For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
And I deal with the law every day yet you consider yourself better placed to lecture me on the origin of legal terms. It may not be worth much to you but coincidentally I am also a (admittedly non-executive) director of an archeological practice and am pretty conversant, although I do not do it every day. If you want to get into a pissing contest be my guest.
At no time did I lecture you on the origin of the terms. I simply observed that we adopt words from many different sources without necessarily changing underlying concepts.
Non executive director... Hahahaha.
I’m a director and trustee of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.
I'm maybe being ridiculously naive, but I think I can imagine you two lads meeting in 'real life' and having a civilized and mutually interesting exchange.
The internet has its rules. and down the pub has its rules.
The former can be refreshing because there is a relaxation of otherwise strict social norms plus it is a sounding board where you can be bold and try to convince others. It can also be positively Socratic in nature as no one gets a free ride with their opinions which are interrogated mercilessly.
@Richard_Tyndall can you believe it was a eurosceptic before he was won over by my arguments and discourse.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
The last time I looked at the Nottingham database I though I found a mistake in it., the village of Hodnet in Shropshire was part of lands given to the Odinet family by William the C. Which is surely the origin of the name. Yet the Nottingham site seems to be trying to stretch a less than convincing origin based on Celtic.
Would you call a Scot who had spent 7 years abroad a mock-Jock?
I would not phrase it so rudely. However I am of the opinion that if one lives abroad for a prolonged period of time then one's ability to describe oneself as "British" is lessened. To reassure you that this is not an attack on you personally, please note that I have mentioned this here before several times in contexts not involving you.
There's something in that to be honest. I think of myself as a 'citizen of the world' (copyright T May), a European, and a Brit in that order, and the fact that I lived 18 years abroad undoubtedly contributes to that. It doesn't make me hate Britain or anything like that, but I think we tend to exaggerate differences and people are much the same in most countries and areas at a similar stage of development - e.g. two metropolitans in London and Berlin or two farmers in Shropshire and Westphalia probably have more in common with their counterparts than their compatriots.
At present, older people who've lived in several countries and feel this way are relatively unusual. In 30 years, I suspect it may be commonplace, and national identity will gently erode in the same way that regional identity has eroded within parts of Britain.
I'm maybe being ridiculously naive, but I think I can imagine you two lads meeting in 'real life' and having a civilized and mutually interesting exchange.
I can think of combinations of posters on here who would batter fuck out of each other in meatspace.
Now having dispensed with my ridiculous naivety, I'm getting the vibe that the prospect isn't entirely displeasing to you.
And I deal with the law every day yet you consider yourself better placed to lecture me on the origin of legal terms. It may not be worth much to you but coincidentally I am also a (admittedly non-executive) director of an archeological practice and am pretty conversant, although I do not do it every day. If you want to get into a pissing contest be my guest.
At no time did I lecture you on the origin of the terms. I simply observed that we adopt words from many different sources without necessarily changing underlying concepts.
Non executive director... Hahahaha.
I’m a director and trustee of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.
Then you really really should known better than to trot out long discarded ideas.
You really need to practice harder at being insulting. You’re as fucking terrible at it as your political arguments are. Also your knowledge of legal history is embarrassing
Regarding legal history/different legal systems, the big difference in terms of property/inheritance between this country and places like France or Italy is between the principle here that a property owner can give property away to whoever he chooses, either in his lifetime or by will, whereas in France or Italy, he is bound to bequeath most of his estate to family members, and lifetime gifts to charities can be clawed back by his heirs, following death.
The latter is a feudal principle; the former rejects it.
There was an attempt by the European Commission to establish a single European inheritance law in 2011/12, but it foundered because these the two principles could not be reconciled.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
That's brilliant. Thanks SO
There is a wonderful but utterly bonkers book that was written by Albany Major in 1913 called The Early Wars of Wessex. It tried to find the locations of al the battles mentioned in the ASC and paint an accurate picture of the Anglo-Saxon invasions of southern England. It is pretty much discredited these days but it does include one really interesting bit of evidence that sadly no longer exists.
I forget the exact details but Major refers to a river near the Hampshire/Dorset border where the locals on each side of the river speak completely different dialects even though they only live a few tens of yards apart. He cites this as evidence of a long standing border between the Anglo-Saxon and British kingdoms which existed for long after the rest of southern England had been conquered.
As I say the conclusions he drew don't stand the test of time but the fact that such differences still existed only 100 years ago and are now lost I find fascinating and slightly sad.
And I deal with the law every day yet you consider yourself better placed to lecture me on the origin of legal terms. It may not be worth much to you but coincidentally I am also a (admittedly non-executive) director of an archeological practice and am pretty conversant, although I do not do it every day. If you want to get into a pissing contest be my guest.
At no time did I lecture you on the origin of the terms. I simply observed that we adopt words from many different sources without necessarily changing underlying concepts.
Non executive director... Hahahaha.
