Added: 3 years ago
From: beatelsthenew
Views: 34,348
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,383)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • the next person who calls the french pussies aughta throw themselves off the tobin bridge

  • Quel est le pays qui a gagné le plus de batailles de toute l'histoire de l'Humanité ? C'est nous !

    VIVE LA FRANCE <3

  • @AllezIstres

    What are your sources?

  • @pierrofromcanada

    -"There have been 53 major wars in Europe

    France had been a belligerent in 49 of them; UK 43.

    In 185 battles that France had fought over the past 800 years, their armies had won 132 times, lost 43 times and drawn only 10.

    Giving the French military the best record of any country in Europe".

    BBC History.

  • @AllezIstres

    Thank you...

    I know you are smart enough to provide me the link to the BBC website where I can find this citation , right??

    Because i can't find it myself... :-(

    (I just hope it is not a copy-paste from imaginative people)

  • PROUD TO BE FRENCH!!!!! VIVE LA FRANCE!!!!

  • It seems Normandy was independant in 1066...

    Not a french victory then...

  • @pierrofromcanada

    Normans, Bretons, Flemings, French, Poitevins, Angevins, Manceaux...So french victory

  • @Spark02ify

    Not in 1066... I am afraid.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    It was well a French-Norman victory in 1066 even it bothers you .

  • @jeffkodiac

    Do you claim this because there were also french troops among the Norman invasion?

  • @pierrofromcanada

    I claim it was a French-Norman victory , it mean what it mean .

  • @jeffkodiac

    OK.

    I just wonder why Lucien Musset never stated this.

    Probably you know more than him.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    Lucien Musset said that there was only Viking in Normandy perhaps ?

  • @jeffkodiac

    He rather speaks about Normans, in Normandy.

    That makes sense.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    You don't answer my question .

  • @jeffkodiac

    You didn't read my answer...

    in 1066... in Normandy... there were Normans.

    But I guess your question is more complicated than that. And I will answer you with another question:

    Are you considering than the german are french since Charlemagne conquered the actual Germany?

  • @pierrofromcanada

    En fin de compte, l’héritage viking s’avère modeste. C’est assez paradoxal car les Scandinaves sont tout de même à l’origine du duché de Normandie.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    - Oui, c’est un paradoxe. Mais il s’explique facilement. Les Vikings qui se sont installés en Normandie ont fait le choix de l’intégration. Ils se sont convertis au christianisme, ont épousé les autochtones, ont abandonné leur langue et ont repris le cadre administratif et judiciaire carolingien. Un siècle après leur installation, leur originalité s’était diluée.

    Laurent Ridel

  • @jeffkodiac

    Il existe encore aujourd'hui un indéniable "type normand". Dans la population du littoral, on a mesuré une dolicocéphalie très prononcée (de l'ordre de 80 à 82). Les études anthropologiques effectuées au début du XX siècle peremettent de classer le Cotentin parmi les pays les plus nordiques d'Europe occidentale. L'ensemble de la Normandie septentrionale soutient la comparaison avec la Hollande ou de la Westphalie.

    Histoire de la Normandie Jean-Robert Ragache.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    Donc tu dis que en Normandie aujourd'hui il n'y a que des vikings ?

  • @pierrofromcanada

    Utilisé initialement à des fins descriptives, le terme a ensuite été employé par les théoriciens racistes tels que Georges Vacher de Lapouge qui souhaitaient établir une classification hiérarchique des « races humaines ». La notion n'est quasiment plus employée en anthropologie, depuis notamment que l'influence de l'environnement sur l'indice céphalique a pu être démontrée.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    Diocephale .

  • @jeffkodiac

    "Diocephale"

    No, dolicocéphalie.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    In fact it's dolichocéphalie from dolichocéphale .

  • @jeffkodiac

    La ligne de partage apparaît à la fois anthropologique et linguistique. Cette ligne de partage est appelée par les spécialistes "ligne Joret", du nom du dialectologue qui l'a établit au siècle dernier.

