| Do
you want a fully independent Cornwall? |
|
|
 |
| Protesters
against the south west assembly |
|
|
How
should our county be run? Have
your say on self-government, a south west assembly, Westminster
and the EU.
How can we preserve our unique culture and move forward in the 21st
Century?
|
|
Do
you support the aims of Mebyon Kernow for a legislative Cornish
Assembly for self-government within the UK?
Or
do you think greater independence could put off investment from
the rest of the UK?
Would
we be better off as part of a south west assembly or would we
end up being governed by Bristol and Exeter?
Do
you feel Cornish, British or both?
*latest mail from the top
Click
here to have your say now.
Oh dear, the phrase 'if the cap fits….' springs easily
to mind but thanks, nevertheless, for the response by Bob
Burns.
I was not only referring specifically to this discussion(!)
but to the general trend of views expressed in opposition
to the Cornish arguments. I had, in fact, read six webpages
of this discussion and would need to be advised on Bob's definition
of 'trivialising'.
I am sure that Athelstan was considered to be king of all
Wessex, which ostensibly included Devonshire, and a key player
in England's history which one would have thought any English
person would have been proud to associate themselves. Perhaps
someone knowledgeable on Wessex could provide some meaningful
edification?
At least Bob acknowledges the synonymy between British and
English. What amazes me is that he can only identify one source
of its use. Perhaps, for now, I shall just let him ponder
on this rather sophisticated coercive Imperial gem and encourage
him to analyse the use of the words 'England' and 'English',
in spontaneous conversation, whenever he hears them used.
It is somewhat concerning that one's association with 'being
Celtic' has to rely on some academic genetic research.
I am still unclear as to what such research proves, seeks
to prove or, indeed, its relevance. It would be most strange
if during the inexorable push west of the invading germanic
tribes, over a period of, say, five hundred years that all
the Celtic-speaking people were totally supplanted by the
incomers and that some were not assimilated into the new order.
I have no wish to attempt to divert people from their chosen
path to happiness since this is a personal choice but from
my side of the Cornish-English Border, Devonshire is perceived
as being one of the most English of English counties. I referred
to the Southwest agencies hijacking, seemingly, the strengths
of the Cornish identity - not Devonshire!
One must wonder, however, if this is, perhaps, something more
than just a coincidence. Rather than perpetuate the waffling
over the meaning of Statutory Instrument 1992 No. 2902, perhaps
Bob - as it seems so important to him! - could ask his friendly
solicitor, or someone in the know, to spell out what it all
means. Then he could genuinely enlighten us all. I am happy
in the knowledge that the Duchy of Cornwall refers to the
whole territory of Cornwall, whereas any Duchy property located
outside of Cornwall forms only a part (little or large as
Devonshire) of whichever administrative county it happens
to be in. Bob seems rather hot under the collar for some reason.
Historically Devonshire and Somersetshire have been precisely
that and, given Bob's interpretation of history, it is anomalous
that Cornwall was never Cornwallshire. It is simply not good
enough just to dismiss this fact as if it has no relevance.
Nowhere have I stated or implied that a 'shire' suffix - which
simply denotes an administrative division - only refers to
a 'Saxon' shire. The other examples he quotes might have more
to do with the Saxon Heptarchy than to the early development
of Wessex. One can hardly argue that Devonshire's history
has been misrepresented without, I imagine, also acknowledging
that Cornish history has also been misrepresented.
If he rereads my posting, however, he will find that I made
a specific reference to official misrepresentation of "our
Cornish Duchy" and its constitution. It is quite wrong to
suggest that the Cornish arguments directly or indirectly
misrepresent the position of Devonshire within the English/British
State. There has been, hitherto, no position to misrepresent.
Post tenth-century Devonshire can certainly share a history
and evolution with its English neighbours but any comparison
with Cornwall can only ever be tenuous at best. I note the
points that Bob chose, interestingly, not to respond to.
