Happy St George's Day!

[Tyrone Biggums]

A nation of ex-Germanic tribesmen, living on the lands of a former Celtic nation celebrating the Saints day of a Turk from Asia Minor.

Interesting.

At least St Patrick set foot upon Ireland's shores and was a celt like them.

Ditch Geroge and have a St Benny Hill day instead.

A Public holiday where it's legal for old men to chase around scantily clad young women.

 

[dougdeep]

We should have picked St Alban. FACT.

http://www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/bios/alban.html

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

We should have picked St Alban. FACT.

http://www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/bios/alban.html

Quite true.

At least he set foot on british soil.

 

[Brovion]

A nation of ex-Germanic tribesmen, living on the lands of a former Celtic nation celebrating the Saints day of a Turk from Asia Minor.

Interesting.

That's why St George is ideal for modern England. He wasn't even an 'immigrant' and he's our national saint. I really do think the government, for antediluvian reasons, have missed a trick here. We could do more to promote an English identity among immigrants by by saying "Look, we know you come from another country, another culture. So did our national saint so don't worry about it."

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

for antediluvian reasons,

Good word brovian.


And good posting.

 

[Trufflehound]

Good word brovian.

As good as umbelliferous?

 

[algie]

So ...

One Anglo-American, one Welshman, one racist **** and a hippie twat.

Sorry to disappoint you but they were all born in England.Thats makes them English by birth

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

As good as umbelliferous?

I am not sure - that is another good one. But that is twice I have had to look up words this morning.

Hmmmm - I will try and use them both in conversation today.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Wellington was Irish.

OK he was born in Dublin to a titled English Protestant family with a seat in Cork when Ireland was a subject state of England.

He had as much in common with Irish Catholic people as the Roman elite had in common with their British subjects.

but I see your point.

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

We should have picked St Alban. FACT.

i'm from st albans and you wouldn't say that if you were too.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Sorry to disappoint you but they were all born in England.Thats makes them English by birth

What about the second generation immigrants out? They are English by birth.

The BNP is very clear on their stance

"The British National Party exists to secure a future for the indigenous peoples of these islands in the North Atlantic which have been our homeland for millennia. We use the term indigenous to describe the people whose ancestors were the earliest settlers here after the last great Ice Age and which have been complemented by the historic migrations from mainland Europe. The migrations of the Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Danes, Norse and closely related kindred peoples have been, over the past few thousands years, instrumental in defining the character of our family of nations. "

 

[unnameable]

I am surprised that the celebration of Saint George's Day hasn't been banned by some jumped-up, deracinated, metropolitan cosmopolite.
The Establishment fears the rise of Scottish nationalism because Scottish independence would lead inexorably to English nationalism. Britishness is a civic identity. Englishness is a racial identity. I have heard many a person say that someone can be black and British, but not black and English.

 

[Strike]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people

Romano-Britons
Further information: Ancient Britons, Romano-Britons
Romano-British is a collective term used to describe the native Brythonic-speaking Celtic population that lived in the area of Britain under Roman rule, known as Britannia, during the 1st-5th C. AD. It is generally believed they are among the descendants of the first wave of hunter-gatherers to colonise Britain after the end of the Ice Age. It was until recently, generally believed that a mass invasion by various Anglo-Saxon tribes largely displaced the native British populations, but recent genetic surveys have contradicted this view somewhat. [12] Some archaeologists see only limited evidence of immigration in the record. Francis Pryor states "I also can't see any evidence for bona fide mass migrations after the Neolithic."[13]

Archeological discoveries suggest that North Africans may have had a very limited presence in those parts of Britain that were to become England at the time of the Roman Empire.[14][15]


[edit] Anglo-Saxons
Further information: Anglo-Saxons, Sub-Roman Britain
Anglo-Saxon is a collective term usually used to describe the population living in Anglo-Saxon held territory in the south and east of the island of Great Britain (modern England) from around the mid-5th century AD to the Norman conquest of 1066.[16] The Anglo-Saxons are believed to originate from Germanic tribes that migrated from northern Germany in the 5th C. AD. It has been suggested that Germanic immigrants and Roman auxiliary troops may have settled in Britain long before the departure of the Roman legions in AD 410; indeed German auxiliary troops may even have been involved in the Roman invasion of the island in the 1st century A.D.[17] This same process occurred in many other provinces along the Roman border with the Germani. If Germanic garrison soldiers had retained their language and culture, this may have facilitated any later migration of Germanic peoples. [17]


[edit] Danish - Vikings
Further information: Danelaw, Vikings, Treaty of Wedmore, Treaty of Alfred and Guthrum
By the time of the first Viking attacks around 800 AD, the numerous petty kingdoms in south and east Britain had coalesced into what is commonly referred to as the Heptarchy. The most powerful of these at this time were Mercia and Wessex. The increasing pressure of Viking attack led to more cooperation between Wessex and Mercia; most notably, this period saw the rise of Alfred the Great, the only English born King of England to be titled 'the great'.

