|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 8, 2024 8:36:15 GMT
you also haven't addressed my earlier post . It was an Angevin crown, Henry the second was king of England , and held an English crown. His other titles doesn't diminish that fact in any way . Trying to imply England wasn't a sovereign state/country/kingdom in the period we are talking about really shows how desperate you are becoming. Lol .Thats the very definition of a colony. An area of land under the partial or full control of another country. What you say Henry 8th did , was exactly what Henry the second did , as per the treaty of Windsor which I have explained numerous times mentions the English crown , not the crown of anywhere else , and the English 12 times in the treaty. Thats right. So you agree with me? From 1175 onwards.... Thats right. So you agree with me , and are sitting contradicting your earlier stance. lol. Under the tudors , like under Henry 2 , the king of England was king of ireland , it was an English crown over a foreign territory , hence a colony. The parliament in ireland was called the colonial parliament , until it was disbanded in 1801 . where does it answer my earlier question ? you appear to be backtracking on your earlier contention ireland was an English colony from the Tudor period (1485) onwards , while waffling incoherently about the period under contention , 1175 to 1485? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 8:52:30 GMT
certainly sandy. Unlike you , im willing to stand under my flag and fight my corner . Here's the English dictionary definition of a country.... Then Ireland was not made a colony of England in 1170 because England, and the English, did not have its own government it had a government imposed upon them by the Normans after conquest. I don't think they want to understand the material nature of the crown or even how the world worked back then. This is because they been using a fictional narrative as part of an odious and hate-filled political campaign, where the English are portrayed in a way which isn't too dissimilar to Adolf's views toward Jewish people. Sadly, this hate fuels their campaign, so there's literally no incentive for them to be nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 8, 2024 9:03:57 GMT
Then Ireland was not made a colony of England in 1170 because England, and the English, did not have its own government it had a government imposed upon them by the Normans after conquest. I don't think they want to understand the material nature of the crown or even how the world worked back then.
can you explain it to us??? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 8, 2024 10:40:08 GMT
Henry the second was king of England , and held an English crown. His other titles doesn't diminish that fact in any way . Trying to imply England wasn't a sovereign state/country/kingdom in the period we are talking about really shows how desperate you are becoming. Lol .Thats the very definition of a colony. An area of land under the partial or full control of another country. What you say Henry 8th did , was exactly what Henry the second did , as per the treaty of Windsor which I have explained numerous times mentions the English crown , not the crown of anywhere else , and the English 12 times in the treaty. Thats right. So you agree with me? From 1175 onwards.... Thats right. So you agree with me , and are sitting contradicting your earlier stance. lol. Under the tudors , like under Henry 2 , the king of England was king of ireland , it was an English crown over a foreign territory , hence a colony. The parliament in ireland was called the colonial parliament , until it was disbanded in 1801 . where does it answer my earlier question ? you appear to be backtracking on your earlier contention ireland was an English colony from the Tudor period (1485) onwards , while waffling incoherently about the period under contention , 1175 to 1485? I am following your logic and definitions. England was invaded by the Normans, England was colonised by the Normans as they took land and settled in the gift of the Crown of England which was a Crown won by conquest and against the wishes of the people in England. That makes England a colony clearly by your definition. The same colonial power still holding the English Crown over 100 years later invaded Ireland which made Ireland, or at least parts of it, a further colony of the Norman/Angevin Empire. England was was not an independent country at this time as the government and crown were not of the English but over the English as it was the Norman aristocracy and the Plantagenet House of the Crown that ruled over England, all part of the Angevin Empire. England was still a colony as it had been settled by Normans and the English owed allegiance to the Normans. However your logic is that the Crown was called the Crown of England and therefore no matter how it became that Crown that was its name and therefore that was the power and force behind the Crown. Which brings us to Henry VIII and using your logic he called himself, and was elected, King of Ireland therefore in Ireland the Crown was the power and Ireland could not be a colony of England as it had its own Crown as a legacy from the Norman invaders in exactly the same way England's legacy was of teh Norman invaders. I am not back tracking I am only suggesting where your logic and definitions take us. I do not necessarily agree but that is the logical outcome of what you said. All in your attempt to blame the English. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 8, 2024 10:56:21 GMT
Henry the second was king of England , and held an English crown. His other titles doesn't diminish that fact in any way . Trying to imply England wasn't a sovereign state/country/kingdom in the period we are talking about really shows how desperate you are becoming. Lol .Thats the very definition of a colony. An area of land under the partial or full control of another country. What you say Henry 8th did , was exactly what Henry the second did , as per the treaty of Windsor which I have explained numerous times mentions the English crown , not the crown of anywhere else , and the English 12 times in the treaty. Thats right. So you agree with me? From 1175 onwards.... Thats right. So you agree with me , and are sitting contradicting your earlier stance. lol. Under the tudors , like under Henry 2 , the king of England was king of ireland , it was an English crown over a foreign territory , hence a colony. The parliament in ireland was called the colonial parliament , until it was disbanded in 1801 . where does it answer my earlier question ? you appear to be backtracking on your earlier contention ireland was an English colony from the Tudor period (1485) onwards , while waffling