|
|
Post by buccaneer on Sept 25, 2023 23:46:54 GMT
Desperate straw-clutching noises and sounds of furious barrel-scraping coming out of the damp, grey North. no dan. Its your rule that if a country/nation/state is part of some other entity then that country and its history cease to exist. Patently absurd of course , but its your made up rule.
I agree with you Little Tommy Snat. Scottish history doesn't cease merely because it's part of the Union. However, the Scottish education system according to the bloke in the OP does appear a tad insular (fair enough) and desperate to play victimhood mentality. The SNP then want 16-17 years to vote, straight after how they've been taught their country has been oppressed by Ingurland. That's quite a manipulation of the education and political system. |
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Sept 26, 2023 0:45:35 GMT
I thought Scottish history as a stand-alone subject per se ended around 1707. What makes you think that? Schools wouldn't be teaching Scottish history if there was none to teach. Universities offer degrees in Scottish history. And, Just for you, Dundee Uni has an online MLitt course. You can earn yourself a Masters Degree in Scottish History, then you wouldn't need to ask stupid questions. I would encourage you to locate and read 2 books by TC Smout: "A History of the Scottish People 1560-1830" "A Century of the Scottish People 1830-1950" Some Scottish episodes after 1707 How about 1713 and the vote to repeal the Treaty. It was brought to the HoL by the Earl of Seafield who was backed by the Duke of Argyll, two prominent pro union voices in the lead up to the signing of the Treaty. In the intervening years they became disillusioned with the promised economic benefits that never happened and taxation imposed on Scots which, according to the Treaty, would never be imposed. The vote was lost by only 4 votes. Many of the pro-union votes cast were proxies for members who couldn't be bothered turning up. How about the Jacobite adventures in 1708, 1715, 1719 and 1745-46. Dan Szechi (e.g. " 1715: The Great Jacobite Rebellion") &, the late, Christopher Duffy e.g. " Fight for a Throne: The Jacobite '45 Reconsidered" are two prominent Jacobite historians How about the Enlightenment: Alexander Broadie " The Scottish Enlightenment" How about the Scottish Clearances? See for example Eric Richards The Highland Clearances" or Tom Devine "The Scottish Clearances: A History of the Dispossessed, 1600-1900 and then a book by Peter Aitchison & Andrew Cassell that tell the story of " The Lowland Clearances: Scotland's Silent Revolution" How about the 1820 Insurrection? An episode kept firmly away from the Scots, until Peter Beresford Ellis & Seumas MacA'Ghobhainn researched the matter " The Radical Rising: The Scottish Insurrection of 1820" 1843 saw the 'Disruption'. " Dissent After Disruption: Church and State in Scotland, 1843-63" by Ryan Mallon The famine of 1846. Just as in Ireland it was the failure of the potato crop. Tom Devine, " The Great Highland Famine: Hunger, Emigration and the Scottish Highlands in the Nineteenth-century" How about the Highland Land League & the Crofters war. Told by Tom Devine in "Clanship to Crofters' War: The social transformation of the Scottish Highlands" How about John Maclean, Red Clydeside and tanks on George Square How about the history of the SNP How about migration and diaspora studies as told by Marjory Harper in her many books on the subject. No doubt I've missed some events but you surely get my drift. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 26, 2023 7:21:51 GMT
what are you talking about sandy? Are you not aware gaelic is scotlands native language , not scots? Scots at best is a dialect of middle english , and there are many arguemnts as to wether its a language in its own right or not .
Galeic is not Scotland's native tongue, it is the language of the Irish invaders and became the language for much of Scotland but never the Eastern lowlands which were always old Scots (English, Dane and Pictish) then English (of sorts) and some Gaelic influences. I do not understand the need to be Gaelic and have the Gaelic language inserted into Central Scotland as a native language. Wallace probably spoke Norman French as did Bruce. I had to travel to Crianlarich before I heard Gaelic in the pub, closer to home I could not understand the country folk from round Dunblane but it was not Gaelic. ok sandy. I will try not multi quote you here.
