Previous post
To borrow from a Monty Python movie title, And Now For Something Completely Different: British academics are saying that Anglo-Saxons should be cancelled.
Hold on — what? Weren’t they the source of the name “England,” which means “Land of the Angles”? Or our modern English language, which emerged from the Anglo-Saxon Old English? (Not to mention the American pejorative WASP, meaning “White Anglo-Saxon Protestant:” upper class white people who live mainly on the East Coast and occupy the Social Register.)
Yes, says the University of Cambridge, but we need to refute the idea that they were a distinct ethnic group. The university is also claiming that there were never any distinct Scottish, Irish, or Welsh ethnicities with ancient roots, either.
That’ll make an Irish pub patron spit out his Guinness.
Mind you that this “anti-racist” drivel comes from Cambridge’s “Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic,” which lacks a sense of irony, apparently.
We need to fight “myths of nationalism,” the department insists:
One concern has been to address recent concerns over the use of the term “Anglo-Saxon” and its perceived connection to ethnic/racial English identity …
In general, ASNC teaching seeks to dismantle the basis of myths of nationalism — that there was ever a “British,” “English,” “Scottish,” “Welsh,” or “Irish” people with a coherent and ancient ethnic identity …
Even the BBC is getting in on the anti-racist act, which has upset some Brits.
This is from the same national news outlet that in 2016 reported that one-third of modern English DNA comes from — you guessed it — Anglo-Saxons.
Anglo-Saxons not only contributed DNA to England, but they changed the culture of Roman Britain to Germanic. In the early 5th century, as Roman rule was collapsing, peoples from northern Europe — the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes — settled in eastern England, gradually moving westward. They were pagans, but became Christianized during the 7th-8th centuries.
Anglo-Saxons were dominant in early medieval England until 1066, when Harold, the last Anglo-Saxon king, was killed at the Battle of Hastings. At that point the French Normans, under William the Conquerer, took over England. But even though French became the official language of royalty and the legal system, Anglo-Saxons still maintained their language and customs. In addition, William ruled as an upholder of the Anglo-Saxon laws of Edward the Confessor. After adding in some Norman French ideas, poof! English Common Law was born.
Death of Harold, Bayeux Tapestry. Trevor Huxham/flickr/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
The Anglo-Saxons as a group are gone now, although their DNA lives on in modern British people and in those of English heritage. Plus, as previously mentioned, they provided England with the country’s name, as well as established English Christianity. And from the Anglo-Saxons came the most dominant language in the world: English.
For us Americans, we see England as sort of our mother country. Her sons of Anglo-Saxon heritage provided us with our language, customs, religion, and the basis for our legal system.
Cambridge wasn’t the first group to cancel Anglo-Saxons. In 2019, Mary Rambaran-Olm, a member of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists, resigned from the group, claiming it encouraged “white supremacy.” She also wrote in Smithsonian Magazine, “The Anglo-Saxon myth perpetuates a false idea of what it means to be “native” to Britain.
The group then concluded that Anglo-Saxon was code word for “whiteness,” and they couldn’t abide that. So they renamed themselves the “International Society for the Study of Early Medieval England.” Presumably they felt better about themselves, having signaled their virtue.
However, in 2020 over 70 British academics signed a statement, arguing that this sort of nonsense is an American import:
The conditions in which the term is encountered, and how it is perceived, are very different in the USA from elsewhere.
Yeah, regrettably we Yanks are the source of this insanity.
The academics added:
In the UK the period has been carefully presented and discussed in popular and successful documentaries and exhibitions over many years.
The term “Anglo-Saxon” is historically accurate in the sense that from the 8th century it was used externally to a dominant population in southern Britain.
Sadly, however, England’s historic University of Cambridge, which dates back to 1209, has decided to embrace the daftness of American progressives.
Dear England, the land of many of my ancestors, I’m sorry we Americans exported this tommyrot. A lot of us on this side of The Pond have had it with these wankers, too.
Welcome, Instapundit readers!
Featured image: Replica of Anglo-Saxon helmet found at Sutton Hoo. Chris Eccles/flickr/cropped/CC BY-ND 2.0.
Royalidiot says: Well if we’re not Anglos and we’re not Saxons or Jutes then who are we?
Kim Hirsch says: If our ancestry is completely Northern European *raises hand* then we’re persona non grata, apparently.
NTSOG says: “England’s historic University of Cambridge, which dates back to 1209, has decided to embrace the daftness of American progressives.”
