Re: Sup****t Cornish Rights

"Ciaran" <ciaran@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:459F3801.9070902@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Very interesting discussion. I am cross-posting it on the Cornish and
> > Breton newsgroups.
>
> Speaking of Conan/Conwy (inpiration for King Arthur ?), when I visited
> Breizh (Brittany) I met a young French lady who told me she was going to
> the place where King Arthur and the round table really existed. It lies
> in a forested part of central Brittany. His exploits expanding the
> Breton kingdom eastwards tally nicely with the military success
> atrributed to Arthur and the knights of the round table (speaking of
> which Breton knights were apparently the main component of the Norman
> Conquest army and the Norman royal line was part Breton - more of an
> inpiration for Arthurian legend ?).

I think it is im****tant to distinguish in nomlacature between
Breton/Britons
and British/Anglo saxon/Norman

Since one version of history views the Normans as foreignors and the
Saxons
being locals. In fact teh Britons would view the later Vikings Saxons and
Angles as "foreigners". In addition the Nornmans were viking i.e. four
centuries they were "norsemen" . After Paris was sacked by them
contuinually
going up stream the king of France (Paris) granted then Normandy if they
would leave him alone.

Anyway Back to the Beetons. A few years ago I was at a conference about
Ireland/scotland links. If you go back ten centuries Ireland was forested.
It is unlikely one would traverse the country. Sea lanes linked peoples.
They were the "superhighway" of the day. Take the Dal Riada. In the 3rd?
5th? century they had a civilisation including north wales East Ireland
west
scotland and the Islands therein.   Maybe cornwall Britanny and Basque
came
into the mix?

But why shouldnt cornwall Britanny bo so linked? It is only since we have
seen maps and road and rail join land places closer together that we think
in those terms. Indeed Britanny is West of London. and how are little
pieces
of France that fell into the Sea (the channel islands) suddenly part of
Briton? :)


[quote]
Mind you, trade and other commerce between areas obviously doesn't
necessarily mean that the general populations of the trading
populations shared a common language, [/quote]

they did! and a common culture. Actually England didnt share a common
language at the time!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwestern_Brythonic_language
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~marisal/ie/celtic.html


http://www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/kingdoms/brittany.html
http://www.earlybritishkingdoms.com/archaeology/tombeaum.html
http://www.brittanytourism.com/eng/preparez/Patrimoine_Culture/legendes.cfm

By the way the Rohan trace back from the eighteenth century to Conan
Meriadoc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohan_(family)