"Let's reunite Ireland as a British dominion"

[The Lawspeaker]

"Let's reunite Ireland as a British dominion. (http://stephenmoran.blogspot.com/2008/11/lets-reunite-ireland-as-british.html)"


It's never too late. Step back, rewind, start over. A united Ireland under the British crown as before, with its proud capital in Dublin and its own sovereignty the same as Canada's or Australia's. I am a republican in the generic sense not a monarchist, but the petty nationalists have divided Ireland. That's exactly what they've done, not united - divided. I expect to be reviled by all sides for this idea, but this is the way to a united Ireland. It does not entail any loss of real sovereignty, laws or anything else, and it incorporates Northern Ireland into the Republic. If you claim to be for a united Ireland, you've got to start loving your unionist countrymen and give them what they want. Within a family, one sacrifices for the benefit of another. We should sacrifice our separation from Britain in order to regain our own unity on the island of Ireland. Does anyone doubt that countries such as Canada and Australia are independent? We had unity before, which was worth more than the present botched independence, but we squandered it. That is my opinion and I might be wrong, but there it is.

Update: Let me put it this way, if I were a classical cartoonist or painter of allegories, I'd depict Ireland as beautiful, innocent Unity being sacrificed on the altar of Independence by malodorous Pride.

* I'm currently reading "On Another Man's Wound" by Ernie O'Malley, and I guess this blog post makes me a "shoneen". But please remember, I am not suggesting that Ireland be ruled from London, I'm suggesting a way to reunite Ireland with rule from Dublin. We should never have given up on the "Home Rule" path, which would have led to complete independence with unity. Instead what we have done is divided Ireland and "gone off half-cocked" with the present botched independence.

Again: Unity is worth more than independence for a country. We should not have sacrificed unity at any stage, that should have been the first priority, not the last.

[Oinakos Growion]

lol
It reminds me when the BNP wanted to run for election in Ireland too and proposed something similar. It didn't go beyond a "voiced rumour" but the reaction of the average citizen folk in the street wasn't pretty ;)

[Bridie]

LOL Indeed. :D



A united Ireland under the British crown as before, with its proud capital in Dublin and its own sovereignty the same as Canada's or Australia's.
I wouldn't recommend it. All it means is that the Queen gets the final say on issues that don't even concern Britain, a portion of your tax-payer's monies go straight overseas and if the poms go to war, you have to support them, even though they are unlikely to support you should you ever need them.

Then again, no need to preach to those who already know.



It does not entail any loss of real sovereignty, laws or anything else, and it incorporates Northern Ireland into the Republic. If you claim to be for a united Ireland, you've got to start loving your unionist countrymen and give them what they want. Within a family, one sacrifices for the benefit of another. We should sacrifice our separation from Britain in order to regain our own unity on the island of Ireland.Double LOL.



Does anyone doubt that countries such as Canada and Australia are independent?Yes.

[Saruman]

Nah, there needs to be a sovereign Celtic state!:D:thumb001:

[antonio]

lol
It reminds me when the BNP wanted to run for election in Ireland too and proposed something similar. It didn't go beyond a "voiced rumour" but the reaction of the average citizen folk in the street wasn't pretty ;)

The true is that I cannot see at present day (with Gaelic being just a populated areas) differences massive enough -apart from History and Religion- to justify two different states being maintained at British Islands. If not were for the historical resistance full of martyrs, it would be a nationalism as childish as Scottish one: for example, let's talk about the tennist Andy Murray: I did not realize that he was Scottish (BTW nothing to disturb my dreams) till the day he declared his support for every team but England at current World Cup...I though: Wso, boy, there's any real difference between you and an Englishman apart from childish statements like this".:D

BTW, Galicia has far more in common with England that with Ireland, just by acknowleding the deep impact of Romans and Germanics peoples on its innermost essence, so I just can't get it -apart from Milesian legends- the perennial brotherhood between Irish activistist and Galician ones.

[Baron Samedi]

Hell nah, indeed.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Northern Ireland = North Korea.

[antonio]

Northern Ireland = North Korea.

But I guess nothing prevents them from going continental England to start a real non-subsidized living...nothing but subsidies themselves (sooner to be heavily trimmed).

[Murphy]

Hardly a new idea. This pops up now and then.

[Loki]

Celts have always done better under Germanic rule. But eh, maybe these days we've got to leave them to their own devices. :wink

[RoyBatty]

Err..... no. Let's rather have a united Ireland.

[Oinakos Growion]

sweetbabyjaysus...


The true is that I cannot see at present day (with Gaelic being just a populated areas) differences massive enough -apart from History and Religion- to justify two different states being maintained at British Islands
Naaah, no differences at all. It's all in the imagination. After all the Irish got violently independent after eight centuries just for the laugh. It's like the Scots, they only "make noise" because they're bored. In fact if you ask anyone in the streets of Glasgow they'll secretly admit they keep a photo of the Queen under the pillow :)
Fortunately there is no need to "justify" anything. Only the Irish decide about their future, and it'll be what they want it to be. As it should be.
Next thing will be saying that Spain and Portugal should unite in one big Iberian state and so on because they're so similar and they're neighbours and it'd be good for the economy, right? The wet dream of many Spaniards since Queen Isabel after all.
But I'm afraid ethnic/cultural groups in Europe want to be differentiated and separated, and history evidences that "experiments" at creating fake centralised states in Europe without agreement of the parts always end up badly. May it take a few years or eight centuries.

I guess Europeans are particularly stubborn :) Glad we are, mind you.


BTW, Galicia has far more in common with England that with Ireland, just by acknowleding the deep impact of Romans and Germanics peoples on its innermost essence, so I just can't get it -apart from Milesian legends- the perennial brotherhood between Irish activistist and Galician ones
You said it: "perennial brotherhood". There must be a reason for that...
Same pre-historical cultural background (radically influencing modern folklore, tradition and popular culture)? Same political situation? Same shared problems of territorial structure? same social fractures over the centuries? famine? emigration? In fact, there's a plethora of similar historical events that shaped the psychology of both peoples in a similar way, different to their neighbours.
England was a world imperial power for centuries. Galicia has been isolated for long periods of time. England is predominantly Germanic despite other influences. Galicia is predominantly Roman in legal and political organisation and pre-Roman (Celtic) in culture, with touches of Germanic (Swabians were politically important, very much so, not culturally). England created its own "flavour" of Christianity. Galicia's capital, Compostela, is the third holiest city in Catholicism after Rome and Jerusalem. Galicia was refuge for fleeing Irish families and Irish troops were trained there in the wars against England. etc. etc.
Damn, there's endless literature about it. There even are Irish research centres in Galicia and Galician ones in Ireland.

But hey, just my imagination I guess :)

[Murphy]

Celts have always done better under Germanic rule. But eh, maybe these days we've go to leave them to their own devices. :wink

:ohwell:..

[Loki]

:ohwell:..

Just pulling your leg matey. :wink

[Murphy]

Just pulling your leg matey. :wink

I know you never meant it seriously.. that's why you were given a disparaging look :P.

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Bridie
I wouldn't recommend it. All it means is that the Queen gets the final say on issues that don't even concern Britain, a portion of your tax-payer's monies go straight overseas and if the poms go to war, you have to support them, even though they are unlikely to support you should you ever need them.

It’s about time the Aussies, Kiwis and Canadians got rid of the Queen as head of state, mind it’s about time we did, if I had my way the royals would be exiled/executed, either one is just as good. I really detest all that pomp and bull shit; government should meet in a field somewhere on a hill over a jug of cider.:D

[Beorn]

I say unite Britain into an Irish dominion. At least I'd get a funky looking passport and a legitimate reason to use my dodgy Irish accent to get girls to buy me drinks.

[poiuytrewq0987]

Celts have always done better under Germanic rule. But eh, maybe these days we've go to leave them to their own devices. :wink

Who knows what the Celts could've achieved if the Romans didn't obliterate the Celts. :angel

[poiuytrewq0987]

I say unite Britain into an Irish dominion. At least I'd get a funky looking passport and a legitimate reason to use my dodgy Irish accent to get girls to buy me drinks.

Your wife certainly won't approve of this. :p

[Jarl]

Your wife certainly won't approve of this. :p

Speaking in her name? Or perhaps you guys've been hiding some little secret from us?

[Beorn]

Your wife certainly won't approve of this. :p

I do as I please and to Hell ...



shh. she's coming.

[The Lawspeaker]

Well.. it's something worth considering I suppose-- after the Brits get rid of their Royal Family and look for a new one.
Are there any decent Irish nobles?

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Asega
after the Brits get rid of their Royal Family and look for a new one.

I thought you were a republican? What’s with this “new” royal family?

When the Queen dies it should be abolished.

[Fortis in Arduis]

I concur that the best solution would to simply refer to England, Scotland and Wales as 'Outer Ireland'.

[Oinakos Growion]

When the Queen dies it should be abolished.
I'm beginning to wonder if it'll even happen. The Queen dying I mean. Formaldehyde baths seem to have progressed a lot lately :)
She's clinging on hard!

[Bridie]

I'm beginning to wonder if it'll even happen. The Queen dying I mean. Formaldehyde baths seem to have progressed a lot lately :)
She's clinging on hard!Yeah, she'll live to see 200 I reckon.

Doesn't matter anyway, I can't imagine Willy will improve much.

As Liffrea has said, the Royal Family needs to go altogether.... Take their vast wealth and distribute it among the Australian people. :D

[Liffrea]

We should keep Prince Phillip, I would make it law that all cider drinking government meetings begin with a "state of the nation" address from Phil.:thumb001:

[Bridie]

We should keep Prince Phillip, I would make it law that all cider drinking government meetings begin with a "state of the nation" address from Phil.:thumb001:Yeah, he's a right corker. I vote we - or rather you :p - keep him, too. :D



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbix4bXEhvA&NR=1

[Beorn]

On Romanian orphans: "There are so many of them, you feel they just breed to put them in orphanages."

Prince Philip.

:bowlol:

[Bridie]

This one's a good one :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXKMIDbUbQ8&feature=related :D

[Fortis in Arduis]

The Queen is actually animatronics, like her mother who they switched off in time for the jubilee.

[Wulfhere]

LOL Indeed. :D



I wouldn't recommend it. All it means is that the Queen gets the final say on issues that don't even concern Britain, a portion of your tax-payer's monies go straight overseas and if the poms go to war, you have to support them, even though they are unlikely to support you should you ever need them.

Then again, no need to preach to those who already know.


Double LOL.


Yes.

What proportion of your tax money goes overseas to support the Queen? I think you'll find it's zero. And if you think Britain wouldn't support you in a war, you don't know the British. Still, bashing the ones who created you is a popular sport, I believe, in the dominions.

[antonio]

But hey, just my imagination I guess :)

Some of your arguments are not definitive but OK, other are plain weak, specially the one linking Ireland and Galicia (why not Ethiopia too?) by the famines they suffered. Anycase it's a subject not to be discussed here which worths an own thread. :coffee:

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by Wulfhere
And if you think Britain wouldn't support you in a war, you don't know the British.

Or she knows us to well.

Britain defended North Africa to the last Australian, yet wouldn’t release the Australian units to defend their homeland against the Japanese advance. It was the Americans that kept the Japs out of Sydney, not the British.

Australia was wise to move its allegiance to the Americans.

[Oinakos Growion]

Some of your arguments are not definitive but OK, other are plain weak, specially the one linking Ireland and Galicia (why not Ethiopia too?) by the famines they suffered. Anycase it's a subject not to be discussed here which worths an own thread. :coffee:
All the issues I mentioned mould a character and a way of seeing life. Collective identities are shaped by such things and our histories ran parallel. And in this particular case this was reinforced by the almost continuous contact between the two territories throughout centuries, if not millennia. If that doesn't bring two peoples together I don't know what does.
But yeah, it'd be pointless to discuss anyway.

[Osweo]

Are there any decent Irish nobles?
:yo:
Ri an Fhothairt Cill Dara, at your service.

Ireland had a High King. Under him were four or five big Provincial Kings. Each province typically had two or three major subkings, often alternating in the provincial kingship. Under these were a plethora of minor kingdoms, so that at any one time, there might be... oh.... let's say 200 or so 'Kings'
on the island. Chances are, therefore, that every man there now has some of their blood in his veins. :p

But anyway, a reUnion?!? Why of ALL of each island? Sod that! Let's just bring back the old partnership between the Norse Kings of Dublin and those of York;
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9364/redrosenooo.gif

[Bridie]

What proportion of your tax money goes overseas to support the Queen? I think you'll find it's zero.
To be fair, I've read articles in news papers critiquing Australian monies sent abroad to Britain and much hearsay, but a quick search on the net for figures comes up with nothing. So, either no Australian money actually funds Britain, or the specifics are not being made available to the public. I hope you're right though, in any case.



And if you think Britain wouldn't support you in a war, you don't know the British. Still, bashing the ones who created you is a popular sport, I believe, in the dominions.Excuse me? "The ones who created you"???? LOL!!!! I can tell you who created Australia... and it sure as hell wasn't the British (like yourself) who stayed safely at home, sitting on their arses, only reading of the explorations, conquests, colonisations and pioneering ventures of the British Empire!

And as far as your claims of "you don't know the British" go... up until a few generations ago my family was British. To claim that I don't know the British is to claim that I don't know myself.

Australia's relationship with Britain has always been close enough that we've never lost sight or knowledge of the mother country. Even today, our largest immigrant group is the British. (In the suburb that I live in over 50% of the population was born in the UK.)



Or she knows us to well.

Britain defended North Africa to the last Australian, yet wouldn’t release the Australian units to defend their homeland against the Japanese advance. It was the Americans that kept the Japs out of Sydney, not the British.

Australia was wise to move its allegiance to the Americans. I think that incident was the final nail in the coffin really. A very sad day for Australians. The final betrayal.

And even then, Australia has been slow to distance herself from the motherland....

Recent British arrivals such as me are often surprised -- startled, even -- by the resilience of Australia's Anglocentrism and how "the British way" retains its permeating influence in so many different realms of national life. Much of this country marks the monarch's birthday with a public holiday, a courtesy not observed in my homeland. There are still about 160,000 Britons who can cast a vote in Australian federal elections, a fancy franchise shared with other residents from the British Commonwealth but with no other non-citizens. British colours still adorn the Australian flag, of course, while Australia Day celebrates the moment of British colonisation. The Queen's profile continues to decorate the coinage and her portrait the $5 note.....

When it comes to the constitutional relationship with Britain, this kind of gradualism provides a common historical thread. The word British survived on the front cover of an Australian passport until the Whitlam era, while people here were Australian citizens as well as British subjects until 1987. It was not until the mid-1980s, with the passage of the Australia Act, that Australians lost their right of legal appeal to the Privy Council in Britain. God Save the Queen survived as the national anthem until 1984, seven years after a referendum decided to replace it with Advance Australia Fair. And even though the Statute of Westminster was passed in 1931, thus removing the right of the British parliament to legislate for its dominions, Australia waited a further 11 years to finalise this constitutional piece of housekeeping, whereas the Canadians ratified it immediately.

What makes Australia's loyalty to Britain all the more anomalous is that the national story has continually been punctuated by imperial slights and colonial condescension. The mother country has not been wholly deserving of the faithfulness of its distant dominion, nor even at times its friendship. For had successive British governments set out to concoct a strategy to alienate their Australian cousins, they could not have done much better than the disaster of Gallipoli, the Melbourne Agreement during the Depression, the great betrayal during World WarII, the British nuclear tests in the outback and entry into the European Common Market. And that list does not include made-for-television crises such as the bodyline Ashes series or the dismissal of the Whitlam government.

Source : http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/arts/republic-awaits-eureka-moment/story-e6frg8nf-1225792081725

[Wulfhere]

To be fair, I've read articles in news papers critiquing Australian monies sent abroad to Britain and much hearsay, but a quick search on the net for figures comes up with nothing. So, either no Australian money actually funds Britain, or the specifics are not being made available to the public. I hope you're right though, in any case.


Excuse me? "The ones who created you"???? LOL!!!! I can tell you who created Australia... and it sure as hell wasn't the British (like yourself) who stayed safely at home, sitting on their arses, only reading of the explorations, conquests, colonisations and pioneering ventures of the British Empire!