    Histoire de la Normandie Jean-Robert Ragache

  • @pierrofromcanada

    So you say to me that the italians of the north are French and the Spanish of the north are French .

  • without power*

  • Hastings is a Norman victory... not french.

  • @pierrofromcanada In the 1,092 comments here, we have explained maybe 100 times why Normans were French. I will not repeat it to you, just read.

  • @Nettempereur

    Sorry, You probably explain 100 times the wrong thing

    May I invite you to see this viideo, where an historian professor explain on the BBC that William the Conqueror won Hastings battle, and this victory is considered as a Norman's one?

    youtube.com/watch?v=oLy1LskT6Y­8

  • @pierrofromcanada No, we have said the truth. I advise to read François Neveux, a specialist of medieval Normandy, I will not lose time arguing with you, everything is in his books (some are translated in English so you can read them).

  • @Nettempereur

    "The Vikings were vassals of the French king by the terms of the treaty they both agreed upon"

    After King Charles was deposed by Robert I, Rollo considered his oath to the King of France to be over

    " Rollo became a Christian as did all of his followers".

    A christian does not make you a French (or Frank)

    Generations later, the Normans became French people. "

    How many generations?

  • @pierrofromcanada Normans were French, lived as French, were Christians (their northmen ancestors were paganic), vassals to the King of France (Guillaume had been helped by the French King to gain the Duchy some years earlier). English Kings were vassals to the French's until the 100 years' war. And Guillaume went to England with Normans, Bretons, other French and even Flemish people!

  • @Nettempereur

    Strikingly, François Neveux speaks about "Normands", not "Français" in his books

  • @pierrofromcanada Yes. I can speak about Provencaux, Breton, Corsican. So they are not French?

    Read his book, and come back if you want. Not before.

  • @Nettempereur

    Sorry, as far as I know, William the Conqueror was considered as a Norman (even in Neveux's book: L'aventure des NORMANDS, VIIIe-XIIIe siècle)

  • @pierrofromcanada read his books. Really, everything is written.

  • @Nettempereur

    "read his books"

    I personnaly read Paul ZUMTHOR's book : Guillaume Le Conquérant...

    William the conqueror was Norman, not french

  • @pierrofromcanada BUT NORMAN IS French. I don't deny he was norman but I'm telling you this is the same thing.

    I am provencal and French. Do you understand the difference? Like English and British. You are telling me Elizabeth is English but not British? Hmm hmm

  • @Nettempereur

    Norman is french, So why Norman fought in Mortemer battle?

    I rather think you really need to indentify what is the definition of a "Nation state (Etat Nation in french)

  • @pierrofromcanada Nation state did not exist in Middle Ages, this was the French revolution which mostly created it.

    Normans could fight against the Kings, it happened many times. Have you ever heard of Burgundy during the 100 years' war? WERE BURGUNDIANS ENGLISH? =)

  • @Nettempereur

    "Nation state did not exist in Middle Ages, this was the French revolution which mostly created it"

    EXACTLY

    that is the point

    You cannot consider Norman as French for this reason.

  • @pierrofromcanada I have to go, I can't answer for a while but I will later.

    See you pierro.

  • @Nettempereur

    Sure

    I am waiting for you

    And I will read m. Neveux?s book this week.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Lived as french"

    Already heard about "more danico", which is NOT a french tradition.

    "vassals to the King of France"

    Then why did he fight against French in Mortemer Battle and in Varaville battle?

    How many Norman, Britton, Flamish, French in Hastings?

  • @pierrofromcanada heard of the francisque? A weapon used in Hastings. Where do you believe this word come from? A FRANCisque?

    So? Feudal war, you know something about it? There were hundreds of them in French History, in every regions.

    How many? How could I know precisely?

    Read Bayeux Tapestry: FRANCI

  • @Nettempereur

    " heard of the francisque"

    You use some american weapon nowadays (javelin)...

    that does NOT make you an american

    "Read Bayeux Tapestry: FRANCI"

    I was pretty sure you will speak to me about it

    There were french on the battlefield... that does not say William was French.

