Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
D. Spencer Hines

Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 06 mai 2007 21:02:48

"The Highlander" <micheil@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:ue8s33909oupr553qa0npucnrkogue7o5a@4ax.com...

The Queen's death will cause worldwide sadness; "The End of an Era"
the newspapers will announce.
--------------------------------------------------------------


Indeed it will.

Many folks alive today have only known her as the British Monarch.

She has done an excellent job in her role as a Constitutional Monarch --
into which she was thrown in 1936, for training -- at the age of 10 -- by
Edward VIII's Abdication and her father's accession to the throne, as George
VI.

Her Coronation on 2 June 1953 was a Grand Affair -- as was her wedding on 20
November 1947.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995

Kings and Queens of Britain

William the Conqueror long did reign

William Rufus by arrow was slain

Henry I was a scholar, bright

Stephen was king without any right

Henry II Plantagenet's scion

Richard I was as brave as a lion

John though a tyrant the charter signed

Henry III had a weakly mind

Edward I conquered Cumbria's Danes

Edward II was crowned Prince of Wales

Edward III restored Scotia's pride

Richard II by Henry's hand died

Henry IV then wore the crown

Henry V pulled the French king down

Henry VI Lost the Roses and France

Edward IV led the Commons a dance

Edward V was slain by his brother

Richard III soon gave way to another

Henry VII was frugal of means

Henry VIII had too many queens

Edward VI Reformation began

Bloody Mary frustrated the plan

Wise and Profound were Elizabeth's ways

England and Scotland were joined under James

Charles found the people a cruel corrector

Oliver Cromwell became the Lord Protector

Charles II hid in an oak

James II took the Popery's yoke

William and Mary shared the throne

Good Queen Anne then reigned alone

George I from Hanover came

George II carried on the name

George III was loved in the land

George IV was pompous and grand

William IV had no heir of his own

So Good Queen Victoria came to the throne

Edward VII loved gambling and fun

George V reigned through World War I

Edward VIII gave his throne for a wife

George VI saw more World War and strife

Elizabeth II was crowned young and serene,

And the People still sing "God Save Our Queen."
-----------------------------------------------------------------

"The last six lines bring it up to date."

"Maggie"

Paul C

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Paul C » 06 mai 2007 22:15:23

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995



Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292–1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306–1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329–1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 06 mai 2007 22:28:42

You Scots and English are STILL fighting each other.

The Welsh are generally quieter -- having been pacified longer.

DSH

"Paul C" <paul@thersgb.net> wrote in message
news:oqgs331c2d431un3irmhf3vt9ouhiaehov@4ax.com...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line
of English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND
QUEENS OF BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_,
is compiled and illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy.
London: Pavilion Books, Limited. 1995

Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following

* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292-1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306-1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329-1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I

And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II.

Dave

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Dave » 08 mai 2007 18:15:38

On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:15:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995




Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292–1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306–1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329–1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


King and Queens of Scots maybe, not of Britain or anywhere else.


And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II

No she isn't. She is QE II by royal prerogative. See MacCormick v
Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396).,

Paul C

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Paul C » 08 mai 2007 20:39:26

On Tue, 08 May 2007 17:15:38 GMT, Dave <dave@knowhere.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:15:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995




Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292–1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306–1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329–1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


King and Queens of Scots maybe, not of Britain or anywhere else.

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

You do not appear to be very consistent.

And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II

No she isn't. She is QE II by royal prerogative. See MacCormick v
Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396).,

Who was the first Queen Elizabeth of Britain. I must have missed that
one?

Dave

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Dave » 08 mai 2007 20:56:57

On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:39:26 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 17:15:38 GMT, Dave <dave@knowhere.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:15:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995




Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292–1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306–1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329–1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


King and Queens of Scots maybe, not of Britain or anywhere else.

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

The list you conveniently snipped, you mean? I don't know as I can't
see the list.

You do not appear to be very consistent.


And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II

No she isn't. She is QE II by royal prerogative. See MacCormick v
Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396).,

Who was the first Queen Elizabeth of Britain. I must have missed that
one?

As you seem to be unable to read, I'm not surprised.

Paul C

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Paul C » 08 mai 2007 21:03:20

On Tue, 08 May 2007 19:56:57 GMT, Dave <dave@knowhere.com> wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:39:26 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 17:15:38 GMT, Dave <dave@knowhere.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:15:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995




Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292–1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306–1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329–1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


King and Queens of Scots maybe, not of Britain or anywhere else.

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

The list you conveniently snipped, you mean? I don't know as I can't
see the list.



Diving in without knowing the full facts can often be a minefield.

Kings and Queens of Britain

William the Conqueror long did reign

William Rufus by arrow was slain

Henry I was a scholar, bright

Stephen was king without any right

Henry II Plantagenet's scion

Richard I was as brave as a lion

John though a tyrant the charter signed

Henry III had a weakly mind

Edward I conquered Cumbria's Danes

Edward II was crowned Prince of Wales

Edward III restored Scotia's pride

Richard II by Henry's hand died

Henry IV then wore the crown

Henry V pulled the French king down

Henry VI Lost the Roses and France

Edward IV led the Commons a dance

Edward V was slain by his brother

Richard III soon gave way to another

Henry VII was frugal of means

Henry VIII had too many queens

Edward VI Reformation began

Bloody Mary frustrated the plan

Wise and Profound were Elizabeth's ways


You do not appear to be very consistent.


And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II

No she isn't. She is QE II by royal prerogative. See MacCormick v
Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396).,

Who was the first Queen Elizabeth of Britain. I must have missed that
one?

As you seem to be unable to read, I'm not surprised.

So you don't know either.

Fair enough.

Dave

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Dave » 08 mai 2007 21:24:25

On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:03:20 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 19:56:57 GMT, Dave <dave@knowhere.com> wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:39:26 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 17:15:38 GMT, Dave <dave@knowhere.com> wrote:

On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:15:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995




Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292–1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306–1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329–1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


King and Queens of Scots maybe, not of Britain or anywhere else.

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

The list you conveniently snipped, you mean? I don't know as I can't
see the list.



Diving in without knowing the full facts can often be a minefield.

Kings and Queens of Britain

William the Conqueror long did reign

William Rufus by arrow was slain

Henry I was a scholar, bright

Stephen was king without any right

Henry II Plantagenet's scion

Richard I was as brave as a lion

John though a tyrant the charter signed

Henry III had a weakly mind

Edward I conquered Cumbria's Danes

Edward II was crowned Prince of Wales

Edward III restored Scotia's pride

Richard II by Henry's hand died

Henry IV then wore the crown

Henry V pulled the French king down

Henry VI Lost the Roses and France

Edward IV led the Commons a dance

Edward V was slain by his brother

Richard III soon gave way to another

Henry VII was frugal of means

Henry VIII had too many queens

Edward VI Reformation began

Bloody Mary frustrated the plan

Wise and Profound were Elizabeth's ways


Well Edward I didn't only conquer Cumbria's Danes.


You do not appear to be very consistent.


And if you're talking about Kings and Queens of Britain the current
monarch is QUeen Elizabeth, not Queen Elizabeth II

No she isn't. She is QE II by royal prerogative. See MacCormick v
Lord Advocate (1953 SC 396).,

Who was the first Queen Elizabeth of Britain. I must have missed that
one?

As you seem to be unable to read, I'm not surprised.

So you don't know either.

Fair enough.

Queen Elizabeth II is the first Queen of Britain with the name
Elizabeth. She could have called herself QE I or even QE XX if she had
preferred but decided to humour the majority of her subjects rather
than the tetchy minority who live north of Carlisle.

Happy now.

Andrew Swallow

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Andrew Swallow » 09 mai 2007 00:41:32

Paul C wrote:
[snip]

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great Briton".

Andrew Swallow

Renia

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Renia » 09 mai 2007 01:18:51

Andrew Swallow wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]


Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?


When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great Briton".

Personally, I was born in Great Britain, specifically in Scotland. I am
a Briton, though. Some people even think I'm great. :-)

John P. Ravilious

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av John P. Ravilious » 09 mai 2007 01:51:44

Dear DSH, et al.,

There are some slightly divergent versions of this ditty, but
they all meet the elementary school requirement for poetry: they
rhyme.

One line of this version is in error, however; " Edward I
conquered Cumbria's Danes ".

One might argue whether there were Danes in Cumbria in the late
13th century. Certainly descendants of Danes resided there, but then
one also sat on the throne, in the person of Edward himself. The
reference in the poem has nothing to do with northern England
(Cumberland or Cumbria, as one might prefer) but rather to Edward's
conquest of Wales.

This line should read, " Edward I conquered Cambria's dales."

Cheers,

John



On May 6, 4:02 pm, "D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@excelsior.com> wrote:
"The Highlander" <mich...@shaw.ca> wrote in message

news:ue8s33909oupr553qa0npucnrkogue7o5a@4ax.com...

The Queen's death will cause worldwide sadness; "The End of an Era"
the newspapers will announce.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Indeed it will.

Many folks alive today have only known her as the British Monarch.

She has done an excellent job in her role as a Constitutional Monarch --
into which she was thrown in 1936, for training -- at the age of 10 -- by
Edward VIII's Abdication and her father's accession to the throne, as George
VI.

Her Coronation on 2 June 1953 was a Grand Affair -- as was her wedding on 20
November 1947.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995

Kings and Queens of Britain

William the Conqueror long did reign

William Rufus by arrow was slain

Henry I was a scholar, bright

Stephen was king without any right

Henry II Plantagenet's scion

Richard I was as brave as a lion

John though a tyrant the charter signed

Henry III had a weakly mind

Edward I conquered Cumbria's Danes

Edward II was crowned Prince of Wales

Edward III restored Scotia's pride

Richard II by Henry's hand died

Henry IV then wore the crown

Henry V pulled the French king down

Henry VI Lost the Roses and France

Edward IV led the Commons a dance

Edward V was slain by his brother

Richard III soon gave way to another

Henry VII was frugal of means

Henry VIII had too many queens

Edward VI Reformation began

Bloody Mary frustrated the plan

Wise and Profound were Elizabeth's ways

England and Scotland were joined under James

Charles found the people a cruel corrector

Oliver Cromwell became the Lord Protector

Charles II hid in an oak

James II took the Popery's yoke

William and Mary shared the throne

Good Queen Anne then reigned alone

George I from Hanover came

George II carried on the name

George III was loved in the land

George IV was pompous and grand

William IV had no heir of his own

So Good Queen Victoria came to the throne

Edward VII loved gambling and fun

George V reigned through World War I

Edward VIII gave his throne for a wife

George VI saw more World War and strife

Elizabeth II was crowned young and serene,

And the People still sing "God Save Our Queen."
-----------------------------------------------------------------

"The last six lines bring it up to date."

