In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That is deeply questionable. As pointed out before DNA of the most Anglo-Saxon part of England, East Anglia, is only 38% Anglo-Saxon. The genocide was cultural. Here in Kent (a place name that comes from the Celtic Canti tribe, Canterbury "the borough of the MEn of Kent" being thus a part Celtic name) the population was closer to the Belgae accross the Channel than the Celts in what is now Wales.
The whole debate, as you prove, is caught up in identity politics and a desire to paint the English as the "other". If there were a genocide there would be archeological evidence of mass graves. Yet the most recent research has shown that there was intermarriage and mixed ancestry in the earliest phase of Anglo-Saxon settlement. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26783717
The dates are about right and it would explain a depopulation that allowed a cultural elite to come in and simply take over. It would also explain why DNA burial sites of the period are not exclusive to one ethnic group.
Where is the BEST place in the UK to sit out this plague? What do people think?
You could argue for a Hebridean island, or the Shetlands, Scillies etc. But then you're probably far away from people you love, and what if supplies get cut off, and what if you suddenly need a hospital?
You could argue a small cottage/village near a big city, with a garden for air and sun, but again local hospitals will be filled with the city dwellers first, if anything goes wrong.
So maybe in a big city near a good hospital? But what if civil disorder breaks out?
Thoughts?
London - that way you get it , recover in 2 weeks and get on with your life without obsessing over a nasty form of flu
I thought you could catch this strain more than once?
I don't think there have been any confirmed cases of that. What we have seen is a couple of people who had it, tested negative, and then were tested positive a little later. However, in these cases they were asymptomatic, and it isn't clear if it was a testing error, a different strain, or reinfection (very mild).
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
There’s a theory that the south and east of England were settled by Germanic language speakers long before the Anglo Saxon arrived, and therefore weren’t speaking celtic to begin with.
Yes, I came across that a few years ago. The evidence for it is tenuous at best.
Does anyone know the names of his other 5 'official' kids?
2 sons and 2 daughters with ex-wife Marina Wheeler and a daughter with Helen MacIntyre. I know there are rumours of a sixth child with another woman but we're never going to know unless she goes public.
If we can find out the names of the others, it could give us a handle on the kind of names Boris prefers.
Of course there's always the possibility that he lets their mothers have the final say.
See the final paragraph of the thread header.
Doh! I didn't read that bit. Well with names like that and the possibility that Carrie might have different ideas I wouldn't touch that market, the prices are all too short and there's too much opportunity for insider betting by the staff at Downing Street and others who might be in the know.
Boudicca. Currently in favour with the posh, and spot-on combo of classical history and English nationalism.
Boudicca ... English nationalism.
Boudicca was not English because there were no English people on these islands in AD60.
Buddig was Welsh.
‘English’ is not really an ethnicity, it is a nationality.
She is not English (whether defined ethnically or by nationality). There was no notion of England until the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons.
Buddig did not speak English (but a Brythonic Celtic language).
Yours is a truly outrageous piece of cultural appropriation. The intellectual equivalent of a skinhead's fist.
In your picture, King Arthur is English ... even though he spent his life fighting the English.
The problem is we have next to no reliable historical record of what was taking place between say, 440 AD and 600 AD. It's hard to know if Arthur actually existed.
Wessex was supposedly an Anglo-Saxon kingdom, yet its founder, Cerdic, and his two successors had British names.
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
Welcome back.
I think there is pretty compelling evidence that a war leader lived at the time and had at least a temporary success in holding back the hordes.
I remember years ago reading speculation that the historical figure Riothamus (operating around AD470) was Arthur based on the suggestion that "Riothamus" was actually a title (it approximates to "Greatest King") and that there is evidence of an upsurge in babies being named "Arthur" around that time
Thanks. I've been working on my dissertation.
There seems to be evidence of a big check to Anglo-Saxon expansion, around 500 or so, which lasted for about 50 years.
According to this report, in Italy, nobody is enforcing the rules, people are still doing things despite what the government have said. It isn't going to be 3000 like in China is it.
Mail: "Under the quarantine, bars and restaurants [in Italy] will remain open but must ensure that everyone is seated at least a three feet apart."
I love "at least a three feet apart"; the rule is of course at least a metre. A Mail sub has enforced the "no foreign lengths" rule but missed the "a".
