So "Normand" is indeed the French term for what the Brits call the Anglo-Normans.

Btw, I can claim direct descent from one of Rollo's captains via one of William of Normandy's knights (though unfortunately our great warrior clan is not named in the Battle Roll of the Abbey - we are represented in the signatories of Magna Carta and among the Knights of the Garter).

Neat. So you're a little bit French, then?

Edit: I should mention, Normandy was named after the Normans, or Vikings, but Rollo et al settled there in 911, when Charles the Simple(who was obviously anything but) made Rollo Duke of Normandy, and married his daughter to him, thus gaining a valuable ally to guard the Seine river, which was previously vulnerable to Viking raids. Nice bit of diplomacy, that was, considering Rollo was besieging Paris at the time, and had already conquered Normandy...

800 years removed, but yes, a little bit French, though the remaining French side of the family lost their noble titles (and their heads) in the Revolution.

But of course, that just means German really now doesn't it since the Franks were indeed Germanic peoples...

(Two can play this game)

Hey I don't mind the subject of the French invasion being brought up! It was almost 1000 years ago after all.

So let me get this straight, 'Normand' is the French term for what in English is known as a 'Norman'? So in modern English it would be correct to say 'Norman'?

Well, Normand is the French term for an inhabitant of Normandy. Normandy was named after the Normanni, latin for Vikings (Northmen). I don't really know what 'Norman' means in English.

Those descended from same. William the Conqueror was a "Norman".

Mr. Toastrack is correct. In English, Norman is the correct term for "Normand".

My apologies for the thread digression.

I don't think Norman has any meaning other than the one you just described, not sure though.....It's a top class first name anyway!!

This is typical of the bullshit produced to denigrate those of us who wish end the Treaty of Union.

Utter crap. Those who "use bullets and blood as their only arguments" have no arguments, nor do they have valid reasons or other courses of action.

I hope this is only an opinion, if not support your assertion.

Incidentally, Bruce was not an Anglo-Norman, he had Anglo-Norman ancestry, he was also, as Earl of Huntingdon (an English title) the second biggest land-owner in England.

__________________
Saorsainn agus cha robh cho-bhann

No. The historical record is quite clear on this issue. Separatists who use blood and bullets usually win or die trying. Separatists who use only arguments and civility always get nice pensions.


Good gosh this is a silly assertion. I'd wager that 100% of 14th century Earls of England were Anglo-Normans (I can't think of any exceptions).

Ergo, your argument here is utterly vacuous and silly.

Indeed, Robert Le Bru was with the majority of the Scottish nobility at that time - Anglo-Normans.

Btw, you do understand that the term "Anglo-Norman" specifically applies to those of Norman ancestry who were born in England or married English? This applies to Robert Le Bru.

L'esperance!

Oh hum, what about India, then?

Bruice was also an Scottish Earl (as wellas having Anglo-Norman antecedents).

Prove it.

You are of course referring to the lowland nobles...........

So where does this apply to the Bruce? He married Isabella of Mar, daughter of the 7th Mormaer of Mar.


We Scots prefer to use the Latinate form "de Brus".

__________________
Saorsainn agus cha robh cho-bhann

White Rabbit;
A dismal choice of verb . One wouldn't expect 'rantings' to be backed with hard evidence.

I see that you're also of the opinion that the Internet can change 'history'. That it can, from the lies you've been fed to a new and factual understanding. Stick with it.

Well, they have been in the past. Give a hound a bad name, what ?

I don't see India as a separatist movement at all.

That was a colonial insurrection to be specific. Entirely different thing that - success or failure of colonial insurrections seems to depend entirely on the actions of the home country, not the colony.

Separatism would be more like Pakistan from India - which was violently successful.

Chookie, nothing you have said detracts from the fact that Robert le Bru was born a member of the Anglo-Norman artistocratic elite of England.

That's just a simple fact. Your need to spin this just illustrates the point I made when I first raised it - "don't tell the Scots this!".

Scots like to play fast and loose with national history (many others do to). I don't mind, just that I like to poke fun at them occasionally for it.