Independence movements [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Daos

03-17-2010, 08:00 PM

Here's an interesting map:

http://www.apn.ru/pictures/5438.gif

Dark shading: regions with strong separatist movements aimed at obtaining independence. Example: Scotland.

Medium shading: regions with developed local and/or ethnic self-consciousness aimed at autonomy, empowerment, protection of rights within the state. Example: Andalusia.

Light shading: historical European regions with a highly developed sense of its special mission. Example: Occitania.

Absence of hatching: "sleeping" regions, whose population is mostly identified with the nation state.

1. Scotland; 2. Northern Ireland; 3. Wales; 4. Cornwall; 5. Isle of Man; 6. Faeroe Islands; 7. Scania; 8. Åland Islands; 9. Friesland; 10. Flanders; 11. Wallonia; 12. Brussels (free city); 13. Eupen-Malmédy; 14. Bavaria; 15. Alamanni; 16. Alsace; 17. Romande; 18. Savoy; 19. Nice area; 20. Occitania; 21. Brittany; 22. Corsica; 23. Basque Country; 24. Asturias; 25. Galicia (with Norte); 26. Andalusia; 27. Aragon; 28. Catalonia (with Roussillon and the Balearic Islands); 29. Valencia; 30. Sardinia; 31. Sicily; 32. Padania; 33. Liguria; 34. Veneto; 35. Südtirol; 36. Val d'Aosta; 37. Istria; 38. Bosnia; 39. Serbian Republic; 40. Eastern Slavonia; 41. Vojvodina; 42. District of resettled Hungarians in Vojvodina; 43. Sandžak; 44. Kossovo; 45. Serbian Mitrovica; 46. Presevo-Bujanovac-Medvedja districts; 47. Ulcinj in Montenegro; 48. Western Macedonia; 49. Northern Epirus (Chameria); 50. Greek Macedonia; 51. Transylvania (including Maramureș, Crișana and Romanian Banat); 52. Wallachia (with Dobruja); 53. Romanian Moldova; 54. Bukowina; 55. Bessarabia; 56. Transnistria; 57. Gagauzia; 58. Budjak; 59. Carpathian Ruthenia; 60. The settlement area of Hungarians in Slovakia; 61. Pryashevschina; 62. Lemkivshchyna (with the Polish part of Boykivshchyna); 63. Moravia; 64. Silesia; 65. Lusatia; 66. Kashubia; 67. Nadsyane; 68. Chełm Land; 69. Podlachia (including Białystok and Polish Suwałki); 70. Vilnius (with Alytus district - Dzūkija); 71. Aukštaitija (with Lithuania Minor); 72. Latgalia; 73. Ida-Viru County

Pallantides

03-17-2010, 08:13 PM

I know some Northern Norwegians have desired their own state in past named Hålogaland after the historical region in Nordland.

Graham

03-17-2010, 08:28 PM

England independence ;)
I support yer cause. Although a would feel sorry for places like Newcastle stuck with the tories for longer.

Of course I support a 32 county and United Ireland, but I have no trust in Sinn Féin. I'm indifferent to Scottish independence, though if you throw your lot in with the SNP you deserve everything you get when the ship starts to sink.

You don't mind being ruled from London then? OK aye because Glasgows done so well in the last 100 years under a UK government . :rolleyes: You don't mind being Brittish then, good for you Meh :p

Don't even know why the SNP/plaid cymru are in the British elections. They should concentrate wholly on Scotland/Wales. Would make more sense.

The SNP have been attacked left right and centre by the press. London owned daily record supporting the Labour Party and attacking the SNP. The Sun supporting the Tories and attacking the SNP. What chance have they got with all the propaganda.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/168/483070357_e2b970b170.jpg

Roll on the Rockall Independance. YEEHAA!!

Murphy

03-17-2010, 10:32 PM

You don't mind being ruled from London then?

I'm indifferent.

OK aye because Glasgows done so well in the last 100 years under a UK government.

To be honest, Glasgow did quite well for its self under British government.

You don't mind being Brittish then, good for you

I don't even consider my self Scottish mate, so I am hardly British.

Beorn

03-17-2010, 10:50 PM

Here's an interesting map:

Like the silly bugger I am, I sent you a rep without asking the question that made me send the rep in the first place.

Can you provide a link to access the page you got that from, please? :)

I support yer cause. Although a would feel sorry for places like Newcastle stuck with the tories for longer.

Newcastle doesn't even know its been born.

It's hard to say what would come out of England becoming independent though. I would like to think it would be governed through a regional system, with only minimal national powers devolved to Westminster, but I expect we will still be governed by one of the two parties currently suffered.

The Lawspeaker

03-17-2010, 10:53 PM

I only respect Vlaams Belang.. and o.k (I forgot to click them) I feel sympathy for the cause of the Tibetans.

Smaland

03-18-2010, 01:20 AM

The Confederate States of America. :D

True, it was active only from 1861 to 1865, but it is still remembered and honored today. Deo Vindice.

Below is the official Third National Flag. It has a white field, except for a single vertical red stripe at the far right. The union is a representation of the Confederate Battle Flag.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Confederate_National_Flag_since_Mar_4_1865.svg/220px-Confederate_National_Flag_since_Mar_4_1865.svg.png

Daos

03-18-2010, 05:41 AM

Like the silly bugger I am, I sent you a rep without asking the question that made me send the rep in the first place.

Can you provide a link to access the page you got that from, please? :)

I tried to find the original page, but was unsuccessful. Here (http://www.balto-slavica.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2776) is the forum thread I got it from.

EDIT: I googled the names of the authors and have found the original link (http://www.apn.ru/opinions/article19815.htm). Victory is mine!

EDIT 2: Some might be interested in the "clean" map (http://www.aer.eu/fileadmin/Images/Tabula/2009/Tabula_2009_Grande.jpg).

Graham

03-18-2010, 06:38 AM

I'm indifferent.

To be honest, Glasgow did quite well for its self under British government.

I don't even consider my self Scottish mate, so I am hardly British.
hehe, was only kidding ye. It's none of my buisness if your Irish or whatever.

aye in the 19th century .Glasgow was the UKs second biggest city. Went downhill after the great depression. Glasgow profited well out of the Empire.

hereward

03-19-2010, 12:57 AM

Vote SNP

Free Scotland:thumb001::thumb001::thumb001::thumb001::t humb001::thumb001:

Octothorpe

03-19-2010, 03:37 AM

Southern Illinois!

http://www.southernilnow.org/

Dalriada

03-20-2010, 08:20 PM

The people of Tibet under Chinese communist rule have my sympathy, and I would sympathise with those of them who would wish to be independent.

Lenny

03-22-2010, 07:00 PM

Other: Movimiento por la Liberación del Viejo Continente.
Bueno y donde podríamos afiliarnos entonces?? :p

Hehe, Where can we sign up? :D

C.V., como Español orgulloso, que piensas sobre la posibilidad de la independencia del país vasco?

Cristiano Viejo, what do you think of possibility of Basque independence?

Lenny

03-22-2010, 07:05 PM

Here's an interesting map:

http://www.apn.ru/pictures/5438.gif

Dark shading: regions with strong separatist movements aimed at obtaining independence. Example: Scotland.
Pretty neat map, but Bayern/Bavaria having a "strong separatist movement"? Meaning a large number of people seriously favor independence? In the year 2010? I don't think so.

They have the Bayernpartei but it gets 1% of the vote.

esaima

03-22-2010, 07:20 PM

Other(s), please specify: don´t know, can we call those independence movements but I support national movements in Russia: Chechens, Tatars, Maris, Udmurts, Sakha etc.

Óttar

03-22-2010, 07:33 PM

Shouldn't English nationalists support the Scottish National Party? :P

@ Cristiano Viejo

Continental Spaniards considered full-blooded Spaniards born in the Americas to be inferior. :coffee:

Comte Arnau

03-23-2010, 01:00 AM

Any pro-independence movement related to the preservation of a distinct ethnolinguistic group, which doesn't use violent means to achieve it.