TGG, Trevarth |
Perhaps if JGG had bothered to go back far enough through
these postings, he would have discovered that it was the Cornish
Nationalists who started trivialising the debate by using
abusive language and name calling. Getting down to the more
important points, the name Wessex was never associated with
Devon, until the Tudor cartographer John Speed decided, for
some unaccountable reason, to add Devon to Wessex (incidentally,
I have even seen maps showing Cornwall in Wessex). I have
only ever heard the word 'British' being used as a synonym
for 'English' by Americans, who never fail to upset the Scots
by saying that they have just been to 'Scotland, England'.
Surely the Cornish aren't as ignorant on such matters as the
Americans. What on Earth is a pseudo-Celt? Perhaps we have
some new Cornish Nationalist definitions here: (1) A Celt;
Someone who is genetically predominantly Celtic and from Scotland,
Ireland, Wales, the Isle of Man, Cornwall or Brittany. (2)
A pseudo-Celt; Someone who is genetically predominantly Celtic
and not from Scotland, Ireland, Wales, the Isle of Man, Cornwall
or Brittany. Is that what JGG means? Just in case JGG is ill
informed on these matters, genetic research has shown conclusively
that the current population of the whole of the South West
is every bit as Celtic as the people of the Scottish Highlands.
So the people of Devon are not trying to hijack Cornish identity,
as we have our own Celtic identity thank you very much, which
just happens to be similar to yours. Regarding Statutory instrument
1992 No. 2902, if the Duchy of Cornwall does not have some
claim to the rivers and foreshore of Devon (as well as those
of Cornwall), then why on Earth might the Duchy have an interest
and therefore need to be notified as standard procedure just
in case? They certainly don't seem to have an interest in
the rivers and foreshore of Dorset or Norfolk. I am sorry
but JGG really does seem to be clutching at straws on that
one. I have no idea why Athelstan didn't name the county 'Cornwallshire'.
It was probably for the same reason that there isn't a Somersetshire,
a Sussexshire or an Essexshire. If JGG seriously thinks that
the ending shire automatically makes a county 'Saxon', he
had better tell a rugby forward from Cardiganshire, or a 20
stone kilted caber tosser from Argyllshire that, and see how
long it takes him to wake up in hospital. Oh, by the way,
the official name is Devon, not Devonshire. Again, if JGG
would care to search back through the postings, he will find
that we Devonians have always acknowledged the fact that the
history of Cornwall has been misrepresented, but it has been
the Cornish Nationalists (in an attempt to demonstrate their
uniqueness), who have done their best to perpetuate the misrepresentation
of Devon history. Who wants a 'Devonwall' We Devonians certainly
don't 'foreigners from the dark valleys' no thanks. We just
want the Cornish Nationalists to stop trying to justify their
'separateness' by misrepresenting Devon. But perhaps that
is the only way they know how.
Bob Burns, Barton-upon-Humber |
|
There is one common agenda emanating from those opposed
to conceding any rights to the Cornish people and this is
manifested by the bizarre use of extreme and emotive terminology
coupled to arrogant trivialisation of the whole debate.
The
attempt by some Devonshire people, within this discussion,
to deny themselves an English identity and move straight
from being Devonian to British is interesting. Bizarre,
but interesting! It is for them alone to argue and justify.
It is certainly a new phenomenon to me and all power to
them, but what happened to Wessex? Perhaps they might also
explain the origins of the almost universal perception of
this sceptred isle, where 'British' is seen to be synonymous
with 'English'. The interesting aspect of this is that there
has been a noticeable shift in the promotion of the English
Southwest over the past, say, fifteen years where we see
what appears to be a deliberate hijacking of the strengths
of the Cornish identity to develop a pseudo-Celtic Southwest.
The purpose of this 'shift' seems to be to provide a pseudo-cultural
comparison to Wales and Brittany as the devious means of
furthering 'English' regional aspirations. Recent media
promotions (ITV. sorry!) of this mythological beast now
seems intent on encouraging the concept of an English Southwest
Motherland. One must surely, therefore, question the motives
of certain writers and ask whether they have been deliberately
planted by the BBC to perpetuate an irrelevant debate based
as it is on such proffered premises and obscure logic?
