Always thought if English nationalists harped on about being Jutie-Fresians instead of Anglo-Saxons I'd find them less annoying.
They’d scrapped Jutie- Friesan when I last went abroad. Ciggies were expensive.
Always thought if English nationalists harped on about being Jutie-Fresians instead of Anglo-Saxons I'd find them less annoying.
So basically if you think you're Anglo-Saxon, everyone is and Arab, African, Berber, Gaul etc, etc.
I doubt you would be thrown in jail but you would certainly be told you were inaccurate.
Surely that would be just as inaccurate as calling an England team "Saxons"?
It used to be called England 'B', Emerging England, England XV. It took the RFU 6 years from 2000 in deciding the reserve side needed a separate, distinct identity before overwhelmingly going for Saxons over England Aces and England Bloods in 2006.
It begs the question if they needed an identity then why do they not need one now? I reckon they didn't have the imagination to try and come up with anything better.
If you are looking for an indigenous creature that bridges the white and black colour divide then maybe the England Grey Squirrels is a goer?
It would to the French, to them the Normans were not seen as French but more English.Couldn’t agree more from every point of view.
If I were living in France and supporting French Rugby and they called their team “Les Normands” (the Normans), would I be offended? Absolutely not.
It would to the French, to them the Normans were not seen as French but more English.
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
I just don't get it, sport uses these nicknames to be more appealing to supporters not to reflect historical accuracy. I am not aware of anyone being offended at the name Saxon both through the media and personally. To me this is more a marketing exercise put together by a trendy on-vogue consultancy.
Where does it stop are we as the seagulls excluding other avian species, do all towns with Saxon names need changing, what about the red rose on the shirts that's a bit divisive? I understand somethings need to change but this seems change for change sake
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Norman invasion in 1066 was actually just another Scandinaviam invasion but bt another route - i.e. it was Scandinavians who had occupied that part of France and then decided to cross the Channel............ but I stand to be corrected. I might actually try to find out myself.
When I was at School - Worthing High School - the House names were Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Vikings. I was a Jute.
It would to the French, to them the Normans were not seen as French but more English.
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
Couldn’t agree more from every point of view.
If I were living in France and supporting French Rugby and they called their team “Les Normands” (the Normans), would I be offended? Absolutely not.
...
It's fascinating how much impact Vikings had both directly but also indirectly years after the peak of the Viking age.
they also established the Russian state, and as Norman descendants featured prominently in the Crusades.
Ugo Monye made some very interesting comments about this recently. By not finding talent in state schools, rugby is really missing a trick. Monye himself was considered one of the fastest players in the World Seven series when he was a youngster, yet (by his own admission) he wasn't even the fastest at his school. His point was that there is lots of untapped talent out there.
Rugby is getting better at this, but if you look at recent England squads, there is still a disproportionately high number of former private school pupils.
The Normans were the descendants of a Viking named Rollo who helped out the French with a bit of cash in hand contract work separate from his Viking mates and was given the land in France as reward where he settled