Svanhild

03-23-2010, 04:53 PM

Pretty neat map, but Bayern/Bavaria having a "strong separatist movement"? Meaning a large number of people seriously favor independence? In the year 2010? I don't think so.

They have the Bayernpartei but it gets 1% of the vote.

http://www.mainpost.de/lokales/bayern/Startschuss-fuer-ein-bdquo-freies-Bayern-ldquo-;art16683,5374675

A study of the Hanns Seidel Stiftung in 2009 revealed that 39% support full or at least particular independence of Bavaria.

Our Bavarian neighbours in the south are odd people. Decent but freaky. :wink

Eldritch

03-25-2010, 08:55 PM

Our Bavarian neighbours in the south are odd people. Decent but freaky. :wink

I thought that Bavarians thought north Germans were freaks, and that Berlin is more or less Sodom and Gomorrah rolled into one?

W. R.

03-25-2010, 09:37 PM

It took some time to think about...

Herstigte Nasionale Party van Suid-Afrika (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herstigte_Nasionale_Party) (Reconstituted National Party of South Africa).

Amapola

03-25-2010, 09:50 PM

http://www.andaluciaoriental.es/

Independence for Eastern Andalusia.
Their aim is to make a community "comunidad autónoma" of the provinces of Eastern Andalusia (Almeria, Granada, Málaga and Jaén), breaking their dependence with Andalusia and its administrative center in Sevilla.
:thumb001:

That is the flag:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8d/Bandera_y_escudo_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa_Oriental_%28PAO %29.svg/750px-Bandera_y_escudo_de_Andaluc%C3%ADa_Oriental_%28PAO %29.svg.png
It's ugly but I would not mind seeing it fluttering outside the town hall.

Äike

03-25-2010, 09:54 PM

Daos

03-26-2010, 06:59 AM

lol, Ida-Viru County getting independence would make as much sense as some region in Germany, which is heavily dominated by Turks, getting independence. Or some Somalis wanting independence in some area of Sweden for example, that would make as much sense as independence of Ida-Viru County.

Anyway... That's the only place of Estonia where I have never been to. Estonians make less then 20% of the population. Thus that region has the highest amount of crime, HIV, drug addicts and other Russian traits.

If it's Russians you're talking about, then it would actually be like Kossovo getting independence. Oh, wait!:rolleyes:

Tabiti

03-26-2010, 07:10 AM

Since I'm not a turk, neither a "macedon" I don't support any of the "liberation" movements here;)

Comte Arnau

03-26-2010, 02:55 PM

Äike

03-26-2010, 05:12 PM

If it's Russians you're talking about, then it would actually be like Kossovo getting independence. Oh, wait!:rolleyes:

It wouldn't be the same as Albanians have been in Kosovo way longer than Russians in Ida-Viru County. Russians have been in Ida-Viru County for only 50 years.

I actually have never heard about any "independence movements" in Ida-Viru County. This map really surprised me.

Amapola

03-26-2010, 08:39 PM

Would malagueños support it?

As most of Málaga was part of the old Kingdom of Granada, I assumed that it would be included but it is not!

I investigated a bit and found this: what Malagueños think about all that, have a look, it's quite interesting :p

http://foros.diariosur.es/somos-andalucia-oriental-occidental-t8093.html

Svanhild

03-26-2010, 10:15 PM

I thought that Bavarians thought north Germans were freaks, and that Berlin is more or less Sodom and Gomorrah rolled into one?
The teasing is mutual. :wink To them we are all priggish Prussians who want to suppress the rest of Germany.

RoyBatty

03-26-2010, 10:17 PM

Other(s), please specify: don´t know, can we call those independence movements but I support national movements in Russia: Chechens, Tatars, Maris, Udmurts, Sakha etc.

I support Russian independence movement in Estonia. :thumb001:

Äike

03-26-2010, 10:25 PM

I support Russian independence movement in Estonia. :thumb001:

Such a thing doesn't exist, as far as I know. That's why this map surprised me. If there would be an independence movement in Estonia, then me as an Estonian, would probably know about it. :p

If such a thing would exist, then you'd probably also support the Moroccan independence movement in France, the Turkish independence movement in Germany and the Somali independence movement in Helsinki etc... :D

RoyBatty

03-26-2010, 10:31 PM

Such a thing doesn't exist, as far as I know. That's why this map surprised me. If there would be an independence movement in Estonia, then me as an Estonian, would probably know about it. :p

If such a thing would exist, then you'd probably also support the Moroccan independence movement in France, the Turkish independence movement in Germany and the Somali independence movement in Helsinki etc... :D

Yeah yeah I know, I was just being annoying towards the Chechen lover. :thumb001:

Spiderman

03-27-2010, 01:08 PM

Local independence is tribalism...which is cool and healthy. Breaking down Nationalist Dogma is good strategy for building a strong, free, Democratic tribal Europe. The right to self-determination is a sacred human stretch objective.

Albion

04-06-2010, 09:35 AM

Sovereign Mercia.

Mercia is just as English as the rest of England! I live in Mercia and this little "Mercian Independence" crap does may head in!

Mercia, Northumbria, Wessex, Kent, Essex and the Heptarchy = ENGLAND, ENGLISH, AND MORE ENGLISH
Mercia is just a region of England, perhaps the most English part of all of England. And go independent what have we got?
Hmmmm... lets think? Birmingham! What a place to call our capital city and biggest city!

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

Independence are some movements I support and don't support:

Scottish independence - If they and the rest of them go we in England get our identity back and get rid of the Scots whinging at us on how they could be so better off without us (yawn). If they're going to go then they should do it instead of just arguing about it, our countries can be good allies in a simple organisation for co-operation in the British Isles.

Northern Irish independence - I've got Ulster Scots ancestry, but so long as Ireland becomes a secular state and stops treating protestants second best then I see no problem with the Ulster Scots along with Ulster going to the Republic of Ireland.
The main reason this doesn't happen I belive is because the Irish goverment lets the catholic church interfere in the state too much (see: Irish abortion debate).

Wales - Maybe they could be independent, but they'd have to build themselves up from an economy comparable to Slovakia's. They're probably best served being attached to England, but with more autonomy (aka a parliament).

Cornwall independence - Independence in Cornwall's circumstances is quite laughable, so no.

English independence - England basically leads the UK, even though it hasn't got its own parliament. The Scots could be richer on their own, so could England.
The City of Westminister is joint-first place as the top financial centre in the world, we're a great trading nation and have our own very different culture and customs, akin to both the Celtic nations and Netherlands and Germany.
We wouldn't have to look after the Celtic nations anymore and a better standard of living would arise.

Flemmish independence - Not indpendence per se, they should merge with the Netherlands in my opinion.

I can't be bothered to write every movement down, it would take to long and would turn into a book so I'll leave it at that for now.

Wulfhere

04-06-2010, 10:28 AM

Mercia is just as English as the rest of England! I live in Mercia and this little "Mercian Independence" crap does may head in!

Mercia, Northumbria, Wessex, Kent, Essex and the Heptarchy = ENGLAND, ENGLISH, AND MORE ENGLISH
Mercia is just a region of England, perhaps the most English part of all of England. And go independent what have we got?
Hmmmm... lets think? Birmingham! What a place to call our capital city and biggest city!

If it wasn't for the colonisation, Birmingham would be a beautiful city - and much of it still is. It has more trees than any other city in Europe, and more miles of canal than Venice. But Birmingham is just one city in a Mercia full of wonderful, fertile countryside and historic, important towns.

You're right to say that Mercia is the most English part of England, perhaps the only place that the true English (Angles) survive. Southern England is Saxon, and Northern England was heavily settled by Danes.

Mercian nationalism is not about rejecting Englishness, but preserving it.

Albion

04-06-2010, 11:27 AM

If it wasn't for the colonisation, Birmingham would be a beautiful city - and much of it still is. It has more trees than any other city in Europe, and more miles of canal than Venice. But Birmingham is just one city in a Mercia full of wonderful, fertile countryside and historic, important towns.

