Soon you will be rooting FOR the Taliban.

Page 4 of 4 [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

KitLily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jan 2021
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,074
Location: England

09 Dec 2023, 10:56 am

naturalplastic wrote:
Well...it was we Americans who...designed the street layout and built our new Capital city soon after winning independence. The British ruled the original 13 colonies seperately. There was no single "capital" of British America.

But you have the right idea. That only the eastern seaboard (the original 13 colonies) were settled. So the capital had to be a city on the eastern seaboard (Philadelphia had been the capital of the new nation prior to the founding of Washington). And after that American history is this epic tale of the westward expansion beyond the Appalachians. They whole mythic frontier thing.

The Roman invaders not only built your first cities (London, Bath, Winchester, and others) and roads...they were the first to have writing. So they were the first to have written records. So ...strictly speaking...British history begins with the Romans.


It is the same as Britain. Invaders have always come from the East, and expanded Westwards. The only true Britons still exist in West Wales and maybe Cornwall and Scotland. They have tested enough British DNA by now to prove this. It seems invaders always come from the East in history. Not sure why that is.

No, there is lots of British history before the Romans. We don't base our history on invaders like them.

There are monuments e.g. Stonehenge, Avebury, which were built by the inhabitants of the British isles, they were about 3000BC. Also well-preserved settlements like Skara Brae from the same era I think? And the mysterious Beaker people who inhabited Britain from 2000BC. Apparently the first evidence of people living here was 1,000,000BC.


_________________
That alien woman. On Earth to observe and wonder about homo sapiens.


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,024
Location: temperate zone

09 Dec 2023, 3:50 pm

Yes. If you start the clock at the Iron Age then yes...the Celtic Britons were the first.

They were conquered by the Romans around the time of Christ. Their queen Boudicca led a rebellion that almost freed the island but was brutally crushed (on the opposite side of the Roman Empire the Jews in Judea rose up, and then were also burtally crushed by the Romans at about the same time).

The Romans ruled for four centuries. Then left as the Empire collapsed.

The continental Germanic tribes invaded...drove the Celtic Britons west ward. The later became the Welsh. Some fled across the Channel to the tip of France and became the Breton in France. The Germanic Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians, became the English.

Then the Germanic Tribes of Scandanavia became the Vikings and pillaged the British Isles. The Norwejians just pillaged but the Danes actually conquered and ruled a big swath of the land called the "Danelaw".

Then Alfred the Great led the Anglosaxon English to retake the Danelaw and create a unified England.

Then the French speaking Normans from France conguered England. So today the aristocracy of the UK is largely of Norman descent. American pundit Roy Blount Jr. explained how he is of "Norman descent". The Anglo Saxon English oppressed everyone (on the planet just about) during the British Empire, but we Normans oppressed them...so we Normans are "the oppressors of the oppressors" :D .

But if you gp back before the Iron Age then even the Celtic Britons were invaders of people before them.

Stonehenge was built at about the same time as the Pyramids at Giza, but by a pre Indoeuropean people.

I had switched gears and was actually addressing Cyber about Native Americans at that point

A lot happened prior the Roman conquest. But it wasnt recorded in writing. Just like in North American no Indian tribe north of Central Mexico had written records prior to European contact. So in the US it would be hard to study history of the precolumbian Native Americans as "history". Only as anthropology/archeaology.

East (or south) is the direction all invaders of Britain come because thats where the land is. To the west and north there is only empty ocean with no people to invade (unless you believe in Atlantis one time existing).



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,417
Location: Right over your left shoulder

09 Dec 2023, 3:58 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
East (or south) is the direction all invaders of Britain come because thats where the land is. To the west and north there is only empty ocean with no people to invade (unless you believe in Atlantis one time existing).


Just to nitpick, the Scoti invaded Britain from Ireland, which is to say from the west.


_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

09 Dec 2023, 6:40 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Yes. If you start the clock at the Iron Age then yes...the Celtic Britons were the first.


Technically no, The first were the Palaeolithic builders of stonehenge, According to genetic records this megalithic culture were completely wiped out by the Bell-Beaker people, a warlike patriarchal Indo-European speaking people from the northwest. Then around 100BC the celtic speaking people invaded absorbing the first invading tribes and from them we get the various celtic tribes whom the Romans encountered when Julius Caesar landed around 50BC.