Gaelic is scotlands native tongue. In fact the original goidelic could probably have been the first celtic language to come to these islands possibly with the beaker people say some 2500 bc. There are arguments that there are five rivers for example named "ouse" from the orkney islands , from the gaelic "uisge" , down to english sussex. The argument is this name derives from a common goidelic spoken originally across these islands at one point before brythonic pushed goidelic north and west.
Gaelic is not irish , but irish is gaelic. The myth that irish people invaded scotland in the 5th century ad is not only a misreading of old gaelic history , where dal riada was split between argyll and antrim , but its also been emphatically proved by archaeology that there was no change in the native culture in western scotland at this stage. Gaelic is therefore as native to scotland as it is ireland.
as for never being the language of the eastern lowlands , i suggest reading up on professors geoffrey barrows "the lost gaidhealtachd of medieval scotland". Gaelic placenames abound acorss what is now lothian , and south east scotland , for example , "close to the castellan of the town of Dunbar , there is a knol called to this day knockenhair , from the gaidhlig cnoc na h-aire , rendered into modern english as the watch hill."
There is "clacharie" the stony place near lauder , and old ford in berwickshire called shannabank...."sean ath" the old ford , and so on and so forth.
so im not sure where you get this fantasy that gaelic was never spoken in the eastern lowlands. Many of the english names there arent from the anglo saxon period , when parts of the south east were ruled by the northumbrians , but from much later.
for example , Eddleston near peebles , we are told is an anglo saxon name . The records show though , prior to the 12 th century , it was known as "baile gille moire" , then gillemorestun , then in 1189 , it was granted by the normas to one edulf son of utred , and became known as edulfstun ,hence where the modern name comes from. So im not sure what you are talking about except repeating long discredited 20 th century myths.
The last native speaker of greater glasgow gaelic died in balloch 19 miles from the city at the end of world war 2 . Similarly , the last native speakers of aberdonian and dundee gaelic died in care home in the 1980`s.
Wallace was a gaelic speaker according to the works of blind harry some 200 years after wallces death. Bruce was a native gaelic speaker , both would have knowledge of norman french and latin.
The argument isnt about reviving gaelic as scotland common language. Very few if any nationalist politicians i can think of are saying that , and we see the irish despite being indepednent for 100 years havent taken gaelic any more serious than playing lip serive to it and teaching it in school as a second language.
The argument is restoring gaelic to scotlands native heritage language. Much of the mdoern stuff being written about scots i personally find embarressing.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 26, 2023 7:24:58 GMT
no dan. Its your rule that if a country/nation/state is part of some other entity then that country and its history cease to exist. Patently absurd of course , but its your made up rule.
I agree with you Little Tommy Snat. Scottish history doesn't cease merely because it's part of the Union. However, the Scottish education system according to the bloke in the OP does appear a tad insular (fair enough) and desperate to play victimhood mentality. The SNP then want 16-17 years to vote, straight after how they've been taught their country has been oppressed by Ingurland. That's quite a manipulation of the education and political system. we arent saying that buccy , that scotland has been oppressed by england in terms of education mate.
My problem with scotlands education system is traditionally with clowns like glasgows labour council , where we have clear exapmles of them over the years trying to hide and telling teachers not to teach scottish history.
Itts a bit like all the left wing muppets in england tearing down statues , and refusing to accept difficult part of english history that dont comply with their modern woke fantasies.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 26, 2023 7:26:20 GMT
Galeic is not Scotland's native tongue, it is the language of the Irish invaders and became the language for much of Scotland but never the Eastern lowlands which were always old Scots (English, Dane and Pictish) then English (of sorts) and some Gaelic influences. I do not understand the need to be Gaelic and have the Gaelic language inserted into Central Scotland as a native language. Wallace probably spoke Norman French as did Bruce. I had to travel to Crianlarich before I heard Gaelic in the pub, closer to home I could not understand the country folk from round Dunblane but it was not Gaelic. One of the most interesting posts I've read today. unfortunately sandy has it wrong red. I know you wish to believe us scots are really just englishmen , but unfortunately sandys hypothesis of language isnt true. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 26, 2023 7:47:58 GMT
what are you talking about sandy? Are you not aware gaelic is scotlands native language , not scots? Scots at best is a dialect of middle english , and there are many arguemnts as to wether its a language in its own right or not .
always old Scots (English, Dane and Pictish) by the way sandy , i see you are claiming somehow pictish is linked with "the scots dialect of middle english) .You do realise you are regurgitating the long discredited theory by john pinkerton , in the late 18th century?
