Jump to content

Talk:British Isles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleBritish Isles was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 26, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 5, 2007Good article nomineeListed
October 16, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
July 5, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Delisted good article


A can of worms, but worth a try

[edit]

So, I know this isn't likely to get anywhere, but it's worth considering the historical nature of using the term "Normans" to describe the 12th Century invaders of Ireland. There is actually a fairly robust consensus among scholars of Ireland (at least among those who have critically examined this terminology) that the term's an anachronism, belonging mainly to the 11th Century, and is unhistorical when applied to Englishmen of the late 12th & 13th Century[1]. As Gillingham also notes (see link), hybrid terminologies like "Anglo-Norman" were unknown at the time, and entered the lexicon only in the late 19th Century, when attempts were made to draw a parallel between the 1169 invasion of Ireland and the 1066 invasion of England. Prior to this, these invaders were described simply as 'Englishmen'.

I realize this isn't likely to get anywhere. "Norman" and "Anglo-Norman" are so widely used on Wikipedia and in pop history that even many historians use these labels out of convenience. But it is really no more accurate than saying the Battle of Hastings was fought between Anglo-Saxons and "Vikings". In the same way the Norse intermingled with the Franks and became 'Normans' in the 11th Century, the Norman invaders of England assimilated with the Anglo-Saxons and became Englishmen a century later. That's also why a number of Old English surnames in Ireland, like Stapleton and Birmingham, have Anglo-Saxon genealogies (and even here, I frequently come across Irish genealogy sites erroneously describing Stapleton as an "Anglo-Norman" name). Jonathan f1 (talk) 18:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem is, whether anachronistic or not, 'Anglo-Norman' has become so entrenched in the English language to describe these invaders that 'common usage' will apply. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I figured, and perhaps a more appropriate place for this discussion would be on the main article for the so-called "Norman" invasion of Ireland. I think there are enough reliable sources disputing this terminology that a section addressing this may be due. Jonathan f1 (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any more proof than just a single abstract of a chapter? The Banner talk 20:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it's the abstract for a whole chapter in a history book about ethnic identity in the Middle Ages. Thomas Bartlett also addressed this issue in Ireland: A History, and even went so far as to describe Norman terminology as pseudo-historical:
"Second, it was an English invasion and partial conquest: all talk of the 'Normans' or the 'Anglo-Normans', or 'Anglo-French' or even the 'Cambro-Normans' coming to Ireland is simply ahistorical. The invaders called themselves English (Engleis, Angli), were called Saxain (=English) or Gaill (=foreigners) by the Irish, and for the next seven hundred years were designated as English in the historical literature. Contemporaries never described them as Norman, Anglo-Norman or much less Cambro-Norman. Only in the late nineteenth century, and largely on grounds of political sensitivity, was the identity of the English invaders fudged by these non-historical terms. This is not merely a matter of semantics, for the cultural identity, if not always the national origins, of the invaders was indisputably English." (p. 34[2]) Jonathan f1 (talk) 00:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And that quote is about the only part of the book that backs up your "claim". Very shaky ground. The Banner talk 00:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]