I’m a director and trustee of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.
I'm maybe being ridiculously naive, but I think I can imagine you two lads meeting in 'real life' and having a civilized and mutually interesting exchange.
''tis the trouble with the Internet, as Tyndall has observed before. The two of them in the pub are most unlikely to end up shouting at each other about their qualifications.
I would rather judge on the argument and the evidence, anyhow. Qualifications and position generally offer poor protection against being wrong.
Yeah, in the pub they could just head to the gents and compare dick size directly, rather than all this faff
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
The last time I looked at the Nottingham database I though I found a mistake in it., the village of Hodnet in Shropshire was part of lands given to the Odinet family by William the C. Which is surely the origin of the name. Yet the Nottingham site seems to be trying to stretch a less than convincing origin based on Celtic.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
The last time I looked at the Nottingham database I though I found a mistake in it., the village of Hodnet in Shropshire was part of lands given to the Odinet family by William the C. Which is surely the origin of the name. Yet the Nottingham site seems to be trying to stretch a less than convincing origin based on Celtic.
Peak PB
Someone suggests an obscure academic resource just for LOLs... and someone else criticises its accuracy...
And I deal with the law every day yet you consider yourself better placed to lecture me on the origin of legal terms. It may not be worth much to you but coincidentally I am also a (admittedly non-executive) director of an archeological practice and am pretty conversant, although I do not do it every day. If you want to get into a pissing contest be my guest.
At no time did I lecture you on the origin of the terms. I simply observed that we adopt words from many different sources without necessarily changing underlying concepts.
Non executive director... Hahahaha.
I’m a director and trustee of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.
Then you really really should known better than to trot out long discarded ideas.
You really need to practice harder at being insulting. You’re as fucking terrible at it as your political arguments are. Also your knowledge of legal history is embarrassing
Regarding legal history/different legal systems, the big difference in terms of property/inheritance between this country and places like France or Italy is between the principle here that a property owner can give property away to whoever he chooses, either in his lifetime or by will, whereas in France or Italy, he is bound to bequeath most of his estate to family members, and lifetime gifts to charities can be clawed back by his heirs, following death.
The latter is a feudal principle; the former rejects it.
There was an attempt by the European Commission to establish a single European inheritance law in 2011/12, but it foundered because these the two principles could not be reconciled.
Differences undoubtedly developed but the law of personal wills was, until 1858, the preserve of the ecclesiastical courts in England where, for obvious reasons, canon law, and through that Roman law, had a strong influence over the centuries. Thus the law of wills is probably the area of English law that has the strongest Roman law influence.
I'm maybe being ridiculously naive, but I think I can imagine you two lads meeting in 'real life' and having a civilized and mutually interesting exchange.
I can think of combinations of posters on here who would batter fuck out of each other in meatspace.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
The last time I looked at the Nottingham database I though I found a mistake in it., the village of Hodnet in Shropshire was part of lands given to the Odinet family by William the C. Which is surely the origin of the name. Yet the Nottingham site seems to be trying to stretch a less than convincing origin based on Celtic.
Yep - there are a few dodgy and questionable ones - but don't ruin it for everyone ;-)
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
I'm maybe being ridiculously naive, but I think I can imagine you two lads meeting in 'real life' and having a civilized and mutually interesting exchange.
I can think of combinations of posters on here who would batter fuck out of each other in meatspace.
Now having dispensed with my ridiculous naivety, I'm getting the vibe that the prospect isn't entirely displeasing to you.
Mr. Seal, we were left by the Romans quite early (and required three legions to Iberia's one, despite a smaller population, to keep down rebellions), we weren't part of the Carolingian Empire, we enjoyed the Alfred and his successors' glories as Europe fragmented, we left the Catholic Church to form our own, we use Common Law rather than Roman Law.
The British Isles have been apart from European-wide institutions for longer than we've been part of them. From religion to empire to law. Opposing continental empire-building has been pretty consistent for the British.
What we have now is a political class that loves the EU and a population that's divided, with a majority in the only vote on the matter against our membership.
Oh dear.
Got to say I hope you know more about law than you do about history or you are in a lot of trouble.
I though the Anglo-Saxon was more of a migration than an invasion. The genetic analysis suggests a lot of cohabitation and surviving British settlements in “Saxon areas”
More a cultural movement than a physical one, with indigenous Britons adopting Saxon language and culture. The evidence of genetics is that numbers coming over were relatively minor from Germany and Scandinavia.
Indeed. In that way the Anglos Saxon and Norman 'invasions' were quite similar. Both look to have involved relatively small numbers of people and there is little sign in the former of much violence involved.