And as far as your claims of "you don't know the British" go... up until a few generations ago my family was British. To claim that I don't know the British is to claim that I don't know myself.

Australia's relationship with Britain has always been close enough that we've never lost sight or knowledge of the mother country. Even today, our largest immigrant group is the British. (In the suburb that I live in over 50% of the population was born in the UK.)


I think that incident was the final nail in the coffin really. A very sad day for Australians. The final betrayal.

And even then, Australia has been slow to distance herself from the motherland....


Source : http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/arts/republic-awaits-eureka-moment/story-e6frg8nf-1225792081725

It's nothing, I assure you. Indeed, I think it rather unfair that although 15 other countries continue to have the Queen as their head of state, they don't contribute a penny to her upkeep.

How on earth do you know if I'm a "stay-at-home"? I wonder if you've ever gone anywhere? It was the British who created Australia, pure and simple.

[Bridie]

It's nothing, I assure you. Indeed, I think it rather unfair that although 15 other countries continue to have the Queen as their head of state, they don't contribute a penny to her upkeep.
Oh well, even if you're right, I'm sure Australians pay enough for the Queen's representative, the Governor General. What a waste, that is.

Anyway, why should we pay for a Queen who contributes nothing to us? At least, for you lads, the Royal Family generates some profits via tourism.



How on earth do you know if I'm a "stay-at-home"? I wonder if you've ever gone anywhere? It was the British who created Australia, pure and simple.NOT ALL BRITISH created Australia, Wulf. That was my point. Those who stayed in safely insulated in Britain did nothing to contribute. The legacy of those who did create Australia (among them, many Irish also) can be found living in... wait for it.... Australia! So when you spout rubbish like this...

Still, bashing the ones who created you is a popular sport, I believe, in the dominions.THE ONLY ONES WHO BASH THOSE WHO FOUNDED AUSTRALIA TEND TO BE THE BRITISH! Not all British, of course, but I've heard enough "you're all convicts and scum" comments, along with other such condescensions, to last a lifetime.

Quite frankly, any Australian would be a fool not to agree with this...

What makes Australia's loyalty to Britain all the more anomalous is that the national story has continually been punctuated by imperial slights and colonial condescension. The mother country has not been wholly deserving of the faithfulness of its distant dominion, nor even at times its friendship.But our bonds with you poms are not so anomalous. Despite everything else, nothing can change the fact that we share a common history, culture, language, customs and perspective on the world. We are the same people.

[Wulfhere]

Oh well, even if you're right, I'm sure Australians pay enough for the Queen's representative, the Governor General. What a waste, that is.

Anyway, why should we pay for a Queen who contributes nothing to us? At least, for you lads, the Royal Family generates some profits via tourism.


NOT ALL BRITISH created Australia, Wulf. That was my point. Those who stayed in safely insulated in Britain did nothing to contribute. The legacy of those who did create Australia (among them, many Irish also) can be found living in... wait for it.... Australia! So when you spout rubbish like this...
THE ONLY ONES WHO BASH THOSE WHO FOUNDED AUSTRALIA TEND TO BE THE BRITISH! Not all British, of course, but I've heard enough "you're all convicts and scum" comments, along with other such condescensions, to last a lifetime.

Quite frankly, any Australian would be a fool not to agree with this...
But our bonds with you poms are not so anomalous. Despite everything else, nothing can change the fact that we share a common history, culture, language, customs and perspective on the world. We are the same people.

Yes, you pay for the Governor General - just like you'd pay for a President, because that's exactly the job he does.

So you're dividing the British up into those that went away and founded places like Australia, and those who stayed behind - by definition, us. In fact, people moved back and forth, especially the governing classes. And those in Britain, far from doing "nothing", payed for the Royal Navy with their taxes, for example. But, if it makes you feel better, go for it.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Well.. it's something worth considering I suppose-- after the Brits get rid of their Royal Family and look for a new one.
Are there any decent Irish nobles?

The McajaThini clan:lightbul:

[Oinakos Growion]

we share a common history, culture, language, customs and perspective on the world. We are the same people
And still "the British" (specially at those times) are not a completely homogeneous group... ;)

[Bridie]

Yes, you pay for the Governor General - just like you'd pay for a President, because that's exactly the job he does.No, the Governor General does bugger all, just like the Queen in England. He/she is for show. We do have a Prime Minister, you know.



So you're dividing the British up into those that went away and founded places like Australia, and those who stayed behind - by definition, us. In fact, people moved back and forth, especially the governing classes. And those in Britain, far from doing "nothing", payed for the Royal Navy with their taxes, for example. But, if it makes you feel better, go for it.
Due to the vast distances and great expenses, people didn't move back and forth as much as you say. Not at all.

As for doing nothing, I was referring to the Brits who were never pioneers themselves, yet wanted to take the credit by way of association. You'd have found the lazy buggers residing back in Britain, enjoying the profits of the Empire which were sowed and reaped by those "disposable" British and Irish citizens whom were mercilessly exploited and used by the British elite... and you'll find their descendants there now.

The travelers who went to the New World at the expense of the British tax payers were the convicts, who suffice it to say, had no choice in the matter and probably would have cost the tax payers in Britain more if they had stayed (assuming they weren't hanged, that is). The free settlers (the majority of those who came to populate Australia) had to pay their own way.

[Wulfhere]

No, the Governor General does bugger all, just like the Queen in England. He/she is for show. We do have a Prime Minister, you know.



So you're dividing the British up into those that went away and founded places like Australia, and those who stayed behind - by definition, us. In fact, people moved back and forth, especially the governing classes. And those in Britain, far from doing "nothing", payed for the Royal Navy with their taxes, for example. But, if it makes you feel better, go for it.
Due to the vast distances and great expenses, people didn't move back and forth as much as you say. Not at all.

As for doing nothing, I was referring to the Brits who were never pioneers themselves, yet wanted to take the credit by way of association. You'd have found the lazy buggers residing back in Britain, enjoying the profits of the Empire which were sowed and reaped by those "disposable" British and Irish citizens whom were mercilessly exploited and used by the British elite... and you'll find their descendants there now.

The travelers who went to the New World at the expense of the British tax payers were the convicts, who suffice it to say, had no choice in the matter and probably would have cost the tax payers in Britain more if they had stayed (assuming they weren't hanged, that is). The free settlers (the vast majority of those who came to populate Australia) had to pay their own way.

The Governor General does exactly what a President would in a parliamentary republic.

So you're trying to divide the British up into those that went and founded places like Australia, and those that didn't. Sorry, but that won't work I'm afraid. It was the British as a nation that did it, not individuals acting on their own.

I ask again - where have you been in the world?

[Bridie]

So you're trying to divide the British up into those that went and founded places like Australia, and those that didn't. Sorry, but that won't work I'm afraid. It was the British as a nation that did it, not individuals acting on their own.Quite typical of an Englishman actually. Arrogantly trying to reap what he hasn't sowed.

Probably why you get so many English immigrants over here that swan about the place as though it's their birthright and whom seem to be of the belief that they deserve a privileged position, even though they've never done a thing in their lives to contribute ANYTHING to the country, let alone its foundation.



I ask again - where have you been in the world?
You want a list of countries? :icon_neutral:

In no particular order and excluding Australia : Canada, USA, Mexico, Tahiti, Hong Kong, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, United Arab Emirates, England, Ireland, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, France and Spain. I think that's about it. Oh yeah, and Tasmania. :p

[Wulfhere]

Quite typical of an Englishman actually. Arrogantly trying to reap what he hasn't sowed.

Probably why you get so many English immigrants over here that swan about the place as though it's their birthright and whom seem to be of the belief that they deserve a privileged position, even though they've never done a thing in their lives to contribute ANYTHING to the country, let alone its foundation.


You want a list of countries? :icon_neutral:

In no particular order and excluding Australia : Canada, USA, Mexico, Tahiti, Hong Kong, Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, United Arab Emirates, England, Ireland, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, France and Spain. I think that's about it. Oh yeah, and Tasmania. :p

As an Englishman I feel proud of all our achievements, even if I wasn't personally involved. Or are you saying that national pride is wrong?

I have another question - what did you personally do to help in Australia's foundation? Or are you taking pride in the achievements of others?

[Bridie]

As an Englishman I feel proud of all our achievements, even if I wasn't personally involved. Or are you saying that national pride is wrong?English national pride is fine, British national pride is misplaced.



I have another question - what did you personally do to help in Australia's foundation? Or are you taking pride in the achievements of others?
I'm taking pride in my own forebears.

[Wulfhere]

English national pride is fine, British national pride is misplaced.


I'm taking pride in my own forebears.

Who are you, a non-Brit, to say that British pride is misplaced? I could just as easily say that Australian pride is misplaced, since it's an artificial country created by us. And if you can take pride in your forebears, why can't I? Personally, I am indeed very proud of the fact that my fellow countrymen created all these new and successful nations.

[Bridie]

Who are you, a non-Brit, to say that British pride is misplaced? You don't have to be a rotten egg to smell its stench.



I could just as easily say that Australian pride is misplaced, since it's an artificial country created by us.
Australian pride would be misplaced. But it wasn't created by you lot, it was created by us.



And if you can take pride in your forebears, why can't I? Personally, I am indeed very proud of the fact that my fellow countrymen created all these new and successful nations.The ones who created all these new and successful countries (not nations) are no longer your fellow countrymen. They are Australian, New Zealanders, US Americans, Canadians etc.

When I mentioned my forebears, I meant those who I am personally descended from. My blood. My family history. I bear their legacy.

[Wulfhere]

You don't have to be a rotten egg to smell its stench.



Australian pride would be misplaced. But it wasn't created by you lot, it was created by us.


The ones who created all these new and successful countries (not nations) are no longer your fellow countrymen. They are Australian, New Zealanders, US Americans, Canadians etc.

When I mentioned my forebears, I meant those who I am personally descended from. My blood. My family history. I bear their legacy.

I understand your reasoning for saying such things, because no nation likes to think it was created by another. Doesn't make it true though.

And if you're talking purely about your own ancestors, rather than the entire settler population, then how do we know they actually did anything much to help? You can't have it both ways. Either you restrict your pride to your own literal ancestors, or you extend it to their fellow countrymen. Your pride is obviously in the entire settler population.

[Bridie]

I understand your reasoning for saying such things, because no nation likes to think it was created by another. Doesn't make it true though.I've already covered who founded Australia and I'm not going to keep repeating myself. However, I do think that you are confusing the terms "nation" and "country".



And if you're talking purely about your own ancestors, rather than the entire settler population, then how do we know they actually did anything much to help? You can't have it both ways. Either you restrict your pride to your own literal ancestors, or you extend it to their fellow countrymen. Your pride is obviously in the entire settler population.Yes, the settler population. You seem to be understanding me now. Well done.

[Wulfhere]

I've already covered who founded Australia and I'm not going to keep repeating myself. However, I do think that you are confusing the terms "nation" and "country".


Yes, the settler population. You seem to be understanding me now. Well done.

Are you descended from the entire settler population? If not, then according to your own statement earlier you have no right to feel pride in it. If you do feel pride in it, then it's no different to me feeling pride in it, since they were my fellow countrymen.

[Bridie]

Are you descended from the entire settler population? If not, then according to your own statement earlier you have no right to feel pride in it. If you do feel pride in it, then it's no different to me feeling pride in it, since they were my fellow countrymen.The histories of Australia and other British post-colonial countries are not your histories, unless you have some New World pioneering ancestors who moved back to England in your family tree.

I don't know why that's so difficult for you to understand.

I'm not talking about the New World being discovered, I'm talking about the long and back-breaking process of forging those colonies into countries.

[Wulfhere]

The histories of Australia and other British post-colonial countries are not your histories, unless you have some New World pioneering ancestors who moved back to England in your family tree.

I don't know why that's so difficult for you to understand.

I'm not talking about the New World being discovered, I'm talking about the long and back-breaking process of forging those colonies into countries.

It's not a question of my not understanding what you're saying, but rather one of refuting it as nationalist propaganda. Those people were English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh - not Australian, because there was no such country - and were therefore my fellow Britons. It's only because successive generations in Australia have tried to forge a national identity that this ridiculous debate is even possible. There might, indeed, be an Australian national identity today, but there wasn't one back then, and the work of creating Australia was done by people who weren't Australian. In fact, I'll go further - the Australians of today are lazy, living off the work of those pioneering Brits.

And, as an aside, I know quite a few people with ancestors who settled in Australia and later came back.

[Bridie]

It's not a question of my not understanding what you're saying, but rather one of refuting it as nationalist propaganda. Those people were English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh - not Australian, because there was no such country - and were therefore my fellow Britons. It's only because successive generations in Australia have tried to forge a national identity that this ridiculous debate is even possible. There might, indeed, be an Australian national identity today, but there wasn't one back then, and the work of creating Australia was done by people who weren't Australian.
It's not a matter of trying to forge a national identity. It's an inevitable consequence of geographic, social and political isolation over time.... combined with a generalised spirit of rebellion against the British elite and a rejection of all that Great Britain stands for.

Some say that the birth of Australia didn't really occur until Gallipoli during WW1, when thousands of Australians were slaughtered in vain due to British callousness and indifference for our troops. It was then that we stopped seeing ourselves as British and Irish castaways far from home and started seeing ourselves as independent (by necessity). It was a time when old resentments came to the surface and it was recognised that they didn't have to be ignored any longer.

That's just one perspective though - although it's an often heard one.



In fact, I'll go further - the Australians of today are lazy, living off the work of those pioneering Brits.I'd be quite happy for my descendants to one day to reap the rewards of my hard work. In fact, I'd feel like I'd lived my life for nothing if they couldn't.

So that's right, the pioneers of Australia were English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh... but they left their homes and common history diverged from that point. Everyone else seems to be able to recognise it, except you.

[Megrez]

Blah blah blah. All Wulfhere wants is Australia to support UK in the next world war. That's all.

[Wulfhere]

It's not a matter of trying to forge a national identity. It's an inevitable consequence of geographic, social and political isolation over time.... combined with a generalised spirit of rebellion against the British elite and a rejection of all that Great Britain stands for.

Some say that the birth of Australia didn't really occur until Gallipoli during WW1, when thousands of Australians were slaughtered in vain due to British callousness and indifference for our troops. It was then that we stopped seeing ourselves as British and Irish castaways far from home and started seeing ourselves as independent (by necessity). It was a time when old resentments came to the surface and it was recognised that they didn't have to be ignored any longer.

That's just one perspective though - although it's an often heard one.


I'd be quite happy for my descendants to one day to reap the rewards of my hard work. In fact, I'd feel like I'd lived my life for nothing if they couldn't.

So that's right, the pioneers of Australia were English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh... but they left their homes and common history diverged from that point. Everyone else seems to be able to recognise it, except you.

You're right about Gallipoli - if I ever see another Australian politico-drama called 1915 or whatever, full of "actors" from Neighbours or Sons and Daughters, I'll probably throw up.

Bite the hand that feeds you, deride those who created you and bash the poms - it's a good job we're mature enough to take it in good spirit.

[Bridie]

You're right about Gallipoli - if I ever see another Australian politico-drama called 1915 or whatever, full of "actors" from Neighbours or Sons and Daughters, I'll probably throw up.
:D



Bite the hand that feeds you, deride those who created you and bash the poms - it's a good job we're mature enough to take it in good spirit.
You feed us? :blink:

[Wulfhere]

:D


You feed us? :blink:

Yep, we gave you your people, your languge, your culture, your law and your constitution.

[Bridie]

Yep, we gave you your people, your languge, your culture, your law and your constitution.Yeah, thanks for the law bit.... that's working out so well. :rolleyes: If I read of another paedophile, murderer or rapist getting just a couple of years imprisonment for committing heinous crimes I might just come over to England and shove your "laws" where the sun doesn't shine. :shakefist :p

Anyway, I'm really glad that the British generously gave us life. And here I was always thinking that it had been God. Well, you learn something new everyday.

You didn't "give us" our language though. The people who migrated to Australia all those years ago already spoke a language all of their own accord. :) Same goes for culture.

I mean, my Grandma, my Mum and myself all like to bake Yorkshire Pud with our roasts, but I can't say that it ever occurred to me that I should be grateful to the English for giving us the recipe.... it has, afterall, been in my family for many, many generations... who knows how many... handed down from mother to daughter. Yep, it's ours, just as much as it is yours.