There is some debate about the identity of the Picts in northern Scotland.Their fierce independence and cultural propensity for tattooing suggests a possible connection to earlier pre-Celtic people.



Last edited by cyberdad on 09 Dec 2023, 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

09 Dec 2023, 7:05 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
The continental Germanic tribes invaded...drove the Celtic Britons west ward. The later became the Welsh. Some fled across the Channel to the tip of France and became the Breton in France. The Germanic Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians, became the English.


The settlement of Anglo-Saxons into Britain probably happened in three phases. In pre-Roman times religious and cultural exchange suggest the Bell Beaker people were constantly moving between northwest Europe and pre-celtic Britain, Proof is the Danish peat big man form of sacrifice was not just common in Denmark but also in Britain and there are archaeological examples of people from Germanic speaking regions in Scandinavia travelling for religious purposes to Britain, This strongly suggests there must always have been a Germanic speaking settlements in Britain in Pre-Roman times who probably spoke something like old Frisian (identical to Old English).

The second phase is in Roman times where the Romans recruited troops from Germanic areas under their control but also german speaking mercenaries. Given the geographic proximity it made sense to ship the closest source of troops is where modern Frisian is spoken. Evidence suggests movement of animals during Roman time suggest people who may have spoken Frisian or Anglo-Saxon may have been coming into Roman territories of Britain as traders, Roman soldiers and even settlers, It further reinforces settlements of "Romanised" Anglo-Saxons might already have been established on the east coast

The final third phase is post-Roman exit (Rexit) where the Romans left Britain. Written records and also stories such as the Arthurian tales suggest the existential threat to Romanised Britains was from the "Saxons". There is no doubt that Saxon war bands pillaged Britain (like the later vikings) but we do not know if they (Saxons) were supplied from existing Anglo-Saxon speaking settlements on the east coast (again like the latter day Danelaw) that predate historically back to Roman times, I think this makes more sense as the Saxons could draw on recruits and supplies in Britain whereas the idea they came as mercenaries and magically displaced numerically superior well armed Roman celts seems far fetched (the celts were also armed by the Romans).

This third phase doesn't contradict the Bede story of Vortigen being betrayed by the brothers Hengist and Horsa. Roman Britain was an attractive land ripe for invasion and the Bede tale (which is spiced with a lot fictional hype) suggest that Anglo-Saxon populations had to be present in order to overthrow the existing celtic tribes and it wasn't just Vortigen, perhaps the settlements welcomed their kinsmen to come and encouraged more of their folk to come over.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,024
Location: temperate zone

09 Dec 2023, 7:41 pm

cyberdad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Yes. If you start the clock at the Iron Age then yes...the Celtic Britons were the first.


Technically no, The first were the Palaeolithic builders of stonehenge, According to genetic records this megalithic culture were completely wiped out by the Bell-Beaker people, a warlike patriarchal Indo-European speaking people from the northwest. Then around 100BC the celtic speaking people invaded absorbing the first invading tribes and from them we get the various celtic tribes whom the Romans encountered when Julius Caesar landed around 50BC.

There is some debate about the identity of the Picts in northern Scotland.Their fierce independence and cultural propensity for tattooing suggests a possible connection to earlier pre-Celtic people.


Why did you post this?

You said I was "technically wrong" and then you demonstrated that I was technically right by reiterating the very thing I said! :lol:

I said "if you start the clock at the Iron Age...then yes...the Celtic Britons were there first".

Then I went on to explain how even the Celtic Britains were themselves invaders...and that there were waves of invaders before that.

Cant you read? I said i"f you start at the Iron Age". So by definition anything in the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, or Bronze Age would have been earlier than the point I am starting the clock at..

And you made a couple of errors. The Celts are thought to have migrated into the British Isles around 500 BC (long before 100 BC). Iron Age tech reached Britain around 750 so the Celtic era and the Iron Age started about the same time roughly.

Second mistake: The builders of Stonehenge were late Neolithic and early Bronze Age. They were not "Paleolithic" as you KEEP ON saying.