Regarding references to Statutory Instrument 1992 No.2902
and the suggestion that this proves that the Duchy of Cornwall
has the same rights to the rivers, foreshore etc, throughout
the English county of Devonshire as it has within the Duchy
of Cornwall: Surely, the only conclusion to be drawn from
that document can only be that the Duchy 'might' have an
interest and should, therefore, be notified as a matter
of standard procedure - just in case? - or, have I missed
something?
I
am also confused as to why, if Athelstan, set the Tamar
Border as simply a 'county' boundary along with so many
others at that time, the territory was not named Cornwall-shire
in the same manner as all those on the English side of the
Tamar? Also, perhaps we could be enlightened as to how a
tenth-century 'county' compares to a 'shire' and what constitutional
quirk could exist to enable one of the first Acts of the
Duke of Cornwall, in 1351, to initiate his own form of domesday
survey to inquire "which those persons of Cornwall and England
have.."? This unique legal and constitutional distinction
has been observed by many subsequent writers and was most
certainly a factor uppermost in the mind of Edward III in
1337.
One aspect of identity, lost to the Imperial English mind,
is a mutual recognition of others having a similar struggle
for denied rights. This inherent camaraderie, clearly, does
not emanate from those promoting a distinct lost Devonshire
identity. Whilst misrepresentation of Devonshire's obscure
past is alleged, together with a pathetic attempt to remove
any concept of the 'E' word, there is no parallel acknowledgement
that official misrepresentation is also true of our Cornish
Duchy. In fact, it seems, that they are more interested
in trivialising the Cornish Case than most and are only
making a case for some form of Imperial Region which might
just coincide with something resembling Dumnonia.
Do you get the picture? A sort of pseudo-Celtic Southwest
which just happens to submerge everything within an expanded
Devonshire - a true Devonwall construct. A Devonshire Province
with the resuscitated, and tainted, name of Dumnonia. In
the absence of any official (BBC) comment on the validity
of the subject title - a point also raised by previous writers
- I would treat this whole exercise with caution and contempt.
The Cornish argument is faultless and all people with conscience
should be demanding a moratorium on all policies which can
be shown to be acting against the interests of Cornish Rights
until there is truth and reconciliation over the Cornish
Question.
JGG
|
Interesting point from Phil in Oman. Yes, we need some very
detailed debate on policy, and I'd be very glad to hear your
ideas on, say, economic development, culture and communication,
or education and training. And given that you (like many of
us) are writing from a long way away, how do you see the Cornish
exiles as best making a contribution to the welfare of the
homeland? P.S. It's just as well that tedium isn't a spectator
sport, otherwise some of our esteemed correspondents could
bore for England!
Tim, Caerdydd |
I once read the Mebyon Kernow mandate thinking that maybe
I would find something in it that I could vote for and I must
say that frankly, I was disappointed. Some of the ideas that
they were putting across seemed to me to be unachievable.
However, now is a good time for the party to show that it
really is in tune with the people, as most voters are dissatisfied
with all three of the major parties. Mebyon Kernow should
concentrate on how they would solve the real main issues that
people face in Cornwall, i.e. unemployment, housing, National
Health, education, the fishing industry, the farming industry,
etc. Do they have a realistic method of solving these problems?
Let's forget about the ethnic rubbish and let's concentrate
on the real issues that people are concerned with, health,
wealth and education.
PhilT Cornishman in Oman |
|
At last, a few rays of common sense and moderation albeit
from an unexpected source, if we can take at face value
what Conan Jenkin is telling us about the aims of Mebyon
Kernow.
However,
to be fair to the BBC, I think that their misunderstanding
of the policies of Mebyon Kernow is probably based on the
original aims of the party in the 1950s and 60s.