Anyway, you pommie lads should be grateful to us for giving you quality television viewing.... like "Neighbours" and "Home and Away." :D

[poiuytrewq0987]

Yep, we gave you your people, your languge, your culture, your law and your constitution.

No, the things you point out were already among the settlers; they merely split away from Great Britain; quite similar to how America split from Great Britain. Britishers did not build Australia but rather descendants of modern day European Australians did. Talking to you is like talking to a repeating parrot.

[Wulfhere]

Yeah, thanks for the law bit.... that's working out so well. :rolleyes: If I read of another paedophile, murderer or rapist getting just a couple of years imprisonment for committing heinous crimes I might just come over to England and shove your "laws" where the sun doesn't shine. :shakefist :p

Anyway, I'm really glad that the British generously gave us life. And here I was always thinking that it had been God. Well, you learn something new everyday.

You didn't "give us" our language though. The people who migrated to Australia all those years ago already spoke a language all of their own accord. :) Same goes for culture.

I mean, my Grandma, my Mum and myself all like to bake Yorkshire Pud with our roasts, but I can't say that it ever occurred to me that I should be grateful to the English for giving us the recipe.... it has, afterall, been in my family for many, many generations... who knows how many... handed down from mother to daughter. Yep, it's ours, just as much as it is yours.


Anyway, you pommie lads should be grateful to us for giving you quality television viewing.... like "Neighbours" and "Home and Away." :D

Yes, it's all yours too of course - because you're British.

And how can you possibly think that Vegemite tastes nice, compared to Marmite? And why do you like drinking piss so much (i.e. lager)?

[Wulfhere]

No, the things you point out were already among the settlers; they merely split away from Great Britain; quite similar to how America split from Great Britain. Britishers did not build Australia but rather descendants of modern day European Australians did. Talking to you is like talking to a repeating parrot.

The descendants of modern day Australians built Australia? So they had time travel too, did they?

[Bridie]

And how can you possibly think that Vegemite tastes nice, compared to Marmite?Marmite is for little girls. :eyes



And why do you like drinking piss so much (i.e. lager)?
Says the guy who comes from a country where they drink warm beer. :crazy:

[Wulfhere]

Marmite is for little girls. :eyes


Says the guy who comes from a country where they drink warm beer. :crazy:

Yes, but it actually is beer - which is supposed to be drank warm. Lager isn't beer, and is only drank cold to cover up the taste.

[Osweo]

Due to the vast distances and great expenses, people didn't move back and forth as much as you say. Not at all.
My Great Great Grandad went and came back. He tried America for a bit too! There's talk of bigamy or even trigamy, by the way... He might even be your Great Great Grandad too... :eek::D

Quite typical of an Englishman actually. Arrogantly trying to reap what he hasn't sowed.
:cry2


By the way, Bridie-Luv, are you Cornish at all? Now that I'm a Devon-man, it's my county-duty to wish they'd sent the lot of the buggers down your way... :p

[Megrez]

Isn't this thread about Ireland?

[Oinakos Growion]

Isn't this thread about Ireland?
Yeah well... There's lots of Irish in Australia and it's also an island anyways...

And, on topic, the only reply to the title of the thread still is: "FECK NO" :)

[Wulfhere]

Yeah well... There's lots of Irish in Australia and it's also an island anyways...

And, on topic, the only reply to the title of the thread still is: "FECK NO" :)

I don't think we want a Spaniard meddling in our affairs. In fact, the suggestion that a united Ireland become a dominion has a long and respectable history in Irish politics, and is seriously proposed every few years. Who knows, it might just work.

[poiuytrewq0987]

I don't think we want a Spaniard meddling in our affairs. In fact, the suggestion that a united Ireland become a dominion has a long and respectable history in Irish politics, and is seriously proposed every few years. Who knows, it might just work.

Or you know, renounce your claim on Northern Ireland, that might just work too.

[Wulfhere]

Or you know, renounce your claim on Northern Ireland, that might just work too.

Ignorance really is bliss, isn't it? I'm sure the vast majority of British people would dump Northern Ireland given half a chance, but since the majority of its population want to remain British, to do so seems a little dishonourable. It would also lead to a war in Ireland that they simply don't have the resources to cope with.

[Oinakos Growion]

I don't think we want a Spaniard meddling in our affairs
First, I am not a "Spaniard". For what you know I could have Irish nationality, with a Galician origin. Or I could be Galician only, either from the north or the south (I'd then have a Portuguese passport), and in any case calling me "Spaniard" would be like calling you Scotsman. In summary: you don't have a clue about how this goes.
Second, "we?", "our?". I thought that a defender of Mercian sovereignty wouldn't have any business with old British Imperial delusions.
Linking one and two, I am very well entitled and allowed to discuss Irish business. Believe me, I am. The only person who would have any right to tell me how he/she sees Ireland and the future of the Republic of Ireland is an Irish citizen with Irish ancestry. You are not. And let me tell you, the Irish in Ireland are pretty happy as they are.


In fact, the suggestion that a united Ireland become a dominion has a long and respectable history in Irish politics, and is seriously proposed every few years
Of course, by the British, every now and then, since independence. What a coincidence, uh?
Actually, the last more or less organised attempt to formally propose this was done by the BNP not so long ago when they wanted to run for elections here. Google it and read on.
Oh yeah, and if you ever come over to Ireland (I doubt it but still), travel around, ask people, face to face, see what happens.

[Bridie]

Lager isn't beer, and is only drank cold to cover up the taste.Proper order too... it tastes like piss. :icon_wink:



My Great Great Grandad went and came back. He tried America for a bit too! There's talk of bigamy or even trigamy, by the way... He might even be your Great Great Grandad too...
:shakefist



By the way, Bridie-Luv, are you Cornish at all? Now that I'm a Devon-man, it's my county-duty to wish they'd sent the lot of the buggers down your way... My Dad's side came from a place on the Devon side of the border. ;) But close enough to Cornwall alrighty. My surname is Devonian. Well, of Norman origin :D but of a form that is unique to Devon.

Anyway, you almost got your wish.... a disproportionate number of convicts sent to Australia were Cornish. :wink

[Murphy]

Of course, by the British, every now and then, since independence. What a coincidence, uh?

More often than not it is suggested by Anglo-Irish West-Brits in Dublin.

[Oinakos Growion]

More often than not it is suggested by Anglo-Irish West-Brits in Dublin.
Ah well... laughable stock.
I certainly only met two Irish people in my life who seriously thought so.

[Osweo]

Anyway, you almost got your wish.... a disproportionate number of convicts sent to Australia were Cornish. :wink
Your user name...
Actually, far more Cornish went willingly for the mining opportunities. As I understand it, the convicts had a large proportion of agricultural discontents, and thus will be a general Southern English phenomenon, Cornwall just a part of it. Probably far more from Dorset sort of area, I would imagine...

Are there figures out there for the most common surnames in Australia\? Might be interesting to see what we can get out of them in terms of contributing English regions... :chin:

Ah well... laughable stock.
I certainly only met two Irish people in my life who seriously thought so.
AH! SO they DO exist!

ANd... I'm of Irish stock with the passport. I am broadly in favour of it too. ;)

And Galicians/Spaniards is NOTHING comparable with English/Scots! :rolleyes2: More like Cumbrians/English, never mind various fantasies. :coffee:

[The Ripper]

Try it and I will volunteer myself to kick the Brits out. :p

[Bridie]

Your user name...
Actually, far more Cornish went willingly for the mining opportunities. As I understand it, the convicts had a large proportion of agricultural discontents, and thus will be a general Southern English phenomenon, Cornwall just a part of it. Probably far more from Dorset sort of area, I would imagine... Mining and agricultural opportunities, I think. I might start a new thread on it sometime. :)

I'm sure you're right about the South. Mind you, plenty came from Lancashire and Yorkshire too, from the stats I've seen.



Are there figures out there for the most common surnames in Australia\? Might be interesting to see what we can get out of them in terms of contributing English regions... :chin:I'm afraid they're just the same surnames that are most common in all of England.... ranked #1 Smith; #2 Jones; #3 Williams; #4 Brown; #5 Wilson; #6 Taylor; #7 Johnson; #8 White; #9 Martin; #10 Anderson....

Australia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_common_surnames_in_Oceania

UK : http://surname.sofeminine.co.uk/w/surnames/most-common-surnames-in-great-britain.html

All pretty boring really. (Except for that weirdo Vietnamese name ranking #12 in Australia, or whatever it is. :p)

[The Khagan]

Celts have always done better under Germanic rule. But eh, maybe these days we've go to leave them to their own devices. :wink

Dál Riata?

[Wulfhere]

First, I am not a "Spaniard". For what you know I could have Irish nationality, with a Galician origin. Or I could be Galician only, either from the north or the south (I'd then have a Portuguese passport), and in any case calling me "Spaniard" would be like calling you Scotsman. In summary: you don't have a clue about how this goes.
Second, "we?", "our?". I thought that a defender of Mercian sovereignty wouldn't have any business with old British Imperial delusions.
Linking one and two, I am very well entitled and allowed to discuss Irish business. Believe me, I am. The only person who would have any right to tell me how he/she sees Ireland and the future of the Republic of Ireland is an Irish citizen with Irish ancestry. You are not. And let me tell you, the Irish in Ireland are pretty happy as they are.


Of course, by the British, every now and then, since independence. What a coincidence, uh?
Actually, the last more or less organised attempt to formally propose this was done by the BNP not so long ago when they wanted to run for elections here. Google it and read on.
Oh yeah, and if you ever come over to Ireland (I doubt it but still), travel around, ask people, face to face, see what happens.

Ireland has got nothing to do with the British Empire, or so-called "imperial delusions". It is a responsibility I'm sure most of us would rather not have, but we do, nevertheless. And the BNP, by the way, proposed that Ireland should become part of the UK again - what we're talking about here is dominion status, like Australia and Canada - which are independent in almost all respects except the monarchy, and this to appease the pro-British majority in Northern Ireland.

Yes, for all I know you might be any of those things... But you aren't. You're a Spaniard who likes to pretend he's a Celt - and after all, what Spaniard wouldn't prefer to be something else, given half the chance? And your delusions have taken you so far as to go to Ireland and think you can speak on their behalf. Well, you can't.

[Wulfhere]

Try it and I will volunteer myself to kick the Brits out. :p

Why?

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Are you descended from the entire settler population? If not, then according to your own statement earlier you have no right to feel pride in it. If you do feel pride in it, then it's no different to me feeling pride in it, since they were my fellow countrymen.

While its earliest boundaries will never be known, there is general agreement that the territory that was called "the first of the Mercians" in the Tribal Hidage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_Hidage) covered much of south Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and Northern Warwickshire[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercia#cite_note-2)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercia#cite_note-3)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercia#cite_note-4).
The earliest king of Mersin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monarchs_of_Mercia) of whom any details are known is Creola (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creoda_of_Mercia)(Creol), said to have been the great-grandson of Icel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icel_of_Mercia)(Mersin province in Turkey) Coming to power around 584, he built a fortress at Fokolworth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamworth) which became the seat of Mersin/Turkey kings.


Are you Black ???????

[Lulletje Rozewater]

I don't think we want a Spaniard meddling in our affairs. In fact, the suggestion that a united Ireland become a dominion has a long and respectable history in Irish politics, and is seriously proposed every few years. Who knows, it might just work.

Oh crap, you darkies have more Spanish blood in you than you realize.
In fact you could be a colony of Spain.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Proper order too... it tastes like piss. :icon_wink:

Correction.
It is piss

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Your user name...
Actually, far more Cornish went willingly for the mining opportunities. As I understand it, the convicts had a large proportion of agricultural discontents, and thus will be a general Southern English phenomenon, Cornwall just a part of it. Probably far more from Dorset sort of area, I would imagine...

Are there figures out there for the most common surnames in Australia\? Might be interesting to see what we can get out of them in terms of contributing English regions... :chin:

AH! SO they DO exist!

ANd... I'm of Irish stock with the passport. I am broadly in favour of it too. ;)

And Galicians/Spaniards is NOTHING comparable with English/Scots! :rolleyes2: More like Cumbrians/English, never mind various fantasies. :coffee:

Here is a list

A LIST OF CONVICTS SENT TO NEW SOUTH WALES, IN 1787.

(From: The Voyage of Governor Phillip to Botany Bay, published 1789)

Name. Where Convicted. Date Of Conviction. Years.

