans are not germanic. Being germanic or not has nothing to do with how a population looks.


When Norse invaders arrived in the then-province of Neustria and settled the land that became Normandy, they gradually adopted the Gallo-Romance speech of the existing populations – much as Norman rulers in England later adopted the speech of the administered people. However, in both cases, the élites contributed elements of their own language to the newly enriched languages that developed in the territories.

In Normandy, the new Norman language inherited vocabulary from Norse. The influence on phonology is more disputed, although it is argued that the retention of aspirated /h/ and /k/ in Norman is due to Norse influence. If you were in Normandy you would know that
And ? Other romance languages have also adopted many germanic or celtic words. Doesn't make them germanic.


Normans were Vikings and Franks were a Germanic Tribe.
Normans were not Vikings. They were a mix of norse people and the native gallo-roman peoples.


The duchy of Normandy was founded by the Normans in the 10th century in the former kingdom of Neustria. Geographically, it was approximately the same region as the old church province of Rouen and what was called Brittania Nova as well as western Flanders. It had no natural frontiers and was previously merely an administrative unit. Historically, its population was mostly Frankish. It included Viking settlers, who had begun arriving in the 880s, divided between a small colony in Upper (or eastern) Normandy and a larger one in Lower (or western) Normandy. The Viking contingents who raided, and ultimately settled Normandy and some parts of the Atlantic coast, included Danes, Norwegians, Hiberno-Norse, Orkney Vikings, as well as Anglo-Danes from the English Danelaw, under Viking control.

In the course of the 10th century, the initial destructive incursions of Norse war bands into the rivers of France evolved into permanent encampments that included women and chattel. The pagan culture was driven underground by the Christian faith and Gallo-Romance language of the local people. The large groups of Vikings that settled there adopted the language and culture of the French into their own customs to create a unique "Norman" culture.

I see you can copy and paste. I know Normandy was founded by norse people, but so what ? The norse people there were always a minority, being the ethnic natives who lived there before, the majority of the population. The language is also very close to french, and is a Romance language.


Your Spanish complexed, stop talking nonsense and disturbing a forum dedicated to france. I don´t need to have ideas Aryan to feel superior to someone. The problem is that, a Spaniard who need to assert themselves, only interpret it that way.
Sure, that's all you can say when you lose arguments.

[Karl der Große]

Well Sarkozy considers Alsace GERM-MANIAC! :D

o8qSxX8Yfyw


Damn right German soil, as it has, and as it should be. At least Germany didn't have to break out the panzers this time!

[Aviane]

Yes, I've been there, but that's irrelevant to what I was saying, that normans are not germanic. Being germanic or not has nothing to do with how a population looks.

Normans were not Vikings. They were a mix of norse people and the native gallo-roman peoples.

Sure, that's all you can say when you lose arguments.

Being Germanic does aleast have something to do with the population, do you know that the people of French Flanders are Flemish and they are also Germanic so surely likewise the Normans where Germanic and Norse


They are still partly Germanic in the same way that England is partly Germanic so what is your point eh.


Alot of people on here already have figured out how you react so it's not surprising that he has said about you and anyway what is your obsession about France being Germanic or not?

[Aviane]

Here is a bit of Norman history for you:

A proof of their origins being from somewhere else than just France:


The Normans had an interesting mix of cultures. Historically, they were a combination of viking settlers who had married into the local Frankish cultures and as a result their society was a conglomerate of the two.

As befits their descendancy from the vikings, the Normans were a warlike culture and prized mounted soldiers. The Norman cavalry were to form the basis for medieval Knights and what we now look at as "Chivalry" stems from the Norman codes of conduct on the battlefield.


The Normans brought with them a wholly new form of warfare. The Saxons and, before them, the Celts had largely depended on armies of "brave warriors" who would band together to fight the enemy. Often battles were resolved through one on one fights between clan heroes. (Very similar to classical era Greeks).

The Normans had a warfare style that evolved from their Norse roots and was heavily influenced by the European wars of the 9th and 10th centuries AD and the Frankish kings like Charlemagne.

http://normans.etrusia.co.uk/

More about their origins from another source:


The Normans that invaded England in 1066 came from Normandy in Northern France. However, they were originally Vikings from Scandinavia.

At the beginning of the tenth century, the French King, Charles the Simple, had given some land in the North of France to a Viking chief named Rollo. He hoped that by giving the Vikings their own land in France they would stop attacking France.

The land became known as Northmannia, the land of the Northmen. It was later shortened to Normandy. The Vikings intermarried with the French and by the year 1000, they were no longer Viking pagans, but French speaking Christians.

http://www.historyonthenet.com/Normans/whowere.htm

[Ibericus]

Being Germanic does aleast have something to do with the population, do you know that the people of French Flanders are Flemish and they are also Germanic so surely likewise the Normans where Germanic and Norse
A part of normans were of germanic origin. Which is far different from saying that today Normans are germanic.The same way a part of Iberia was Celtic. But today we are Romance.



