"anglo-saxon attitudes" Topic

Sadly I fell under the spell of Gildas in the 70's – Alcock was the prime mover and I "read" him (in translation). As a Catholic (and at the time very very practising) I did understand his slant but thought the evidence supported him : now (and Prior was not the template but long discussions with "Viking historians" was) I feel the evidence is less good.

On linguistics – I would argue we need to look at the foundations or assumptions this is based on. We have little evidence of what the ordinary folk spoke either in or before the Roman incursion: probably something we now know as Celtic. What was lost is indefinate: as Cornish / Welsh / Breton / Gaelic / Gallic differ we may never know. What I do know is that all these languages have almost disappeared despite the best efforts of communities and goverment agencies in the last 300 years – to English. In that time we have not seen the type of extermination I read about in traditional histories. I type that with trepidation as I am well versed in the Irish element – I am half-Irish.
So did the Celtic languages die out as they were regionally different? I do not know. I know that "English" was not that whole a language even a hundred years ago. I wish I could argue this elsewhere – but we have treated each other well and I hope I can be disproved. I would sleep a bit better.

My point was what motivated Gildas to write was his desire to castigate the behaviour of some contempory British rulers. He has no reason to fabricate a German invasion to justify his attacks on the benighted rulers.

The linguistic situation is not as obscure as all that. We know from place name evidence that Britain was Celtic speaking and that it was P Celtic rather than Q. So closer to Welsh than Irish. Cornish, Breton and Welsh are not that different at all. Though spelling can differ. Scots and Irish Gaelic have little difference either my native Irish speaking friend from County Clare found he could converse in the western isles of Scotland without much effort. He did say they sounded like Donegal people to his ear.

Your very wrong about the best efforts of Government to save these langauges in the last 300 years. Apart from major policy led erradication of the population who spoke these languages for example the Highland Clearances and the Great Famine, sustained effort was made by Government to discourage their use through schools and the legal system. In the last century these policies were reversed and Celtic languages are recovering some ground. My point in going over this is to demonstrate that left to themselves they were resilient enough to more than survive as the Welsh prove so amply.

If we look at the record we see that the once Celtic speaking East Anglia with its Iceni and Boudica (Victoria is a fair translation)becomes a powerful English speaking Kingdom. Something happened to cause that change and Bede, Gildas and the linguistic evidence say it was violent invasion.

I'm not sure about English not been a whole language a hundred years ago?

Anyhow its nice to have a reasoned discussion.

We have a fair idea of what the Celts of post-Roman Britain were speaking as we have written evidence I think – and it's pretty similar to modern Welsh.

Lowland Scottish names are also recognisably Welsh – Glasgow being Glas-caeau for example ("Green fields")as are many elsewhere in England.

And Welsh hasn't died out – it's spoken by a majority of people in the area I live and is taught in all schools. It's not unusual in Gwynedd for a child to enter primary school not speaking English.

Cornish only died out a couple of centuries ago and Breton survives. Both are similar to Welsh.

Don't know where to start – Gildas could have referred to a German (?) invasion but such had being going on (and would as "Danes") for hundreds of years. Schleswig Holstein problem.
I am on record as not seeing most (if not very very few) of the inhabitants as Celtic. I also feel that the languages varied then more than we think – Gallic in the Western Isles would always sound like Ulster Gaelic as the two regions are connected by water – the main way to travel.

The Iceni kingdom was hammered by the Romans. The power vacuum existed for 300 years before the traditional date of the invasions. It also has had long links to that area of Europe where the Rhine and other now German rivers enters the North Sea. Immigration would happen naturally.

I'm not going into the efforts to eradicate the "Celtic" fringe's cultures – yes the English were guilty and often heinously so (Mountjoy especially) but this has started a Newtonian reaction that made them survive.

I wish there was another place where we can discuss this – I also wish Dr Halsall was involved as he is one expert for whom I have always enjoyed reading.
We need a Yahoo group.

Why would the inhabitants not be Celtic?

They were Celts when the Romans arrived, and still Celts when they left.

Immigration would happen naturally would it? The Saxon Shore forts show what the Romans thought of interlopers… though it is possible the name Saxon Shore refers as much to the inhabitants as foreign enemies.

However, that doesn't explain what happened away from the East Coast.

"The Saxon Shore forts show what the Romans thought of interlopers…"

Though some have questioned if their purpose was trade rather than defence …

Maybe, but they housed an awful lot of warships…

That does point to a robust attitude towards free trade :)

"Maybe, but they housed an awful lot of warships…"

Warships, in a fort???

I,m surprised nobody has mentioned eye colour in this debate,
For years, as a lot of you have said it was thought that
the English in the main came from Germanic stock and the Welsh,Highland Scots and Irish were mainly Celtic stock,but
there was a problem with the fact that brown eyes were the
most common eye colour among the English.This baffled a lot
of Anthropologists as brown eyes are the least common eye
colour in Germany, Austria and other Germanic areas.This
strange fact was finally solved when DNA was identified.
There was a five year study of taking peoples DNA around
England that revealed 70% of Engish people had the same
ancestry as the IBERIAN penisula, this so the story goes
explains the brown eye colour predominating the English.
It also showed that apart from the odd Scandinavian DNA
and also Middle eastern the rest were of Germanic ancestry.
Which may suggest that the native Britons really were pushed
into Wales and Cornwall.

Regards

Pick up the book'Blood of the Isles'its all in there
its by Bryan Sykes