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
As an interesting counterfactual, I wonder if something similar would have occurred if the Danes had conquered Wessex in 878. Would we now be a Danish-speaking population, with most place names being Danish?
A lot of placenames in the former Danelaw *are*. All those -bys and -thorps and streetnames ending in -gate. That’s why the BBC’s siting of “Holby” in the south-west enrages me.
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
There’s a theory that the south and east of England were settled by Germanic language speakers long before the Anglo Saxon arrived, and therefore weren’t speaking celtic to begin with.
Yes, I came across that a few years ago. The evidence for it is tenuous at best.
It rested significantly on the DNA research when this provided an entirely new source of evidence. Oppenheimer’s book summaries it all. I understand more recent analysis of the DNA data has called some of his findings into question, but I am not aware whether there is a more recent source available to non academics.
According to this report, in Italy, nobody is enforcing the rules, people are still doing things despite what the government have said. It isn't going to be 3000 like in China is it.
Mail: "Under the quarantine, bars and restaurants [in Italy] will remain open but must ensure that everyone is seated at least a three feet apart."
I love "at least a three feet apart"; the rule is of course at least a metre. A Mail sub has enforced the "no foreign lengths" rule but missed the "a".
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
I have just been informed by a friend at a leading UK university that their department has now moved to work from home, no meetings, no presentations, all travel cancelled.
I think we are going to see a big shut down very soon.
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
The South East has hardly any celtic monuments (stone crosses and the like), unlike parts of England further north or west. Tending to support theories of a difference between the pre-Anglo Saxon populations of eastern and western Britain.
I have just been informed by a friend at a leading UK university that their department has now moved to work from home, no meetings, no presentations, all travel cancelled.
I think we are going to see a big shut down very soon.
The big question is, what will be the first signs of an imminent quarantine for a city? Media presumably won't be able to report it before it happens, unlike Italy.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
The virus has already reached the Faroe Islands. So I don't think there's anywhere clever you can go to escape from it.
I'd say you'd want a detached house with a private garden and your own vehicle (that way you can absolutely isolate and aside from the postman, milkman and deliverymen ..all deliveries of which you can "wipe down" before taking inside) and if you have to go out you're going out in your own vehicle. You're minimising any contact with anyone else to effectively zero.
Other than that I don't think it matters where you are. I'd just pick a low crime area.
You can certainly overthink it. If you're too isolated you won't be a priority for supplies if supply chains break down (including fuel to get in and out) and almost entirely on your own.
I have just been informed by a friend at a leading UK university that their department has now moved to work from home, no meetings, no presentations, all travel cancelled.
I think we are going to see a big shut down very soon.
The big question is, what will be the first signs of an imminent quarantine for a city? Media presumably won't be able to report it before it happens, unlike Italy.
Virus seems to be spread pretty even in England so not much point even if you cower the population to be believing this is a sensible response
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
As an interesting counterfactual, I wonder if something similar would have occurred if the Danes had conquered Wessex in 878. Would we now be a Danish-speaking population, with most place names being Danish?
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
There are many definitions for the seasons and using the equinoxes and solstices only makes sense if you have no other way to measure the passage of time through the year.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
The South East has hardly any celtic monuments (stone crosses and the like), unlike parts of England further north or west. Tending to support theories of a difference between the pre-Anglo Saxon populations of eastern and western Britain.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
I have just been informed by a friend at a leading UK university that their department has now moved to work from home, no meetings, no presentations, all travel cancelled.
I think we are going to see a big shut down very soon.
The big question is, what will be the first signs of an imminent quarantine for a city? Media presumably won't be able to report it before it happens, unlike Italy.
Virus seems to be spread pretty even in England so not much point even if you cower the population to be believing this is a sensible response
Travel related cases are, but local transmission won't be.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
About stopping global warming.....
Weather != Climate Is malaria, dengue fever, etc, for covid-19 a good trade?
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
The South East has hardly any celtic monuments (stone crosses and the like), unlike parts of England further north or west. Tending to support theories of a difference between the pre-Anglo Saxon populations of eastern and western Britain.
