3 ms·

Ancient flamewar? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Wales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Wales

by seanf 11y ago

mynameismonkey 11y ago
Shwmae, (third?) Welshman checking in. The legal entity that was a Principality ended in 1542, but the P word has stuck over the centuries as a sort of colloquial reference, strongly enough that even ISO only got it right a few years ago. Some of us get offended by it, but mostly only when the Saxons next door use the term.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  Wales was annexed to England and then formally incorporated by the Laws in Wales Act, viz (quoting Wikipedia, apparently quoting the LiW Act 1535): >"That his said Country or Dominion of Wales shall be, stand and continue for ever from henceforth incorporated, united and annexed to and with this his Realm of England;" // So, yes, Wales ceased to be recognised as a principality and instead the lands that formed the area at the time called Wales were, according to Henry VIII, to be referred to only as England. Wasn't this also when English was established as the language to be used in legal proceedings? IIRC the Welsh Language Act 1993 was what changed this situation? I've yet to find definitive details of when Wales officially became a country. It's always struck me that prior to annexation it was only a loose confederation of principalities and that not all of what we now call "Wales" was not a part of the possessions of the English crown. It seems Wales, perhaps first defined by the invading Romans, was then created as an entity only by the English crown's definition of the area in which "Welsh" courts could act. Do you have any input on this?
  - mynameismonkey 11y ago
    Well, I suppose we need to define country, nation, and state first. England annexed Wales, so there must have been a country to annex. Your quote lists Wales as a country. The nation, i.e. the peoples with a common language and culture and within some borders less than the Isle as a whole could I suppose be classified as forming a country post-Roman departure, until such a time as relatively stable borders could be recognised as the geographic borders of the country that nation inhabited, so 5th century? However, your two replies speak more to statehood/governance than nation, to me you're asking the question "when did Wales become a sovereign state" which is a very different question - and as I'm guessing you well know the UK is comprised of four countries, the UK being the sovereign state - none of the four countries are sovereign states unto themselves. > prior to annexation it was only a loose confederation of principalities Which I would classify as a country. The borders were stable-ish, as much as any were for their time, and the people shared a common tongue and culture. Subdividing a country doesn't negate country-hood, does it? The United States has powerful member states, and has accreted states along the way, with borders changing up until what, 1950 something? > I've yet to find definitive details of when Wales officially became a country. Supposing we could find an agreeable definition of "official", I'd be surprised if more than a few relatively recently formed countries can be held to the same standard. When did England become a country? When did China? "Official" recognition creates the need for another entity to be the one recognising. If we go by inclusion in ISO 3166 then I suppose Wales became a country in 2011. if we go by nationality, then one could argue it was a country pre-Roman invasion, and it has progressively shrunk its borders ever since. > It seems Wales, perhaps first defined by the invading Romans, was then created as an entity only by the English crown's definition of the area in which "Welsh" courts could act. Wales, as in, a collection of people sharing a language and customs, was clearly in place for the Romans to come along and see it. Unless we are getting into some metaphysical quantum country state where a country can only be a country once observed, it seems odd to say that the Romans could call it Wales, but the Welsh couldn't do so prior to the Romans turning up and having at it. As for creation by the English, again, the English annexed the country of Wales. The country was there for them to annex. Wales was not in some cat-in-the-box superposition waiting to be seen by hungry Anglo-Saxons. It existed, thus it was annexed. Regardless of its unified authority or lack thereof, a people inhabiting a space called that place home. Fomr your other reply: > When did it become a country? Or if you prefer more specificity: When did the region of land we today call "Wales" acquire any sort of significant unity of governance, as a totality, separate from England? So, the question is in fact: Wales was once a country, got gobbled up and is slowly regaining some independence. When did it become a country _again_? Is that roughly what you're saying? If so, most people would likely point to 1998's creation of a National Welsh Assembly for that one. The reason I think it is important to define the terms, is that while I - as a Welshman - wouldn't consider iron age Britain to be "Wales", I still recognise its ethnic importance on modern day Cymry. I'm no scholar, but given today's borders it's hard for me to not consider post-Roman Wales as the birth of the contemporary geographic and to some degree geopolitical country. So I suppose my answer is it became a country whenever people generally started calling it such, and it became a recognised state whenever some recognising entity recognised it as such.
    - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
      >England annexed Wales, so there must have been a country to annex. // I don't think that's true, the premise is false. There wasn't a country to annex, there was a loose amalgamation of forces fighting under Gwynedd (from what I can tell), because Gwynedd had recently subdued those areas by force. Those areas hadn't been annexed in to a collective country with a single ruler, just like Gwynedd when it paid fealty to the English crown wasn't yet annexed. Alongside that some regions were already in effective possession of the English crown, and some few maybe were neither under Llywellyn's nor John's boot yet [I've not figured that out quite yet in my research]. [...cut for size...] >So, the question is in fact: Wales was once a country, got gobbled up and is slowly regaining some independence. // I think this is a nationalist misdirection. To recapitulate - Deheurbath and Gwynedd always seemed to be at odds, never united in to a common cause or stably under a common leader, nor common rule of law after the Romans, until they both came under the English Crown (just as it was in [the rest of] England). Wales was arguably a country - a single kingdom - for a very brief time but the people of the different kingdoms went their separate ways at the earliest opportunity. These separate kingdoms then got gobbled up, just like the separate Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were gobbled up by Wessex. Unless you consider Kent to have been a country in 1900, say, I can't see how you can consider Wales to have been one then either. I think you're right that since the WAG was established Wales has had some claim to being a "country" but there seems a stronger claim that it's counties, like those of the rest of England are still a part of the country that is the dominion of the English Crown. There has certainly been an effort in the last 80 years or so, since the Council for Wales was created, to make a new country: I'm certainly happy to go along with the WAG being a strong weight in favour of calling Wales a country. It's strange to me that in the UK we had a great Welsh ruler of an historic Welsh line who ruled over all over England [aka "England and Wales"] as a unit, yet many in Wales instead want to look back to the time when the Wales was critically divided between two great powers and when it was most common for Cymry to be killing one another; a brief period that ended with Welsh killing their "own" king [Gruffydd ap Llewellyn]. It strikes me that had Henry VIII chosen a new name for the "land of the Angles", perhaps Cymru, then those who imagine they descend from the Celtic Cymry would have no complaint and would take full part in being citizens of that country. I wonder how getting access to genetic markers will, in the near future, change people's ideas of national identity - if people discover they descend from the invading Irish, Scots, Vikings, Romans, Angles, Jutes or some other group rather than the "native" Celts will they consider themselves less Welsh? More British? Thanks for challenging my arguments and for walking through this with me, happy to get more responses to this if you have them.