The one interesting avenue being explored though which might challenge that view is the idea that lowland Britain had, to a large extent, been depopulated by plagues and societal collapse by the early 5th century. It is entirely possible that Anglo-Saxons arriving at that time were moving into a largely empty landscape. It would help to account for their habit of avoiding Roman towns and cities which may have been associated with death and disease.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
LOL To be fair you picked the wrong person to ask about that. My current team includes two Americans, two Vietnamese (one of whom I have just been a referee for so he can get British citizenship) and a Romanian. There are only two Brits in the team including me.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
That's brilliant. Thanks SO
There is a wonderful but utterly bonkers book that was written by Albany Major in 1913 called The Early Wars of Wessex. It tried to find the locations of al the battles mentioned in the ASC and paint an accurate picture of the Anglo-Saxon invasions of southern England. It is pretty much discredited these days but it does include one really interesting bit of evidence that sadly no longer exists.
I forget the exact details but Major refers to a river near the Hampshire/Dorset border where the locals on each side of the river speak completely different dialects even though they only live a few tens of yards apart. He cites this as evidence of a long standing border between the Anglo-Saxon and British kingdoms which existed for long after the rest of southern England had been conquered.
As I say the conclusions he drew don't stand the test of time but the fact that such differences still existed only 100 years ago and are now lost I find fascinating and slightly sad.
Totally agree. There is also quite a sharp cut-off between the Brummie and Black Country accents even today which I have seen ascribed to tribal boundaries within Mercia.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
That's brilliant. Thanks SO
There is a wonderful but utterly bonkers book that was written by Albany Major in 1913 called The Early Wars of Wessex. It tried to find the locations of al the battles mentioned in the ASC and paint an accurate picture of the Anglo-Saxon invasions of southern England. It is pretty much discredited these days but it does include one really interesting bit of evidence that sadly no longer exists.
I forget the exact details but Major refers to a river near the Hampshire/Dorset border where the locals on each side of the river speak completely different dialects even though they only live a few tens of yards apart. He cites this as evidence of a long standing border between the Anglo-Saxon and British kingdoms which existed for long after the rest of southern England had been conquered.
As I say the conclusions he drew don't stand the test of time but the fact that such differences still existed only 100 years ago and are now lost I find fascinating and slightly sad.
Totally agree. There is also quite a sharp cut-off between the Brummie and Black Country accents even today which I have seen ascribed to tribal boundaries within Mercia.
Can you hear a Coventry/Warwickshire accent out of interest ? It might colour my view being from there but I've always thought of myself as not having an accent.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
Long ago, Jacques Delors tried to democratise the EU. Thatcher handbagged him.
She said No, No, No to any loss of *her* powers. She was quite happy to nationalise education and take it away from county councils. Academies to this day report to Whitehall, not to local government.
Even at present, I regard 'Brussels democracy' as slightly better than 'Whitehall democracy'.
Anyone have any idea how the Renew Party did so well last night? To be within a spit of catching up with the Lib Dems on their first outing is quite an achievement. I hadn't even heard of them before yesterday.
And I deal with the law every day yet you consider yourself better placed to lecture me on the origin of legal terms. It may not be worth much to you but coincidentally I am also a (admittedly non-executive) director of an archeological practice and am pretty conversant, although I do not do it every day. If you want to get into a pissing contest be my guest.
At no time did I lecture you on the origin of the terms. I simply observed that we adopt words from many different sources without necessarily changing underlying concepts.
Non executive director... Hahahaha.
I’m a director and trustee of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.
Then you really really should known better than to trot out long discarded ideas.
You really need to practice harder at being insulting. You’re as fucking terrible at it as your political arguments are. Also your knowledge of legal history is embarrassing
Regarding legal history/different legal systems, the big difference in terms of property/inheritance between this country and places like France or Italy is between the principle here that a property owner can give property away to whoever he chooses, either in his lifetime or by will, whereas in France or Italy, he is bound to bequeath most of his estate to family members, and lifetime gifts to charities can be clawed back by his heirs, following death.
The latter is a feudal principle; the former rejects it.
There was an attempt by the European Commission to establish a single European inheritance law in 2011/12, but it foundered because these the two principles could not be reconciled.
The persistance and subtlety of accent in England is quite something. Even within Leics, I can hear the difference between a Hinckley, a Market Harborough, Coalville and Lestah itself. It was similar in the Black Country, with an audible difference between contiguinous towns.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
I doubt many could even identify them...leti alone identify with.
And I deal with the law every day yet you consider yourself better placed to lecture me on the origin of legal terms. It may not be worth much to you but coincidentally I am also a (admittedly non-executive) director of an archeological practice and am pretty conversant, although I do not do it every day. If you want to get into a pissing contest be my guest.
At no time did I lecture you on the origin of the terms. I simply observed that we adopt words from many different sources without necessarily changing underlying concepts.
Non executive director... Hahahaha.
I’m a director and trustee of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust.
I'm maybe being ridiculously naive, but I think I can imagine you two lads meeting in 'real life' and having a civilized and mutually interesting exchange.
The internet has its rules. and down the pub has its rules.