Abel, Robert London 23 Feb. 1785. 7
Abrams, Henry
Abrahams, Esther London 30 August, 1786 7
Abell, Mary, alias Tilley Worcester 5 March, 1785 7
Acres, Thomas Exeter 14 March, 1786 7
Adams, John London 26 May, 1784 7
Adams, Mary Ditto 13 Decem. 1786 7
Agley, Richard Winchester 2 March, 1784 7
Allen, John Hertford 2 March, 1786 7
Allen, William Ormskirk 11 April, 1785 7
Allen, Charles London 7 July, 1784 7
Allen, Susannah Ditto 18 April, 1787 7
Allen, Mary Ditto 25 October, 1786 7
Allen, Jamasin, alias Boddington Ditto 25 Oct. 1786 7
Allen, Mary, alias Conner Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Anderson, John Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Anderson, Elizabeth London 10 Jan. 1787 7
Anderson, John Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Anderson, Fanny Winchester 7 March, 1786 7
Archer, John London 26 May, 1784 7
Arscott, John Bodmin 18 August, 1783 7
Atkinson, George London 21 April, 1784 7
Ault, Sarah Ditto 21 Feb. 1787 7
Ayners, John, alias Agnew Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Ayres John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Bartlett, James Winchester 1 March, 1785 7
Barsby, George Ditto 1 March, 1785 Life
Barnett, Henry, alias Barnard, alias Burton Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Bails, Robert Reading 28 Feb. 1785 Life
Barnes, Stephen York 9 July, 1785 7
Bannister, George London 1 April, 1784 7
Barferd, John Ditto 14 Decem. 1784 7
Barland, George Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Balding, James, alias William Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Bason, Elizabeth, wife of William Bason New Sarum 24 July, 1784 7
Bayley, James Ditto 11 March, 1786 7
Bazley, John Exeter 12 Jan. 1785 7
Baker, Thomas Ditto 10 Jan. 1786 7
Barrett, Thomas Ditto 24 May, 1784 Life
Batley, Caten Ditto 24 May, 1784 7
Barsby, Samuel Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Ball, John Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Barry, John Bristol 23 Novem. 1785 7
Barret, Daniel
Barber, Elizabeth
Baldwin, Ruth, alias Bowyer London 20 August, 1786 7
Baker, Martha Ditto 30 August, 1786 7
Bell, William Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Benear, Samuel Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Bellett, Jacob Ditto 12 Jan. 1785 7
Beardsley, Ann Derby 5 August, 1786 5
Best, John
Beckford, Elizabeth London 10 Jan. 1787 7
Bellamy, Thomas Worcester 9 July, 1785 7
Bird, James Croydon 20 July, 1785 7
Bird, Samuel Ditto 20 July, 1785 7
Bishop, Joseph
Bingham, John, alias Baughan
Bingham, Elizabeth, alias Mooring London
Bird, Elizabeth, alias Winisred Maidstone 14 March, 1787 7
Blackhall, William Abingdon 6 March, 1786 7
Blunt, William London 10 Decem. 1783 7
Blake, Francis Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Blatherhorn, William Exeter 24 May, 1784 Life
Bloedworth, James Kingstone 3 Oct. 1785 7
Blanchett, Susannah Ditto 2 April, 1787 7
Bond, Peter London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Boyle, John London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Boggis, William
Bond, William Exeter 18 July, 1785 7
Bond, Mary, wife of John Bond Wells 19 August, 1786 7
Boulton, Rebecca Lincoln 16 July, 1784 7
Bonner, Jane London 18 April, 1787 7
Bolton, Mary Shrewsbury 12 March, 1785 7
Brown, James Hertford 2 March, 1785 7
Brown, William Southwark 10 Jan. 1786 7
Brindley, John Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Brown, Richard Reading 15 July, 1783 7
Brough, William Stafford 9 March, 1789 7
Bradley, James London 29 June, 1785 7
Bradley, James Ditto 6 May, 1784 7
Brown, Thomas Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 7
Bradbury, William Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 7
Bryant, Thomas Maidstone 15 March, 1784 7
Bryant, William Launceston 20 March, 1784 7
Brown, Thomas Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Bradford, John Ditto 9 Jan. 1786 7
Brannegan, James Ditto 24 May, 1784 7
Bruce, Robert Ditto 24 May, 1784 7
Brown, William Ditto 24 May, 1784 7
Bryant, John Ditto 14 March, 1786 7
Brewer, William Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Brice, William Bristol 11 Feb. 1785 7
Brand, Curtis
Bryant, Michael
Brand, Lucy, alias Wood London 19 July, 1786 7
Branham, Mary Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Bruce, Elizabeth Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Burleigh, James Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Burn, Peter Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 7
Burne, James Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Butler, William Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Buckley, Joseph Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Burridge, Samuel Ditto 3 August, 1786 7
Burn, Patrick
Burn, Simon
Busley, John
Bunn, Margaret London 26 April, 1786 7
Burkitt, Mary Ditto 20 August, 1786 7
Burdo, Sarah Ditto 25 Oct. 1786 7
Carver, Joseph Maidstone 13 March, 1786 7
Castle, James London 7 July, 1784 7
Campbell, James, alias George Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Campbell, James Guildford 11 August, 1784 7
Carney, John Exeter 22 July, 1782 7
Carty, Francis Bodmin 14 August, 1786 7
Carey, Ann Taunton 30 March, 1786 7
Carter, Richard, alias Michael Cartwright Shrewsbury 13 March, 1784 7
Cable, Henry
Carroll, Mary, wife of James Carroll London 25 Oct. 1786 7
Cesar, John Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Chields, William
Chaddick, Thomas London 7 July, 1784 7
Church, William Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Chaaf, William Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Chinery, Samuel Ditto 7 August, 1786 7
Chanin, Edward Ditto 7 August, 1786 7
Clough, Richard Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Clements, Thomas London 7 July, 1784 7
Clark, John, alias Hosier Ditto 6 April, 1785 7
Clark, William Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Clarke, John Exeter 7 August, 1786 7
Cleaver, Mary Bristol 4 April, 1786 7
Clear, George
Clark, Elizabeth
Connelly, William Bristol 3 Feb. 1785 7
Cormick, Edward Hertford 2 March, 1786 7
Corden, James Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Colling, Joseph London 7 July, 1784 7
Cole, William Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Cox, John Matthew Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Collier, Richard Kingstone 24 March, 1784 7
Connolly, William Bodmin 14 August, 1786 7
Conelly, Cornelius Exeter 7 August, 1786 7
Colman, Ishmael Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Coffin, John Exeter 9 Jan. 1786 7
Cole, Elizabeth Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Cox, James Ditto 24 May, 1784 Life
Copp, James Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Coombes, Ann, wife of Samuel Coombes Taunton 30 March, 1786 7
Cole, Elizabeth London 26 April, 1786 7
Colley, Elizabeth London 23 Feb. 1785 14
Cooke, Charlotte Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Cooper, Mary Worcester 19 July, 1785 7
Colpitts, Ann Durham 2 Oct. 1786 7
Cross, John New Sarum 25 March, 1785 7
Cropper, John London 14 Decem. 1784 7
Cross, William Coventry 21 March, 1783 7
Creamer, John Exeter 12 Jan. 1785 7
Creek, Jane London 14 Septem. 1785 7
Cunningham, Edward Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Cullen, James Bryen Ditto 6 April, 1785 7
Cullyhorn, John Exeter 22 July, 1782 7
Cudlip, Jacob, alias Norris Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7
Cuss, John, alias Hanaboy New Sarum 11 March, 1786 7
Cuckow, William
Davis, Aaron Bristol 29 March, 1785 7
Day, Richard Reading 24 July, 1786 7
Davies, Edward Stafford 27 July, 1785 7
Day, Samuel Glocester 23 March, 1785 14
Davis, Samuel Ditto 13 July, 1785 7
Davis, William
Davis, James London 8 Decem. 1784 7
Daniells, Daniel Ditto 6 May, 1784 7
Daley, James Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Davidson, John Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Davis, William Brecon 15 July 1785 Life
Davis Richard
Daley, Ann, wife of Gore Daley, alias Ann Warburton Nether Knutsford 3 Oct1786 7
Darnell, Margaret London 18 April, 1787 7
Davis, Ann Ditto 26 April, 1786 7
Dalton, Elizabeth Ditto 14 Sept. 1785 7
Davidson, Rebecca, wife of Robert Davidson Ditto 25 Oct. 1786 7
Dawson, Margaret Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Davis, Frances Chelmsford 6 March, 1786 14
Davies, Sarah Worcester 2 August, 1783 7
Davies, Mary Shrewsbury 12 March, 1785 7
Dennison, Michael Poole 15 April, 1785 7
Denison, Barnaby Bristol 30 April, 1783 7
Delany, Patrick
Dickson, Thomas, alias Ralph Raw Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Discall, Timothy Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7
Dixon, Mary London 31 May, 1786 7
Dickenson, Mary Southwark 8 Jan. 1787 7
Douglas, William Lincoln 9 July, 1785 7
Dowland, Ferdinand London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Dodding, James, alias Doring
Dring, William Kingston upon Hull 7 Oct. 1784 7
Dunnage, Joseph London 21 April, 1784 Life
Dudgens, Elizabeth
Dundass, Jane London 18 April, 1787 7
Dutton, Ann Ditto 26 April, 1786 7
Deyer, Leonard Southwark 10 Jan. 1786 7
Dykes, Mary London 26 April, 1786 7
Earle, William New Sarum 5 March, 1785 7
Eagleton, William, alias Bones Kingston 22 March, 1786 7
Eaton, Mary, alias Shephard
Early, Rachel Reading 24 July, 1786 7
Eaton, Martha
Eccles, Thomas Guildford 22 July, 1782 Life
Edmunds, William Monmouth 21 March, 1785 7
Edwards, William
Eggleston, George Maidstone 13 March, 1786 7
Ellam, Peter Ormskirk 18 July, 1785 7
Elliot, William Croydon 18 August, 1783 7
Elliot, Joseph Bristol 24 Nov. 1784 7
Ellam, Deborah Chester 30 August, 1784 7
English, Nicholas London 8 Decem. 1784 7
Everett, John Hertford 2 March, 1786 7
Everingham, Matthew London 7 July, 1784 7
Evans, Williams Shrewsbury 12 March, 1785 7
Evans, Elizabeth London 13 Decem. 1786 7
Farrell, Phillip London 15 Sep. 1784 7
Farley, William Bristol 10 Feb. 1785 7
Farmer, Ann London
Fentum, Benjamin Ditto 10 Oct. 1783 7
Ferguson, John Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Fillesey, Thomas Bristol 29 April, 1783 7
Fitzgerald, Jane, alias Phillips Ditto 4 April, 1786 7
Field, William
Finlow, John, alias Hervey
Field, Jane London
Fitzgerald, Elizabeth Ditto 13 Decem. 1786 7
Flyn, Edward
Flarty, Phebe London 21 Feb. 1787 7
Fowkes, Francis Ditto 13 Decem. 1785 7
Forrester, Robert Ditto 10 Sept. 1783 7
Foyle, William New Sarum 9 July, 1785 7
Fowles, Ann London 6 April, 1785 7
Fownes, Margaret Shrewsbury 4 August, 1784 7
Forbes, Ann Kingston 2 April, 1787 7
Freeman, James Hertford 3 March, 1784 7
Freeman, Robert London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Francis, William Ditto 14 Decem. 1784 7
Francisco, George Ditto 8 Decem. 1784 7
Fry, George
Fryer, Catherine, alias Prior
Fraser, William Manchester Jan. 1787 7
Fraser, Ellen Ditto Jan. 1787 7
Fuller, John Ditto 15 March, 1784 7
Gardner, Francis London 21 April, 1784 7
Garth, Edward Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Garland, Francis Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Garth, Susannah, alias Grath
Gabel, Mary Southwark 13 Jan. 1784 7
Gascoygne, Olive Worcester 5 March, 1785 7
Gearing, Thomas Oxford 8 March, 1786 Life
Gess, George Glocester 24 March, 1784 7
George, Anne London 11 May, 1785 7
Glenton, Thomas Northallerton 5 April, 1785 7
Gloster, William London 29 June, 1785 7
Gordon, Daniel Winchester 5 April, 1785 7
Goodwin, Edward London 21 April, 1784 7
Goodwin, Andrew Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Gould, John Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Gray, Charles Southwark 16 Feb. 1785 7
Griffiths, Samuel, alias Briscow, alias Butcher Gloucester 24 March, 1784 7
Greenwell, Nicholas London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Green, John Reading 11 July, 1786 7
Griffiths, Thomas London 15 Septem. 1784 7
Granger, Charles Plymouth 20 Decem. 1786 7
Grace, James
Green, Hannah
Groves, Mary Lincoln 9 July, 1785 7
Green, Mary London 18 August, 1787 7
Green, Ann Ditto 13 Decem. 1786 7
Greenwood, Mary Ditto 13 Decem. 1786 7
Gunter, William Bristol 4 August, 1783 7
Handford, John Winchester 1 March, 1785 7
Hatcher, John Ditto 1 March, 1785 7
Hatfield, William Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Hawkes, Richard Reading 28 July, 1785 7
Harris, William Maidstone 11 July, 1785 7
Hatch, John Reading 10 Jan. 1786 7
Hartley, John Oxford 2 March, 1785 7
Hart, John Stafford 27 July, 1785 7
Haines, Joseph Gloucester 13 July, 1785 7
Hathaway, Henry Ditto 24 March, 1784 7
Hayes, Dennis London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Hall, Samuel Ditto 12 March, 1785 7
Harbine, Joseph
Harper, Joshua London 10 Septem. 1783 7
Hayton, George, alias Clayton Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Harrison, Joseph Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Hart, John Ditto 12 Jan. 1785 7
Harris, John Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Hayes, John Guildford 11 August, 1784 7
Hattom, Joseph
Harrison, Joseph
Hamlin, William Exeter 12 Jan. 1784 7
Hall, Joseph Ditto 12 Jan. 1784 Life
Hall, John Ditto 24 May, 1784 7
Hadon, John Ditto
Hares, William
Handy, Cooper
Haynes, William
Hervey, Elizabeth
Hall, Margaret
Hart, Frances
Harrison, Mary Lincoln 6 March, 1784 7
Heading, James Chelmsford 7 March, 1785 Life
Headington, Thomas Abingdon 7 July, 1785 7
Herbert, John London 21 April, 1784 7
Hart, Catherine Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Herbert, John Exeter 14 March, 1786 7
Handland, Dorothy, alias Gray London 22 Feb. 1786 7
Hall, Sarah Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Hamilton, Maria Ditto 19 October, 1785 7
Harrison, Mary Ditto 19 October, 1785 7
Harwood, Esther, alias Howard Ditto 20 August, 1786 7
Hayward, Elizabeth Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Hall, Elizabeth Newcastle 18 Jan. 1786 7
Herbert, Jane, alias Rose, alias Jenny Russell London 30 August, 1786 7
Henry, Catherine Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Hill, John Maidstone 14 March, 1785 Life
Hindley, William, alias Platt Ormskirk 18 July, 1785 7
Hindle, Ottiwell Preston 6 Oct. 1785 7
Hill, John London 6 May, 1784 7
Hill, Thomas Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Hilt, William Exeter 18 July, 1785 Life
Hill, Thomas 7
Hipsley, Elizabeth London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Hill, Mary Ditto 25 Oct. 1786 7
Hollister, Job Bristol 10 Feb. 1785 7
Hawell, Thomas Stafford 5 Oct. 1785 7
Holmes, William London 7 July, 1784 7
Holloway, James Ditto 24 Aug. 1784 7
Howard, Thomas Ditto 12 Jan. 1785 7
Hogg, William Ditto 23 Feb. 1786 14
Howard, John Ditto 23 July, 1783 7
Hortop, James Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Holland, William Ditto 7 August, 1786 7
Holmes, Susannah
Hollogin, Elizabeth London 18 April, 1787 7
Hughes, Hugh Southwark 16 Feb. 1785 7
Humphrey, Edward London 8 Decem. 1784 7
Husband, William Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Hughes, John Maidstone 15 March, 1784 7
Hurley, Jeremiah Exeter 22 July, 1782 7
Hubbard, William
Humphreys, Henry Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Hughes, Thomas
Hudson, John
Hussey, James
Hughes, Frances Ann Lancaster 6 March, 1787 7
Hussnell, Susannah Worcester 2 Oct. 1786 7
Humphries, Mary
Hylids, Thomas Guildford 1 Aug. 1784 7
Jackson, William Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Jacobs, David London 20 Oct. 1784 7
Jacobs, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Jackson, Hannah Bristol 27 July, 1785 7
Jameson, James
Jackson, Jane, alias Esther Roberts London 29 June, 1785 7
Jackson, Mary Ditto 20 August, 1786 7
Jeffries, Robert Devizes 5 April, 1785 7
Jefferies, John Maidstone 11 July, 1785 7
Jenkins, Robert, alias Brown Ditto 13 March, 1786 7
Jepp, John London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Jenkins, William Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Ingram, Benjamin London 8 Decem. 1784 7
Inett, Ann Worcester 11 March, 1786 7
Jones, Francis Winchester 12 July, 1785 7
Jones, Thomas Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Johnson, Charles Manchester 14 April, 1785 7
Jones, Edward London 15 Septem. 1784 7
Josephs, Thomas Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 7
Johnson, William Kingston 24 March, 1784 7
Johns, Stephen Launceston 25 March, 1786 7
Jones, Margaret Ditto 8 March, 1783 14
Johnson, Edward Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Jones, John Exeter 24 May, 1784 14
Jones, William Shrewsbury 12 March, 1785 7
Jones, Richard Ditto 4 August, 1784 7
Jones, Thomas Bristol 30 March, 1784 14
Johnson, Catherine London 18 April, 1787 7
Johnson, Mary Ditto 26 April, 1786 7
Irvine, John, alias Aderson, alias Law Lincoln 6 March, 1784 7
Kelly, Thomas Pontefract 13 Jan. 1785 7
Kellan, John, alias Keeling London 10 Septem. 1783 Life
Kennedy, Martha Kingston 2 April, 1787 7
Kidney, Thomas Bristol 20 Oct. 1783 7
Kilby, William Reading 16 Jan. 1784 7
King, John London 21 April, 1784 7
