Les anglais aiment tricher sur leur histoire c'est bien connut, avec leur innombrables coalitions ils ont finalement réussit à battre Napoléon et donc la domination Française en Europe, nous de notre coté, nous leur avons brisé leur rève de dominer la planète en aidant les USA à devenir indépendant. Au final c'est du 50/50 sans UK le monde serait Français et vice versa.
On a conquis l'Angleterre à Hasting, occupés l'Angleterre pendant 16 mois (First Barons' War"), Isabelle de France a pris encore une fois l'Angleterre en 1326, on a gagné la guerre de cent ans, ils n'ont jamais conquis une puissance européennes par eux même depuis qu'une pucelle leur a botté le cul, le R-U n'est qu'une puissance naval qui a le Channel pour les protéger dans sol européens on les dominent largement
@Spark02ify Oui,nous leur avons même imposé notre langue pendant 300 ans, l'Angleterre à était notre première colonie grâce aux Normands il faut le préciser,mais il faut aussi admettre qu'ils ont était par la suite notre principale adversaire pendant plusieurs siècles,et ont possédé un empire plus vaste que le notre.La France fut et restera toujours plus prestigieuse que cette île dont leur seul victoire finalement se résume à avoir imposé leur langage comme langue universelle ( merci aux USA ).
One of the many episodes of Italian HEROISM in a war that the Italians could not win and if we won, it meant the Nazis won in Europe, and the Italians were no way friends of the Germans, because Hitler would have treated us as a colony in case of victory.
"the German soldier has astonished the world, the Italian Bersaglieri have astonished the German soldier"
Although Rommel had his elite "Afrika Corps", panzerdivisions to join the Italians in the war in Lybia, ALWAYS 1/2 of his forces were Italians and some of them were praised by the Germans and British together like the Armoured Division "Ariete" or Folgore Paratroopers who fought to the last man and refused to surrender after El Alamein.
And Italy was a poor country, no way the industrialized and wealthy country is today (and I hope it will remain). So if the British surrendered (130.000) at Singapore in 1942 against the Japanese, or if the Soviets initially lost ground and MILIONS of prisoners in the hands of Nazis, are they "cowards"? Easily to judge when you are living in 2011 in the societies of the west.
@Civisreggianus the italians surrenderd so fast to the he allies in the desert that the allies had troubles to feed and accomodate all this italian prisoners of war and had troubles to find enough soldiers to guard em- cowardice was avery italina thing in the second world war--live with it and spare us all this fabricated comments about italian bravery
WE WON ALSO THE FIRST WORLD WAR when the centuries-lasting Austrian Empire COLLAPSED entirely in the ITALIAN FRONT (Battle of Vittorio Veneto):
We could have taken Innsbruck too if we wanted; we were content to take Bozen (Bolzano), and still it was a mistake because they are not italians.
If you like so much wars, what do you think the current economic crisis is? We got free of Berlusconi (FINALLY) and now we want to remain in the Euro if it fits us. Otherwise, Fuck the Germans euro.
@Civisreggianus being beaten by a few greeks armed with hunting rifles--or having surrendered by the hounderd-thousand to the brits in the desert makes you the worst soldiers in WW2--even the germans didn't really respect their itlalian allies a lot--so live with it
@Civisreggianus Landser Fritz Möller told me--when the germans were at the front the russians came front on--when itlalians were on our left the russians came from our left--he had a very bad opinon about your soldiers--he found the spaniards-the hungarians-the romanians ok
@Civisreggianus just for your information I was actually an elite soldier and was competing in military biathlons and orienteering also against soldiers from nato in Commnado exercise--we also trained the brits for their Afghanistan mission in the mountains--compared to any euopean nation we swiss have nothing to fear militarywise--lol
@hyurgy123 Giovanni Messe was a great italian commander in Afrika korps and he was respected by allies.You better see Tunisia campaign how he defended Mareth line.You know nothing of history.
Not to mention the Italians surrendered THE DAY AFTER the Germans surrendered in Tunisia. I never said that the Italian Generals were so capable as people like Rommel, Guderian, Patton or Zukov, but in that war the Italians did what they could with the bad weapons they had. And remember the Italians were suffering a dictatorship, that of Mussolini, who decided we had to fight "with the Nazis". We fought from the 10 June 1940 to the 8 September 1943, then the Italian Resistance started.
Useless country on Europe, SWITZERLAND. Bunch of peaceful bastard bankers receiving money from the NAZIS and still keeping, famous for respecting every fart of rule in their useless country while becoming arrogant shithead as soon as they leave their paradise.
@Civisreggianus as I remeber Italy was fascist during ww2 and the germans had no troubles to occupy it after Mussolinis fall--the germans also helped your brave italian warriors against the bad bad greek who fought with hunting rifles against italain machine guns-just keep quiet -kiddo
My 2 granfathers fought the ITALIAN RESISTANCE against the Germans, something you swiss don't even know because you were already too full of Nazi money (taken with force from the Jews). Which ever won, Switzerland always won :D
@Civisreggianus about the Anschluss the austrian did in a time the germans were victorious--the swiss people didn't care about german victories or countries to be ruled--the nazi gold was found and divided between USA and Britain--little Switzerland saved 40thousand jewish refugees -USA, Britain and Canada closed their borders to all jewish refugees--so go and fuck yourselves you hypocrites who sent the St Louis back to Germany= Auschwitz
What is certain is that the style of life changed -from agriculture back to cattle herding, from inumation to incineration, spread of bronze tools, new "warrior" societies founded on the sagas of the "heroes" (for Ilyad to the Mahabaharata) new Pantheon of Gods in the Heaven opposed to the old Gods related to the fertility of Mother Earth.
It was very probably a bloody, military invasions because the Indoeuropeans had, beside the bronze weapons (those of the Achaens in the War of Troy) the Horse and Char, with which they conquered the local farmers of Europe and became the ruling people, imposing language over generations of mixing, so that this Proto-IndoEuropean later split into the Germanic languages, the Greek, Italics, Celtics, Slavic et. An invasion in that time was not a "colonial Empire", so THEY DID CERTAINLY carry genes.
I think it was a bloody invasion in which the natives (I1, I2, J1, J2 and E1b1b, mostly the old Cro-Magnoides and Middle-easteners and North Africans farmers) were conquered by the IE R1b and R1a.
Because pretty ALL Europeans belong to "indo-european" linguistic family, there are different theories about this expansion, one is that it was peaceful and linked to agriculture, the other that it was a bloody invasion after which the bronze weapons and tools, brough by the IE, spread to the entire Europe together with the new "Gods" in Heaven (unlike the old Gods in Earth, of the natives pre-IE), so common to Greek, Roman, Celtic, German and Slavic mythology (not to mention Iranic and Indian).
You don't understand do you? Invasion or migration what occurred was an Elite Dominance model where the elite (representing a small fraction of the population) took over a country and imposed their language and culture. This has happened many times in history (The Visigoths and Moors in Spain, the Normans in England, the Slavs in the Balkans, the Turks in Anatolia) they simply didn't "destroy" the natives, they just ruled them.
Oddly to say "GrandeCondé" I already talked about (months ago) of the "elite" Visigoths in Spain, Turks in Anatolia, Slavs in the Balkans, Normans in England etc.
But for the IE invasion it could be a different thing, I always thought it was an "elite" invasion, changing nothing on the genetic of the people conquered, but for this, the IE could have destroyed or exterminated great part of the natives, took their women (european Mt DNA did not change much) and proliferated.
Because Italy was ALWAYS divided since the end of the roman empire, thus developing a "hundred independent cities" (the Comuni) and then regional states who fell dominated by foreign powers (in the end the Austrians). To "create" Italy the state of Piedmont under the dynasty of the Savoia militarly conquered all the rest of the country and then copied the model of centralized France. Thus the regional languages of Italy disappeared and became only "dialects".
But it's possible that R1b existed in Europe well before the Indo-European migration (2500 BC). However the Indo-Europeans of the "Kurgan Culture" in Ukraina were R1b and R1a. So it's possible both carried the same haplogroups. In Spain before the Roman conquest there were Iberians, Celtiberians, Vascones (Basques) and Lusitans, main people. The fact that the Basques don't speak indoeuropean language but are mostly 100% R1b can mean that the haplogroups existed before the invasions.
Yes... The Basques have R1b in excess of 80% (highest in Europe), they are not Indo-European yet you claim the Indo-Europeans brought R1b into Spain? lmao. The Indo-Europeans carried mainly R1a and haplogroup I since these are the most common in Central and Eastern Europe.
Also, this notion that the Indo-Europeans wiped out all the pre-Indo-Europeans is silly, the Indo-Europeans brought their LANGUAGE, not necessarily their genes.
It is not "me" who claims that, but what I read on the webiste "Eupedia" according European genetics. Useless you say "lmao", speak plainly, unless you are a genetist, your hypotesis are as good as mine and as I've said, it is possible the R1b existed in Europe BEFORE the indo-european invasions BUT the indo-europeans were CERTAINLY R1b or R1a in majority.
And you say "no invasion"? on contrary, an invasion MUST have taken place.
It is confirmed from the fact that R1b is present also in ancient "indoeuropean" cultures and languages like Iran (from the "Aryans"), Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
R1a remained in the eastern europe -mainly Slavic countries, but Germanic also (Scandinavians and Germans are about 30% R1a, 30% I1 and 30% R1b -a mixture of indoeuropeans and Cro-Magnoids).
Also I said, the R1b in Spain (S-116) is not that in England (R1b-U106) or France (R1b-U152 and others). All these people ARE "indo-europeans" but of different stocks (Latins, Germans and Gauls, mainly).
Further to be "R1b" doesn't mean anything. The Spanish are R1b but are OBVIOUSLY different from the English that are R1b too. There are different subclades of R1b too, for example, Spanish are R1b-S116 while English or Germans are R1b-U106, French or Swiss or Northern Italians R1b-U152. "Racial" features are not linked to any particular genotipe however.
Another thing I don't understand is why "Portugal" exists. If Portugal exists, why not Catalonia? Why not Basque countries? They ALL speak different languages from the Castillan. Castillan Kings unified Spain but didn't touch Portugal -only in the period 1580-1640 there was the "Iberian union". I know Portugal was allied wit England who granted its independence. Still if Portugal do exists, Spain itself is a construction of different countries.
@Civisreggianus Portugal gained independance from Spain in a battle,same with Switzerland--why does Switzerland exist with 4 languages?? it seems the notion of being free people is a unifier more important then a common language, that centralistic states such as Italy and France alwayas have troubles with regions is a fact which only a lose confederation can solve-in todays Europe regions will become closer across borders such as the Alsace is already closer to Basle then to Paris.