"Maggie"

Paul C

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Paul C » 09 mai 2007 08:03:23

On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
<am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]


Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

Andrew Swallow

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Andrew Swallow » 09 mai 2007 18:42:09

Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?
When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

Technical point - define British/Britain.

Andrew Swallow

The Highlander

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av The Highlander » 09 mai 2007 18:49:40

On Wed, 09 May 2007 08:03:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:

On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]


Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?

When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

So what else is new?

Paul C

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Paul C » 09 mai 2007 19:56:44

On Wed, 09 May 2007 18:42:09 +0100, Andrew Swallow
<am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?
When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

Technical point - define British/Britain.

It doesn't matter whether we are discussing (Great) Britain or the
United Kingdom.

Pre-Union, listing English monarchs and calling them British is a
nonsense. They are no more 'British' than the Scottish monarchs who
were ignored.

Looks like whoever made all this up is one of those people who doesn't
understand the distinction between 'English' and 'British'.

Chris Dickinson

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Chris Dickinson » 09 mai 2007 20:04:01

Andrew Swallow

Technical point - define British/Britain.


There is a case for arguing that later English monarchs have the right to be
called 'of Britain', even before the Union. The notion of 'Bretwalde', of a
High Kingship over the British Isles, goes way back and was attached to the
English, not to the Scottish or Welsh or Irish.

That's a reflection of power, size, population, wealth. It doesn't
necessarily define a de facto suzereinty, more an aspiration to it - which,
at convenient times, is accepted by lesser powers.

Chris

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 09 mai 2007 21:30:42

"Dave" <dave@knowhere.com> wrote in message
news:8hb1435hr6p2glj8o95na4s5r2e9rnap5k@4ax.com...
On Sun, 06 May 2007 22:15:23 +0100, Paul C <paul@thersgb.net> wrote:


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a poem used in British Schools to help children remember the line
of
English Kings (from Victorian times)...The book, _KINGS AND QUEENS OF
BRITAIN: A Victorian Mnemonic or Learning verse_, is compiled and
illustrated by Frances and Rowan Barnes-Murphy. London: Pavilion Books,
Limited. 1995




Kings and Queens of Britain

Kings and Queens of Britain? LOL!!!!

The writer appears to have forgotten the following



* Kenneth I
* Donald I
* Constantine I
* Áed
* Eochaid
* Giric
* Donald II
* Constantine II
* Malcolm I
* Indulf
* Dub
* Culen
* Kenneth II
* Amlaíb
* Kenneth II
* Constantine III
* Kenneth III
* Malcolm II
* Duncan I
* MacBeth
* Lulach
* Malcolm III
* Donald III
* Duncan II
* Donald III
* Edgar
* Alexander I
* Saint David I
* Malcolm IV
* William I
* Alexander II
* Alexander II
* Margaret
* John (Iain) (1292-1296)
* Robert I the Bruce (Raibeart I) (1306-1329)
* David II (Daibidh II) (1329-1371)
* Edward Balliol
* Robert II
* Robert III
* James I
* James II
* James III
* James IV
* James V
* Mary I


King and Queens of Scots maybe, not of Britain or anywhere else.

I think that was the point being made about the original post and poem.
Except swap Scotland for England.


Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 09 mai 2007 21:35:56

"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?
When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great
Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

Technical point - define British/Britain.

All the said English or Scottish kings way back into the mists of time were
British kings in that both England and Scotland are part of the island of
Britain. However none were Kings of Britain as that implies they ruled over
the entire island. The first to do so was James VI of Scotland who styled
himself King of Great Britain. Even this was wishful thinking on his part as
in fact England and Scotland were still seperate entities. The first real
monarch of Britain was Anne.


Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 09 mai 2007 21:48:21

"Chris Dickinson" <chris@dickinson.uk.net> wrote in message
news:J9CdnVUAlpjGht_bRVnyhAA@bt.com...
Andrew Swallow

Technical point - define British/Britain.


There is a case for arguing that later English monarchs have the right to
be
called 'of Britain', even before the Union.

From 1603 to 1707 the English monarchs were of the Scottish House of Stuart
and styled themselves Kings of Great Britain. I know of no other later
English monarchs who were anywhere near being regarded as monarch of the
entire island.

The notion of 'Bretwalde', of a
High Kingship over the British Isles, goes way back and was attached to
the
English, not to the Scottish or Welsh or Irish.

The very early English kings often claimed feudal overlorship but that is a
completely different thing from actually being monarch and that notion was
finally laid to rest as early as the 14thC anyway.



That's a reflection of power, size, population, wealth. It doesn't
necessarily define a de facto suzereinty, more an aspiration to it -
which, at convenient times, is accepted by lesser powers.

It mainly only accepted it whilst an occupying English army was present or
if the Scottish king was captured. Scottish monarchs were often major
landholders in England too and they themselves generally only accepted the
English King only as feudal superior for these English held lands. Likewise
there were times when the English Borderlands looked on the Scottish king as
their overlord. That was an acceptance of political reality at that time,
not evidence that the Scottish kingdom actually included 15thC
Northumberland and Cumberland.


Allan

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 09 mai 2007 23:17:11

"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?
When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great
Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

Technical point - define British/Britain.

Andrew Swallow
The definitions in the Concise Oxford Dictionary gives -


British // adj. & n.
adj.
1 of or relating to Great Britain or the United Kingdom, or to its people or
language.
2 of the British Commonwealth or (formerly) the British Empire (British
subject).
n. (prec. by the; treated as pl.) the British people.

There is no definition for, "Britain", but that for Great Britain is -
Great Britain n.

England, Wales, and Scotland.

Then we have, "The British Isles".

I've been making these points for years.

The Act of Union was signed between two countries for Wales was subsumed
into England in the 1300s and there is no Welsh flag incorporated in the
Union Flag.

Thus the Union was originally, "Scotland", and, "England/Wales". The full
title became, "The United Kingdom of Great Britain".

Then,when Ireland signed an Act Of Union, that act was between, "Great
Britain", i.e., "Scotland and England/Wales" and, "Ireland" and the full
title became, "The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Ireland"
When Ireland partitioned the title was changed to, "The United Kingdom of
Great Britain & Northern Ireland".

So if the two original signatories part company then Ireland could quite
well request to go with either of the originals but who would want them? So
Great Britain ends when England and Scotland part company and Northern
Ireland would needs negotiate with either of the other two, (or The
republic).
--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 09 mai 2007 23:18:48

"Paul C" <paul@thersgb.net> wrote in message
news:e16443hjslkq60llb8gmd7n1jrqpivnuqm@4ax.com...
On Wed, 09 May 2007 18:42:09 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
[snip]

Erm, are you suggesting the first couple of dozen on the list *were*
Kings of Britain?
When you get this technical watch out for the difference in definitions
between "Britain" and "Great Briton". Scotland is part of "Great
Briton".

There's nothing technical about pointing out the nonsense of listing
Kings/Queens of England as British monarchs, yet ignoring Scottish
monarchs.

Whoever drew up the list is just plain wrong.

Technical point - define British/Britain.

It doesn't matter whether we are discussing (Great) Britain or the
United Kingdom.

Pre-Union, listing English monarchs and calling them British is a
nonsense. They are no more 'British' than the Scottish monarchs who
were ignored.

Looks like whoever made all this up is one of those people who doesn't
understand the distinction between 'English' and 'British'.
Put it this way - The English are British but not all British are English.

--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

The Highlander

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av The Highlander » 10 mai 2007 03:46:48

On Wed, 9 May 2007 20:04:01 +0100, "Chris Dickinson"
<chris@dickinson.uk.net> wrote:

Andrew Swallow

Technical point - define British/Britain.


There is a case for arguing that later English monarchs have the right to be
called 'of Britain', even before the Union. The notion of 'Bretwalde', of a
High Kingship over the British Isles, goes way back and was attached to the
English, not to the Scottish or Welsh or Irish.

That's a reflection of power, size, population, wealth. It doesn't
necessarily define a de facto suzereinty, more an aspiration to it - which,
at convenient times, is accepted by lesser powers.

Chris



Scotland was never conquered by the English. So you can trundle that

cartload of bullshit back to London.

England on the other hand was repeatedly conquered throughout its
history, by the Romans, the Vikings, the Danes, the Anglo-Saxons, the
Normans, etc. As Brendan Behan remarked, a nation of natural slaves.

The Scots drove the Vikings out. The English became the Vikings'
slaves - twice, when you include the Norman Conquest!

This is why the Scots are quietly amused when the English boast about
"Britons never shall be slaves!" They were rarely anything else.

The Antonine and Hadrian's Walls still stand as a testament to
Scottish superiority in battle.

"Rule Britannia!" by the way, was composed by a Scot trying to console
the English for a thousand years of loss of face...

Just setting the record straight...

William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 10 mai 2007 08:22:24

"The Highlander" <micheil@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dj05435dcbhd09l4r7g5lav72j3fvsftfh@4ax.com...

Scotland was never conquered by the English. So you can trundle that
cartload of bullshit back to London.

That'll come as something of a shock to Edward II, Cromwell and William
III

William is an interesting one really.

He conquered Scotland without even sending a man...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 10 mai 2007 16:06:49

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:QKz0i.6703$eY1.2618@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
"The Highlander" <micheil@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dj05435dcbhd09l4r7g5lav72j3fvsftfh@4ax.com...

Scotland was never conquered by the English. So you can trundle that
cartload of bullshit back to London.

That'll come as something of a shock to Edward II, Cromwell and William
III

William is an interesting one really.

He conquered Scotland without even sending a man...

Of course it isn't strictly true to say Scotland was never conquered. It was
never pemanently conquered though.

Edward I certainly all but conquered the country reasonably thoroughly but
it didn't last as during the reign of Edward II the Scottish King Robert the
Bruce put paid to that. Even Edward I himself died whilst planning another
campaign.

Cromwell managed to conquer the country when it was at a low ebb and divided
after years of civil conflict. However the forced union only lasted several
years. This time fizzling out on the restoration of the monarchy.

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England. Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and stripped
him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to William and his
wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish royal line.

Allan

William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 10 mai 2007 16:13:15

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England. Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and army
and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his side
doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to have
been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

Alan Smaill

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Alan Smaill » 10 mai 2007 16:20:49

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> writes:

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England. Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and army
and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his side
doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to have
been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...