In short self-important intelligentsia in the UK have followed trendy fools in the USA and are deliberately diving headlong into a new Dark Age so as to prove their virtue and smarts.
Dale says: My last name is Stewart. I should be safe, right? Won’t get canceled?
Cameron says: Self Hating White People are so hot right now!
GWB says: we need to refute the idea that they were a distinct ethnic group
Well, duh. You’re just white. Ain’t nothin’ else – just colors. Looking beyond that to cultural and actual tribal differences would just perpetuate that people really aren’t more than their skin color.
“myths of nationalism,”
Ah, there it is: GLOBALISM. Which is closely tied to the PROGRESSIVE utopia.
Sorry, but you don’t get believed on this one, because we’ve caught you out in all the other lies. We. Don’t. Believe. You. Anymore.
that there was ever a … “Irish” people
I believe both the Firbolg and Tuatha De Danann would like to speak to you about that.
Oh, and every redhead in America.
I’m sorry we Americans exported this tommyrot.
No, don’t let them get away with shifting blame. The university system in England and Great Britain has been rotten for a long time. And they’re the ones who first started, say, arresting people for quietly standing and praying on a public sidewalk. Or banning guns and knives. Or arresting people for what they tweeted. No, you don’t get to lay that blame on me.
Alec Rawls says: More idiots who think that the problem with national Socialism was the nationalism not the Socialism. There are only insignificant differences between National Socialism (fascism) and International Socialism (communism). And both are bottomlessly murderous totalitarian tyrannies whose first central defining characteristic is ruthless violent suppression of all political opposition, either through immediate mass murder, through gulag and concentration camp murder, or through Holodomor (stripping property and livelihoods from dissidents, so that they die of starvation).
National vs international makes no difference. All of the evil comes through the socialism, but communists (international socialists) have been pretending nationalism was the problem with the Nazis since the beginning of WWII (when Adorno and the rest of the commie trash from the Frankfurt School fled Germany and were taken in by American academia.)
The communist have been using this trope to attack nation states for 75 years so it’s not at all surprising to see the rot is still spreading, disgusting as this is. Western communists are at a high point, and are madly destroying as fast as they can.
LGH says: National vs international makes no difference.
And there we should go no further with our consideration of your views on National Socialism.
You are wrong. End of story. Perhaps if you knew what National Socialism was in actuality, rather than just an inbred Jewish propaganda version.
GWB says: Perhaps if you knew what National Socialism was in actuality
Perhaps you would care to lay out your arguments, then? Instead of just anti-semitic insults?
NTSOG says: You’re correct Alec: Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler represented the two sides of the socialist [read: dictatorial communistic] coin. Other European leaders, e.g. Mussolini and Miklós Horthy de Nagybánya from Hungary, joined in with NAZI Germany to get a cut of the spoils until late in the war. Communism/Socialism is the root cause of much evil in the World.
Jim Harr says: “We need to fight “myths of nationalism,” the department insists:”
Remember when colleges and universities were for research and teaching? Good times…
Tattycoram says: I believe you mean to refer to Edward the Confessor.
Kim Hirsch says: Thank you! Fixed it.
This “woke” nonsense is England’s version of America’s 1619 Project. An effort to erase the true identity and culture of native, ethnic English. If there is no such identity, then how can those “claiming to be English” have any more right to that land then, say, the newest batch of Pakistanis or Syrians?
A terrific recounting of the true history of the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons and the sanguine centuries of warfare and ethnic cleansing that turned Britannia into England can be found in my blog series: The Age of Arthur. (Spoiler Alert: the Anglo-Saxons play a BIG part in it!)
https://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com/2017/04/26/the-age-of-arthur-part-one-3/
Penrod says: “Latin Americans not only contributed DNA to the US, but they changed the culture of Euro-America to Latino. In the early 21st century, as American rule was collapsing, peoples from Latin America — the Maya, Zapotec, mestizo — settled in the western US, gradually moving eastward. They were Catholics, but became Marxists during the 21st and 22nd centuries.”
Penrod says: Anti-nationalism seems to me to be simple code for ‘I want world government so there is no place to which dissenters can escape the clutches of my ideal totalitarian state.’
Oddly enough, the very people who advocate for world government seem to be the same people who advocated for the breakup of the colonial empires which were on the way to coalescing into the world government the anti-colonialists wanted. I don’t know how else they expect a world government to form, so breaking up the empires seems like a self-directed step backwards. Perhaps the UN is in their fantasy going acquire it’s own armies fit to invade, conquer, and rule the world.
16 Comments