Pinkerton was a germanic racial supremacy theorist , from Edinburgh , who made the laughable claim that pictish was somehow the precursor to the scots dialect of middle english. The only problem is he had no evidence of his wild theory , and has been dismissed as a crackpot for centuries.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Sept 26, 2023 7:49:51 GMT
I thought Scottish history as a stand-alone subject per se ended around 1707. What makes you think that? Schools wouldn't be teaching Scottish history if there was none to teach. Universities offer degrees in Scottish history. And, Just for you, Dundee Uni has an online MLitt course. You can earn yourself a Masters Degree in Scottish History, then you wouldn't need to ask stupid questions. I would encourage you to locate and read 2 books by TC Smout: "A History of the Scottish People 1560-1830" "A Century of the Scottish People 1830-1950" Some Scottish episodes after 1707 How about 1713 and the vote to repeal the Treaty. It was brought to the HoL by the Earl of Seafield who was backed by the Duke of Argyll, two prominent pro union voices in the lead up to the signing of the Treaty. In the intervening years they became disillusioned with the promised economic benefits that never happened and taxation imposed on Scots which, according to the Treaty, would never be imposed. The vote was lost by only 4 votes. Many of the pro-union votes cast were proxies for members who couldn't be bothered turning up. How about the Jacobite adventures in 1708, 1715, 1719 and 1745-46. Dan Szechi (e.g. " 1715: The Great Jacobite Rebellion") &, the late, Christopher Duffy e.g. " Fight for a Throne: The Jacobite '45 Reconsidered" are two prominent Jacobite historians How about the Enlightenment: Alexander Broadie " The Scottish Enlightenment" How about the Scottish Clearances? See for example Eric Richards The Highland Clearances" or Tom Devine "The Scottish Clearances: A History of the Dispossessed, 1600-1900 and then a book by Peter Aitchison & Andrew Cassell that tell the story of " The Lowland Clearances: Scotland's Silent Revolution" How about the 1820 Insurrection? An episode kept firmly away from the Scots, until Peter Beresford Ellis & Seumas MacA'Ghobhainn researched the matter " The Radical Rising: The Scottish Insurrection of 1820" 1843 saw the 'Disruption'. " Dissent After Disruption: Church and State in Scotland, 1843-63" by Ryan Mallon The famine of 1846. Just as in Ireland it was the failure of the potato crop. Tom Devine, " The Great Highland Famine: Hunger, Emigration and the Scottish Highlands in the Nineteenth-century" How about the Highland Land League & the Crofters war. Told by Tom Devine in "Clanship to Crofters' War: The social transformation of the Scottish Highlands" How about John Maclean, Red Clydeside and tanks on George Square How about the history of the SNP How about migration and diaspora studies as told by Marjory Harper in her many books on the subject. No doubt I've missed some events but you surely get my drift. Micro-events and obsessive parochiality writ large. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2023 16:05:11 GMT
no dan. Its your rule that if a country/nation/state is part of some other entity then that country and its history cease to exist. Patently absurd of course , but its your made up rule.
