3 ms·

> The Norman Conquest brought French kings I stopped at the first sentence. It's historically illiterate to say the Normans were 'French', in particular Willia

by krona 3y ago

> The Norman Conquest brought French kings I stopped at the first sentence. It's historically illiterate to say the Normans were 'French', in particular William I. If that were the case, then Edward the Confessor was just as 'French' as the Normans who replaced the house of Wessex. The etymology of the word Norman tells you all you need to know.

Wytwwww 3y ago
Weren't the Normans more culturally French than anything else at that point? William the Conqueror did speak it as his first language.
- inglor_cz 3y ago
  Normans were definitely French speaking, though their cultural pecularities made them a specific unit. For example, they were considered very warlike, and even Norman clergy was inclined to carry weapons and engage in combat, which wasn't typical elsewhere. If we consider 911 to be the year when Normandy was founded, it took just two centuries for Norman power to expand from Normandy to England, South Italy and Palestine, which is quite a remarkable feat. In contrast, power of the Capetian kings remained limited to the region around Paris. Which is a testament to the aforementioned warlikeness of the Normans.
inglor_cz 3y ago
It is somewhat unwise to stop reading at the subtitle. Subtitles are often chosen by editors, not authors, and may not reflect the author's competence. Plus, the subtitle only requires one correction to become entirely true: instead of "French", it should say "French-speaking". Because by the time of the Conquest, the switch of the Normans' vernacular from Old Norse to Old French was long complete. By some four to five generations or so.
- amyjess 3y ago
  > instead of "French", it should say "French-speaking" Mostly true, but the Norman language isn't 100% the same as French, and the differences affected the development of the English language. For example, if England had been conquered by true French speakers, the words "war" and "cat" would have been something like "guar" and "chat" instead. In fact, there are a few doublets where we borrowed both the Norman and French versions of a word into English. A good example of this is "warranty" and "guarantee"; the former is Norman, and the latter is French. Another is "cattle" and "chattel"; again, the former is Norman, and the latter is French.
  - inglor_cz 3y ago
    Yes, but we are talking about the situation 1000 years ago, when languages weren't standardized and, as a result, much more fuzzy. Today you can say where, say, German ends and Dutch begins; but it used to be a continuum. Same with French. Even Medieval Latin spoken by the learned people was a bit different from Classical Latin of Cicero, and that was a language which was taken care of by educated, literate people. Vernaculars of the day ... well, tended to be different from region to region, because there was no one with enough influence and authority to codify them. Looking at that situation, I am fine with classifying 11-th century Norman as "basically French". Mutual intelligibility was certainly fairly high. William the Conqueror would need no interpreter when talking to some Parisian merchant. There were some Norse leftovers present, but such was the situation everywhere.
  - seszett 3y ago
    > For example, if England had been conquered by true French speakers, the words "war" and "cat" would have been something like "guar" and "chat" instead. Even today there are dialects in France where people say "cat" (with a silent t) instead of "chat", and nobody would call them "not French", or not French-speaking, for that.
  - qwytw 3y ago
    > by true French speakers Was that really a thing in the middle ages? Every region had its own dialect and people living in the half of the territory of modern France didn't even speak any form of "French". e.g. Occitan is as Italian or Spanish as it is French.
adastra22 3y ago
You are being downvoted in part because if you’d kept reading you’d find that info is all in the article.
RockyMcNuts 3y ago
The Normans were ethnically Vikings from Norway (i.e. North-men). In 911 the Franks made a treaty giving them Normandy so they would stop raiding and ally with France. After a while they resumed their raiding habits, invaded England and also Sicily and southern Italy. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Norman-people https://www.britannica.com/topic/Norman-people

by krona 3y ago

Wytwwww 3y ago

Weren't the Normans more culturally French than anything else at that point? William the Conqueror did speak it as his first language.

inglor_cz 3y ago
Normans were definitely French speaking, though their cultural pecularities made them a specific unit. For example, they were considered very warlike, and even Norman clergy was inclined to carry weapons and engage in combat, which wasn't typical elsewhere. If we consider 911 to be the year when Normandy was founded, it took just two centuries for Norman power to expand from Normandy to England, South Italy and Palestine, which is quite a remarkable feat. In contrast, power of the Capetian kings remained limited to the region around Paris. Which is a testament to the aforementioned warlikeness of the Normans.

inglor_cz 3y ago

It is somewhat unwise to stop reading at the subtitle. Subtitles are often chosen by editors, not authors, and may not reflect the author's competence. Plus, the subtitle only requires one correction to become entirely true: instead of "French", it should say "French-speaking". Because by the time of the Conquest, the switch of the Normans' vernacular from Old Norse to Old French was long complete. By some four to five generations or so.

amyjess 3y ago
> instead of "French", it should say "French-speaking" Mostly true, but the Norman language isn't 100% the same as French, and the differences affected the development of the English language. For example, if England had been conquered by true French speakers, the words "war" and "cat" would have been something like "guar" and "chat" instead. In fact, there are a few doublets where we borrowed both the Norman and French versions of a word into English. A good example of this is "warranty" and "guarantee"; the former is Norman, and the latter is French. Another is "cattle" and "chattel"; again, the former is Norman, and the latter is French.
- inglor_cz 3y ago
  Yes, but we are talking about the situation 1000 years ago, when languages weren't standardized and, as a result, much more fuzzy. Today you can say where, say, German ends and Dutch begins; but it used to be a continuum. Same with French. Even Medieval Latin spoken by the learned people was a bit different from Classical Latin of Cicero, and that was a language which was taken care of by educated, literate people. Vernaculars of the day ... well, tended to be different from region to region, because there was no one with enough influence and authority to codify them. Looking at that situation, I am fine with classifying 11-th century Norman as "basically French". Mutual intelligibility was certainly fairly high. William the Conqueror would need no interpreter when talking to some Parisian merchant. There were some Norse leftovers present, but such was the situation everywhere.
- seszett 3y ago
  > For example, if England had been conquered by true French speakers, the words "war" and "cat" would have been something like "guar" and "chat" instead. Even today there are dialects in France where people say "cat" (with a silent t) instead of "chat", and nobody would call them "not French", or not French-speaking, for that.
- qwytw 3y ago
  > by true French speakers Was that really a thing in the middle ages? Every region had its own dialect and people living in the half of the territory of modern France didn't even speak any form of "French". e.g. Occitan is as Italian or Spanish as it is French.

adastra22 3y ago

You are being downvoted in part because if you’d kept reading you’d find that info is all in the article.

RockyMcNuts 3y ago

The Normans were ethnically Vikings from Norway (i.e. North-men). In 911 the Franks made a treaty giving them Normandy so they would stop raiding and ally with France. After a while they resumed their raiding habits, invaded England and also Sicily and southern Italy. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Norman-people https://www.britannica.com/topic/Norman-people