  • @pierrofromcanada ??? And? Do you think gloablized markets were common in 1060s? lOl The Northmen who settled in the 9th century mixed with the population and took their war methods? Northmen had no cavalry for instance, anyway not as important as the Frankish. They took it from them.

    Yeah, I talk you about the Bayeux Tapestry.Truth hurts? Find somewhere the word Norman!

  • @Nettempereur

    "Northmen had no cavalry for instance, anyway not as important as the Frankish. They took it from them."

    True, there were some FRENCH troops in Hasting, (and that is the reason they are mentionned on the Tapestry) How many? How many Norman?

    As for the Norman part:

    Guillaume de Jumièges wrote Gesta Normannorum Ducum (I let you guess what Normannorum means)

  • @pierrofromcanada FRENCH=NORMAN, I can't say it in another way, I am sorry.

    When I say French in Hastings, I mean French not from Normandy to make the distinction.

  • @Nettempereur

    Yes, I know you want to convince yourself... (Méthode Coué)

    But Normans were not French.

  • @pierrofromcanada No méthode Coué, I swear =)

  • Comment removed

  • @pierrofromcanada And his name was Guillaume le Bâtard. It eventually gave bastard in English but it has another meaning.

  • @Nettempereur

    Do you know why he was named "Batard"?

    (it is related to y previous "more danico" assertion.)

  • @pierrofromcanada Because he was the illegitimate son of Robert le Magnifique and Arlette.

  • @Nettempereur

    Not really

    Because the old Viking Law allow you to get married with other women.

    Even William's father did it... (against the FRENCH law)

    That is why is son, who was born outside this "french law", was called the batard.

  • @pierrofromcanada He was unlegitimate, it was the cause why his rule over Normandy was contested by the Richards. Check his whole childhood, his three masters were killed. When he was 19, he was attempted to be killed too.

    No poligamy in Christiandom, you are wrong.

  • @Nettempereur

    "No poligamy in Christiandom"

    But polygamy in More Danico.

  • @pierrofromcanada Guillaume and his father were Christian. In the times of Guillaume, the Church had a huge reform to prevent priest being married or having wife. Trust me, they did not play with these matters. Guillaume was considered a bâtard in French. His mother married another man.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Guillaume and his father were Christian"

    So why did they keep the More Danico tradition?

    "His mother married another man..."

    William's father had no spouse but 2 "frillas"... like a Viking

  • @pierrofromcanada Neveux never speaks of More Danico, as far as I remember. You speak of this but I have got no evidence. Normans were not Vikings, so no frillas too.

    Why? The nation state did not exist. What existed were Kingdoms. You were part of a Kingdom when you were the vassal of a King. Normans were vassals to the French King, they were French. That's what I'm telling you for one hour.

  • @Nettempereur

    Try here

    books.google.fr/books?id=pcIsA­AAAMAAJ&ots=0NEujjacOh&pg=PA54­#v=onepage&q&f=false

  • @pierrofromcanada Hello again.

    I did not manage to find your file. Google tells me there is a mistake.

    Good for Neveux, I advice you "L'aventure des Normands", I hope there is an english version because it was really an excellent book.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Normans were vassals to the French King, they were French"

    No.

    The duties of the vassal to his King : the vassal must not INTERFERE with his King, his family and his property. BUT william fought against him in Mortemer AND Varaville (still a vassal?)

    The vassal is military aid to his lord when he is attacked, the vassal must come with weapons to defend him.

    And IT IS A SYNALLAGMATIC CONTRACT (The King has to protect his vassal too) .

  • @pierrofromcanada

    " heard of the francisque? A weapon used in Hastings"

    And William the Conqueror cross the channel on Drakkar (Does it sound like a french name?) ;-)

    We can see some on the Bayeux Tapestry

  • @pierrofromcanada Yes, the Normans were vassals to the King of France; it did not prevent vassals to fight against their King sometimes, it happened. The King could vanquish, and chase away the Lord or accept his apologies. Otherwise, if he lost (and it happened, f.e with Burgundy) his power is shaken, he may see other Lords rising against him. But that doesn't mean he could do more than accepting the defeat.