Or a difference in the settlement pattern and/or density. Much of the South West was settled quite late. There is evidence that the Romans settled Germanic tribes as Foederati in Britannia, and that some military units would have been Germanic in origin, but I'm not sure they would have provided a substantial proportion of the population. May have acted as a beachhead when others came over, though.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
Read Adam Rutherford's Abrief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived.
Everyone of largely European descent alove today is decsended from everyone who was both: alive in Europe over 1500 years ago and has living descendents.
So if you are of largely European descent and Boudicca has any living descendants at all, you are one of them.
The only unknown really is whether Boudicca has any living descendants but it reckoned that about 80% of people who lived in the past do have living descendants.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Well, if you want midsummers day to be in the middle of summer then the meteorological seasons don't work too well either. The traditional Irish seasons have May 1st being the start of summer which works a bit better, and would make Feb 1st the start of spring.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
A good mind trick is to believe it started on the 1st March and then when it gets to the 20th change your mind so you get an elongated Spring
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
There are both meteorological and astronomical definitions of the seasons, and they are different. Neither is right or wrong but in discussions of the weather, the meteorological one has at least the right to be heard.
Today I went to a very interesting talk by Melvyn Bragg, had a short chat with him afterwards and met and chatted with Hazel Blears (remember her?). She is quite delightful.
The weather has been lovely too. Driving to Ambleside with the car roof down was wonderful - fresh air and sunshine and a definite feel of spring.
I am not ignoring what is happening. But I am not going to let it govern my every waking thought or comment either.
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
Read Adam Rutherford's Abrief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived.
Everyone of largely European descent alove today is decsended from everyone who was both: alive in Europe over 1500 years ago and has living descendents.
So if you are of largely European descent and Boudicca has any living descendants at all, you are one of them.
The only unknown really is whether Boudicca has any living descendants but it reckoned that about 80% of people who lived in the past do have living descendants.
I reada book recently which argued the case that much of what is now Eastern England was largely Germanic-speaking at the time of the Roman invasion.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
I expect it is very likely to be called off together with many other events
Today I went to a very interesting talk by Melvyn Bragg, had a short chat with him afterwards and met and chatted with Hazel Blears (remember her?). She is quite delightful.
The weather has been lovely too. Driving to Ambleside with the car roof down was wonderful - fresh air and sunshine and a definite feel of spring.
I am not ignoring what is happening. But I am not going to let it govern my every waking thought or comment either.
Beautiful day. Enjoyed a lovely walk near Arnside. If only, if only.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
No but the Meydan meeting on Saturday and fixtures in Japan and France are taking place behind closed doors.
It may be too late to impose similar at Cheltenahm but you will have 250,000 spectators plus racecourse staff all in close proximity over a four day period which some may consider a bit of a risk.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
I expect it is very likely to be called off together with many other events
10/1 then if you think "very likely" .Good bet for you .
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
There are both meteorological and astronomical definitions of the seasons, and they are different. Neither is right or wrong but in discussions of the weather, the meteorological one has at least the right to be heard.
You don't do complexity, do you?
As the Solstice is the shortest day, I reckon that is the midpoint of winter, so winter stars 6 1/2 weeks earlier, so in early Nov and ends early Feb etc etc
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
Read Adam Rutherford's A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived.
Everyone of largely European descent alove today is decsended from everyone who was both: alive in Europe over 1500 years ago and has living descendents.
So if you are of largely European descent and Boudicca has any living descendants at all, you are one of them.
The only unknown really is whether Boudicca has any living descendants but it reckoned that about 80% of people who lived in the past do have living descendants.
I reada book recently which argued the case that much of what is now Eastern England was largely Germanic-speaking at the time of the Roman invasion.
Who knows. The point is we* are all related to everyone who was alive in Europe 1500 years ago.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
As it has been accepted as the time of the start of Spring in Britain since the time of the Druids
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
Somewhere around 20C is when the virus doesn’t persist as long on surfaces, reportedly... Good couple of weeks yet, then.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
Bingo! So winter starts on midwinters day.
What pisses me off is November; it isn't winter by any official definition but it obviously is, really. So at least a third of the year is winter, or might as well be.