They are still partly Germanic in the same way that England is partly Germanic so what is your point eh.
England is full germanic, not part germanic. eh. And Normandy is not part germanic. Is a Romance territory. Regardless of ancestry. We spaniards are also Romance. Regardless of our partial celtic ancestry. It's not that hard to understand.


Alot of people on here already have figured out how you react so it's not surprising that he has said about you and anyway what is your obsession about France being Germanic or not?
I wasn't talking about France being germanic or not, I was talking about Normandy, which some people are obsessed to call it Nordic and Germanic.


Here is a bit of Norman history for you:

A proof of their origins being from somewhere else than just France
I never said their origin are only in France.

[Karl der Große]

Just a random question to French posters.

Guys, why do the French speak a romance language instead of a language based on Frankish?

I know that the country of France is named after the Franks, who are a Germanic tribe speaking a Germanic language and I’ve always been curious why the national language, and also why some historic regional languages of France are all Latin based.

I know that the Romans conquered Gaul and that but the Gauls spoke a language like Welsh, and the Franks settled there after the Romans had left anyway as happened in Britain as well where today they speak a derived Germanic language.

[Hess]

Im not sure why it makes a difference either way, bit I would say that some regions of Framce are Germanic while others are Romance.

[gandalf]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Frankish
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_words_of_Germanic_origin

Those show how important is the contribution of frankish
on french language ,
and this , very few french people knows it .

[Ouistreham]

Guys, why do the French speak a romance language instead of a language based on Frankish?

This is a very good question. Sehr gute Frage.

And the answer is: nobody knows. Keine Ahnung, aucune idée!

The official theory is that the Gauls once used to speak Celtic, then decided to switch to an obnoxiously intricate language called Latin, and finally (within a quite short time) choose to speak Romance, which beyond some similarities in vocabulary is grammatically completely different from Latin.

This official story sounds like pure nonsense.

Possible explanations may be found with :

• The Paleolithic Continuity Theory.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_Continuity_Theory
http://languagecontinuity.blogspot.com/

• The History of Britain Revealed (The Shocking Truth about the English Language), of M.J. Harper. The author's opinion is that English was already spoken in England and even Ireland well before Roman times, and that Old Romance had been the real Gallic vernacular for millenia.
http://www.applied-epistemology.com/
http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/1/98/52/61/Michael-John-Harper/Chapitre-3.pdf

• Die Nordwestblock-Hypothese: the area from Northern France to Ostfriesland spoke a language that was neither Celtic nor Germanic (which could explain the strange phonetical similarities of French and Dutch).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock

Loads of food for the brain!

En français, voir :
http://www.la-langue-verte-et-la-cuite.com/

[AntonyCapolongo]

Flemish, Picards, Normands, Mosellans, Alsatians : Germanics
Gascons, Basques and Poitevins : Aquitani (Iberic)
Southern Occitans : Gallo-Romance (more Latins)
Northen Occitans, Arpitans and Other Oïl : Gallo-Romance (more Celtics) with Germanics elements
Britons (and Gallos) : Celtics with maybe a little Gallo-Romance influences
Corsicans : Latins

[gandalf]

Un grand merci sire Ouistreham ,

ces quelques lectures m'ont mis en appétit .

[Sikeliot]

Gascons, Basques and Poitevins : Aquitani (Iberic)
Southern Occitans : Gallo-Romance (more Latins)
Corsicans : Latins

I agree strongly.

[Ibericus]

Only alsatians could be considered germanic. The normands are 100% french.

[Aelred]

Well, Brittany is Breton - and every one I've met say they feel more kinship across the Channel than across the border. When I say 'France' I also don't mean Occitania. Occitania is more Gallic, France more Germanic.

[Osweo]

This is a very good question. Sehr gute Frage.

And the answer is: nobody knows. Keine Ahnung, aucune idée!

The official theory is that the Gauls once used to speak Celtic, then decided to switch to an obnoxiously intricate language called Latin, and finally (within a quite short time) choose to speak Romance, which beyond some similarities in vocabulary is grammatically completely different from Latin.

This official story sounds like pure nonsense.

Possible explanations may be found with :

• The Paleolithic Continuity Theory.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_Continuity_Theory
http://languagecontinuity.blogspot.com/

• The History of Britain Revealed (The Shocking Truth about the English Language), of M.J. Harper. The author's opinion is that English was already spoken in England and even Ireland well before Roman times, and that Old Romance had been the real Gallic vernacular for millenia.
http://www.applied-epistemology.com/
http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/1/98/52/61/Michael-John-Harper/Chapitre-3.pdf

• Die Nordwestblock-Hypothese: the area from Northern France to Ostfriesland spoke a language that was neither Celtic nor Germanic (which could explain the strange phonetical similarities of French and Dutch).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock

Loads of food for the brain!

