Re: [sceptredisle] The Vikings
- I think that you have just made my point that it was a question of 'civilisations' rather than ethnicity.Steve:I think you're dead wrong on this. Because 50 years earlier, the Danes under Cnut invaded and took over England, but there wasn't anything like the degree of resentment among the English that there later was among the English, toward William & Co. This is partly due to the fact that the Danes and the English both spoke a "Germanic" language, though not necessarily mutually intelligible, and their customs were similar, and partly due to the fact that Cnut was smart enough to try to integrate the two groups as much as possible. The Normans had different customs, spoke a form of Old French, which would have been completely unintelligible to most people, made little or no effort to integrate themselves,even as rulers, and yes, raised taxes and stole land. They were much more obviously "different" in important ways that marked them off, than their predecessors had been, and both sides knew it. If this isn't or wasn't, "ethnicity at work", I don't know what is.Anne GI would contend that the resentment of the Anglo Saxons was more based on the fact that the Normans had come along and stolen their land rather than the fact that they were of a different 'ethnicity'. A similar feeling arose against Wessex from the time of Alfred onwards. England was very much, in the words of Metternich in a different context, 'a geographical expression', hence Edgar's claim in the 970s to be king of all Britain.Steve
- Steve:I am perfectly calm. And you're still misunderstanding, to the point of ignoring the obvious.Anne GCalm downSteve:And I think you completely misunderstand the issue, to the point of ignoring the obvious.Anne GI think that you have just made my point that it was a question of 'civilisations' rather than ethnicity..