  • @Nettempereur

    Vassal... During this period of the Middle Age, that does not mean anything

    Adhemar of Chabannes, a writer from the early eleventh century, summarizes an exchange of letters between Capet and one of his "Vassal":

    Hughes Capet, "Adalbert, who made you count?"

    Adalbert of Périgord, "Hughes, who made​you king?"

  • @Nettempereur

    The feudal vassal system was developed because of the weakening of the public authority after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire (tenth - eleventh century): the emperor, the kings and soon the territorial princes were unable to bring order and impose their power to local lords.

  • @pierrofromcanada The Mora was mix of Frankish and northmen shipping skills, the Mora was built in Barfleur, Normandy. It did not come from Norway or Denmark. Influence from their Vikings elders, but it doesn't change the fact that Guillaume and his men were not Northmen.

  • @Nettempereur

    "The Mora was mix of Frankish and northmen shipping skills"

    Frankish didn't develop this kind of boat, with this shape.

  • @pierrofromcanada Yes, they did: Le mora est un type de navire médiéval alliant les technologies francques et norroise, apparu au Xe siècle. (source: fr.wikipédia). Traduction: the Mora was a kind of medieval ship which mixed frankish and norroise (Northmen) technics, appeared in the 10th century.

    Normans had the rules they wanted (each Lord ruled his land according to his view), it doesn't change anything.

  • @Nettempereur

    Le Mora

    "Très colorés, les moras étaient apparentés aux langskips scandinaves."

    Any "Frankish" inspiration? there are no frankish ship that looks like those .

  • @Nettempereur

    As for le Mora wikipedia

    There are mistakes...

    it is written Sur le Mora un Barfleurais Etienne porta Guillaume en Angleterre 1066...

    And the conclusion: The Mora was built in Barfleur

    Unfortunately, the real writing is: Sur le Mora un Barfleurais, Etienne / porta Guillaume en Angleterre / 1066

    Etienne comes from Barfleur... (as for the Mora, we do not know)

    This wikipedia link is highly doubtful.

  • @pierrofromcanada About vassal, you must understand there was theory (what you are giving to me) and facts. Yes, a Lord was supposed to be faithful to his King. In facts, it almost never happened. Everyone tried gaining as much power as possible, at any occasion. If we consider your view, so France never existed until Louis XIV, and it is a bit stupid.

  • @Nettempereur

    "France never existed until Louis XIV"

    As far as I know:

    Louis VI le Gros (1108 to 1137) described himself as "roi de France (rex Franciai), in a letter to pope Calixte II. It is the first of reference of "roi de la France" (before him, the other King were "roi des francs")

    do you confirm?

  • @pierrofromcanada Être apparenté in French means "look like", "has an origin", 'is derivated from". Sure the Normans inherited their elders technics and they mixed them with Frankish's ones. It doesn't mean Mora was a foreign ship.

  • @pierrofromcanada Yes, indeed "as long as they wanted so". That was facts, that was the difference with your dictionnary definition of 'vassal'. Reality was not so clear and clean. But whatsoever, the French King was their sole King, and it meant they were French as we agree on the non-existence of state-nation before 1789. What was the definition of a people then? A common King/Chief/Emperor, whoever you want.

  • @Nettempereur

    "non-existence of state-nation " means no nationality...

    "A common King/Chief/Emperor, whoever you want... "

    Yes the Norman trust William the Conqueror only means Norman Nation.

  • @pierrofromcanada Hello Pierre.