En français, voir :
http://www.la-langue-verte-et-la-cuite.com/
For fuck's sake...
A great big heap of bullshit, which I do not recommend for the unprepared laymen to read. :tsk:

Gaul was Romanised by its upwardly mobile native aristocrats, and later by the Church. The Frankish rulers were outnumbered by these Romance speakers, and more importantly were heavily reliant on the Church (the strongest surviving bastion of civilisation in the country they had conquered) for their bureaucracy and ideological purposes.

[Tel Errant]

None of the above. The Flemish have long forgotten their dialect, Mosellans are now as much Italian as anything else and Alsacian has less speakers than moribond occitan.

Surrealist thread.

[gandalf]

Tel Errant ,

if your meta-ethnicity is latin ,
witch doesn't exist anymore since 1500 years ,
then you don't understand what are french ,
a pitty really for a "french" ...

[gandalf]

For fuck's sake...
A great big heap of bullshit, which I do not recommend for the unprepared laymen to read. :tsk:

Gaul was Romanised by its upwardly mobile native aristocrats, and later by the Church. The Frankish rulers were outnumbered by these Romance speakers, and more importantly were heavily reliant on the Church (the strongest surviving bastion of civilisation in the country they had conquered) for their bureaucracy and ideological purposes.

You are steadily on the mainstream ideology
witch says that suddenly the Gauls have abandoned their original language
for the latin , because this is convenient for english
who can say " wogs start at Calais " ... ( these Romance speakers ... )

But this new theory of continuity if explaining a lot ,
sorry if is disturbing for you .

[Tel Errant]

Tel Errant ,

if your meta-ethnicity is latin ,
witch doesn't exist anymore since 1500 years ,
then you don't understand what are french ,
a pitty really for a "french" ...

French is a latin language and the (normal) French define themselves culturally as a Latin people. There's nothing to argue about my fellow germanic-celtic.

[Ouistreham]

The normands are 100% french.

... says someone who claims his metaethnicity to be "Celtiberian".

As long as he cannot deliver any serious evidence that he can speak Celtic, Iberian or some combination of both, his opinion will not be taken into consideration.


For fuck's sake...
A great big heap of bullshit

Gaul was Romanised by its upwardly mobile native aristocrats, and later by the Church. The Frankish rulers were outnumbered by these Romance speakers, and more importantly were heavily reliant on the Church (the strongest surviving bastion of civilisation in the country they had conquered) for their bureaucracy and ideological purposes.

I do not buy the Continuity theory wholesale but it's able to explain lots of otherwise unexplained enigmas:
• how come Celtic toponyms (except for river names) are so rare in the Eastern half of England?
• how come Romance languages are present in some former parts of the Roman Empire and not in others?
• how come that in France the Oïl region was from the beginning so strikingly homogeneous, disregarding the fact that some areas were saturated with Frankish settlements while others barely had any?

A commonly received assumption is that Southern France was submitted to stronger Roman influence while Northern France underwent stronger Germanic input. Alright, the overall image fits well and makes sense. But if you look in detail, the superstrate-based explanations do not make any.


At any rate two things are above any doubt:

• We do not know which languages were actually used in ancient times. Had a gigantic tsunami wiped out whole of Western Europe in the Middle Ages, Asian archeologists by examining ruins of churches and remnant gravestones would conclude that from Sicily to Finnmark everybody spoke Latin. Prove me wrong about that!

• Romance languages are not and can't be derived from Latin. Beyond a number of well-known differences thay all have in common a number of grammatical features that are absolutely incompatible.

[Ibericus]

None of the above. The Flemish have long forgotten their dialect, Mosellans are now as much Italian as anything else and Alsacian has less speakers than moribond occitan.

Surrealist thread.
Finally a french with some common sense.

[Portukalos]

French is a latin language and the (normal) French define themselves culturally as a Latin people. There's nothing to argue about my fellow germanic-celtic.

You're obviously a troll account. Just looking at your profile , you only registred on here to post on this thread.

[Portukalos]

then decided to switch to an obnoxiously intricate language called Latin.

I took Latin for 3 years and I understood nothing of it. Our professor was completely fucked up , he thought we could understand a text in Latin :lol:. In a Latin text I could only understand 3 or 4 words at best.

[gandalf]

French is a latin language and the (normal) French define themselves culturally as a Latin people. There's nothing to argue about my fellow germanic-celtic.

Latin people doesn't mean anything .

If you dare reading the text brought by Ouistreham

you will understand that the Latin wasn't spoke even in Italy at this time

it is a language for writing , and administrative purposes .

I never thought myself as "latin" , this is a joke !

[Ibericus]

Of course french are latin and romance people. What makes you think the contrary ?

[Winterwolf]

Well, Brittany is Breton - and every one I've met say they feel more kinship across the Channel than across the border.