The former can be refreshing because there is a relaxation of otherwise strict social norms plus it is a sounding board where you can be bold and try to convince others. It can also be positively Socratic in nature as no one gets a free ride with their opinions which are interrogated mercilessly.
@Richard_Tyndall can you believe it was a eurosceptic before he was won over by my arguments and discourse.
I hadn't realised 'you fucking moron' was the modern equivalent of the gladiator raising his finger. I shall look at Tyndall's posts in a new light.
For my sins I studied medieval English history at university. It left me with an abiding interest in landscape, dialect and place names - which is all pretty niche, I know! Anyway, if you are interested, this is a link to a brilliant place names resource. For nurds like me it can provide hours of fun:
It offers a dip into an England that has all but gone.
The last time I looked at the Nottingham database I though I found a mistake in it., the village of Hodnet in Shropshire was part of lands given to the Odinet family by William the C. Which is surely the origin of the name. Yet the Nottingham site seems to be trying to stretch a less than convincing origin based on Celtic.
Peak PB
Someone suggests an obscure academic resource just for LOLs... and someone else criticises its accuracy...
Well that one did look to me as if someone had simply sat in a room with a Celtic dictionary and tried to make the answer up. I would have hoped there was more to it than that.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
Brits who identify with British political parties are not especially common.
Police were called to a central London pub last night to break up a brawl amongst a group of middle-aged men. Bystanders reported that trouble broke out during a heated discussion on to what extent the legal system of England had been influenced down the years by the Vikings as opposed to the Romans. “It was crazy,” said one. “This bloke was saying one thing and this other bloke was having none of it. They started shouting, rest of them got involved, next thing we knew tables were going over, beer was flying around, and people were throwing haymakers.” Two men were arrested but later released without charge. No-one was hurt, thankfully, but the incident does seem to bear out fears that Brexit has raised the temperature of the nation in ways that are not always benign.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
I don't think many people could name them.
I certainly can't. I know there is a centre left one, a hard-left/green one, the EPP something with the Tories left, the ECR which they founded, ALDE (is it?) with the Lib Dems, and I think a new far right one?
Anyone have any idea how the Renew Party did so well last night? To be within a spit of catching up with the Lib Dems on their first outing is quite an achievement. I hadn't even heard of them before yesterday.
Is "Renew" a one nation Tory party of sorts ? - Edmund mentioned they were planning to sit in the same European Parliament Group as Fine Gael and the CDU; we have no major party in that group so a bit of a gap.
Anyone have any idea how the Renew Party did so well last night? To be within a spit of catching up with the Lib Dems on their first outing is quite an achievement. I hadn't even heard of them before yesterday.
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?" But my social circle is full of people who are keen pro-Europeans and follow what happens in the European Parliament with interest (for a contrary view, put this to DavidL, standing well back to avoid the explosion).
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
Police were called to a central London pub last night to break up a brawl amongst a group of middle-aged men. Bystanders reported that trouble broke out during a heated discussion on to what extent the legal system of England had been influenced down the years by the Vikings as opposed to the Romans. “It was crazy,” said one. “This bloke was saying one thing and this other bloke was having none of it. They started shouting, rest of them got involved, next thing we knew tables were going over, beer was flying around, and people were throwing haymakers.” Two men were arrested but later released without charge. No-one was hurt, thankfully, but the incident does seem to bear out fears that Brexit has raised the temperature of the nation in ways that are not always benign.
Lol.
'Leave it Wayne, that Napoleonic Code slag just aint wurf it.'
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?" But my social circle is full of people who are keen pro-Europeans and follow what happens in the European Parliament with interest (for a contrary view, put this to DavidL, standing well back to avoid the explosion).
I dont think your social circle is your typical regulars down the dog and duck
Police were called to a central London pub last night to break up a brawl amongst a group of middle-aged men. Bystanders reported that trouble broke out during a heated discussion on to what extent the legal system of England had been influenced down the years by the Vikings as opposed to the Romans. “It was crazy,” said one. “This bloke was saying one thing and this other bloke was having none of it. They started shouting, rest of them got involved, next thing we knew tables were going over, beer was flying around, and people were throwing haymakers.” Two men were arrested but later released without charge. No-one was hurt, thankfully, but the incident does seem to bear out fears that Brexit has raised the temperature of the nation in ways that are not always benign.
Good job they didnt get onto the topic of if die hard is a christmas movie or not!
Police were called to a central London pub last night to break up a brawl amongst a group of middle-aged men. Bystanders reported that trouble broke out during a heated discussion on to what extent the legal system of England had been influenced down the years by the Vikings as opposed to the Romans. “It was crazy,” said one. “This bloke was saying one thing and this other bloke was having none of it. They started shouting, rest of them got involved, next thing we knew tables were going over, beer was flying around, and people were throwing haymakers.” Two men were arrested but later released without charge. No-one was hurt, thankfully, but the incident does seem to bear out fears that Brexit has raised the temperature of the nation in ways that are not always benign.
