Do what extent do the Norman descendants still dictate European affairs? - Page 2 - Historum

Nyneve · January 9th, 2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frog33inUK

Did you take a DNA sample ?

How can I take a DNA sample of a description?

Frog33inUK · January 9th, 2012, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nyneve

How can I take a DNA sample of a description?

Thought you had actually met people corresponding to the description.
Never mind.

Nyneve · January 9th, 2012, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frog33inUK

Thought you had actually met people corresponding to the description.
Never mind.

Of course I have.

**DreamWeaver** · January 9th, 2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nyneve

On the term "frog-face"? As far as I know it's a pretty standard description of upper class people.

Never heard of it. Might not standard round my neck of the woods.

Nyneve · January 9th, 2012, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWeaver

Never heard of it. Might not standard round my neck of the woods.

Maybe just here then.

Frog33inUK · January 9th, 2012, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by werner

I admit that it's a bit ridiculous to demand that everyone with Norman ancestry, or even the elites, be kicked out of England as was suggested in the following thread http://www.historum.com/european-his...ans-stole.html

The Norman influence on European affaris was extensive, politically, militarily, and culturally. The Normans did practically steal everything from the English, I mean a few select Normans just went to England from France and just took everything. What's interesting about the Normans however is what they did afterwards, which is to set up super estates, and basically introduced the world to the idea of immense and unparalled greed.

Since the Norman takeovers there has been no official regime change. Things kind of accelerated after that, with respect to world affairs. If you watch the documentary by Eddie Izzard - Mongrel Nation - folks with Norman ancestry still inhabit England and they still have connections to the French. I truly wonder how much of the scheme to setup America, Canada, and Australia was really just an extension of this insatiable Norman greed?

Sure, some Normans have mixed in with their respective regions, however, the elites haven't. And from some documentaries that I've seen of Scotland, folks with Norman ancestry have distinctive features and live quite a distinguished and priviledged lifestyles which suggests to me that some of them chose to remain distinct from local populations.

Anyways, did and do the Norman ancestral elites have significant control and driving power in the affairs of the new world?

Norman timeline

1) Takeover of the Britain, political and cultural changes.

2) Extensive influence over European affairs

3) The immediate implementation of unprecedented greed with continued emphasis on ways to obtain even more wealth.

4) Acceleration of new world affairs and global capitalistic systems shortly after takeovers.

5) No regime changes in Britain since takeover, which implicates that these Norman elites have remained in power.

Kind of a weird topic I admit, but it's a different line of discussion then those that suggest that Jews or some secret society e.g. Free Masons , have utmost control over world affairs. Personally, I prefer a perspective with the topic of lineage in it.

I would say a very small extent, maybe close to nothing.

There may be a few people who have more Norman ancestors than most of the rest of us, but in almost a 1000 years, it is virtually impossible for anyone to retain any "1066 Normanness" .

The question of the OP is, in essence, flawed, in the way it focuses on a group of individuals which, over 1000 years, probably was as diluted as any other in the community of individuals around them.

The only group of people who might retain more "Normanness" than any other would be the people currently living in Normandy.

Although the paradigm of the OP sounds preposterous to me, I am open to arguments.

werner · January 10th, 2012, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frog33inUK

I would say a very small extent, maybe close to nothing.

There may be a few people who have more Norman ancestors than most of the rest of us, but in almost a 1000 years, it is virtually impossible for anyone to retain any "1066 Normanness" .

The question of the OP is, in essence, flawed, in the way it focuses on a group of individuals which, over 1000 years, probably was as diluted as any other in the community of individuals around them.

The only group of people who might retain more "Normanness" than any other would be the people currently living in Normandy.

Although the paradigm of the OP sounds preposterous to me, I am open to arguments.

Why is it completely necessary that all British ethnicities have become "diluted", especially if they hold elite positions in society.

I would definitely say that the Norman elites in England whom still maintain contacts with their French ancestors have somewhat been more selective towards marrying other Normans. They haven't simply mixed in as you suggest that they have. People in power like to maintain their strong familial connections and heritage, people that REALLY have power that is.

Take for instance, the ethnic composition of U.S. presidents, the vast majority of them are English. Now considering the fact that the majority of the citizens in the U.S. aren't English and that the majority of the folks in the U.S. are mixed, choice of U.S. presidents is quite selective.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/ind...?topic=98954.0

People in power don't simply mix and mix onwards until they become "diluted". They're habits and ethnic makeup remain distinct from the general population. You should know this what happened onwards after the Saxons took over England, the region became a Saxon oriented society with Saxon ways of doing things and adherance to a history rewritten by the Saxons.

In short, I think it's healthy to consider the question of towards what extent have these Norman elites still maintained their power over English affairs and English wealth and also on the extent of their influence in world affairs. I don't believe that they've simply abandoned their ancestry. The group of Normans that took over England were relative few, it's a small group of folks that have strong connections to each other and whom conspired to take the riches of England all to themselves. Sounds like a group of people that would still like to maintain those strong familial connections and would conspire onwards to gather more wealth. The Norman tendency to acquire wealth is a strong one.

**Clodius** · January 10th, 2012, 07:34 AM

The question is, do members of a ruling elite in Britain still identify themselves as "Normans", or as "English"? I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I've never heard of this. As far as I know, the English aristocracy regard themselves as just that. Is it really possible to tell if a person has Norman ancestry nowadays? I doubt it, unless they have a distinctly French-sounding name (such as De Wyche, for instance), which may be an indication. I honestly couldn't tell you how much of my ancestry is Anglo-Saxon or Norman, and I doubt many English people could. Though I'm not in the "ruling elite" (not by a long way), I can't rule out Norman ancestry.

I do wonder if this "Norman - Saxon" business isn't just manufacturing a distinction that simply doesn't exist any more in British culture.

pablo668 · January 10th, 2012, 07:54 AM

I'm absolutely flabbergasted that anyone could think that there is still a group of people that could be identified as Normans still around.
They're just a group of people who had their moment in the sun and have long since moved on, intermarried, assimilated and disappeared as a recognisable group.

Reading through history you don't often hear the word 'Norman' bandied about once the Angevins took over.
The latest I hear it used is in the Scottish wars of independence. The inter-relatedness and landholding of the ruling classes on both sides of the border was still influenced from Norman times. The ruling class in both countries being regarded and Anglo-Norman and Scoto-Norman, or something like that.

For all practical purposes the 'Normans' stopped existing a long time ago.

Nyneve · January 10th, 2012, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodius

The question is, do members of a ruling elite in Britain still identify themselves as "Normans", or as "English"? I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I've never heard of this. As far as I know, the English aristocracy regard themselves as just that. Is it really possible to tell if a person has Norman ancestry nowadays? I doubt it, unless they have a distinctly French-sounding name (such as De Wyche, for instance), which may be an indication. I honestly couldn't tell you how much of my ancestry is Anglo-Saxon or Norman, and I doubt many English people could. Though I'm not in the "ruling elite" (not by a long way), I can't rule out Norman ancestry.

I do wonder if this "Norman - Saxon" business isn't just manufacturing a distinction that simply doesn't exist any more in British culture.

Only the "de" in de Wyche is Norman. "Wyche" is English, from Droitwich I believe.