3 ms·

> Modern historians don't use the term Anglo-Saxon much these days, so it's not especially important. To you. And to a bunch of people who have to live in fear

• klodolph 5y ago
  Historians don't use the term because it's a bit imprecise and outdated. If you were talking about the "Anglo-Saxon language", you would probably say "Old English" instead. If you were talking about the people, you would probably want to make it clear whether you were talking about the Germanic tribes who migrated to England starting in the 5th century, or whether you were talking about the English people in the 5th-11th century, which also included the indigenous British population. Just as an illustration of why the term "Anglo-Saxon" muddles things, we have the person in the article who seems to think that Murphy is an Anglo-Saxon surname, when it is clearly Celtic in origin. I'm not doubting that the author is Anglo-Saxon... just pointing out that his suname, itself, is not. I'm not a historian, so I'm just relating the parts of the issue that I understand. There are articles online by historians that go into greater depth explaining why historians tend to avoid the term "Anglo-Saxon" these days, and why the term became so popular in the 18th and 19th century. Not sure what "uncomfortable truth" you are referring to. If you have something to say, spit it out. I also don't understand why someone would "fear being canceled" just because they used a somewhat obsolete term.