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?" But my social circle is full of people who are keen pro-Europeans and follow what happens in the European Parliament with interest (for a contrary view, put this to DavidL, standing well back to avoid the explosion).
When looking at polling in other countries I do find the EU groupings useful indicators.
Astonishingly, this seems to be a minority interest in fleshworld*.
*Many thanks for @Dura_Ace introducing me to the word!
I don't think many people in this country identify with the pan-EU political groupings that are set up in the European Parliament.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?" But my social circle is full of people who are keen pro-Europeans and follow what happens in the European Parliament with interest (for a contrary view, put this to DavidL, standing well back to avoid the explosion).
I know plenty of pro-Europeans, but I think I know one only that knows the constitution of the European parliament even as well as the typical Briton knows Westminster.
I don't think it matters whether we have more in common with the Europeans or the Anglosphere. I don't want to govern, or be governed, by either. I want to be friends with them all, and that's it.
We are not "governed" by the EU .
I would define governed, at least in part, as having laws made for us, with or without our agreement, over which we have no veto. That is certainly the case with the EU.
Didn't we... don't we still for the moment anyway.... have a seat on all the governing bodies?
We do. But in the majority of cases we do not have a veto. That means laws can be made against our wishes. It is a fundamental point.
Yet the constant complaint about the EU is that it is "undemocratic". In democracies 27 Yeses and 1 No means Yes, not No.
As I just replied to William, the lack of a European demos means that the EU making laws that cannot be vetoed by the member states is undemocratic.
Speak for yourself. Donald Tusk represents my views and interests far better than ether of our two largest domestic parties.
But you are an extremist example and certainly not representative of the majority of the population if the polls are to be believed.
The polls aren't to be believed. There clearly is a European demos. When was the last time you spoke to an American in the flesh while going about your daily business in the UK? You interact with continental Europeans all the time.
Long ago, Jacques Delors tried to democratise the EU. Thatcher handbagged him.
She said No, No, No to any loss of *her* powers. She was quite happy to nationalise education and take it away from county councils. Academies to this day report to Whitehall, not to local government.
Even at present, I regard 'Brussels democracy' as slightly better than 'Whitehall democracy'.
I think they are both bad. A massive transfer of powers from national to local levels (as well as from supranational back as well) is long overdue. It is one of the reasons why the Henry VIIIth powers May proposed were so offensive.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
One aspect is that when the Vikings/Normans came along there was a local elite that the newcomers essentially replaced, which has some bearing on interaction with the local population as a whole. This seems less to be the case when the Anglo-Saxons arrived (there's an interesting contrast with the Frankish takeover of Gaul) so that might explain the difference.
[This analysis brought to you courtesy of recent listening to the History of England podcast]
It depends if you are looking backwards or forwards. Our future is European, and has been since the Sixties. Australia and NZ see themselves as Pacific since about the same period.
In the long run maybe*, but right now I find it ludicrous that people say we have more in common with places like Bulgaria.
* In the long run I think global factors will be far more important the proximity within the EU.
The real question is not whether we have more in common with Australia than Bulgaria, but whether we have more in common with Germany than the US.
One thing that strikes me, having lived and worked in Italy, Greece, and now Germany, is that in these countries the idea of "European solidarity" is familiar and generally welcome (impressions of Greece somewhat handicapped by never properly learning the language). In Britain I can't remember many people talking about European solidarity. It's a shame. The EU is clearly more than just a trading club, it is also about European solidarity, which is a good thing, but nobody in the UK is prepared to say that. Often the rest of the EU are spoken of as enemies.
It's scary that Boris Johnson (who was an actual US dual citizen until they sent him a tax bill) can write about how terrible it is that young people have "split allegiances" because they wave EU flags, as if the EU was a hostile power. As if people can't have multiple identities. As if people can't identify as both Arsenal supporters and Londoners, or both chess players and vegetarians, or both Quakers and Scottish. As if the only acceptable "split allegiance" for a Brit is to the USA.
I never feel more European than when I am in the US. For me, it is a very foreign place in a way that no European country is. Everything seems to be done differently there, But it is clearly a very personal thing. I certainly have multiple identities and it largely depends on where I am. I feel like a Londoner in England. In the other UK countries I am clearly English. In Scandinavia I am probably English, but in the rest of Europe British. In Australia and New Zealand I am definitely English. In Asia and Canada British. It's a marvellous thing. At my very core, though, I'd say I was English. When I am asked where I am from I always say England, except when I am in England. Then I say London!
And the finest Englishmen are those that, like you, don't feel the need to wrap themselves up the flag like certain other people I could mention.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?"
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name any European parliamentary grouping.
Would you call a Scot who had spent 7 years abroad a mock-Jock?
I would not phrase it so rudely. However I am of the opinion that if one lives abroad for a prolonged period of time then one's ability to describe oneself as "British" is lessened. To reassure you that this is not an attack on you personally, please note that I have mentioned this here before several times in contexts not involving you.