It wasn't a "bloodless revolution" in Scotland either (Killiecrankie,
the opposition to William led by Dundee, a Protestant faithful to
James).

Still, that doesn't go down as an invasion in my book, since both
armies involved were Scots.

--
William Black


--
Alan Smaill

William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 10 mai 2007 16:56:39

"Alan Smaill" <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:fwezm4cln72.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> writes:

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in
the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to
William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army
and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his side
doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to have
been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...


It wasn't a "bloodless revolution" in Scotland either (Killiecrankie,
the opposition to William led by Dundee, a Protestant faithful to
James).

Still, that doesn't go down as an invasion in my book, since both
armies involved were Scots.

Same for Culloden then...

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

Alan Smaill

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Alan Smaill » 10 mai 2007 19:46:52

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> writes:

"Alan Smaill" <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:fwezm4cln72.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> writes:

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in
the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to
William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army
and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his side
doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to have
been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...


It wasn't a "bloodless revolution" in Scotland either (Killiecrankie,
the opposition to William led by Dundee, a Protestant faithful to
James).

Still, that doesn't go down as an invasion in my book, since both
armies involved were Scots.

Same for Culloden then...

in that case, the Hanoverian army was mostly non-Scottish.

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

It's the combattants at Killiecrankie that were Scots, not William ...

--
William Black


--
Alan Smaill

William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 10 mai 2007 19:52:54

"Alan Smaill" <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:fweodksldnn.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...

Same for Culloden then...

in that case, the Hanoverian army was mostly non-Scottish.

Erm no...

We went through this one a month or two ago.

The bulk of the soldiers on the government side were Scots.


--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 10 mai 2007 20:27:10

Deeeeelightful!...

And Informative.

I think it's charming that you Brits still argue about such things.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Fortem Posce Animum
------------------------------------------

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.

Once this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the
majority in the Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish
nation and stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown
to William and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended
from the Scottish royal line.

In 1688 and 1689 -- the "Glorious Revolution" -- we Americans watched it
closely -- and learned from it -- and John Locke. -- DSH

Yes, they are 1st cousins, both grandchildren of King Charles I, who lost
his head in 1649. They are my cousins as well. <g> -- DSH

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to
have been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...

It wasn't a "bloodless revolution" in Scotland either (Killiecrankie,
the opposition to William led by Dundee, a Protestant faithful to
James).

Still, that doesn't go down as an invasion in my book, since both
armies involved were Scots.

Same for Culloden then...

in that case, the Hanoverian army was mostly non-Scottish.

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

It's the combatants at Killiecrankie that were Scots, not William ...
--

William Black

--
Alan Smaill

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 10 mai 2007 22:10:18

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fEG0i.6734$eY1.4683@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England. Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in
the Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

The part of the island that army landed in was England. There was no
invasion of Scotland. Once James fled the English throne and lost his power
base the Scots threw him off the Scottish throne themselves branding him a
traitor. The throne was offered to William and Mary providing they accept
the Presbyterian settlement in Scotland. There was some opposition to this
in particular from James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy
Clavers) who stormed out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of
Highlanders in what was the first Jacobite Rising. Claverhouse probably had
no choice other than rebellion as he had been James Stuart's chief henchman
in the period known as the Killing Times, and the restored Presbyterians and
the likes of the returning exiles were bound to seek revenge. New Scottish
regiments were quickly raised to defend the capital. This was when what went
on to be called the Kings Own Scottish Borderers were raised. The two
Scottish armies met at Killikrankie where the Jacobites won the day but
Claverhouse was killed. The Jacobites were then held by a much smaller band
of Cameronians at Dunkeld and the rebellion died out.



Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side doesn't change this.

You claimed Scotland was conquered which was completely incorrect. William's
invasion of England gave the Scottish Presbyterian majority the chance to
regain their dominance which had been lost in the Restoration. There was no
outside invasion.

Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 10 mai 2007 22:13:58

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aSJ0i.8691$J81.3332@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
"Alan Smaill" <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:fweodksldnn.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...

Same for Culloden then...

in that case, the Hanoverian army was mostly non-Scottish.

Erm no...

We went through this one a month or two ago.

The bulk of the soldiers on the government side were Scots.

I don't think that is true either. There were many Scots in the Hanovarian
ranks and in the overall conflict it is reckoned that there were more Scots
on the Hanovarian side than the Jacobite side. However there seems to have
been more non-Scots in Cumberland's forces at Culloden than Scots.

Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 10 mai 2007 22:25:25

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:XgH0i.12367$8E.5740@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
"Alan Smaill" <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:fwezm4cln72.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> writes:

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in
the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to
William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army
and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his side
doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to have
been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...


It wasn't a "bloodless revolution" in Scotland either (Killiecrankie,
the opposition to William led by Dundee, a Protestant faithful to
James).

Still, that doesn't go down as an invasion in my book, since both
armies involved were Scots.

Same for Culloden then...

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

He was Dutch but both he and his wife were descended from the Stuart kings
of Scotland. William was a grand-son of Charles I and Mary was the daughter
of James VII of Scotland. Hence the Scots deposed the sitting king and
offered the throne to his daughter and son-in-law.


Allan

William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 10 mai 2007 22:41:13

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644dd0b@news.greennet.net...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:XgH0i.12367$8E.5740@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...

"Alan Smaill" <smaill@SPAMinf.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:fwezm4cln72.fsf@collins.inf.ed.ac.uk...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> writes:

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need
to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in
the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and
stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to
William
and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the
Scottish
royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army
and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side
doesn't change this.

Of course the Dutch army fought later in Ireland, but they seem to
have
been mainly Catholic mercenaries...

Fighting mainly Protestants who were loyal to James...


It wasn't a "bloodless revolution" in Scotland either (Killiecrankie,
the opposition to William led by Dundee, a Protestant faithful to
James).

Still, that doesn't go down as an invasion in my book, since both
armies involved were Scots.

Same for Culloden then...

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

He was Dutch but both he and his wife were descended from the Stuart kings
of Scotland. William was a grand-son of Charles I and Mary was the
daughter of James VII of Scotland. Hence the Scots deposed the sitting
king and offered the throne to his daughter and son-in-law.

It was a bit of a stretch though wasn't it.

I mean, it wasn't as if there weren't a whole slew of Stuarts kicking about
the place who all had a better claim.

Including the incumbent who got the sack...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 10 mai 2007 22:42:39

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644d981@news.greennet.net...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fEG0i.6734$eY1.4683@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority
in the Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation
and stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to
William and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the
Scottish royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

The part of the island that army landed in was England. There was no
invasion of Scotland. Once James fled the English throne and lost his
power base the Scots threw him off the Scottish throne themselves branding
him a traitor. The throne was offered to William and Mary providing they
accept the Presbyterian settlement in Scotland. There was some opposition
to this in particular from James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or
Bluidy Clavers) who stormed out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of
Highlanders in what was the first Jacobite Rising. Claverhouse probably
had no choice other than rebellion as he had been James Stuart's chief
henchman in the period known as the Killing Times, and the restored
Presbyterians and the likes of the returning exiles were bound to seek
revenge. New Scottish regiments were quickly raised to defend the capital.
This was when what went on to be called the Kings Own Scottish Borderers
were raised. The two Scottish armies met at Killikrankie where the
Jacobites won the day but Claverhouse was killed. The Jacobites were then
held by a much smaller band of Cameronians at Dunkeld and the rebellion
died out.




Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side doesn't change this.

You claimed Scotland was conquered which was completely incorrect.
William's invasion of England gave the Scottish Presbyterian majority the
chance to regain their dominance which had been lost in the Restoration.
There was no outside invasion.

Allan




Killiecrankie

by Robert Burns.

Whaur hae ye been sae braw lad?
Whaur hae ye been sae brankie-o?
Whaur hae ye been sae braw lad?
Cam' ye by Killiecrankie-o?

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

I fought at land, I fought at sea
At hame I fought my auntie-o
But I met the Devil, and Dundee
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

The bold Pitcur fell wi' a fur
And Clavers gat a clankie-o
And I had fed an Atholl gled
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

Oh fie, McKay, what gart ye lie
In the bush ayont the brankie-o?
Ye'd better kissed King Willie's loof
Than come by Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

There's nae shame, there's nae shame
There's nae shame tae swankie-o
There's soor slaes on Atholl's braes
And the De'il's at Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

Refers to battle in 1689, where winner, Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie
Dundee) was slain, ending Jacobite hopes.

Nebulous

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Nebulous » 10 mai 2007 23:02:13

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:NfadnZxYGYtPDN7bnZ2dnUVZ8t2snZ2d@bt.com...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644d981@news.greennet.net...

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fEG0i.6734$eY1.4683@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the
majority in the Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish
nation and stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the
crown to William and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended
from the Scottish royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

The part of the island that army landed in was England. There was no
invasion of Scotland. Once James fled the English throne and lost his
power base the Scots threw him off the Scottish throne themselves
branding him a traitor. The throne was offered to William and Mary
providing they accept the Presbyterian settlement in Scotland. There was
some opposition to this in particular from James Graham of Claverhouse
(Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy Clavers) who stormed out of Edinburgh and raised
an army mostly of Highlanders in what was the first Jacobite Rising.
Claverhouse probably had no choice other than rebellion as he had been
James Stuart's chief henchman in the period known as the Killing Times,
and the restored Presbyterians and the likes of the returning exiles were
bound to seek revenge. New Scottish regiments were quickly raised to
defend the capital. This was when what went on to be called the Kings Own
Scottish Borderers were raised. The two Scottish armies met at
Killikrankie where the Jacobites won the day but Claverhouse was killed.
The Jacobites were then held by a much smaller band of Cameronians at
Dunkeld and the rebellion died out.




Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side doesn't change this.

You claimed Scotland was conquered which was completely incorrect.
William's invasion of England gave the Scottish Presbyterian majority the
chance to regain their dominance which had been lost in the Restoration.
There was no outside invasion.

Allan




Killiecrankie
by Robert Burns.

Whaur hae ye been sae braw lad?
Whaur hae ye been sae brankie-o?
Whaur hae ye been sae braw lad?
Cam' ye by Killiecrankie-o?