Switzerland is an example of cantonal democracy but in her history the cantons fought each others not only for religious but also for political power, some cantons dominated others etc., and conquering area like the Ticino who were part of Lombardy thus Italy. The Alps protected Switzerland to develop how the Swiss wanted, bit like the waters protected England and allowed an independent evolution.
I don't like centralized States, but for Italy was a necessity.
@Civisreggianus fighting Charles the bolds knight armies and destroying them in open battle was a first farmes defeating aristocrats--later a swiss vanguard of 1500youngsters stopped a 40thousand war-hardened french Armagnac army at St Jacques-Basle, the swiss defeating LouisXII of France and chasing his army to Lyon now alps there to protect them neither in the swiss/german wars against german emperor maximillians knight army which fled--swiss victories at Koblenz-Schwaderloh
@Civisreggianus the austro-german emperors from the von Habsburg branch which also governed parts of Italy suffered many heavy defeats against the Swiss-such as-Morgarten-Laupen-Sempach--then the burgundians lost and the bernese annexed their lands--later the comte de Savoie also got defeated by Berne--we were the most feared infantery force in medieval Europe,as mercenaries to hire swiss regiments was victory guranteed.
@Civisreggianus after Marignano where the Bernese and Fribourgeois didn't participate the Swiss became protestant and started the industrial revolution with Geneva as its banking center--Huldrich Zwingly issued an decree forbidding mercenary service--still Frederic Haldimand a swiss was Commander of Chief of British North America.
@Civisreggianus swiss leader Jürg Jenatsch kicked out the french from the grisons and the spanish from the Valtellina and still the swiss guarded french kings--Louis Pfyffer saved the french kings live from a huguenot attack--we never became obsolete--the bernese got paid by Francois 1er--not to participate at Marignan--so the other swss lost-
I don't understand hyurgy why you need to "separate" some Swiss from others, as if the "others" lost, it means the "good part" of the Swiss didn't lost. It looks a childish nationalistic little game :)
Well hyurgy, to my eyes the "Swiss" were no better, no worse soldiers than the Germans Landksnechte of the age. Both became obsolete, with the musket ranges, does not mean they were useless.
@Civisreggianus we swiss were a lose confederation and affronting Napoleon canton by canton showed us that we needed a federal army. Napoleon sent without declaration of war 2 armies--one got beaten by Neuenegg the other was victorisou at Grauholz--the lucernois put women in uniform to fight the french--finally we were under Napoleons dictatorship for 10 years after 500 years of independence.
I know of the Swiss fighting qualities, but I would not say the Swiss troops were "invincible", as they suffered defeat as mercenaries and if France or Germany (United) wanted to invade Switzerland, they could do. But Switzerland lives for peaceful neutrality and her banks.
@Civisreggianus Francois 1er of France made a perpetual peace treaty with the Swiss Confederation after Marignano which was only broken by Napoleon-then we had a entraide treaty with France after they had 80thousands french troops disarmed and interned in Switzerland in 1870( Bourbaki-Armée de l'Est) up to WW1 and2, Hitler's generals figured attacking Switzerland to costly--today we have not to fear either Germany nor France since 400 swisss Leopard2 tanks
@hyurgy123 swiss own more artillery per square km then any european nation plus around 30 F18--plus Super Puma's and so on-we easily could take Italy tomorrow withpout much resistance--lol
@Civisreggianus you are getting ridicoulos-Austria and Sweden are neutral as well and armed to their teeth --Italy can be happy we protect their Northern border-lol
A country of scarcely 8 milions of people who is PEACEFUL SINCE CENTURIES. I bet you wish to be a French or a Briton (or a German), at least they are BIG countries and they FOUGHT the wars you love so much to fight behind a computer.
@Civisreggianus your nation attacked spear-wielding people with machine guns and even the greeks were outnumbered by italians still they kicked their asses-looking at the possibility of which of us european nations had the biggest succes on the battle fields--the swiss outscored french and germans--today we are still able to defend our sovereignity.
We lost the battle of Adwa (1896) when 10.000 Italians were surrounded by 100.000+ Ethiopians ARMED WITH RIFLES sold by Britain, France and Italy too sob :(
Then we came back in 1935-1936 and conquered the whole Ethiopia -THE ONLY FUCKING AFRICAN COUNTRY THAT NOT BRITAIN NOR FRANCE EVER TOUCHED.
WHY?
Because the Ethiopians were a mass of warlike warriors. AND THE ITALIANS WON!
In medieval time, I forgot to say hyurgy, that the italian "Lombard League" of North Italy and Tuscany did beat 2 German Emperors: the "hero" Frederick Barbarossa and his nephew Frederick II of Sicily. When the Italian cities-States did fought for their liberty, they won against the Germans.
Interesting thing would be that the Visigoths, in 300 years ruling Iberia, were not militarly prepared as the Franks for the long isolation. Also civil wars among Visigothic nobles are a cause. It is however the only case of an european country being so rapidly and steadily held by the Muslims.
The Visigoth also were the best soldiers who fought for the Roman Empire with the general Aetius in the battle of Chalons (451) to stop Attila's Huns to conquer Gaul.
Perhaps the germanic barbarians were super-strong in conquest, and become "civilized" and tired in the long rule (as the Vandals in Africa, as Procopius describe them).
@Civisreggianus No, I am Spanish from Asturias -the only region the Moors couldn't conquest-.
My comments don't attempt to offend anybody, I just want to clarify certain events that are usually misunderstood.
The Visigoths fell because they were a relatively small elite not very close with the bulk of the Roman-Iberian population -which had no access to power-. They had also feuds between themselves; in fact, legends say the Moors were "invited" to invade by rivals of the king don Rodrigo.
Also the Franks in "France" was an elite -perhaps 200.000 people, among 6 milions of Gauls- who represented the military aristocracy. The same in Spain with the Visigoths, or in Italy with Ostrogoths or the Lombards -we are talking about "elite". It is difficult to believe that a kingdom that lasted 300 years -from 416 to 711- were still "divided" among conquerors and conquered. On contrary, Visigoth legislation was the "Latinest" of all, promoving merging between Visigoths and Spanish.
@HerrOttoKranz Anyway, I don't care about many of these things. I don't have any problem recognising that Britain, for instance, is the most successful country ever, or that France and Germany have better economies, etc.
I know for a fact that if you solve the current crisis, especially the big unemployment problem, Spain is one of the best countries in the world to live in. It's fine to work in northern Europe, but there is nothing like Spain and its people in terms of friendliness and charm.
Perhaps you know -by the way, are you Spanish or Argentinian? Latin american?
Why the Visigoth kingdom fell to the Arabs? Was it weak, in 711, but the Visigoths were the barbarians who caused the fall of the Roman Empire (Battle Adrianople 378, and sack of Rome 410): did they become weak in Spain, unlike the Franks so strong in France?
I don't think Spain has "french" blood, it has Iberian, Celtiberian, Roman, Greek, Carthaginians, and later German (Swabian, Vandals, Visigoths) and then Arabs, Maghrebin. Every country is a mixture. Some French knights, I read, fought in the Reconquista, but don't think they resettled Spain.
@Civisreggianus I didn't mean French blood. I meant that French culture has influenced Spain much more than Islamic culture. And yet nobody talks of a "French Spain".
I don't care if there is Arab blood or not. The only thing that matters is culture for me.
It doesn't work that way. It is France that has "Spanish" blood, not the other way around. R1b is a genetic marker passed from father to son, it originated over 15,000 years ago in the last ice age in modern day Iberia. Once the ice receded, these people resettled Western Europe.
In Spain R1b is found in over 70% of males, in France 65%, in Ireland almost 80%, Italy 60%, the Netherlands 70% etc... Arab contribution to the Iberian genepool is less than 6%.
Interesting, "GrandeCondé". R1b is not originated in Iberia, but brought by the Indoeuropeans invaders (as R1a) from the steppes of Ukraina to the rest of Europe where it merged with the locals pre-indoeuropeans, genetically E1b1b, I1 or I2, J1 and J2 etc. (paleolithic hunters-gathereres and neolithic farmers).
However it's controversial why some 100% Basques are R1b but don't speak indoeuropean languages.
Sweden, Norway etc. were Luteran. Capitalism evolved in Calvinistic countries.
Who say this? According to the website "Eupedia", R1b and R1a were both brought by the Indo-Europeans invaders in Bronze Age 2500 years BC. So you are wrong or, it is wrong who wrote that in the website. Controversy do exist about origin of this haplogroup.
Obviously its wrong. 3000 years ago (1000 B.C) there were very few Indo-European speaking tribes in Spain, which today has some of the most R1b of any Western European country (except Ireland). Whats more is that R1b is lacking in Eastern Europe, and R1a lacks in Western Europe. If the Indo-Europeans "carried both", Spain would not have 70+% R1b and almost no R1a.
And the indo-europeans, which haplogroup did the carry? I think they carry R1b, so you are wrong, and this is what Eupedia on "European Genetic History" says. Before the R1b arrived to Europe, there were neolitich farmers who came from middle east and were J1, J2, E1b1b, and the old Cro-Magnoids with them, I1 and I2. These are the "oldest" European haplogroups BEFORE the INDO-EUROPEANS R1b and R1a (Slavs) came.
I guess if the Spanish developed such fanatic catholicism from the crusade mentality of the "Reconquista". Having suffered the muslim occupation, they wanted to revenge the humiliation not in Spain only, but impose Catholicism worldwide.
1.-Some Spaniards committed crimes in the Americas (mainly during the first half of the 16th century), but not a genocide. In fact, the Crown passed legislation to protect the Indians, something no other power did. During the American Wars of Independence the natives sided with Spain!
2.-The arabs didn't invade "Spain" in 711. They invaded the Iberian Peninsula, and both Spain and Portugal emerged from the fight against them.
@Civisreggianus The Leyes de Burgos (1512) and the Leyes Nuevas (1542) forbade Indian slavery, which ceased to exist to be replaced with Blacks brought from Africa by the English. After 1550 many abuses disappear. And if committed, they were private. The Crown always protected the natives.
When Darwin travelled to South America he met an Indian who told him: "Today we are nothing, not like when the king of Spain was still our sovereign".
Spain has been continuously smeared throughout History.
@Civisreggianus No humillation in the Muslim conquest: they were the foremost power of their time, and I am proud to have monuments and buildings in Spain that Arab countries envy for themselves. Cordoba became one of the most important cities of the world during that time.
Anyway, there is a very common mistake according to which Spaniards are radically different due to that century-long Arab presence. It is false, the mixing was small; French influence, for instance, is bigger.
I know, that under the muslims, Spain (Iberia) was a flourishing culture, that saved the ancient greek and roman texts (Toledo School). I don't know about mixing, but certainly many Spanish converted, and later re-converted to catholicism, so that some arab blood (is it a shame?) is present, like in Sicily. Genetically however you are R1b at 60-70% -that is considered "indoeuropean".