The Paleolithic was the Old Stone Age...the CroMagnon hunter gatherer "cavemen" of the Ice Age. The Mesolithic was at the end of the last age and transitional period. And the Neolithic was when they had farming and settled villages but didnt yet have metal. They still used stone tools like their caveman ancestors, but had a higher population density than their caveman ancestors so they had more manpower and could build things like Stonehenge.

The Paleolithic ended around ten thousand BC. Stonehenge was around 3000 BC. Not the same era.

So please stop calling its builders "Paleolithic". The cave paintings of were Paleolithic. Stonehenge was not.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,024
Location: temperate zone

09 Dec 2023, 8:33 pm

cyberdad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
The continental Germanic tribes invaded...drove the Celtic Britons west ward. The later became the Welsh. Some fled across the Channel to the tip of France and became the Breton in France. The Germanic Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians, became the English.


The settlement of Anglo-Saxons into Britain probably happened in three phases. In pre-Roman times religious and cultural exchange suggest the Bell Beaker people were constantly moving between northwest Europe and pre-celtic Britain, Proof is the Danish peat big man form of sacrifice was not just common in Denmark but also in Britain and there are archaeological examples of people from Germanic speaking regions in Scandinavia travelling for religious purposes to Britain, This strongly suggests there must always have been a Germanic speaking settlements in Britain in Pre-Roman times who probably spoke something like old Frisian (identical to Old English).

The second phase is in Roman times where the Romans recruited troops from Germanic areas under their control but also german speaking mercenaries. Given the geographic proximity it made sense to ship the closest source of troops is where modern Frisian is spoken. Evidence suggests movement of animals during Roman time suggest people who may have spoken Frisian or Anglo-Saxon may have been coming into Roman territories of Britain as traders, Roman soldiers and even settlers, It further reinforces settlements of "Romanised" Anglo-Saxons might already have been established on the east coast

The final third phase is post-Roman exit (Rexit) where the Romans left Britain. Written records and also stories such as the Arthurian tales suggest the existential threat to Romanised Britains was from the "Saxons". There is no doubt that Saxon war bands pillaged Britain (like the later vikings) but we do not know if they (Saxons) were supplied from existing Anglo-Saxon speaking settlements on the east coast (again like the latter day Danelaw) that predate historically back to Roman times, I think this makes more sense as the Saxons could draw on recruits and supplies in Britain whereas the idea they came as mercenaries and magically displaced numerically superior well armed Roman celts seems far fetched (the celts were also armed by the Romans).

This third phase doesn't contradict the Bede story of Vortigen being betrayed by the brothers Hengist and Horsa. Roman Britain was an attractive land ripe for invasion and the Bede tale (which is spiced with a lot fictional hype) suggest that Anglo-Saxon populations had to be present in order to overthrow the existing celtic tribes and it wasn't just Vortigen, perhaps the settlements welcomed their kinsmen to come and encouraged more of their folk to come over.

Who knows?

Could be.

In college I took a course given jointly by the anthropology and history depts about archeology of Dark Ages Britain.

You woulda liked it.

The professor drew a free hand map of Britain on the chock board and talked about how one occasion Roman Britian was attacked by Barbarian tribes simultaneously from...Ireland, Scotland, and Scandanavia. Couldnt be a coincidence. They must planned the attacks to be simultaneous. So there must have been a lot of communication among Celts and Germanic tribes back then.

And if you go back far enough you get to where the two groups (Celtic and Germanic) branched off their common ancestor group. The Scottish and Irish word for "the people" or "the tribe" is "tuetha" which is cognant with "Teuton" the same word in Germanic (from which words like "Duits", "Dutch", and "Deutsch" came from).



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

09 Dec 2023, 9:17 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Yes. If you start the clock at the Iron Age then yes...the Celtic Britons were the first.


Technically no, The first were the Palaeolithic builders of stonehenge, According to genetic records this megalithic culture were completely wiped out by the Bell-Beaker people, a warlike patriarchal Indo-European speaking people from the northwest. Then around 100BC the celtic speaking people invaded absorbing the first invading tribes and from them we get the various celtic tribes whom the Romans encountered when Julius Caesar landed around 50BC.

There is some debate about the identity of the Picts in northern Scotland.Their fierce independence and cultural propensity for tattooing suggests a possible connection to earlier pre-Celtic people.