Yes, okay, I agree with you on that, but something needs to be done about Birmingham and Stoke (god I hate stoke - its like visiting Pakistani).
I happen to live in that wonderful, fertile countryside with the nice towns you speak of, so I can relate to that. :thumb001:

You're right to say that Mercia is the most English part of England, perhaps the only place that the true English (Angles) survive. Southern England is Saxon, and Northern England was heavily settled by Danes.

In my opinion all the Danes did was add a bit more flavour to certain areas, the Danes were and still are basically kith and kin to the Anglo-Saxons and English. Mercia is the most Anglo-Saxon (or Anglian) part though and it is thoroughly English.

Mercian nationalism is not about rejecting Englishness, but preserving it.

Maybe I got you wrong then, I've read about Mercian nationalism before and it was on about something like "soverign eco-regions" which sounded a bit break-away nationalist to me (i.e. hoping to attain independence).

I've got no problem with Mercia with a independent England, once England is independent we can split England into provinces based on the heptarchy (Mercia, Northumbria, East Anglia, etc.), but full independence would be silly and we're all English.
One problem I've thought of though with Mercian Nationalism is will it lead to the breakup of England? Would these provinces create new ethnic identities instead of regional English one's and break-away? I for one am Mercian and English and want it to stay this way.

Okay, so I'll put more time into reading up on Mercian Nationalism and getting to know what its really like.
One question though, strictly speaking shouldn't it be called "Mercian Regionalism"?
Mercian Regionalism is something I can embrace, I'm Mercian English and wish to see a more powerful Mercia within England.

Wulfhere

04-06-2010, 11:40 AM

Yes, okay, I agree with you on that, but something needs to be done about Birmingham and Stoke (god I hate stoke - its like visiting Pakistani).
I happen to live in that wonderful, fertile countryside with the nice towns you speak of, so I can relate to that. :thumb001:

In my opinion all the Danes did was add a bit more flavour to certain areas, the Danes were and still are basically kith and kin to the Anglo-Saxons and English. Mercia is the most Anglo-Saxon (or Anglian) part though and it is thoroughly English.

Maybe I got you wrong then, I've read about Mercian nationalism before and it was on about something like "soverign eco-regions" which sounded a bit break-away nationalist to me (i.e. hoping to attain independence).

I've got no problem with Mercia with a independent England, once England is independent we can split England into provinces based on the heptarchy (Mercia, Northumbria, East Anglia, etc.), but full independence would be silly and we're all English.
One problem I've thought of though with Mercian Nationalism is will it lead to the breakup of England? Would these provinces create new ethnic identities instead of regional English one's and break-away? I for one am Mercian and English and want it to stay this way.

Okay, so I'll put more time into reading up on Mercian Nationalism and getting to know what its really like.
One question though, strictly speaking shouldn't it be called "Mercian Regionalism"?
Mercian Regionalism is something I can embrace, I'm Mercian English and wish to see a more powerful Mercia within England.

The Danes are indeed our very close kith and kin, that goes without saying - but, as you say, if we're talking about the English, or Angles specifically, then Mercia is the only place they survived unmixed.

The "eco-region" thing you referred to is the policy of something called the "Acting Witan of Mercia", a group we do not see eye to eye with at all - and they hardly ever do anything anyway except collect names on a petition - they've had one public meeting in 17 years whereas we have two per fortnight. Our manifesto is linked below, if you wish to take a closer look.

Albion

04-06-2010, 04:36 PM

The Danes are indeed our very close kith and kin, that goes without saying - but, as you say, if we're talking about the English, or Angles specifically, then Mercia is the only place they survived unmixed.

The "eco-region" thing you referred to is the policy of something called the "Acting Witan of Mercia", a group we do not see eye to eye with at all - and they hardly ever do anything anyway except collect names on a petition - they've had one public meeting in 17 years whereas we have two per fortnight. Our manifesto is linked below, if you wish to take a closer look.

Right, so your a proper organisation then. But I'm still oposed to Mercia being anything but a province of England.

Should Mercia have complete independence? No.

Should Mercia have autonomy within England whilst England remains within the UK? No, this gets in the way of English aspirations for independence on a national level and Westminister would use this as an excuse to break England up and not give any of it independence

Should Mercia have self-goverment and autonomy within a independent England? Yes, absolutely!

Wulfhere

04-06-2010, 04:41 PM

Right, so your a proper organisation then. But I'm still oposed to Mercia being anything but a province of England.

Should Mercia have complete independence? No.

Should Mercia have autonomy within England whilst England remains within the UK? No, this gets in the way of English aspirations for independence on a national level and Westminister would use this as an excuse to break England up and not give any of it independence

Should Mercia have self-goverment and autonomy within a independent England? Yes, absolutely!

England is already independent - it has 83% of the population of the UK, so runs it.

The problem is that the people who run it are the Norman-descended aristocracy of the south.

Albion

04-06-2010, 05:04 PM

England is already independent - it has 83% of the population of the UK, so runs it.

The problem is that the people who run it are the Norman-descended aristocracy of the south.

Having 83% of the population doesn't equal independence. The British Empire controlled about 400 million people, only 50 million of them (the British) could have been said to have independence (since they ran the empire).

I belive the Norman aristocracy is dieing out, have you seen the state of many aristocratic families in England?
Only the Percy's (yes, the same traitors who conspired with Llwelyn Glyndwr) seem to be doing well.
All these families aren't based in the south, and even if they were we could just abolish more of their privileges.
Your on about bringing Anglo-Saxon ruled Mercia back, and I admire that but why not bring Anglo-Saxon ruled Mercia and England back?

Now probably isn't the best time to say this but those Norman aristocrats you speak of, well before my Ulster Scots ancestors went out to Ireland they were Norman land-holders in Scotland, minor aristocrats :D :p:thumb001:
And guess what? I haven't got one single penny nor 1 inch of their land! :D:D hahaha. Seriously, many Norman families went bust centuries ago, as did the one's I'm related to (hence the move to Ireland). Oh, and the one's I'm related to have died out since the paternal line died out with my mum's grandad.

Wulfhere

04-06-2010, 05:11 PM

Having 83% of the population doesn't equal independence. The British Empire controlled about 400 million people, only 50 million of them (the British) could have been said to have independence (since they ran the empire).

I belive the Norman aristocracy is dieing out, have you seen the state of many aristocratic families in England?
Only the Percy's (yes, the same traitors who conspired with Llwelyn Glyndwr) seem to be doing well.
All these families aren't based in the south, and even if they were we could just abolish more of their privileges.
Your on about bringing Anglo-Saxon ruled Mercia back, and I admire that but why not bring Anglo-Saxon ruled Mercia and England back?

Now probably isn't the best time to say this but those Norman aristocrats you speak of, well before my Ulster Scots ancestors went out to Ireland they were Norman land-holders in Scotland, minor aristocrats :D :p:thumb001:
And guess what? I haven't got one single penny nor 1 inch of their land! :D:D hahaha. Seriously, many Norman families went bust centuries ago, as did the one's I'm related to (hence the move to Ireland). Oh, and the one's I'm related to have died out since the paternal line died out with my mum's grandad.

The rest of the empire didn't have the vote, so it was controlled by those who did - the British. The fact that England has 83% of the population - and votes - of the UK means that it controls it.

We feel that the interests of Mercia would best be served by complete sovereignty.

Albion

04-06-2010, 05:34 PM

The rest of the empire didn't have the vote, so it was controlled by those who did - the British. The fact that England has 83% of the population - and votes - of the UK means that it controls it.

We feel that the interests of Mercia would best be served by complete sovereignty.

Yes England controls the UK, but its Scottish MPs who can swing through a new law only affecting England by use of their sheer numbers and because we don't have a parliament.
And Mercia is part of England, Mercia is England so why are you saying complete sovereignty would be the best option for Mercia? Your speaking as if Mercia is already one of the "home-nations", when in fact it enjoys no official status as yet.

