Rule, Britannia!

[antisocialmunky]

Okay, I'm wrong:

B) English culture managed to take over the world in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. :-p

[Atraphoenix]

Okay, I'm wrong:

B) English culture managed to take over the world in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. :-p

Check your memories this helps a bit:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The World before the Napoleonic wars.....

19th may be,
I leave 16th 17th for Spanish and Portuguese domination in the world...
but (17th?) and 18th 19th centuries in Europe French language & Culture were ruling and french revolution swept the Europe.
until 1900s diplomatic language throughout the world was French and English would not be so much a dominating Language and Culture without US. English Language and Culture started to dominate the world after the defeats of France in Napoleonic Wars and mainly after World wars......
and if Axis had won the world you can be sure that the world should be speaking German now....

[Apázlinemjó]

Okay, I'm wrong:

B) English culture managed to take over the world in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. :-p

I guess we would speek French on the internetz' if the French were the winner of the Seven years' war.

[antisocialmunky]

Check your memories this helps a bit:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The World before the Napoleonic wars.....

19th may be,
I leave 16th 17th for Spanish and Portuguese domination in the world...
but (17th?) and 18th 19th centuries in Europe French language & Culture were ruling and french revolution swept the Europe.
until 1900s diplomatic language throughout the world was French and English would not be so much a dominating Language and Culture without US. English Language and Culture started to dominate the world after the defeats of France in Napoleonic Wars and mainly after World wars......
and if Axis had won the world you can be sure that the world should be speaking German now....

Dominate as in increasing.

Over that period:
1) Britain defeats the Spanish Armada and later develops as the preeminant naval power in the world.
2) Spain loses its colonial holdings after the Napoleonic Wars.
3) Britain because the first industrialized power in Europe and stays that way for a good amount of time.
4) Escape Unscathed during the Napoleonic Wars...
5) Britain ends up with the largest empire the world had ever seen.

British culture ends up dominating North America, Oceania, South Asia, a good chunk of Africa, etc.


The point still stands, Longbows are hyped because of English culture.

[Horatius Flaccus]

I was accualy asking if any of the long ones will be in?

Well, since Indian Longbowmen are already in EBI, I would assume they are also in EBII.

I leave 16th 17th for Spanish and Portuguese domination in the world...

I disagree about the Portugese, I would argue the Dutch were at least as strong, if not stronger.

but (17th?) and 18th 19th centuries in Europe French language & Culture were ruling and french revolution swept the Europe.
until 1900s diplomatic language throughout the world was French and English would not be so much a dominating Language and Culture without US. English Language and Culture started to dominate the world after the defeats of France in Napoleonic Wars and mainly after World wars......

Uh, aren't you forgetting something like the 'Industrial revolution'? And the Age of Enlightment wasn't an exclusive French thing too.

and if Axis had won the world you can be sure that the world should be speaking German now....

Wait, what?

I'm sorry for the offtopic!

[Atraphoenix]

5) Britain ends up with the largest empire the world had ever seen.

The biggest Empire of all times :

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The Mongol Empire is the largest contiguous empire in the history of the world.

I have B.A. in ELT and please let me know something about the cultural and linguistic expansion of England. England, UK in fact, dominated the world from Waterloo until World War I. After World War I she started to decline and after World War II she lost her world domination to US and USSR ...
Domination does not mean expansion.

please get back to topic, I do not wanna kill it any more.....

[Aulus Caecina Severus]

Britannia?
Very nice faction to play... nothing else
Briton?
Only the Welsh are what remains of the Britons...
English are Saxons... aren't they?

[The General]

English are Saxons... aren't they?

Norman-Viking-Anglo-Saxon-Roman-Celtic(-Pre-Celtic=Basque?), mixed with more modern immigrants (from India, Pakistan, etc.).

Mostly though Pre-Roman populations mixed with a good deal of Angle/Saxon blood.

Iirc.

[Horatius Flaccus]

Domination does not mean expansion.

Exactly. That's why you can't just say that until Waterloo 'French language and culture were ruling'. Britain was the first to really industrialize as a country, that also counts as 'dominating'.

And when you say that the French revolution 'swept through Europe', you know that you are talking about roughly ten years?

[Meneldil]

Exactly. That's why you can't just say that until Waterloo 'French language and culture were ruling'. Britain was the first to really industrialize as a country, that also counts as 'dominating'.

One can certainly say that. Industrialization has no tie to culture and language. The ruling language in Europe from the late 16th to the mid-19th was french. Same goes for the culture, though the downfall started earlier.

But I'm pretty sure the British Empire was bigger than the Mongol Empire though. Would have to check that.

[bobbin]

The Mongol Empire is the largest contiguous empire in the history of the world.

The word to note here is "Contiguous" meaning connected together. The British empire was bigger, it just wasn't joined up in one big chunk like the Mongol empire.

[Atraphoenix]

If we talk about land size, Mongol Empire should have been more size.
If we talk about population England had more because they survived 700 years later!