    I don't know where your comments are given as spam, I am not responsible for it. No state-nation means no nationality. I disagree. The state nation means that state and nation are melted. Before, there were nations (France, England, etc...). The state was something more. In France, the state was created quite soon (with the Carolingians) but it was given its modern shape with Richelieu, in the 17th century. In this time, you can't then mix state and nation.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Before, there were nations "

    Yes, there was the Frankish nation

    But also Norman nation. we just have to think why they are called "Norman"... North Men... These people share the same history. As far as the Normandy has its own government, people from Normandy share the same daily life.

    "Le pays désigne une entité géographique tandis que le gouvernement est l’institution qui dirige l’État ; la nation quant à elle ne se confond pas avec l’État sauf dans le modèle de l’État-nation"

  • @pierrofromcanada No, sorry, there was no Norman nation, there was a Norman Duchy in the Kingdom of France. You don't realize that the invaders who followed Rollon mixed with the local population. In 1066, except some influences like the one we have seen on ships, they were not a nation apart.Normans' daily life, as you say, was common to every folks in Northern France.

  • @Nettempereur

    as for the word "France", the first latin text speaking about "France" and not "Frankish" was the letter of King Louis VI to the pope Calixte II. Do you have one?.

    "there was no Norman nation", there was. As there was a native people "seminole nation" (which is a mix of different people, but having the same life and destiny.

  • @pierrofromcanada

    "The small groups of Vikings that settled there adopted the language, religion and culture of the French majority. After a generation or two, the Normans were indistinguishable from the French".

    Encyclopaedia Britannica

  • @lahire666

    Please, I have this encyclopaedia.

    Could you please give me the name/subject/item were I can find this citation (you obviously didn't read in the encyclopaedia)

  • @lahire666

    Article from theEncyclopædia Britannica

    Subject :Norman

    Norman, member of those Vikings, or Norsemen, who settled in northern France (or the Frankish kingdom), together with their descendants. The Normans founded the duchy of Normandy and sent out expeditions of conquest and colonization to southern Italy and Sicily and to England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland

  • @lahire666

    Subject: Viking (people)

    Item: The Carolingian empire and France

    Viking settlement ... Scandinavian influence on continental languages and institutions is, outside Normandy, very slight.........Normandy, the only permanent Viking achievement in what had been the empire of Charlemagne (see Norman)

  • @pierrofromcanada France is the land of the Frankish/French. Frankreich is the current name in German language, it still means kingdom of the Franks. I don't know the very first time it was used but after thr Treaty of Verdun, please explain me the difference between Franks and French. Your point if you find it.

  • @pierrofromcanada No, there was no norman nation, the native population was the descendants of the frankish population when Rollon landed. Do you realize his "army" was perhaps a few hundreds? They completely melted in the population. It was not a colonization

    Their own money: every Lord has his money whatever the region. Their own law: yes, all Lords ruled supreme on his land: no centralized state in the 11th century. Their own governement: yes, like every Lords.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Normans' daily life, as you say, was common to every folks in Northern France. "

    Normans had their own money, their own law, and their own government.

    What is related to the Frankish King there? Or other regions surrounding?

  • @pierrofromcanada Guillaume the Conqueror spent a part of his youth in Paris, at the court of the French king.

    Guillaume and all the Normans spoke French, were christians and were subjects of the French King.

    Normandy had some particularities, like every French regions at this time.

    HONNI SOIT QUI MAL Y PENSE.

    DIEU ET MON DROIT

  • @pierrofromcanada You are just giving me the way France was in every regions in the 11th century. Each Lord ruled his land, they did not ask permission from the King to do this or that. This was not a Norman feature. As I said before, if we are accepting your definition of a country, we can't speak of France until perhaps Louis XIV: this is completely unacademic and quite stupid, don't you think?

    You spoke about Occitan, what was your point?

  • @Nettempereur

    "You spoke about Occitan, what was your point?"

    OK, you wrote:

    "Are 150 years enough for you to be considered as a French? For me, they are. Remember the life expectancy was about 30-40 years, so it means 4 generations AT LEAST."

    My reply was:

    "What about all the dialect (occitan ?) that still remain"

    Indeed, you wrote me that 150 yeas is enough to erase a culture.

