haha we created all you colonies :3
We surpassed you a long time ago, Big Dogg.
>>225512074where's the India flag?
>>225512074And we created you teehee
>>225512074Since you're our original colony, they're our colonies as well o algo
>>225512074Proofs?
>>225512354THIS>>225512074you guys were beaten restlessly by them,pal. That's why modern English is nothing but a French and Latin rape baby
i created a shit in my toilet and called it the UK
>>225515257LOL
>>225512074all except the US
>>225515257GEEG, you've done him lad!
>>225512074I like the UK
>>225516346Hi Brandon.
>>225516346Brandon, you HAVE to go back
You act as if we are not literally the same people, with the only distinction being geography
>>225512074
>>225512354Ceci. Ils sont vraiment jaloux de vous mais nous amerloques aimeront bien la France. >>225515116Anglish is such a cope.
>>225512074>>225512354>>225515116The worlds first, not super power or global hegemon. But Global Super Hegemon by merging all these countries together, when?
>>225517349
>>225518424The furthest extent of muttification here of 'heritage Australians', is a combination of Irish, Scottish, Scotch-Irish, Welsh & English. Even then, religious sectarianism kept these communities separate until two generations ago. Catholics would be jeered at by Anglicans, etc.. I think my predominantly Irish family has a bit of French in it, but that's about it
>>225512354>>225515116Normans didn't create England that peak midwit retardism. Let alone the French.The Duke of Normandy BTFO the French king twice before invading England btw
>>225518667>The furthest extent of muttification here of 'heritage Australians', is a combination of Irish, Scottish, Scotch-Irish, Welsh & English. Even then, religious sectarianism kept these communities separate until two generations ago. Catholics would be jeered at by Anglicans, etc.. I think my predominantly Irish family has a bit of French in it, but that's about it or something cunt
>>225512354>>225518738England had only just united to become a single kingdom a little over a century before 1066, under king Aethelstan in 927 AD. Rollo and his vikings had settled near Rouen in 911 after Charles III was half-forced to deal with them this way by ceding land. Worth noting furthermore the Normans were absolute chads that not only got the French king to give them a major duchy, but later conquered southern italy and sicily, briefly tunisia, various crusader states, etc. 1066 was a 3-way succession war between the Anglo-Saxons (native scandinavians), Danes (scandinvanians), and Normans (gallicised scandinavians) over who would become king after Edward died heirless. Harold II was elected in his place and marched to the north in York to kill harald hardrada the varangian king of norway (who btw was the coolest guy in this entire story but i cant go into it), then for 2 weeks marched all the way south to face a 2nd invasion from William of Normandy which he lost. William was lucky and he had the support of a lot of european factions to invade. Theres a few observations. Firstly the word "France" means Frank of course, who were the ruling class of France beginning with Clovis I in 481 AD, that were basically dutch. By that rhetoric France was founded by the dutch. Of course going back further both of us are germanicised celts, us more, that got raped by the Latins, with you more. Id go further and say France didnt exist at the time, and that Norman is a world of difference apart from French, but they did speak a variety of French at the same time. And of course the Normans were simply the ruling class. Most european countries were ruled by German-descended dynasties in recent history. My point is that the ruling class matters less and is distinct to the people of a nation. I believe an Anglo-Norman culture emerged which became what we define now as Englishness.
>>225519244This kind of projection isn't going to work, hermano
>>225519294It would’ve been interesting to see what England would’ve been like had Angles, Saxons, and Jutes not invaded the island. Would England have spoken another insular Romance language since Britain was a Roman colony?
>>225519294Basically my point is its completely fallacious to say France created us. Whereas we did create anglophone civilisation directly. The Normans became anglocised and the Anglo-saxons became normanised, both merged to become English. Later on that merged into being british. The Hundred Years War solidified that identity and is one of the pivotal moments in all european history. We also nearly conquered France back twice over the next 400 years from 1066 despite being 1/4 of the size.I will say though the Norman heritage of England was excellent for us. Tolkien and a few other autists argue against it, that it diluted some grand original Anglo-Saxon culture, but he was an autist that was also against the idea of Britishness too. He wanted to preserve every original tribally-rooted culture in europe and perhaps elsewhere, so including the Welsh. I believe it elevated us, flung us straight onto the big boy table of continental europe where we became a high culture and major power, instead of keeping us stuck as an isolated nordic backwater. >>225518146I mean they dont need to merge together. They already cooperate. Anglo civilisation does dominate the modern world. Theres 500M native speakers all of which are the richest countries including the richest country and occupy about 20% of the worlds land area, even without the British empire. Although of course many of those europeans are not actually anglos but germans, other british celtic diasporas, etc, but culturally Pax Britannica is still here.
>>225519517ok, but who cares
>>225519433>Would England have spoken another insular Romance language since Britain was a Roman colony?I havent thought about this before, but it seems possible if the Roman Britain rump state persisted afterwards. It's debated how much a variation of vulgar Latin was spoken in england, most likely it was greatest in the south east and around London and perhaps the midlands. It could've been a majority. Unfortunately this is the part the Saxons invaded first and settled most intensely. The Saxon migration seems to have been more violent and less peaceful than people presume. The Franks on the other hand were the opposite and merged and adopted the native Romance language. It would have had to hold out against the non-Latin parts of the isles like Scotland and Ireland too, and I doubt Wales was that latinised, and it was cut off from Rome and their state was abruptly falling apart. England was fringe even within the Roman empire, so the latinisation was less intense here than say Gaul which neighboured Italia. The Welsh, who managed to hold out against England until the 11th-13th century, did however contribute to the Christianisation of the pagan Saxons after they arrived, and the spread of Latin.
>>225519639me and your mum