I agree with you Little Tommy Snat. Scottish history doesn't cease merely because it's part of the Union. However, the Scottish education system according to the bloke in the OP does appear a tad insular (fair enough) and desperate to play victimhood mentality. The SNP then want 16-17 years to vote, straight after how they've been taught their country has been oppressed by Ingurland. That's quite a manipulation of the education and political system. Yes, who'd have thought devolution meant that an executive would rename itself to a parliament and completely change the education system into the SNP Nazi Youth! I guess it's only fair that the rest of us on this rainy island should tolerate this dehumanising hatred toward the English. In fact, the SNP aren't really all that different from New Labour.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 26, 2023 21:10:22 GMT
Galeic is not Scotland's native tongue, it is the language of the Irish invaders and became the language for much of Scotland but never the Eastern lowlands which were always old Scots (English, Dane and Pictish) then English (of sorts) and some Gaelic influences. I do not understand the need to be Gaelic and have the Gaelic language inserted into Central Scotland as a native language. Wallace probably spoke Norman French as did Bruce. I had to travel to Crianlarich before I heard Gaelic in the pub, closer to home I could not understand the country folk from round Dunblane but it was not Gaelic. ok sandy. I will try not multi quote you here.
Gaelic is scotlands native tongue. In fact the original goidelic could probably have been the first celtic language to come to these islands possibly with the beaker people say some 2500 bc. There are arguments that there are five rivers for example named "ouse" from the orkney islands , from the gaelic "uisge" , down to english sussex. The argument is this name derives from a common goidelic spoken originally across these islands at one point before brythonic pushed goidelic north and west.
Gaelic is not irish , but irish is gaelic. The myth that irish people invaded scotland in the 5th century ad is not only a misreading of old gaelic history , where dal riada was split between argyll and antrim , but its also been emphatically proved by archaeology that there was no change in the native culture in western scotland at this stage. Gaelic is therefore as native to scotland as it is ireland.
as for never being the language of the eastern lowlands , i suggest reading up on professors geoffrey barrows "the lost gaidhealtachd of medieval scotland". Gaelic placenames abound acorss what is now lothian , and south east scotland , for example , "close to the castellan of the town of Dunbar , there is a knol called to this day knockenhair , from the gaidhlig cnoc na h-aire , rendered into modern english as the watch hill."
There is "clacharie" the stony place near lauder , and old ford in berwickshire called shannabank...."sean ath" the old ford , and so on and so forth.
so im not sure where you get this fantasy that gaelic was never spoken in the eastern lowlands. Many of the english names there arent from the anglo saxon period , when parts of the south east were ruled by the northumbrians , but from much later.
for example , Eddleston near peebles , we are told is an anglo saxon name . The records show though , prior to the 12 th century , it was known as "baile gille moire" , then gillemorestun , then in 1189 , it was granted by the normas to one edulf son of utred , and became known as edulfstun ,hence where the modern name comes from. So im not sure what you are talking about except repeating long discredited 20 th century myths.
The last native speaker of greater glasgow gaelic died in balloch 19 miles from the city at the end of world war 2 . Similarly , the last native speakers of aberdonian and dundee gaelic died in care home in the 1980`s.
Wallace was a gaelic speaker according to the works of blind harry some 200 years after wallces death. Bruce was a native gaelic speaker , both would have knowledge of norman french and latin.
The argument isnt about reviving gaelic as scotland common language. Very few if any nationalist politicians i can think of are saying that , and we see the irish despite being indepednent for 100 years havent taken gaelic any more serious than playing lip serive to it and teaching it in school as a second language.
The argument is restoring gaelic to scotlands native heritage language. Much of the mdoern stuff being written about scots i personally find embarressing.
Now we are in the realms of prehistory. The original 'native' language must be that spoken in the immediate post glacial or even the previous interglacial but then we move into the ridiculous and cave paintings. There is very much a move to separate 'the Scots' from 'the English' as much as possible and give them distinct cultural, language and historical differences yet both are intrinsically bound together in many ways. Gaelic is being used as this jemmy to prise apart this binding and being 'native Scots' is very much a mantle adopted that really has little to do with the current population. Even the first Minister has nothing to do with Gaeldom and eschewed the Bible on taking his seat. I do contend that the Eastern Lowlands were 'natively' Scots or Pictish Scots (whatever that is/was) and then had many influences including Gaelic. When the Scots regiments arrived in Crimea some rested at McKenzie's farm, that just means that a man owned a farm there who was, or at least descended from, Scots. The point being that place names can be misleading as individual items but I accept there is an overall picture. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 26, 2023 21:26:17 GMT
One of the most interesting posts I've read today. unfortunately sandy has it wrong red. I know you wish to believe us scots are really just englishmen , but unfortunately sandys hypothesis of language isnt true. That is moot, there are many theories and disagreements. The problem being that some want it to be one way so that English can be removed from influence. Yet the roots of the Picts is probably from across Dogger land from the same areas as the Anglo-Saxons. So like many languages they are strongly linked. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 26, 2023 21:29:32 GMT
always old Scots (English, Dane and Pictish) by the way sandy , i see you are claiming somehow pictish is linked with "the scots dialect of middle english) .You do realise you are regurgitating the long discredited theory by john pinkerton , in the late 18th century?