Kilpack, David Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 Life
Kimberley, Edward Coventry 20 March, 1783 7
Knowler, John Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Knowland, Andrew
Lankey, David London 26 May, 1784 7
Lane, Richard Winchester 2 March, 1784 7
Lawrell, John Bodmin 18 August, 1783 7
Lane, William Chelmsford 8 July, 1784 7
Larne, James Exeter 12 July, 1785 7
Lambeth, John Bristol 31 May, 1785 7
Lavell, Henry
Lara, Flora London
Laycock, Carolina Ditto
Langley, Jane Ditto 14 Sept. 1785 7
Lawrence, Mary Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Lemon, Isaac Chelmsford 7 March, 1785 7
Levy, Joseph London 6 May, 1784 7
Leary, John Winchester 3 March, 1783 7
Legg, George Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Leary, Jeremiah Bristol 30 March, 1784 14
Legrove, Stephen
Lee, Elizabeth London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Lewis, Sophia Ditto 25 Oct. 1786 7
Leonard, Elizabeth Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Levy, Amelia Southwark 9 Jan. 1787 7
List, George, London 10 Septem. 1783 Life
Limeburner, John New Sarum 9 July, 1785 7
Limpus, Thomas Exeter 24 May, 1784 Life
Lightfoot, Samuel Ditto 14 March, 1786 7
Longstreet, Joseph Marlborough 5 Oct. 1784 7
Long, Joseph Glocester 23 March, 1785 14
Lockley, John London 10 Jan. 1787 7
Long, Mary Ditto 21 Feb. 1787 Life
Love, Mary Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Lock, Elizabeth Gloucester 26 March, 1783 7
Lucas, Nathaniel London 7 July, 1784 7
Lynch, Humphry New Sarum 25 March, 1785 7
Lynch, Ann Bristol 20 March, 1786 14
Lyde, John
May, Richard New Sarum 25 March, 1785 7
Martin, Stephen Bristol 28 April, 1783 7
Mansfield, John Chelmsford 6 March, 1786 7
M'Lean, Francis Guildford 11 August, 1784 7
M'Lean, Thomas Ditto 11 August, 1784 7
Maton, Thomas Maidstone 11 July, 1785 7
M'Donnaugh, James Ditto 11 July, 1785 7
Mariner, William Oxford 8 March, 1786 7
Marrott, John Gloucester 24 March, 1784 7
M'Laughlin, Charles Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Macintire, John Ditto 19 July, 1785 7
Martin, John London 3 July, 1782 7
M'Donald, Alexander Ditto 10 Decem. 1784 7
Marney, William Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Marshall, Joseph Ditto 21 April, 1784 14
M'Lean, Edward Maidstone 15 March, 1784 7
Martin, Abraham New Sarum 11 March, 1786 7
Martin, Thomas Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Martyn, James Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
M'Cormick, Sarah Manchester 4 May, 1786 7
M'Cormack, Mary Liverpool 12 Aug. 1784 7
Mason, Betty Gloucester 23 March, 1785 14
M'Grah, Redman
M'Deed, Richard
M'Na Mar, William
Mackrie, James
Marriott, Jane London 18 April, 1787 7
Mather, Ann Ditto 18 April, 1787 7
Mather, Mather Ditto 18 April, 1787 7
Mason, Susannah, alias Gibbs Ditto
M'Cabe, Eleanor Ditto 11 May, 1785 7
Marshall, Mary Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Marshall, Mary Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Martin, Ann Southwark 9 Jan. 1787 7
Meynell, John, alias William Radford Nottingham 10 March, 1785 7
Messiah, Jacob
Meech, Jane, wife of William Meech Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Milton, Charles Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Midgley, Samuel Lancaster 22 March, 1785 7
Middleton, Richard London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Mitchell Nathaniel Dorchester 3 August, 1786 7
Mills Matthew
Mitchcraft, Mary Kingston 2 April, 1787 7
Mitchell, Mary Ditto 3 Oct. 1785 7
Morris, Peter Bristol 12 July, 1784 7
Mowbray, John Lincoln 5 March, 1785 7
Morgan, Richard Glocester 23 March, 1785 7
Morrisby, John London 7 July, 1784 7
Moore, William Ditto 21 Jan. 1785 7
Morley, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Moorin, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Morgan, Robert Ditto 6 May, 1784 7
Mobbs, Samuel Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Morgan, William Ditto 15 Septem. 1784 7
Mould, William Guildford 11 August, 1784 7
Mollands, John Launceston 20 March, 1784 7
Moyle, Edward Ditto 19 March, 1785 7
Mood, Charles
Mortimore, John Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Morley, Joseph
Morton, Mary London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Mullock, Jesse New Sarum 25 March, 1785 7
Murphy, William Liverpool 26 Jan. 1785 7
Munroe, John, alias Nurse London 21 April, 1784 7
Mullis, Stephen Exeter 12 Jan. 1785 7
Murphy, James 7
Munro, Lydia Kingston 2 April, 1787 14
Mullens, Hannah London 10 Jan. 1787 Life
Nettleton, Robert Kingston upon Hull 12 October, 1784 7
Newland, John London 21 April, 1784 7
Neal, John Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Neal, James Bristol 10 Feb. 1785 7
Needham, Elizabeth London 19 July, 1786 7
Nicholls, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Norton, Phebe Ditto 25 Oct. 1786 7
Nunn, Robert Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
O'Craft, John Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Ogden, James Manchester 20 Jan. 1785 7
Okey, William Gloucester 24 March, 1784 7
Oldfield, Thomas Manchester 20 July, 1786 7
Oldfield, Isabella Ditto 20 July, 1786 7
Opley, Peter Maidstone 13 March, 1786 7
Orford, Thomas London 7 July, 1784 7
Osborne, Thomas Ditto 14 Decem. 1784 7
Osborne, Elizabeth, alias Jones Ditto 30 August, 1786 7
Owles, John Croydon 20 July, 1785 7
Owen, John London 10 Septem. 1783 7
Owen, Joseph Shrewsbury 12 March, 1785 14
Page, Paul Lincoln 11 March, 1786 7
Pane, William Nottingham 10 March, 1785 7
Parry, Edward Stafford 27 July, 1785 7
Parr, William Liverpool 17 Jan. 1785 7
Palmer, John Herry London 10 Jan. 1786 7
Parker, John Ditto 1 April, 1784 7
Parish, William Ditto 20 Oct. 1784 7
Partridge, Richard Ditto 10 Sep. 1783 Life
Parris, Peter Exeter 17 March, 1783 7
Paget, Joseph Ditto 10 Jan. 1786 7
Parkinson, Jane, alias Partington, alias Ann Marsden Manchester 21 July, 1785 7
Parker, Elizabeth Gloucester 23 March, 1785 7
Parsley, Ann London 21 Feb. 1787 7
Parker, Mary Ditto 26 April, 1786 7
Partridge, Sarah, alias Roberts Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Parry, Sarah Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 Life
Perrot, Edward Bearcroft Bristol 3 Feb. 1785 7
Petrie, John London 14 Jan. 1784 7
Peyton, Samuel Ditto 26 May, 1785 7
Percival, Richard Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Pettitt, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Peaulet, James Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Peet, Charles Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Peck, Joshua Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Perkins, Edward Plymouth 26 Jan. 1785 7
Petherick, John Plymouth 26 Jan. 1785 7
Penny, John 7
Phillimore, William London 10 Sept. 1783 7
Phillips, Richard Ditto 10 Decem. 1783 7
Phillips, Mary Taunton 30 March, 1786 7
Phyfield, Roger, alias Twyfield Shrewsbury 12 March, 1785 7
Phyn, Mary London 14 Septem. 1785 7
Pigott, Samuel Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Pinder, Mary Lincoln 13 Jan. 1787 7
Pipkin, Elizabeth London 7
Piles, Mary Ditto 6 April, 1785 7
Pope, David Southwark 16 Feb. 1785 7
Power, John London 14 Decem. 1786 7
Pontie, John Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Poole, Jane Wells 19 August, 1786 7
Power, William
Powley, Elizabeth
Powell, Ann London 13 Decem. 1786 7
Price, John Southwark 16 Feb. 1785 7
Prior, Thomas Reading 16 Jan. 1784 7
Price, James Gloucester 13 July, 1785 7
Pritchard, Thomas
Pugh, Edward Gloucester 5 Oct. 1784 7
Randall, John Manchester 14 April, 1785 7
Reymond, George London 12 Jan. 1785 7
Ramsey, John Kingston 24 March, 1784 7
Repeat, Charles Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Read, William Croydon 18 August, 1783 7
Reardon, Bartholemew Winchester 15 July, 1783 7
Read, Ann London 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Risdale, Thomas, alias Crowder Bristol 29 March, 1785 Life
Richard, James East Grinstead 20 March, 1786 7
Richardson, James Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Risby, Edward Gloucester 24 March, 1784 7
Richardson, William London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Richardson, Hardwicke Ditto 25 Oct. 1785 7
Richardson, John Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Richard, David Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Richardson, Samuel Ditto 15 Septem. 1784 7
Rickson, William Chelmsford 8 July, 1784 7
Richards, John, alias Williams Winchester 2 March, 1784 7
Richard, James Launceston 25 March, 1786 7
Rice, John Exeter 18 July, 1785 7
Rope, Anthony Chelmsford 7 March, 1785 7
Rogers, Daniel Croydon 20 July, 1785 7
Robinson, George Lincoln 9 July, 1785 7
Rogers, Isaac Gloucester 23 March, 1785 14
Robinson, Thomas Kingston upon Hull 7 Oct. 1784 7
Robert, John Liverpool 26 Jan. 1785 7
Robinson, George London 21 April, 1784 7
Romain, John, Ditto 15 Septem. 1784 7
Rowe, John Launceston 19 March, 1785 7
Rowe, William Ditto 19 March, 1785 7
Roberts, William Bodmin 14 August, 1786 7
Robinson, William Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Roach, Henry Ditto 24 May, 1784 7
Robins, John, alias Major Ditto 18 July, 1785 7
Rous, Walton, alias Batley
Rolt, Mary London
Rosson, Isabella Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Russel, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Ruglass, John Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Russler, John Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Ruce, James Bodmin 29 July, 1782 7
Ruth, Robert Exeter 14 March, 1786 7
Ryan, John
Saltmarsh, William Kingston 28 March, 1785 7
Sanderson, Thomas Lincoln 9 July, 1785 7
Sands, William Ditto 9 July, 1785 7
Sampson, Peter London 7 July, 1784 7
Sandlin, Ann, alias Lynes, alias Pattens Ditto 13 Decem. 1786 7
Scattergood, Robert Stafford 6 Oct. 1785 7
Scott, Elizabeth London 21 Feb. 1787 7
Selshire, Samuel Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Seymour, John Sherborne 25 April, 1786 7
Shearman, William Reading 7 Oct. 1785 7
Shaw, Joseph Stafford 27 July, 1785 7
Shepherd, Robert Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Sharpe, George Ditto 19 July, 1785 7
Shore, William Lancaster 22 March, 1785 7
Shore, John
Shiers, James London 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Silverthorn, John New Sarum 6 March, 1784 7
Sideway, Robert
Slater, Sarah London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Smart, Richard Gloucester 10 Jan. 1786 7
Smart, Daniel Ditto 10 Jan. 1786 7
Smith, Thomas Lancaster 22 March, 1785 7
Smith, William Liverpool 26 Jan. 1785 7
Smith, Edward London 15 Oct. 1784 7
Smith, William Ditto 10 April, 1783 7
Smith, Thomas, alias Haynes Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Smith, James Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Smith, John Guildford 11 August, 1784 7
Smith, William Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7
Smith, Ann, wife of John Smith Winchester 1 March, 1785 7
Smith, Hannah Ditto 5 April, 1785 7
Smith, William Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Smith, Edward Exeter 14 March, 1786 7
Smith, John Ditto 14 March, 1786 7
Small, John Ditto 14 March, 1786 7
Smith, Ann London 18 April, 1787 7
Smith, Catherine Ditto 18 April, 1787 7
Smith, Ann Ditto 30 August, 1786 7
Smith, Catherine Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Smith, Mary Ditto 10 Jan. 1787 7
Snaleham, William Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Sparks, Henry
Spencer, Daniel Dorchester 3 August, 1786 14
Spencer, John, alias Pearce
Spence, Mary Wigan Jan. 1786 5
Sprigmore, Charlotte London 19 August, 1785 7
Springham, Mary Ditto 25 October, 1786 7
Squires, James Kingston 11 April, 1785 7
Stanley, William New Sarum 25 March, 1785 7
Strong, James Dorchester 10 March, 1784 7
Stow, James Lincoln 9 July, 1785 7
Stone, Martin Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Stokee, John Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Stone, Charles London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Stone, Henry Ditto 10 Decem. 1784 7
Stogdell, John Ditto 20 Decem. 1784 14
Stuart, James Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Stanton, Thomas, alias Ebden Launceston 20 March, 1784 7
Stephens, John Morris Dorchester 16 March, 1786 7
Stewart, Margaret Exeter 28 August, 1786 7
Strech, Thomas Shrewsbury 16 August, 1783 7
Summers, John Gloucester 13 July, 1784 7
Taylor, Joshua Manchester 14 Oct. 1784 7
Taylor, Henry
Taylor, Sarah Kingston 2 April, 1787 7
Tenant, Thomas Hilton, alias Phillip Divine Chelmsford 6 March, 1786 7
Teague, Cornelius Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7
Tenchall, James, alias Tenninghill
Thompson, William Durham 19 July, 1785 7
Thomas, James London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Thompson, James Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Thomas, James Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 7
Thomas, John Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Thompson, William Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Thackery, Elizabeth Manchester 4 May, 1786 7
Thoudy, James
Thomas, Elizabeth Wigan Jan. 1787 7
Thornton, Ann London 13 Decem. 1786 7
Tunmins, Thomas Warwick 21 March, 1785 7
Tilley, Thomas Stafford 27 July, 1785 7
Till, Thomas London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Todd, Nicholas Ditto 21 April, 1784 7
Trotter, Joseph Maidstone 13 March, 1786 7
Trace, John Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Trippett, Susannah London 20 August, 1786 7
Turner, Ralph Manchester 14 April, 1785 7
Tuso, Joseph London 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Turner, John
Tucker, Moses Plymouth 7 June, 1786 7
Turner, Thomas
Turner, John
Turner, Mary Worcester 5 March, 1785 7
Twyneham, William Reading 10 Jan. 1786 7
Twyfield, Ann, since said to be married to William Dawley,
a convict Shrewsbury 4 August, 1784 7
Tyrrell, William Winchester 1 March, 1785 7
Vandell, Edward East Grinstead 22 March, 1784 7
Vincent, Henry London 21 April, 1784 7
Vickery, William Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Underwood, James New Sarum 11 March, 1786 14
Usher, John Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Waterhouse, William Kingston 28 March, 1785 7
Watsan, John Maidstone 13 March, 1786 7
Ward, John Lowth 11 July, 1786 7
Wall, William Oxford 8 March, 1786 7
Wager, Benjamin London 20 Oct. 1784 7
Walsh, William Ditto 15 Septem. 1784 7
Walker, John Ditto 20 Oct. 1784 7
Walbourne, James Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 7
Watson, Thomas Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Ware, Charlottee
Watkins, Mary
Wainwright, Ellen, alias Estther Eccles Preston Jan. 1787 7
Ward, Ann London 19 Decem. 1786 7
Wade, Mary, alias Cacklane Ditto 19 July, 1786 14
Welch, James Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Welch, John Durham 19 July, 1785 7
West, Benjamin London 10 Decem. 1784 7
Westwood, John Ditto 20 October, 1784 7
Welch, John Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Welch, John Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 Life
Westlale, Edward Exeter 20 March, 1786 7
Waddicomb, Richard Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Wheeler, Samuel Croydon 20 July, 1785 7
Whitaker, George Maidstone 14 March, 1785 7
Whiting, William Gloucester 23 March, 1785 7
Whitton, Edward Maidstone 10 March, 1783 Life
White, James Ditto 11 August, 1783 7
Wilcocks, Samuel Dorcester 10 March, 1784 7
Wilton, William Bristol 12 Jan. 1784 7
Wilson, Peter Manchester 20 Jan. 1785 7
Wilson, John Wigan 10 Oct. 1785 7
Williams, Charles London 7 July, 1784 7
Williams, James Ditto 11 May, 1785 7
Wilson, Charles Ditto 10 Septem. 1783 Life
Williams, John, alias Black Jack Maidstone 2 August, 1784 7
Williams, Robert Launceston 25 March, 1786 7
Williams, John, alias Floyd Bodmin 18 August, 1783 7
Wilding, John, alias Warren Bury 23 March, 1784 7
Wickham, Mary New Sarum 2 August, 1788 14
Williams, Peter, alias Flaggett, alias Creamer Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Wilcocks, Richard Ditto 20 March, 1786 7
Williams, John Ditto 7 August, 1786 7
Wisehammer, John Bristol 10 Feb. 1785 7
Williams, Daniel Preston 23 March, 1785 7
Williams, Frances Mold 2 Septem. 1783 7
Williams, Mary London 22 Feb. 1786 7
Wood, George Ditto 20 Oct. 1784 7
Woodcock, Peter Ditto 7 July, 1784 7
Woodham, Samuel Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 Life
Worsdell, William Launceston 22 March, 1783 7
Woolcot, John Exeter 18 July, 1785 Life
Woodcock, Francis Shrewsbury 13 March, 1784 7
Wood, Mark
Wright, Thomas Reading 28 Feb. 1785 7
Wright, Benjamin London 6 May, 1784 7
Wright, Joseph Ditto 26 May, 1784 7
Wright, William Ditto 15 Sept. 1783 7
Wright, James Maidstone 11 August, 1783 7
Wright, Ann London 23 Feb. 1785 7
Yardsley, Thomas, Shrewsbury 4 August, 1784 7
Yates, Nancy York 9 July, 1785 7
Young, John London 20 Oct. 1784 7
Young, Simon Ditto 23 Feb. 1785 7
Youngson, Elizabeth Lancaster 6 March, 1787 7
Youngson, George Ditto 6 March, 1787 7



