Frankish language in France

Arminius   Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:13 am GMT
Germans are first and foremost of Germanic stock, and people at the border of the neighboring (slavic or Latin) countries do also have mostly Germanic genes.
The main ancestors of the Germans are those tribes of the Saxones, Frisii, Franci, Thuringii, Alamanni, Suebi and Bavarii.
just a comment   Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:56 am GMT
" Germans are first and foremost of Germanic stock, and people at the border of the neighboring (slavic or Latin) countries do also have mostly Germanic genes.
The main ancestors of the Germans are those tribes of the Saxones, Frisii, Franci, Thuringii, Alamanni, Suebi and Bavarii. "


Well, take an abitrary sample of 1O germans and compare them to a sample of 10 Danish os Swedish people... you will notice that German are far to be all of pure Scandinavian origins (were "Germanic stock" as you call it is coming from). It is obvious that when the Germanic peoples moved form Scandinavia to what is now modern Germany, they mixed with the local pre-existing populations (that were at that time celtic-speaking population), especially in southern Germany/switzerland/Austria.

Well then take another arbitray sample of 10 Germans and compare it to 10 average french... still quite differences, etc.
The more you go south, the more you have greater probabilitites to find more people with darkers features, even if there are diversity in every place, because people has been mixed in a lot of places since ever. This has nothing to see with been of "celtic", "germanic", "slavic" or "latin" cultures.
observant   Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:06 am GMT
-- Well then take another arbitray sample of 10 Germans and compare it to 10 average french... still quite differences, etc.
The more you go south, the more you have greater probabilitites to find more people with darkers features --


France (excepted the southern Occitan fringe) is not more south than Germany. So its people look as Germanic as germans themselves.
just a comment   Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:11 pm GMT
Well, France is quite a bit more south than Germany, no? I'd say that excepted than the northern fringe France is mainly south of Germany's southermost points.

http://cjoint.com/data/gfoj3Cgmp4.htm
Brunhild   Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:57 pm GMT
Arminius:<<Germans are first and foremost of Germanic stock(...)>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh dear!
Not only is your statement wrong, but it uses terms from ANIMAL BREEDING referring to humans, which is not only morally questionable concerning the history that such illfounded ideas have (see Manchester Capitalism, Social Darwinism, Racism, Eugenics, Fascism on your encyclopedia), but proven to be utter nonsense!
Furthermore you erroneously confuse ideas of TRIBES and RACES,
and your argument reveals a complete ignorance towards the fact, that NATIONS and their inhabitants consist of Millions of people from all around the world (today as well as in the past).

Now, as the name Brunhild might indicate, I am German, and this argument in it´s ill logic of yours, is not only insulting my intellects,
but it is very awkward. It´s embarrassing you!
And for all of you, who don´t know better, I thought I put some facts to this pile of wonderful gibberish, before this poppycock is going on much longer.

Here´s some data on scientific research that has already been published in 1874, regarding your thoughts -
and since this has been a discussion about the French in the beginning, it is even funnier:

Before the war between France and Prussia of 1872, some French Cultural Anthropologists postulated the "Germanic Race" to represent the "Idlest of all Races", because of their assumed pure Arian-Germanic descent.

Unfortunately, the French lost the war with Prussia, and, all of a sudden, the French Anthropologists judged the Prussians to be "of a dark, finnish" decent, for an "Idle Race" could have never done that to France!

And while the Prussians might not have given anything on these "accusations", or, on the contrary, might have even been angry about those theories, nevertheless, there was a Scientist in Berlin,
who couldn´t simply leave it at that, for scientific reasons:
For there was simply no scientific evidence for either of the arguments.
And there was no proof of a Germanic Race.

That Scientist was famous Rudolf Virchow, at that time working at the Berlin Charité Hospital, today better known as the father of modern Pathology, a passionate scientist and a revolutionary in his field.
(see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Virchow
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Virchow)

Now what happened until Virchows publication in 1874 ?