Pinkerton was a germanic racial supremacy theorist , from Edinburgh , who made the laughable claim that pictish was somehow the precursor to the scots dialect of middle english. The only problem is he had no evidence of his wild theory , and has been dismissed as a crackpot for centuries.
Perhaps you are misreading 'English' the old Scots had common roots from the continent with later English. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 27, 2023 7:07:42 GMT
ok sandy. I will try not multi quote you here.
Gaelic is scotlands native tongue. In fact the original goidelic could probably have been the first celtic language to come to these islands possibly with the beaker people say some 2500 bc. There are arguments that there are five rivers for example named "ouse" from the orkney islands , from the gaelic "uisge" , down to english sussex. The argument is this name derives from a common goidelic spoken originally across these islands at one point before brythonic pushed goidelic north and west.
Gaelic is not irish , but irish is gaelic. The myth that irish people invaded scotland in the 5th century ad is not only a misreading of old gaelic history , where dal riada was split between argyll and antrim , but its also been emphatically proved by archaeology that there was no change in the native culture in western scotland at this stage. Gaelic is therefore as native to scotland as it is ireland.
as for never being the language of the eastern lowlands , i suggest reading up on professors geoffrey barrows "the lost gaidhealtachd of medieval scotland". Gaelic placenames abound acorss what is now lothian , and south east scotland , for example , "close to the castellan of the town of Dunbar , there is a knol called to this day knockenhair , from the gaidhlig cnoc na h-aire , rendered into modern english as the watch hill."
There is "clacharie" the stony place near lauder , and old ford in berwickshire called shannabank...."sean ath" the old ford , and so on and so forth.
so im not sure where you get this fantasy that gaelic was never spoken in the eastern lowlands. Many of the english names there arent from the anglo saxon period , when parts of the south east were ruled by the northumbrians , but from much later.
for example , Eddleston near peebles , we are told is an anglo saxon name . The records show though , prior to the 12 th century , it was known as "baile gille moire" , then gillemorestun , then in 1189 , it was granted by the normas to one edulf son of utred , and became known as edulfstun ,hence where the modern name comes from. So im not sure what you are talking about except repeating long discredited 20 th century myths.
The last native speaker of greater glasgow gaelic died in balloch 19 miles from the city at the end of world war 2 . Similarly , the last native speakers of aberdonian and dundee gaelic died in care home in the 1980`s.
Wallace was a gaelic speaker according to the works of blind harry some 200 years after wallces death. Bruce was a native gaelic speaker , both would have knowledge of norman french and latin.
The argument isnt about reviving gaelic as scotland common language. Very few if any nationalist politicians i can think of are saying that , and we see the irish despite being indepednent for 100 years havent taken gaelic any more serious than playing lip serive to it and teaching it in school as a second language.
The argument is restoring gaelic to scotlands native heritage language. Much of the mdoern stuff being written about scots i personally find embarressing.