I've realised that I think the luxury item I want is cigars but they're annoying to keep. I'd like one every 6 weeks. Maybe I'll buy a pipe and some tobacco as I think that might be easier to keep.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
There are both meteorological and astronomical definitions of the seasons, and they are different. Neither is right or wrong but in discussions of the weather, the meteorological one has at least the right to be heard.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
I expect it is very likely to be called off together with many other events
Cheltenham was called off during the Foot & Mouth crisis despite the government not advising it, so we cannot rule it out. That said, there is no need now. I'd be more worried about the Grand National in a few weeks' time if the number of cases increases.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
No but the Meydan meeting on Saturday and fixtures in Japan and France are taking place behind closed doors.
It may be too late to impose similar at Cheltenahm but you will have 250,000 spectators plus racecourse staff all in close proximity over a four day period which some may consider a bit of a risk.
Could make it even more hedonistic then it normally is with people wanting a last good day out for a while!
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
Bingo! So winter starts on midwinters day.
What pisses me off is November; it isn't winter by any official definition but it obviously is, really. So at least a third of the year is winter, or might as well be.
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
As it has been accepted as the time of the start of Spring in Britain since the time of the Druids
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
The South East has hardly any celtic monuments (stone crosses and the like), unlike parts of England further north or west. Tending to support theories of a difference between the pre-Anglo Saxon populations of eastern and western Britain.
Or a difference in the settlement pattern and/or density. Much of the South West was settled quite late. There is evidence that the Romans settled Germanic tribes as Foederati in Britannia, and that some military units would have been Germanic in origin, but I'm not sure they would have provided a substantial proportion of the population. May have acted as a beachhead when others came over, though.
Aren't most of the Welsh stone crosses from no earlier than the period when the first major A/S conquests were taking place though? And mostly from after the clear establishment of the proto-English kingdoms.
IIRC it’s certain that Anglo-Saxons were invited to Britain as fœderati by Romano-British leaders after the Roman military left and that they probably did act as a bridgehead. Not sure if the evidence is so good for them coming before the recall of the legions though.
I think the biggest argument against a pre-Roman departure A/S settlement though is that the peoples the Romans record conquering in what is now south and eastern England are clearly Celtic: Iceni, Atrebates and some like the Belgae around modern Hampshire were clearly offshots of Gallic people with the same names. We have absolutely no records or evidence of them being displaced prior to the end of Roman Britain. Now, it’s not impossible that a whole bunch of Anglo-Saxons were indeed invited to Britain at some point between say 100AD and 400AD but we’ve yet to find any real evidence of it.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
I expect it is very likely to be called off together with many other events
Cheltenham was called off during the Foot & Mouth crisis despite the government not advising it, so we cannot rule it out. That said, there is no need now. I'd be more worried about the Grand National in a few weeks' time if the number of cases increases.
I can understand you hope it is not called off but it looks as if COBRA will change advice to delay tomorrow and a real change to advice on travelling and gatherings including sporting ones.
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
Can I also just say that a lot of the dogs at Crufts look ridiculous.
My hound, looking at me soulfully from the comfy sofa where he is perched, is much better looking.
And in any event, dogs just don’t seem right in beauty parades.
My dog got disqualified from his show for growling at the judge (who came up afterwards and said what a great dog he was, apart from not liking judges). I thought he had a point. The dog, that is.
Biggest market to bet on politics at the moment is the betfair market on will Cheltenham be called off (has come in from 20/1 to 10/1 today presumably on the back of the planned sports/government meeting tomorrow
With both Britain and Ireland being relatively clear, there is no reason to call it off.
I expect it is very likely to be called off together with many other events
Cheltenham was called off during the Foot & Mouth crisis despite the government not advising it, so we cannot rule it out. That said, there is no need now. I'd be more worried about the Grand National in a few weeks' time if the number of cases increases.
I can understand you hope it is not called off but it looks as if COBRA will change advice to delay tomorrow and a real change to advice on travelling and gatherings including sporting ones.
Tomorrow could be a very important day
It is possible, of course, but unless there has been an uptick in cases over the weekend, there is no new reason that did not exist last week.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
As it has been accepted as the time of the start of Spring in Britain since the time of the Druids
Do you have a poll to prove that?
Now that is a challenge.
Woman living in Italy on Sky just said people standing in a queue at a bread shop were all a metre apart.
Looks as if there is going to a run on tape measures !!!!!