incoherently about the period under contention , 1175 to 1485? I am following your logic and definitions. you are not. False dichotomy. they held the English crown. The didnt rule England as a colony via a foreign crown as the English did in ireland. thats correct. its nothing like the same. The English crown in the treaty of Windsor annexes ireland in 1175 and paves the way for subsequent conquests and colonisation which still exist to this day , whereas the normans didnt annex England to the Norman crown. your contentions are nothing like my logic. you are backtracking where we have seen you dredge the bottom of the barrel by claiming the englsih arent responsible for their own actions in this period , or that England didnt exist as a sovereign state. Thats how pathetic your arguments are. It isnt. Can you show me where England was annexed to the Norman crown the way ireland was annexed to the English crown in 1175? That would show a logical comparison . sandy tells lies and makes things up again. I said ireland was an English colony (in part or full) from 1175 onwards to the present day. I stand by that point , and so far , you haven't even began to argue against it. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 8, 2024 20:10:58 GMT
I am following your logic and definitions. you are not. False dichotomy. they held the English crown. The didnt rule England as a colony via a foreign crown as the English did in ireland. thats correct. its nothing like the same. The English crown in the treaty of Windsor annexes ireland in 1175 and paves the way for subsequent conquests and colonisation which still exist to this day , whereas the normans didnt annex England to the Norman crown. your contentions are nothing like my logic. you are backtracking where we have seen you dredge the bottom of the barrel by claiming the englsih arent responsible for their own actions in this period , or that England didnt exist as a sovereign state. Thats how pathetic your arguments are. It isnt. Can you show me where England was annexed to the Norman crown the way ireland was annexed to the English crown in 1175? That would show a logical comparison . sandy tells lies and makes things up again. I said ireland was an English colony (in part or full) from 1175 onwards to the present day. I stand by that point , and so far , you haven't even began to argue against it. Are you saying England was not a colony of the Normans? It fits very well your definition, in what way does it not? The English Crown was part of the Angevin Empire and it was ruled as an Empire as Henry was Count of Anjou and Duke of Normandy and the Duke of Normandy for the Plantagenet line was an older title and that was from whence the Normans came. The Normans did not need to annex the English Crown they took it by conquest. According to your definition of a colony the country (using your definition) of Normandy took over the English Crown. The power base was Normandy. What has annexing Ireland to the English Crown got to do with it I am working on your definitions of colony and country? I know you do not accept it but you keep reverting to the English Crown as the basis for your claim yet that fits nicely with your definition of a colony as it was won by conquest and ruled by colonists (ie the Normans). It is like saying native Americans are to blame for all that the USA did because they are the original people from whom the colonists seized power. I suppose it is why blame the Normans when one can blame the English |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 9, 2024 8:55:35 GMT
you are not. False dichotomy. they held the English crown. The didnt rule England as a colony via a foreign crown as the English did in ireland. thats correct. its nothing like the same. The English crown in the treaty of Windsor annexes ireland in 1175 and paves the way for subsequent conquests and colonisation which still exist to this day , whereas the normans didnt annex England to the Norman crown. your contentions are nothing like my logic. you are backtracking where we have seen you dredge the bottom of the barrel by claiming the englsih arent responsible for their own actions in this period , or that England didnt exist as a sovereign state. Thats how pathetic your arguments are. It isnt. Can you show me where England was annexed to the Norman crown the way ireland was annexed to the English crown in 1175? That would show a logical comparison . sandy tells lies and makes things up again. I said ireland was an English colony (in part or full) from 1175 onwards to the present day. I stand by that point , and so far , you haven't even began to argue against it. Are you saying England was not a colony of the Normans? It fits very well your definition, in what way does it not? Aye , im saying England was not under the Norman French crown the way ireland was under the English crown from 1175 to 1485. you are getting desperate sandy and re repeating yourself. The same man who held the English crown , as discussed up the thread , also held other titles. However , he kept the English crown separate and didnt impose the crowns of Anjou , or normandy on England the way Henry 2 imposed the English crown on ireland. back to you. They did. There was also a special reason why the Duke of normandy didnt annex England to the Norman `crown` the way Henry annexed ireland to the English crown. Im sure you will work it out eventually. you are telling lies again , and inventing things I haven't said. Ive repeated my definition throughout the thread. please re read through the thread. Ive defined my position umpteen times , that from 1175 onwards to the present day , the English crown claimed , annexed , invaded and colonised ireland numerous times over 849 years so that to this present day , a part of the island of ireland is still under the crowns control , hence ireland was. , and still is , in part and full an English colony. Keep repeating it till it sinks in . The English crown is the pinnacle of the nation of England , and has represented England since its inception in the tenth century no matter who has held it. We have had frenchmen , Germanics , Danes , Scots , and the current German house of saxe gotha Coburg. It s still the English crown representing England. Is Northern Ireland a part of France or normandy today? Do the French claim ireland through the former French crown ? I have no idea what you are talking about , and I suspect as the thread goes on neither do you. please see my repeated definition , that ireland was claimed invaded and annexed and colonised by the English crown , not the crown of normandy or anywhere else , from 1175 onwards. Can you disprove that claim? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 9, 2024 16:11:19 GMT
So let us run through again.