Now we are in the realms of prehistory. The original 'native' language must be that spoken in the immediate post glacial or even the previous interglacial but then we move into the ridiculous and cave paintings. There is very much a move to separate 'the Scots' from 'the English' as much as possible and give them distinct cultural, language and historical differences yet both are intrinsically bound together in many ways. Gaelic is being used as this jemmy to prise apart this binding and being 'native Scots' is very much a mantle adopted that really has little to do with the current population. Even the first Minister has nothing to do with Gaeldom and eschewed the Bible on taking his seat. I do contend that the Eastern Lowlands were 'natively' Scots or Pictish Scots (whatever that is/was) and then had many influences including Gaelic. When the Scots regiments arrived in Crimea some rested at McKenzie's farm, that just means that a man owned a farm there who was, or at least descended from, Scots. The point being that place names can be misleading as individual items but I accept there is an overall picture. im afraid im going to have to multi quote you here.
no we arent in the realms of prehistory. Prehistory is regarded as the time before the era that shcolastic research can penetrate to . arguably pre roman . We are talking about scottish history , generally from the widely regarded foundation date of scotland in 845 ad , to the modern period. Regarded in hisotrical studies as medieval to modern.
Over that 1200 year period ,we are discussing the common language of scotland which has moved from gaelic , to modern english.
now you are being ridiculous. Beofre we delve into your ususal goal post moving and running off at a tangent lets remind ourselves of your original claim. You claimed gaelic was never spoken in the eastern lowlands......demonstrably false , and by implication was never scotlands native language , demonstrably false.
Scotland didnt exist in the immediate aftermath of the pre glacial period. We have no idea what language hunter gatherers spoke ,not just in what became scotland , but england and the whole european continent. The hypothesis is what they call an indo european language , which the majority of european languages including gaelic and english descend from.
However , in scotland (and the enitre british islands) the first identifiable culture was "celtic". the gaelic language and its ancestor could very well have been spoken in scotland and the entire british islands goping back something like 4500 thousand years.
If gaelic isnt scotland native language using your pre history rule , then that same rule applies to england france germany and every other coutnry oin the planet regarding their languages. Its a ridiculous assertion.
scots was a dialect of middle english that came into scotland post late 14th century. The original speakers of the language/dialcet called their language "inglis" and the native scots called it "beurla shassanch" ( literally saxon speech). it wasnt till the late 15th century that gavin douglas if first recorded as calling it "scots". Within less than a century , by the 16th century the scottish elite were again calling it english , and demanding a unifrom standard english be taught across scotland.
We are being gaslighted here. Since the reformation and there abouts , we have been told the scottish language is irish , and the english language is scottish.
gaelic pre dates both scots and english , was originally called the scottish language (albannach)and the majority of scots spoke gaelic , not scots or english , up till around the 16th century.
The spanish ambassador to the court of king james 4th in the early 16th century wrote to king ferdinand of spain that...
"the language of the scots is the same as the irish (gaelic) but some of the scots speak english very well as a result of the interaction they have on the border through war and commerce". I would say it has everything to do with our current popualtion in terms of it being scotland native heritage language.......no different to ireland and wales.
This is desperate. Dont you think thats because he is an urdu speaking muslim ?
ive just proved you wrong. Your original claim mind was that gaelic wasnt spoken in the eastern lowlands which is demonstably untrue. i have no idea what you are talking about pictish for in the south eastern lowlands of scotland. The picts were a people nicknamed the "picti" in the 3rd century ad by the romans , and by the 8th century they were starting to disaapear from recorded history as they became scots (fir albann). Their language by this stage was demonstrably gaelic , and as picts , pictland was to the north of the ochil hills and east of drum albann.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 27, 2023 7:14:01 GMT
unfortunately sandy has it wrong red. I know you wish to believe us scots are really just englishmen , but unfortunately sandys hypothesis of language isnt true. That is moot, there are many theories and disagreements. The problem being that some want it to be one way so that English can be removed from influence. Yet the roots of the Picts is probably from across Dogger land from the same areas as the Anglo-Saxons. So like many languages they are strongly linked. no im not. You are putting words in my mouth. Im gently explaining to you the direction of travel and how scotland , a celtic nation , came to speak english , a germanic language.