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

I fought at land, I fought at sea
At hame I fought my auntie-o
But I met the Devil, and Dundee
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

The bold Pitcur fell wi' a fur
And Clavers gat a clankie-o
And I had fed an Atholl gled
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

Oh fie, McKay, what gart ye lie
In the bush ayont the brankie-o?
Ye'd better kissed King Willie's loof
Than come by Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

There's nae shame, there's nae shame
There's nae shame tae swankie-o
There's soor slaes on Atholl's braes
And the De'il's at Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

Refers to battle in 1689, where winner, Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie
Dundee) was slain, ending Jacobite hopes.


Bonnie Dundee by Sir Walter Scott

Tae the lairds i' convention
T'was Claverhouse spoke
E'er the Kings crown go down,
There'll be crowns to be broke;
Then let each cavalier
Who loves honour and me
Come follow the bonnet
O' bonnie Dundee.

Chorus
Come fill up my cup,
Come fill up my can
Saddle my horses
And call out my men
And it's Ho! for the west port
And let us gae free,
And we'll follow the bonnets
O' bonnie Dundee!

Dundee he is mounted,
He rides doon the street,
The bells they ring backwards,
The drums they are beat,
But the Provost, douce man,
Says "Just e'en let him be
For the toon is well rid of that
De'il o' Dundee."

Chorus
Come fill up my cup,
Come fill up my can
Saddle my horses
And call out my men
And it's Ho! for the west port
And let us gae free,
And we'll follow the bonnets
O' bonnie Dundee!

There are hills beyond Pentland
And lands beyond Forth,
Be there lairds i' the south,
There are chiefs i' the north!
There are brave duniewassals,
Three thousand times three
Will cry "Hoy!" for the bonnets
O' bonnie Dundee.

Chorus
Come fill up my cup,
Come fill up my can
Saddle my horses
And call out my men
And it's Ho! for the west port
And let us gae free,
And we'll follow the bonnets
O' bonnie Dundee!

Then awa to the hills,
To the lea to the rocks,
Ere I own a usurper
I'll crouch with the fox
So tremble false Whigs,
In the midst o'your glee,
Ye have not seen the last
O' my bonnets and me.

Chorus
Come fill up my cup,
Come fill up my can
Saddle my horses
And call out my men
And it's Ho! for the west port
And let us gae free,
And we'll follow the bonnets
O' bonnie Dundee!

I really like that line

Ere I own a usurper I'll crouch with the fox.

It makes a shiver run up my spine when I hear it sung.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imf6B8Xf0j4

Neb

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 10 mai 2007 23:41:50

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ZjM0i.13068$d9.4294@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644dd0b@news.greennet.net...

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

He was Dutch but both he and his wife were descended from the Stuart
kings of Scotland. William was a grand-son of Charles I and Mary was the
daughter of James VII of Scotland. Hence the Scots deposed the sitting
king and offered the throne to his daughter and son-in-law.

It was a bit of a stretch though wasn't it.

I mean, it wasn't as if there weren't a whole slew of Stuarts kicking
about the place who all had a better claim.

No-one had a better claim. Scottish law had decreed that the monarch must be
Protestant. Mary was first in line using that criteria and her sister Anne
was second.


Including the incumbent who got the sack...

Well that depends if you believe in divine right or not. Most of the Scots
in psoitions of authority at that time did not. As far back as the
Declaration of Arbroath there was the thinking that the Scottish king could
be deposed by his own people. Basically James VII was kicked off the throne
by what was then lawful majority consent. After him surely the only person
who would normally have been in line for the throne before Mary would be her
infant brother the Old Pretender. However he was automatically excluded
because of his religion. The 1689 Claim of Right specifically excluded not
only Catholics but also Protestants who refused to swear the Coronation
Oath. What was a total precedent about William was not his sharing of power
with Mary but the fact that he remained in power after Mary's death. Again
though even if that had not happened it would not have seen the Old
Pretender on the Scottish throne. Anne would simply have succeeded 6 years
earlier than she did. The Claim of Right specifically names her as William
and Mary's successor should they leave no issue.



Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 11 mai 2007 06:34:27

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:r_ydnfb5hMvx1d_bnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@bt.com...
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
The Act of Union was signed between two countries for Wales was subsumed
into England in the 1300s and there is no Welsh flag incorporated in the
Union Flag.

You are basically right excepting that the English/Welsh union, in which was
Wales was incorporated into the English kingdom, was during the reign of
Henry VIII in the 1500s.

cheers

Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 11 mai 2007 08:10:01

Bingo!

DSH
------------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644eef5@news.greennet.net...
"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ZjM0i.13068$d9.4294@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644dd0b@news.greennet.net...

The idea of Dutch William being a Scot is a new one though...

He was Dutch but both he and his wife were descended from the Stuart
kings of Scotland. William was a grand-son of Charles I and Mary was the
daughter of James VII of Scotland. Hence the Scots deposed the sitting
king and offered the throne to his daughter and son-in-law.

It was a bit of a stretch though wasn't it.

I mean, it wasn't as if there weren't a whole slew of Stuarts kicking
about the place who all had a better claim.

No-one had a better claim. Scottish law had decreed that the monarch must
be Protestant. Mary was first in line using that criteria and her sister
Anne was second.

Including the incumbent who got the sack...

Well that depends if you believe in divine right or not. Most of the Scots
in psoitions of authority at that time did not. As far back as the
Declaration of Arbroath there was the thinking that the Scottish king
could be deposed by his own people. Basically James VII was kicked off the
throne by what was then lawful majority consent. After him surely the only
person who would normally have been in line for the throne before Mary
would be her infant brother the Old Pretender. However he was
automatically excluded because of his religion. The 1689 Claim of Right
specifically excluded not only Catholics but also Protestants who refused
to swear the Coronation Oath. What was a total precedent about William was
not his sharing of power with Mary but the fact that he remained in power
after Mary's death. Again though even if that had not happened it would
not have seen the Old Pretender on the Scottish throne. Anne would simply
have succeeded 6 years earlier than she did. The Claim of Right
specifically names her as William and Mary's successor should they leave
no issue.

Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 11 mai 2007 08:19:39

James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy Clavers) who stormed
out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of Highlanders in what was the
first Jacobite Rising.

Linked to the Border Reiver Grahams?

How about the Earls of Montrose -- linkage there?

DSH
----------------------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644d981@news.greennet.net...

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

The part of the island that army landed in was England. There was no
invasion of Scotland. Once James fled the English throne and lost his
power base the Scots threw him off the Scottish throne themselves branding
him a traitor. The throne was offered to William and Mary providing they
accept the Presbyterian settlement in Scotland. There was some opposition
to this in particular from James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or
Bluidy Clavers) who stormed out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of
Highlanders in what was the first Jacobite Rising.

Claverhouse probably had no choice other than rebellion as he had been
James Stuart's chief henchman in the period known as the Killing Times,
and the restored Presbyterians and the likes of the returning exiles were
bound to seek revenge. New Scottish regiments were quickly raised to
defend the capital. This was when what went on to be called the Kings Own
Scottish Borderers were raised. The two Scottish armies met at
Killikrankie where the Jacobites won the day but Claverhouse was killed.
The Jacobites were then held by a much smaller band of Cameronians at
Dunkeld and the rebellion died out.

Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side doesn't change this.

You claimed Scotland was conquered which was completely incorrect.
William's invasion of England gave the Scottish Presbyterian majority the
chance to regain their dominance which had been lost in the Restoration.
There was no outside invasion.

Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 11 mai 2007 09:17:43

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:VOU0i.43$y33.276@eagle.america.net...
James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy Clavers) who stormed
out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of Highlanders in what was the
first Jacobite Rising.

Linked to the Border Reiver Grahams?

Claverhouse was created 1st Viscount Dundee and his family came from that
area. So he wasn't from the Border Grahams. He may well have been linked by
family to the Earl of Montrose though. I'm not sure.


Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 11 mai 2007 09:32:43

Thanks.

He does seem to be a distant relative of James Graham, 1st Marquess of
Montrose -- which makes him kin to me as well.

<http://www.rampantscotland.com/famous/blfamdundee.htm>

DSH
--------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:464575eb@news.greennet.net...
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:VOU0i.43$y33.276@eagle.america.net...

James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy Clavers) who
stormed out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of Highlanders
in what was the first Jacobite Rising.

Linked to the Border Reiver Grahams?

Claverhouse was created 1st Viscount Dundee and his family came from that
area. So he wasn't from the Border Grahams. He may well have been linked
by family to the Earl of Montrose though. I'm not sure.


Allan

Peter Stewart

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 11 mai 2007 10:04:09

Google Books has Volume III of Scots Peerage, covering the Graham viscounts
of Dundee and their connections to Montrose & to Robert III, on pp 316-333.

Peter Stewart


"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:kTV0i.44$y33.184@eagle.america.net...
Thanks.

He does seem to be a distant relative of James Graham, 1st Marquess of
Montrose -- which makes him kin to me as well.

http://www.rampantscotland.com/famous/blfamdundee.htm

DSH
--------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:464575eb@news.greennet.net...

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:VOU0i.43$y33.276@eagle.america.net...

James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy Clavers) who
stormed out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of Highlanders
in what was the first Jacobite Rising.

Linked to the Border Reiver Grahams?

Claverhouse was created 1st Viscount Dundee and his family came from that
area. So he wasn't from the Border Grahams. He may well have been linked
by family to the Earl of Montrose though. I'm not sure.


Allan


William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 11 mai 2007 16:29:34

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:kTV0i.44$y33.184@eagle.america.net...
Thanks.

He does seem to be a distant relative of James Graham, 1st Marquess of
Montrose -- which makes him kin to me as well.

So your relative was betrayed by the Stuarts and executed as a traitor...

No surprises there then...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

The Highlander

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av The Highlander » 11 mai 2007 18:18:22

On Thu, 10 May 2007 16:06:49 +0100, "allan connochie"
<allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote:

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:QKz0i.6703$eY1.2618@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...

"The Highlander" <micheil@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:dj05435dcbhd09l4r7g5lav72j3fvsftfh@4ax.com...

Scotland was never conquered by the English. So you can trundle that
cartload of bullshit back to London.

That'll come as something of a shock to Edward II, Cromwell and William
III

William is an interesting one really.

He conquered Scotland without even sending a man...

Of course it isn't strictly true to say Scotland was never conquered. It was
never pemanently conquered though.

Edward I certainly all but conquered the country reasonably thoroughly but
it didn't last as during the reign of Edward II the Scottish King Robert the
Bruce put paid to that. Even Edward I himself died whilst planning another
campaign.

Cromwell managed to conquer the country when it was at a low ebb and divided
after years of civil conflict. However the forced union only lasted several
years. This time fizzling out on the restoration of the monarchy.