http://gutenberg.net.au/pga-australia.jpg

[Wulfhere]

While its earliest boundaries will never be known, there is general agreement that the territory that was called "the first of the Mercians" in the Tribal Hidage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_Hidage) covered much of south Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and Northern Warwickshire[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercia#cite_note-2)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercia#cite_note-3)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercia#cite_note-4).
The earliest king of Mersin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monarchs_of_Mercia) of whom any details are known is Creola (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creoda_of_Mercia)(Creol), said to have been the great-grandson of Icel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icel_of_Mercia)(Mersin province in Turkey) Coming to power around 584, he built a fortress at Fokolworth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamworth) which became the seat of Mersin/Turkey kings.


Are you Black ???????


Are you talking complete crap? The name "Mersin" doesn't even sound that much like "Mercia" (Mierce in Old English, pronounced something like "march"). The Mercians were Angles, from Angeln in Schleswig-Holstein.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

Are you talking complete crap? The name "Mersin" doesn't even sound that much like "Mercia" (Mierce in Old English, pronounced something like "march"). The Mercians were Angles, from Angeln in Schleswig-Holstein.

Hahahahaha.You are funny you mean you are an old fashioned angler.
http://www.sumedh.info/pictures/deep-sea/hairy-angler.png

[Bridie]

Here is a list
.................
One list out of... what? 50 or more?

[Wulfhere]

Here's a true story. On a whim, a friend of mine went into the Australian High Commission in London to enquire about emigrating there. They asked him if he had a criminal record, and he replied, "I didn't know you still needed one." They terminiated the interview. Do they have no sense of humour?

[Bridie]

Here's a true story. On a whim, a friend of mine went into the Australian High Commission in London to enquire about emigrating there. They asked him if he had a criminal record, and he replied, "I didn't know you still needed one." They terminiated the interview. Do they have no sense of humour?
Bah! That's not a true story! I've heard that joke before. ;)

[Wyn]

I have never actually met an Irish person who would wish to see this. And I would be surprised to, not least because of the fact that our figurative ship is sinking at an even faster rate than theirs, regardless of history. Then again, a population that actually desired to be in some way associated with this glorified gangster's party would probably deserve all that came with it.

[Oinakos Growion]

And your delusions have taken you so far as to go to Ireland and think you can speak on their behalf. Well, you can't.
I know how they think, breath and what they want. Mine is a very well informed opinion from the inside. Only a full Irish person, living and working here, could discuss such things with me simply because we'd have the same references and know they fine details present in daily life.
You are not.
If anything this is a "foreigner to foreigner" reflection on Irish issues, and it wouldn't matter where we are from, until an Irish person came and shared his/her thoughts with us.


ANd... I'm of Irish stock with the passport. I am broadly in favour of it too
But you identify yourself as English... That alone in the eyes of many here would automatically make you "English" forever ;)
Still, if you'd like to see Ireland as a British dominion you're invited to come over and start campaigning. Again, you'll see the reaction.


And Galicians/Spaniards is NOTHING comparable with English/Scots! :rolleyes2: More like Cumbrians/English
You probably know better than I do... :rolleyes:


This is the problem with the internet: People talk about things they read or overhear, ignoring the obvious.
The obvious fact is that the overwhelming majority of Irish people in the Republic of Ireland do not want Britain any closer than it is. And they do get along fine with Brits, mind you (within reason). Come here and ask.
And since it has been mentioned: The obvious fact is that the differences/similarities between Galicia and its neighbours are more enough to recognise Galicia as a "historical nation" on its own even according with Spanish law. We don't even speak the same language ffs. It is obvious to the naked eye just by taking a look at the landscape and seeing how people live and organise themselves. We have our President, Parliament, High Court of Justice... We have a political status that Scotland could only dream for. Go there and see and spot the differences between Galicia and, for example, Castile.

What's next? Estonians were all bloody Russians after all? The Balkans went to war because they were bored? China and Mongolia should unite because they're all "yellow" and probably is all the same thing? What's that crap with all those Nordic countries? They all are blonde and look the same to me... let's put them together and employ them all at Nokia and Ikea. Oh, let's give Greece back to Turkey because they drink the same coffee after all and kebabs and gyros look strangely similar? (don't tell the Greeks though)...

[Wulfhere]

I know how they think, breath and what they want. Mine is a very well informed opinion from the inside. Only a full Irish person, living and working here, could discuss such things with me simply because we'd have the same references and know they fine details present in daily life.
You are not.
If anything this is a "foreigner to foreigner" reflection on Irish issues, and it wouldn't matter where we are from, until an Irish person came and shared his/her thoughts with us.


But you identify yourself as English... That alone in the eyes of many here would automatically make you "English" forever ;)
Still, if you'd like to see Ireland as a British dominion you're invited to come over and start campaigning. Again, you'll see the reaction.


You probably know better than I do... :rolleyes:


This is the problem with the internet: People talk about things they read or overhear, ignoring the obvious.
The obvious fact is that the overwhelming majority of Irish people in the Republic of Ireland do not want Britain any closer than it is. And they do get along fine with Brits, mind you (within reason). Come here and ask.
And since it has been mentioned: The obvious fact is that the differences/similarities between Galicia and its neighbours are more enough to recognise Galicia as a "historical nation" on its own even according with Spanish law. We don't even speak the same language ffs. It is obvious to the naked eye just by taking a look at the landscape and seeing how people live and organise themselves. We have our President, Parliament, High Court of Justice... We have a political status that Scotland could only dream for. Go there and see and spot the differences between Galicia and, for example, Castile.

What's next? Estonians were all bloody Russians after all? The Balkans went to war because they were bored? China and Mongolia should unite because they're all "yellow" and probably is all the same thing? We should give Greece back to Turkey because they drink the same coffee after all and kebabs and gyros look strangely similar? (don't tell the Greeks though)...

The really embarrassing thing about all this is the fact that your ridiculous claim to be a Celt makes you side with the Irish, when in fact they're probably laughing at you behind your back.

[Bridie]

The really embarrassing thing about all this is the fact that your ridiculous claim to be a Celt makes you side with the Irish, when in fact they're probably laughing at you behind your back.There's no need for that. Grow up Wulfhere.

[Oinakos Growion]

The really embarrassing thing about all this is the fact that your ridiculous claim to be a Celt makes you side with the Irish, when in fact they're probably laughing at you behind your back.
The really embarrassing thing is that after a rationalization of facts all you do is bark.

And I'm not taking sides. I'm saying how things are as I see them and hear them on a daily basis. I could start a deep criticism on Ireland and how things work here, but I only do that with Irish people, face to face, because it's an internal and "private" matter. They're happy to hear my input by the way, they ask for it, that is why I am here and why they pay me. Nobody is laughing.

[poiuytrewq0987]

The really embarrassing thing is that after a rationalization of facts all you do is bark.

And I'm not taking sides. I'm saying how things are as I see them and hear them on a daily basis. I could start a deep criticism on Ireland and how things work here, but I only do that with Irish people, face to face, because it's an internal and "private" matter. They're happy to hear my input by the way, they ask for it, that is why I am here and why they pay me. Nobody is laughing.

Don't worry, he's an idiot with a complex. ;)

[Wulfhere]

There's no need for that. Grow up Wulfhere.

I know the Irish far better than he appears to (Birmingham is full of them, and I often frequent their pubs), and I know what they're like. They do indeed mock very mercilessly any such claims of kinship and ancestry.

[Murphy]

Growion, without meaning to offend.. I personally think you're stretching a little.

[Oinakos Growion]

I know the Irish far better than he appears to (Birmingham is full of them, and I often frequent their pubs), and I know what they're like
LOL

I know the Chinese well. Any city in Europe is full of them. I often frequent their restaurants. I know what they're like. They all dismiss eating dogs and cats and blame it on the Koreans.

Edit:

Growion, without meaning to offend.. I personally think you're stretching a little.
As I said, all I say is always based on first hand personal experience and observation.
And yes, I make points vehemently and use extreme examples in the hope that it'll make things clear by confronting people with the absurd.
Sometimes it's understood sometimes it's not. Oh well :)

[Bridie]

I know the Irish far better than he appears to (Birmingham is full of them, and I often frequent their pubs), and I know what they're like. They do indeed mock very mercilessly any such claims of kinship and ancestry.Wulfhere, the Irish mercilessly mock just about everyone and everything, pretty much like the English (and the Australians, for that matter) do. It's all just for a laugh. But I'm sure you know that already.

There's no need to try to humiliate Oinakos when his heart is in the right place.

[Wulfhere]

Wulfhere, the Irish mercilessly mock just about everyone and everything, pretty much like the English (and the Australians, for that matter) do. It's all just for a laugh. But I'm sure you know that already.

There's no need to try to humiliate Oinakos when his heart is in the right place.

That's the thing you see, because I think he's heading for a fall, if he really believes himself to be a Celt. He doesn't act, think or talk like a Celt, and apparently doesn't understand their sense of humour or anything at all.

[Murphy]

Personally, I have no time for being "Celtic".

[Oinakos Growion]

No, I'm Chinese, told ya in the other post.

[Wyn]

Personally, I have no time for being "Celtic".

The concept of meta-ethnicity is something that gets "overdone" on forums. In the real world it is very rare to see individuals from different ethnicities identify with one another based on a perceived Celticness, Germanicness, or whatever. The only time I have witnessed something close to this was a friend of mine who said that "we [the Irish] like them [the Scots] because they're Celtic" to paraphrase somewhat. She is a republican from South Armagh, if you're interested.

[The Khagan]

The concept of meta-ethnicity is something that gets "overdone" on forums. In the real world it is very rare to see individuals from different ethnicities identify with one another based on a perceived Celticness, Germanicness, or whatever. The only time I have witnessed something close to this was a friend of mine who said that "we [the Irish] like them [the Scots] because they're Celtic" to paraphrase somewhat. She is a republican from South Armagh, if you're interested.

Well, the case for the Slavs... then again, most of that was manipulative political garbage.

Most post-Celtic peoples are about as Celtic as a German anyway, ie; not very.

[Jack B]

Nah let's not :)

[Osweo]

I thinned out the list for Cornish names and Cornish locations;
Arscott, John Bodmin 18 August, 1783 7

Bryant, Thomas Maidstone 15 March, 1784 7
Bryant, William Launceston 20 March, 1784 7

Bryant, John Ditto 14 March, 1786 7

Bryant, Michael

Carty, Francis Bodmin 14 August, 1786 7

Connolly, William Bodmin 14 August, 1786 7

Cudlip, Jacob, alias Norris Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7

Discall, Timothy Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7

Johns, Stephen Launceston 25 March, 1786 7
Jones, Margaret Ditto 8 March, 1783 14

Lawrell, John Bodmin 18 August, 1783 7

Larne, James Exeter 12 July, 1785 7

Limpus, Thomas Exeter 24 May, 1784 Life

Mollands, John Launceston 20 March, 1784 7
Moyle, Edward Ditto 19 March, 1785 7

Petherick, John Plymouth 26 Jan. 1785 7

Richard, James Launceston 25 March, 1786 7

Rowe, John Launceston 19 March, 1785 7
Rowe, William Ditto 19 March, 1785 7
Roberts, William Bodmin 14 August, 1786 7

Roach, Henry Exeter 24 May, 1784 7
Robins, John, alias Major Ditto 18 July, 1785 7

Ruce, James Bodmin 29 July, 1782 7

Smith, William Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7

Stanton, Thomas, alias Ebden Launceston 20 March, 1784 7

Teague, Cornelius Bodmin 25 July, 1785 7

Williams, Robert Launceston 25 March, 1786 7
Williams, John, alias Floyd Bodmin 18 August, 1783 7

Worsdell, William Launceston 22 March, 1783 7

Interestingly, the Cornish DO seem over-represented in number! Thanks for the lead on this, Bridie, and the data, Kleitrapper! (Did you find it while looking up Mary Bryant? Her surname is here a lot)

Perhaps there were some specific agricultural riots in these few years in Cornwall... :chin:

OH, AND LOOK AT THIS!!! I do believe there's a good chance of having found me a relative!!!!!!!!!! :clap: :D
Ogden, James Manchester 20 Jan. 1785 7

My own Great Great Great Grandad was an Ogden from Manchester, born around the 1810s...! I wonder if this James was an uncle or cousin? :thumbs up


One list out of... what? 50 or more?
Sure, but a snapshot, taken at random, CAN be of use in attempting to at least get an idea of wider tendencies.

But you identify yourself as English... That alone in the eyes of many here would automatically make you "English" forever ;)
:p Ah, but I can be flexible you see, chameleon-style... :swl

Still, if you'd like to see Ireland as a British dominion you're invited to come over and start campaigning. Again, you'll see the reaction.
I'd say it was probably too late, sadly. But before 1916 it was an immensely popular idea. I've seen graves from a while later where Irishmen were obstinately putting 'of the Kingdom of Ireland' in their epitaphs. But I fear the propaganda machine has worked all too well in making it too hard to go back. :(


And since it has been mentioned: The obvious fact is that the differences/similarities between Galicia and its neighbours are more enough to recognise Galicia as a "historical nation" on its own even according with Spanish law. We don't even speak the same language ffs. It is obvious to the naked eye just by taking a look at the landscape and seeing how people live and organise themselves.
But there's a continuum between you all in that peninsular down there. You have little unique to yourselves that isn't just a question of degree or proportion. You might talk 'Portuguesey' but you've lived through the same historical story as the rest of the Spanish. Gallegos have a distinct nature, and one recognisable to other Spaniards, but the familiarity of it is a result of the fact that your fates have been so intertwined. Your kin live all over Spain, and have done since the Reconquista. Your very ancestry in the most remote periods is shared with the other peoples of the Peninsula.

'Nation', 'Regional Identity', 'Subethnos' and 'meta-ethnicity' are all part of the same continuum however. Sometimes one word is applied instead of another while this would not apply in a different time or circumstance. Galicia is special, but it cannot be artificially cut off from its environs. That's my simple position on it.

And this applies to Ireland too. It's part of a greater whole, and simplistic 'two-state' solutions don't adequately reflect it. Shared sovereignty solutions are interesting though. We'll have to see how they work out... :strokebeard:

We have our President, Parliament, High Court of Justice... We have a political status that Scotland could only dream for. Go there and see and spot the differences between Galicia and, for example, Castile.
Scotland is pretty analogous in those terms, actually. :confused:

What's next? Estonians were all bloody Russians after all? The Balkans went to war because they were bored? China and Mongolia should unite because they're all "yellow" and probably is all the same thing? What's that crap with all those Nordic countries? They all are blonde and look the same to me... let's put them together and employ them all at Nokia and Ikea. Oh, let's give Greece back to Turkey because they drink the same coffee after all and kebabs and gyros look strangely similar? (don't tell the Greeks though)...
These pairings can't sensibly be put alongside Galician/Castilian. :rolleyes:

[Oinakos Growion]

If I may explain something about some other place in an Irish thread... ;) Just to clarify:


But there's a continuum between you all in that peninsular down there. You have little unique to yourselves that isn't just a question of degree or proportion
That analysis could be applied to an entire continent. From that point of view, in my southerner eyes, there'd be no difference between an Icelandic and a Danish or Swedish or... But I know there are differences. Otherwise we could as well get rid of half the countries and ethnic groups in the planet and start grouping them. If we apply the "perspective factor" we're dammed, because all of us look the same to a Chinese... So much for "preservation" ;)
That's why I wrote those extreme examples about other countries before.


