Dear England

[Shay HTFC]

Blue Meanie said:

JRM said:

Blue Meanie said:

JRM said:

I THOUGHT we were discussing at what point in time it is reasonable to go back to in order to define the first English, in so much as looking at the White Dragon Flag and working out if that was truely original England.

I was trying to make the point that it is almost an impossible thing to do and that today's definition of English is muddied by all sorts of immigration, but that is no different to tribal days

It's quite simple really. Each of the tribes were in effect countries in their own right, however, when those tribes united, into one form, then they became the country of England. The North did the same and became Scotland. If the tribes in the North had joined, they too would be England, and vice versa. Immigration has little to do with it, really, I feel. It may change the cultural content of the country, but the 'country' itself will remain the same, until it joins with another, becoming something else.

But surely they didn't all join up at the same time? Hence my reference to the Cornish, is 'original' English at the time pre-cornish join up or not?

Well, they were britons, but presumable they were not what we think of as Englsih until they joined what we know as England. 'England' is just a subset of Britain. The Cornish were a subset of Britain.

But surely all the tribes didn't meet at the same time. Was it the first two tribes to meet that decided upon England, or maybe only once a third party had arrived?

As for being patriotic, I am not at all patriotic, especially when I am in England. It is only when I venture abroad and watch the BBC News in some hut in Africa, or stand in a bar full of Sri Lankans watching the Premiership, or see a news article about the Queen whilst in the depths of Asia somewhere that I feel a tinge of pride. Thats when I realise that for such a small island, we are quite well renowned globally and it makes me smile that I can call that place my homeland.

But on a more pragmatic level, I don't really care for the nation of England when it comes to feeling 'connected' or part of a nation. I think I am a product of a globalised world and would happily move anywhere at the drop of a hat and happily live alongside the 'international' crowd. Most of my good friends are hardly what you would call English. England is just the name of the rock upon which I was born. I would quite happy for passports to be abolished and for there to be freedom to go and live where you please without any concept of nations (however unworkable that would be)

Edited by Shay HTFC on Tuesday 20th April 22:32

[Blue Meanie]

Shay HTFC said:

But surely all the tribes didn't meet at the same time. Was it the first two tribes to meet that decided upon England, or maybe only once a third party had arrived?

I have no idea on who decided what the name was, but that it not the point. All 'England' is is a collection of united tribes that had an alliance, and one 'king/leader'. The name doesn't matter. I presume the name for a country came from others, hence 'Angle'land'. I have no doubt they didn't all meet at once. It started with tribes in the south east, (Wessex, mercia, etc), and grew, until it got to the point where it wasn't going to get any bigger. Whatever that reason was. The picts/scots in the North who just were hostile so it stayed at 'England' as history tells it. I don't know.

As for being patriotic, I am not at all patriotic, especially when I am in England. It is only when I venture abroad and watch the BBC News in some hut in Africa, or stand in a bar full of Sri Lankans watching the Premiership, or see a news article about the Queen whilst in the depths of Asia somewhere that I feel a tinge of pride. Thats when I realise that for such a small island, we are quite well renowned globally and it makes me smile that I can call that place my homeland.

I'm not really patriotic. I like to see british teams win, or whatever, but I feel no nationalistic pride, etc. I would happily sign up if the UK was under invasion threat, but I feel no connection to it particularly

But on a more pragmatic level, I don't really care for the nation of England when it comes to feeling 'connected' or part of a nation. I think I am a product of a globalised world and would happily move anywhere at the drop of a hat and happily live alongside the 'international' crowd. Most of my good friends are hardly what you would call English. England is just the name of the rock upon which I was born.

I see myself as a 'citizen of the earth' for want of a better cliche! I find the notion of nationality, and borders to be one of the most limiting factors that humanity will face.

[Semi hemi]

Ayahuasca said:

It was like the Monty Python 'I look down on him' sketch.

Nope, It was a "Frost Report" sketch.

[Shay HTFC]

Blue Meanie said:

I see myself as a 'citizen of the earth' for want of a better cliche! I find the notion of nationality, and borders to be one of the most limiting factors that humanity will face.

But as the world gets more connected, the concept of nations will start to mean less and less much in the same way that the concept of tribes means nothing today compared to years ago.