There's something in that to be honest. I think of myself as a 'citizen of the world' (copyright T May), a European, and a Brit in that order, and the fact that I lived 18 years abroad undoubtedly contributes to that. It doesn't make me hate Britain or anything like that, but I think we tend to exaggerate differences and people are much the same in most countries and areas at a similar stage of development - e.g. two metropolitans in London and Berlin or two farmers in Shropshire and Westphalia probably have more in common with their counterparts than their compatriots.
At present, older people who've lived in several countries and feel this way are relatively unusual. In 30 years, I suspect it may be commonplace, and national identity will gently erode in the same way that regional identity has eroded within parts of Britain.
I think that very true. I am quite at home with European, Asian and African doctors, with our common education and outlook
It depends if you are looking backwards or forwards. Our future is European, and has been since the Sixties. Australia and NZ see themselves as Pacific since about the same period.
In the long run maybe*, but right now I find it ludicrous that people say we have more in common with places like Bulgaria.
* In the long run I think global factors will be far more important the proximity within the EU.
The real question is not whether we have more in common with Australia than Bulgaria, but whether we have more in common with Germany than the US.
One thing that strikes me, having lived and worked in Italy, Greece, and now Germany, is that in theseing about European solidarity. It's a shame. The EU is clearly more than just a trading club, it is also about European solidarity, which is a good thing, but nobody in the UK is prepared to say that. Often the rest of the EU are spoken of as enemies.
It's scary that Boris Johnson (who was an actual US dual citizen until they sent him a tax bill) can write about how terrible it is that young people have "split allegiances" because they wave EU flags, as if the EU was a hostile power. As if people can't have multiple identities. As if people can't identify as both Arsenal supporters and Londoners, or both chess players and vegetarians, or both Quakers and Scottish. As if the only acceptable "split allegiance" for a Brit is to the USA.
I never feel more European than when I am in the US. For me, it is a very foreign place in a way that no European country is. Everything seems to be done differently there, But it is clearly a very personal thing. I certainly have multiple identities and it largely depends on where I am. I feel like a Londoner in England. In the other UK countries I am clearly English. In Scandinavia I am probably English, but in the rest of Europe British. In Australia and New Zealand I am definitely English. In Asia and Canada British. It's a marvellous thing. At my very core, though, I'd say I was English. When I am asked where I am from I always say England, except when I am in England. Then I say London!
And the finest Englishmen are those that, like you, don't feel the need to wrap themselves up the flag like certain other people I could mention.
When I first travelled to the USA in 1969 i remember being struck by how foreign it felt, far more so than any country I had been to in continental Europe. It's a belief I've always held since that despite speaking the same language, Britain and the USA are very, very different countries.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
Good job they didnt get onto the topic of if die hard is a christmas movie or not!
Too right. Matters such as that - which touch on a person's deepest beliefs and sense of themselves - should on no account be debated in the presence of alcohol.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
It does always surprise me how many of our rivers apparently have pre-AS names.
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
It does always surprise me how many of our rivers apparently have pre-AS names.
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
Richard no need to prove you're a smart guy*, we get it.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?"
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name any European parliamentary grouping.
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name the leader of their local council.
You could see both parties losing a big share of vote but one of them scraping a majority. It's a race to see who loses more of their support.
FWIW, I tried plugging those numbers into Electoral Calculus and it spat out a very well hung indeed kind of a Parliament, in which Mr Corbyn would need both the SNP and Lib Dems to get over the finishing line. But frankly, who has the foggiest idea what might happen?
That said, it would indeed be possible for one party to win the election outright with less than third of the popular vote, providing that all its opponents' votes split in the right ways and places. Labour won a healthy majority of 66 in the 2005 GE, based on only 35% of the vote.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?"
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name any European parliamentary grouping.
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name the leader of their local council.
Mrs Cutts, I can't name the district level one though.
Jesus...the NYT is supposed to be the paper of record.
Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.
So somebody told the NYT, that somebody that them, that somebody told them that they saw some stuff in the report that looked bad. That is like some crazy game of chinese whispers.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
It does always surprise me how many of our rivers apparently have pre-AS names.
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
There was, IIRC, both a plague.... Justinians Plague?...... in the 5th or 6th C CE, plus a couple of really large volcanic explosions which wrecked the crops around that time.
Police were called to a central London pub last night to break up a brawl amongst a group of middle-aged men. Bystanders reported that trouble broke out during a heated discussion on to what extent the legal system of England had been influenced down the years by the Vikings as opposed to the Romans. “It was crazy,” said one. “This bloke was saying one thing and this other bloke was having none of it. They started shouting, rest of them got involved, next thing we knew tables were going over, beer was flying around, and people were throwing haymakers.” Two men were arrested but later released without charge. No-one was hurt, thankfully, but the incident does seem to bear out fears that Brexit has raised the temperature of the nation in ways that are not always benign.