If England controls the UK then so does Mercia. And if Mercia was grafted out of the West midlands and East midlands Mercia by far would have the majority of MPs, even more than London (which has an unfairly large ammount).

Wulfhere

04-06-2010, 05:38 PM

Yes England controls the UK, but its Scottish MPs who can swing through a new law only affecting England by use of their sheer numbers and because we don't have a parliament.
And Mercia is part of England, Mercia is England so why are you saying complete sovereignty would be the best option for Mercia? Your speaking as if Mercia is already one of the "home-nations", when in fact it enjoys no official status as yet.

If England controls the UK then so does Mercia. And if Mercia was grafted out of the West midlands and East midlands Mercia by far would have the majority of MPs, even more than London (which has an unfairly large ammount).

Mercia has 16 million, England as a whole has 50 million.

Murphy

04-06-2010, 05:44 PM

Northern Irish independence - I've got Ulster Scots ancestry, but so long as Ireland becomes a secular state and stops treating protestants second best then I see no problem with the Ulster Scots along with Ulster going to the Republic of Ireland.

The main reason this doesn't happen I belive is because the Irish goverment lets the catholic church interfere in the state too much (see: Irish abortion debate).

Who the fuck do you think you are, you cheeky little fucking gobshite? Catholics in Ireland have suffered for generations at the hands of Protestant government, and you have the cheek to come here and say that it's the other way around? Fuck you. No really, FUCK YOU.

And you don't think Ireland is a secular state? Do you honestly think the Church has that much power? The Irish Republic is a fucking disgrace with no shred of moral decency in it. It is a degenerate materialist-atheist-liberal piece of shite.

The only reason abortion hasn't been made legal yet, is because people don't want to give women the so-called right to murder their unborn children. And what kind of fucking argument is this? Do you think legalising Abortion in the Republic is going to make the Protestant in the north love us any more than they do now?

You fucking stupid cunt.

Äike

04-06-2010, 05:55 PM

Murphy

04-06-2010, 05:59 PM

What's wrong with you?

Karl. If someone told you that it was actually Estonia who has mistreated the Russian people etc., how would you react?

I've been active on such fora(like TA) for about half a decade and I've never seen anyone swear as much as you do.

Really? Cool :D!

You're obsessed with the word "fuck".

It is the word most used of my vocabulary.

Seriously, if you disagree with someone, you don't have to shower him with such harsh foul language.

Heh, he deserves it for being such a dick.

Äike

04-06-2010, 06:11 PM

Karl. If someone told you that it was actually Estonia who has mistreated the Russian people etc., how would you react?

I would make a calm and rational post that completely disproves that claim without using any foul words...

Murphy

04-06-2010, 06:16 PM

I would make a calm and rational post that completely disproves that claim without using any foul words...

But surely you understand why such a post as his would rile me so. I may not be as calm as you, but that is neither here nor there.

Also, I think there may be an issue here with English being your second language. Swear-words are generally thrown around quite casually here (Scotland). I have a rough tongue. So do most Glaswegians.

Deal with it.

Äike

04-06-2010, 06:23 PM

But surely you understand why such a post as his would rile me so. I may not be as calm as you, but that is neither here nor there.

Also, I think there may be an issue here with English being your second language. Swear-words are generally thrown around quite casually here (Scotland). I have a rough tongue. So do most Glaswegians.

Deal with it.

Well, I've been called a stoic by my friends, so you might be right.

Although, I still think that you use foul words too often. :ohwell:

Albion

04-06-2010, 06:28 PM

Who the fuck do you think you are, you cheeky little fucking gobshite? Catholics in Ireland have suffered for generations at the hands of Protestant government, and you have the cheek to come here and say that it's the other way around? Fuck you. No really, FUCK YOU.

Yeah, Catholics really did suffer at the hands of protestants, but does that mean the catholics should do the same back?
Whilst we're at it why don't religious riots just break out all because Ireland just can't be officially secular?
Seriously, do you want Northern Ireland united with Ireland or not? Well if so maybe you in the republic should engage brains and think - your alienating the protestants, and if you continue the protestants will never accept Irish rule! If you got the bloody church out of the state then there would be no real problem with the protestants in Northern Ireland accepting Irish rule!!!!
The only problem that might be encountered now though would be hostility from the protestants there to incorporation within Ireland due to the conflict.

Can't you bloody see man? I'm on your side! I want Northern Ireland where it belongs - in the republic!
The "awww! evil protestant!" argument your trawling doesn't work here.:mad:
Besides, I'm not even protestant, for all you know I could be Budhist or Catholic, I merely said an ancestor was a protestant dufus!:mad::mad:

And you don't think Ireland is a secular state? Do you honestly think the Church has that much power? The Irish Republic is a fucking disgrace with no shred of moral decency in it. It is a degenerate materialist-atheist-liberal piece of shite.

No, I don't think its secular. Okay it doesn't have as much power as the church does in other countries, but nevertheless you've still got the Catholic church wispering in the President of Ireland's ear.

See "In the Irish free state", "Influence on Irish society > Politics" in this link:
This link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_in_Ireland#In_the_Irish_Free_Sta te_and_Republic_.281922.E2.80.93present.29)

More info (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws91/church32.html)

Besides, everyone and his dog knows Ireland is run by the catholics.

The only reason abortion hasn't been made legal yet, is because people don't want to give women the so-called right to murder their unborn children. And what kind of fucking argument is this? Do you think legalising Abortion in the Republic is going to make the Protestant in the north love us any more than they do now?

Abortion has nothing to do with it, I was merely showing an example of where the catholic church has effectivley blocked a piece of legislation. No, not officially, just by using its mighty influence it weilds in Ireland via politicians and the ordinary folk.

What's wrong with you? I've been active on such fora(like TA) for about half a decade and I've never seen anyone swear as much as you do.

You're obsessed with the word "fuck". Seriously, if you disagree with someone, you don't have to shower him with such harsh foul language.

Don't worry man, apparently its an Irish cultural trait - Irish and Ulster Scot.

Get that box of your head and see the outside world man! Now wonder you've got the vatican flag on your acount, because we all know that's who basically runs Ireland!!!:rolleyes2:

Now, lets move on and make up shall we? :thumb001: Or are you going to continue this for the whole thread like I'm thinking you will?:confused:

Albion

04-06-2010, 06:37 PM

Karl. If someone told you that it was actually Estonia who has mistreated the Russian people etc., how would you react?

But I didn't say that did I? :crazy: I said that the Catholic church in Ireland being so involved in the state like it is risks alienating protestants in the north. How do you expect Ireland to be united if it is only run by 1 of the 2 peoples who live there?

Really? Cool :D!

Its nothing to be proud of, trust me.

Heh, he deserves it for being such a dick.

Typical Irish, see's I'm English and woosh, the "the English are out to get us!" mentality kicks in.
If I was Welsh or French no doubt you would have politely "corrected" me.

Albion

04-06-2010, 06:40 PM

But surely you understand why such a post as his would rile me so. I may not be as calm as you, but that is neither here nor there.

Well I hope he does, because I surely don't!:mad: Maybe you should think more about what I said, being officially secular isn't so bad is it?
If Ireland became majority muslim you'd want a secular Ireland then wouldn't you! or else you'd have Islam forced down your throats!:rolleyes2:

I have a rough tongue. So do most Glaswegians.

Really? I hadn't bloody noticed!

Albion

04-06-2010, 06:43 PM

Mercia has 16 million, England as a whole has 50 million.

Yes and Mercia would leave England with 34 million people, what's your point?

Albion

04-06-2010, 06:44 PM

Oh god! Why does a advertisment for the Liberal Democrats keep appearing on this forum!

Murphy

04-06-2010, 06:46 PM

Yeah, Catholics really did suffer at the hands of protestants, but does that mean the catholics should do the same back?

But Catholics are not doing the same back. When Ireland first achieved independence after the Anglo-Irish War and the Civil War, there was a small backlash from a Catholic pesantry aimed at the Protestant Irishmen. Especially around the border. However, these were isolated and quickly died away.