They do?
I've been in Brittany as well and the people there, nice folks by the way, talked about the English like the 100 Years War was still going on... :p
They seemed to me like very proud French citizen.

[Le duc d'Abrantès]

Are the French, French? Reading this thread one might by mistake conclude that the French are anything but French. I ask: what do most of the French people identify themselves with to a greater extent? Isn't there a unifying culture among them? In my opinion the bulk of French culture (being the French language the utmost expression of it) and way of life to be more close to Romance rather than Germanic.

[gandalf]

@ Iberia

Of course !!!

This is the mainstream ideology but not necessary the truth .

The glorious Roman Empire made a lot of people wanting to

place them self into his heritage , for exemple Charlemagnes

wanted to be equal of a Roman Cesar , was he "latin" ?

[gandalf]

"In my opinion the bulk of French culture (being the French language the utmost expression of it) and way of life to be more close to Romance rather than Germanic. "

Of course French are not germanic cause the language is not germanic ,
call it romance if you want , but latin no way .

French language is a barbarian language , obviously ,
much more than English witch is more singing .

[Treffie]

They do?
I've been in Brittany as well and the people there, nice folks by the way, talked about the English like the 100 Years War was still going on... :p
They seemed to me like very proud French citizen.

That's probably because a large proportion of people living in Brittany are not Bretons at all and have migrated from the other départements.

[Ibericus]

... says someone who claims his metaethnicity to be "Celtiberian".

As long as he cannot deliver any serious evidence that he can speak Celtic, Iberian or some combination of both, his opinion will not be taken into consideration.

What ? The celtiberian in spaniards is the equivalent of Gauls in France, I never denied that French people are predominantly of gaulish (Celtic) stock. But today, we spaniards, and you french, are Romance people. We can't deny that.

[Tel Errant]

Ca s'offusque, ça rouspète, ça affiche une mauvaise foi crasse; en somme ça parle pour rien dire.


Latin people doesn't mean anything .


Latin is just a synonym for Romance.
Romance is an english word, we don't use it to call ourselves et tu le sais très bien. The French in real life call themselves Latin people, this is what we are linguistically and culturally, there's no point in arguing about it.
I don't see where the problem is. Really.


I never thought myself as "latin" , this is a joke !
A fellow French calling himself "germanic-celtic", this, is a joke.

[Tel Errant]

Are the French, French? Reading this thread one might by mistake conclude that the French are anything but French.
Reading this thread my impression is that the French apricians are refugees from Fdesouche who got their ass kicked there.



I ask: what do most of the French people identify themselves with to a greater extent? Isn't there a unifying culture among them? In my opinion the bulk of French culture (being the French language the utmost expression of it) and way of life to be more close to Romance rather than Germanic.

Ask a French what's his main identity, he will answer Français (obviously);
Ask him about his ancestry and he will say Gaulois;
Ask him about his cultural identity, he will answer Latin.

Only in the once Germanic speaking fringes people could view themselves as Germanic.

[Portukalos]

What ? The celtiberian in spaniards is the equivalent of Gauls in France, I never denied that French people are predominantly of gaulish (Celtic) stock. But today, we spaniards, and you french, are Romance people. We can't deny that. That wasn't the point. The point of the thread was that France has some non-Romance regions.

[MagnaLaurentia]

Reading this thread my impression is that the French apricians are refugees from Fdesouche who got their ass kicked there.



Ask a French what's his main identity, he will answer Français (obviously);
Ask him about his ancestry and he will say Gaulois;
Ask him about his cultural identity, he will answer Latin.

Only in the once Germanic speaking fringes people could view themselves as Germanic.

Culturellement les Français sont des Latins.
Racialement, ils sont en majeur partie des Gallo-Romains.

MAIS

Aux quatre coins de la France les origines sont différentes. Au nord-ouest les origines celtiques sont plus forte. Au nord-est les origines germaniques sont plus forte. Au sud-ouest les origines ibériques/basques sont plus forte et au sud-est les origines italique et alpine sont plus forte.

L'an dernier, j'ai vu un documentaire qui expliquait que les Français se considérait comme les descendants des Franc jusqu'en 1914 mais comme ces derniers étaient de descendance germanique et qu'il y avait la première guerre mondiale et que leur adversaire était les Allemands alors ils auraient opté pour des ancêtres gaulois. Je résume vite mais c'est environs ça.

[Portukalos]

Racialement, ils sont en majeur partie des Gallo-Romains.


"Romains" designe seulement les citoyens de l'empire. Pas une race ni une ethnie (minus la cité elle-même).

[Hussar]

Aux quatre coins de la France les origines sont différentes. Au nord-ouest les origines celtiques sont plus forte. Au nord-est les origines germaniques sont plus forte. Au sud-ouest les origines ibériques/basques sont plus forte et au sud-est les origines italique et alpine sont plus forte.


Your last line....derives from a logic based on the current borders and national identity.
Back then in tha ancient era, the current north-Italy wasn't "Italy" : Italy was the peninsula .