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
As it has been accepted as the time of the start of Spring in Britain since the time of the Druids
Do you have a poll to prove that?
Now that is a challenge.
Woman living in Italy on Sky just said people standing in a queue at a bread shop were all a metre apart.
Looks as if there is going to a run on tape measures !!!!!
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
Bingo! So winter starts on midwinters day.
What pisses me off is November; it isn't winter by any official definition but it obviously is, really. So at least a third of the year is winter, or might as well be.
November is the height of autumn, not winter
In Scandinavia, winter in one tradition begins on 14 October and ends on the last day of February.
In Celtic nations such as Ireland (using the Irish calendar) and in Scandinavia, the winter solstice is traditionally considered as midwinter, with the winter season beginning 1 November, on All Hallows, or Samhain. Winter ends and spring begins on Imbolc, or Candlemas, which is 1 or 2 February.
Scandinavia sounds about right to me. All the autumnal things (harvest and leaf fall) have happened by 1 November. And some spring things (snowdrops, wild cherry blossom) happen in February.
Today I went to a very interesting talk by Melvyn Bragg, had a short chat with him afterwards and met and chatted with Hazel Blears (remember her?). She is quite delightful.
The weather has been lovely too. Driving to Ambleside with the car roof down was wonderful - fresh air and sunshine and a definite feel of spring.
I am not ignoring what is happening. But I am not going to let it govern my every waking thought or comment either.
Life is very fleeting...so best to enjoy every minute of it...
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
There was some talk that the weather might start to warm up in March to help dissipate the virus, but so far it is an average of 1C colder than in February, so no respite there.
It is still Winter until March 20th
So you are one of those crazy people who thinks that midsummers day is the first day of summer.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
Winter Started on 21st December and Spring starts with the Spring equinox on 20th March
That is just one definition among dozens. Why is it the one that you favour?
As it has been accepted as the time of the start of Spring in Britain since the time of the Druids
Do you have a poll to prove that?
Now that is a challenge.
Woman living in Italy on Sky just said people standing in a queue at a bread shop were all a metre apart.
Looks as if there is going to a run on tape measures !!!!!
Have I missed something or has the EU been conspicuously silent on the Covid 19 crisis? If so surely that has to be something of a disappointment in the light of clear failings in the lack of co-ordination among different European countries. Almost as poor as the US in this instance.
Boudicca was not English, but it's probable that most inhabitants of Norfolk and Suffolk today have Icenian ancestors. And, they would undoubtedly see themselves as English.
There is little evidence for that. Most inhabitants of Norfolk today are not descendants of Icenians, as judged by their names of the place names of the towns that they built. There is little or no discernible Celtic influence.
The descendants of the Icenians are much further West, because waves of invasion pushed them there. The descendents will be in Wales or the West Country.
If you believe Boudicca was English, then you believe Pythagoras was Italian, Euclid & Aristarchus were Egyptian and Epicurus & Diogenes were Turkish.
These philosophers are all associated with Sicily or Alexandria or present-day Turkey. But they were Greek.
Boudicca was Welsh.
It’s a conundrum. Almost all archaeologists reject the notion that there was a large-scale population transfer of Anglo-Saxons that physically drove the Romano-British/proto-Welsh from the lowlands, rather than they formed a new ruling class on top of the existing population.
Yet as others have said there is a dearth of Celtic placenames in south and east England and next to no Brythonic loanwords in Anglo-Saxon or indeed modern English, so the putative Anglo-Saxon “ruling class” did a far better job of rooting out the general population’s language than the Romans did, or indeed the Normans, who really did form just a ruling class, did to the Anglo-Saxons. Then we have placenames like “Walton” (“foreigner settlement”) which suggest that remnant British populations did exist but lived to some degree separate from the Anglo-Saxons.
Genetics doesn’t resolve the issue either: I’m not super up to date on the latest research but what I recall is that while the lowland “English” population is somewhat distinct from the upland “Celtic” population it’s not particularly close to the regions on the Continent that the Anglo-Saxons hailed from, and probably reflects a much older set of population movements.
In the North East of the US, plenty of Native American names survive in geographical features or place names, even though the Indian tribes were annihilated or pushed further West.
There are very few names of Celtic origin in East Anglia.