They were understandable reactions. It was sad that they happened, but they happened for a reason.

Protestants eventually began to leave the new Republic. Many went to the North and many across the sea. But this was not born out of a persecution from Irish Catholics. This came from their desire not to live under an independent Ireland or a Catholic Ireland which they thought the new government meant. There is a strong argument for that, at the time.

But today, Protestants get along fine in the Republic. In the pubs, maybe there will be a few jokes at his/her expense, but all in good fun and I am sure they give as good as they get.

Whilst we're at it why don't religious riots just break out all because Ireland just can't be officially secular?

Ireland is secular!

Seriously, do you want Northern Ireland united with Ireland or not?

Yes and no. I want a united Ireland but I don't want the breed of Protestant that such a union will bring with it.

Well if so maybe you in the republic should engage brains and think - your alienating the protestants, and if you continue the protestants will never accept Irish rule!

Ulster Protestants never will accept Irish rule regardless of what we do, until their pastors and their so-called heroes begin to die off. And why should we have to appease the Protestant?

If you got the bloody church out of the state then there would be no real problem with the protestants in Northern Ireland accepting Irish rule!!!!

The Church is fucking out of the state! You fool! And Protestants from the North don't want a secular state anyway. They want a PROTESTANT state.

Can't you bloody see man? I'm on your side! I want Northern Ireland where it belongs - in the republic!

Northern Ireland doesn't belong in the Republic, 6 occupied counties of Ulster belong in the Republic.

Northern Ireland is a Protestant-British construction nd should be torn down bit by bit.

The "awww! evil protestant!" argument your trawling doesn't work here.:mad:

I was simply stating a fact.

Besides, I'm not even protestant, for all you know I could be Budhist or Catholic, I merely said an ancestor was a protestant dufus!:mad::mad:

You've obviously had the same brainwashing as your Protestant ancestors.

No, I don't think its secular.

Then you are blind.

Okay it doesn't have as much power as the church does in other countries, but nevertheless you've still got the Catholic church wispering in the President of Ireland's ear.

The Church hardly has much power in any country anymore. And the Church is not "whispering" in the presidents ear! Some some evidence that the evil Pope is telling miss McAleese what to do.

See "In the Irish free state", "Influence on Irish society > Politics" in this link:
This link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_in_Ireland#In_the_Irish_Free_Sta te_and_Republic_.281922.E2.80.93present.29)

More info (http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws91/church32.html)

I'll check these out later. However, I m sure they are dealing with events in the early 20th century. I have not denied that once the Church did have power, power I am sad to see go. But now, it is a secular state.

Besides, everyone and his dog knows Ireland is run by the catholics.

No, you mean the people who are running the country identify with being Catholic. Perhaps because the majority of the Irish people identify s being Catholic? But that's quite different from saying the Church runs Ireland.

Abortion has nothing to do with it, I was merely showing an example of where the catholic church has effectivley blocked a piece of legislation. No, not officially, just by using its mighty influence it weilds in Ireland via politicians and the ordinary folk.

So, only an atheist is allowed an opinion on such matters? Bg bad Catholics cannot be trusted?

Murphy

04-06-2010, 06:51 PM

Maybe you should think more about what I said, being officially secular isn't so bad is it?

I don't want a secular Ireland. I wish Ireland was still a Catholic nation, but it is not.

If Ireland became majority muslim you'd want a secular Ireland then wouldn't you! or else you'd have Islam forced down your throats!:rolleyes2:

I'll be dead, so whether it is secular or not does not bother me.

Really? I hadn't bloody noticed!

;).

Murphy

04-06-2010, 06:57 PM

But I didn't say that did I? :crazy:

You said that Catholics mistreat Protestants in the south, did you not?

I said that the Catholic church in Ireland being so involved in the state like it is risks alienating protestants in the north.

But the Church is not. The Lisbon Treaty is a fine example. The Vatican advised against it, yet it was pushed through.

How do you expect Ireland to be united if it is only run by 1 of the 2 peoples who live there?

Protestants are a tiny % of the Irish population. Why should they be given unfair representation?

Typical Irish, see's I'm English and woosh, the "the English are out to get us!" mentality kicks in.

The English are not out to get the Irish though. I higly doubt that wee farmer in Yorkshire gives two flying fucks about Ireland nor the lass in the London night club.

If I was Welsh or French no doubt you would have politely "corrected" me.

If you were Welsh, you'd get the same rection. If you were French, you'd get the same reaction and a lot worse. I would have thrown in several references to the French betraying their Faith for Freemasonry and the Revolution.

If you were Spanish or Italian or Polish, I would have politely explined my position and enjoyed a fruitful discussion, though :).

Bloodeagle

04-06-2010, 07:10 PM

How about the American Patrol. http://www.americanpatrol.com/
I support their efforts wholeheartedly!

Albion

04-06-2010, 07:21 PM

You said that Catholics mistreat Protestants in the south, did you not?

Yeah, maybe I could have worded that a bit better, what I meant was both religions should be accepted on equal grounds. My bad.:rolleyes:

But the Church is not. The Lisbon Treaty is a fine example. The Vatican advised against it, yet it was pushed through.

Yes, I meant indirectly. If the muslims for example influenced Westminister, even if they aren't an official religion it would still give westminister a muslim bias and viewpoint.

Protestants are a tiny % of the Irish population. Why should they be given unfair representation?

I'm not really asking for that, but you can't just abandon them can you?

The English are not out to get the Irish though. I higly doubt that wee farmer in Yorkshire gives two flying fucks about Ireland nor the lass in the London night club.

No, that was a wind up. Sometimes it feels to the English like you Irish think we're all after your blood or something. We're not that bad, we just had a unfortunate succesion of monarchs and goverments. The same monarchs and goverments which still don't damn listen to us!

If you were Welsh, you'd get the same rection. If you were French, you'd get the same reaction and a lot worse. I would have thrown in several references to the French betraying their Faith for Freemasonry and the Revolution.

Okay.:thumb001:

If you were Spanish or Italian or Polish, I would have politely explined my position and enjoyed a fruitful discussion, though :).

Riiiiiiight.... May I ask why? :p:p

Alright, maybe I was wrong to presume the Catholic church pulls the strings in Eire and that protestants are left out, but I still think you over-reacted a bit.
Anyway shall we call a truce Aequoreus? We could keep arguing forever but that'd be boring :D .

Murphy

04-06-2010, 07:45 PM

Alright, maybe I was wrong to presume the Catholic church pulls the strings in Eire and that protestants are left out, but I still think you over-reacted a bit.
Anyway shall we call a truce Aequoreus? We could keep arguing forever but that'd be boring :D .

Truce it is. But as you stay here at Apricity you shall come to learn everyone has faced my wrath at some point ;)!

Albion

04-06-2010, 08:09 PM

Truce it is. But as you stay here at Apricity you shall come to learn everyone has faced my wrath at some point ;)!
alright, i'll be good :D

The Lawspeaker

04-06-2010, 10:56 PM

I would also support giving more autonomy to the Frisians (as part of giving more autonomy to all the provinces) and to West Friesland within Holland. Personally I would consider it to be a good idea if East Frisia joined the Netherlands and got it's own province.. along with establishing an Inter-Frisian council dedicated to the needs of the Frisian-speaking minority within the Netherlands.

Other minority groups that should receive more autonomy (including the right to use their own dialects within the provincial councils) are the Saxons of Drenthe, Twente (Overijssel) and de Graafschap (Guelders) as well as the Limburgians of Limburg with their dialect that is more closely related to German then to Dutch.

Basically I think that all provinces should receive more autonomy but these minority groups should be especially and actively protected.

And of course.. personally I would like to see a reunification of Flanders and the Netherlands. And if the Walloons would want to join they should be welcome too :thumbs up

Wulfhere

04-06-2010, 11:05 PM

Yes and Mercia would leave England with 34 million people, what's your point?

You seemed to be saying that Mercia controlled England with its votes, but this isn't true.