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England. Once
this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority in the
Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation and stripped
him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to William and his
wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the Scottish royal line.

Allan

For God's sake, stop clouding the issue with facts!


<just kidding>

The Highlander

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av The Highlander » 11 mai 2007 18:26:26

On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:42:39 +0100, "Robert Peffers."
<peffers@btinternet.com> wrote:

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4644d981@news.greennet.net...

"William Black" <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fEG0i.6734$eY1.4683@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:46448450@news.greennet.net...

William of Orange of course didn't conquer Scotland. He didn't need to.
James Stuart fled the English throne when William landed in England.
Once this unpopular monarch had lost his English power base the majority
in the Scots parliament declared him a traitor to the Scottish nation
and stripped him off the Scottish throne before offering the crown to
William and his wife Mary Stuart, both of whom were descended from the
Scottish royal line.

So why did he bring that Dutch army with him then?

The part of the island that army landed in was England. There was no
invasion of Scotland. Once James fled the English throne and lost his
power base the Scots threw him off the Scottish throne themselves branding
him a traitor. The throne was offered to William and Mary providing they
accept the Presbyterian settlement in Scotland. There was some opposition
to this in particular from James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or
Bluidy Clavers) who stormed out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of
Highlanders in what was the first Jacobite Rising. Claverhouse probably
had no choice other than rebellion as he had been James Stuart's chief
henchman in the period known as the Killing Times, and the restored
Presbyterians and the likes of the returning exiles were bound to seek
revenge. New Scottish regiments were quickly raised to defend the capital.
This was when what went on to be called the Kings Own Scottish Borderers
were raised. The two Scottish armies met at Killikrankie where the
Jacobites won the day but Claverhouse was killed. The Jacobites were then
held by a much smaller band of Cameronians at Dunkeld and the rebellion
died out.




Dutch William certainly invaded these islands. That the parliament and
army and just about everyone else not called James Stuart rallied to his
side doesn't change this.

You claimed Scotland was conquered which was completely incorrect.
William's invasion of England gave the Scottish Presbyterian majority the
chance to regain their dominance which had been lost in the Restoration.
There was no outside invasion.

Allan




Killiecrankie
by Robert Burns.

Whaur hae ye been sae braw lad?
Whaur hae ye been sae brankie-o?
Whaur hae ye been sae braw lad?
Cam' ye by Killiecrankie-o?

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

I fought at land, I fought at sea
At hame I fought my auntie-o
But I met the Devil, and Dundee
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

The bold Pitcur fell wi' a fur
And Clavers gat a clankie-o
And I had fed an Atholl gled
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

Oh fie, McKay, what gart ye lie
In the bush ayont the brankie-o?
Ye'd better kissed King Willie's loof
Than come by Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

There's nae shame, there's nae shame
There's nae shame tae swankie-o
There's soor slaes on Atholl's braes
And the De'il's at Killiecrankie-o

And ye had been whaur I hae been
Ye wadna been sae cantie-o
And ye had seen what I hae seen
On the braes o' Killiecrankie-o

Refers to battle in 1689, where winner, Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie
Dundee) was slain, ending Jacobite hopes.

I can't help thinking about the Provost of Dundee who had more sense

than most of them:

Dundee he is mounted, he rides up the street.
The bells were rung backwards, the drums they were beat.
But the Provost douce man, just said "Een let him be!
The guid toon is weel rid o that deil frae Dundee!"

He kent his man! He was probably D@ve Allison's ancestor - both had an
eye for reality.

The Highlander

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av The Highlander » 11 mai 2007 18:28:32

On Fri, 11 May 2007 09:17:43 +0100, "allan connochie"
<allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote:

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:VOU0i.43$y33.276@eagle.america.net...
James Graham of Claverhouse (Bonnie Dundee or Bluidy Clavers) who stormed
out of Edinburgh and raised an army mostly of Highlanders in what was the
first Jacobite Rising.

Linked to the Border Reiver Grahams?

Claverhouse was created 1st Viscount Dundee and his family came from that
area. So he wasn't from the Border Grahams. He may well have been linked by
family to the Earl of Montrose though. I'm not sure.


Allan

I believe he was. My granny always said so.

The Highlander

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av The Highlander » 11 mai 2007 19:45:40

On Fri, 11 May 2007 05:34:27 GMT, "allan connochie"
<conncohies@noemail.com> wrote:

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:r_ydnfb5hMvx1d_bnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@bt.com...

"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
The Act of Union was signed between two countries for Wales was subsumed
into England in the 1300s and there is no Welsh flag incorporated in the
Union Flag.

You are basically right excepting that the English/Welsh union, in which was
Wales was incorporated into the English kingdom, was during the reign of
Henry VIII in the 1500s.

cheers

We are in poetic mood today and thus...

Allan Connochie - Memo to SCS.

Wha daur fecht wi Connochie?
A Reiver chiel as aa kin see!
His feet weel grunded in thi facts
O airmies, kings and brucken pacts.
A kempie fechter he maun be
Wha wales a strowe wi Connochie!
Young loon, shud ye ere daff his game,
Lap up yer gear an skelp aff hame!
Tho kibble callant ye micht bi,
Ne'er bleck Allan Connochie!
Fur aa as weens they'll bi his maik,
Thi ootcomes aye a yerkit craik!

A loose translation for non-Scots speakers...

Who dares fight with Connochie?
A Borderer as all can see!
His feet well-grounded in the facts
Of armies, kings and broken treaties.
A bold fighter he must be
Who picks a quarrel with Connochie!
Young man should you ever challenge his knowledge,
Pack up your goods and run off home!
Though a tough lad you may be,
Never challenge Allan Connochie!
Despite all those who think they'll be his match,
The result is always a cry from the lash of his whip!

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 13 mai 2007 00:52:48

"allan connochie" <conncohies@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:DfT0i.9849$J81.1698@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:r_ydnfb5hMvx1d_bnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@bt.com...

"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
The Act of Union was signed between two countries for Wales was subsumed
into England in the 1300s and there is no Welsh flag incorporated in the
Union Flag.

You are basically right excepting that the English/Welsh union, in which
was Wales was incorporated into the English kingdom, was during the reign
of Henry VIII in the 1500s.

cheers

Allan

Well I was thinking more along the lines of -


1282 - Llwyelyn II is killed in battle and Wales's resurgence comes to an
end. Wales falls beneath Edward the First's advances. Wales becomes an
English principality under the Statute of Rhuddlan. In the future, the
eldest son of the English king is designated Prince of Wales. The building
of castles in Wales is started by Edward I.

1301 At Caernarvon Castle Edward's son is invested as the Prince of Wales.

Seems fairly clear to me that Wales became a English principality in 1282
but Edward's son was not invested until 1301, but I'm not going to argue the
point. I'm not really well up on Welsh History and may have missed
something.
--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 01:26:31

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:28CdnYP-C-fNztvbRVnyhgA@bt.com...
"allan connochie" <conncohies@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:DfT0i.9849$J81.1698@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:r_ydnfb5hMvx1d_bnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@bt.com...

"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
The Act of Union was signed between two countries for Wales was subsumed
into England in the 1300s and there is no Welsh flag incorporated in the
Union Flag.

You are basically right excepting that the English/Welsh union, in which
was Wales was incorporated into the English kingdom, was during the reign
of Henry VIII in the 1500s.

cheers

Allan

Well I was thinking more along the lines of -

1282 - Llwyelyn II is killed in battle and Wales's resurgence comes to an
end. Wales falls beneath Edward the First's advances. Wales becomes an
English principality under the Statute of Rhuddlan. In the future, the
eldest son of the English king is designated Prince of Wales. The building
of castles in Wales is started by Edward I.

1301 At Caernarvon Castle Edward's son is invested as the Prince of Wales.

You are right of course, but that is not the same thing as Wales actually
being part of England though!


Seems fairly clear to me that Wales became a English principality in 1282
but Edward's son was not invested until 1301, but I'm not going to argue
the point. I'm not really well up on Welsh History and may have missed
something.

The Act of Union between England and Wales was passed in 1536. From that
date the Wales wes legally part of England, the Welsh were regarded as being
English and had representation in parliament etc. Of course unlike the
Scottish and Irish unions the Act was only passed in the English parliament.
Henry did claim that the Act was only confirming the existing reality. Of
course in the popular mind England and Wales remained seperate entities
despite the legislation. I think it was as late as the 1960s when it was
made clear by the government, in one of the Welsh Language Acts, that Wales
was legally a distinct entity seperate from England.


Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 01:27:54

"The Highlander" <micheil@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:gv9943pkpck0jnk1ip44sia3jrvm40rsat@4ax.com...
On Fri, 11 May 2007 05:34:27 GMT, "allan connochie"
conncohies@noemail.com> wrote:


"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:r_ydnfb5hMvx1d_bnZ2dnUVZ8q2dnZ2d@bt.com...

"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:8LydnTbcadppmt_bRVnyhQA@bt.com...
Paul C wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 00:41:32 +0100, Andrew Swallow
am.swallow@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Paul C wrote:
The Act of Union was signed between two countries for Wales was subsumed
into England in the 1300s and there is no Welsh flag incorporated in the
Union Flag.

You are basically right excepting that the English/Welsh union, in which
was
Wales was incorporated into the English kingdom, was during the reign of
Henry VIII in the 1500s.

cheers

We are in poetic mood today and thus...

Allan Connochie - Memo to SCS.

Wha daur fecht wi Connochie?
A Reiver chiel as aa kin see!

Well I'm going to have to reply to that but it won't be started at 01:30 in
the morning!


Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 01:33:36

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

DSH
-----------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647aa74@news.greennet.net...

Well I was thinking more along the lines of -

1282 - Llwyelyn II is killed in battle and Wales's resurgence comes to
an end. Wales falls beneath Edward the First's advances. Wales becomes an
English principality under the Statute of Rhuddlan. In the future, the
eldest son of the English king is designated Prince of Wales. The
building of castles in Wales is started by Edward I.

Llywelyn the Last ap Gruffydd, Prince of Wales -- a 1st cousin -- and Edward
I an ancestor.

Interesting.

1301 At Caernarvon Castle Edward's son is invested as the Prince of
Wales.

You are right of course, but that is not the same thing as Wales actually
being part of England though!

Seems fairly clear to me that Wales became a English principality in 1282
but Edward's son was not invested until 1301, but I'm not going to argue
the point. I'm not really well up on Welsh History and may have missed
something.