Good job they didnt get onto the topic of if die hard is a christmas movie or not!
"Boys, boys... stop fighting! Let's settle this in a friendly way over pizza. Hawaiian?"
You could see both parties losing a big share of vote but one of them scraping a majority. It's a race to see who loses more of their support.
FWIW, I tried plugging those numbers into Electoral Calculus and it spat out a very well hung indeed kind of a Parliament, in which Mr Corbyn would need both the SNP and Lib Dems to get over the finishing line. But frankly, who has the foggiest idea what might happen?
That said, it would indeed be possible for one party to win the election outright with less than third of the popular vote, providing that all its opponents' votes split in the right ways and places. Labour won a healthy majority of 66 in the 2005 GE, based on only 35% of the vote.
Both as a candidate and as a party, your prospects under our system depend heavily on who your opponents are and how the rest of the vote splits between them.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
It does always surprise me how many of our rivers apparently have pre-AS names.
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
In Hungarian the names of two major rivers are the Temes (pronounced Tem-esh) and the Tisza (pronounced Teess-uh). It's a curious coincidence if coincidence it is.
I'm sure you're right, but FWIW I know lots of people who routinely say things like "Is that a GUE proposal?" or "What is the EPP position on that, they won't get it through without them?"
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name any European parliamentary grouping.
I doubt 1 in 50 Brits could name the leader of their local council.
Mrs Cutts, I can't name the district level one though.
Graham Butland, who I was partially responsible for bringing to Essex. Not in a political capacity I hasten to add.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
It does always surprise me how many of our rivers apparently have pre-AS names.
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
In Hungarian the names of two major rivers are the Temes (pronounced Tem-esh) and the Tisza (pronounced Teess-uh). It's a curious coincidence if coincidence it is.
When I was at school, one of my fellow pupils who wanted to skive off games was persuaded to tell the school nurse that he had menstrual pains. I suspect Mrs May will get about as much sympathy as he did.
Yes, I suspect that lowland England was quite lightly populated after Roman Britain collapsed.
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
It is very confusing and I am pretty sure no one has yet got close to the answer. The fact that the general population seems to have mostly disappeared would account for the widespread adoption of AS. But that then does not account for why the language structure is Brythonic which would imply a continuance of pre-AS population.
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
I can remember writing essays about why there are few Celtic place names in south east England, other than rivers, not many Celtic inscriptions or monuments. The Oppenheimer thesis that the English were largely Germanic all along and that the celts themselves migrated up from Iberia seemed plausible at the time it came out. Some sort of 5th century plague and depopulation might explain the place names but not the lack of inscriptions. The map of those Celtic ones that have been discovered is heavily weighted to the north and west.
It does always surprise me how many of our rivers apparently have pre-AS names.
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
In Hungarian the names of two major rivers are the Temes (pronounced Tem-esh) and the Tisza (pronounced Teess-uh). It's a curious coincidence if coincidence it is.
Are those river names pre-Magyar? There were significant populations of Celtic speaking people in Mid Europe in early Roman times.
Morning all. As others have said, not much to see in the Newport result, but there is perhaps one little thing: UKIP did relatively well, implying perhaps that the meltdown we've seen at the national level won't necessarily stop people voting UKIP. That matters in the sense that the hardline Brexit vote won't automatically transfer to Nigel Farage's new gang but may be split, which could limit the future electoral impact of hardline Brexit disgruntlement.
Gotta say I think once Farages party is out in the open, Kipper support will melt away like snow off the dyke. They will have the hardcore Yaxley BNP nutters but struggle to save any deposits, they will probably only stand 50 or so candidates, there's no money in them anymore. 8% given the 'outrage' of the no deal plurality is not great in a leave seat with a recognized figure standing and both main parties struggling with Brexit
I dont think so. UKIP have the branding, and are not too bothered by being called Islamophobic. Indeed Islamophobia is quite a vote winner for them. The BNP used to get 10% or so in a number of elections, so there is always a place for an avowed racist party.
Can they afford to stand and campaign nationally in euros and a GE? Have they any serious backers? Helmer quit Tuesday, they are out of recognisible figures apart from Yaxley, and he will drop them when he finds something else to piss about with
Surely their focus will be the European elections and winning MEPs - which we assume will happen now. Although if the Brexit party also stands voters may desert them once they realise it’s not Farage’s party.
Of course the problem is those regions where they are likely to win most votes have fewer MEPs so it’s harder to win seats.
And if they split the vote with Farage we may find the only MEP elected across both parties is Farage himself in the large south east region.
And Farage is highly unlikely to be a party group leader in the next parliament as his EFDD group will probably disappear so won’t have the same opportunity to make his big speeches in front of the big players. So he is likely to cut a less influential figure in Brussels.