In
the late 60s, I had a protracted correspondence with the
then chairman Mr. Robert Dunstone, who told me in no uncertain
terms that he had no time for anyone to the East of the
Tamar, as he was a Celt and they were all Saxons, and that
the only good thing ever to come out of Devon was the road
to Cornwall. In this day and age, with up to date knowledge
of history and genetics, such a stance is no longer viable,
and in any case reeks of fascist style racism.
Despite
MK abandoning such unsavoury and outmoded attitudes, there
still remains a persistent core of Nationalists who still
promote racism and hatred from t! he! sanctuary of their
venomous web sites, some of whose doctrinal attitudes have
appeared in this forum.
If
we are to believe Mr. Jenkin, when he states that ethnicity
has no part to play in Cornish Nationalism (and there is
no reason to doubt his sincerity), then perhaps he would
care to enlighten us on what singles out Cornwall as a distinct
and separate nation, but not (for instance) Kent, Lancashire,
Cumbria or Rutland. If it is because the Cornish wish to
have more autonomy over their own affairs, then I would
refer him to the forum on devolution at BBC Devon, where
the overwhelming (and strongly expressed) opinion is that
the Devonians have no time for the concept of a seven county
mega region, and want substantially increased powers for
a new Devon Assembly.
The big difference seems to be that there is no demand to
be recognised as a separate nation, and therefore there
is no ‘Mebyon Dewnans’. What particularly annoys
Devonians is the way that Devon is treated by the Cornish
Nationalists. They presume to dictate that although the
seven county mega region is ‘not for Cornwall’,
it is perfectly acceptable for the other six (including
Devon). They also try to back up their claims for a separate
and unique identity for Cornwall by blatantly misrepresenting
the history, ethnicity and culture of the Devonians, in
order to distance themselves from Devon. I have already
given, as an example, the way in which the contribution
of the people of Devon, in the Prayer Book Rebellion of
1549, has been deliberately written out of the account,
as told by Cornish ‘historians?’, in order to
emphasise the Cornish ‘uniqueness’.
This
practice may seem (to some) to be fairly harmless, but there
is already evidence that it is poisoning the minds of Cornish
children toward their Devonian neighbours (note some of
the letters from Cornish school child! re! n in the book
“Cornwall For Ever”). All I can say is that
if the Nationalists have to resort to presenting distorted
facts about Devon, in order to prove their separateness,
then their case cannot be a particularly strong one.
Bob Burns, Barton-upon-Humber
|
As part of the leadership team of Mebyon Kernow - the Party
of Cornwall, there are a number of issues aired via this forum
that require a sensible response. Firstly the BBC have substantially
misrepresented the position of Mebyon Kernow and its members.
Mebyon Kernow does not advocate independence from the UK.
Our present published policy position is 'greater independence
within the UK'.
Devolution for Cornwall is widely accepted within the community
that lives in Cornwall. The present debate is not about whether
devolution should take place, but the level of devolution.
As you would expect Mebyon Kernow - the Party for Cornwall
advocates more substantial devolution than either The Labour
party, The Conservative party or The Liberal Democratic party.
Secondly, the disappointing debate that exists amongst many
of the contributors to this site has seemed to equate Cornish
Nationalism with ethnic identity.
The reality, of course, is that political nationalism in Cornwall
advocated by Mebyon Kernow has long adopted the civic form
of Nationalism that is favoured by the Scottish National Party.
This is all inclusive and recognizes that a modern Cornwall
is a pluralist society that has a broad multi-cultural base.
Racism can have no place in a modern society (whether Cornish
or English). Cornish Nationalism is not ethnic, many of the
Cornish Nationalists that I frequently come into contact both
in Mebyon Kernow and outside could be ethnically described
as 'english'. Yet Cornish Nationalists are committed to enhancing
the welfare of Cornwall and all of its community. I hope the
debates within this forum start to reflect more these realities.
Oll an gwella, All the best
Conan Jenkin - Communications Officer,
Mebyon Kernow, Truro, Kernow |
All of this talk of Cornish independence stems from what?
