Game of Thrones and old english

[Malthus]

But for godsake man Longshanks was a Anglo-Frenchie, a French speaking descendent of the Dukes of Anjou.

But he's the embodiment of the English King, along with Arthur.  Most of England's greatest kings weren't really English (as we'd define it today), I suppose.  Wasn't it around the War of the Roses that French was totally abandonned in favour of English along the nobility?

I've never heard anyone call Arthur an English King.

King Arthur is a legendary British leader of the late 5th and early 6th centuries  (source: Wikipedia)Didn't medieval English kings traced their genealogy back to King Arthur?  I thought I read that somewhere.

Not arthur, they trace to Cerdic

And, amusingly enough, through him to the god Wotan (Odin). I recently saw in the Tower of London gift shop an elaborate family tree of the royals and "Wotan" was the earliest ancestor mentioned!  I wonder if the people putting it together knew he was, literally, a god.

For Cerdic, an amusing fictional account is The Concience of the King by Alfred Duggan.

[Malthus]

I have always thought it a tad simple to refer to every English King from William the Conquerer to Henry IV/V as "French." In 1066 there was no concept of France as a monolithic place, and there were even multiple dialects in France of "Langues d'oïl"; when the Normans conquered England there developed an Anglo-Norman variation of the Old Norman language.

While I'm sure to some degree it was mutually intelligible with other "Langues d'oïl", I don't know to what degree, and I do think it's rightly considered a separate language. When Richard I was King I've read that he knew Occitan (which was another French language, one of the "Langues d'Oc" so even further differentiated from the "Langues d'oïl" that are often collectively known as "Old French") and he knew the Parisian dialect of the Langues d'oïl, but he didn't speak or know the Anglo-Norman dialect.

I'm not sure if the differences were as subtle as "American English vs. British English" or more like "American and British English vs. Jamaican Patois."

The way I've understood it is the initial administrations of Norman conquest England were "Norman." But the royal family continually intermarried heavily with Parisian nobility and royalty strengthening ties both culturally and politically with the court in France (not necessarily meaning the court in France was always an ally or a friend, but the ties were close.)

Reminds me of how William Wallace, scottish rebel, is portrayed as a half-naked kilted pict painted with woad in Braveheart and generally elsewhere as a highland savage - when, of course, he was descended from Norman aristocrats.

[Valmy]

And, amusingly enough, through him to the god Wotan (Odin). I recently saw in the Tower of London gift shop an elaborate family tree of the royals and "Wotan" was the earliest ancestor mentioned!  I wonder if the people putting it together knew he was, literally, a god.

Yeah his name is kinda Briton-sounding so maybe it was a Brit who threw his lot with the Saxons.   Later on becoming an important figure I guess the later powers that be decided that he needed to appear more Saxon than the Saxons so showed how he was descended from Germanic Gods or something.  That is always sort of amusing that the head of the Church of England claims to be descended from Wotan.

[Valmy]

The way I've understood it is the initial administrations of Norman conquest England were "Norman." But the royal family continually intermarried heavily with Parisian nobility and royalty strengthening ties both culturally and politically with the court in France (not necessarily meaning the court in France was always an ally or a friend, but the ties were close.)

There were never very many Normans in Normandy to begin with and they had a conscious policy of intermarrying and culturally becoming French so as to legitimize their rule so they became indistinguishable from the French (granted...whatever that might mean in the 11th century) pretty fast..  Throw that in with the fact William recruited knights and lords from all over France (and some in Flanders and Germany) for his war of conquest and you realize very few of the Normans were really Norman in ethnic or cultural sense, but rather only in the sense they were the vassals of the Duke of Normandy.

[Sheilbh]

Reminds me of how William Wallace, scottish rebel, is portrayed as a half-naked kilted pict painted with woad in Braveheart and generally elsewhere as a highland savage - when, of course, he was descended from Norman aristocrats.