Albion

04-07-2010, 07:50 AM

You seemed to be saying that Mercia controlled England with its votes, but this isn't true.
No, as it stands with the partition of Mercia into East and West Midlands, no Mercia cannot possibly control England.
But if Mercia was on the otherhand united within a independent England then it would represent the biggest number of MPs in parliament.

Besides, you talk as if Mercia is abandoned and ignored by parliament, as if its some other nation being ruled over by "evil" England. This is not the case, we're English first, Mercian second and the most a part of England as you can get.

If only London lay in the centre of the country, things would be a bit more even then.
Its the same in France with the Occitans - they feel isolated from Paris. But unlike Mercia they have large differences in culture from the North French - we're a variation of the English and nothing more.

Wulfhere

04-07-2010, 08:40 AM

No, as it stands with the partition of Mercia into East and West Midlands, no Mercia cannot possibly control England.
But if Mercia was on the otherhand united within a independent England then it would represent the biggest number of MPs in parliament.

Besides, you talk as if Mercia is abandoned and ignored by parliament, as if its some other nation being ruled over by "evil" England. This is not the case, we're English first, Mercian second and the most a part of England as you can get.

If only London lay in the centre of the country, things would be a bit more even then.
Its the same in France with the Occitans - they feel isolated from Paris. But unlike Mercia they have large differences in culture from the North French - we're a variation of the English and nothing more.

The Mercians are the true English, and are descended directly from the Angles. Mercian independence is not a rejection of Englishness, but a rejection of those areas of England that are not truly English.

Not only is Mercia currently split into two government office regions (West and East Midlands), but large areas of its territory have been put into other regions entirely.

Murphy

04-07-2010, 08:42 AM

I'm as English as any of you Mercians, Wulfhere :mad:!

Albion

04-07-2010, 10:39 AM

I'm as English as any of you Mercians, Wulfhere :mad:!

So I've been calling you Irish and nobody bothered to tell me your English? :confused: Crap, I feel like an idiot :D

The Mercians are the true English, and are descended directly from the Angles. Mercian independence is not a rejection of Englishness, but a rejection of those areas of England that are not truly English.

No, the only "true" English are all the English. The Angles might have given their name to England but it was the Saxons who united it (although Mercia under Offa came close).
Being English isn't about being decended from Anglian Mercians, its about our English culture which is mainly derived from our Germanic heritage - from the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes and Norwegians (the latter being Vikings).
All these peoples above were (and still are to some extent) very similar and inter-realted - we come from a common culture and developed locally.
Our culture also has some Celtic elements but on the whole the English are a Germanic people made from many Germanic tribes, not just the Angles.

It is no use calling ourselves the "true" English, because the "true" English are all the English. We can call ourselves Mercians as a regional name for our variant of the English culture, but we're still English and no more English than any other English people.
Calling ourselves the "true English" is insulting to the other about 36 million English.

Not only is Mercia currently split into two government office regions (West and East Midlands), but large areas of its territory have been put into other regions entirely.

Yes, and if Mercia was to unite the West Midlands, East Midlands, Gloucestershire, Cheshire and Flintshire within a independent England then this would be great.
At the moment though I don't see why Mercia should break-away from England all together though, this would be stupid. And this whole movement gets in the way and complicates thinks for English independence (i.e. the goverment would use Mercia as a tool to break-up England and give none of it independence).

Anyway, I think we're getting in the way here, we should move the conversation to the Mercia thread, this is starting to dominate the independence thread a bit now.

Wulfhere

04-07-2010, 10:44 AM

Anyway, I think we're getting in the way here, we should move the conversation to the Mercia thread, this is starting to dominate the independence thread a bit now.

I can't access the Mercia thread, nor a number of others either (including at least one I started myself). It makes my screen freeze. Quite a few others have been experiencing this too, apparently.

Murphy

04-07-2010, 10:57 AM

So I've been calling you Irish and nobody bothered to tell me your English? :confused: Crap, I feel like an idiot :D

Don't worry! I am Irish too. And Welsh and Italian and Finnish and German and even Serbian.

It comes with the perks of being "white" :D!

Albion

04-07-2010, 11:11 AM

I can't access the Mercia thread, nor a number of others either (including at least one I started myself). It makes my screen freeze. Quite a few others have been experiencing this too, apparently.

Oh, I thought that was just intermittent. Okay, we'll keep it on here then I guess.

Osweo

04-07-2010, 11:23 PM

The Mercians are the true English, and are descended directly from the Angles. Mercian independence is not a rejection of Englishness, but a rejection of those areas of England that are not truly English.
LOL :rolleyes:

You're right to say that Mercia is the most English part of England, perhaps the only place that the true English (Angles) survive. Southern England is Saxon, and Northern England was heavily settled by Danes.

Half of Mercia is the most intensively Danish area of toponymy in England. You can't walk half a mile in Lincolnshire without getting an earful of East Norse place-names. Eastern Mercia is the site of the former 'Five Boroughs' that were carved out by the Danes to settle their Great Army in. Derbyshire's county town has a solidly Danish name, and how much more Viking could you get than Grimsby, Skegness and Enderby?!?

Western Mercia is relatively free of such toponymy, though the Wirral and a scattering of places in eastern Cheshire do witness some level of colonisation. However, Shropshire and Herefordshire are some of the most ridiculously Welsh parts of England going! Your 'true English' statement is utter rubbish, on your own terms! Normal sensible people know that ancient tribal divisions are more or less irrelevant to the question, though.

Wulfhere

04-07-2010, 11:32 PM

LOL :rolleyes:

Half of Mercia is the most intensively Danish area of toponymy in England. You can't walk half a mile in Lincolnshire without getting an earful of East Norse place-names. Eastern Mercia is the site of the former 'Five Boroughs' that were carved out by the Danes to settle their Great Army in. Derbyshire's county town has a solidly Danish name, and how much more Viking could you get than Grimsby, Skegness and Enderby?!?

Western Mercia is relatively free of such toponymy, though the Wirral and a scattering of places in eastern Cheshire do witness some level of colonisation. However, Shropshire and Herefordshire are some of the most ridiculously Welsh parts of England going! Your 'true English' statement is utter rubbish, on your own terms! Normal sensible people know that ancient tribal divisions are more or less irrelevant to the question, though.

The North has certainly got a lot more Scandinavian names than the East Midlands, but you're right to say that the East Midlands had a lot of Danish settlement, and right too about the Welsh border counties. The core area though - Warwickshire, Worcestershire etc., is indeed the area where the Angles survived intact.

Osweo

04-08-2010, 12:11 AM

The North has certainly got a lot more Scandinavian names than the East Midlands, but you're right to say that the East Midlands had a lot of Danish settlement, and right too about the Welsh border counties. The core area though - Warwickshire, Worcestershire etc., is indeed the area where the Angles survived intact.

I suggest you think on the names Rugby and Bretford in Warwickshire, for proof that Norsemen AND Welsh were present there. For Worcestershire, try reflecting on the solidly Welsh etymology of Malvern, Avon, Severn, Teme and Pensax. The first and last are most significant, but the rivernames are broadly indicative of greater British survival too, see how the county straddles Areas 2 and 3 on Kenneth Jackson's famous map:
http://www.yorkshiredialect.com/gfx/celtriv.gif

Some 'untouched core'... :rolleyes2:

The North is every bit as variegated as the Midlands for Norse traces. Durham and Northumberland (Bernicia, that is) are almost lacking in such placenames, but for a pocket at Tynemouth. Southeast Lancashire likewise escaped serious colonisation too.

Actually, if you're after statistically greater inheritance from the original Angles of Angeln, I'd be more inclined to look at inland Suffolk. Maybe Cambridgeshire too.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 12:17 AM

I suggest you think on the names Rugby and Bretford in Warwickshire, for proof that Norsemen AND Welsh were present there. For Worcestershire, try reflecting on the solidly Welsh etymology of Malvern, Avon, Severn, Teme and Pensax. The first and last are most significant, but the rivernames are broadly indicative of greater British survival too, see how the county straddles Areas 2 and 3 on Kenneth Jackson's famous map:
http://www.yorkshiredialect.com/gfx/celtriv.gif

Some 'untouched core'... :rolleyes2:

The North is every bit as variegated as the Midlands for Norse traces. Durham and Northumberland (Bernicia, that is) are almost lacking in such placenames, but for a pocket at Tynemouth. Southeast Lancashire likewise escaped serious colonisation too.