Why did you post this?

You said I was "technically wrong" and then you demonstrated that I was technically right by reiterating the very thing I said! :lol:

I said "if you start the clock at the Iron Age...then yes...the Celtic Britons were there first".

Then I went on to explain how even the Celtic Britains were themselves invaders...and that there were waves of invaders before that.

Cant you read? I said i"f you start at the Iron Age". So by definition anything in the Paleolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, or Bronze Age would have been earlier than the point I am starting the clock at..

And you made a couple of errors. The Celts are thought to have migrated into the British Isles around 500 BC (long before 100 BC). Iron Age tech reached Britain around 750 so the Celtic era and the Iron Age started about the same time roughly.

Second mistake: The builders of Stonehenge were late Neolithic and early Bronze Age. They were not "Paleolithic" as you KEEP ON saying.

The Paleolithic was the Old Stone Age...the CroMagnon hunter gatherer "cavemen" of the Ice Age. The Mesolithic was at the end of the last age and transitional period. And the Neolithic was when they had farming and settled villages but didnt yet have metal. They still used stone tools like their caveman ancestors, but had a higher population density than their caveman ancestors so they had more manpower and could build things like Stonehenge.

The Paleolithic ended around ten thousand BC. Stonehenge was around 3000 BC. Not the same era.

So please stop calling its builders "Paleolithic". The cave paintings of were Paleolithic. Stonehenge was not.


Apologies, got the terminology and dates wrong, But the chronology is roughly correct My point is that Britain was always invaded going back to prehistoric times, The cromagnon populations could walk across a land bridge connecting France and Britain. There were probably numerous conflicts over the last 10,000 years. The megalithic cultures responsible for stonehenge were related to the megalithic builders of southern Europe, north Africa and Anatolia bought farming and weapons into Britain displacing and or absorbing the previous populations, But we do know the Bell-Beaker people from north-west Europe completely wiped out the builders of stonehenge. This genocide would be repeated with the Celts in 500BC and later with the Anglo-Saxons in 500AD.

It;s not surprising therefore that when you look at the history of people who started empires such as the English, Germans and Japanese they have a long history of warfare and patriarchal martial culture. Aggressive and violent nature is inherited over millennia and provided footsoldiers for invasion of less militarily developed peoples along the equator



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

09 Dec 2023, 9:29 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
The professor drew a free hand map of Britain on the chock board and talked about how one occasion Roman Britian was attacked by Barbarian tribes simultaneously from...Ireland, Scotland, and Scandanavia. Couldnt be a coincidence. They must planned the attacks to be simultaneous. So there must have been a lot of communication among Celts and Germanic tribes back then.


Wasn't the fall of Anglo-Saxon Britain and King Harold bought on by simultaneous civil conflict between petty Anglo-Saxon factions supporting Harold's brother, the invasion of northern England by Harald Hadrada and his viking horde and then almost simultaneously the arrival of William's Norman army on the south west coast of England? confluence of events that tipped everything in favor of Williams victory. Poor Harold.

I have often wondered when Hengist and Horsa were busy with the Picts whether they came into contact with the irish? Coincidence that following the victory Hengist (Horsa was killed by the Picts according to Bede) went south rather than consolidate the northern lands bequeathed from Vortigen on condition they defeated the Picts, Instead Hengist left the north vacant and went back south to overthrow Vortigen. At that moment the Irish rushed in and occupied the lands and would become the Scotti (or Scots).



KitLily
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jan 2021
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,074
Location: England

10 Dec 2023, 5:55 am

Talking about the different ancient races in Britain. It was quite funny when I went to university in a little village in Wales- the difference between the local Welsh people and the English students was very, very noticeable. The Welsh tended to be very short and dark, the English tended to be tall and much fairer. Apparently the original Britons were small, dark people.

The thing that interests me is that a large percentage of Brits have now had their DNA tested. And the native Brits are overwhelmingly Anglo Saxon. They are the ones that made the biggest impression on Britain. Not the Romans, Norse/ Normans or anyone else.