These arent theories , but widely accepted hsitorical fact that has evidence to back them up .
eh? prove it?
doggerland disappeared beneath the wave some 2000 years before the very earliest celtic tribes came to these islands. The picts dont appear in recorded history to some 7000 years later. If you have proof pictish is some anglo saxon language , im all ears.
over to you mate.
the hypothesis is all european languages are linked to some indo european ancestor some 5000 years ago or somethng like that , apart from hungarioan and basque. so are you claiming we are all proud europeans now sandy?
I fully agree mate.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 27, 2023 7:18:50 GMT
by the way sandy , i see you are claiming somehow pictish is linked with "the scots dialect of middle english) .You do realise you are regurgitating the long discredited theory by john pinkerton , in the late 18th century?
Pinkerton was a germanic racial supremacy theorist , from Edinburgh , who made the laughable claim that pictish was somehow the precursor to the scots dialect of middle english. The only problem is he had no evidence of his wild theory , and has been dismissed as a crackpot for centuries.
Perhaps you are misreading 'English' the old Scots had common roots from the continent with later English. im not misreading anything. scots is a dialect of middle english. I think it you that are confusing some of the languages of the early medieval burghs which were french , geman , flemish. Mere islands in a sea of gaelic as professor barrow put it , beofore the late 14th century when english became the language of the scottish court , and the language of power .
My point to you is i dont understand why you earlier linked "old scots" (also known as middle english or inglis to native speaker) with danish and pcitish. One is a germanic language the other regarded as a celtic tongue. There was also very few if any danish speakers in scotland , as most of the scandinavians in scotland were norwegian , and most of them in england danish.
perhaps you could elaborate?
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Sept 27, 2023 7:19:37 GMT
What makes you think that? Schools wouldn't be teaching Scottish history if there was none to teach. Universities offer degrees in Scottish history. And, Just for you, Dundee Uni has an online MLitt course. You can earn yourself a Masters Degree in Scottish History, then you wouldn't need to ask stupid questions. I would encourage you to locate and read 2 books by TC Smout: "A History of the Scottish People 1560-1830" "A Century of the Scottish People 1830-1950" Some Scottish episodes after 1707 How about 1713 and the vote to repeal the Treaty. It was brought to the HoL by the Earl of Seafield who was backed by the Duke of Argyll, two prominent pro union voices in the lead up to the signing of the Treaty. In the intervening years they became disillusioned with the promised economic benefits that never happened and taxation imposed on Scots which, according to the Treaty, would never be imposed. The vote was lost by only 4 votes. Many of the pro-union votes cast were proxies for members who couldn't be bothered turning up. How about the Jacobite adventures in 1708, 1715, 1719 and 1745-46. Dan Szechi (e.g. " 1715: The Great Jacobite Rebellion") &, the late, Christopher Duffy e.g. " Fight for a Throne: The Jacobite '45 Reconsidered" are two prominent Jacobite historians How about the Enlightenment: Alexander Broadie " The Scottish Enlightenment" How about the Scottish Clearances? See for example Eric Richards The Highland Clearances" or Tom Devine "The Scottish Clearances: A History of the Dispossessed, 1600-1900 and then a book by Peter Aitchison & Andrew Cassell that tell the story of " The Lowland Clearances: Scotland's Silent Revolution" How about the 1820 Insurrection? An episode kept firmly away from the Scots, until Peter Beresford Ellis & Seumas MacA'Ghobhainn researched the matter " The Radical Rising: The Scottish Insurrection of 1820" 1843 saw the 'Disruption'. " Dissent After Disruption: Church and State in Scotland, 1843-63" by Ryan Mallon The famine of 1846. Just as in Ireland it was the failure of the potato crop. Tom Devine, " The Great Highland Famine: Hunger, Emigration and the Scottish Highlands in the Nineteenth-century" How about the Highland Land League & the Crofters war. Told by Tom Devine in "Clanship to Crofters' War: The social transformation of the Scottish Highlands" How about John Maclean, Red Clydeside and tanks on George Square How about the history of the SNP How about migration and diaspora studies as told by Marjory Harper in her many books on the subject. No doubt I've missed some events but you surely get my drift. Micro-events and obsessive parochiality writ large. ...and you were trying to prove scottish history doesnt exist dan............over to you...... |
|