I do not want to about culture any more, it is so subjective so it changes from man to man...
If we talk about political domination I would give my vote to:

15th 16th Century Ottomans dominated Europe, world is under debate,
17th 18 th Rise of Spain and Portugal as world powers and Rise of French Language in Europe.
19 th century for me the peak of England domination over the world, Europe is under debate.

If we talk about Cultural domination especially rise of English, I can say that from my univ. years that we discussed the topic for days, the Language itself started to dominate the world after successful colonialism of Britannia of Africa, India, America and Australia. World trade centers were on the hand of Englishmen so trade caused English's Inflation than of course literature etc. but even the golden era artistic works was not starred before 18th and 19 th century even Shakespeare became a world celebrity after 200 years after his death.

[bobbin]

If we talk about land size, Mongol Empire should have been more size.
If we talk about population England had more because they survived 700 years later!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_empires
Some of the empire sizes are quite contriversial (the persian empire is sated as being the biggest ancient empire which a lot of people don't agree with) but with in land area there seems to be a consenus with respect to the British and Mongol sizes.

[Megas Methuselah]

Dominate as in increasing.

Increasing in influence certainly does not mean domination.

The point still stands, Longbows are hyped because of English culture.

I had always thought it was more to do with bands of peasants beating the undisputed nobility on the field of battle.

[antisocialmunky]

You know, I don't care about this conversation. I don't even get why he split off these threads when they will clutter up the forum, screws up context, and has created another parallel thing in the last post. It wasn't even that off topic. We were talking about why Longbowman were so over hyped.

You're cleaning up individual off topic threads at the expense of cluttering up the thread list with off topic threads... Am I the only one that feels like its somewhat counter productive to highlight off topicness?

PS. Maybe we should jsut sticky a thread called 'Random Thoughts' and just merge every single off topic line of reasoning into it. Atleast that'd keep the forum clean.

[Megas Methuselah]

You know, I don't care about this conversation. I don't even get why he split off these threads when they will clutter up the forum, screws up context, and has created another parallel thing in the last post. It wasn't even that off topic. We were talking about why Longbowman were so over hyped.

You're cleaning up individual off topic threads at the expense of cluttering up the thread list with off topic threads... Am I the only one that feels like its somewhat counter productive to highlight off topicness?

PS. Maybe we should jsut sticky a thread called 'Random Thoughts' and just merge every single off topic line of reasoning into it. Atleast that'd keep the forum clean.

I win the argument by default. And yes, Ludens is a strange creature, but he is one we must nonetheless obey. I'm one of the rare exceptions, though, if my infraction count is anything to judge by.

[Ludens]

You're cleaning up individual off topic threads at the expense of cluttering up the thread list with off topic threads... Am I the only one that feels like its somewhat counter productive to highlight off topicness?

Perhaps, but I feel you are exaggerating here. There are only two split threads on the first page and perhaps two or three more in the rest of the forum. That is hardly cluttering up the list.

[Knight of Heaven]

I disagree about the Portugese, I would argue the Dutch were at least as strong, if not stronger.

It depends, of the time frame, first the Portuguese had a great hegemony, in the orient, africa and brazil. only in 17 century that you can call the ducth a great power, even so, it didnt last long. Only maybe in the orient for some time, but they coulnt get the Portuguese out. And the Portuguese end up of reconquering again most of the colonies. Only in the orient was more even. So you can say the duch were stronger then the portuguese for a time period, and the portuguese were stronger then the duch for other time periods. As for the cultural hegemony, i would say the portuguese were always stronger, with efects on todays day.

If you want a hint, they you should know that the Portuguese language is more spoken then the duch, in the 4 corners of the world. Remember the portuguese colonial empire only end in 1999, with the restoring of Macau to the chinese again.

The biggest Empire of all times :

The mongols are you joking? they got a huge land mass to rule, but it wasnt an empire unlike Alexanders empire, the roman, or the british, or the portuguese, or spanish, or the the ducth. My meaning is it had a impact during the living time of his empire, but the cultural efects were few, the mongols were absorved culturaly by his conquered people, unlike the other empires in history. what im saying it was a empire with diferent caracteristics, then the others, naturaly.

[Bloody Sacha]

I have seen on many occasions English-British people who claim the empire started with queen Elizabeth 1 and was cruelly evaporated by chance and circumstance in 1945. Realistically their golden age was from 1748 to 1920. A time span not much greater on average then any other empire.

Whether it was English culture which has iconified the longbow I can not say. I would blame the weapons outright efficiency myself.

[antisocialmunky]

Perhaps, but I feel you are exaggerating here. There are only two split threads on the first page and perhaps two or three more in the rest of the forum. That is hardly cluttering up the list.

That's true, but if you keep doing this... :)

[KARTLOS]

Geoff Capes is the strongest man in the world.