You provided a definition of a colony as...
"a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country:"
There is little doubt England was invaded by another country, that settlers from that country assumed all the power and control of all the land in England.
The same source definition also gives...
"a group of people living in a colony, consisting of the original settlers and their descendants and successors:"
The Normans were the original settlers in the colony of England and their descendants and successors retained all the land and control of the government and Crown.
If we take the USA there is no doubt it was a colony of the UK but once they gained their independence did the Native Americans cease to be colonised as it was the ex colonial groups that had the power of government and control. In the same way the Anglo Saxon kingdom was still colonised many years after Normandy was absorbed by France.
England and the Crown of England may be an unbroken, if wobbly, line from William the Conqueror to the present but pretending that England and the English is the same is a bit rich and preparing a narrative based on colony, the colonised and the colonisers is I think largely mischief making and the definitions you have provided do not explicitly meet the reality of England and Ireland and the complex relationships and claims that have occurred and a simple 'Ireland was the first colony of England' as a statement is rife with such complexities.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 10, 2024 15:45:13 GMT
So let us run through again. You provided a definition of a colony as... "a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country:" Yep. I provided the dictionary reference of a colony . Have you worked out why the normans didnt annex England to the Norman crown the way Henry 2 did with ireland to the English crown? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 10, 2024 19:46:42 GMT
So let us run through again. You provided a definition of a colony as... "a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country:" Yep. I provided the dictionary reference of a colony . Have you worked out why the normans didnt annex England to the Norman crown the way Henry 2 did with ireland to the English crown? It does not matter why, all that matters is were the Normans colonisers. I say yes you say no yet it was your definition I was working on. I see you ignored the USA comparison whereby the Colonists separated from the colonial power but were always colonists over Native Americans because the colonists and their descendants held the power. The native Americans did not cease to be colonised with the separation of the US from the British Crown just as England and the English did not cease to be colonised by the Normans. There is little doubt England was under full or partial control of another country and even when that other country was separated from England then the Colonisers still held the power. England was a colony of Normandy (through invasion) and just as in the US once separated into an independent state then the English did not cease to be having been colonised by the Normans. Why do you rail against that basic premise so? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 10, 2024 19:47:58 GMT
Yep. I provided the dictionary reference of a colony . Have you worked out why the normans didnt annex England to the Norman crown the way Henry 2 did with ireland to the English crown? It does not matter why, all that matters is were the Normans colonisers. It matters greatly. You whole argument hinges on that fact. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 10, 2024 19:54:39 GMT
please see my repeated definition , that ireland was claimed invaded and annexed and colonised by the English crown , not the crown of normandy or anywhere else , from 1175 onwards. Can you disprove that claim? And the English Crown itself was held by a colonising power through invasion. The Crown of England was the Crown of the English, in fact the English fought two battles, were encased in Castles, had scorched earth tactics used against them and were subdued in battles and skirmishes all to entrench Norman power |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 10, 2024 19:55:52 GMT
It does not matter why, all that matters is were the Normans colonisers. It matters greatly. You whole argument hinges on that fact. In your mind that does not mean you are right as you keep ignoring the colonising of the English by the Normans. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 10, 2024 19:58:10 GMT
please see my repeated definition , that ireland was claimed invaded and annexed and colonised by the English crown , not the crown of normandy or anywhere else , from 1175 onwards. Can you disprove that claim? And the English Crown itself was held by a colonising power through invasion. ...but not annexed to that foreign power , the way ireland was to the English crown. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 10, 2024 20:00:00 GMT
It matters greatly. You whole argument hinges on that fact. In your mind that does not mean you are right as you keep ignoring the colonising of the English by the Normans. Irrelevant to my point. Your argument though hinges on the fact that you cannot once prove in the entirety of this thread England was annexed to the Norman or Anjou crowns , the way I pointed out ireland was annexed to the English crown , hence why ireland was an English colony past and present in part of full to this day over an 849 year period. All you have to do is provide the evidence. If you can't , then we can easily dismiss the guff you keep coming out with to divert from your losing argument. back to you. |
|