Ancient flamewar? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Wales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Wales

by seanf 11y ago

Ancient flamewar? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Wales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Wales

mynameismonkey 11y ago

Shwmae, (third?) Welshman checking in. The legal entity that was a Principality ended in 1542, but the P word has stuck over the centuries as a sort of colloquial reference, strongly enough that even ISO only got it right a few years ago. Some of us get offended by it, but mostly only when the Saxons next door use the term.

pbhjpbhj 11y ago
Wales was annexed to England and then formally incorporated by the Laws in Wales Act, viz (quoting Wikipedia, apparently quoting the LiW Act 1535): >"That his said Country or Dominion of Wales shall be, stand and continue for ever from henceforth incorporated, united and annexed to and with this his Realm of England;" // So, yes, Wales ceased to be recognised as a principality and instead the lands that formed the area at the time called Wales were, according to Henry VIII, to be referred to only as England. Wasn't this also when English was established as the language to be used in legal proceedings? IIRC the Welsh Language Act 1993 was what changed this situation? I've yet to find definitive details of when Wales officially became a country. It's always struck me that prior to annexation it was only a loose confederation of principalities and that not all of what we now call "Wales" was not a part of the possessions of the English crown. It seems Wales, perhaps first defined by the invading Romans, was then created as an entity only by the English crown's definition of the area in which "Welsh" courts could act. Do you have any input on this?
- mynameismonkey 11y ago
  Well, I suppose we need to define country, nation, and state first. England annexed Wales, so there must have been a country to annex. Your quote lists Wales as a country. The nation, i.e. the peoples with a common language and culture and within some borders less than the Isle as a whole could I suppose be classified as forming a country post-Roman departure, until such a time as relatively stable borders could be recognised as the geographic borders of the country that nation inhabited, so 5th century? However, your two replies speak more to statehood/governance than nation, to me you're asking the question "when did Wales become a sovereign state" which is a very different question - and as I'm guessing you well know the UK is comprised of four countries, the UK being the sovereign state - none of the four countries are sovereign states unto themselves. > prior to annexation it was only a loose confederation of principalities Which I would classify as a country. The borders were stable-ish, as much as any were for their time, and the people shared a common tongue and culture. Subdividing a country doesn't negate country-hood, does it? The United States has powerful member states, and has accreted states along the way, with borders changing up until what, 1950 something? > I've yet to find definitive details of when Wales officially became a country. Supposing we could find an agreeable definition of "official", I'd be surprised if more than a few relatively recently formed countries can be held to the same standard. When did England become a country? When did China? "Official" recognition creates the need for another entity to be the one recognising. If we go by inclusion in ISO 3166 then I suppose Wales became a country in 2011. if we go by nationality, then one could argue it was a country pre-Roman invasion, and it has progressively shrunk its borders ever since. > It seems Wales, perhaps first defined by the invading Romans, was then created as an entity only by the English crown's definition of the area in which "Welsh" courts could act. Wales, as in, a collection of people sharing a language and customs, was clearly in place for the Romans to come along and see it. Unless we are getting into some metaphysical quantum country state where a country can only be a country once observed, it seems odd to say that the Romans could call it Wales, but the Welsh couldn't do so prior to the Romans turning up and having at it. As for creation by the English, again, the English annexed the country of Wales. The country was there for them to annex. Wales was not in some cat-in-the-box