|
|
Post by morayloon on Feb 10, 2024 23:38:41 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. 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.
Still waiting for examples to back your preposterous accusations. How can anyone take you seriously? Oh ... they don't!!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2024 0:16:06 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. Ignorance is Strength. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 11, 2024 8:15:34 GMT
In your mind that does not mean you are right as you keep ignoring the colonising of the English by the Normans. Ignorance is Strength. you epitomise the definition of that word.... |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 11, 2024 14:47:14 GMT
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. England was part of the Angevin Empire. Why is annexation so important as we are dealing with people being colonised whereas you seem to be embroiled in the legal and historic niceties of the rule of a specific Crown. As you have stated yourself many of these legal and historic niceties have many question marks over them. In terms of your points I have tried to answer them using the definitions you gave and in the definition of colony and country there is no mention of the Crown so in terms of both it seems to hold no import other than a route for you to lay it all on the English |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 11, 2024 18:35:47 GMT
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. England was part of the Angevin Empire. It as never though ruled by the angevin crown , the English crown was kept separate unlike the comparison with ireland , which became an English colony from 1175 onwards when it was legally annexed to the English crown. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2024 6:14:01 GMT
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. England was part of the Angevin Empire. Why is annexation so important as we are dealing with people being colonised whereas you seem to be embroiled in the legal and historic niceties of the rule of a specific Crown. As you have stated yourself many of these legal and historic niceties have many question marks over them. In terms of your points I have tried to answer them using the definitions you gave and in the definition of colony and country there is no mention of the Crown so in terms of both it seems to hold no import other than a route for you to lay it all on the English The entire foundation that holds up their campaign is built on anglophobia as well as being a constant victim.
Basically, they favour the lies.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 12, 2024 9:09:40 GMT
England was part of the Angevin Empire. Why is annexation so important as we are dealing with people being colonised whereas you seem to be embroiled in the legal and historic niceties of the rule of a specific Crown. As you have stated yourself many of these legal and historic niceties have many question marks over them. In terms of your points I have tried to answer them using the definitions you gave and in the definition of colony and country there is no mention of the Crown so in terms of both it seems to hold no import other than a route for you to lay it all on the English The entire foundation that holds up their campaign is built on anglophobia as well as being a constant victim.
Basically, they favour the lies.
well it isnt b4 , because sandy and I are discussing ireland , Englands first colony not scotland. Have you heard of the treaty of Windsor in 1175? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 12, 2024 11:05:44 GMT
England was part of the Angevin Empire. It as never though ruled by the angevin crown , the English crown was kept separate unlike the comparison with ireland , which became an English colony from 1175 onwards when it was legally annexed to the English crown. England was ruled by those of the Angevin Empire which as always is the point. If the English Crown is a separate entity within the Angevin Empire that does not mean it is totally separate. The seat of power of that Empire moved to the English Crown but that did not stop England being a colony of said Empire as the power holders were those not English and teh Royal Succession had been changed by force and the lands and titles forfeited to said colonisers. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 13, 2024 8:56:08 GMT
It as never though ruled by the angevin crown , the English crown was kept separate unlike the comparison with ireland , which became an English colony from 1175 onwards when it was legally annexed to the English crown. England was ruled by those of the Angevin Empire which as always is the point. If the English Crown is a separate entity within the Angevin Empire that does not mean it is totally separate. The seat of power of that Empire moved to the English Crown but that did not stop England being a colony of said Empire as the power holders were those not English and teh Royal Succession had been changed by force and the lands and titles forfeited to said colonisers. you just keep tap dancing around the point the 1175 treaty established England claim on ireland hence why ireland is regarded as Englands first colony. The angevin crown didnt rule England , the English crown did. Thats an inescapable fact. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 13, 2024 10:01:44 GMT
England was ruled by those of the Angevin Empire which as always is the point. If the English Crown is a separate entity within the Angevin Empire that does not mean it is totally separate. The seat of power of that Empire moved to the English Crown but that did not stop England being a colony of said Empire as the power holders were those not English and teh Royal Succession had been changed by force and the lands and titles forfeited to said colonisers. you just keep tap dancing around the point the 1175 treaty established England claim on ireland hence why ireland is regarded as Englands first colony. The angevin crown didnt rule England , the English crown did. Thats an inescapable fact. Well let us go back to first principles. Was England invaded and colonised in 1066 and beyond? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 14, 2024 8:07:43 GMT
you just keep tap dancing around the point the 1175 treaty established England claim on ireland hence why ireland is regarded as Englands first colony. The angevin crown didnt rule England , the English crown did. Thats an inescapable fact. Well let us go back to first principles. Was England invaded and colonised in 1066 and beyond? England was clearly invaded in 1066 , and conquered , by a Norman army (made up of many different peoples such as native franks , Celtic bretons , flemish etc) of some 30 000 men if I mind correct. The English population at the time was around 4 million so less than 1 % of the English , never mind total population of these islands at the height of the Norman invasion was Norman French. The point we keep going back to , is the normans ruled England as English lords. They had English titles , they kept the crown , they didnt rule England as a colony of the Norman French crown , or dukedom , the way ireland was subsequently ruled , claimed invaded and colonised due to the 1175 treaty. I can't see why you can't accept the comparison , instead of constantly trying but failing to make fatuous arguments. Does France claim to rule England today , the way the English parliament claims part of Ireland? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 14, 2024 10:06:18 GMT