Gallegos have a distinct nature, and one recognisable to other Spaniards, but the familiarity of it is a result of the fact that your fates have been so intertwined. Your kin live all over Spain, and have done since the Reconquista. Your very ancestry in the most remote periods is shared with the other peoples of the Peninsula
hm. Half Argentina and Uruguay are of Galician descent. Blonde people in Brazil were called "Galicians"; in fact Brazilians would called "Galicians" to the Germans who later emigrated there because "they were blonde too" (just expressing how we were seen as a clearly differentiated group).
Galicians in other parts of the Peninsula went there in recent times (1960s emigration) and before that only in one wave of deportations to the south after the Catholic Monarchs got hold of Compostela (late 15thC) (hence some Galician surnames and placenames in some locations of Andalusia). That's about it. Everything else were military operations, rarely inter-marriage. We were, if anything, more an exporter of culture and trends than an importer (and "imports" would rather come straight from the rest of Europe thanks to the St James pilgrimage route) (as an example, if anyone can read Galician, this book (http://openlibrary.org/books/OL2465898M/Gallaecia_scandinavica) is very interesting as it explains the medieval relations between Galicia and Scandinavia)
In fact, Galicia has historically worked as a "cultural island". There's some nice mountains in the East that kept us separated from that side of the Peninsula for centuries. Before there were airplanes, motorways and railways it was easier to sail to Galicia than to walk to it. That's also why the Roman empire took their while to get there and we were only superficially romanised. Castilians wouldn't really like to go westwards either (there be dragons you know). Our natural expansion was always southwards, where our influence would grow (Portugal appears after the independence of the southern Galician county, and the common language starts there). The road eastwards was always related to military activity, as mentioned (that is why, for example, the dominion of the Kingdom of Leon - to the east - would eventually get independent).
Influences from the outside were far from common unless they came by that pilgrimage to Compostela or by sea, and that means a direct link to the rest of Atlantic Europe first and the Americas later.
There's a big name in Spanish anthropology, a guy called Lisón Tolosana - I guess some of this works are translated into English - He's the one who defined Galicians and Galician culture as the most peculiar (in the sense of unique) of the whole Peninsula (over the Basques), precisely because of our isolation.
It is embedded in the Spanish psyche - at least before lowcost flights :P - that Galicia is like the end of the world, a place "up there" where nobody goes and nobody knows what's going on. We've been called everything, from the "Transylvania of the West" to "The Gates of Hell" and "Land of the Witches". From a Romantic point of view South Americans of Galician descent would relate to Galicia the same way the Irish-Americans talk about Ireland (it's actually shocking to read both overseas literature about the "mother land").

With all this I'm trying to explain that we're "intertwined" (as you said) with the rest of the Peninsula in a very particular way. And our culture and ethnic composition can still be clearly distinguished by an impartial observer, or definitely as much or as little as one could tell apart Scotland from England.


Galicia is special, but it cannot be artificially cut off from its environs. That's my simple position on it
Of course. I just mentioned above how our environs might be a bit more complex that just our southern and eastern neighbours ;)
Sailing is what we used to do best :p


Scotland is pretty analogous in those terms, actually
...
These pairings can't sensibly be put alongside Galician/Castilian
Uh, well, I was just trying to exemplify that the dichotomy Galicia/Castile can be easily compared to the Scotland/England and that politically the Galician Parliament has a greater autonomy than the Scottish Parliament (the different laws and powers of each territory can be easily compared); but that was just an example anyway.

I hope this information is useful :) It was a bit longer than expected :D

[Amapola]

]hm. Half Argentina and Uruguay are of Galician descent. Blonde people in Brazil were called "Galicians"; in fact Brazilians would called "Galicians" to the Germans who later emigrated there because "they were blonde too" (just expressing how we were seen as a clearly differentiated group).

Pls, Oinakos, behave here! :D

Half Argentina or even more than a half is made up of people of Italian ancestry, and from other European countries. Then others are Galizians, Asturians and Spaniards in general.

Blondess is not a typical galizian trait, let's say Estonia, ok? but Galician or Iberian?!

Any person that goes to Galicia won't identify you like "blondes". Believe me... :rolleyes: I have been there and I have not been impressed, nor for blonds neither for that peculiar and distinct Celtic trait you like to mention. Every Spanish region has a different flavour, but that means nothing ultimately like Osweo said, we have been too intertwined in Iberia, in every possible aspect: cultural, biological... etc..

[Bridie]

I thinned out the list for Cornish names and Cornish locations;
Interestingly, the Cornish DO seem over-represented in number! Thanks for the lead on this, Bridie, and the data, Kleitrapper! (Did you find it while looking up Mary Bryant? Her surname is here a lot)

Perhaps there were some specific agricultural riots in these few years in Cornwall... :chin:

There were an awful lot of people sentenced in Exeter : http://members.pcug.org.au/~pdownes/dps/1stflt.htm

I watched a documentary not long ago in which it was told that the convicts from Cornwall/Devon were also over-represented in being convicted of petty crimes, such as "being in possession of an illegal book". :D Although, I remain skeptical.

Nevertheless,the ol' justice system was a bit harsh in those days. Personally, I think crime was used as an excuse to cull the English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh populations. (Oh well, at least they didn't put us into gas chambers.:cool:) Sort of like killing two birds with one stone.... getting rid of the "undesirables" and maintaining/strengthening the Empire at the same time! :clap2: Who needs slave labour when you can just use your own people? Wait for the widespread poverty and political and social discontent to kick in, then use the resultant increase in crime rates to the economic benefit of the Empire! You little beauty! That solves the problem of being condemned for using black slaves too!

And then when convict transportation ceases, the British govt can just start using orphaned English children to populate the Empire and keep the money rolling in! Fantastic! Forget sticking kiddies down the coal mines any longer, bung 'em over to Australia, torn from their home environment, friends and everything they've ever known, whack 'em into a Christian Brothers institution and Bob's your uncle! Just sit back and watch the profits start rolling in....

Hard to believe that over 160,000 of such British and Irish people were transported to Australia (not anywhere near that number surviving the journey, of course), not to mention the 10's of 1000's of English orphans.


Anyway, needless to say, Ireland is doing well to keep Britain at as much of a distance as possible.

As a political and economic entity, Britain is, and always has been, corrupt and exploitative.

[Megrez]

Blonde people in Brazil were called "Galicians"; in fact Brazilians would called "Galicians" to the Germans who later emigrated there because "they were blonde too" (just expressing how we were seen as a clearly differentiated group).

Lol, today we call blonde people "alemão" ("german") or "polaco" ("polak").

[Oinakos Growion]

Half Argentina or even more than a half is made up of people of Italian ancestry, and from other European countries. Then others are Galizians, Asturians and Spaniards in general
You sure know well that all Spaniards in Argentina are simply called "Galicians". The vast majority of emigrants coming from Iberia were Galicians (on top of the Italians and Germans, etc). If you go to Argentina you'll be called gallega ;) For instance, if you check the list of names of the Uruguyan football players you'll see more than plenty Galician surnames and so on. There's also quite a handful in Brazil, Venezuela (together with Portuguese) and in Mexico (together with Asturians).
My point is that being Galicia so small in size the social and cultural impact in that part of the world has been enormous. If you want a figure there's still some +330,000 Galicians in Argentina and 53 Galician centres/associations (http://galiciaaberta.com/centros_asociacions/2) (including "non-officials"). No other ethnic group has our numbers there nor is that well organised. No wonder Buenos Aires was called "the fifth province" decades ago (Galicia has four provinces, B.A. was the "fifth").
Someday I'll tell you a funny story about what Galicians would do when arriving in Argentina and with whom they were grouped with... ;)
And everybody knows that the Argentinian accent is a mix between the Galician and Italian way of speaking :D haha (j/k - but it is said!).


we have been too intertwined in Iberia, in every possible aspect: cultural, biological... etc..
As I said, we've been very peculiar about it. Not my words; I'm just referring to what anthropologists say. Their works are there to be read.
Next time you go to Galicia do let me know and I'll take you where the tourists don't go, so you can scratch under the surface :)


Blondess is not a typical galizian trait, let's say Estonia, ok? but Galician or Iberian?!
Not "typical" but not rare. It is indeed decreasing in recent times because of the immigration. It was noticeable in my parents' generation (I have to take their word for that). Obviously not like comparing with Estonia as you say, but still noticeable within Iberian standards. I can still see the difference when I go to eastern Spain and the Balearics.
Furthermore there were third party references to it. Again, it's all written by the South Americans when they saw the Galicians coming.
Not that I worry that much about phenotypes, but I was just providing more further examples anyway.


Lol, today we call blonde people "alemão" ("german") or "polaco" ("polak").
Yep. Today. But along the lines of what I said above "Galician" used to mean "blonde" in the past and, by extension "German" in some areas of the country. Somehow Galician ended up meaning German for the folk there.
Random example; website of the Brazilian "TV Galega" (Galega= Galician (f))
http://www.tvgalega.com.br/hpn/institucional/index.php

"Seu nome - GALEGA - foi inspirado no apelido pelo qual são conhecidas, na região, as mulheres de origem alemã"

"Its name - Galician - was inspired by the nickname given in the region to the women of German origin"

Why? How? Since when? I don't know :) That I'd like to know myself... I'll need some more trips to Brazil to find out :D

[Lulletje Rozewater]

One list out of... what? 50 or more?

He wanted a list of names,so I gave one(See post)
Could be more than 50.......There were about 20.000 prisoners,obviously those names would still appear in Australia

[Lulletje Rozewater]

I thinned out the list for Cornish names and Cornish locations;
Interestingly, the Cornish DO seem over-represented in number! Thanks for the lead on this, Bridie, and the data, Kleitrapper! (Did you find it while looking up Mary Bryant? Her surname is here a lot)

No I was planning to counter act Wulfie on his 'pretense' that Australia had to be thankful for the input on all aspects of Australian life.I googled Australia and prisoners.
I mean Australia "took" their own independence from GB,just like the Afrikaner.That there are roots going back to GB is of no consequence,yet could be interesting. Same for New-Holland etc.
Autralia is an interesting country and a darned side more realistic than GB is at present.
There is no love lost between the English(in South Africa) and me,yet the British history is fascinating.
I have only friends in the Irish , Scottish and Canadian clan. :)
None in the American-Australian and English nationalities.
The Australian should be proud of their achievements without the help of GB.
That they are aligned to the queen is mere tokenism.:)

[Wulfhere]

I mean Australia "took" their own independence from GB,just like the Afrikaner.

No they didn't - every stage in Australian independence was granted, peacefully and legally, by the British parliament. Even as recently as the 1980s, in the Australia Acts, the Australian states had to ask the British parliament to legislate on their behalf.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

No they didn't - every stage in Australian independence was granted, peacefully and legally, by the British parliament. Even as recently as the 1980s, in the Australia Acts, the Australian states had to ask the British parliament to legislate on their behalf.

Wrong.
Australia told Britain what they wanted "legally" and Britain knew bloody well what the consequences were if not granted.(SEE India)

Legally Australia is not independent as yet although they themselves were independent in 1901

Prior to 1901, Australia was made up of six self-governing colonies; New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania. These colonies were ultimately under British rule from the time the First Fleet landed, in 1788, until 1901. Numerous politicians and influential Australians through the years had pushed for federation of the colonies, and self-government. On 22 January 1899, leaders of the six Australian colonies met in Melbourne to discuss a federation bill.

After not being accepted by the states the first time, the amended Commonwealth Constitution was given Royal Assent on 9 July 1900. On 1 January 1901, federation of the colonies was achieved and the Commonwealth of Australia was proclaimed by Australia's first Governor-General, John Hope, at Centennial Park in Sydney. Australia's first Prime Minister was Edmund Barton, who was Prime Minister from January 1901 to September 1903. This gave Australia the right to govern itself.

Although the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia came into effect at Federation, this did not mean that Australia was now independent of Britain. When the UK approved colonial federation, it simply meant that the six self-governing states of Australia allocated some functions to a federal authority. Australia gained the status of a Dominion, which meant it remained a self-governing colony within the British Empire, with the Head of State being the British monarch. The British government appointed Australia's Governor-General and State Governors, who answered to the British government.

All Dominions within the British Empire were declared "equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by a common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations" at the Imperial Conference of 1926. The Statute of Westminster 1931 ratified the discussions of the Imperial Conference. This meant that Australia and other Dominions such as South Africa, New Zealand and Canada could now conduct treaties and agreements with foreign powers, and manage their own military strategies. No longer were the Australian Governor-General, Parliament and individual governors answerable to the UK. The British monarch could only act on the advice of the Australian Government, and the Governor-General was no longer appointed by and answerable to the British monarch.

The defeat of the large British garrison at Singapore in January 1942 came as a very unwelcome shock to the Australian government. It exposed the weakness of Britain and led Australia to seek much closer ties with the US and it was felt that for this the country needed full independence; hence the date for activating the 1931 Statute of Westminster. Australian Parliament formally adopted the Statute of Westminster 1931 under the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942, on 9 October 1942.

Australia reached the next stage of independence on March 3rd 1986, when the Australia Acts came into effect. The Australia Acts declared that Australia had the status of a Sovereign, Independent and Federal Nation. The nation still retains Elizabeth II as head of state, but her position as Australia's head of state is a completely separate position from her position as the head of state of any other country, including the UK. What the Australia Act effectively did was remove the ability of the British Government to make laws for Australia and removed the last legal link with the UK by abolishing the right of appeal to the judicial committee of the Privy Council. Also it was not until 1988 that the last state, Queensland, removed this from their statutes as well.

Some might say Australia is still on a path to independence as they are still technically ruled by the British monarchy, even though that monarchy does not have any right to interfere with Australian laws. There will always be those who disagree with the above, as it could be said that Australia received independence in varying degrees.

Wulfie,get a live GB is just pissing against the odds
and a queen whose power is limited to her Duckies in a row:p
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Queens.guard.buck.palace.arp.jpg

[Wulfhere]

Wrong.
Australia told Britain what they wanted "legally" and Britain knew bloody well what the consequences were if not granted.(SEE India)

Legally Australia is not independent as yet although they themselves were independent in 1901

[etc.]



None of these things were done against the will of the British parliament, but with its active co-operation. India was a very different case, since its population was not British. There was no Australian Gandhi, and the idea is preposterous. It has always been British policy to devolve powers to the settler colonies as soon as practicable.

[Murphy]

In fact if you ask anyone in the streets of Glasgow they'll secretly admit they keep a photo of the Queen under the pillow :)

I'm from Glasgow and I don't have Ol' Lizzy's likeness under my pillow.

[Oinakos Growion]

I'm from Glasgow and I don't have Ol' Lizzy's likeness under my pillow.
No shit... ;) :)

[Jarl]

Lol, today we call blonde people "alemão" ("german") or "polaco" ("polak").

Is "aleman" German in all West Romance languages?

[Oinakos Growion]

Is "aleman" German in all West Romance languages?

Alemão in Galician-Portuguese (different spellings can be found for Galician but it's the same word in essence), Alemán in Spanish, Alamany in Catalan, Allamand in French...
So yeah, pretty much it ;)

But we also keep "Germanic" for a cultivated or literary register. For example, you could say "a equipa alemã jogou muito bem hoje" (the German team played very well today) or "o combinado germânico jogou muito bem hoje" (meaning the same, but just a bit more embelished). Although you wouldn't say "o meu amigo é germânico" (my friend is German) but rather "o meu amigo é alemão" (the first form is theoretically right but it just sounds weird).
In summary, Alemão or Germânico are both used depending on the context but alemão is by far the most common. At least in the languages I know (Galician-Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan; not so sure about French). Same with the difference Alemanha (modern Germany) and Germânia (historical).

[Treffie]

That's the thing you see, because I think he's heading for a fall, if he really believes himself to be a Celt. He doesn't act, think or talk like a Celt, and apparently doesn't understand their sense of humour or anything at all.

So what does `acting like a Celt` actually mean, Wulfhere? :confused:

Should we wear kilts, insist on eating haggis and play the bagpipes on the train to work?

[Osweo]

Should we wear kilts, insist on eating haggis and play the bagpipes on the train to work?

I do those things in a solidly Anglo-Saxon/Germanic way, though! :grumpy:

[Murphy]

[. . .] and play the bagpipes on the train to work?

Wouldn't advise that one.. bagpipes near air you see, trains too cramped :D;)!

[Liffrea]

Originally Posted by KEN
Should we wear kilts, insist on eating haggis and play the bagpipes on the train to work?

You should be branded or made to wear a badge…..perhaps some Celtic knot work.:D

[Wulfhere]

So what does `acting like a Celt` actually mean, Wulfhere? :confused:

Should we wear kilts, insist on eating haggis and play the bagpipes on the train to work?

No. I believe kilts were an English invention, anyway - at least in their modern form.

It's a lot more intangible than that. A Celt will have everyone laughing one minute, and will fight them the next. Quick to anger, and quick to forgive. Loves music and stories, but has a tendency to maudlin self-pity when drunk - and a Celt is often drunk (but then, so are the English).

These are generalisations of course, and not all Celts will exhibit all of these.

[Murphy]

No. I believe kilts were an English invention, anyway - at least in their modern form.

Do you know how annoying it is for people to claim so-called "inventions"? But I am interested in how modern kilts are an English "invention"?