First of all, Virchow sent Photographers to Finland - to have a look, if there was visible evidence for the theory - who of course couldn´t prove the French pretensions, or anything at all.
Secondly, he started a broad SCIENTIFIC STUDY on the anatomical differences and body measurements amongst the GERMANS. During this study, he and his colleagues where taking the measurements of the astounding number of altogether SEVEN MILLION schoolchildren of his time, from all over Germany (Prussia).
And the results were shocking to all of those, who were hanging on to racial theories and other wild beliefs like the GERMANIC descent:
As it turned out, there is no such thing as a Germanic Race, there is no Germanic Stock, nothing that could prove, that particularly Germans, or humans in general, consist of Races, like Darwin´s Doves did, which all derive from the Rock Pigeon and reveal their characteristics, when cross-bred.
Virchow´s scientific research of 1874 proved, that this belief is wrong, and the Germans are descending from Ancestor´s from allover the world. The territory the Germans live in, as well as every other place or country on the blue planet, has always been widely travelled, and invaded, and immigrated, and the evidence that Virchow collected, shows, that the Germans carry all the signs of such a mixture of all kinds of anatomical, visible and measureable body features. And even more: On water-courses, any kind of area next to waterways like rivers, the anatomical differences mingled the most, since these routes were of course the areas of the most traffic and trade channels in the literal sense, and they had always been.
To today there is no such thing as a proof for Germanic stock or human races, not genetically, not measureable, not at all.
You will have to simply accept that we are looking different, in a great variety of shades and shapes, with some genetic specialties, like genetic disease in some cases, or, I don´t know - just brown skin, slitted eyes, jugged ears, red hair, bowlegs - sorry, but that´s about it.
And the term Germanic, concerning certain unpleasant foreigners to deal with, derives from a note by Julius Ceasar, I believe, a political remark on the tribes in this widespread area, which only long after the Holy Roman Empire, and having shrunk to just a minimal part of the once giant territory Ceasar was referring to, would one day become Prussia, and later Germany.
Do your homework hon, read some more.
Leasnam   Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:52 pm GMT
<<Well, France is quite a bit more south than Germany, no? I'd say that excepted than the northern fringe France is mainly south of Germany's southermost points.

http://cjoint.com/data/gfoj3Cgmp4.htm >>

That map is not a little biased, though, in it's angle from the South is it ;)?
lucien   Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:28 pm GMT
>>Germans are first and foremost of Germanic stock, and people at the border of the neighboring (slavic or Latin) countries do also have mostly Germanic genes.
The main ancestors of the Germans are those tribes of the Saxones, Frisii, Franci, Thuringii, Alamanni, Suebi and Bavarii.<<

You forgot the Chatti, a very influential tribe.
Leasnam   Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:27 pm GMT
<<,You forgot the Chatti, a very influential tribe. >>

Yes. The Hessians :)
guest guest   Fri Jun 05, 2009 7:56 pm GMT
<<Well, France is quite a bit more south than Germany, no? I'd say that excepted than the northern fringe France is mainly south of Germany's southermost points.

http://cjoint.com/data/gfoj3Cgmp4.htm >>

That map is not a little biased, though, in it's angle from the South is it ;)?




No it isn't biaised. The reality is that many common representations of western Europe are biased, seen with angular deformation. Like this one for exemple:
http://www.e-voyageur.com/atlas/Europe.jpg

It gives the impression (especially when the parallel lines (latitudes) are not represented), that most of France is more or less lined with Germany, or that Spain appears more or less lined with Italy. Actually this is what most people think, because these representations are widely spread.

In the reality, Italy as a whole is more north than Spain (only southern half of Italy is lined with Spain, while northern half of Italy is lined with southern and central France)

In the reality, only the 1/3 northern fringe of France is lined with Germany (Baden-wurtemberg and Bavaria). Paris, which is very north in France, still be at similar latitudes with Stuttgart, Munich, or Vienna. Central french cities such as Lyon are lined with Alps, Torino, Milan or Venice, and southern ones such as Marseille, Toulouse or Nice are lined with central Italian cities of tuscany or Lazio.
CID   Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:53 pm GMT
<<No it isn't biaised. The reality is that many common representations of western Europe are biased, seen with angular deformation. Like this one for exemple:
>>