North of Italy or Bavaria are catholic but lack fanatism of the Spanish. North of Italy and Tuscany were already "capitalistic" in their Comuni in Middle Age, while the rest of Europe was still feudal, aristocratic, and military. What the Italians lacked was exactly, the military mentality. They had no armies, only mercenaries. They changed sides. The Spanish or French fought for their Nations, the Italians had not.
The best of Germany, however, was Luteran. Catholics developed only later.
Spain decayed until lost all the american colonies by 1829. And after had to learn all modernity from the most advanced european countries (like France and Britain), democracy, industrialization, civil rights, free thought, and continued to fight these "liberal" ideals until the time of Franco.
At least one thing I love of the Spanish: bullfighting. The Spanish have balls. The "Romans" took 2 centuries to completely conquer Iberia, and just 7 years for Gaul.
@Civisreggianus Well, I don't agree with you, but I respect your views. Just one thing: to say that Spain committed a genocide in the Americas is simply false, propaganda.
True Spanish decline began in the 19th century. Although no longer preeminent since 1650, until the French invasion we were among the first powers. But the 1808-1813 war with Napoleon was disastrous for the country, just like the 19th century in general, when we failed to industrialize and suffered 3 civil wars.
To give origin to economically powerful countries you need the "Work Ethic". Like that of the Protestants, Calvinist English, Swiss and Dutch, and that which charachterize the Germans.
Spain remained a feudal, aristocratic country during the "Siglo de Oro" and despite all the colonies and the gold and silver (managed by Genoese bankers) could not build a CAPITALIST country and an ACTIVE BOURGEOISE, unlike England, or Holland. They created Bourgeoise and Democratic, Free countries.
@Civisreggianus Let me disagree with the "protestant work ethic". France has always been a Catholic country and it has excelled in economics. And half of Germany is Catholic; indeed Bavaria, the richest Land right now, is entirely Catholic. Same with the north of Italy.
In my opinion it has more to do with the economic system. Believe it or not, Spaniards are hard-working. But historically free market ideas weren't successful, and until 1959 we didn't become a veritable capitalist country.
I don't say the Spanish are not "hard-working" (but this concept is relative: every country claims to be "hard-working"), but traditionally were not a country of "merchants". Perhaps the Catalunians are, more than Castillans. Spain was a traditionalist, catholic, aristocratic, closed to the new ideas country. In the last century has learned but needed to wait Franco's death.
About colonialism, the Spanish were horrible. There were too many natives so they survived, as slaves.
@Civisreggianus True, Swiss, Dutch, English... are hard-working, but their historical success has more to do with a stable political system and the right free market economic thinking than with individual diligence.
The tragedy of Spain has always been its rulers, and we failed in important fields. But don't exaggerate the "modernity" of Europe either. Women could vote in Spain in 1931, but in France not before 1945 (Switzerland 1971!). Britain wasn't a real democracy until the end of WW1.
The rulers of Spain were aristocratic, military men supported by the catholic church. In the colonies in Latin america, they tried to be "democratic" but in every country sooner or later fell to the dictatorships, of military rulers supported by the catholic church. That's conservative, but the new ideas don't come from Spain but from the Anglosaxons. Unfortunately also the modern financial capitalism that has brought to world crisis.
Spain wanted to eradicate the Protestants in Holland (80 years; failure) in the war of Thirty Years in Germany (failure). The only countries were Spain "triumphed", are Spain (expulsion of the only ones who worked, Jews and Muslims), and Italy, the famous "Lombardy" so rich before the Spanish and so poor after (Naples and Sicily were poor before and poor later).
Thanks, Spanish. You gave the perfect WRONG EXAMPLE.
@Civisreggianus Thanks for reminding me that we owned half of Italy for several centuries. We did indeed, and back then Naples and Sicily weren't ruled by mafiosi. And about Milan... their inhabitants cried bitter tears of grief when the Spaniards departed to be replaced with Austrians.
Yeah, it took England, France, and the Dutch 80 years to doblegate us, while simultaneosly expanding in America and fighting the Turks. Didn't Machivelli say Ferdinand the Catholic was the best king of its era?
The Lombards and the Veneti today are PROUD OF THE AUSTRIAN RULE, efficient, ordered and clean, just the contrary of the spanish one.
About the South you say "ruled by the mafiosi", the presence of organized criminality in Sicily or Naples has been attributed to CENTURIES OF EXPLOITATION and BAD GOVERNMENT, and the south became such properly when it was ruled by the Spanish, when there were the "Normans" or Frederick II, not.
Suddenly the proud Flemish Jeffkodiac who is so proud of his Flemish culture that he speak absolutely no Flemish at all has disappeared.
Guess he could not find a modern day band singing in Flemish in French occupied Flanders.
Jeffkodiac must be happy it gives him a reassured feeling that French has eliminated this shameful language that the lonely old people still speaking it in Flanders should be ashamed to talk. He considers these old Flemish speakers traitors to France lol.
Too funny obliged to speak of another culture to defend their ridiculous cutlure . Tell me what you don't put on your channel the many Norman song of today because your Norman culture is so strong ..
Italy is ALSO the lands of the Romans, but was divided before them and became divided after. The "Romans" were the people of Rome, Latins, in central Italy-. Other parts of Italy were inhabited by different people (Celts, Etruscans, Greeks etc.). Later we ALL became "Romans"as the Spanish or French.
Nobody should feast if a language dies. Languages should be conserved, but in history, the losers, if they have not a cultural superiority, lose their language too.
What are you saying? The "Gauls" were already called "Romans" because they spoke Latin and were Latinized. So they were "culturally superiors" to the Franks who adopted Latin too, introducing some words. The "Normans" are Gauls in the end, how was the region called in Frankish time? Neustria? Regional differences are in every european country but the French perhaps think they have only them? :D
@Civisreggianus The Gauls did not adopt the Latin of Caesar but a rustic form of Latin, lower class Latin.
The "Normans" what is that " " for lol. It's much more correct to use this on the "French". Because what are the French? There is no unique French blood, no French true ethnicity.
There is a complete difference between us Normans and the Occitan people. Also a big difference between us Normans and the Bretons etc.
There is no such a thing as a French people or French blood lol.
The Gauls adopted LATIN, just like the other people of the Empire, that EVOLVED in Vulgar Latin, you dumbass.
I don't care about your "supposed" TOTALLY DIFFERENT NORMANS FROM THE OCCITANS. You don't care about Europe, you WANT THE BOUNDARIES between the same country.
What an absurdity lol, Are you telling me the Gauls adopted the Latin of the higher ends of Roman society when the Roman soldiers and traders who came to Gaul did not even use Latin but vulgar Latin. Latin is the written Latin spoken by the elites only you pathetic clownish creature.
Are you telling me that a Gaulish farmer or a Germanic Frank spoke the same Latin as the highest of highest in Rome but not the language of the Roman mob who was the majority?
Do you like the detail? The Latin of the Laws, of the Army, of the Literature, was the "Vulgar Latin"? Of course even the Romans -and see the graffiti in Pompei- used not the "Latin of Cicero" but the common, folkish one. The Gauls adopted the Latin, the Gallic senators, writers, poets, and soldiers, spoke in the society both the "Official" Latin and the Vulgar one.
The centralization of power in the capitals of the countries or regional is responsible for the uniformity of the language. Just as English has imposed upon the world, Francien dialect prevailed in France and then the modern French has done the same. I do not agree with any of that. I hate centralism, however, little can be done against this, since the same people who are of regions are to live in the capital, leaving their culture or subculture side.
Broadly speaking, the contributions are France, are Nordic-Germanic: Franks, Goths, Burgundians, Normans and Alemanni. Other contributions are the Basques (the oldest town) from which all the western Atlantic is related by blood, especially in the British Isles. The Celts who like the Basques in the West Atlantic are adding southern Germany and northern Italy. The other great people is the Greek patriarchs of Western culture. And finally the fundamental Roman contribution. Vive la France !!!
The great patriarchs of France begins with Clovis, followed by the powerful Charlemagne, Hugh Capet, Philip II and Charles de Gaulle. It is certainly Charlemagne the great lord of the West trying to structure a first idea of Europe(Celtic-Roman-Germanic and Catholic) in a Frankish Kingdom and Empire , producing a cultural renaissance and giving stability to the region. Charlemagne was never defeated, but the rear of his army suffered a terrible attack of the Basques in Roncesvalles.
Franks, Burgundians and Visigoths were creating the identity of France finally was further strengthened with the mixture of Norman blood. The tutor of Duke William was the same French King. The Duke came to power with the help of the King and defeated the rebels barons. The Duke came to have so much power and ability in the war that did not respect the King, imposing their own rules. At that time most of the Dukes were rebels, but certainly, the Duke of Normandy was more even.
Do you have some kind of problem with answering why the Flemish language is almost completely disappearing in French occupied Flanders and replaced by French while Flemish is thriving strong a few Km away in Flemish Belgium?
You perhaps don't want to answer because you know the reason why things are as they are. The hate and contempt the French have for the Flemish language and culture as with other non French languages and cultures.
@LaNormandieLibre I understand what you say and I'm loving the regional cultures of France! I disagree disappear languagesof the regions. France is richer in its diversity! I agree with Norman language that is protected, as are the languagesof the south. I love Europe because my blood, and almost all of my culture comes from there:)
Remember that the Franks had their first contact with the latin when they were part of the Roman armies with other Gauls and Germans. Later, as Rome foederati in Rhineland.
@LaNormandieLibre each region of France should speak French, and regional dialect or language! but you're from Anglo-Norman islands right? It is under British sovereignty. As is the treatment of the Saxons on my Norman Cousinsthere?
I'm from the the center of Continental Normandy who is under French occupation not from the Norman Islands.
As a Norman I shit on the French. We in continental Normandy have had the French remove our Norman laws in 1806 but they are still the official legal laws of the Norman Islands of Guernsey and Jersey. These Islands are the independent part of Normandy and are NOT a part of Britain or the EU. But in connection to the crown since the Norman conquest of 1066.
The Flemish language descended from the languagesspoken by the Franks. Flanders has historically been part of France.
Those with Celtic and Roman blood are entitled to live in all the land since before the Franks. The Franks respected and mixed with the Gauls, made the Christian religion of the Burgundians and the majority of the people of Gaul.