On the actual border between France and Italy there weren't italic populations. There wasn't any ethnic barrier but a fluid continuum. north Italy was called Gallia cisalpina, and there were just 2 ethnic elements : Ligurians and Gauls. Less or more in equal numbers (later deeply mixed).

So to say that south eastern France could have italic origins.......is without sense.

[Ouistreham]

They do?
I've been in Brittany as well and the people there, nice folks by the way, talked about the English like the 100 Years War was still going on... :p
They seemed to me like very proud French citizen.

Brittany is absolutely the Frenchiest region of France. And it is the epitome of traditional French virtues: rudeness, alcoholism, stubbornness... :)

Open contempt of anything English and Spanish are founding elements of Breton mindset and have spread all over France.


That's probably because a large proportion of people living in Brittany are not Bretons at all and have migrated from the other départements.

Impossible. Brittany has ever been a high demographic pressure zone (like Ireland used to be in the Anglosphere) and has maintained higher birth rates up to this day. After WW-I entire demographically depressed areas like in the South-West were re-populated with Breton farmers.

As a consequence nearly every real French has a Breton grand-grand-parent. I was born in Normandy, and except for an Alsatian grand-father I thought I was mainly Norman, until I checked vital records put online (genealogy is incredibly easy in France with all records since the Middle Ages being available for free for most parts of the country). And I found out that almost half of my Norman forefathers actually had Breton roots.

[Tel Errant]

Culturellement les Français sont des Latins.
Racialement, ils sont en majeur partie des Gallo-Romains.
Culturellement les Français sont des Latins parce qu'ils ont été des Gallo-romains avant. Dans les deux cas il ne s'agit que de dénominations culturelles.



MAIS

Aux quatre coins de la France les origines sont différentes. Au nord-ouest les origines celtiques sont plus forte. Au nord-est les origines germaniques sont plus forte. Au sud-ouest les origines ibériques/basques sont plus forte et au sud-est les origines italique et alpine sont plus forte.
Oui, alors là on rentre vite dans un sujet polémique et je préfère éviter ce genre de discussion. C'est entre autre pour ça que le terme Gaulois me convient assez bien, les Aquitains, les Belges et les Celtes (Gallia Celtica/Comata) étant tous des Gaulois pour les Romains. Tour de passe-passe sémantique si on veut mais bon...

A propos des origines germaniques dans le nord-est, la frontière rhénane n'a jamais été qu'une frontière de convenance entre Gaulois et Germains. Mon intuition me dit que les tribus germaines de l'autre coté du Rhin étaient en grande partie d'origine celtique, et que le terme germanique n'a pas plus de résonance ethnique que celui de celte.

Au sujet des origines italiques du sud-est: s'il y en a elles sont récentes. Alors oui la Narbonnaise a vu la fondation de nombreuses colonies, mais soldat romain ne veut pas dire soldat italien. Les colons étaient principalement des vétérans, et les vétérans bien souvent des gars du cru. César a conquis la Gaule avec des légions qu'il a en partie fait lever en Narbonnaise et Cisalpine, régions dont il était gouverneur.





L'an dernier, j'ai vu un documentaire qui expliquait que les Français se considérait comme les descendants des Franc jusqu'en 1914 mais comme ces derniers étaient de descendance germanique et qu'il y avait la première guerre mondiale et que leur adversaire était les Allemands alors ils auraient opté pour des ancêtres gaulois. Je résume vite mais c'est environs ça.
C'est Napoléon III qui a remis à l'honneur le passé Gaulois des Français en entreprenant de nombreuses fouilles archéologiques en vue notamment de retrouver le site d'Alésia.
Avant ça les Français se considéraient comme descendants des Romains civilisateurs des barbares Gaulois.
L'évolution politique outre-rhin a changé la donne et les Français se sont dotés d'un nouveau mythe national faisant écho au pan-germanisme ciment de l'unification allemande.

[Ouistreham]

A propos des origines germaniques dans le nord-est, la frontière rhénane n'a jamais été qu'une frontière de convenance entre Gaulois et Germains. Mon intuition me dit que les tribus germaines de l'autre coté du Rhin étaient en grande partie d'origine celtique, et que le terme germanique n'a pas plus de résonance ethnique que celui de celte.

Frontière de convenance effectivement, qui était noyée dans l'appellation Gallia Belgica étendue entre la Seine et le Rhin.

Mais les Romains se sont vite rendu compte du côté arbitraire de cette division, et ont taillé à l'intérieur de la Gaule Belgique les provinces de Germania Inferior et Germania Superior (qui englobait l'Alsace).


soldat romain ne veut pas dire soldat italien. Les colons étaient principalement des vétérans, et les vétérans bien souvent des gars du cru. César a conquis la Gaule avec des légions qu'il a en partie fait lever en Narbonnaise et Cisalpine, régions dont il était gouverneur.