superposition waiting to be seen by hungry Anglo-Saxons. It existed, thus it was annexed. Regardless of its unified authority or lack thereof, a people inhabiting a space called that place home. Fomr your other reply: > When did it become a country? Or if you prefer more specificity: When did the region of land we today call "Wales" acquire any sort of significant unity of governance, as a totality, separate from England? So, the question is in fact: Wales was once a country, got gobbled up and is slowly regaining some independence. When did it become a country _again_? Is that roughly what you're saying? If so, most people would likely point to 1998's creation of a National Welsh Assembly for that one. The reason I think it is important to define the terms, is that while I - as a Welshman - wouldn't consider iron age Britain to be "Wales", I still recognise its ethnic importance on modern day Cymry. I'm no scholar, but given today's borders it's hard for me to not consider post-Roman Wales as the birth of the contemporary geographic and to some degree geopolitical country. So I suppose my answer is it became a country whenever people generally started calling it such, and it became a recognised state whenever some recognising entity recognised it as such.
  - pbhjpbhj 11y ago
    >England annexed Wales, so there must have been a country to annex. // I don't think that's true, the premise is false. There wasn't a country to annex, there was a loose amalgamation of forces fighting under Gwynedd (from what I can tell), because Gwynedd had recently subdued those areas by force. Those areas hadn't been annexed in to a collective country with a single ruler, just like Gwynedd when it paid fealty to the English crown wasn't yet annexed. Alongside that some regions were already in effective possession of the English crown, and some few maybe were neither under Llywellyn's nor John's boot yet [I've not figured that out quite yet in my research]. [...cut for size...] >So, the question is in fact: Wales was once a country, got gobbled up and is slowly regaining some independence. // I think this is a nationalist misdirection. To recapitulate - Deheurbath and Gwynedd always seemed to be at odds, never united in to a common cause or stably under a common leader, nor common rule of law after the Romans, until they both came under the English Crown (just as it was in [the rest of] England). Wales was arguably a country - a single kingdom - for a very brief time but the people of the different kingdoms went their separate ways at the earliest opportunity. These separate kingdoms then got gobbled up, just like the separate Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were gobbled up by Wessex. Unless you consider Kent to have been a country in 1900, say, I can't see how you can consider Wales to have been one then either. I think you're right that since the WAG was established Wales has had some claim to being a "country" but there seems a stronger claim that it's counties, like those of the rest of England are still a part of the country that is the dominion of the English Crown. There has certainly been an effort in the last 80 years or so, since the Council for Wales was created, to make a new country: I'm certainly happy to go along with the WAG being a strong weight in favour of calling Wales a country. It's strange to me that in the UK we had a great Welsh ruler of an historic Welsh line who ruled over all over England [aka "England and Wales"] as a unit, yet many in Wales instead want to look back to the time when the Wales was critically divided between two great powers and when it was most common for Cymry to be killing one another; a brief period that ended with Welsh killing their "own" king [Gruffydd ap Llewellyn]. It strikes me that had Henry VIII chosen a new name for the "land of the Angles", perhaps Cymru, then those who imagine they descend from the Celtic Cymry would have no complaint and would take full part in being citizens of that country. I wonder how getting access to genetic markers will, in the near future, change people's ideas of national identity - if people discover they descend from the invading Irish, Scots, Vikings, Romans, Angles, Jutes or some other group rather than the "native" Celts will they consider themselves less Welsh? More British? Thanks for challenging my arguments and for walking through this with me, happy to get more responses to this if you have them.