@skiteufr This icelandic shit hates so much France he does not want to admit French and norman like all langues d'oil are very close
And yes, the only difference is spelling and minor
When speaking Picard and Old French, you would find very little difference in spelling and writitng
If you do like you do today, comparing Picard (old language that did not evolve) with modern French of 2011, that evolves every decade, of course you will have differences stupid nazi asshole
@skiteufr Lol the devoted FN fanatic who once believed The king of the Franks helped the Norman William the conqueror in conquering England ,until later having to be forced to admit such a thing was impossible,has no arguments as usual. This cowardly French horsain from Paris even said that the Norman Oil language was a dialect of the French language lol. The Oil languages can be found in Belgium, Switzerland etc and are not a specific language group existing only in the RF lol the clown.
@skiteufr Fact is you cowardly son of a whore that the French Oil language is inferior to my Norman language and to the Picard Oil language. This abomination of the Oil languages did not even have a written literature before long after Picard and Norman lol. This weak language changes every decade like you say unlike the strong Norman and Picard languages. What the hell is "French" going to sound like in 50 years something very different from French lol. Norman and Picard are real languages ;)
It's not a question of number we are dealing with here but the the fact that you claimed that Norman had disappeared as a language. But how can a language be disappeared if it is still spoken?
If a language does not exist then it can't be spoken. Norman is still spoken hence your claim that Norman is a disappeared language is false.
Are you claiming that Norman is not spoken anymore by anyone yes or no?
That's what I thought. You think when that language is spoken by a few hundred people is a strong language but in fact what you are doing this is called self-persuasion .
You did not think anything. You only refused to answer for your claim that Norman had disappeared. A language has to be extinct you see to be considered a disappeared language. And by refusing to answer if you think Norman is not spoken by anyone anymore you admit telling a lie.
Norman is a stronger language as in being purer than the bastard of all the Oil language that French is.
Hebrew was a none spoken language except by a few but a strong language. Look at it now in Israel.
You say anything as usual . OK your bastard language is not dead he is only spoken by several ridiculous clown lol . I do not want to annoy your self-persuasion lol .
So you admit coming with a false statement in the beginning. So we don't have to wonder about your other statements lol.
My Norman language did not need to be influenced by French but French needed to be influenced by my Norman language lol.
French did not even have an existing literature when Norman was written down, after all it is a bastard language. The left overs of Norman and Picard, two noble Oil languages.
Nice reference to French culture on the video on your page lol.
My comment what no more false than your with your "strong Norman " who is ridiculous lol . The French was influenced by the oil language like you bastard Norman and the oc language and then ? This is why the French language is the descendant of this language . I see that today the Picard is a noble language when last times you said that the Picard was ridiculous you have really true reaction of disturbed clown .
Show me a video with the Flemish in French occupied Flanders speaking or singing in Flemish. Don't take any Flemish from Flemish Belgium or Flemish Netherlands.
Just show me one video with Flemish people in French occupied Flanders using their language.
Surely you can do that if you can put on American TV shows right?
I did not say you ever mentioned Flemish singers in the RF. I said can you procure any Flemish singing people or even Flemish speaking people in French occupied Flanders on a video on Youtube?
Or is the Flemish culture and language disappearing inside the borders of the RF?
Come on just show me one video with Flemish people in French occupied Flanders using their language, that must not be hard now is it?
Post it on your page. Come on and it better have the Flemish of French occupied Flanders speaking in Flemish and not the bastard language called French.
Go on put this ghost video on your channel if it exists that is lol
You are a liar because when I note the name I find the video myself . I do not know why you are angry because the Norman bastard language is one of the ancestors of the French language lol . I put the video on your page little hypocritical .
Lol what's the problem? Can't you put a video with the Flemish language in French occupied Flanders on your page? Do you hate the Flemish culture that much or is there another reason like there is no video with people speaking Flemish or singing in Flemish in French occupied Flanders lol.
That must be why you have an American TV show on your video and not Flemish people in French occupied Flanders speaking Flemish lol
I however have my Norman language spoken on my video ;)
That must be why you can't find it and put it on display lol.
So you can't find ONE video with Flemish people in French occupied Flanders speaking their native Flemish language but you can find endless amounts of Anglo-Saxon musicians singing in English.
Lol the self hate.
Again I have showed how ridiculous you are.
My channel has a video with the Norman language yours can't even have one with Flemish spoken in French occupied Flanders but no problem with Anglo-Saxon music lol
You are ridiculous with your clownish "strong Norman language " when in fact one of your 2 video about your " strong Norman identity " on your channel are ..........IN FRENCH loooooooool . I spend a really good time with you ..
Now you are trying to avoid the fact that you don't have one single video with the Flemish in French occupied Flanders speaking Flemish but an endless amount of music from the Anglo-Saxon world, the world you admire more than your own Flemish one lol.
Common kiddo can't you find ONE video with people speaking Flemish in French occupied Flanders lol.
Now you try to hide the fact that I have sent a video where Flemish is spoken in northern France when your so-called Norman culture is represented by a French video on your page with music that comes from American culture lol . You made me laugh with your Norman culture of joker .
@LaNormandieLibre adolf try that --- >on google book page 7"Home Help in Spelling of Sue Clarke, Sue Cason, Caanan Grall -an history of english spelling (lesson 2) on google book page 7, this is what the little british can learn at school today :)
In 1066, a french prince called william the conqueror crossed the channel, killing the english king, and made england a french colony. this is the time of the legendary Robin Hood, the native saxons hated the french invaders, but were ......
"Nice reference to French culture on the video on your page" Sorry but i'm not a nationalist like you and i have video of around the world in my channel , thing than a nationalist like you can not understand lol .
jeffkodiac (2 weeks ago) Spam Tu sais ici c'est pareil il y a une renaissance de la culture Flamande , je pense que cela est une bonne chose . jeffkodiac (2 weeks ago) Spam D'après ce que j'ai vu en Normandie il y a des parti qui veulent un rattachement entre les 2 départements et aussi une certaine reconnaissance de la culture ce qui pour moi devrait être accordé par le gouvernement Français .
Only 2 weeks ago you wrote this. And here you are anti-Norman. You schizo lol.
@skiteufr You consider the Oil languages as something French (funny specially since not all Oil languages are even inside the French Republic. But you consider all non Oil languages then as something not French and not a part of French culture. Meaning the Breton Celtic language. The Bask language. And of course the langues d'Oc who are not Oil languages.Go tell a Breton that Brittany is not his country and that Breton is a foreign language and to the Basks and Occitans lol
Lool funny coming from a stupid neo nazi like you, that likes a norman nationalist website supposed to be "anti racist" and that contains links to the FN website
I remember it was so funny to own you like a little poddle on that one
Like the time where you said Eleanor of Aquitaine spoke Occitan when she spoke Oil language Poitevin, or when you miserable refuse to acknowledges that the mottos of English monarchy are in French
@skiteufr Btw, you again try to invent something i never said
Breton, Basque Oc language are not part of French languages like Norman, Picard.
They have different origins
However, by the fact that Bretons, Basques are part of France for centuries, they are languages of France, they are part of the regional cultures of France but not part of French original culture that has seen the birth of French language we speak today
@skiteufr Why are you so frustrated that most people in France feel proud in being French? WHy you are disgusted that France is united under one culture and one power, but respecting regional indentities in the same time
"Oil languages did not even have a written literature before long after Picard and Norman lol."
Then read about Chretien de Troyes, one of the most admired writter of middle ages
@skiteufr The modern Norman language dead? Lol this coming from a person who said not so long ago that the Norman language was a dialect of french. A bad version of French. Now forced to admit that these claims were totally absurd lol. This from the man who called Henry II a bitch lol. Chretien of Troyes adapted his work on the works of the Normans such as Wace. You do know that Wace was for example the first to ever mention the famous round table don't you lol
YEAAH FRANCE RULES, SAME VICTORIES OVER THE GERMANS, RUSSIANS, EVERYBODY !!
turner2123 3 weeks ago
This wont take long then......
theode080 3 weeks ago
Les anglais aiment tricher sur leur histoire c'est bien connut, avec leur innombrables coalitions ils ont finalement réussit à battre Napoléon et donc la domination Française en Europe, nous de notre coté, nous leur avons brisé leur rève de dominer la planète en aidant les USA à devenir indépendant. Au final c'est du 50/50 sans UK le monde serait Français et vice versa.
daftpara28 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
Spark02ify 3 weeks ago
@daftpara28
On a conquis l'Angleterre à Hasting, occupés l'Angleterre pendant 16 mois (First Barons' War"), Isabelle de France a pris encore une fois l'Angleterre en 1326, on a gagné la guerre de cent ans, ils n'ont jamais conquis une puissance européennes par eux même depuis qu'une pucelle leur a botté le cul, le R-U n'est qu'une puissance naval qui a le Channel pour les protéger dans sol européens on les dominent largement
Spark02ify 3 weeks ago
@Spark02ify Je suis d'accord
skiteufr 2 weeks ago
@Spark02ify Oui,nous leur avons même imposé notre langue pendant 300 ans, l'Angleterre à était notre première colonie grâce aux Normands il faut le préciser,mais il faut aussi admettre qu'ils ont était par la suite notre principale adversaire pendant plusieurs siècles,et ont possédé un empire plus vaste que le notre.La France fut et restera toujours plus prestigieuse que cette île dont leur seul victoire finalement se résume à avoir imposé leur langage comme langue universelle ( merci aux USA ).
daftpara28 1 day ago
@daftpara28
Sache aussi que le language de la guerre est pour la plupart français
Colonel, général, capitaine, lieutenant, sergent, soldat, militaire, amiral, marin (marine), fusilier .
Compagnie, bataillon, brigade, régiment, escadron, (squadron)...
Tranchées (trench), camouflage, volontaire (volunteer), baraque, combat, bataille (battle), stratégie, infanterie, cavalerie, munitions, croiseur, frégate, aviation...
Baïonnette, épaulette, uniforme, lance, mine, grenade, missile et j'en passe
Spark02ify 21 hours ago
Churchill
"We must bow to the Lions of the Folgore"
One of the many episodes of Italian HEROISM in a war that the Italians could not win and if we won, it meant the Nazis won in Europe, and the Italians were no way friends of the Germans, because Hitler would have treated us as a colony in case of victory.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
Rommel himself said
"the German soldier has astonished the world, the Italian Bersaglieri have astonished the German soldier"
Although Rommel had his elite "Afrika Corps", panzerdivisions to join the Italians in the war in Lybia, ALWAYS 1/2 of his forces were Italians and some of them were praised by the Germans and British together like the Armoured Division "Ariete" or Folgore Paratroopers who fought to the last man and refused to surrender after El Alamein.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
And Italy was a poor country, no way the industrialized and wealthy country is today (and I hope it will remain). So if the British surrendered (130.000) at Singapore in 1942 against the Japanese, or if the Soviets initially lost ground and MILIONS of prisoners in the hands of Nazis, are they "cowards"? Easily to judge when you are living in 2011 in the societies of the west.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus the italians surrenderd so fast to the he allies in the desert that the allies had troubles to feed and accomodate all this italian prisoners of war and had troubles to find enough soldiers to guard em- cowardice was avery italina thing in the second world war--live with it and spare us all this fabricated comments about italian bravery
hyurgy123 1 month ago
Fuck english pussies
Long live France !!!
