Who are the true English?

[Wulfhere]

Since the term English is derived from the Angles, this means that the Saxons are not truly English. The Saxons settled in what is now southern England, meaning that Southerners, therefore, are not properly English. The Angles settled in Mercia, Northumbria and East Anglia, but the latter two were later entirely overrun and settled by Danes, creating a new, hybrid population. Parts of eastern Mercia were too, but western Mercia never was, meaning that the ony true English people left in England are Mercians from the western Midlands.

[Jackson]

But the English nation was really created a little after the initial invasion, and incorporated these groups - but was pushed by the West Saxon royals really. Probably the biggest difference as recognized at the time was between Southumberland/land south of the Humber and Northumberland.

Certainly the people of the black country have a dialect that is very archaic (and so preserved better the speech of England than most other areas) though, if i remember correctly?

[safinator]

I missed your posts, truly.

[Wulfhere]

But the English nation was really created a little after the initial invasion, and incorporated these groups - but was pushed by the West Saxon royals really. Probably the biggest difference as recognized at the time was between Southumberland/land south of the Humber and Northumberland.

Certainly the people of the black country have a dialect that is very archaic (and so preserved better the speech of England than most other areas) though, if i remember correctly?

We should make a distinction between the English nation, and the English ethnic group. The English nation is named after the ethnic group that had been dominant before the rise of Wessex.

[Jackson]

We should make a distinction between the English nation, and the English ethnic group. The English nation is named after the ethnic group that had been dominant before the rise of Wessex.

But i view the nation as the ethnic group in this context, it's more or less how it was in close-knit societies. Large parts of the Anglian, Frisian and Saxon nations moved to a new place, and then later formed a large conglomerate nation of similar peoples. It's known that people sometimes did this, for example the Helvetii and some other smaller tribes destroyed their previous settlements and moved to a new place, around 300,000 of them. So in that case the nation needed new land to fulfill it's needs. Of course often new nations are formed after arriving on new land.

I mean that the existence of an English nation was pushed quite significantly by Wessex, but it was done by the English as a whole, of course. Of course it's difficult to tell how quickly it happened, whether the formation of a proper English nation was a reaction of the elite to the will of the people, or whether it was pushed by the elite for a people that largely accepted it.

[Wulfhere]

But i view the nation as the ethnic group in this context, it's more or less how it was in close-knit societies. Large parts of the Anglian, Frisian and Saxon nations moved to a new place, and then later formed a large conglomerate nation of similar peoples. It's known that people sometimes did this, for example the Helvetii and some other smaller tribes destroyed their previous settlements and moved to a new place, around 300,000 of them. So in that case the nation needed new land to fulfill it's needs. Of course often new nations are formed after arriving on new land.

I mean that the existence of an English nation was pushed quite significantly by Wessex, but it was done by the English as a whole, of course. Of course it's difficult to tell how quickly it happened, whether the formation of a proper English nation was a reaction of the elite to the will of the people, or whether it was pushed by the elite for a people that largely accepted it.

The Mercians in particular placed a great deal of emphasis on continuity with their pre-migration ancestors, and the Mercian royal family was descended from the kings of the Angles. They would not have regarded themselves as having formed a new nation when settling in Britain. Later, the centuries of Mercian dominance in England led to the name, English, being applied beyond Mercia proper to England as a whole.

[Proctor]

A bit confuzzled by your definition of English. Haven't the saxons already assimilated quite well? If you want to distinguish the Angles as a distinct ethnic group I have no problem with that then. But in essence all these groups have contributed to a defined English culture so can't they all be considered English in some way shape or form?

[Smaug]

Don't forget my dear lad, that the West Midlands also have a strong Celtic contribution of Brythonic stock.

[Jackson]

A bit confuzzled by your definition of English. Haven't the saxons already assimilated quite well? If you want to distinguish the Angles as a distinct ethnic group I have no problem with that then. But in essence all these groups have contributed to a defined English culture so can't they all be considered English in some way shape or form?

Perhaps at the time English was considered as a term similar to the way British is often used now, ie not all English are Angles, but all Angles are English, or something along those lines.

[Wulfhere]

A bit confuzzled by your definition of English. Haven't the saxons already assimilated quite well? If you want to distinguish the Angles as a distinct ethnic group I have no problem with that then. But in essence all these groups have contributed to a defined English culture so can't they all be considered English in some way shape or form?

In "some shape or form" yes. But not in the original sense of the word. The first and true English were the Angles (the latter simply being a Latinised form of the actual name, Engle).