Re: Dutch/vlaams (was [tied] Etruscans)

According to the book

"2000 ans d'histoire du 59-62" by Alain Lottin

Published by "La voix du Nord"

I translate "

"2000 years of history of Northern France"

Published by "the voice of the North" =

the local newspaper.

The history around Boulogne is like that :

After a rather difficult conquest by the Romans around - 50,

the area was integrated into the Roman Empire,

Around 350, Gaulish is dead

and the area is a late-latin-speaking area.

From 500 to 600

many Saxons invade the area and settle permanently.

The area becomes a mixed latin-saxon area.

Afterwards local Saxons maintained contacts with England's Saxons

And local rulers married with daughters of Ethelred III etc.

which indicates a clear saxon leaning.

The first man to have convinced the locals to become Christians

is himself a Saxon : Wulmar.

Previous people had failed because they did not master Saxon language

like St Omer.

Around 1000, the area is conquered by Flemish rulers,

And some Flemish people settled in Boulogne.

Modern-time people descending from these first Flemish settlers

bear the name Devriendt "the friend".

Afterwards, this area becomes a 100% old-French-speaking area.

And the French/Flemish boundary remains stable from 1000 to 1850

with Calais and Flanders as boundaries.

There is not a shadow of a doubt

that this area *never" spoke Flemish.

The only question is :

Did Late-Latin/Old French survive among the Saxon settlers ?

It seems highly probable,

since we have clear mentions

of Saxon and Norse villages written in Latin in 800 and afterwards.

Note that the <ea> in Old Saxon

definitely was a diphtongue : it's written ea in

Latin rendition of Amfleat > Ambleteuse.

Arnaud

----- Original Message -----

From: tgpedersen

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 12:59 PM

Subject: [Courrier indésirable] Re: Dutch/vlaams (was [tied] Etruscans)

> > Do you have a source on this?
> > > ===========
> > There are a couple of interesting maps at this address
> > and following pages :
> > http://www.mdsk. net/histb_ fr.html
> > If you have some trouble with French
> > I can help
>
> http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Dutch_language
> http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Old_Frankish
>
> Would you like to comment on this quote from your source?
> "
> Dans les ports de la côte flamande, le dialecte utilisé par les
> marchands de la Mer du Nord est l'ANGLO-FRISON. Les
> charactéristiques anglo-frisonnes se retrouveront plus tard dans
> le Germanique de la Mer du Nord qui connaîtra son apogée vers
> l'an 1000 sur les côtes de la Baltique et de la Mer du Nord.
> =========
>
> It translates as :
>
> "In the harbours of Flanders Coast (From Calais to Belgie up)
>the dialect used by salesmen of the North-sea was Anglo-frisian
>(Frisian and "Anglisk" are supposed to be closest). Anglo-frisian
>features (of this dialect) are to be found later in the Germanic
>languages spoken "around" the north sea. This Anglo-frisian reached
>its maximum (expansion I suppose) circa the year 1000 along the
>coast of Baltic sea and North-sea"

I didn't ask you translate to it, you buffoon. I asked you to
comment on it. Particularly on the strange idea of an Anglo-Frisian
language being spoken in the Baltic around 1000AD.

> ====
> I have found a text from 1286 that has a couple of
> words "Germanic-looking" .
> They may shed some light on Dutch or no Dutch in Boulogne's
> area.
> I let you know.

Perhaps you should consider reading the links I provided first?

Torsten