The Act of Union between England and Wales was passed in 1536. From that
date the Wales wes legally part of England, the Welsh were regarded as
being English and had representation in parliament etc. Of course unlike
the Scottish and Irish unions the Act was only passed in the English
parliament. Henry did claim that the Act was only confirming the existing
reality. Of course in the popular mind England and Wales remained seperate
entities despite the legislation. I think it was as late as the 1960s when
it was made clear by the government, in one of the Welsh Language Acts,
that Wales was legally a distinct entity seperate [sic] from England.


Allan

Renia

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Renia » 13 mai 2007 02:13:58

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 02:29:18

Do the Welsh all speak Welsh with each other?

Did Richard Burton? <g>

DSH
--------------------------------------

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 02:36:57

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.

- nilita

Renia

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Renia » 13 mai 2007 02:48:51

La N wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:


Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.


I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.

Not all the Welsh peoples speak Welsh. It was a dying language but it
has been encouraged for the past two decades or more.

Eugene Griessel

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Eugene Griessel » 13 mai 2007 02:51:06

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.


Bach ffladr bun!

Eugene L Griessel

It is a good thing to make mistakes
- so long as you are found out quickly!

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 02:54:59

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46466e96.2513038@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.


Bach ffladr bun!


<swoon> I like when you talk dirty, Eugene.

My bro' often lectures on Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by
Douglas R. Hofstadter. Might as well be Welsh. Or Greek. Or Swahili ...
;)

I have a sis who has gone over and visited him. She says all the street
signs are something like this: Ksafynd fydd ingwallen ....

I made that up, but you get the point ...%)

- nli

Eugene Griessel

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Eugene Griessel » 13 mai 2007 02:59:07

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46466e96.2513038@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.


Bach ffladr bun!


swoon> I like when you talk dirty, Eugene.

My bro' often lectures on Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by
Douglas R. Hofstadter. Might as well be Welsh. Or Greek. Or Swahili ...
;)

I have a sis who has gone over and visited him. She says all the street
signs are something like this: Ksafynd fydd ingwallen ....

I made that up, but you get the point ...%)


Besides Wales is a dreadful place - huge gangs of swarthy men roam the
hillsides terrifying everyone with their close harmony singing.

I hope Doc Andy isn't following this thread - I'll get crossed off his
Xmas card list for sure!

Eugene L Griessel

Kids in the back seat cause accidents; accidents in the back seat
cause kids.

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 03:00:45

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25qpu$33g$5@mouse.otenet.gr...
La N wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:


Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.


I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as
far as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.

Not all the Welsh peoples speak Welsh. It was a dying language but it has
been encouraged for the past two decades or more.

My bro' got his PhD at the U. of Edinburgh, also taught at U. of Uppsala,
Sweden, and has lived in Wales the past few years. My little nephews, when
they come visiting in Canada, speak English *and* Swedish with a rather
aristocratic (english) accent.

- nilita

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 03:05:21

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:4646706b.2982043@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46466e96.2513038@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as
far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.


Bach ffladr bun!


swoon> I like when you talk dirty, Eugene.

My bro' often lectures on Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by
Douglas R. Hofstadter. Might as well be Welsh. Or Greek. Or Swahili
...
;)

I have a sis who has gone over and visited him. She says all the street
signs are something like this: Ksafynd fydd ingwallen ....

I made that up, but you get the point ...%)


Besides Wales is a dreadful place - huge gangs of swarthy men roam the
hillsides terrifying everyone with their close harmony singing.

Heheheh ... you know my bro' ... ;) (who is also a choral singer)

I hope Doc Andy isn't following this thread - I'll get crossed off his
Xmas card list for sure!

Hey, see if he has crossed paths with my bro, 'kay?

Eugene L Griessel

- nilita

Kids in the back seat cause accidents; accidents in the back seat
cause kids.

"A pedestrian hit me and went under my car." - a real true statement on an
insurance claim form ...

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 03:16:17

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:4646706b.2982043@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46466e96.2513038@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as
far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.


Bach ffladr bun!



Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)

- nilita

Eugene Griessel

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Eugene Griessel » 13 mai 2007 03:28:54

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)


There's this stunning bird, Cleopatra, I want to chat up.......

The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

Eugene L Griessel

A good time to keep your mouth shut is when you're in deep water.

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 03:37:19

Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and replace
them.

Deus Vult.

Look at the History of the American West as a stellar example.

We won out over Geronimo and Cochise.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas
-----------------------------------------

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46467665.4504179@news.uunet.co.za...

The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 03:37:36

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46467665.4504179@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)


There's this stunning bird, Cleopatra, I want to chat up.......

You're just dying to unwrap her! ... ;)

The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

I've been hearing about this too. When I go for my walks, I put on my
earphones and listen to CBC (talk) Radio, and this is a much discussed
topic - that is, the death of languages and cultures. The First Nations
elders are scrambling, even as they are dying, to pass on the traditions and
languages to their youth. Unfortunately, many of these traditions were
weaned out of the generations by (Church-driven) residential schools.


Eugene L Griessel

- nilita

A good time to keep your mouth shut is when you're in deep water.

"Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out, but it ain't going away." -
Elvis Presley

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 05:11:44

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...
"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such. At
the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but that
reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it has since
started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is over 600,000
speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of Welsh speakers
living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only between 1% and 2%
of people speak Gaelic.


Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 05:14:43

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:a2t1i.105$y33.416@eagle.america.net...
Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

Over one in five of the population, mainly towards the north and west, still
speak Welsh.


Allan

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 05:17:19

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647df3c@news.greennet.net...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such. At
the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but that
reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it has
since started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is over
600,000 speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of Welsh
speakers living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only between
1% and 2% of people speak Gaelic.


Okay. So, what happened that Welsh should have become so precarious a
language? As for Gaelic, about the only time I hear it anymore is on the
part of songs by our Canadian Nova Scotian singers such as The Rankin
Family.

- nilita

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 05:27:27

How is "speak Welsh -- or Gaelic" defined?

DSH
-----------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647df3c@news.greennet.net...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such. At
the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but that
reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it has
since started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is over
600,000 speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of Welsh
speakers living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only between
1% and 2% of people speak Gaelic.


Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 05:29:10

Speak it how fluently?

Main language?

DSH

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647dfee@news.greennet.net...
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:a2t1i.105$y33.416@eagle.america.net...

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

Over one in five of the population, mainly towards the north and west,
still speak Welsh.


Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 05:30:24

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46467665.4504179@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)


There's this stunning bird, Cleopatra, I want to chat up.......

The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

I think the figure for 1870 was estimated at about 30%. By the 1901 census
it had dropped to 9% then by 1921 to about 1%. The last native speakers died
out in the 70s but of course there was still people who spoke it as a second
language. Since then Manx medium education has become available and there
are now again a few dozen native speakers with about another 1700 folk with
it as a second language.

I imagine that much of the richness of the language must have been lost
though as the first of the new native speakers learned it from people who
had it only as a second language.

Allan

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 05:37:41

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647e39c@news.greennet.net...
"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46467665.4504179@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)


There's this stunning bird, Cleopatra, I want to chat up.......

The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

I think the figure for 1870 was estimated at about 30%. By the 1901 census
it had dropped to 9% then by 1921 to about 1%. The last native speakers
died out in the 70s but of course there was still people who spoke it as a
second language. Since then Manx medium education has become available and
there are now again a few dozen native speakers with about another 1700
folk with it as a second language.

I imagine that much of the richness of the language must have been lost
though as the first of the new native speakers learned it from people who
had it only as a second language.


One really has to be enculturated, don't they, to maintain a "second"
language. I used to be so fluent in French as my second language - that is,
while I attended school - but lost it due to not having to use it. And then
I learned Spanish, and it kicked French out of my head ... ;(

- nilita

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 06:21:27

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jjw1i.3383$V75.331@edtnps89...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647df3c@news.greennet.net...

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such.
At the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but
that reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it
has since started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is
over 600,000 speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of
Welsh speakers living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only
between 1% and 2% of people speak Gaelic.


Okay. So, what happened that Welsh should have become so precarious a
language?

Well I think I was just saying that it isn't all that precarious. it is in
quite a healthy state especially when compared with the other Celtic
languages in the British Isles.


As for Gaelic, about the only time I hear it anymore is on the part of
songs by our Canadian Nova Scotian singers such as The Rankin Family.

The vast bulk of Scottish Gaelic speakers live in Scotland though of course
there are still small numbers in Canada etc. Even in many parts of Scotland
though, apart from Gaelic medium TV, one can go for long periods without
hearing the language being spoken. As I said there is less than 2% of the
population speak it. Most of those are either in the more traditional Gaelic
areas of the Western Isles and parts of the Highlands, or they are blended
into the mass in the large cities. Unlike Welsh the Gaelic language is in a
precarious position.


Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 06:24:09

Hmmmmmm...

Indeed.

Just like The Highgonader.

DSH
-------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647ef93@news.greennet.net...

Unlike Welsh the Gaelic language is in a precarious position.


Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 06:45:48

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:ftw1i.126$y33.414@eagle.america.net...
How is "speak Welsh -- or Gaelic" defined?

I'm sure there are something like 60,000 people who can speak Gaelic in that
they are fluent - then about another 30,000 who have some knowledge. Though
that is taken from memory so I may be slightly out.

As far as Welsh goes according to the Welsh Langauge Board there are 582,368
Welsh speakers which is up 74,000 from 1991. So this is 20.8% of the
population and 24.7% of those actually born in Wales speak Welsh. Some of
course may not be fluent but the figures for pre-school 3 to 5 year olds is
itself 18.8% of the population. Hence it suggests that most speakers have
learned the language at home and in the community rather than first
encountering it at school.

16.3% of the population have all three skills in that they can speak, read
and write Welsh. 28.4% of the population have at least one of the skills.
71.6% of the population have no Welsh language skills.

Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 06:56:39

Thank you kindly.

Very useful.

DSH

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647f595@news.greennet.net...
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:ftw1i.126$y33.414@eagle.america.net...

How is "speak Welsh -- or Gaelic" defined?

I'm sure there are something like 60,000 people who can speak Gaelic in
that they are fluent - then about another 30,000 who have some knowledge.
Though that is taken from memory so I may be slightly out.

As far as Welsh goes according to the Welsh Langauge Board there are
582,368 Welsh speakers which is up 74,000 from 1991. So this is 20.8% of
the population and 24.7% of those actually born in Wales speak Welsh. Some
of course may not be fluent but the figures for pre-school 3 to 5 year
olds is itself 18.8% of the population. Hence it suggests that most
speakers have learned the language at home and in the community rather
than first encountering it at school.