    Occitan is part of the "occitan" culture and still remain... from a looooong time, right?

  • @pierrofromcanada But Occitan, do you think it remains??? Who speaks Occitan? Is there any class where I can learn it?

    Moreover, what is this comparaison? Occitan was a language spoke by thousands, while we are talking of an armada of some hundreds of vikings who settled in a populated land. Do you really think it is the same thing? Moreover, Occitan has disappeared.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Who speaks Occitan? Is there any class where I can learn it?"

    "Occitan has disappeared"

    Are you just inventing each word you are writing?

    crdp-montpellier fr/languesregionales/occitan/e­xamens_concours/lycee_bac_cons­ignes.html

  • @pierrofromcanada Occitan is what we call a dead language (like Latin, Ancient Greek), it doesn't forbid people to learn it but, except to have more points in the Baccalauréat, I must confess you I have forgotten everything.

    Rosa, rosa, rosam, euhh sorry =)

  • @Nettempereur

    "Occitan is what we call a dead language"

    Wikipedia:

    "Le nombre de ses locuteurs actuels fait l'objet de controverses, on estime qu'en France entre 789 000 à 12 millions de personnes sont plus ou moins bilingues."

    Dead language?

  • @Nettempereur

    "Each Lord ruled his land, they did not ask permission from the King to do this or that"

    Each lors ruled, yes... and Norman applied their own LAWS and rised their own TAXES.

    "we are accepting your definition of a country"

    It is not "my" definition of a "Nation"... it is "the" definition I found in the dictionnary.

    "we can't speak of France until perhaps Louis XIV".

    I rather think we can speak of "france" from the moment when "France" stands in an historical text.

  • @pierrofromcanada Norman applied their own LAWS and rised their own TAXES. Yes, like every Lord. I think you should read about Medieval Europe, you are surprized by common things. There was NO CENTRALIZED STATE!

    A 20th-century dictionnary is a bad idea to understand something 1,000 years old. Just saying.

    Ah. So how do you name the land of the Franks after the Treaty of Verdun? What is the name of Western Francia?

  • @pierrofromcanada La nation was the French Kingdom composed of the French royal territory (around Ile de France) and its dependencies (Britanny, Normandy, Poitou, etc.. etc...). One people for one King. A Duke doesn't lead a nation.

    We are doing circles in our conversation, I don't think we will reach further. I read Neveux, and everything made stronger my conviction Normans were not separate of the Frankish Kingdom. You have your view, I have mine. Let's finish..

  • @Nettempereur

    "A Duke doesn't lead a nation."

    The current Duke of Normandy is Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom. The Duchy is not part of the United Kingdom but is a Crown Dependency of the Monarch. So, Who has a higher rank as Elizabet II? She is the queen... but considered as a Duke in Normandy.

    isn't it strange?

  • @pierrofromcanada LOL So, Prince Charles will be Duke of Normandy soon xD

  • @lahire666

    Exactly.

  • @pierrofromcanada Elizabeth II???? Come on, you know this is completely nonsense. British King have kept this claim without no power on Normandy for centuries. They still claimed the French crown until the UK was established!!! This is a matter of pride and arrogance, they keep this title for nothing more. There is no Duke in France, we have abolished priviledges a night of 4 August ^^

    Yes, it is strange but British folk have always been strange, and have an odd humour.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Elizabeth II???? Come on, you know this is completely nonsense"

    Yes and No.

    Elizabeth II is the Duke of Normandy, but Normandy stands for the anglo-Norman islands (that was part of the original Normandy Duché)

    The point here: Queen Elizabeth 's title is "duke", even if there is no one above her in the monarchy hierarchy. You can be duke and be independant.

  • @pierrofromcanada ????? No, you can't be Duke and independent, she is independant as a Queen and perhaps independant as a Duke because the French King is today... euh I don't even know where his descents are LOL Remeber Edward III who started the Hundred Years' War? Before the war, he came to France to give his allegiance to King Philip IV, like all his predecessors did since Guillaume, because of the Duchy.