SuperBradva 1 month ago
WE WON ALSO THE FIRST WORLD WAR when the centuries-lasting Austrian Empire COLLAPSED entirely in the ITALIAN FRONT (Battle of Vittorio Veneto):
We could have taken Innsbruck too if we wanted; we were content to take Bozen (Bolzano), and still it was a mistake because they are not italians.
If you like so much wars, what do you think the current economic crisis is? We got free of Berlusconi (FINALLY) and now we want to remain in the Euro if it fits us. Otherwise, Fuck the Germans euro.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus being beaten by a few greeks armed with hunting rifles--or having surrendered by the hounderd-thousand to the brits in the desert makes you the worst soldiers in WW2--even the germans didn't really respect their itlalian allies a lot--so live with it
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
All BULLSHITS, but thanks to have told me such.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus Landser Fritz Möller told me--when the germans were at the front the russians came front on--when itlalians were on our left the russians came from our left--he had a very bad opinon about your soldiers--he found the spaniards-the hungarians-the romanians ok
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
Go to study the history of the ITALIAN ALPINE DIVISIONS IN RUSSIA and the battle of NIKOLAJEWKA, swiss PIECE OF SHIT.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus poor little imbecile--did I heart your feelings about your nations great warriors--hahahlol
hyurgy123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Civisreggianus just for your information I was actually an elite soldier and was competing in military biathlons and orienteering also against soldiers from nato in Commnado exercise--we also trained the brits for their Afghanistan mission in the mountains--compared to any euopean nation we swiss have nothing to fear militarywise--lol
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123 Giovanni Messe was a great italian commander in Afrika korps and he was respected by allies.You better see Tunisia campaign how he defended Mareth line.You know nothing of history.
SuperBradva 1 month ago
Not to mention the Italians surrendered THE DAY AFTER the Germans surrendered in Tunisia. I never said that the Italian Generals were so capable as people like Rommel, Guderian, Patton or Zukov, but in that war the Italians did what they could with the bad weapons they had. And remember the Italians were suffering a dictatorship, that of Mussolini, who decided we had to fight "with the Nazis". We fought from the 10 June 1940 to the 8 September 1943, then the Italian Resistance started.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
Useless country on Europe, SWITZERLAND. Bunch of peaceful bastard bankers receiving money from the NAZIS and still keeping, famous for respecting every fart of rule in their useless country while becoming arrogant shithead as soon as they leave their paradise.
Go to fix your coocko clock.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus as I remeber Italy was fascist during ww2 and the germans had no troubles to occupy it after Mussolinis fall--the germans also helped your brave italian warriors against the bad bad greek who fought with hunting rifles against italain machine guns-just keep quiet -kiddo
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
Fuck off.
My 2 granfathers fought the ITALIAN RESISTANCE against the Germans, something you swiss don't even know because you were already too full of Nazi money (taken with force from the Jews). Which ever won, Switzerland always won :D
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus about the Anschluss the austrian did in a time the germans were victorious--the swiss people didn't care about german victories or countries to be ruled--the nazi gold was found and divided between USA and Britain--little Switzerland saved 40thousand jewish refugees -USA, Britain and Canada closed their borders to all jewish refugees--so go and fuck yourselves you hypocrites who sent the St Louis back to Germany= Auschwitz
hyurgy123 1 month ago
What is certain is that the style of life changed -from agriculture back to cattle herding, from inumation to incineration, spread of bronze tools, new "warrior" societies founded on the sagas of the "heroes" (for Ilyad to the Mahabaharata) new Pantheon of Gods in the Heaven opposed to the old Gods related to the fertility of Mother Earth.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
It was very probably a bloody, military invasions because the Indoeuropeans had, beside the bronze weapons (those of the Achaens in the War of Troy) the Horse and Char, with which they conquered the local farmers of Europe and became the ruling people, imposing language over generations of mixing, so that this Proto-IndoEuropean later split into the Germanic languages, the Greek, Italics, Celtics, Slavic et. An invasion in that time was not a "colonial Empire", so THEY DID CERTAINLY carry genes.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
I think it was a bloody invasion in which the natives (I1, I2, J1, J2 and E1b1b, mostly the old Cro-Magnoides and Middle-easteners and North Africans farmers) were conquered by the IE R1b and R1a.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
Because pretty ALL Europeans belong to "indo-european" linguistic family, there are different theories about this expansion, one is that it was peaceful and linked to agriculture, the other that it was a bloody invasion after which the bronze weapons and tools, brough by the IE, spread to the entire Europe together with the new "Gods" in Heaven (unlike the old Gods in Earth, of the natives pre-IE), so common to Greek, Roman, Celtic, German and Slavic mythology (not to mention Iranic and Indian).
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus
You don't understand do you? Invasion or migration what occurred was an Elite Dominance model where the elite (representing a small fraction of the population) took over a country and imposed their language and culture. This has happened many times in history (The Visigoths and Moors in Spain, the Normans in England, the Slavs in the Balkans, the Turks in Anatolia) they simply didn't "destroy" the natives, they just ruled them.
TheGrandeConde 1 month ago
@TheGrandeConde
Oddly to say "GrandeCondé" I already talked about (months ago) of the "elite" Visigoths in Spain, Turks in Anatolia, Slavs in the Balkans, Normans in England etc.
But for the IE invasion it could be a different thing, I always thought it was an "elite" invasion, changing nothing on the genetic of the people conquered, but for this, the IE could have destroyed or exterminated great part of the natives, took their women (european Mt DNA did not change much) and proliferated.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
Because Italy was ALWAYS divided since the end of the roman empire, thus developing a "hundred independent cities" (the Comuni) and then regional states who fell dominated by foreign powers (in the end the Austrians). To "create" Italy the state of Piedmont under the dynasty of the Savoia militarly conquered all the rest of the country and then copied the model of centralized France. Thus the regional languages of Italy disappeared and became only "dialects".
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
But it's possible that R1b existed in Europe well before the Indo-European migration (2500 BC). However the Indo-Europeans of the "Kurgan Culture" in Ukraina were R1b and R1a. So it's possible both carried the same haplogroups. In Spain before the Roman conquest there were Iberians, Celtiberians, Vascones (Basques) and Lusitans, main people. The fact that the Basques don't speak indoeuropean language but are mostly 100% R1b can mean that the haplogroups existed before the invasions.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus
Yes... The Basques have R1b in excess of 80% (highest in Europe), they are not Indo-European yet you claim the Indo-Europeans brought R1b into Spain? lmao. The Indo-Europeans carried mainly R1a and haplogroup I since these are the most common in Central and Eastern Europe.
Also, this notion that the Indo-Europeans wiped out all the pre-Indo-Europeans is silly, the Indo-Europeans brought their LANGUAGE, not necessarily their genes.
TheGrandeConde 1 month ago
@TheGrandeConde
It is not "me" who claims that, but what I read on the webiste "Eupedia" according European genetics. Useless you say "lmao", speak plainly, unless you are a genetist, your hypotesis are as good as mine and as I've said, it is possible the R1b existed in Europe BEFORE the indo-european invasions BUT the indo-europeans were CERTAINLY R1b or R1a in majority.
And you say "no invasion"? on contrary, an invasion MUST have taken place.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
It is confirmed from the fact that R1b is present also in ancient "indoeuropean" cultures and languages like Iran (from the "Aryans"), Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
R1a remained in the eastern europe -mainly Slavic countries, but Germanic also (Scandinavians and Germans are about 30% R1a, 30% I1 and 30% R1b -a mixture of indoeuropeans and Cro-Magnoids).
Also I said, the R1b in Spain (S-116) is not that in England (R1b-U106) or France (R1b-U152 and others). All these people ARE "indo-europeans" but of different stocks (Latins, Germans and Gauls, mainly).
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
*Facepalm* Can't even be bothered to argue.
Speukan 1 month ago
Further to be "R1b" doesn't mean anything. The Spanish are R1b but are OBVIOUSLY different from the English that are R1b too. There are different subclades of R1b too, for example, Spanish are R1b-S116 while English or Germans are R1b-U106, French or Swiss or Northern Italians R1b-U152. "Racial" features are not linked to any particular genotipe however.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
cest qoui le nom de la chancon?
turner2123 1 month ago
@turner2123
Hughes Aufray , Santiano .
jeffkodiac 1 month ago
@jeffkodiac thank you, merci
turner2123 1 month ago
whats the name of the song?
turner2123 1 month ago
English = suckers and homosexuals
DariusLeGrand100 1 month ago
@DariusLeGrand100
Feck off.
mwillis1000 1 month ago
Another thing I don't understand is why "Portugal" exists. If Portugal exists, why not Catalonia? Why not Basque countries? They ALL speak different languages from the Castillan. Castillan Kings unified Spain but didn't touch Portugal -only in the period 1580-1640 there was the "Iberian union". I know Portugal was allied wit England who granted its independence. Still if Portugal do exists, Spain itself is a construction of different countries.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Civisreggianus Portugal gained independance from Spain in a battle,same with Switzerland--why does Switzerland exist with 4 languages?? it seems the notion of being free people is a unifier more important then a common language, that centralistic states such as Italy and France alwayas have troubles with regions is a fact which only a lose confederation can solve-in todays Europe regions will become closer across borders such as the Alsace is already closer to Basle then to Paris.
hyurgy123 2 months ago
@hyurgy123
Switzerland is an example of cantonal democracy but in her history the cantons fought each others not only for religious but also for political power, some cantons dominated others etc., and conquering area like the Ticino who were part of Lombardy thus Italy. The Alps protected Switzerland to develop how the Swiss wanted, bit like the waters protected England and allowed an independent evolution.
I don't like centralized States, but for Italy was a necessity.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus fighting Charles the bolds knight armies and destroying them in open battle was a first farmes defeating aristocrats--later a swiss vanguard of 1500youngsters stopped a 40thousand war-hardened french Armagnac army at St Jacques-Basle, the swiss defeating LouisXII of France and chasing his army to Lyon now alps there to protect them neither in the swiss/german wars against german emperor maximillians knight army which fled--swiss victories at Koblenz-Schwaderloh
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus the austro-german emperors from the von Habsburg branch which also governed parts of Italy suffered many heavy defeats against the Swiss-such as-Morgarten-Laupen-Sempach--then the burgundians lost and the bernese annexed their lands--later the comte de Savoie also got defeated by Berne--we were the most feared infantery force in medieval Europe,as mercenaries to hire swiss regiments was victory guranteed.