16.3% of the population have all three skills in that they can speak, read
and write Welsh. 28.4% of the population have at least one of the skills.
71.6% of the population have no Welsh language skills.

Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 07:11:14

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pCw1i.3394$V75.1732@edtnps89...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647e39c@news.greennet.net...

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46467665.4504179@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)


There's this stunning bird, Cleopatra, I want to chat up.......

The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

I think the figure for 1870 was estimated at about 30%. By the 1901
census it had dropped to 9% then by 1921 to about 1%. The last native
speakers died out in the 70s but of course there was still people who
spoke it as a second language. Since then Manx medium education has
become available and there are now again a few dozen native speakers with
about another 1700 folk with it as a second language.

I imagine that much of the richness of the language must have been lost
though as the first of the new native speakers learned it from people who
had it only as a second language.


One really has to be enculturated, don't they, to maintain a "second"
language. I used to be so fluent in French as my second language - that
is, while I attended school - but lost it due to not having to use it.
And then I learned Spanish, and it kicked French out of my head ... ;(

Quite so plus when it gets down to so few speakers then you really struggle
to keep it going. I imagine if there are 1600 with some knowledge of Manx
then a good proportion of those are going to be less than fluent - some
possibly only have a passing knowledge. It has probably been kept alive by
just a handful of real enthusiasts. Even when the new native speakers leave
primary education then they'll go into English medium secondary education
and the vast bulk of their peers will only speak English. How many current
native Manx speakers will pass it on to their offspring when there is no
Manx speaking community as such?

cheers

Allan

allan connochie

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av allan connochie » 13 mai 2007 07:19:23

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:Luw1i.127$y33.421@eagle.america.net...
Speak it how fluently?

Main language?

Apart from pre-school kids there are virtually no Welsh speaking monoglots.
Virtually all can also speak English but yes, for a significant number of
Welsh people, the Welsh language is their first language. That is the
language normally used at home, socially and even ofen at work. I believe it
is a good deal different in the likes of Ireland where many people, perhaps
most, included in Irish speaking stats learned the language at school.

Allan

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 07:38:51

Hmmmmm...

'Strod'nry!

Did Richard Burton speak Welsh fluently?

Dylan Thomas?

Christian Bale?

Stanley Baker?

Henry Morton Stanley?

Jonathan Price?

John Prescott?

Lawrence of Arabia?

Tom Jones?

Catherine Zeta Jones?

Anthony Hopkins?

Timothy Dalton?

Aneurin Bevan?

Shirley Bassey ?

DSH
----------------------------------

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647fd25@news.greennet.net...
"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:Luw1i.127$y33.421@eagle.america.net...

Speak it how fluently?

Main language?

Apart from pre-school kids there are virtually no Welsh speaking
monoglots. Virtually all can also speak English but yes, for a significant
number of Welsh people, the Welsh language is their first language. That
is the language normally used at home, socially and even ofen at work. I
believe it is a good deal different in the likes of Ireland where many
people, perhaps most, included in Irish speaking stats learned the
language at school.

Allan

Renia

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Renia » 13 mai 2007 11:33:18

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and replace
them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 13 mai 2007 14:11:55

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...
"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as far
as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.

- nilita

Just in case you do not know Wales is a rather culturally divided country

with and the growth of the Welsh language and its associated culture is
historically concentrated in the rural Welsh-speaking areas of north and
west Wales. The two areas in Wales have co-existed in much the same way as
the three distinct Scottish areas with different cultural histories, that
is, "Borders", "Lowlands" and, "Highlands & Islands".
--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 14:46:07

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and replace
them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.

Hines is so .... Darwinian ... ;)

- nilita

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 14:47:39

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:GIKdnfOMLoYGk9rbnZ2dnUVZ8tyqnZ2d@bt.com...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

btw, I have a bro' who is a professor at the University of Swansea; as
far as I know, he doesn't speak Welsh.

- nilita

Just in case you do not know Wales is a rather culturally divided country
with and the growth of the Welsh language and its associated culture is
historically concentrated in the rural Welsh-speaking areas of north and
west Wales. The two areas in Wales have co-existed in much the same way as
the three distinct Scottish areas with different cultural histories, that
is, "Borders", "Lowlands" and, "Highlands & Islands".
--

Thank you. I'm going to have to go over and visit some day ....

- nilita

Eugene Griessel

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Eugene Griessel » 13 mai 2007 14:52:19

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and replace
them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.

Hines is so .... Darwinian ... ;)

Not to mention ignorant of history. Eventually every advanced
civilisation is overrun by the Barbarians.

Eugene L Griessel

Do not hire a chemical engineer to brew you a cup of coffee.

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 14:54:21

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:464717cf.8414839@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and
replace
them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.

Hines is so .... Darwinian ... ;)

Not to mention ignorant of history. Eventually every advanced
civilisation is overrun by the Barbarians.


No kidding! Just think of whom *we* have overrun ...%)

- nilita

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 13 mai 2007 14:58:17

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:QRu1i.3329$V75.656@edtnps89...
"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46467665.4504179@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hey, I just remembered! You're someone who's teaching himself
hieroglyphics! Talk about a dead language ...;)


There's this stunning bird, Cleopatra, I want to chat up.......

You're just dying to unwrap her! ... ;)


The death of a language is so much more than the disappearance of a
mere means of communication. It is often also the irrevocable death
of a large part of a culture. And sadly we are seeing many languages
dying out - and much culture and history lost as a result.

I was reading, recently, that half the spoken languages on earth are
expected to die within the next 50 or so years. I also read that in
something like 1870 about 90% of the citizens of the Isle of Man spoke
Manx as their native tongue - and a century later Manx was being kept
alive artifically. Imagine all those lost folk tales, songs - even
recipes - that are gone forever.

I've been hearing about this too. When I go for my walks, I put on my
earphones and listen to CBC (talk) Radio, and this is a much discussed
topic - that is, the death of languages and cultures. The First Nations
elders are scrambling, even as they are dying, to pass on the traditions
and languages to their youth. Unfortunately, many of these traditions
were weaned out of the generations by (Church-driven) residential schools.



Eugene L Griessel

- nilita


A good time to keep your mouth shut is when you're in deep water.

"Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out, but it ain't going away." -
Elvis Presley

Well it has to be said that in spite of the Scots language being effectively

proscribed by the UK Education systems and pupils punished for speaking it
in class right up until the 1990s the languages and cultures are alive and
well and dwelling in Scotland.
I started school in the early 1930s after being raised on what was then an
comparatively isolated farm. I had never heard real English spoken until
that first day at school. I was immediately, "Lochgellied", by the school
teacher.
Every teacher carried a thick leather strap or, "Tawse", with a thonged end.
These tawse were made in the Fife town of Lochgelly and they were called,
"The Lochgelly", with the administration of the strap to the pupil's
hand(s), known as being, "Lochgellied". There were several variations to the
rather barbaric methods of application of the, "Lochgelly". One such was to
have the pupil hold one hand on top of the other 2" above the desk so that
when the top hand was struck the knuckles of the bottom hand rattled off the
desktop. Another was to apply the Lochgelly at 90° to the hand so that the
Lochgelly curled right round the hand. Yet another was to apply the strap
end on to the hand but with the thongs extending beyond the hand and some
way up the pupil's wrist. All this for using the language you learned at the
mother's knee and thus the language that you think in. Anyway, the fact is
many pupils resented being made to use a foreign language, and although they
became competent English users, they railed against it for the rest of their
lives and, like me, were bloody minded enough to always deliberately use
Scots somewhere within every class to assert their right to their own
language. I ended school in the manner that I started by using Scots in
class to accept the prize for being top of the class at English. You may not
be aware that the English actually hung Scots for wearing Scottish national
dress, playing Scottish pipe music or speaking a Scots language.

See - http://www.scotclans.com/history/1746_proscrption.html
and http://www.scotclans.com/history/1782_p ... tion2.html

Yet in spite of all that the Scottish cultures of the Borders, Lowlands and
Highlands/Islands lives yet.
(and they wonder why we do not support their bloody football team)(G).

--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 13 mai 2007 15:03:14

"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647df3c@news.greennet.net...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such. At
the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but that
reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it has
since started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is over
600,000 speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of Welsh
speakers living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only between
1% and 2% of people speak Gaelic.


Allan

And about 98% speak some form of Lowland Scots, (The rest are speaking Urdu

or Polish).
--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 13 mai 2007 15:04:34

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jjw1i.3383$V75.331@edtnps89...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647df3c@news.greennet.net...

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such.
At the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but
that reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it
has since started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is
over 600,000 speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of
Welsh speakers living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only
between 1% and 2% of people speak Gaelic.


Okay. So, what happened that Welsh should have become so precarious a
language? As for Gaelic, about the only time I hear it anymore is on the
part of songs by our Canadian Nova Scotian singers such as The Rankin
Family.

- nilita

In Britain it is was/is due to the English biased broadcasting services.

--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).

Eugene Griessel

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Eugene Griessel » 13 mai 2007 15:05:55

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote:

Well it has to be said that in spite of the Scots language being effectively
proscribed by the UK Education systems and pupils punished for speaking it
in class right up until the 1990s the languages and cultures are alive and
well and dwelling in Scotland.
I started school in the early 1930s after being raised on what was then an
comparatively isolated farm. I had never heard real English spoken until
that first day at school. I was immediately, "Lochgellied", by the school
teacher.
Every teacher carried a thick leather strap or, "Tawse", with a thonged end.
These tawse were made in the Fife town of Lochgelly and they were called,
"The Lochgelly", with the administration of the strap to the pupil's
hand(s), known as being, "Lochgellied". There were several variations to the
rather barbaric methods of application of the, "Lochgelly". One such was to
have the pupil hold one hand on top of the other 2" above the desk so that
when the top hand was struck the knuckles of the bottom hand rattled off the
desktop. Another was to apply the Lochgelly at 90° to the hand so that the
Lochgelly curled right round the hand. Yet another was to apply the strap
end on to the hand but with the thongs extending beyond the hand and some
way up the pupil's wrist. All this for using the language you learned at the
mother's knee and thus the language that you think in. Anyway, the fact is
many pupils resented being made to use a foreign language, and although they
became competent English users, they railed against it for the rest of their
lives and, like me, were bloody minded enough to always deliberately use
Scots somewhere within every class to assert their right to their own
language. I ended school in the manner that I started by using Scots in
class to accept the prize for being top of the class at English. You may not
be aware that the English actually hung Scots for wearing Scottish national
dress, playing Scottish pipe music or speaking a Scots language.

