Recently Rated:
Stats
My personal two bits: did Romney campaign's "Anglo-Saxon" comment DIS the British Isles?
An idiot on the Romney campaign t old a reporter for the London Telegraph that Romney would restore the unique relationship between the US and the UK and that the Obama White House failed to understand the "Anglo-Saxon heritage" the US and the UK share.
Let's excuse the obvious gaffe that Obama DOES have plenty of British Isles heritage and Irish specifically. How could anyone have missed Obama's rock star visit to Ireland ?! Many African-Americans DO have British ancestry also. Web and radio news are rightfully full of the anti-African American sentiments of this statementbut they're missing the equally prejudiced anti-Brit ignorance it betrays.
Nothing wrong with Germany, I have known and dearly loved many wonderful Germans but the Angles and Saxons were German and aren't the Brits Brits, not Germans?
DNA research has shown that British people are British, that British DNA has been in Britain since about the end of the last ice age or over 10,000 years, which predates the coming of the Anglo Saxon tribes (who contributed a bit of DNA to Britain) and the rise of the Celts in Europe (who also contributed a bit of DNA to Britain) by thousands of years. The differences between English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh peoples are historic, cultural and political, not genetic and they are not German or strictly speaking, European, they are British. (If you're Irish and you don't like being lumped in as "British", sorry, I just mean in the genetic context as in descended from peoples who migrated to the British Isles after the last Ice Age and I do know that Ireland is a separate country and not part of Britain or the UK) (would the right word for this be "Briton"?)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/pf/1590652.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Sykes#Blood_of_the_Isles
The pseudo-scientific idea that the English were "Anglo-Saxon" and that Scottish, Welsh and Irish people were "Celts" became very popular in the Victorian era and was used to justify discrimination against "Celts," including a once-popular belief that "Anglo-Saxons" were descended from Cro-Magnons and "Celts" from Neanderthals. We now know that we all have some Neanderthal DNA.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100506-science-neanderthals-humans-mated-interbred-dna-gene/
Many great things have come from the Britain and Ireland. What's wrong with Brits being Brits and what's wrong with Welsh, English, Scottish and Irish heritage? I'm personally pretty proud of all of mine, as I would be of German heritage if I had it, which so far I've found that I don't.
What do you think?
Thanks to Chicago Tafia for posting the Onion article on Twitter.
I love that Onion thing. No, in this case it wasn't Who Do You Think You Are but I'm damned if I can remember what the programme was - I just recall this young woman revering King Harold and the other "Turkish" woman being insulted and incensed!!
Ha! Yes, that was hysterical, I LOVE the Onion. Ann Romney's (nee Davis) father was from Careau near Bridgend? And Gaynor, was the show that "Who Do You Think You Are?" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Do_You_Think_You_Are%3F_ (British_TV_series)
This might provide some assistance on the DNA question: www.theonion.com/articles/7-million-people-direct-descendants-of-single-smoo,2762/
LOL
Isn't Romney's wife Welsh? I seem to remember something about her making Welsh Cakes. I'm going to look up the article to read it properly but clearly, as Ceri says, it was a very dumb remark and if Romney's disowned it then good for him.
The question of who is what is such a huge one. As far as I know, British came from the Roman name Britannia and "Britons" were the Celts (and whoever the older people were before us). Angles and Saxons, Vikings and Normans (who were actually Vikings in the first place before they moved to northern France) later invaded and, as Ceri mentioned, tried to reduce the indigenous population (including Anglo-Saxons) to serfdom. Under Norman rule, Welsh/Cornish etc were known as "foreign" (see Sir Bernard Knight's John Crowner novels). The truth is we are a mish-mash so there's going to be a lot of "Roman" in the British people and, as Roman soldiers came from a number of countries that could mean anything. I remember a programme on TV a few years ago where people were given DNA tests to see if they were what they thought they were. There was an old lady who was determinedly English but whose DNA showed that she was Turkish from way back! Her fury on being told this was amazing. Then there was a young woman who almost worshipped King Harold and considered herself Anglo-Saxon; I can't remember the exact result of her test except that it wasn't at all what she expected and she was also furious.
Great idea, Swansea. I like a good, reasoned discussion but hate-filled flaming will not be tolerated.
I dont see anything party political in this post. Clearly this was an unguarded remark by a campaign staffer which was subsequently disavowed by the candidate. Nothing more to it.
As for the DNA issue... this has been the source of spirited and illuminating discussions on the site ever since it sarted in 2008. Here is an example:- http://americymru.net/forum/topics/2111712:Topic:18211#.UBCbb8-TRKg
The historical issue is this. We know that the Normans settled the British Isles as conquerors and installed themselves as a new ruling elite. They did not massacre the inhabitants but reduced them to serfdom. The Romans did something similar and the British 'Celtic' tribes were as well assimilated into the Empire as any of their continental counterparts. What is NOT certain is what happened in the aftermath of the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic invasions/settlements. Was there cataclysm or continuity? Did the newcomers massacre the former inhabitants or intermarry and mingle with them? It is the legitimate business of historians and DNA researchers to attempt to answer these questions and it is perfectly legitimate to discuss their findings.
I think Gaabriel is much more impressed by Sykes and the other genetic researchers who stress the notion of a common genetic heritage going back to the last ice age, than I am. I cannot accept the idea that the Anglo-Saxons were "long haired tourists who occasionally roughed up the natives". I think there was quite possibly an element of ethnic cleansing particularly in the South and East. It's also entirely conceivable that something similar occurred in the wake of the much earlier Celtic incursions.
Whatever the case I think it likely that a more accurate understanding of the historical antecedents of the modern British population will lead to a diminution of latter day prejudice rather than any kind of "hate-fest'.
Yes, the point I wanted to raise about this gaffe was not the anti-African American part of it, which many other people have already raised, but what I think is the ignorant anti-Britishness of it. And my point and this discussion have nothing to do with either American political party, they're both making the same assumptions this idiot Romney adviser made, and so are the US press. My point is that this label, "Angle-Saxon," is incorrect.
The British Isles are the geographic area that includes Ireland, right or wrong? But you wouldn't call someone Irish "British", would you? I'm looking for what would be the correct term for this genetic group of humans, the humans that continued to evolve in the British Isles and share that genetic pool. Would it be Britons?
Yep, Romney personally said that he disagreed with this statement, but he didn't say anything about the "Anglo-Saxon" part of it.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/07/mitt-romney-anglo-saxon-heritage-nbc-interview/1#.UBCGBTHLzw4
In fairness to Mitt he disavowed this remark pretty fast http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/07/mitt-romney-anglo-saxon-heritage-nbc-interview/1#.UBCEXM-TRKg
BUT I have to agree it was a dumb move by the unnamed staffer to stir up this hornet's nest