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
Certainly you are also swiss-braggart
"as mercenaries to hire swiss regiments was victory guranteed."
Not always. After Marignano, the Swiss became obsolete. No more "invincible". Spanish Tercios took their place.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus after Marignano where the Bernese and Fribourgeois didn't participate the Swiss became protestant and started the industrial revolution with Geneva as its banking center--Huldrich Zwingly issued an decree forbidding mercenary service--still Frederic Haldimand a swiss was Commander of Chief of British North America.
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus swiss leader Jürg Jenatsch kicked out the french from the grisons and the spanish from the Valtellina and still the swiss guarded french kings--Louis Pfyffer saved the french kings live from a huguenot attack--we never became obsolete--the bernese got paid by Francois 1er--not to participate at Marignan--so the other swss lost-
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
I don't understand hyurgy why you need to "separate" some Swiss from others, as if the "others" lost, it means the "good part" of the Swiss didn't lost. It looks a childish nationalistic little game :)
Well hyurgy, to my eyes the "Swiss" were no better, no worse soldiers than the Germans Landksnechte of the age. Both became obsolete, with the musket ranges, does not mean they were useless.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus we swiss were a lose confederation and affronting Napoleon canton by canton showed us that we needed a federal army. Napoleon sent without declaration of war 2 armies--one got beaten by Neuenegg the other was victorisou at Grauholz--the lucernois put women in uniform to fight the french--finally we were under Napoleons dictatorship for 10 years after 500 years of independence.
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
I know of the Swiss fighting qualities, but I would not say the Swiss troops were "invincible", as they suffered defeat as mercenaries and if France or Germany (United) wanted to invade Switzerland, they could do. But Switzerland lives for peaceful neutrality and her banks.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus Francois 1er of France made a perpetual peace treaty with the Swiss Confederation after Marignano which was only broken by Napoleon-then we had a entraide treaty with France after they had 80thousands french troops disarmed and interned in Switzerland in 1870( Bourbaki-Armée de l'Est) up to WW1 and2, Hitler's generals figured attacking Switzerland to costly--today we have not to fear either Germany nor France since 400 swisss Leopard2 tanks
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123 swiss own more artillery per square km then any european nation plus around 30 F18--plus Super Puma's and so on-we easily could take Italy tomorrow withpout much resistance--lol
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
Come to take it, swiss "fighting men".
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
"without much resistance".
Of course, but we are part of the NATO, and drop some atomic bombs on the head of some worthless swiss armchair warrior like you.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus you are getting ridicoulos-Austria and Sweden are neutral as well and armed to their teeth --Italy can be happy we protect their Northern border-lol
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
armed to the teeh
A country of scarcely 8 milions of people who is PEACEFUL SINCE CENTURIES. I bet you wish to be a French or a Briton (or a German), at least they are BIG countries and they FOUGHT the wars you love so much to fight behind a computer.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus your nation attacked spear-wielding people with machine guns and even the greeks were outnumbered by italians still they kicked their asses-looking at the possibility of which of us european nations had the biggest succes on the battle fields--the swiss outscored french and germans--today we are still able to defend our sovereignity.
hyurgy123 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
These are CRAPS hyrugy.
We lost the battle of Adwa (1896) when 10.000 Italians were surrounded by 100.000+ Ethiopians ARMED WITH RIFLES sold by Britain, France and Italy too sob :(
Then we came back in 1935-1936 and conquered the whole Ethiopia -THE ONLY FUCKING AFRICAN COUNTRY THAT NOT BRITAIN NOR FRANCE EVER TOUCHED.
WHY?
Because the Ethiopians were a mass of warlike warriors. AND THE ITALIANS WON!
So Fuck You.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@hyurgy123
In medieval time, I forgot to say hyurgy, that the italian "Lombard League" of North Italy and Tuscany did beat 2 German Emperors: the "hero" Frederick Barbarossa and his nephew Frederick II of Sicily. When the Italian cities-States did fought for their liberty, they won against the Germans.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
Interesting thing would be that the Visigoths, in 300 years ruling Iberia, were not militarly prepared as the Franks for the long isolation. Also civil wars among Visigothic nobles are a cause. It is however the only case of an european country being so rapidly and steadily held by the Muslims.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
The Visigoth also were the best soldiers who fought for the Roman Empire with the general Aetius in the battle of Chalons (451) to stop Attila's Huns to conquer Gaul.
Perhaps the germanic barbarians were super-strong in conquest, and become "civilized" and tired in the long rule (as the Vandals in Africa, as Procopius describe them).
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus No, I am Spanish from Asturias -the only region the Moors couldn't conquest-.
My comments don't attempt to offend anybody, I just want to clarify certain events that are usually misunderstood.
The Visigoths fell because they were a relatively small elite not very close with the bulk of the Roman-Iberian population -which had no access to power-. They had also feuds between themselves; in fact, legends say the Moors were "invited" to invade by rivals of the king don Rodrigo.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
Also the Franks in "France" was an elite -perhaps 200.000 people, among 6 milions of Gauls- who represented the military aristocracy. The same in Spain with the Visigoths, or in Italy with Ostrogoths or the Lombards -we are talking about "elite". It is difficult to believe that a kingdom that lasted 300 years -from 416 to 711- were still "divided" among conquerors and conquered. On contrary, Visigoth legislation was the "Latinest" of all, promoving merging between Visigoths and Spanish.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
The black legend is an exageration of the protestants founded on truth.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus Yes, an IMMENSE exaggeration. And it was the Spanish friars which denounced the crimes.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz Anyway, I don't care about many of these things. I don't have any problem recognising that Britain, for instance, is the most successful country ever, or that France and Germany have better economies, etc.
I know for a fact that if you solve the current crisis, especially the big unemployment problem, Spain is one of the best countries in the world to live in. It's fine to work in northern Europe, but there is nothing like Spain and its people in terms of friendliness and charm.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz
Perhaps you know -by the way, are you Spanish or Argentinian? Latin american?
Why the Visigoth kingdom fell to the Arabs? Was it weak, in 711, but the Visigoths were the barbarians who caused the fall of the Roman Empire (Battle Adrianople 378, and sack of Rome 410): did they become weak in Spain, unlike the Franks so strong in France?
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
I don't think Spain has "french" blood, it has Iberian, Celtiberian, Roman, Greek, Carthaginians, and later German (Swabian, Vandals, Visigoths) and then Arabs, Maghrebin. Every country is a mixture. Some French knights, I read, fought in the Reconquista, but don't think they resettled Spain.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus I didn't mean French blood. I meant that French culture has influenced Spain much more than Islamic culture. And yet nobody talks of a "French Spain".
I don't care if there is Arab blood or not. The only thing that matters is culture for me.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz
It doesn't work that way. It is France that has "Spanish" blood, not the other way around. R1b is a genetic marker passed from father to son, it originated over 15,000 years ago in the last ice age in modern day Iberia. Once the ice receded, these people resettled Western Europe.
In Spain R1b is found in over 70% of males, in France 65%, in Ireland almost 80%, Italy 60%, the Netherlands 70% etc... Arab contribution to the Iberian genepool is less than 6%.
TheGrandeConde 1 month ago
Interesting, "GrandeCondé". R1b is not originated in Iberia, but brought by the Indoeuropeans invaders (as R1a) from the steppes of Ukraina to the rest of Europe where it merged with the locals pre-indoeuropeans, genetically E1b1b, I1 or I2, J1 and J2 etc. (paleolithic hunters-gathereres and neolithic farmers).
However it's controversial why some 100% Basques are R1b but don't speak indoeuropean languages.
Sweden, Norway etc. were Luteran. Capitalism evolved in Calvinistic countries.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus
R1b has been in Western Europe for thousands of years prior to the Indo-European migration (no more than 3,000 years ago in Iberia by the way).
TheGrandeConde 1 month ago
@TheGrandeConde
Who say this? According to the website "Eupedia", R1b and R1a were both brought by the Indo-Europeans invaders in Bronze Age 2500 years BC. So you are wrong or, it is wrong who wrote that in the website. Controversy do exist about origin of this haplogroup.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus
Obviously its wrong. 3000 years ago (1000 B.C) there were very few Indo-European speaking tribes in Spain, which today has some of the most R1b of any Western European country (except Ireland). Whats more is that R1b is lacking in Eastern Europe, and R1a lacks in Western Europe. If the Indo-Europeans "carried both", Spain would not have 70+% R1b and almost no R1a.
TheGrandeConde 1 month ago
@TheGrandeConde
And the indo-europeans, which haplogroup did the carry? I think they carry R1b, so you are wrong, and this is what Eupedia on "European Genetic History" says. Before the R1b arrived to Europe, there were neolitich farmers who came from middle east and were J1, J2, E1b1b, and the old Cro-Magnoids with them, I1 and I2. These are the "oldest" European haplogroups BEFORE the INDO-EUROPEANS R1b and R1a (Slavs) came.
Civisreggianus 1 month ago
I guess if the Spanish developed such fanatic catholicism from the crusade mentality of the "Reconquista". Having suffered the muslim occupation, they wanted to revenge the humiliation not in Spain only, but impose Catholicism worldwide.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus You make two mistakes:
1.-Some Spaniards committed crimes in the Americas (mainly during the first half of the 16th century), but not a genocide. In fact, the Crown passed legislation to protect the Indians, something no other power did. During the American Wars of Independence the natives sided with Spain!
2.-The arabs didn't invade "Spain" in 711. They invaded the Iberian Peninsula, and both Spain and Portugal emerged from the fight against them.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz
1. If not a genocide, a slavicide.
2. I know. Spain and Portugal, but the Asturians and Basques (see Pelayo) who started the Reconquista.
Detail.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus The Leyes de Burgos (1512) and the Leyes Nuevas (1542) forbade Indian slavery, which ceased to exist to be replaced with Blacks brought from Africa by the English. After 1550 many abuses disappear. And if committed, they were private. The Crown always protected the natives.
When Darwin travelled to South America he met an Indian who told him: "Today we are nothing, not like when the king of Spain was still our sovereign".
Spain has been continuously smeared throughout History.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus No humillation in the Muslim conquest: they were the foremost power of their time, and I am proud to have monuments and buildings in Spain that Arab countries envy for themselves. Cordoba became one of the most important cities of the world during that time.
Anyway, there is a very common mistake according to which Spaniards are radically different due to that century-long Arab presence. It is false, the mixing was small; French influence, for instance, is bigger.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz
I know, that under the muslims, Spain (Iberia) was a flourishing culture, that saved the ancient greek and roman texts (Toledo School). I don't know about mixing, but certainly many Spanish converted, and later re-converted to catholicism, so that some arab blood (is it a shame?) is present, like in Sicily. Genetically however you are R1b at 60-70% -that is considered "indoeuropean".