God I hate Gibson

The thing that really annoys me is that because of Braveheart I don't think we'll ever get a film about Robert the Bruce which is the far more interesting story.  The cunning, wily and ultimately successful rebel deserves more than Wallace.

I have always thought it a tad simple to refer to every English King from William the Conquerer to Henry IV/V as "French." In 1066 there was no concept of France as a monolithic place, and there were even multiple dialects in France of "Langues d'oïl"; when the Normans conquered England there developed an Anglo-Norman variation of the Old Norman language.

Agreed.  There's a big cultural shift from the Normans to the Central French of the Angevin Empire.  The legacy is differet Norman words are rather like Anglo-Saxon in terms of literature, they're on the same register whereas words we got from Central French courtly culture are different.

[Valmy]

Reminds me of how William Wallace, scottish rebel, is portrayed as a half-naked kilted pict painted with woad in Braveheart and generally elsewhere as a highland savage - when, of course, he was descended from Norman aristocrats.

You mean like Robert de Brus...er...Robert the Bruce?

[Valmy]

God I hate Gibson

Since you live in the England I assure you the feeling is mutual

[Malthus]

And, amusingly enough, through him to the god Wotan (Odin). I recently saw in the Tower of London gift shop an elaborate family tree of the royals and "Wotan" was the earliest ancestor mentioned!  I wonder if the people putting it together knew he was, literally, a god.

Yeah his name is kinda Briton-sounding so maybe it was a Brit who threw his lot with the Saxons.   Later on becoming an important figure I guess the later powers that be decided that he needed to appear more Saxon than the Saxons so showed how he was descended from Germanic Gods or something.  That is always sort of amusing that the head of the Church of England claims to be descended from Wotan.

My impression is that among the Saxons, a people who were more at the "chieftom" level of social development at the time (in anthropology a stage often associated with leaders who claim some sort of divine mana or supernatural ancesty or both), anyone with aristocratic/chiefly ancesty claimed descent from the gods. Being "Wotan-born" may have been simply the mark of heriditary aristocracy. 

[Sheilbh]

God I hate Gibson

Since you live in the England I assure you the feeling is mutual

My nan was Jewish as well

To be fair Gibson's always wanted to make a movie about the Maccabees and I kind of what him to make that.  This is his vision:

"I just read it when I was teenager, and it's amazing. It's almost like" -- here, he grabbed my digital recorder, held it to his mouth, and spoke in a portentous movie-announcer voice -- "They profaned his Temple. They killed his father. They... all kinds of stuff. In the face of great odds for something he believed in" -- here he switched out of movie-announcer voice -- "Oh, my God, the odds they faced. The armies they faced had elephants! How cinematic is this! Even Judah's dad -- what's his name? Mattathias? -- you kind of get this guy who more or less is trying to avoid the whole thing, but he just gets to a place where had enough, and he just snapped!"

I would love to see that.

[Valmy]

Agreed.  There's a big cultural shift from the Normans to the Central French of the Angevin Empire.  The legacy is differet Norman words are rather like Anglo-Saxon in terms of literature, they're on the same register whereas words we got from Central French courtly culture are different.

Yep it gets rather messy, regional variations for so profound back then.

In fact this sort of thing is an explanation for why "French" was the language of the English upper classes for such a suprisingly long time: Old English itself was really just the language of the Anglo-Saxon nobility.  The people on the ground spoke a huge variety of local dialects that were almost unintelligible to each other and the Church, of course, had their latin.  So it was not like they were speaking French to resist English but rather they needed a language that all the nobles could speak and until modern English comes around such a thing does not really exist.  Which is sort of like how French was for a long time in France yes?  A language of the nobles.

[Malthus]

Reminds me of how William Wallace, scottish rebel, is portrayed as a half-naked kilted pict painted with woad in Braveheart and generally elsewhere as a highland savage - when, of course, he was descended from Norman aristocrats.

You mean like Robert de Brus...er...Robert the Bruce?

Heh.  But the Bruce is generally portrayed in fiction as more of an aristocrat.