  • @pierrofromcanada Moreover, I think she is Queen of Jersey and Guernsey, these are Crown Dependencies, not Dukedom.

    The Bourbon still claims indeed. So does the Orléans, the Bonaparte, the dog of my neighbour and myself if I want to =)

  • @pierrofromcanada If you prove more danico still persists after Hastings, that will prove Normans were less integrated than I think but it doesn't change the fact they were part of France. Perhaps not like Poitou or Burgundy, but do you really think it changes something? Come on, noone thinks Normandy was independent, our discussion is meaningless.

  • @Nettempereur

    Come on, all the historian are speaking about "Norman" as they are a nation ("nation" word has a definition).

    I received François Neveux's book yesterday.

    I will read it today and come back to you.

  • @pierrofromcanada Normandy as a nation? No. Read Neveux, that's an excellent idea. If you still think that Normandy was like France and England, I think there will be a problem inside you.

  • @Nettempereur

    "If you still think that Normandy was like France and England, I think there will be a problem inside you"

    Do not worry

    I will give you some citations and from Pierre Bauduin too.

    I wonder what is your definition of "nation" ? and "state"?

  • @pierrofromcanada You want citations?

    - "During the century and a half after the Conquest, there is no English history. The French Kings of England rose to an eminence which was the wonder of all nations".

    Thomas Babington Macauley

    - "The small groups of Vikings that settled there adopted the language, religion and culture of the French majority. After a generation or two, the Normans were indistinguishable from the French". Encyclopaedia Britannica

  • @Nettempereur

    Macaulay was already described as a liar by Karl Marx and Churchill...

  • @pierrofromcanada Marx and Churchill being God and always telling truths of course...

    Churchill also say there was lie about John Churchill and the letter he wrote before the battle of camaret. Why should I trust such a jingoist man?

  • @pierrofromcanada

    from Maccaulay:

    The battle of Hastings, and the events which followed it, not only placed a Duke of Normandy on the English throne, but gave up the whole population of England to the tyranny of the Norman race. The subjugation of a nation by a nation has seldom, even in Asia, been more complete.

    "Norman is a Nation"

  • @Nettempereur

    I have the entire free access o the updated version of this encyclopaedia. This citation does not refer to the "viking" definition, neither to the "Norman" one

    where can I find it please?

  • @pierrofromcanada Ask thecajuncutthroat where he found it, I took his citation from his channel page. You have his video near our comments.

  • @pierrofromcanada I don't want to spend my whole weekend arguing with you. I leave it for now, I think I will answer once you read Neveux. Have a good reading, I personally love the book.

    Have a nice day, Pierre.

  • @Nettempereur

    Please, just answer where you pick up this nice definition in the Encyclopaedia Britannica ??

  • @Nettempereur

    Hi Nettempereur

    I really want to thank you to give me the opportunuty to discover François Neveux.

    It's becoming more and more clear, and I learn a lot.

    Thank you, once again.

  • @Nettempereur

    By the way, I also have the book of Elisabeth Ridel, describing the ship that were used to cross the channel,

    and also the book "histoire de la normandie" from Mabire and Ragache. (seems very interesting)

    I will do a review so that we can discuss it a bit later.

    Have a very nice evening Nettempereur.

  • @pierrofromcanada A nation, the definition has changed with times. In the 11th century, a nation is a both a land and a people under the rule of a suzerain. A Duke is not a suzerain.

    The state is an instituion which is in charge of a country.

    Occitan, langues régionnales, yes, but there is no official regional languages in France, these are optionnal class, like I learnt Latin but Latin does not exist anymore, you don't speak Latin do you?

  • @Nettempereur

    "A nation, the definition has changed with times"

    source?

    "The state is an instituion which is in charge of a country"

    Normandy had such an institution.

  • @pierrofromcanada I am glad you enjoy this reading, Neveux is really a great teacher, I really love his book.