Alfred defeated a Danish army at the Battle of Edington in 878, coming to terms with the Danish leader Guthrum. After the Battle of Edington, Alfred negotiated the Danelaw with the Danes, resulting in a settlement of Danish-Vikings in northern and eastern England.[18] The influence on the English language by Danes, particularly in the former Danelaw, is most pronounced in places like York, formerly the settlement of Jorvik, although Jorvik is derived from the Old English Eoforwîc and in turn possibly from the Brythonic name Eborakon which was a settlement long before the Danes.[19] These groups had a noticeable impact on the English language; for example, the modern meaning of the word dream is of Old Norse origin.[20] Additionally place names that include thwaite and by are Scandinavian in origin.[21]

Then it goes on and on but the English state of mind and culture is still there.

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

this is bullshit. how can anyone truly claim to be 'english' by that definition. even if there was a genetic definition of what 'english' was at the time of these mass migrations, there's no way it can exist today. you would have to in-breed so much to avoid any kind of racial impurity. the idea that 'englishness' can be defined at all i think is a joke. our history is coloured with migrations from all parts of europe. we are a mongrel race and so can have no claim to ethnic nationalism. the best we could hope for is state nationalism which makes no genetic clims on its members. but who wants to rally round the flag in the name of the british government?

not i.

 

[Brovion]

I am surprised that the celebration of Saint George's Day hasn't been banned by some jumped-up, deracinated, metropolitan cosmopolite.
The Establishment fears the rise of Scottish nationalism because Scottish independence would lead inexorably to English nationalism. Britishness is a civic identity. Englishness is a racial identity. I have heard many a person say that someone can be black and British, but not black and English.

I agree with your first part - and profoundly disagree with the second. Of course you can be black and English, the two are NOT mutually incompatible - you might as well say you can't be a Geordie and English or a Scouser and English or Cornish and English. It's the fact that we ARE a mongrel nation with a non-English patron saint that needs to be celebrated.

BTW black people who call themselves English actually do manage to upset both ends of the racist spectrum. They obviously offend the BNP supporters you know and they offend the more twisted people of their own color. Both sides say "You can't be English, you're black!" Being 'English' is most definitely NOT a racial identity - otherwise having largely Scottish ancestry I wouldn't qualify!

 

[Strike]

I agree with your first part - and profoundly disagree with the second. Of course you can be black and English, the two are NOT mutually incompatible - you might as well say you can't be a Geordie and English or a Scouser and English or Cornish and English. It's the fact that we ARE a mongrel nation with a non-English patron saint that needs to be celebrated.

BTW black people who call themselves English actually do manage to upset both ends of the racist spectrum. They obviously offend the BNP supporters you know and they offend the more twisted people of their own color. Both sides say "You can't be English, you're black!" Being 'English' is most definitely NOT a racial identity - otherwise having largely Scottish ancestry I wouldn't qualify!

Have to agree with you there. I think nowadays all nations are mongrel racial wise.

 

[The Large One]

Sorry to disappoint you but they were all born in England.Thats makes them English by birth

So are Cliff Richard or Ted Dexter English or not then?

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Have to agree with you there. I think nowadays all nations are mongrel racial wise.

This is pretty true.

I read in some science mag where they had done a DNA research study into for want of a better word "pureness" of racial lines.

I can't remember all the specifics of it but the purest lines apparently were the Basques of Spain and the Celts in Ireland.

This was attributed to both groups being somewhat isolated from contact with other groups for various reasons.

 

[The Large One]

This is pretty true.

I read in some science mag where they had done a DNA research study into for want of a better word "pureness" of racial lines.

I can't remember all the specifics of it but the purest lines apparently were the Basques of Spain and the Celts in Ireland.

This was attributed to both groups being somewhat isolated from contact with other groups for various reasons.

And possibly accounts (certainly in the case of the people of what is now northern Spain) for the lack of any apparent common tongue with other races.

 

[Ozymandias]

This is pretty true.

I read in some science mag where they had done a DNA research study into for want of a better word "pureness" of racial lines.

I can't remember all the specifics of it but the purest lines apparently were the Basques of Spain and the Celts in Ireland.

This was attributed to both groups being somewhat isolated from contact with other groups for various reasons.

Not sure about the Celts in Ireland, my mothers a Galician (north west of spain the bit where it rains all the time) and apparently she is genetically closer to the Celts of sourthern Ireland than the peoples of madrid. Then again the same report stated that the people of the very south of Ireland are more closely linked to the Galicians than the people of Dublin ...... bunch of spics