September 10, 2004

• They're laying it on wi' a trool here, but actually Scots English is a legitimate form quite independent of English English. It's a pity in a way that the English language in general isn't called 'Anglo-Saxon' or something in order to differentiate it from the language of England specifically. The effect is that Scots tend to think of English as a foreign language imposed on their ancestors at some stage in the past. Scots Gaelic is regarded as the real original national tongue, although I believe it actually came from Ireland, and has no deeper roots in Scotland than English: the original Celtic language of Scotland being a Brythonic one, more like Welsh. I dare say someone who actually knows about this stuff will put me right if I have got this wrong.
• Scots language in action
• i love talking with my scottish friend angela, although sometimes it's difficult for each of us to understand the other. speaking as a person with a boring "american" accent, i adore the crisp lilt of the scots. aye! ("it it's not scottish, it's CRAP!")
• I find a good Scots Dictionary is a must for reading history or literature related to Scotland; The Concise Scots Dictionary and its companion volume, the Scots Thesaurus have been useful; both are products of the Scottish National Dictionary Association. FORMER FRIEND Plegmund, the kindest thing I have to say following your remarks on Gaelic is that you have spoken like a true Sassenach, which genetic MISFORTUNE I suppose you cannot help, but do not number me among those who are reconciled to such pitiable displays of ignorance. /joke. Mostly
• I can see I have to mind my Ps and Qs here. Perhaps some Scottish poems will help diminish bees' indignation? *Makes note on very short list headed "About beeswacky" - possible Scottish origins ??*
• Here's a real Scots dictionary, the best on the topic, bar none.
• Actually, beeswacky, Plegmund has it right. I've been recently reading a book by an Iron Age archeologist addressing contemporary conceptions and misconceptions about the Celts. Basically, the place we now call Scotland was invaded at about the same time by the Irish Scotti, and Germanic speaking Anglo-Saxons, the former settling in the highlands, the latter in the lowlands (thus Scots English does not come from England at all, though undoubtedly influenced by, and influencing England - remember that it was Scotland that took over England in 1604, and the posh English accent in James' day was Scottish. It was also the Scots who pushed for unification in 1707, and throughout the 18th century, it was the English who were more likely to be separatists. The Scottish wanted access to the English colonies - and could only get that by making them British colonies.) As far as the local tribes were concerned, both the Scottish and the English were invaders, most notable for being pagan, rather than their language groups (and as Plegmund notes, Scottish Gaelic is very different from British languages like Welsh or Breton - It is an entirely different branch of the language family, I think more different from Welsh than German from English). There was no pan-Celtic identity (before the 18th century), any more than there has even been a pan-Germanic (from Norse to English) identity. What archeologists had thought was an Celtic settling of the isles in the few hundred years before the Romas, they now think was just a case of local people speaking related languages adopting continental noble fashions - their farming techniques, for instance, didn't change. With the Roman invasions, there is a possibility that the British may have felt some joint identity (in the face of this other), but much of England and southern Wales, this gave way to Romano-British identity, and then a Christian one. It probably never included the Irish, who were very different - and who were invading just at the same time the Anglo-Saxons were. I agree, Plegmund - a name like "Anglo-Saxon" would be good, to clear up ideas that the language only originated in England. It might also help with contemporary confusions with adjectives for English speakers all over the world. I tend to use "Anglophone" or just plain "Anglo", to be clear that I mean the language, and not the nationality.
• (And I say all this as the decendant of Scots peasants forced off their land in the Highland clearances - by their Scottish landlords. But we should never let ethnic pride get in the way of trying to understand history.)
• >>Irish Scotti obviously, the origin of the scotti dog. heh.
• jb, history is consentual. Fresh interpretations give historians an occupation. Potted pre-history: Everyone from outside Africa is an invader. Potted history: The folk in Scotland you call Anglo-Saxon are Sassenachs. They can't help this, 'tis just the fate fallen on them. Lowlanders are also Sassenachs. The Irish are cousins who had the misfortune to live in a mountainless land, which meant one traditional pastime of the clans there (cattle stealing) was somewhat restricted due to a lack of deep valleys or and clefts into which one could tidy purloined animals and from which one could harry the pursuers. On the other hand, the Irish had more arable soil, but then the poor things went and planted potatoes in it and look where that got them. Better to stick to oats even if it means the result will be an Infliction of Porridge afterwards. The Highlands were a trifle bloody to live in at times, squabbling between clans being a way of life in the bad old days. The Highlanders with the sense got the hell out of Scotland the first chance that offered. More seriously: There were no peasants among the Highlanders. A clan was a group of people more or less closely related to one another by (mostly) consanguinous ties and who inhabited/claimed certain land. One of these would be called the chief and was looked to for leadership. If he proved worthless, he was usually replaced, not necessarily by anyone closely kin to him. Only by slow degrees did the Sassenach notions of aristocracy prevail to the degree the chief held title to what originally the common heritance of all the members of the clan, but this was a relatively recent erosion of the traditional authority within a Highland clan. The feudal system the Normans imposed on the England did not exist in the Highlands nor the Isles.
• I don't quite understand - what do you mean by "potted history"? I was just pointing out, as I believe Plegmund was, that the Anglo Scots in Scotland have the same length of history and legitimacy (for people who fuss about these things)* as the Gaelic Scots, no more and no less. They certainly were Sassenachs, but they were different Sassenachs from those ones the Normans conquered (aka the English) - made more different by the fact that they weren't part of that Empire, at least not for very long (briefly around the time of Edward I, I think - but then that William Wallace guy stopped it - that bit (and little else) of Braveheart is true). If the Sassenachs are to be labelled invaders, so should the Gaelics. I haven't done enough reading in Scottish history to say for sure, but I find the concept that there were no Scots peasants in the later middle ages and early modern period a bit unbelievable, if only because I have heard historians of Scotland talk about Scots peasants. Even within a clan system as you describe, one can have a great deal of heirarchy, with people who are all but peasants to their cheiftains, even if they are not legally villeins or serfs. I hope to know more about this at the end of this year (Social structure is one of my research fields, and I want to extend my knowledge beyond England to Scotland, Ireland and Wales). I do know that the Scottish cheiftains were influenced by English thought on property in the 18th and 19th centuries - but that had actually nothing to do with feudalism. It's a post-feudal paradigm of landlord and tenant-at-will (who can be evicted at anytime), not a feudal paradigm of lord and vassal (where the lord has certain responsibilities to his inferiors in exchange for their obedience and respect), that inspired enclosures and clearances in both England and Scotland. Though whether you can see this as "English" influence per se is debateable - the noble classes in question were at the same time in the process of forming (through intermarriage and a growing joint identity) a British upper class that would include the English, Scots and Anglo-Irish. Indeed, since the nineteenth century, the Royal Family has considered their home to be in Scotland. *Personally, I find it too nationalist to be talking about anyone on your country as if they had more right to be there - Gaelic Scots, Anglo Scots or South Asian Scots, all are equally Scots.
• Lord grant that Marshal Wade May by thy mighty aid Victory bring. May he sedition hush, And like a torrent rush, Rebellious Scots to crush. God save the Queen!
• ...that bit (and little else) of Braveheart is true) Does that mean it really wasn't Mel's ass? Damn.
• Good mefi comment from a Scot on Scots.