Well let us go back to first principles. Was England invaded and colonised in 1066 and beyond? England was clearly invaded in 1066 , and conquered , by a Norman army (made up of many different peoples such as native franks , Celtic bretons , flemish etc) of some 30 000 men if I mind correct. The English population at the time was around 4 million so less than 1 % of the English , never mind total population of these islands at the height of the Norman invasion was Norman French. The point we keep going back to , is the normans ruled England as English lords. They had English titles , they kept the crown , they didnt rule England as a colony of the Norman French crown , or dukedom , the way ireland was subsequently ruled , claimed invaded and colonised due to the 1175 treaty. I can't see why you can't accept the comparison , instead of constantly trying but failing to make fatuous arguments. Does France claim to rule England today , the way the English parliament claims part of Ireland? Was England colonised by the Normans? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 16, 2024 7:02:48 GMT
England was clearly invaded in 1066 , and conquered , by a Norman army (made up of many different peoples such as native franks , Celtic bretons , flemish etc) of some 30 000 men if I mind correct. The English population at the time was around 4 million so less than 1 % of the English , never mind total population of these islands at the height of the Norman invasion was Norman French. The point we keep going back to , is the normans ruled England as English lords. They had English titles , they kept the crown , they didnt rule England as a colony of the Norman French crown , or dukedom , the way ireland was subsequently ruled , claimed invaded and colonised due to the 1175 treaty. I can't see why you can't accept the comparison , instead of constantly trying but failing to make fatuous arguments. Does France claim to rule England today , the way the English parliament claims part of Ireland? Was England colonised by the Normans? Was ireland colonised by England? the answer is of course yes in both cases. However , we are talking about events over a century after the 1066 invasion. Are you telling me fifth generation descendants of the Norman French soldiers who had settled England in 1066 didnt see themselves as part of the English nation just as English settlers descendants in ireland came to see themselves part of the Irish nation ? Are you denying Henry 2 was king of England because of his ancestry? Whats your point sandy in relation to my argument? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 16, 2024 21:13:14 GMT
Was England colonised by the Normans? Was ireland colonised by England? the answer is of course yes in both cases. However , we are talking about events over a century after the 1066 invasion. Are you telling me fifth generation descendants of the Norman French soldiers who had settled England in 1066 didnt see themselves as part of the English nation just as English settlers descendants in ireland came to see themselves part of the Irish nation ? Are you denying Henry 2 was king of England because of his ancestry? Whats your point sandy in relation to my argument? Let us take a look at what British Heritage says britishheritage.com/robin-hood-the-folk-hero/N THE LATE 12TH CENTURY, England was divided into two castes. The native Saxons, or “English,” were bested a century earlier by William the Conqueror. Within a generation, lands and titles were stripped from the Saxon thanes and granted to Norman knights. The Saxons were getting pretty tired of being oppressed and paying taxes. Into this historical context rode a hero of the occupied English, who gave the common folk something to cheer about. Now Robin Hood may be a myth/legend that is not the point I draw your attention to ;'The native Saxons or 'English'; ;lands and titles were stripped from the Saxon Thanes and given to Norman Knights; and ; The Saxons were getting pretty tired of being oppressed and paying taxes; In relation to your argument England was still an occupied country with the Colonial power still in control in the late 12th century when your invasion of Ireland was undertaken by that same colonial power. But you know this but still you insist the Crown of England at that time was England and the English. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 17, 2024 13:16:39 GMT
Was ireland colonised by England? the answer is of course yes in both cases. However , we are talking about events over a century after the 1066 invasion. Are you telling me fifth generation descendants of the Norman French soldiers who had settled England in 1066 didnt see themselves as part of the English nation just as English settlers descendants in ireland came to see themselves part of the Irish nation ? Are you denying Henry 2 was king of England because of his ancestry? Whats your point sandy in relation to my argument? Let us take a look at what British Heritage says britishheritage.com/robin-hood-the-folk-hero/N THE LATE 12TH CENTURY, England was divided into two castes. The native Saxons, or “English,” were bested a century earlier by William the Conqueror. Within a generation, lands and titles were stripped from the Saxon thanes and granted to Norman knights. The Saxons were getting pretty tired of being oppressed and paying taxes. Into this historical context rode a hero of the occupied English, who gave the common folk something to cheer about. Now Robin Hood may be a myth/legend that is not the point I draw your attention to ;'The native Saxons or 'English'; ;lands and titles were stripped from the Saxon Thanes and given to Norman Knights; and ; The Saxons were getting pretty tired of being oppressed and paying taxes; In relation to your argument England was still an occupied country with the Colonial power still in control in the late 12th century when your invasion of Ireland was undertaken by that same colonial power. But you know this but still you insist the Crown of England at that time was England and the English. Thanks for that. So what are you arguing then , that Henry 2 wasn't a native saxon so England couldnt possibly be to blame for Ireland being its first colony in 1175? Huge if true. No. Not only do I refute your argument above , 5 generations on from Hastings , but even if we accepted your argument ( and I dont) this isnt my point in this thread. Did the Norman crown rule England in 1175 ? Or was it the English crown? back to you? |
|