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
North of Italy or Bavaria are catholic but lack fanatism of the Spanish. North of Italy and Tuscany were already "capitalistic" in their Comuni in Middle Age, while the rest of Europe was still feudal, aristocratic, and military. What the Italians lacked was exactly, the military mentality. They had no armies, only mercenaries. They changed sides. The Spanish or French fought for their Nations, the Italians had not.
The best of Germany, however, was Luteran. Catholics developed only later.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
Spain decayed until lost all the american colonies by 1829. And after had to learn all modernity from the most advanced european countries (like France and Britain), democracy, industrialization, civil rights, free thought, and continued to fight these "liberal" ideals until the time of Franco.
At least one thing I love of the Spanish: bullfighting. The Spanish have balls. The "Romans" took 2 centuries to completely conquer Iberia, and just 7 years for Gaul.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus Well, I don't agree with you, but I respect your views. Just one thing: to say that Spain committed a genocide in the Americas is simply false, propaganda.
True Spanish decline began in the 19th century. Although no longer preeminent since 1650, until the French invasion we were among the first powers. But the 1808-1813 war with Napoleon was disastrous for the country, just like the 19th century in general, when we failed to industrialize and suffered 3 civil wars.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
To give origin to economically powerful countries you need the "Work Ethic". Like that of the Protestants, Calvinist English, Swiss and Dutch, and that which charachterize the Germans.
Spain remained a feudal, aristocratic country during the "Siglo de Oro" and despite all the colonies and the gold and silver (managed by Genoese bankers) could not build a CAPITALIST country and an ACTIVE BOURGEOISE, unlike England, or Holland. They created Bourgeoise and Democratic, Free countries.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus Let me disagree with the "protestant work ethic". France has always been a Catholic country and it has excelled in economics. And half of Germany is Catholic; indeed Bavaria, the richest Land right now, is entirely Catholic. Same with the north of Italy.
In my opinion it has more to do with the economic system. Believe it or not, Spaniards are hard-working. But historically free market ideas weren't successful, and until 1959 we didn't become a veritable capitalist country.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
I don't say the Spanish are not "hard-working" (but this concept is relative: every country claims to be "hard-working"), but traditionally were not a country of "merchants". Perhaps the Catalunians are, more than Castillans. Spain was a traditionalist, catholic, aristocratic, closed to the new ideas country. In the last century has learned but needed to wait Franco's death.
About colonialism, the Spanish were horrible. There were too many natives so they survived, as slaves.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz
Not to mention that 'Protestant' countries like Denmark, Norway and Sweden were the POOREST in Europe until the early 20th century.
TheGrandeConde 1 month ago
@TheGrandeConde I completely agree with you, to say that Protestant mentality is superior is just too simplistic.
HerrOttoKranz 1 month ago
@Civisreggianus True, Swiss, Dutch, English... are hard-working, but their historical success has more to do with a stable political system and the right free market economic thinking than with individual diligence.
The tragedy of Spain has always been its rulers, and we failed in important fields. But don't exaggerate the "modernity" of Europe either. Women could vote in Spain in 1931, but in France not before 1945 (Switzerland 1971!). Britain wasn't a real democracy until the end of WW1.
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
@HerrOttoKranz
The rulers of Spain were aristocratic, military men supported by the catholic church. In the colonies in Latin america, they tried to be "democratic" but in every country sooner or later fell to the dictatorships, of military rulers supported by the catholic church. That's conservative, but the new ideas don't come from Spain but from the Anglosaxons. Unfortunately also the modern financial capitalism that has brought to world crisis.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
Spain wanted to eradicate the Protestants in Holland (80 years; failure) in the war of Thirty Years in Germany (failure). The only countries were Spain "triumphed", are Spain (expulsion of the only ones who worked, Jews and Muslims), and Italy, the famous "Lombardy" so rich before the Spanish and so poor after (Naples and Sicily were poor before and poor later).
Thanks, Spanish. You gave the perfect WRONG EXAMPLE.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus Thanks for reminding me that we owned half of Italy for several centuries. We did indeed, and back then Naples and Sicily weren't ruled by mafiosi. And about Milan... their inhabitants cried bitter tears of grief when the Spaniards departed to be replaced with Austrians.
Yeah, it took England, France, and the Dutch 80 years to doblegate us, while simultaneosly expanding in America and fighting the Turks. Didn't Machivelli say Ferdinand the Catholic was the best king of its era?
HerrOttoKranz 2 months ago
This is the first and most famous Italian Novel.
The Lombards and the Veneti today are PROUD OF THE AUSTRIAN RULE, efficient, ordered and clean, just the contrary of the spanish one.
About the South you say "ruled by the mafiosi", the presence of organized criminality in Sicily or Naples has been attributed to CENTURIES OF EXPLOITATION and BAD GOVERNMENT, and the south became such properly when it was ruled by the Spanish, when there were the "Normans" or Frederick II, not.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
The Spanish have been MEN OF HONOUR, Knights, Peasants, (Quixote & Sancho Panza), and Priests; but WORKERS, never.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
Suddenly the proud Flemish Jeffkodiac who is so proud of his Flemish culture that he speak absolutely no Flemish at all has disappeared.
Guess he could not find a modern day band singing in Flemish in French occupied Flanders.
Jeffkodiac must be happy it gives him a reassured feeling that French has eliminated this shameful language that the lonely old people still speaking it in Flanders should be ashamed to talk. He considers these old Flemish speakers traitors to France lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Too funny obliged to speak of another culture to defend their ridiculous cutlure . Tell me what you don't put on your channel the many Norman song of today because your Norman culture is so strong ..
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
Sidonius Apollinaris.
Look for him.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
Italy is ALSO the lands of the Romans, but was divided before them and became divided after. The "Romans" were the people of Rome, Latins, in central Italy-. Other parts of Italy were inhabited by different people (Celts, Etruscans, Greeks etc.). Later we ALL became "Romans"as the Spanish or French.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
Nobody should feast if a language dies. Languages should be conserved, but in history, the losers, if they have not a cultural superiority, lose their language too.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus
So you are saying that the Romans from Italy are superior to the Gauls and Franks.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
What are you saying? The "Gauls" were already called "Romans" because they spoke Latin and were Latinized. So they were "culturally superiors" to the Franks who adopted Latin too, introducing some words. The "Normans" are Gauls in the end, how was the region called in Frankish time? Neustria? Regional differences are in every european country but the French perhaps think they have only them? :D
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus The Gauls did not adopt the Latin of Caesar but a rustic form of Latin, lower class Latin.
The "Normans" what is that " " for lol. It's much more correct to use this on the "French". Because what are the French? There is no unique French blood, no French true ethnicity.
There is a complete difference between us Normans and the Occitan people. Also a big difference between us Normans and the Bretons etc.
There is no such a thing as a French people or French blood lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
The Gauls adopted LATIN, just like the other people of the Empire, that EVOLVED in Vulgar Latin, you dumbass.
I don't care about your "supposed" TOTALLY DIFFERENT NORMANS FROM THE OCCITANS. You don't care about Europe, you WANT THE BOUNDARIES between the same country.
You suck.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
@Civisreggianus
What an absurdity lol, Are you telling me the Gauls adopted the Latin of the higher ends of Roman society when the Roman soldiers and traders who came to Gaul did not even use Latin but vulgar Latin. Latin is the written Latin spoken by the elites only you pathetic clownish creature.
Are you telling me that a Gaulish farmer or a Germanic Frank spoke the same Latin as the highest of highest in Rome but not the language of the Roman mob who was the majority?
Lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Do you like the detail? The Latin of the Laws, of the Army, of the Literature, was the "Vulgar Latin"? Of course even the Romans -and see the graffiti in Pompei- used not the "Latin of Cicero" but the common, folkish one. The Gauls adopted the Latin, the Gallic senators, writers, poets, and soldiers, spoke in the society both the "Official" Latin and the Vulgar one.
Details, details, to demonstrate what?
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
The centralization of power in the capitals of the countries or regional is responsible for the uniformity of the language. Just as English has imposed upon the world, Francien dialect prevailed in France and then the modern French has done the same. I do not agree with any of that. I hate centralism, however, little can be done against this, since the same people who are of regions are to live in the capital, leaving their culture or subculture side.
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
Broadly speaking, the contributions are France, are Nordic-Germanic: Franks, Goths, Burgundians, Normans and Alemanni. Other contributions are the Basques (the oldest town) from which all the western Atlantic is related by blood, especially in the British Isles. The Celts who like the Basques in the West Atlantic are adding southern Germany and northern Italy. The other great people is the Greek patriarchs of Western culture. And finally the fundamental Roman contribution. Vive la France !!!
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
where he fought bravely, one of the twelve Frank paladins and governor of Brittany "Roland". Hruodland or Roland, will be remembered forever!
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
The great patriarchs of France begins with Clovis, followed by the powerful Charlemagne, Hugh Capet, Philip II and Charles de Gaulle. It is certainly Charlemagne the great lord of the West trying to structure a first idea of Europe(Celtic-Roman-Germanic and Catholic) in a Frankish Kingdom and Empire , producing a cultural renaissance and giving stability to the region. Charlemagne was never defeated, but the rear of his army suffered a terrible attack of the Basques in Roncesvalles.
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
Franks, Burgundians and Visigoths were creating the identity of France finally was further strengthened with the mixture of Norman blood. The tutor of Duke William was the same French King. The Duke came to power with the help of the King and defeated the rebels barons. The Duke came to have so much power and ability in the war that did not respect the King, imposing their own rules. At that time most of the Dukes were rebels, but certainly, the Duke of Normandy was more even.
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
@LaSombraFantasma
Do you have some kind of problem with answering why the Flemish language is almost completely disappearing in French occupied Flanders and replaced by French while Flemish is thriving strong a few Km away in Flemish Belgium?
You perhaps don't want to answer because you know the reason why things are as they are. The hate and contempt the French have for the Flemish language and culture as with other non French languages and cultures.
I understand why you don't answer.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre I understand what you say and I'm loving the regional cultures of France! I disagree disappear languagesof the regions. France is richer in its diversity! I agree with Norman language that is protected, as are the languagesof the south. I love Europe because my blood, and almost all of my culture comes from there:)
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
Remember that the Franks had their first contact with the latin when they were part of the Roman armies with other Gauls and Germans. Later, as Rome foederati in Rhineland.
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
@LaSombraFantasma
Tell me why is Flemish almost extinct in French occupied Flanders but thriving a few Km away in Belgium and the Netherlands.
Is it because the French love and respect the Flemish language and culture ;)
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre each region of France should speak French, and regional dialect or language! but you're from Anglo-Norman islands right? It is under British sovereignty. As is the treatment of the Saxons on my Norman Cousinsthere?