[Brennus]

English- Not really a mix of Celt-Saxon-Angle-Viking-Roman-Norman and Pre-Celtic population. Genetic and linguistic evidence points to the fact that the majority of English (excluding those of Cornwall, Cumbria and Yorkshire) are Anglo-Saxons with most possessing pre-Celtic genes (although these genes are fairly ubiquitous across Neolithic Europe)

Now we are dealing with the BRITISH empire not the ENGLISH empire, the massive contribution made by Celts to the creation of the empire probably exceeds the contribution of the English. In particular massive numbers of soldiers and sailors were Irish, if anything we are dealing with a Celtic empire in which only the upper strata is English.

[Cambyses]

Now we are dealing with the BRITISH empire not the ENGLISH empire, the massive contribution made by Celts to the creation of the empire probably exceeds the contribution of the English. In particular massive numbers of soldiers and sailors were Irish, if anything we are dealing with a Celtic empire in which only the upper strata is English.

You really believe this?

It was very definitely a British Empire and not an English one, any attempt to divide who did what would be incredibly artificial. In fact to suggest that the "Celts" created more of the empire than the "upper strata of English" is patently absurd.

[A Very Super Market]

So... the poor and sociopathic were all Irish? The British army (Along with most others) was recruited mostly from criminals and other low-lifes that had nothing better to do. It was hardly a volunteer outfit until the 20th century.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Stop making it look like there are no certainties. British dominance over the Sea was a gradual but firm process, beginning with 1588 and reaching its culmination in the Seven Years War. After 1763 none could challenge them on the Sea, Napoleon tried but the precedents were so unfavourable that he failed as expected - and this situation continued well up to the XX century.

That's dominance, because maritime dominance means necessarily commercial, and thus economic dominance. Britain only truly began to forego it after their peak in 1850, first by repealing the Corn Laws, then by being steadily outmatched in industrial production by continental powers and the United States. But it was a 200 year period when they practically ruled the waves.

I had always thought it was more to do with bands of peasants beating the undisputed nobility on the field of battle.

A myth. People try to portray Agincourt as some sort of Marxian class struggle where the "proletariat" left victorious. In fact there were as many nobles scattered among the "peasants" as there were proportionally nobles in the French army; it was a common practice.

And the yeoman class was hardly a bunch of peasants with pitchforks. If anything, and by the standards of the Middle Ages, they were rather middle class property owners.

[Brennus]

You really believe this?

It was very definitely a British Empire and not an English one, any attempt to divide who did what would be incredibly artificial. In fact to suggest that the "Celts" created more of the empire than the "upper strata of English" is patently absurd.

I merely say this to offest anyone claiming the Empire was a product of only the English. Of course it would be artificial to try and divide up the Empire along lines of Celt and Anglo-Saxon all I am saying is that the Irish contribution is often overlooked.

[Megas Methuselah]

A myth. People try to portray Agincourt as some sort of Marxian class struggle where the "proletariat" left victorious. In fact there were as many nobles scattered among the "peasants" as there were proportionally nobles in the French army; it was a common practice.

And the yeoman class was hardly a bunch of peasants with pitchforks. If anything, and by the standards of the Middle Ages, they were rather middle class property owners.

Thanks. Nevertheless, if anything, this myth merely strengthens my point that English longbows may be hyped up because of the well-known story/myth of the French nobility beaten on the field by English commoners.

[antisocialmunky]

I'm slightly bemused by the fact that it has steered back towards the longbow debate.

But my memory is fuzzy. What did hte Irish contribute to the British Empire besides being a subject of racism and having bad things done to them?

[Brennus]

A massive contribution, large numbers of the army and navy were Irish, the Irish were the main builders of canals within the Empire and anything that required large amounts of manual labour, not to mention many leaders, the Duke of Wellington, Robert Ross (who burnt Washington DC during the war of 1812) to name a few. The Irish contribution was massive

[Gododdin O'Ceallagh]

I'm slightly bemused by the fact that it has steered back towards the longbow debate.

But my memory is fuzzy. What did hte Irish contribute to the British Empire besides being a subject of racism and having bad things done to them?

4th Royal Irish Dragoon Guards
5th Royal Irish Lancers
6th Inniskilling Dragoon Guards
8th Royal Irish Hussars
18th Foot (Royal Irish Regiment)
Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers (27th Regt. of Foot)
Royal Irish Regiment (83rd and 86th Regiments of Foot)
Royal Irish Fusiliers (87th and 89th Regiments of Foot)
Connaught Rangers (88th Regiment of Foot)
Leinster Regiment (100th and 109th Regiments of Foot)
Royal Munster Fusiliers (101st and 104th Regiments of Foot)
Royal Dublin Fusiliers (102nd and 103rd Regiments of Foot)
Irish Guards

""British Army had always used Irishmen, in fact it is has been said "the British Empire was won by the Irish, administered by the Scots and Welsh and the profits went to the English". In recent years the last line was amended to read "lost by the English.""

And as you can tell from my id on this forum, I am what is sometimes called Irish-Scots.

GO'C