Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No french

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No french

    Just asking
    What if there were no french.

    The Us revoulotion would have failed without their support and even if it did work the US would of lost 1812.

  • #2
    IF there were no French? Well then there would have been no Hasting which means we would not have had England as we know it. Which might mean that England did not colonize NA and all of the Americas would be Spanish and perhaps Germany would be the #1 power in the world or perhaps Spain
    "Ask not what your country can do for you"

    Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

    you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

    Comment


    • #3
      No French? Fewer obnoxious waiters, but no Juliet Binoche. Does that mean that France woud have been filled up with Germans or with grumpy Engish second home owners mowing their lawn all day.

      By the way the US did lose the War of 1812 I'm afraid, even without French help.
      What would Occam say?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by notwillW View Post
        Just asking
        What if there were no french.

        The Us revolution would have failed without their support and even if it did work the US would of lost 1812.
        No French? Where to start?

        There wouldn't have been a need for a US revolution minus Hastings and with an Anglo-Saxon monarchy intact. The US and Commonwealth would have been settled far more peaceably by folks who weren't looking to flee from Norman rule.

        But then the sheer horror of the thought. French food, wine, cuisine, culture, language. Even English wouldn't be the same, two-track language now that it is- why a Polish chap told me the other day that it has more words than any other language, and I replied that that's because you get two++ for the price of one.

        No, no, even with all the woes they've bestowed on us English, I couldn't imagine a world without them.
        Tactics are based on Weapons... Strategy on Movement... and Movement on Supply.
        (J. F. C. Fuller 1878-1966)

        Comment


        • #5
          yes you are right

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Half Pint View Post
            IF there were no French? Well then there would have been no Hasting which means we would not have had England as we know it. Which might mean that England did not colonize NA and all of the Americas would be Spanish and perhaps Germany would be the #1 power in the world or perhaps Spain

            Theres till would have been a Hastings possibly because the invaders werent Fench they were Norman who certainly werent French and would have vey miffed to be called so. If there was no Hastings?,Hastings probably slowed political development in England because the Norman conquest brought in the Norman feudal serf system and knocked back development till the Magna Carta got it rolling again. No French? Yeah no waiters for sure but also being English wouldnt have been so much fun!

            Comment


            • #7
              Excellent point on the development of feudalism although as a Hegelian I tend to think that the Feudal system was a neccessary evil on the way to our modern social paradise. It created the centralised state and brought the robber baron aristocrats under some type of control so maybe no bad thing?
              What would Occam say?

              Comment


              • #8
                If it wasn't for the French, we would all be Muslim, remember Charles Martel and Tours. The Islamic hordes cut like a knife through butter the best that the Visigoths and Romans had and it was only the French who stopped them.
                "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Would Martel have thought of himself as French?
                  What would Occam say?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by notwillW View Post
                    The Us revoulotion would have failed without their support.
                    Probably, NWW ... the French had financed the American Revolution (according to Bicheno's Rebels and Redcoats, a lump sum of four million livres in January 1777, equal to the average yearly income of 42,000 families, and two million livres annually after that), supplied the standard musket of the Continental Army, and made defeat of Lord Cornwallis possible with the only French victory over the Royal Navy since 1690. Most of the troops at Yorktown were Frogs, too ... not just the one comic relief character you see in Mel Gibson's The Patriot!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by copenhagen View Post
                      Theres till would have been a Hastings possibly because the invaders werent Fench they were Norman who certainly werent French and would have vey miffed to be called so.
                      It had been a couple of hundred years since the Vikings settled in Normandy, Copenhagen. They became throrougly Romanized ... the language of William the Conqueror and his descendants was really a dialect of French, not Norse, and they adopted the local religion and customs.

                      Someone as far down the line as Richard the Lionheart may not have even been able to speak English. Effectively, several centuries of battles between England and France were a type of interfamily civil war.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by billscottmorri View Post
                        No French? Fewer obnoxious waiters, but no Juliet Binoche. Does that mean that France woud have been filled up with Germans or with grumpy Engish second home owners mowing their lawn all day.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by clackers View Post
                          It had been a couple of hundred years since the Vikings settled in Normandy, Copenhagen. They became throrougly Romanized ... the language of William the Conqueror and his descendants was really a dialect of French, not Norse, and they adopted the local religion and customs.

                          Someone as far down the line as Richard the Lionheart may not have even been able to speak English. Effectively, several centuries of battles between England and France were a type of interfamily civil war.

                          I am aware of that but they did not consider themselves to be French much like their neighbours in Brittany who guarded their independence for many years afterwards.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Well, if you want to look at historical backgrounds like that, Copenhagen, William (Norman, but not French) was attacking Harold Goodwin (West Saxon, but not British) after the death of the English king (Danish, and also not British)!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by billscottmorri View Post
                              Would Martel have thought of himself as French?
                              Well he called himself - dux et princeps Francorum - Duke and Prince of the Franks. Given that France is named after the Franks he was probably much more 'French' than most Frenchmen alive today.
                              "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X