Off Topic The BBC sinks to a new low!

In an article on racism I found the following gem "Before the French took over in 1066"!

Given, though, that the article was unattributed other than to state "This piece has been adapted from the BBC radio programme How to argue with a racist, and presented by Dr Adam Rutherford" I'm unsure who to blame for the ignorance - the unnamed author or Dr Rutherford!

Whoever was responsible, though, the BEEB should be ashamed of publishing such inaccurate cr*p!

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51914782

 

The French are the same race as us (Caucasian). It is an oxymoron to say that indigenous British people are being racist about indigenous French people or vice versa, as we are both the same race.

 

It would appear that you believe that it was the French, not the Normans, who invaded in 1066 and therefore don't accept the historical inaccuracy.

Is that correct?

 

The French, Normans, Vikings are all of the same race. Northern European caucasian. Which is the same race as Prussian, Bavarian Germans. Or Celts, Picts, British for that matter. Pedantry.

 

It seems I was correct and you just can't accept historical fact.

Many thanks for the confirmation.

 

"Normandy a region of France"

 

It's really condescending to even publish that tbh.

In 1800 only half of France spoke French and there were many languages some of which are still spoken.

Many people still don't consider themselves French and aren't pleased to be called that.

In some of the northern coastal villages they'd prefer to be thought of as British.

In Corsica, which is part of France, they'd be horrified to be thought of as being French.

 

In 1066?

Really?

Try 1204 and I'll agree with you.

 

What does that have to do with the price of fish, or anything else for that matter?

The answer is zich, nothing!

Normandy didn't become part of France until 1204

Rollo (Norman: Rou; Old Norse: Hrólfr; French: Rollon; c. 860 – c. 930 AD) was a Viking who became the first ruler of Normandy, a region in northern France. He is sometimes called the first Duke of Normandy. His son and grandson, William Longsword and Richard I, used the titles "count" (Latin comes or consul) and "prince" (princeps), respectively. His great-grandson Richard II was the first to officially use the title of Duke of Normandy.[5].

He emerged as the outstanding warrior among the Norsemen who had secured a permanent foothold on Frankish soil in the valley of the lower Seine. After the Siege of Chartres in 911, Charles the Simple, the king of West Francia, ceded them lands between the mouth of the Seine and what is now Rouen in exchange for Rollo agreeing to end his brigandage, and provide the Franks with protection against future Viking raids.[6][7]

Rollo is first recorded as the leader of these Viking settlers in a charter of 918, and he continued to reign over the region of Normandy until at least 928. He was succeeded by his son William Longsword in the Duchy of Normandy that he had founded.[8] The offspring of Rollo and his followers became known as the Normans. After the Norman conquest of England and their conquest of southern Italy and Sicily over the following two centuries, their descendants came to rule Norman England (the House of Normandy), much of the island of Ireland, the Kingdom of Sicily (the Kings of Sicily) as well as the Principality of Antioch from the 10th to 12th century, leaving behind an enduring legacy in the histories of Europe and the Near East.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollo

 

We were Anglo Saxon at the time, so are you saying the Anglo Saxons weren't "English" as well ?

 

My point was easy enough (or should have been) for anyone to understand.

We were invaded by the Normans NOT THE FRENCH (The Normans WERE NOT French).

Understand now?

Just stop wriggling and answer the question - Were we invaded by the French or the Normans?

Which?

 

"We" were not British/English then so in answer to your question NO. The Anglo Saxons (who are now described as English), were invaded by Normans (who are now described as French). Two can play your game.

 

You're, quite clearly, not worth debating with because you attempt to constantly change the subject of what we are supposed to be discussing.

I would, therefore, suggest you hide back under your rock (wrapped in the EU flag) to prevent your sensitive body from getting too cold and stop responding top each other's posts - there's no point if you, continually,try to change historical facts!

BYE!

 

And I suggest you stop referring to Britain as "we" when you do not live here. Sayonara

 

Please do everyone a favour and stop polluting this board with your pro EU leaning rhetoric.

You do it time after time!

Now (trying to be polite!) crawl back under your stone!

I didn't succumb to my thoughts and post what I thought would be a more appropriate response that I would have made to your face!

 

CELTS PICTS SCOTS ANGLES DANES BRITONS SAXONS and the NORSEMEN = SCANDINAVIANS inhabited this island before the 1066 invasion Normans defeated Harald the dane, king of England, The Normans were never able to change the language from the English spoken by the natives, who in turn cannibalised some of their words to add to their own vocabulary.

 

I've recently noticed that we often use the French words for meat ...

... but English words for the animals it comes from.

Porc/Pig Boeuf/Cow Mouton/Sheep

Dunno why yet, haven't worked it out.

 

Nice to see that, in a time of non-football, people say. Find other pointless things to argue about!!!

 

I believe that a good case can be made as follows.

The peasants of Anglo-Saxon heritage were the ones who did the work.
They ploughed the land and looked after the livestock, all for their, usually Norman, overlords.

These workers called their animals by their old English names, pig, cow and sheep, but once the animal was turned into food, this was for Their Lordships, not the peasants.
At that stage they, the Norman French, referred to it as Porc, Boeuf ant Mouton.

Basically it was pig in the sty and Pork in the oven.