![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
inulroDid anybody else watch Britain AD, the new Francis Pryor vehicle?
I missed the first episode, and was relatively impressed with the conclusions drawn in the second one, though I'm not really in a position to know how credible the theory about 5th-century Britain being a seat of Classical learning is (that there was no major collapse of society after the Roman withdrawal isn't news).
This week's was more problematic. He claims that there was NO anglo-saxon invasion at all. Again, anyone seirously interested in the topic now knows that huge hordes didn't just invade & wipe out the native population, but as far as I'm concerned, the linguistic evidence says that there was a significant influx of Germanic people. We've got two things to compare this with: Roman Britain, and the Norman invasion. The first left little linguistic trace (otherwise we'd be speaking a Romance language), the latter much more (but even so gave us a hybrid between Germanic & Romance). So presumably there's some critical mass at which a language becomes dominant.
I'm also in no position to know whether the woman from Glasgow University was talking out of her arse when she said that there are traces of Celtic languages in English in that the other Germanic languages are more dependent on endings while English is dependent on word order. I suspect, however, that I was taught that this occurred much later than the 7th or 8th century as the programme claimed. (I can even see my copy of A History of English from here, but it would take me hours to find it, if it's even in there).
Thoughts?
FWIW, I know who Pryor is from reading Seahenge, which is only peripherally about Seahenge. I found it a very good book; though a friend who knows more about archaeology than I do thinks that Pryor is too fixated on ritual aspects.
This was the last, though next week in its place is apparently a series about how the 14th century was the worst century ever, starting with the Black Death. I might have to watch for heckling purposes.
I missed the first episode, and was relatively impressed with the conclusions drawn in the second one, though I'm not really in a position to know how credible the theory about 5th-century Britain being a seat of Classical learning is (that there was no major collapse of society after the Roman withdrawal isn't news).
This week's was more problematic. He claims that there was NO anglo-saxon invasion at all. Again, anyone seirously interested in the topic now knows that huge hordes didn't just invade & wipe out the native population, but as far as I'm concerned, the linguistic evidence says that there was a significant influx of Germanic people. We've got two things to compare this with: Roman Britain, and the Norman invasion. The first left little linguistic trace (otherwise we'd be speaking a Romance language), the latter much more (but even so gave us a hybrid between Germanic & Romance). So presumably there's some critical mass at which a language becomes dominant.
I'm also in no position to know whether the woman from Glasgow University was talking out of her arse when she said that there are traces of Celtic languages in English in that the other Germanic languages are more dependent on endings while English is dependent on word order. I suspect, however, that I was taught that this occurred much later than the 7th or 8th century as the programme claimed. (I can even see my copy of A History of English from here, but it would take me hours to find it, if it's even in there).
Thoughts?
FWIW, I know who Pryor is from reading Seahenge, which is only peripherally about Seahenge. I found it a very good book; though a friend who knows more about archaeology than I do thinks that Pryor is too fixated on ritual aspects.
This was the last, though next week in its place is apparently a series about how the 14th century was the worst century ever, starting with the Black Death. I might have to watch for heckling purposes.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-09-22 01:26 pm (UTC)I've read conflict articles about DNA tests. Some says that most Brits are decended from the "celts/anciet britons"....others saying that the English have more in common with Germanic people, and it's just the welsh, cornish, manx and scots that have celtic connections. Who knows!
English does have some traces of celtic languages according to Bill Bryson's Mother tongue.
Like I saw I'm not an expert...got a few of his books in the to be read pile. I'll leave it to someone who knows what they are on about :)
no subject
Date: 2004-09-22 01:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-22 01:29 pm (UTC)According to it, the Celts originated from the area around the Danube, and ruled (more or less) most of central-west Europe before the Gauls (visigoths and such) rose up and took over. It was after that point that the Celts were relegated to the British Isles areas.
Or something to that effect. A lot of it was referenced to Julius Ceaser, who's writings refered to the people in Gaul as Celts more often than Gauls, amongst other things.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-23 11:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-22 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-09-22 04:08 pm (UTC)