France believes it is 'premature' to assume they will grant Britain another extension to the Brexit negotiation period, a source close to the President has said.
The French diplomatic source slammed as 'clumsy plans of a 'flexible extension' for Britain to leave the EU in the next year.
'It is premature to talk of an extension despite the fact the 27 had set a clear pre-condition: the need for a credible alternative plan justifying this request. We're not there today,' the source said.
Comments
The former can be refreshing because there is a relaxation of otherwise strict social norms plus it is a sounding board where you can be bold and try to convince others. It can also be positively Socratic in nature as no one gets a free ride with their opinions which are interrogated mercilessly.
@Richard_Tyndall can you believe it was a eurosceptic before he was won over by my arguments and discourse.
At present, older people who've lived in several countries and feel this way are relatively unusual. In 30 years, I suspect it may be commonplace, and national identity will gently erode in the same way that regional identity has eroded within parts of Britain.
The latter is a feudal principle; the former rejects it.
There was an attempt by the European Commission to establish a single European inheritance law in 2011/12, but it foundered because these the two principles could not be reconciled.
There is a wonderful but utterly bonkers book that was written by Albany Major in 1913 called The Early Wars of Wessex. It tried to find the locations of al the battles mentioned in the ASC and paint an accurate picture of the Anglo-Saxon invasions of southern England. It is pretty much discredited these days but it does include one really interesting bit of evidence that sadly no longer exists.
I forget the exact details but Major refers to a river near the Hampshire/Dorset border where the locals on each side of the river speak completely different dialects even though they only live a few tens of yards apart. He cites this as evidence of a long standing border between the Anglo-Saxon and British kingdoms which existed for long after the rest of southern England had been conquered.
As I say the conclusions he drew don't stand the test of time but the fact that such differences still existed only 100 years ago and are now lost I find fascinating and slightly sad.
Someone suggests an obscure academic resource just for LOLs... and someone else criticises its accuracy...
The strange thing about the "Saxon invasion" as cultural change rather than physical replacement is that language tends to be quite resilient, and it indeed was under the Normans and Vikings, but it seems that language changed quickly under the Saxons, from Romano-Celtic.
She said No, No, No to any loss of *her* powers. She was quite happy to nationalise education and take it away from county councils. Academies to this day report to Whitehall, not to local government.
Even at present, I regard 'Brussels democracy' as slightly better than 'Whitehall democracy'.
I certainly can't. I know there is a centre left one, a hard-left/green one, the EPP something with the Tories left, the ECR which they founded, ALDE (is it?) with the Lib Dems, and I think a new far right one?
One of the urns we excavated last October has AS decoration on it but is a late RB form which again would indicate a mixing of the two cultures. This is backed up by sites like West Heslerton in Yorkshire where invasion period burials that were classically Anglian in nature were found by dentine analysis to contain people who had almost all been born in Britain.
'Leave it Wayne, that Napoleonic Code slag just aint wurf it.'
Astonishingly, this seems to be a minority interest in fleshworld*.
*Many thanks for @Dura_Ace introducing me to the word!
[This analysis brought to you courtesy of recent listening to the History of England podcast]
https://twitter.com/rachel_bradley1/status/1114144389482283009?s=21
https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/parliamentary-under-secretary-of-state--94
https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1114148462734585856
Imagine if too many headbangers have quit the party to elect their chosen successor...
So, Theresa May might find herself in good company, should a snap poll be forced upon her in a couple of months' time...
I do wonder with regard to the depopulation if part of the problem was that the Villa landscape was so endemic in the south and east of Britain that it had effectively pushed out any other settlement so that when it collapsed there was nothing left to replace it.
*non-Brexit wise at least.
I haven't done my homework in time
That said, it would indeed be possible for one party to win the election outright with less than third of the popular vote, providing that all its opponents' votes split in the right ways and places. Labour won a healthy majority of 66 in the 2005 GE, based on only 35% of the vote.
Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/03/us/politics/william-barr-mueller-report.html
So somebody told the NYT, that somebody that them, that somebody told them that they saw some stuff in the report that looked bad. That is like some crazy game of chinese whispers.
The Python sketch that never was but should have been, if indeed there wasn't.
*thwack*
Of course the problem is those regions where they are likely to win most votes have fewer MEPs so it’s harder to win seats.
And if they split the vote with Farage we may find the only MEP elected across both parties is Farage himself in the large south east region.
And Farage is highly unlikely to be a party group leader in the next parliament as his EFDD group will probably disappear so won’t have the same opportunity to make his big speeches in front of the big players. So he is likely to cut a less influential figure in Brussels.
Standards around here are really slipping.
Next you'll be showing Theresa May in a gold bikini...
The French diplomatic source slammed as 'clumsy plans of a 'flexible extension' for Britain to leave the EU in the next year.
'It is premature to talk of an extension despite the fact the 27 had set a clear pre-condition: the need for a credible alternative plan justifying this request. We're not there today,' the source said.