[Germanicus]

In Scottland at around that time, the only people in Britain who had large amounts of wool were the Southern Brits, the whole of the south was a vast sheep farm if you like.
So how would the northern tribes invent kilts when they just had hessian to wear?

[Murphy]

In Scottland at around that time, the only people in Britain who had large amounts of wool were the Southern Brits, the whole of the south was a vast sheep farm if you like.
So how would the northern tribes invent kilts when they just had hessian to wear?

Nowhere in all the annals of recorded history did the English ever claim that the kilt was their own. Everywhere it is identified as the garb of the Highland Gael that was later (after the Union of the Parliaments) adopted as the symbolic clothing of all of Scotland.

What evidence have you that the kilt originated in England and was not an organic development of the Highland Gaels? Your wool-theory is not enough. What evidence have you that your English took that wool and turned it into a kilt?

[Bridie]

It's a lot more intangible than that. A Celt will have everyone laughing one minute, and will fight them the next. Quick to anger, and quick to forgive. Loves music and stories, but has a tendency to maudlin self-pity when drunk - and a Celt is often drunk (but then, so are the English).

These are generalisations of course, and not all Celts will exhibit all of these.I know exactly the lively personality type you speak of. Not sure if that's a "Celtic" thing though... probably rather a generalised "British Isles" thing...

For sure, these traits seem to me to be typical of many English people too. Maybe not certain sections of English society... like the "upper crust" and other such assorted bastards... but the for majority, yes.

[Germanicus]

Nowhere in all the annals of recorded history did the English ever claim that the kilt was their own. Everywhere it is identified as the garb of the Highland Gael that was later (after the Union of the Parliaments) adopted as the symbolic clothing of all of Scotland.

What evidence have you that the kilt originated in England and was not an organic development of the Highland Gaels? Your wool-theory is not enough. What evidence have you that your English took that wool and turned it into a kilt?

When Septimius Severus took 0ver 40,000 Legionaires into the unconquered north he encountered sparce evidence of habitation, the army he took with him was the biggest army the Romans had ever assembled.
Pockets of resistance were found but nothing of real interest, the northern tribes had no farming, and little livestock.
The Victorians invented the history of most of the clan colours, the designs were worn by the fashion conscious southeners..:coffee:

[Hussar]

I know exactly the lively personality type you speak of. Not sure if that's a "Celtic" thing though... probably rather a generalised "British Isles" thing...
For sure, these traits seem to me to be typical of many English people too. Maybe not certain sections of English society... like the "upper crust" and other such assorted bastards... but the for majority, yes.



Strange to say, but......most of the traits Wulfhere mentioned....are typical of mediterranean temperament (or Atlantic ? )

The famous atlanto-mediterranean/Paleo-atlantid residual spirit in the british isles ??

[Beorn]

Thomas Rawlinson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Rawlinson) is accredited with fashioning the modern day smaller, traditional kilt.

It's a lot more intangible than that. A Celt will have everyone laughing one minute, and will fight them the next. Quick to anger, and quick to forgive. Loves music and stories, but has a tendency to maudlin self-pity when drunk - and a Celt is often drunk (but then, so are the English).

Mary said it well enough.


I know exactly the lively personality type you speak of. Not sure if that's a "Celtic" thing though... probably rather a generalised "British Isles" thing...

To be honest, what Wulfhere describes sounds like me to a tee. The only one I'd discard is the quickness to forgive. It depends upon what was done to anger me in the first place, but I have the memory of an elephant in regards to who has wronged me. :D

[Megrez]

Is "aleman" German in all West Romance languages?

Alemán is german in spanish.

[Hussar]

Alemán is german in spanish.


"Alemaines" in french (i think), and "Alemanno" (in old italian form)

[Murphy]

Thomas Rawlinson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Rawlinson) is accredited with fashioning the modern day smaller, traditional kilt.



Hey may have, there is some debate on the issue but I generally agree that he did, but the kilt was already in evidence at the time.

[Megrez]

Alemão in Galician-Portuguese (different spellings can be found for Galician but it's the same word in essence), Alemán in Spanish, Alamany in Catalan, Allamand in French...
So yeah, pretty much it ;)

But we also keep "Germanic" for a cultivated or literary register. For example, you could say "a equipa alemã jogou muito bem hoje" (the German team played very well today) or "o combinado germânico jogou muito bem hoje" (meaning the same, but just a bit more embelished). Although you wouldn't say "o meu amigo é germânico" (my friend is German) but rather "o meu amigo é alemão" (the first form is theoretically right but it just sounds weird).
In summary, Alemão or Germânico are both used depending on the context but alemão is by far the most common. At least in the languages I know (Galician-Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan; not so sure about French). Same with the difference Alemanha (modern Germany) and Germânia (historical).

The word teutônico is also used, though not so often. This form is used mainly when referring to things.

[Murphy]

When Septimius Severus took 0ver 40,000 Legionaires into the unconquered north he encountered sparce evidence of habitation, the army he took with him was the biggest army the Romans had ever assembled.
Pockets of resistance were found but nothing of real interest, the northern tribes had no farming, and little livestock.

The kilt is a medieval development.. I wouldn't imagine they had them during the Roman times :coffee:..


The Victorians invented the history of most of the clan colours the designs were worn by the fashion conscious southeners..:coffee:

Prove it?

[Megrez]

I'm wondering whether the irish recognise themselves firstly as irish or as catholic.

[Bridie]

Strange to say, but......most of the traits Wulfhere mentioned....are typical of mediterranean temperament (or Atlantic ? )

The famous atlanto-mediterranean/Paleo-atlantid residual spirit in the british isles ??
As far as I know, Mediterraneans are not known for being quick to forgive. ;) The humour is also a bit different I think. With people from the Isles I've noticed that humour is injected into just about any situation, (although it is often a wry type of humour - especially in the English, with the Irish being a bit more on the lively side of things) usually the more serious the circumstances, the more humour is used... whereas I think just about everywhere else in the world, people tend to completely separate the grave from the light-hearted, the serious from the humourous.

[Murphy]

I'm wondering whether the irish recognise themselves firstly as irish or as catholic.

Many today consider themselves first and foremost as Irish, sadly.

[Jarl]

I'm wondering whether the irish recognise themselves firstly as irish or as catholic.

By far as Irish. They are strongly nationalist up there.

[Megrez]

Many today consider themselves first and foremost as Irish, sadly.

So, they can build a nation, instead of being puppeteered.

http://www.rocksonora.com/file/sns_uploads/4667/images/f_catollica2qm_ebf7d6c.jpg

[Murphy]

So, they can build a nation, instead of being puppeteered.

Oh, how enlightening :coffee:..

[Wyn]

Thomas Rawlinson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Rawlinson) is accredited with fashioning the modern day smaller, traditional kilt.



The wearing of plaid is Scotch. Rawlinson is indeed credited with the modern-style kilt. Also worthy of note is the fact that the association of clan tartans with kilts is modern as well.

The Highlanders duly came [to the royal visit]. But what tartan should they wear? The idea of differentiated clan tartans, which had now been publicized by Stewart [David Stewart of Garth, army Colonel], seems to have originated with the resourceful manufacturers who, for thirty-five years, had no clients except for the Highland regiments but who now, since the repeal of 1782, saw the prospect of a far larger market. The greatest of these firms was that of William Wilson and Son of Bannockburn, whose vast records are an invaluable source for historians. Messrs Wilson and Son saw the advantage of building up a repertoire of differentiated clan tartans, and this stimulating tribal competition, and for this purpose they entered into an alliance with the Highland Society of London, which threw, over their commercial project, a cloak, or plaid, of historical respectability. In 1819, when the royal visit was first suggested, the firm prepared a 'Key Pattern Book' and sent samples of the various tartans up to London, where the society duly 'certified' them as belonging to this or that clan. However, when the visit was confirmed, the time for such pedantic consistency had passed. The spate of orders was now such that 'every piece of tartan was sold as it came off the loom'. In these circumstances, the chief duty of the firm was to keep up the supply and ensure that the Highland chiefs were able to buy what they needed. So Cluny Macpherson, heir to the chief of the discoverer of Ossian, was given a tartan from the peg. For him it was now labeled 'Macpherson', but previously, having been sold in bulk to a Mr Kidd to clothe his West Indian slaves, it had been labeled 'Kidd', and before that it been simply 'No. 155'.

The Invention of Tradition, edited by Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger. (http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sfvnNdVY3KIC&dq=the+invention+of+tradition&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=4pAwTMfmCYyTjAeyuICXBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[Oinakos Growion]

The word teutônico is also used, though not so often. This form is used mainly when referring to things.
True! I forgot about that one :) Just now I heard on TV about the "Teutonic" victory over Argentina :D Then again, it's not that commonly used where I'm from; it sounds very... "poetic".


It's a lot more intangible than that. A Celt will have everyone laughing one minute, and will fight them the next. Quick to anger, and quick to forgive. Loves music and stories, but has a tendency to maudlin self-pity when drunk - and a Celt is often drunk (but then, so are the English)
You forgot speaking in riddles and looking like leprachauns :)

Re. kilt: As a piece of clothing a kilt, or something like it, it's not that rare. After all it is a sort of skirt :p
The development of that piece of clothing as a cultural element and even as a symbol of national identity is a different story though.
For example, check these pics of some statues representing Galician Celtic warriors (dating back to the 1stC BC-1stC AD period, if I'm not mistaken):
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AIf5O_sWNik/SIfH9NzUa4I/AAAAAAAAAJw/QJP-HnrPZcA/s400/fig64.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_UAN2kjDVYoQ/SWwa_Ax5NhI/AAAAAAAAAT8/EHzzzbt4Als/s320/berr%C3%B5es+e+guerreiros+galaicos.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_cF21235LJNA/R87xWUMt0mI/AAAAAAAAAC8/-uCQdBaMf4g/s320/guerreiro+galaico.JPG
And a torso with a garment that today could be identified as a plaid:
http://www.tartan.galician.org/images/saio.jpg
And now an artistic reconstruction based on the details of the statues - the ones above and others - made by archaeologist/historian André Pena Granha (pity there's no close ups of the actual statues, but when observed from close one can see the patterns in some parts):
http://www.tartan.galician.org/images/principe_galaico_02.jpg
http://www.tunadesantiago.com/andres/images/galaicos.jpg

But as I said, how the kilt was later developed and used in Scotland and other places probably is a different story altogether...
It could be just a coincidence. Or not ;)

[Germanicus]

The kilt is a medieval development.. I wouldn't imagine they had them during the Roman times :coffee:..



Prove it?



A sense of humour and indeed a sense of history are probably prerequisites for more traditional kilt-makers these days. It's worth remembering that tartan – which derives from the French word 'tiretaine' meaning woven cloth – first expressed the Celts' love of vivid colours by way of the plaid, a large piece of cloth belted in the middle. It gradually evolved into the shorter kilt to make a garment more practical for work and battle. Essentially it was an everyday garment that was proscribed for almost 40 years after the Battle of Culloden. A new enthusiasm naturally followed the lifting of the ban in 1782 which grew into a 'tartan frenzy' after Sir Walter Scott had persuaded King George IV to visit Edinburgh in 1822 in full Highland dress. And finally the affection Queen Victoria and Prince Albert showed for Scotland and the full-scale endorsement of tartan in the Prince's festooning of the newly purchased Balmoral Castle in a tartan of his own design, paved the way for an international appetite. It was then that canny Victorian marketers began assigning specific tartan designs to each of the great clans, knowing the appeal it would have to the already sizeable diaspora.

So history, natural evolution and commercial nous have had a big part to play in the development of tartan and the kilt. New research also shows that contrary to popular belief many of the dyes that were traditionally used in the creation of tartan were not from native Scottish plants, but were imported from far away. The native plants were just not bright enough to deliver the dazzling reds, yellows and blues that the old clan chiefs hankered after. So, they sent agents to buy Mexican cochineal for red, North American Old Fustic for yellow, and Indian indigo for blue.


Also this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilt

Also this link http://www.denverfabrics.com/pages/static/vintage/victorian-dresses.htm

[Jack B]

I'm wondering whether the irish recognise themselves firstly as irish or as catholic.

Irish ;)

[Graham]

A. A new enthusiasm naturally followed the lifting of the ban in 1782 which grew into a 'tartan frenzy' after Sir Walter Scott had persuaded King George IV to visit Edinburgh in 1822 in full Highland dress.
Aye that bit's true, the whole tartan linked to certain clan names, is made up.




The baning of the kilts and bagpipes was a bit harsh though like

The Act

Abolition and Proscription of the Highland Dress 19 George II, Chap. 39, Sec. 17, 1746

That from and after the first day of August, One thousand, seven hundred and forty-six, no man or boy within that part of Britain called Scotland, other than such as shall be employed as Officers and Soldiers in His Majesty's Forces, shall, on any pretext whatever, wear or put on the clothes commonly called Highland clothes (that is to say) the Plaid, Philabeg, or little Kilt, Trowse, Shoulder-belts, or any part whatever of what peculiarly belongs to the Highland Garb; and that no tartan or party-coloured plaid of stuff shall be used for Great Coats or upper coats, and if any such person shall presume after the said first day of August, to wear or put on the aforesaid garment or any part of them, every such person so offending ... For the first offence,shall be liable to be imprisoned for 6 months, and on the second offence, to be transported to any of His Majesty's plantations beyond the seas, there to remain for the space of seven years.



Anyhow, stick to your morris dancing dress and stop trying to steal our kilt!


http://wallscometumblingdown.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/cotswold_morris_dancers.jpg

[Wyn]

stop trying to steal our kilt!


We're not stealing it, we're reminding you that you borrowed it. :D You all seem to have forgotten.

Stick to your haggis eatin'....

...actually, that's Inglis too I'm afraid. :thumbs up

Stick to your talking Scots...

...now I've really dunnit. :D

[Treffie]

The wearing of plaid is Scotch. Rawlinson is indeed credited with the modern-style kilt. Also worthy of note is the fact that the association of clan tartans with kilts is modern as well.


That's debateable. Tartan seems to have been worn by the ancient Tocharians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartan#History).

[Murphy]

That's debateable. Tartan seems to have been worn by the ancient Tocharians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartan#History).

There's a difference between plaid and tartan.

[Treffie]

There's a difference between plaid and tartan.

That's why I said it's debateable :D

[The Lawspeaker]

:yo:
Ri an Fhothairt Cill Dara, at your service.

God save the King !:cool:

[Lulletje Rozewater]

None of these things were done against the will of the British parliament, but with its active co-operation. India was a very different case, since its population was not British. There was no Australian Gandhi, and the idea is preposterous. It has always been British policy to devolve powers to the settler colonies as soon as practicable.

What a load of crap Wulfie.
I shall comeback later:For now Mercia for the Mercians???????????When
I get it,you started your 1st battalion-Mercian Regiment-died for another country last week 1.
Have to do battle with chemo-- I am brain dead.:embarrassed:embarrassed:D:lightbul:

[Wulfhere]

What a load of crap Wulfie.
I shall comeback later:For now Mercia for the Mercians???????????When
I get it,you started your 1st battalion-Mercian Regiment-died for another country last week 1.
Have to do battle with chemo-- I am brain dead.:embarrassed:embarrassed:D:lightbul:

What other country did the Mercians die for - America?

[Lulletje Rozewater]

What other country did the Mercians die for - America?

Mersins fighting in America
http://www.mudtrap.com/images/funny-thanksgiving-turkey-cartoon1.jpg

[Albion]

Err..... no. Let's rather have a united Ireland.

I agree, Northern Ireland is a burden anyway, I don't agree with the Brit unionists at all.


Who knows what the Celts could've achieved if the Romans didn't obliterate the Celts.

Maybe it would be the Celts dominating Western Europe instead of the Germanics. Maybe the Germanic and Slavic migrations may never have occurred if the Romans hadn't of Latinized the Celts and stopped them from bearing arms and continuing warfare as they had always done to that point.

[NationalConservative]

Do gach duine, chuir mé ábhar faoi choinne polasaí de Páirtí Náisiúnta na Breataine atá ag rá go bhfuil fonn a chur fáilte roimhe Éireann isteach sa Bhreatain air.

Everyone, I have uploaded a topic about the British National Party's policy in wanting to allow Ireland into Britain.

[Peterski]

How about restoring Italy's borders from year 8 AD?