Oui, il était opportun de le rappeler. Dans l'historiographie vernaculaire qui s'exprime souvent ici on prête des effets ethnologiques démesurés aux invasions militaires. C'est oublier que recruter des gens sur place était de pratique normale. Depuis Hannibal, dont les troupes étaient essentiellement composées de Gaulois enrôlés en chemin, jusqu'à Attila dont la majorité des cavaliers étaient Germains.


C'est Napoléon III qui a remis à l'honneur le passé Gaulois des Français en entreprenant de nombreuses fouilles archéologiques en vue notamment de retrouver le site d'Alésia.
Avant ça les Français se considéraient comme descendants des Romains civilisateurs des barbares Gaulois.
L'évolution politique outre-rhin a changé la donne et les Français se sont dotés d'un nouveau mythe national faisant écho au pan-germanisme ciment de l'unification allemande.

Petite erreur: avant Napoléon III les origines franques étaient à l'honneur (cf. Augustin Thierry). C'est à l'occasion des guerres d'Italie et du Mexique que le terme "latin" a été mis en avant, pour des raisons de politique étrangère. Il est vrai en revanche que l'intérêt pour les choses gauloises a pris son essor au même moment (là, pour des motifs de politique intérieure).

[El Palleter]

There is no germanic culture .

There are germanic languages ,
and English is the less germanic of them ,
there are romance languages ,
and French is the less romanised of them .
Both are in the border in their own way .

I suppose this is not a novelty !
It's new to me.

Both French and Castilian are Romance languages which means that they derive from Vernacular or Vulgar Latin. But the origins of the Castilian language lie in a part of Spain that was little romanicised still in the early Dark Ages.

The romanisation of Gaul was more complete than that of Iberia where many rural and especially mountain areas remained with little or out of control from Rome. As an example the garrisoned frontier (limes) in Cantabria lasted until well after the fall of the Roman Empire.

Early Castilian was a rough Romance spoken by those and other little romanicised peoples.

Later in history both Castilian and French were "re-polished" by a reform done through Classic Latin. Or rather through Ecclesiastical Latin in the case of Castilian and through Courtesan Latin in the case of French.

I don't think that you can say that one is less "romanised" than the other. What you could say is that Italian (Florentine?) would be by far the more romanised if put in the group.

[Treffie]

Impossible. Brittany has ever been a high demographic pressure zone (like Ireland used to be in the Anglosphere) and has maintained higher birth rates up to this day. After WW-I entire demographically depressed areas like in the South-West were re-populated with Breton farmers.

As a consequence nearly every real French has a Breton grand-grand-parent. I was born in Normandy, and except for an Alsatian grand-father I thought I was mainly Norman, until I checked vital records put online (genealogy is incredibly easy in France with all records since the Middle Ages being available for free for most parts of the country). And I found out that almost half of my Norman forefathers actually had Breton roots.

These aren't my words, they're from a Breton anti-Jacobinist.

[Aelred]

If only they had stuck with Burgundian back in the '60s instead of this neologism 'Arpitan'.

[Osweo]

You are steadily on the mainstream ideology
witch says that suddenly the Gauls have abandoned their original language
for the latin , because this is convenient for english
who can say " wogs start at Calais " ... ( these Romance speakers ... )
I can look at a map of Roman Gaul, and actually UNDERSTAND the BLATANTLY Celtic toponyms, because I have an interest in the Ancient British language, and have personally read a lot about old Celtic placenames in England (especially in my home region of Lancashire).

Gaul did not speak the language you French speak today. Gaul did not speak a Latin/Italic/Romance language. To claim otherwise is simply bizarre.

I can even semi-understand the few rare inscriptions in Gaulish that have survived to our day;
"Segomaros Uilloneos Toutius Namausatis eioru Belesami sosin Nemeton." "Segomaros son of Uillo, Citizen of Nimes, dedicated this here sanctuary to Belisama."

This language is NOT the direct ancestor of any modern French language.

It is close to the ancestor of Breton, but this obviously involves a non-Latin language.

That anyone in 2011 opposes this is frightening! Not ALL that is 'mainstream' is lies and falsehood!


...
I do not buy the Continuity theory wholesale but it's able to explain lots of otherwise unexplained enigmas:
• how come Celtic toponyms (except for river names) are so rare in the Eastern half of England?
Cos there was such a huge disruption in culture and even basic subsistence patterns. However, there are probably more Celtic names in the east than you seem to realise.


• how come Romance languages are present in some former parts of the Roman Empire and not in others?
THe reasons are complex and particular to each region. You seem to be saying that there is a simpllistic answer to this problem which involves Romance languages (in Gaul, Dacia and Iberia) predating the Roman conquests, but this is just stupid.