The borders between nations will become more and more porous (its already happening) and nations will diversify and come together to make a 'world nation' in the same way that tribes diversified and came together to make England. It is an inevitable part of the natural growth and 'evolution' of society, unless you take draconian measures to prevent it and enforce the separation of different societies.

It is my opinion that in however many years (hundreds?) England will only be present in history books. And it doesn't concern me in the slightest.

Edited by Shay HTFC on Tuesday 20th April 22:58

[Ayahuasca]

Semi hemi said:

Ayahuasca said:

It was like the Monty Python 'I look down on him' sketch.

Nope, It was a "Frost Report" sketch.

I stand corrected.

[anonymous-user]

Shay HTFC said:

The borders between nations will become more and more porous (its already happening) and nations will diversify and come together to make a 'world nation' in the same way that tribes diversified and came together to make England. It is an inevitable part of the natural growth and 'evolution' of society, unless you take draconian measures to prevent it and enforce the separation of different societies.

ignoring religion for a second, that is exactly what will happen. human nature. resource rich countries like australia, canada, middle east, usa certainly are not open to mass immigration from populous emerging economy's, nor will they be. once indiginous populations think they are getting a raw deal (who doesn't) the barriers go up. we are extremely fortunate to have uk passports, very few people can travel or relocate as freely as us.

[JRM]

Blue Meanie said:

Shay HTFC said:

But on a more pragmatic level, I don't really care for the nation of England when it comes to feeling 'connected' or part of a nation. I think I am a product of a globalised world and would happily move anywhere at the drop of a hat and happily live alongside the 'international' crowd. Most of my good friends are hardly what you would call English. England is just the name of the rock upon which I was born.

I see myself as a 'citizen of the earth' for want of a better cliche! I find the notion of nationality, and borders to be one of the most limiting factors that humanity will face.

I agree with you both, exactly how I am starting to feel, and I used to be rediculously patriotic as were all my friends. Maybe it is just a result of growing up and realising the bigger picture.

[cazzer]

Blue Meanie said:

I see myself as a 'citizen of the earth' for want of a better cliche! I find the notion of nationality, and borders to be one of the most limiting factors that humanity will face.

Hippy.

[Groober]

cazzer said:

Blue Meanie said:

I see myself as a 'citizen of the earth' for want of a better cliche! I find the notion of nationality, and borders to be one of the most limiting factors that humanity will face.

Hippy.

Do you also think meat is murder.

[Hugo a Gogo]

I love the idea that various tribes decided to join 'England' like some sort of treaty

countries are formed by killing and conquering rivals, and claiming their territory as your own

So it was with Aethelred and England, and then , then William etc etc

[JRM]

I love the censorship!

[Blue Meanie]

Hugo a Gogo said:

I love the idea that various tribes decided to join 'England' like some sort of treaty

Who said they decided to 'join England'? Stop reading into stuff.

"by the 7th century a coherent set of Anglo-Saxon petty kingdoms known as the Heptarchy had emerged in southern and central Britain: Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Sussex, and Wessex.

Christianity was introduced in the south by Augustine from Rome and in the north by Aidan from Ireland. This reintroduced Christianity, which was lost after the founding of the Heptarchy. The title Bretwalda, meaning "Lord of the Britons", denoted the most influential kingship. Northumbria and Mercia were the most dominant forces early on. However, following Viking conquests in the north and east, and the imposition of Danelaw, the premier English kingdom became Wessex under Alfred the Great. His grandson Athelstan unified England in 927, although this was only cemented after Edred defeated the Viking Eric Bloodaxe."

Edited by Blue Meanie on Wednesday 21st April 14:14

[Ayahuasca]

Hugo a Gogo said:

I love the idea that various tribes decided to join 'England' like some sort of treaty

countries are formed by killing and conquering rivals, and claiming their territory as your own

So it was with Aethelred and England, and then , then William etc etc

The Bernard Cornwell's 'Saxon' series is great for bringing all this to life for anyone who is interested.

Also Julian Rathbone's 'The Last English King' is good for the Harold/William part.

[Hugo a Gogo]

maybe I should have spelled it 'Canute'