I think Wallace gets the 'retroactive highlander' treatment (Gibson isn't the only one who does this) because of his rather extreme rep (a murderous giant who did stuff like make a sword belt out of an English general's skin).

As usual, Horrible Histories has the last word:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g61xASD-24

[Viking]

But for godsake man Longshanks was a Anglo-Frenchie, a French speaking descendent of the Dukes of Anjou.

But he's the embodiment of the English King, along with Arthur.  Most of England's greatest kings weren't really English (as we'd define it today), I suppose.  Wasn't it around the War of the Roses that French was totally abandonned in favour of English along the nobility?

I've never heard anyone call Arthur an English King.

King Arthur is a legendary British leader of the late 5th and early 6th centuries  (source: Wikipedia)Didn't medieval English kings traced their genealogy back to King Arthur?  I thought I read that somewhere.

Not arthur, they trace to Cerdic

And, amusingly enough, through him to the god Wotan (Odin). I recently saw in the Tower of London gift shop an elaborate family tree of the royals and "Wotan" was the earliest ancestor mentioned!  I wonder if the people putting it together knew he was, literally, a god.

For Cerdic, an amusing fictional account is The Concience of the King by Alfred Duggan.

Strangelly enough Heimskringla also starts with Odin as well. It's like the norse version of Ameratsu and the Tennoheika.

[Sheilbh]

My impression is that among the Saxons, a people who were more at the "chieftom" level of social development at the time (in anthropology a stage often associated with leaders who claim some sort of divine mana or supernatural ancesty or both), anyone with aristocratic/chiefly ancesty claimed descent from the gods. Being "Wotan-born" may have been simply the mark of heriditary aristocracy.

My impression of the Anglo-Saxons is that their understanding of leadership was very much based on reciprocity.  The major feature of their society is the swearing of oaths to your lord and to your hall.  In Anglo-Saxon texts the focus on the failure of any individual to fulfil their boast almost always presages immediate and total defeat of the whole.  The other aspect of that is that leadership doesn't seem to have any divine features.  There's no outrage at bad lord, or lords who fail to fulfil their role of protector, being removed.  It's the legitimacy of a very warlike society really.

What's really interesting is how they try and imagine Christianity in this context.  They imagine Christ as an Anglo-Saxon Lord.  His supporters are like retainers, the Cross is his most loyal servant doing his wish.  While Christ being crucified is making the ultimate self-sacrifice for his oathsmen, to protect his people.  Other poems have Christ leading spear charges against demons.  The promise of heaven is seen as a Lord rewarding his thanes at an eternal feast in their hall.  It's a very distinctive vision, but even for Christ his divinity is almost secondary to his role as Lord. 

[Valmy]

Heh good point Sheilbh.  I heard in the History of England podcast a Anglo-Saxon era priest singing the praises of some Anglo-Saxon king (Offa I think?) about how great he was because he rewarded his followers with treasure.  Which I found to be a hilarious commentary by a religious figure.

But I would like to point out that it looks like blood was vitally important to who got to be a king in Anglo-Saxon England.  The king always had to be a blood relative of the ruling family, but he did not necessarily have to be the son of the former king.

[Sheilbh]

The giving of rings is a huge part of the poetry actually.  That's the standard reward for being a worthy thane (and goes on in heaven too, eternal life is secondary) and a common part of any mourning for a good lord is that there won't be any more gift-giving.

One very odd aspect in terms of family is that sons don't get much of a look-in for Anglo-Saxons.  You didn't spend much time with your son.  You would send him to another hall to serve another lord which would help keep the peace.  It was very common to send him to a sibling's hall.  So while there's very little mention of sons there's a lot of poetry that gives prominence to your 'sister-son'.  They will get whole sections of being very worth thanes and following through on their oaths; if they die they will get a good chunk of mourning in the poem.  Some more cynical twentieth century academics have suggested 'sister-sons' were important because they're one of the few relatives who were definitely genetically related to you