If we look at the evidence of placenames, I think it shows that the Anglo-Saxon invasion of what is now the East of England was one of incredible violence and fury -- the Welshness was obliterated, far more so than Native American names were obliterated in the US.
England is the land of a terrible genocide.
That theory is about fifty years out of date. It was discredited even when i studied Anglo Saxon history thirty five years ago.
What theory?
I merely made an assertion about place names.
If you have evidence, present it, rather than invoice the Papal Infallability of IanB2's teachers thirty-five years ago.
Certainly not infallible. And my notes are in a box somewhere in the loft.
There’s no right answer, given the inadequacy of the evidence. Wikipedia has a reasonable article with links to a stack of citations. Here’s part of its summary:
However, another view, the most widely accepted among 21st century scholars, is that the migrants were fewer, possibly centred on a warrior elite. This hypothesis suggests that the incomers, having achieved a position of political and social dominance, initiated a process of acculturation by the natives to their language and material culture, and intermarried with them to a significant degree. Archaeologists have found that settlement patterns and land use show no clear break with the Romano-British past, though there were marked changes in material culture. This view predicts that the ancestry of the people of Anglo-Saxon and modern England would be largely derived from the native Romano-British. The uncertain results of genetic studies have tended to support both a predominant amount of native British Celtic ancestry and a significant continental contribution resulting from Germanic immigration.
Yes, that is the accepted view, and the archaeology tends to support it. I still have yet to come across a convincing explanation of how there is next to no Brythonic legacy in the English language or SE English placenames though. If the Anglo-Saxon elite did eradicate the proto-Welsh language from their subject population they managed to do it to a degree absolutely unprecedented in any other place or time I can think of.
The South East has hardly any celtic monuments (stone crosses and the like), unlike parts of England further north or west. Tending to support theories of a difference between the pre-Anglo Saxon populations of eastern and western Britain.
Or a difference in the settlement pattern and/or density. Much of the South West was settled quite late. There is evidence that the Romans settled Germanic tribes as Foederati in Britannia, and that some military units would have been Germanic in origin, but I'm not sure they would have provided a substantial proportion of the population. May have acted as a beachhead when others came over, though.
Aren't most of the Welsh stone crosses from no earlier than the period when the first major A/S conquests were taking place though? And mostly from after the clear establishment of the proto-English kingdoms.
IIRC it’s certain that Anglo-Saxons were invited to Britain as fœderati by Romano-British leaders after the Roman military left and that they probably did act as a bridgehead. Not sure if the evidence is so good for them coming before the recall of the legions though.
I think the biggest argument against a pre-Roman departure A/S settlement though is that the peoples the Romans record conquering in what is now south and eastern England are clearly Celtic: Iceni, Atrebates and some like the Belgae around modern Hampshire were clearly offshots of Gallic people with the same names. We have absolutely no records or evidence of them being displaced prior to the end of Roman Britain. Now, it’s not impossible that a whole bunch of Anglo-Saxons were indeed invited to Britain at some point between say 100AD and 400AD but we’ve yet to find any real evidence of it.
No there is clear evidence of fœderati being settled in Roman Britain from the late 3rd century onwards. Probably from around 280AD when a lot of the Roman towns were instructed to build defences around them as a result of incursions and instability across the Empire. The presence of Germanic shrines on Hadrian's wall and of Deae Matres at a number of Roman garrison towns and cities across Britain shows they were around for at least a century before 410AD.
I have just been filming with Channel 5 for a programme they are doing on Roman Britain and touched on this in the (very short) interview.
On the question of displacement of existing population, I think that misunderstands the situation. In much of Southern Britain it now looks like the pre-Roman population had already been substantially cleared as part of the formation of the Villa Landscape.
Comments
The whole debate, as you prove, is caught up in identity politics and a desire to paint the English as the "other". If there were a genocide there would be archeological evidence of mass graves. Yet the most recent research has shown that there was intermarriage and mixed ancestry in the earliest phase of Anglo-Saxon settlement. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26783717
What happened, in my view, and pertenent to the current issue, was this -
https://www.medievalists.net/2019/06/the-justinianic-plague-reached-as-far-as-the-british-isles-study-finds/
The dates are about right and it would explain a depopulation that allowed a cultural elite to come in and simply take over. It would also explain why DNA burial sites of the period are not exclusive to one ethnic group.