In general, the West Midlands received far less colonisation than any other Angle area. That is not to say none at all, but less than anywhere else.

Osweo

04-08-2010, 12:53 AM

In general, the West Midlands received far less colonisation than any other Angle area. That is not to say none at all, but less than anywhere else.

As a simplistic rule of thumb; the further from the Norse you are, the more Welsh you're gonna get.

I see the Trent colonies as a secondary or tertiary stage of English invasion. That may mean more younger single men. And therefore more Welsh wives and concubines. :thumb001:

Albion

04-08-2010, 10:16 AM

As a simplistic rule of thumb; the further from the Norse you are, the more Welsh you're gonna get.
I see the Trent colonies as a secondary or tertiary stage of English invasion. That may mean more younger single men. And therefore more Welsh wives and concubines. :thumb001:
Yeah, this is true. Mercia has always had some Celtic influence like the rest of England.
England can be described as a sort of Celto-Germanic mix, with the Germanic cultural elements predominating, but with many Celtic cultural elements under the surface.

The thing with the Welsh women is basically true as well, I live near stoke-on-trent (luckily in a nice town some distance away) :) and all the women around here usually have the typical round-faced Celt look, with the bloke population looking quite Germanic.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 10:28 AM

As a simplistic rule of thumb; the further from the Norse you are, the more Welsh you're gonna get.

I see the Trent colonies as a secondary or tertiary stage of English invasion. That may mean more younger single men. And therefore more Welsh wives and concubines. :thumb001:

It almost sounds like you're saying there was no real Angle settlement at all - Welsh in the west, Norse in the east, and out of that mixture came the English...

Bede tells us that, unlike the Saxons, the entire Angle nation migrated to Britain, and that even in his day (early 8th century) the region of Angeln was still largely devoid of people because of this. Whether this was literally true is another matter, but it must be based on something. And the fact that we speak English, rather than Welsh or Norse, speaks for itself.

I'm sure there was a great deal of mixing with the Celts, especially in the western fringes, but culturally they contributed almost nothing at all.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 10:33 AM

Yeah, this is true. Mercia has always had some Celtic influence like the rest of England.
England can be described as a sort of Celto-Germanic mix, with the Germanic cultural elements predominating, but with many Celtic cultural elements under the surface.

The thing with the Welsh women is basically true as well, I live near stoke-on-trent (luckily in a nice town some distance away) :) and all the women around here usually have the typical round-faced Celt look, with the bloke population looking quite Germanic.

But that could hardly be true now though, could it. After the first generation of mixing, both men and women would be half Germanic and half Celtic.

I've got no problems whatsoever with this idea of a Celtic-Germanic hybridisation - it is the story of the entire British Isles (and Iceland too, oddly enough). But culturally, the Anglo-Saxons picked up nothing at all from the Celts. A few place names, no more than half a dozen other words, and that's it.

Albion

04-08-2010, 04:43 PM

But that could hardly be true now though, could it. After the first generation of mixing, both men and women would be half Germanic and half Celtic.

I've got no problems whatsoever with this idea of a Celtic-Germanic hybridisation - it is the story of the entire British Isles (and Iceland too, oddly enough). But culturally, the Anglo-Saxons picked up nothing at all from the Celts. A few place names, no more than half a dozen other words, and that's it.

Yes, I know the culture is predominantly Germanic, I was just explaining it better. Besides, it doesn't really matter what Mercia was, even if it was something completley random like Finnish they would still be our ancestors.

I think the point other posters have been trying to make is that Mercian is more of a cultural identity rather than a homegenous group, we formed out of Angles and Celts, with a sprinkling a Vikings and Normans (All apart from the Celts being Germanic, and the Celts are a good culture too).

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 05:52 PM

Yes, I know the culture is predominantly Germanic, I was just explaining it better. Besides, it doesn't really matter what Mercia was, even if it was something completley random like Finnish they would still be our ancestors.

I think the point other posters have been trying to make is that Mercian is more of a cultural identity rather than a homegenous group, we formed out of Angles and Celts, with a sprinkling a Vikings and Normans (All apart from the Celts being Germanic, and the Celts are a good culture too).

Indeed, that is certainly true. But the core of Mercian identity, to which the others assimilated, comes from the Angles. The Mercian monarchy was itself descended from the monarchs of the Angles, and the entire Angle nation migrated as a group.

poiuytrewq0987

04-08-2010, 05:56 PM

Albion

04-08-2010, 06:14 PM

Indeed, that is certainly true. But the core of Mercian identity, to which the others assimilated, comes from the Angles. The Mercian monarchy was itself descended from the monarchs of the Angles, and the entire Angle nation migrated as a group.

Yes, I know this and I basically said as much, but is it right totally disregard the none Anglian elements of our culture?
Even if we express the non-Anglian elements of Mercian culture, for example the Celtic and Viking features Mercian culture would still be 95 to 99% Anglian.
I know it is nice to have a nice clean slate of a culture, but the English can hardly claim this, bor can any Mercian English.

There is NO difference between the Angles and Saxons. Both came from the same place.

http://www.paradoxplace.com/Photo%20Pages/UK/Britain_Yorkshire_and_North/Lindisfarne/Images/800/Angles-&-Saxons-Aug07-D5865sAR800.jpg

There is differences but they're only minor regional differences. The Jutes were the most strikingly different from any of the tribes that settled from the Anglo-Saxon homeland, but even they weren't totally foreign to the Saxons or Angles.
The differences weren't massive but they were there, leading to local variants of the English culture, not other, non-English peoples.
The Mercians are as English as any other Englishmen.

Osweo

04-08-2010, 10:21 PM

It almost sounds like you're saying there was no real Angle settlement at all - Welsh in the west, Norse in the east, and out of that mixture came the English...
That would obviously be daft. I was moderator of a Germanic forum, once upon a time, I have no interest in denying the MAIN part of our heritage.

Bede tells us that, unlike the Saxons, the entire Angle nation migrated to Britain, and that even in his day (early 8th century) the region of Angeln was still largely devoid of people because of this. Whether this was literally true is another matter, but it must be based on something.
Certainly.
But I feel I know the BIG picture now, and so I concentrate on little 'footnotes' as it were. I don't try to pass them off as anything else.

Speaking of which, there were other little 'new Angelns' in central Germany and northern Gaul... Not all came to Bretland.

I'm sure there was a great deal of mixing with the Celts, especially in the western fringes, but culturally they contributed almost nothing at all.
'Almost nothing at all' is a daft thing to say. If we look at Mercia, I can point out a few very British things in it that date from pre-English times. The well-dressing in the Peak, the Soulcakers of Cheshire (especially resilient a tradition in the VERY Welsh named villages of Antrobus and Comberbach), perhaps even the 'peeping Tom' tradition of Coventry... So many local traditions are inherited from our British forebears.

we formed out of Angles and Celts, with a sprinkling of Vikings and Normans
I'd say that the Norse component is far greater than you indicate. Its effect on language is enough to demonstrate that.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 10:57 PM

There is NO difference between the Angles and Saxons. Both came from the same place.

http://www.paradoxplace.com/Photo%20Pages/UK/Britain_Yorkshire_and_North/Lindisfarne/Images/800/Angles-&-Saxons-Aug07-D5865sAR800.jpg

They were certainly, along with the Jutes and Frisians, all Ingaevones, speaking dialects of the same language. But to say there was no difference isn't true. We know for example that the Saxon tribe, as a whole, didn't have a hereditary monarchy in this period, whereas the Angles did. So cultural and dialectical differences existed, and these differences persisted into the later Old English period with different spellings etc.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 11:00 PM

Yes, I know this and I basically said as much, but is it right totally disregard the none Anglian elements of our culture?
Even if we express the non-Anglian elements of Mercian culture, for example the Celtic and Viking features Mercian culture would still be 95 to 99% Anglian.
I know it is nice to have a nice clean slate of a culture, but the English can hardly claim this, bor can any Mercian English.

