British Politics spam thread

******ed post

 

Why? ...

... it's factually correct ... that area of France was settled my Scandinavian raiders (Vikings) hence "North-men" subsequently morphing to "Normans" ..

 

He is correct, which I know is very rare.

 

It's not factually correct at all. Was Rollo originally a 'Viking'? Yes. Was William the Conqueror? No. The same applies to Canute, who for some reason is often termed a 'Viking' as if he had any connection to the men who sacked Northumbria two centuries earlier. FWIW Rollo's army is known to have included Anglo-Saxon mercenaries recruited during his time in England. Were the Normans therefore English? No.

The Normans were not 'Vikings', they were Normans. They continued to celebrate their 'Normanitas' (as distinct from both the French and the English) well into the 12th and 13th centuries, and a supposed speech made at Hastings by William makes reference to Danish and Norwegian ancestors and their respective triumphs over the 'cowardly' Anglo-Saxons. By 1066 they were a distinct nation whose ethnogenesis lay in Scandinavian men taking Gallo-Roman wives and adopting a Gallicised culture in order to better rule the lands they had forced the French to cede to them

Not really, I know some people feel the need to say that Normans were Vikings in order to prove they weren't French, when in reality they were distinct from - and also a product of - both.

 

It's self evident really, as Norman's is a very English name. If they were Vikings, they'd be called Olaf or Sven and if they were French, they'd have never attacked anyway.

 

Shut up

 

Nice little history snapshot but; to go "a viking" was merely a term used by scandinavians for going raiding ... as I said, some of those raiders then settled in Normandy which translates as "the men from the North's land"

 

My mistake, I assumed for a moment that an enlightened liberal would like to have a discussion about history... I should've realised you'd rather repeat factoids that appear to support your argument than accept reality

PS. Thank you for proving my point with your own post though

 

please log in to view this image

 

Shut the **** up

 

No problem... there was a certain irony in you clearly not understanding the origin of the term 'viking' ... glad I was able to clear it up for you

 

You said it yourself

Viking, Norman and Dane mean different things

Normans were not a 'Viking' people, especially by 1066

Maybe European history isn't for you?

 

please log in to view this image

 

Vikings at it again

 

Very oddly I had this very discussion this week. My partner is a history graduate and we were in Falaise. She was saying that the Norman invasion was largely Viking in makeup. You can see it in the locals. They're big and fair, not at all French looking.