There seems to be evidence of a big check to Anglo-Saxon expansion, around 500 or so, which lasted for about 50 years.
No Toilet Paper/Kitchen Roll
No Tinned Tomatoes
No Baked Beans
No Rice
I think we are going to see a big shut down very soon.
I'd say you'd want a detached house with a private garden and your own vehicle (that way you can absolutely isolate and aside from the postman, milkman and deliverymen ..all deliveries of which you can "wipe down" before taking inside) and if you have to go out you're going out in your own vehicle. You're minimising any contact with anyone else to effectively zero.
Other than that I don't think it matters where you are. I'd just pick a low crime area.
You can certainly overthink it. If you're too isolated you won't be a priority for supplies if supply chains break down (including fuel to get in and out) and almost entirely on your own.
1st of March is the start of Spring.
And so the seven finalists are ready for the big event.
On BFE the Utility dog is the favourite followed by the Pastoral (a great Old English Sheepdog).
Edit/ the pastoral has gone into the favourite spot. At 2.96, followed by the toy category winner.
Is malaria, dengue fever, etc, for covid-19 a good trade?
Everyone of largely European descent alove today is decsended from everyone who was both: alive in Europe over 1500 years ago and has living descendents.
So if you are of largely European descent and Boudicca has any living descendants at all, you are one of them.
The only unknown really is whether Boudicca has any living descendants but it reckoned that about 80% of people who lived in the past do have living descendants.
But there are other options.
Oh. And sticking the word “Democratic” in their country’s name. Presumably because of their devotion to OMOV.
You don't do complexity, do you?
Last week he was encouraging trips to Venice. When does this man's advice border on the dangerous?
Why has our Foreign Office guidance not been updated for Italy to prevent people like Calder getting away with this?
Lots of these little mistakes are starting to add up.
The weather has been lovely too. Driving to Ambleside with the car roof down was wonderful - fresh air and sunshine and a definite feel of spring.
I am not ignoring what is happening. But I am not going to let it govern my every waking thought or comment either.
*dry cough* ....
My hound, looking at me soulfully from the comfy sofa where he is perched, is much better looking.
It may be too late to impose similar at Cheltenahm but you will have 250,000 spectators plus racecourse staff all in close proximity over a four day period which some may consider a bit of a risk.
(*Western Europeans)
Good couple of weeks yet, then.
But we might have snow at Easter
My preference is for the more natural looking working dogs, such as the longer legged terriers.
IIRC it’s certain that Anglo-Saxons were invited to Britain as fœderati by Romano-British leaders after the Roman military left and that they probably did act as a bridgehead. Not sure if the evidence is so good for them coming before the recall of the legions though.
I think the biggest argument against a pre-Roman departure A/S settlement though is that the peoples the Romans record conquering in what is now south and eastern England are clearly Celtic: Iceni, Atrebates and some like the Belgae around modern Hampshire were clearly offshots of Gallic people with the same names. We have absolutely no records or evidence of them being displaced prior to the end of Roman Britain. Now, it’s not impossible that a whole bunch of Anglo-Saxons were indeed invited to Britain at some point between say 100AD and 400AD but we’ve yet to find any real evidence of it.
Tomorrow could be a very important day
Woman living in Italy on Sky just said people standing in a queue at a bread shop were all a metre apart.
Looks as if there is going to a run on tape measures !!!!!
In Celtic nations such as Ireland (using the Irish calendar) and in Scandinavia, the winter solstice is traditionally considered as midwinter, with the winter season beginning 1 November, on All Hallows, or Samhain. Winter ends and spring begins on Imbolc, or Candlemas, which is 1 or 2 February.
Scandinavia sounds about right to me. All the autumnal things (harvest and leaf fall) have happened by 1 November. And some spring things (snowdrops, wild cherry blossom) happen in February.
Is your complaint that the EU is NOT interfering with national sovereignty?
I have just been filming with Channel 5 for a programme they are doing on Roman Britain and touched on this in the (very short) interview.
On the question of displacement of existing population, I think that misunderstands the situation. In much of Southern Britain it now looks like the pre-Roman population had already been substantially cleared as part of the formation of the Villa Landscape.