So what did the Anglo Saxons do? Some professors say that they did some form of apartheid, suppressing the native Brits and not allowing them to marry each other/breed. People say that the Norse Vikings had a great effect on Britain, and certainly there is a lot of Norse DNA here, especially Danish. Apparently there is no difference between some British men's DNA and some Danish men's DNA (I mean the Y chromosome). But most of us are Anglo Saxon, so what the hell happened when they arrived from the Germany area?

And also, English is an Anglo Saxon language. Not many words survive from languages that were used before they arrived. Except in languages like Welsh and Gaelic. I know that King Alfred the Great was very keen on literacy and said that everyone should learn to read, so maybe they had to learn English.

Maybe it was just that the Anglo Saxons mingled with the natives, but other invaders tended to keep themselves to themselves? e.g. I think the Normans turned their noses up at the locals and didn't mingle with them, as they were royalty and the locals were commoners. I think it could have been the same with the Romans- they didn't mingle very much. I don't think Latin ever became the common language of Britain.


_________________
That alien woman. On Earth to observe and wonder about homo sapiens.


goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,595
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

10 Dec 2023, 7:20 am

Probably has something to do with the rising/setting Sun. If you're going to travel for all of the daylight hours.. if you travel from East to West you can travel much longer in a day as it stays lighter for longer.

Does the Sun's directional path overhead also dictate the direction of trade winds for sailing ships? Perhaps. Might also naturally blow them West. Canada/USA were settled from East to West as well.. but that's maybe just the nature of being a globe and all the genocidal dirtbags landing on the East coast as a simple matter of being on the opposite side of the ocean from where they came.

As for the whole West being more desirable than the Eastern part of any city/town, maybe has to do with poor people having to wake up at Sunrise to start working and rich people leisurely enjoying the Sunset ? Just at thought.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,024
Location: temperate zone

10 Dec 2023, 7:53 am

goldfish21 wrote:
Probably has something to do with the rising/setting Sun. If you're going to travel for all of the daylight hours.. if you travel from East to West you can travel much longer in a day as it stays lighter for longer.

Does the Sun's directional path overhead also dictate the direction of trade winds for sailing ships? Perhaps. Might also naturally blow them West. Canada/USA were settled from East to West as well.. but that's maybe just the nature of being a globe and all the genocidal dirtbags landing on the East coast as a simple matter of being on the opposite side of the ocean from where they came.

As for the whole West being more desirable than the Eastern part of any city/town, maybe has to do with poor people having to wake up at Sunrise to start working and rich people leisurely enjoying the Sunset ? Just at thought.


Canada was invaded from the west...the original indigenous people came out of Asia via Alaska from the west.
And in modern times Czarist Russia seized Alaska from the west and penetrated down the west coast of Canada and into the northwest of what would become the USA. And Canada was also invaded from the south once. By the USA in the War of 1812.

The length of the day is not effected by which direction you move unless your traveling in a modern jet airliner at six hundred mph. If you're a marching army, or on a sailing ship, its not going to make any practical difference. You dont get jetlag moving three mph.

The prevailing winds in the temperate zone are westerly (west to east). That doesnt have anything to do why Britain's invaders came from the east.

Britain's invaders came from the mainland of Europe. And Europe is east and south of Britian. Only Ireland is west of Britain. And the Irish (then called the "Scoti") invasion of Scotland in early post Roman times and absorbing the native Picts to become the modern Scots are about the only major invaders from the west that I know of.


Russia got invaded from both east and west. By Genghis Khan and by Tamerlaine from the East, and by Napoleon and by Hitler from the West. And by countless other invaders ( Swedes, Tarters, etc ) from both Europe and from Asia.

The Polynesians populated the Pacific from west to east (despite, or more likely because, the prevailing winds of the tropics are EASTERLY).

France had a natural barrier in the Pyrenees Mountain Range on its southern border. So most of France's invaders were from the north or from the east. Only the Muslim Moors came from the South -from North Africa by way of Spain, and crossed the mountains to invade France, but were defeated by the Franks at the battle of Tours in circa 800 AD.

In Egypt's long history it was invaded from every compass direction. The same with Israel-Palestine.

The Indian subcontinent was only ever invaded from the northwest (through the mountain passes between Afghanistan and Pakistan until the Europeans learned to sail around Africa and began to harass India from its sea coasts in the last few centuries.