• how come that in France the Oïl region was from the beginning so strikingly homogeneous, disregarding the fact that some areas were saturated with Frankish settlements while others barely had any?
Again, you seem to be scared of actually dealing with the historical nitty-gritty of the situation. Areas that were REALLY saturated with Franks became Dutch, end of story. Otherwise, the language of the Romanised Gauls won out, which is unsurprising given the appeal of their culture to the invading Franks.

At any rate two things are above any doubt:

• We do not know which languages were actually used in ancient times. Had a gigantic tsunami wiped out whole of Western Europe in the Middle Ages, Asian archeologists by examining ruins of churches and remnant gravestones would conclude that from Sicily to Finnmark everybody spoke Latin. Prove me wrong about that!
That is a PISS-POOR analogy.


• Romance languages are not and can't be derived from Latin. Beyond a number of well-known differences thay all have in common a number of grammatical features that are absolutely incompatible.
This is an utter joke.

Maybe I should give up trying to convince cranks. :shrug:

[supergiovane]

are we 100% sure that Bretons are descedants from refugee from Britain and not the last gaulish speaking gauls?
what if their language is not britain celtic but rather gaulish?

[Aelred]

2NaeJf8HvxI

[Osweo]

are we 100% sure that Bretons are descedants from refugee from Britain and not the last gaulish speaking gauls?
what if their language is not britain celtic but rather gaulish?

The Bretons owe their existence to these British migrants (calling them 'refugees' diminishes the rather more pro-active nature of their move - they weren't only running FROM, but many were conscious seekers after lands - real conquerors). Britons who landed in Armorica found some natives there and absorbed them.

British and Gaulish were near identical in pre-Roman times, but Breton shares specific commonalities with Cornish which indicate its insular origin.

There is ONE dialect which is sometimes suggested as preserving more Gaulish influence than others. 'Vannetais' is the name I remember off the top of my head. This is a debated point, however.


We have evidence that the Auvergne and the regions around the Moselle were scenes of late surviving Gaulish speech, but sadly this was not to be preserved. St. Jerome spoke of the latter being similar to Galatian in Anatolia, so the 'Continuity' theorists can stick this fact up where they please... :tongue

[Efim45]

I only consider the French to be raging queers.

[Aelred]

I only consider the French to be raging queers.

I've not met one yet that was. Quite the contrary in my experience...

[Ouistreham]

I only consider the French to be raging queers.

I have heard that a few American citizens like you are accomplished douchebags.

Besides, in view of some Anglospheric specificity, you should better avoid touchy topics:


Australia and America "Gayest Countries"

According to a international survey of sexual habits by Durex, 17% of Americans and the equal amount of Australians are in homosexual relationships.

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=33047

Thanks.

[Tel Errant]

The Bretons owe their existence to these British migrants (calling them 'refugees' diminishes the rather more pro-active nature of their move - they weren't only running FROM, but many were conscious seekers after lands - real conquerors). Britons who landed in Armorica found some natives there and absorbed them.

British and Gaulish were near identical in pre-Roman times, but Breton shares specific commonalities with Cornish which indicate its insular origin.

There is ONE dialect which is sometimes suggested as preserving more Gaulish influence than others. 'Vannetais' is the name I remember off the top of my head. This is a debated point, however.


We have evidence that the Auvergne and the regions around the Moselle were scenes of late surviving Gaulish speech, but sadly this was not to be preserved. St. Jerome spoke of the latter being similar to Galatian in Anatolia, so the 'Continuity' theorists can stick this fact up where they please... :tongue

Isn't that giving more weight to the British immigrants than they could have had?
If Gaulish survived in the late antiquity in Auvergne and Mosellan regions, so could have it in Armorica all the more.
Shared specific commonalitities can be just that, shared specific commonalities.

[Tel Errant]

I only consider the French to be raging queers.

Unexpected display of anglo-saxon intelligence.

[Hess]

Unexpected display of anglo-saxon intelligence.

Taking Efim too seriously is a mistake best not made :p

Besides, I think he's Russian, not Anglo Saxon ;)

[alzo zero]

north Italy was called Gallia cisalpina, and there were just 2 ethnic elements : Ligurians and Gauls.
It's true, Northern Italy was known as Gallia Cisalpina, however there weren't only Cisalpine Gauls and Ligurians there (both related to the Central Italian Indo-European Italics anyway). What about the Etruscans, the Veneti, the Raetians?

[Hussar]

It's true, Northern Italy was known as Gallia Cisalpina, however there weren't only Cisalpine Gauls and Ligurians there (both related to the Central Italian Indo-European Italics anyway). What about the Etruscans, the Veneti, the Raetians?

No. Two mistakes.

First , "indo european" is just a general cultural term. Inhabitants of peninsula (central Italy) were indo-european just culturally, not biologically. So the "italics" of central Italy weren't related to the celts of Cisalpine Gallia. Let alone Ligurians, that belongs to a different mediterranean stock (western).

Etruscan weren't part of northern Italy (Tuscany is central Italy). Raetians were amongst the very ancient autoctonous alpine populations (common in Austria and Switzerland too.