The first map shows Europe from a southern angle. Parallax distorts the alignment of east to west.
Arminius   Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:26 pm GMT
Germans are first and foremost of Germanic stock, and people at the border of the neighboring (slavic or Latin) countries do also have mostly Germanic genes.
The main ancestors of the Germans are those tribes of the Saxones, Frisii, Franci, Thuringii, Alamanni, Suebi and Bavarii.
just a comment   Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:59 pm GMT
" The first map shows Europe from a southern angle. Parallax distorts the alignment of east to west. "



The first map (http://cjoint.com/data/gfoj3Cgmp4.htm) is a mercator projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercator_projection)

It means that the deformation concerns the size of land (the more you go north, the bigger they appear), but keep the longitudes and latitudes strait and perpendicular.

It means that we can, on this kind of map, knowing that two points are at same latitudes because they are lined on an horizontal line.


To come back to the subject:
http://cjoint.com/data/ggb4aEcwtV.htm

As we see on this map, only the northern third fringe of France lies at similar latitudes with southern Germany (blue). Most of french territory lies at similar latitudes with northern and central Italy (red).
Guest   Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:02 am GMT
So boring...
PARISIEN   Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:24 am GMT
<< In the reality, only the 1/3 northern fringe of France is lined with Germany (Baden-wurtemberg and Bavaria). Paris, which is very north in France, still be at similar latitudes with Stuttgart, Munich, or Vienna. >>

-- Considérations vraiment oiseuses. La perception selon laquelle la France est à l'Ouest de l'Allemagne est historiquement, culturellement et linguistiquement justifiée car:

. Le centre de gravité originel de la culture française reste le domaine d'oïl (dont la Wallonie), surtout au nord de la Seine, celui de l'Allemagne a été la bande du moyen-haut-allemand (Thuringe-Franconie-Hesse-Palatinat)

. Le domaine occitan, tout comme celui bas-allemand, a été acculturé à leur culture nationale dominante (resp. française et allemande) seulement à partir du 16e. Cela s'est fait sans résistance, tout naturellement, mais jusqu'au 17e l'Allemagne du Nord et la France du Sud n'ont pas contribué à leur cultures nationales.

. La frontière entre français et néerlandais se prolonge droit vers l'Est à travers la ligne Benrath (qui sépare bas- et moyen-haut-allemand), celle entre oïl et oc se prolonge égament droit vers l'Est à travers la limite nord des parlers nord-italiens.

Le cas de l'Italie est un peu spécial. On considère souvent que le noyau de sa langue est Florence, mais ce n'est pas vrai. Très tôt au Moyen-Age aussi bien la Sicile que Venise participent à la culture nationale en formation. Dans toutes les régions tend à apparaître dans la classe supérieure une langue de compromis, comprise partout, la "lingua corteggiana". Avant même Dante, les notaires dans tout le pays, de l'Apulie au Piémont, quand ils consignent sur leurs actes (en latin) des formules de serment compréhensibles au vulgaire tout en conservant la noblesse attribuée au latin, utilisent un langage un peu artificiellement latinisé, qui évite soigneusement toute déformation dialectale et préfigure étrangement le toscan litéraire. En fait, Dante a fixé un standard déjà virtuellement préexistant un peu partout.
CID   Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:36 am GMT
<<The first map (http://cjoint.com/data/gfoj3Cgmp4.htm) is a mercator projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercator_projection)

It means that the deformation concerns the size of land (the more you go north, the bigger they appear), but keep the longitudes and latitudes strait and perpendicular.

It means that we can, on this kind of map, knowing that two points are at same latitudes because they are lined on an horizontal line.
>>

We know this. Mercator Projections are the maps which show Greenland larger than South America, because they are Northern hemisphere biased (Northern Hemisphere is larger than the Southern). Also, they are global maps laid out flat, which expands and stretches the areas around the Polar regions.

It's possible that the first map is a Mercator Projection, but I cannot see enough of it to know for sure.

Regardless, what I said is still true. Viewing any surfacr at an angle distorts the relationship of points on the surface.

We are not viewing the surface dead-on.

But thanks for the nerdy comment!