    I have not heard about Ridel or the others you gave me. I will read them thanks to you, that's good! Thanks

    I have to answer the questions you gave me last time.

  • @pierrofromcanada I have never denied Normandy was in charge of its own administration, like every other French regions. So yes, we can speak of a kind of local governement. There was no centralized state as I said man times, so yes, Normandy had its own local governement.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Normandy had its own local governement"

    Thank you.

  • @pierrofromcanada It is not "my" definition of the Encyclopedia but I agree it is nice. I told you, I picked up from thecajuncutthroat's channel (whose videos are available on the right). He is a trustworthy guy and this is the reason why I advised you to ask him where he took it.

  • Comment removed

  • @Nettempereur

    from this encyclopaedia,

    subject: NORMAN PEOPLE:

    "following their settlement in Normandy, the Normans retained many of the traits of their piratical Viking ancestors"

    "The Normans were quick to imitate whatever they saw, and this faculty of imitation is evident in all the different countries where the Normans settled. But Norman imitation was never slavish, and is certainly not the whole story of Norman achievement"

  • @Nettempereur

    " I picked up from thecajuncutthroat's channel"

    "I advised you to ask him where he took it"

    Mmmm... you claim something but do not have any proof..., nor link...

    I have access to the updated online version of this encyclopaedia, and I will be pleased to check any claim you may have.

  • @pierrofromcanada I must do everything for you, yeah? I just asked cajun, he will answer me as soon as possible I think. Just wait please. I trust him. He is not a teacher as far as I know but you don't need being a teacher to copy and paste a citation, do you?

  • @Nettempereur

    "I must do everything for you, yeah?"

    Mmmm

    I look on the enyclopaedia for "viking" "norman" "normandy"

    where should I look at? I know you are far smarter than me... that is why I ask you the question.

  • @pierrofromcanada "Some people still speak it" All right all right, if we count some muggy farmers who have not seen an Iphone in life, I think you may be right but I am talking about the whole French population (around 75-80% urbans). And local languages are not the rule. It is dead, it has no purpose.

  • @pierrofromcanada France does NOT recognize regional "patois", it is STRICTLY forbidden to speak another language than French in the official places (Senate, National Assembly, etc...). The EU is blaming France for refusing recognizing these regional specificities because it is not our Jacobin traditions to emphasize regional particularities (these languages are not even recognized in the Constitution).

  • @pierrofromcanada This is the reason why the Senate and the Ministry of Education are doing little effors for this (they speak in your citation of the cadre europén) but it is actually unconstitutional. The Republic is one and indivisible, so I don't see how the Senate could go further without breaking out a constitutionnal crisis.

  • @pierrofromcanada ==> They had mission to learn French and the love of the Republic (and the revanchism against Germany) even in all remote countrysides of France. I don't want to be pompous neither arrogant but it is elementary, a bit like Quebec vs English Canada for you.

    You may be very interested in the fr.wiki page "Langues régionales ou minoritaires de France".

  • @pierrofromcanada Norman race? Does race exist, pierre? LoL Anyway, it is nothing linked to a nation. It is not ein Volk, ein Reich, you know? Neveux makes it clear, you can't speak of a nation for the Normans, trust me. He shows how complicated the relations between Guillaume and the King are but they were vassals.

    Thank you for a governement? LoL REMEMBER IT WAS THE SAME FOR EVERY REGIONS, NOT ONLY NORMANDY. But yes, indeed.

  • @Nettempereur

    "Norman race? Does race exist, pierre? LoL Anyway, it is nothing linked to a nation"

    Are you telling me that Macauley is writing bullshit?

  • @pierrofromcanada I send you a mail for the citation.

    I am just telling that speaking of race is nonsense. Macauley can write some things and I can disagree with them and agree on others. So can you.

  • @Nettempereur

    Yes, you agree with every single word that fits with your thoughs... and disagree with all the others. I know that.

  • @pierrofromcanada You agree with the existence of races? I know that too but I don't like it.