Veneti ? Maybe part of the illyrian spectrum.

[El Palleter]

No. Two mistakes.

First , "indo european" is just a general cultural term. Inhabitants of peninsula (central Italy) were indo-european just culturally, not biologically. So the "italics" of central Italy weren't related to the celts of Cisalpine Gallia.You are right. But there are linguists who argue that Celtic and Italic languages derive from a common Italo-Celtic branch.


Let alone Ligurians, that belongs to a different mediterranean stock (western).Also the ancient Ligurians were not even indo-european. Later it seems that they were indo-europeanised and then we'd speak of Ambro-Ligures.


Etruscan weren't part of northern Italy (Tuscany is central Italy).The Etruscans expanded as far as the Alps in a N-NE direction.


Raetians were amongst the very ancient autoctonous alpine populations (common in Austria and Switzerland too.An elusive population in history. Are they known to have put any resistance to conquest by Romans or by any others?


Veneti ? Maybe part of the illyrian spectrum.Related to the Histri so Illyrians.

[Osweo]

Isn't that giving more weight to the British immigrants than they could have had?
The British conquerors were the new Kings of Armorica, its army, its landowners, its churchmen, many of its rank-and-file commoners. Of course they had 'weight' - they NAMED the place after themselves, after all! The Gallic peasants were swept up into the new cultural arrangement, giving way to the ways of the incomers.



If Gaulish survived in the late antiquity in Auvergne and Mosellan regions, so could have it in Armorica all the more.
Mm? Ah, sure, I didn't mean to indicate that Gaulish was extinct in Armorica.

However, it appears that the Celtic speech was in a far better position in (at least western) Britain than it was in Gallia. Armoricans of higher rank would have been under far greater pressure to Romanise in habits and speech than our lordlings in our highland zone, and so Celtic speech in the land that became Britanny would not have enjoyed the prestige of the related language across la Manche.

Consider this; the Arthurian legends were later to be very strong in Britanny. These are clearly of British inspiration, in their geography and content, and so testify to a transplantation of a strong Celtic culture into the land from our island.


Shared specific commonalitities can be just that, shared specific commonalities.
I can't go into the specifics, but Cornish and Breton were more or less one language at not TOO long ago a period. They were closer than Welsh and Cornish. The specific commonalities are too peculiar and too common to be ascribed to chance independent evolution on both sides of the sea.

Anyway, the Bretons call their language 'BRITISH'. Can't we take that at face value?!? :p

[curiousman]

Related to the Histri so Illyrians.

Ancient Veneti were not Illyrians, they formed their own group distinct from Italics, Illyrians and Celts.

[Portukalos]

Also the ancient Ligurians were not even indo-european. Later it seems that they were indo-europeanised and then we'd speak of Ambro-Ligures..

Nobody knows actually. All we know is that Ligurian toponyms appear to be Indo-European with Celtic affinities.

[Star Valley]

Yes, some of the French are former Germanic people.
What matters is who they are today, the French have a strong unified nationality.

[Portukalos]

Anyway, the Bretons call their language 'BRITISH'. Can't we take that at face value?!? :p

Something like "Breizh" isn't it? lol^

[Osweo]

Something like "Breizh" isn't it? lol^

'Brezhoneg', I think.

Compare with Welsh 'Brythonic'. It's nothing other than a development of the Latinate Britannic, a word which is to be found in the front page of my British passport.

'Breizh' is Breton for Britanny itself.

[Comte Arnau]

France started South of the Somme. Whatever is North of it are lands that have been stolen by the French that need to be liberated.


France... South of the Somme, North of la Loire.

[Ouistreham]

Ancient Veneti were not Illyrians, they formed their own group distinct from Italics, Illyrians and Celts.

The Veneti belonged clearly to the Italic group. Remarkably, they joined the Romans of their free will, on a basis of mutual friendship. They were probably the only part of the Roman Empire that wasn't conquered by force or under threat.

While being akin to Latin the Venetic language had also some commonalities with both the Celtic and Germanic groups, which makes it an extremely interesting case within the IE "Centum" family.


France started South of the Somme. Whatever is North of it are lands that have been stolen by the French that need to be liberated.

Pure horseshit.


France... South of the Somme, North of la Loire.

Nonsense.
The River Loire has never been an ethnic or political boundary of any significance. The limit between the core Oïl domain and so-called "Occitania" is the Bordeaux-Briançon line, that runs 200 to 300 km South of the Loire.

[curiousman]

The Veneti belonged clearly to the Italic group.

It is safe to say that linguistic affiliation of Venetic language is still highly controversial. A recent fringe theory considers it as a proto-Slovenian language :rolleyes:. It is also highly debatable if ancient Adriatic Veneti shared some kind of kinship with Veneti/Venedi of the Vistula and Veneti of Armorica.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Iron_Age_Italy.svg