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
@LaSombraFantasma
I'm from the the center of Continental Normandy who is under French occupation not from the Norman Islands.
As a Norman I shit on the French. We in continental Normandy have had the French remove our Norman laws in 1806 but they are still the official legal laws of the Norman Islands of Guernsey and Jersey. These Islands are the independent part of Normandy and are NOT a part of Britain or the EU. But in connection to the crown since the Norman conquest of 1066.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
The Flemish language descended from the languagesspoken by the Franks. Flanders has historically been part of France.
Those with Celtic and Roman blood are entitled to live in all the land since before the Franks. The Franks respected and mixed with the Gauls, made the Christian religion of the Burgundians and the majority of the people of Gaul.
LaSombraFantasma 2 months ago
Guesse his mother banned him from using internet again lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Do not go crying in the arms of your wife if the truth hurt you. lol .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
The only true intellectual is that who does it with the fists.
Civisreggianus 2 months ago
This little norman nazi anquetil is funny
Trying to learn us history with his nationalist bullshits
You didn't answer me
Why the language of law in England was called Law French if norman is not close to French?
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr This icelandic shit hates so much France he does not want to admit French and norman like all langues d'oil are very close
And yes, the only difference is spelling and minor
When speaking Picard and Old French, you would find very little difference in spelling and writitng
If you do like you do today, comparing Picard (old language that did not evolve) with modern French of 2011, that evolves every decade, of course you will have differences stupid nazi asshole
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr Comparing picard, norman and Old French, you will find brother languages, that are all part of French culture and all have French oil roots
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr Lol the devoted FN fanatic who once believed The king of the Franks helped the Norman William the conqueror in conquering England ,until later having to be forced to admit such a thing was impossible,has no arguments as usual. This cowardly French horsain from Paris even said that the Norman Oil language was a dialect of the French language lol. The Oil languages can be found in Belgium, Switzerland etc and are not a specific language group existing only in the RF lol the clown.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@skiteufr Fact is you cowardly son of a whore that the French Oil language is inferior to my Norman language and to the Picard Oil language. This abomination of the Oil languages did not even have a written literature before long after Picard and Norman lol. This weak language changes every decade like you say unlike the strong Norman and Picard languages. What the hell is "French" going to sound like in 50 years something very different from French lol. Norman and Picard are real languages ;)
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
"strong Norman " too funny a disappeared language .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
How can a language that is still spoken be a disappeared language lol.
The definition of disappeared is passing out of sight or existence. Norman is neither.
But then again you're not very intelligent lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Tell me the " great number " of people who speak your language in the world ? Show your intelligence ..
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
It's not a question of number we are dealing with here but the the fact that you claimed that Norman had disappeared as a language. But how can a language be disappeared if it is still spoken?
If a language does not exist then it can't be spoken. Norman is still spoken hence your claim that Norman is a disappeared language is false.
Are you claiming that Norman is not spoken anymore by anyone yes or no?
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
That's what I thought. You think when that language is spoken by a few hundred people is a strong language but in fact what you are doing this is called self-persuasion .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
You did not think anything. You only refused to answer for your claim that Norman had disappeared. A language has to be extinct you see to be considered a disappeared language. And by refusing to answer if you think Norman is not spoken by anyone anymore you admit telling a lie.
Norman is a stronger language as in being purer than the bastard of all the Oil language that French is.
Hebrew was a none spoken language except by a few but a strong language. Look at it now in Israel.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
You say anything as usual . OK your bastard language is not dead he is only spoken by several ridiculous clown lol . I do not want to annoy your self-persuasion lol .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
So you admit coming with a false statement in the beginning. So we don't have to wonder about your other statements lol.
My Norman language did not need to be influenced by French but French needed to be influenced by my Norman language lol.
French did not even have an existing literature when Norman was written down, after all it is a bastard language. The left overs of Norman and Picard, two noble Oil languages.
Nice reference to French culture on the video on your page lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
My comment what no more false than your with your "strong Norman " who is ridiculous lol . The French was influenced by the oil language like you bastard Norman and the oc language and then ? This is why the French language is the descendant of this language . I see that today the Picard is a noble language when last times you said that the Picard was ridiculous you have really true reaction of disturbed clown .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
Tell you what.
Show me a video with the Flemish in French occupied Flanders speaking or singing in Flemish. Don't take any Flemish from Flemish Belgium or Flemish Netherlands.
Just show me one video with Flemish people in French occupied Flanders using their language.
Surely you can do that if you can put on American TV shows right?
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Tell me when i have said that there is Flemsih singers in France ?? Now you invent anything lol .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Oh and i think that i have already send you video a bout the Flemish culture in north of France but you have " forget " that lol .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
I did not say you ever mentioned Flemish singers in the RF. I said can you procure any Flemish singing people or even Flemish speaking people in French occupied Flanders on a video on Youtube?
Or is the Flemish culture and language disappearing inside the borders of the RF?
Come on just show me one video with Flemish people in French occupied Flanders using their language, that must not be hard now is it?
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
/9MDNBbig2I8
I send you that for a second time now you can say all the xenophobic bullshit that you want about the Flemish
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
LOL Page not found.
Post it on your page. Come on and it better have the Flemish of French occupied Flanders speaking in Flemish and not the bastard language called French.
Go on put this ghost video on your channel if it exists that is lol
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
You are a liar because when I note the name I find the video myself . I do not know why you are angry because the Norman bastard language is one of the ancestors of the French language lol . I put the video on your page little hypocritical .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
Lol what's the problem? Can't you put a video with the Flemish language in French occupied Flanders on your page? Do you hate the Flemish culture that much or is there another reason like there is no video with people speaking Flemish or singing in Flemish in French occupied Flanders lol.
That must be why you have an American TV show on your video and not Flemish people in French occupied Flanders speaking Flemish lol
I however have my Norman language spoken on my video ;)
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Lol you are too funny with your bullshit this video is in my favorites since a long time and on my channel .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
That must be why you can't find it and put it on display lol.
So you can't find ONE video with Flemish people in French occupied Flanders speaking their native Flemish language but you can find endless amounts of Anglo-Saxon musicians singing in English.
Lol the self hate.
Again I have showed how ridiculous you are.
My channel has a video with the Norman language yours can't even have one with Flemish spoken in French occupied Flanders but no problem with Anglo-Saxon music lol
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
You are ridiculous with your clownish "strong Norman language " when in fact one of your 2 video about your " strong Norman identity " on your channel are ..........IN FRENCH loooooooool . I spend a really good time with you ..
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@jeffkodiac
Now you are trying to avoid the fact that you don't have one single video with the Flemish in French occupied Flanders speaking Flemish but an endless amount of music from the Anglo-Saxon world, the world you admire more than your own Flemish one lol.
Common kiddo can't you find ONE video with people speaking Flemish in French occupied Flanders lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
Now you try to hide the fact that I have sent a video where Flemish is spoken in northern France when your so-called Norman culture is represented by a French video on your page with music that comes from American culture lol . You made me laugh with your Norman culture of joker .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre adolf try that --- >on google book page 7"Home Help in Spelling of Sue Clarke, Sue Cason, Caanan Grall -an history of english spelling (lesson 2) on google book page 7, this is what the little british can learn at school today :)
In 1066, a french prince called william the conqueror crossed the channel, killing the english king, and made england a french colony. this is the time of the legendary Robin Hood, the native saxons hated the french invaders, but were ......
mmtos28 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre .....forced to learn their language anyway.
learn your homework, stupid lazy adolfo :)
mmtos28 2 months ago
@mmtos28
Is that all you can you jealous French horsain, quote children books?
Google "La bataille de Varaville"
When in 1057 the Norman William the Conqueror and his Normans slaughtered the much larger French army of the Frankish king Henri I who fled lol.
French victory perhaps? Lol.
William for sure had more Scandinavian blood than Napoleon had French. Oh wait Napoleon had no French blood at all lol.
No wonder you suck in history, you quote books for children eul horsain lol
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre
"Nice reference to French culture on the video on your page" Sorry but i'm not a nationalist like you and i have video of around the world in my channel , thing than a nationalist like you can not understand lol .
jeffkodiac 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jeffkodiac
jeffkodiac (2 weeks ago) Spam Tu sais ici c'est pareil il y a une renaissance de la culture Flamande , je pense que cela est une bonne chose . jeffkodiac (2 weeks ago) Spam D'après ce que j'ai vu en Normandie il y a des parti qui veulent un rattachement entre les 2 départements et aussi une certaine reconnaissance de la culture ce qui pour moi devrait être accordé par le gouvernement Français .
Only 2 weeks ago you wrote this. And here you are anti-Norman. You schizo lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@skiteufr You consider the Oil languages as something French (funny specially since not all Oil languages are even inside the French Republic. But you consider all non Oil languages then as something not French and not a part of French culture. Meaning the Breton Celtic language. The Bask language. And of course the langues d'Oc who are not Oil languages.Go tell a Breton that Brittany is not his country and that Breton is a foreign language and to the Basks and Occitans lol
FN masturbator lol.
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago
@LaNormandieLibre "FN masturbator lol"
Lool funny coming from a stupid neo nazi like you, that likes a norman nationalist website supposed to be "anti racist" and that contains links to the FN website
I remember it was so funny to own you like a little poddle on that one
Like the time where you said Eleanor of Aquitaine spoke Occitan when she spoke Oil language Poitevin, or when you miserable refuse to acknowledges that the mottos of English monarchy are in French
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr Btw, you again try to invent something i never said
Breton, Basque Oc language are not part of French languages like Norman, Picard.
They have different origins
However, by the fact that Bretons, Basques are part of France for centuries, they are languages of France, they are part of the regional cultures of France but not part of French original culture that has seen the birth of French language we speak today
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr Why are you so frustrated that most people in France feel proud in being French? WHy you are disgusted that France is united under one culture and one power, but respecting regional indentities in the same time
"Oil languages did not even have a written literature before long after Picard and Norman lol."
Then read about Chretien de Troyes, one of the most admired writter of middle ages
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr French language evolves because he is living, modern
Norman language is dead, only spoken by dying old guys, that is the sad reality
Just be proud of all the normans and all did to build and make France great
This is why, we normans, are proud to be FRENCH
skiteufr 2 months ago
@skiteufr The modern Norman language dead? Lol this coming from a person who said not so long ago that the Norman language was a dialect of french. A bad version of French. Now forced to admit that these claims were totally absurd lol. This from the man who called Henry II a bitch lol. Chretien of Troyes adapted his work on the works of the Normans such as Wace. You do know that Wace was for example the first to ever mention the famous round table don't you lol
We Normans are proud NORMANS ;)
LaNormandieLibre 2 months ago