I have no wish at all to disregard the Celtic and Danish influences on our culture and language. Those influences exist - especially the latter with regard to the East Midlands dialect.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 11:09 PM

That would obviously be daft. I was moderator of a Germanic forum, once upon a time, I have no interest in denying the MAIN part of our heritage.

Certainly.
But I feel I know the BIG picture now, and so I concentrate on little 'footnotes' as it were. I don't try to pass them off as anything else.

Speaking of which, there were other little 'new Angelns' in central Germany and northern Gaul... Not all came to Bretland.

'Almost nothing at all' is a daft thing to say. If we look at Mercia, I can point out a few very British things in it that date from pre-English times. The well-dressing in the Peak, the Soulcakers of Cheshire (especially resilient a tradition in the VERY Welsh named villages of Antrobus and Comberbach), perhaps even the 'peeping Tom' tradition of Coventry... So many local traditions are inherited from our British forebears.

I'd say that the Norse component is far greater than you indicate. Its effect on language is enough to demonstrate that.

It's true there were pockets of Angle settlement on the Continent, but these were all absorbed and assimilated by their neighbours. The Angles as a nation only survived in England (to which, it goes without saying, they gave their name - i.e. not Saxland).

The Peak District is certainly a very interesting anomaly, and there is no doubt at all that a Celtic population survived their almost intact. And Cheshire too, which wasn't taken over by Mercia until long after the initial settlement phase (like the Welsh borders) and may not have received much settlement. Not at all sure about Peeping Tom though - is there any evidence that this story predates the time of Leofric and Godiva?

poiuytrewq0987

04-08-2010, 11:17 PM

They were certainly, along with the Jutes and Frisians, all Ingaevones, speaking dialects of the same language. But to say there was no difference isn't true. We know for example that the Saxon tribe, as a whole, didn't have a hereditary monarchy in this period, whereas the Angles did. So cultural and dialectical differences existed, and these differences persisted into the later Old English period with different spellings etc.

Oh noes! No hereditary monarchy! Slightly different spelling! Clearly two different people! :icon_lol:

Saxons and Angles lived a couple miles apart in Northern Germany and continued to do so in Britain.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 11:23 PM

Oh noes! No hereditary monarchy! Slightly different spelling! Clearly two different people! :icon_lol:

Saxons and Angles lived a couple miles apart in Northern Germany and continued to do so in Britain.

I was pointing out differences in social organisation. And some of them, certainly, lived only a couple of miles apart - those who lived near the border for example. Others lived much further.

If they were exactly the same, they wouldn't have organised themselves into two different tribes (or the other way round, if you prefer). Which, moreover, had differing forms of government and a different dialect.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 11:24 PM

Oh noes! No hereditary monarchy! Slightly different spelling! Clearly two different people! :icon_lol:

Lol - are the Americans and British two different people?

poiuytrewq0987

04-08-2010, 11:25 PM

I was pointing out differences in social organisation. And some of them, certainly, lived only a couple of miles apart - those who lived near the border for example. Others lived much further.

If they were exactly the same, they wouldn't have organised themselves into two different tribes (or the other way round, if you prefer). Which, moreover, had differing forms of government and a different dialect.

So what? All they have done is develop separately for some time. There is no plausible genetic nor cultural differences between both people. From the collapse of the Mercian kingdom, the Saxons and Angles have been one from there. Deal with it.

Wulfhere

04-08-2010, 11:30 PM

So what? All they have done is develop separately for some time. There is no plausible genetic nor cultural differences between both people. From the collapse of the Mercian kingdom, the Saxons and Angles have been one from there. Deal with it.

I never said there was any genetic difference, though I've already pointed out some of the cultural differences.

Differences between Angles and Saxons (though no doubt exacerbated by the Danish settlements of Northern England) have persisted to this day in the North-South divide in England.

Osweo

04-09-2010, 12:19 AM

Not at all sure about Peeping Tom though - is there any evidence that this story predates the time of Leofric and Godiva?

I haven't the book to hand that I read it in. Quite an old one though. All I remember now is the vague impression, unfortunately. But think about it - would the antics of an eleventh century earl's wife prompt an annual ritual like it did? I reckon Godgifu just gave it all a name, possibly decades or centuries later as local traditions were conflated in the minds of the illiterate townsfolk (the Norman Conquest having stopped the elite from having much to do with this sort of thing any more, and not exerting a factual check to the transmission of garbled memories of pre-1066 days), and the legend was already old in her day.

poiuytrewq0987

04-09-2010, 08:24 AM

I never said there was any genetic difference, though I've already pointed out some of the cultural differences.

Differences between Angles and Saxons (though no doubt exacerbated by the Danish settlements of Northern England) have persisted to this day in the North-South divide in England.

No, it just proves that your Mercians are the true English is a load of crock when there is no real difference between Angles and Saxons. Both lived close before migrating to Britain, both spoke similar language, etc etc.

Wulfhere

04-09-2010, 08:32 AM

I haven't the book to hand that I read it in. Quite an old one though. All I remember now is the vague impression, unfortunately. But think about it - would the antics of an eleventh century earl's wife prompt an annual ritual like it did? I reckon Godgifu just gave it all a name, possibly decades or centuries later as local traditions were conflated in the minds of the illiterate townsfolk (the Norman Conquest having stopped the elite from having much to do with this sort of thing any more, and not exerting a factual check to the transmission of garbled memories of pre-1066 days), and the legend was already old in her day.

I think that this is indeed almost certainly the case, and have always assumed a Pagan origin for the custom. But this was most likely the Paganism of the Angles, rather than the Welsh - or at any rate, I see no reason to assume the latter. For a start off, any Pagan Welsh traditions would have had to survive through the Christian centuries that preceeded the Anglo-Saxon settlement. It's true there were famous goddess and heroine figures in Celtic mythology, but this is equally true of Germanic mythology. The description of Nerthus by Tacitus around AD 100, whom he specifically tells us was a goddess of the Angles, and her ritual procession across the sacred island, seems to parallel the Godiva story quite well (though she was in a cart, rather than on horseback) - but the idea that no one could look at her on pain of death is strikingly similar.

Albion

04-09-2010, 08:36 AM

No, it just proves that your Mercians are the true English is a load of crock when there is no real difference between Angles and Saxons. Both lived close before migrating to Britain, both spoke similar language, etc etc.

There is a difference but Wulfhere is blowing it out of proportion. Mecians differ from the other English only in minor ways, a slight regional identity not an ethnicity.
Every region of England has such regional identities and we differ but little.

poiuytrewq0987

04-09-2010, 08:41 AM

There is a difference but Wulfhere is blowing it out of proportion. Mecians differ from the other English only in minor ways, a slight regional identity not an ethnicity.
Every region of England has such regional identities and we differ but little.

That's why I said "no real difference" meaning there is no huge difference between Angles and Saxons just minor ones as is normal if a people doesn't live together for the entirety of their lives.

Liffrea

04-10-2010, 07:04 PM

For one there is no “Mercian” identity, the average Joe on the streets of Derby would perhaps recognise the Mercian Regiment maybe even have heard of a police force with Mercian in the title, other than that they wouldn’t have a clue what you were waffling on about.

At best there is some vague East Midlands identity linking Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire (Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire are debatable), this may be due to once being part of the Danelaw and manifesting itself in local dialects and organisation.

If there is a recognisable division it’s between the West Midlands (Birmingham basically) the Welsh border counties and the East Midlands, there is simply no over arching sense of identity that encompasses all of them units.

Some ten years back there was a campaign to forge an “East Midlands” identity, it didn’t get very far. There simply is and not likely to be an identity that compares with Cockney’s, Scousers, Geordies, Yorkshire, Brummies are probably the closest the Midlands has.