See - http://www.scotclans.com/history/1746_proscrption.html
and http://www.scotclans.com/history/1782_p ... tion2.html

Yet in spite of all that the Scottish cultures of the Borders, Lowlands and
Highlands/Islands lives yet.
(and they wonder why we do not support their bloody football team)(G).

Paradoxically oppressing a small culture group usually results in a
firm blossoming of that group's language and culture. Best way to
kill it is encourage it - make it compulsory at school. It will soon
die out then!

Eugene L Griessel

Looking for a helping hand? There's one on your arm.

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 15:14:06

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:46471ac9.9174452@news.uunet.co.za...
"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote:

Well it has to be said that in spite of the Scots language being
effectively
proscribed by the UK Education systems and pupils punished for speaking it
in class right up until the 1990s the languages and cultures are alive and
well and dwelling in Scotland.
I started school in the early 1930s after being raised on what was then an
comparatively isolated farm. I had never heard real English spoken until
that first day at school. I was immediately, "Lochgellied", by the school
teacher.
Every teacher carried a thick leather strap or, "Tawse", with a thonged
end.
These tawse were made in the Fife town of Lochgelly and they were called,
"The Lochgelly", with the administration of the strap to the pupil's
hand(s), known as being, "Lochgellied". There were several variations to
the
rather barbaric methods of application of the, "Lochgelly". One such was
to
have the pupil hold one hand on top of the other 2" above the desk so that
when the top hand was struck the knuckles of the bottom hand rattled off
the
desktop. Another was to apply the Lochgelly at 90° to the hand so that the
Lochgelly curled right round the hand. Yet another was to apply the strap
end on to the hand but with the thongs extending beyond the hand and some
way up the pupil's wrist. All this for using the language you learned at
the
mother's knee and thus the language that you think in. Anyway, the fact is
many pupils resented being made to use a foreign language, and although
they
became competent English users, they railed against it for the rest of
their
lives and, like me, were bloody minded enough to always deliberately use
Scots somewhere within every class to assert their right to their own
language. I ended school in the manner that I started by using Scots in
class to accept the prize for being top of the class at English. You may
not
be aware that the English actually hung Scots for wearing Scottish
national
dress, playing Scottish pipe music or speaking a Scots language.

See - http://www.scotclans.com/history/1746_proscrption.html
and http://www.scotclans.com/history/1782_p ... tion2.html

Yet in spite of all that the Scottish cultures of the Borders, Lowlands
and
Highlands/Islands lives yet.
(and they wonder why we do not support their bloody football team)(G).

Paradoxically oppressing a small culture group usually results in a
firm blossoming of that group's language and culture. Best way to
kill it is encourage it - make it compulsory at school. It will soon
die out then!

Heh. I wonder if that holds true of any compulsory second language
training. I know several people in my school years resenting to *have* to
take French in high school. I know that our Quebecois friends felt the same
way about English. Not that the languages died out, of course ... just that
it is human nature to resist that which is "forced" upon them.

Eugene L Griessel

- nilita
Looking for a helping hand? There's one on your arm.

"That woman speaks eighteen languages, and can't say No in any of them." -
Dorothy Parker

Renia

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Renia » 13 mai 2007 15:19:40

La N wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:


Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and replace
them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.


Hines is so .... Darwinian ... ;)

Please, don't insult Darwin. :-)

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 15:21:22

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f276pn$k5t$1@mouse.otenet.gr...
La N wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:


Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and
replace them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.


Hines is so .... Darwinian ... ;)

Please, don't insult Darwin. :-)

Do you think that Hines could be Darwin's missing link? ... ;)

- nilita

Robert Peffers.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Robert Peffers. » 13 mai 2007 17:04:04

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:C9F1i.7267$V75.1464@edtnps89...
"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f276pn$k5t$1@mouse.otenet.gr...
La N wrote:

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:


Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior cultures and
replace them.


No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.


Hines is so .... Darwinian ... ;)

Please, don't insult Darwin. :-)

Do you think that Hines could be Darwin's missing link? ... ;)

- nilita

In fact there really was no missing link. People were quite ready to see the

great similarities in every other species that bound them to whatever they
evolved from but could not see the even greater resemblances between mankind
and other bipeds such as the simians.
--

Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
..

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 17:15:29

No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.

Renia Simmonds -- British Ex-Pat Living In Greece
-------------------------------------------------------------------

That sort of insipid, dead-wrong thinking led to our being caught asleep on
9/11 -- the Multi-Cultural, "Do Your Own Thing" Miasma.

Newcomers must be assimilated into the Mainstream Culture of a Nation.

Ethnic Foods, Dress [within reason], Languages in the Home, Religion [as
long as it does not infringe on others], Dances, et cetera are all fine and
enrich the Mainstream Culture -- while maintaining Individual Freedoms.

But There Are Limits On Behavior...

The newcomers cannot just be allowed to set up shop, with alternate laws,
languages in the workplace and behavioral patterns of their own.

The British and French have been singularly unsuccessful, for example, in
integrating Muslims into the Mainstream Culture -- and we have had similar
problems in America.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f26ph8$elq$2@mouse.otenet.gr...

D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Twaddle.

Superior Cultures consistently win out over inferior
cultures and replace them.

Deus Vult.

Look at the History of the American West as a stellar example.

We won out over Geronimo and Cochise.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

No culture is inferior. Cultures are just different.

Eugene Griessel

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av Eugene Griessel » 13 mai 2007 17:27:27

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:

Do you think that Hines could be Darwin's missing link? ... ;)


On behalf of Orrorin tugenesis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Ardipithecus
anamensis, Australipithecus afarensis, Australipithecus africanus,
Australipithecus bahrelghazi, Kenyanthropus platypus, Paranthropus
africanus, Pararanthropus boisei, Australipithecus garhi, Paranthropus
aethiopicus, Paranthropus crassidens, Paranthropus robustus, Homo
hablis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, Homo
erectus, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo heidelbergiensis may I enter a
strong protest at this insinuation - oh and Eoanthropus dawsonii says
he protests too.

Eugene L Griessel

Concerto (n): a fight between a piano and a pianist.

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 18:03:10

She's never even been to Scotland.

Or Wales, or even England -- most probably.

Hilarious!

DSH
-----------------------------------

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%FE1i.7001$V75.4716@edtnps89...

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:GIKdnfOMLoYGk9rbnZ2dnUVZ8tyqnZ2d@bt.com...

Just in case you do not know Wales is a rather culturally divided country
with and the growth of the Welsh language and its associated culture is
historically concentrated in the rural Welsh-speaking areas of north and
west Wales. The two areas in Wales have co-existed in much the same way
as the three distinct Scottish areas with different cultural histories,
that is, "Borders", "Lowlands" and, "Highlands & Islands".
--

Thank you. I'm going to have to go over and visit some day ....

- nilita

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 13 mai 2007 18:07:46

Another Good Description of "La Nilita".

DSH

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:O2F1i.7208$V75.6349@edtnps89...

"That woman speaks eighteen languages, and can't say No in any of them." -
Dorothy Parker

La N

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av La N » 13 mai 2007 18:17:06

"Eugene Griessel" <eugene@dynagen..co..za> wrote in message
news:4647390c.10963524@news.uunet.co.za...
"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:


Do you think that Hines could be Darwin's missing link? ... ;)


On behalf of Orrorin tugenesis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Ardipithecus
anamensis, Australipithecus afarensis, Australipithecus africanus,
Australipithecus bahrelghazi, Kenyanthropus platypus, Paranthropus
africanus, Pararanthropus boisei, Australipithecus garhi, Paranthropus
aethiopicus, Paranthropus crassidens, Paranthropus robustus, Homo
hablis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo ergaster, Homo antecessor, Homo
erectus, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo heidelbergiensis may I enter a
strong protest at this insinuation - oh and Eoanthropus dawsonii says
he protests too.

Adding to my apologies to Sean this a.m., I off my heartfelt also to all the
apes in the world, and to all the homo-whatevers for comparing them with
Hines! ...%)

Eugene L Griessel

- nilita
Concerto (n): a fight between a piano and a pianist.

"If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he
gave it to!" - Dorothy Parker

William Black

Re: Queen Elizabeth II (21 April 1926- )

Legg inn av William Black » 13 mai 2007 18:29:01

"Robert Peffers." <peffers@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:XYqdnUA9W-k_h9rbnZ2dnUVZ8v-dnZ2d@bt.com...
"allan connochie" <allan@noemail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4647df3c@news.greennet.net...

"La N" <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ZYt1i.3313$V75.445@edtnps89...

"Renia" <renia@DELETEotenet.gr> wrote in message
news:f25ooh$2o1$3@mouse.otenet.gr...
D. Spencer Hines wrote:

Charming.

How much of the Welsh language is actually used today?

It's a living language. There is even a Welsh TV channel.

I had heard on a radio documentary a while ago that Welsh is a dying
language.

The number of speakers was reducing decade on decade until relatively
recently but I don't think it has ever been in danger of dying as such.
At the turn of the 1900s about half of all Welsh speakers spoke it but
that reduced to a low of about 19% at the start of the 1990s though it
has since started to increase again and is now about 22% or so. That is
over 600,000 speakers. Plus of course there are significant numbers of
Welsh speakers living in England. Compare that with Scotland where only
between 1% and 2% of people speak Gaelic.


Allan

And about 98% speak some form of Lowland Scots, (The rest are speaking
Urdu or Polish).

A hell of a lot more than 2% speak Urdu.

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

Andrew Swallow

Ideas for winning in Iraq was [ Queen Elizabeth II (21 April

Legg inn av Andrew Swallow » 13 mai 2007 19:18:45

Robert Peffers. wrote:
[snip]
language. I ended school in the manner that I started by using Scots in
[snip] You may not
be aware that the English actually hung Scots for wearing Scottish national
dress, playing Scottish pipe music or speaking a Scots language.

See - http://www.scotclans.com/history/1746_proscrption.html
and http://www.scotclans.com/history/1782_p ... tion2.html

Yet in spite of all that the Scottish cultures of the Borders, Lowlands and
Highlands/Islands lives yet.
(and they wonder why we do not support their bloody football team)(G).

Thank you for a list of proven methods of putting down an insurgency.

The ban on kilts will have to be replaced by a ban on Arab dress but
that is not too hard.

Andrew Swallow

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»