Basically, it’s the result of people living in the county
becoming so frustrated with the way successive British governments
have totally ignored the deteriorating rural conditions within
the county. As you all should know by now, Cornwall has been
designated Priority One status by the EU. That means it is
amongst 46 poorest areas in Europe. The average income in
Cornwall is just 75% of the European average whereas the South-east
of England has an average income of two and half times the
European average. Cornwall currently pays nearly £2billion
a year in taxes to central government, but only gets £1.65billion
back - a shortfall of £350million every year. House prices
in Cornwall are compatible to areas further west but wages
are much lower. Unemployment in Cornwall, realistically is
around 12% although the government would deny this. A large
proportion of people work for minimum wages within the hospitality!
industry, which is not only low paying but seasonal as well.
Our tin mining industry was allowed to collapse. Our fishing
industry was allowed to collapse. Our farming industry has
come under fire in the past few years. So tell me, do you
think we could do any worse if we were independent? I think
not. We have a saying in Cornwall: the fishing's scat, the
mining's scat and the farming's scat. Looks like it's back
to wrecking boys.
Phil T, Cornishman in Oman |
Speaking as a descendent of the Bronze Age people of the South
West, I challenge the right of the Iron Age Celtic descendents
(the Cornish) to claim that our ancient monuments are their
heritage. These monuments raised by our ancestors, such as
the Dolmen, Menhirs, Hut Circles, Stone Rows, Stone Circles
(including Stonehenge) etc., were here in our ancient land,
long before the Iron Age Celts set foot in this island. Not
only did these invaders deprived us of our ancient tongue,
by forcing us to adopt their own language, but also drove
us into the Western extremities by their acts of ethnic cleansing
and cultural theft. Next time they claim that the English
have stolen their heritage, because the English were not here
when the (Bronze Age) monuments were erected, they should
stop and consider that neither were they (the Celts). So,
hands off our monuments, you Cornish thieves.
Den an Fro Breidh, Teh Kren Hueh,
Keas Grim |
Welcome back Dyalor Kernewek. I hope you had a good holiday
at Perranzabuloe. I must apologise for assuming that you had
buried you head in the sand like some of your colleagues,
I didn't know you were away. However, I still note that you
haven’t answered any of the points I made in my reply
to your previous posting. Instead you have hurled accusations
at me about being a Devon Nationalist (whatever one of those
may be). If you would care to read some of my most recent
postings, you would see that I am opposed to all forms of
rampant nationalism, wherever it originates. However, I will
give you the benefit of the doubt, and ask again the questions
I raised in answer to your last posting.
Firstly you state that the Dukes of Cornwall exercised a prerogative
right to double the ‘coinage’ for Cornwall, which
they could not legally do in England. According to my researches,
the double coinage rate for Cornwall was imposed in 1198 AD,
so was obviously not imposed by a Duke of Cornwall, as there
were no Dukes of Cornwall (who were heirs to the throne) until
1337. You also haven't answered my point about the tin tax
in Devon being double that in Cornwall prior to 1197. Comments
please.
On the statutes concerning 'Bona Vacantia', are you aware
that the provisions regarding the Duchy of Cornwall are not
unique in England, as they also apply to the Duchy of Lancaster.
You used the word 'unique'. Distorted fact? In my reply to
Hunlef, I stated the following:- Your point about the ‘Foreshore
Dispute’ also raises an interesting point. You seem
to be claiming that the Duke’s rights can only be exercised
in the geographical area of Cornwall (including the foreshore),
and that it would be illegal for him to do so anywhere else.
Statutory Instrument 1992 No. 2902 states:-
(1) Authority sought in order:- 1. Works affecting the foreshore
below mean high water spring tides, tidal waters, or the bed
of, or the subsoil beneath tidal waters.
(2) Persons to be served:- 1. (a) In or adjacent to England
or Wales, the Crown Estate Commissioners and the National
Rivers Authority; and (b) In or adjacent to England, the Minister
of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food; and (c) In or adjacent
to Wales, the Secretary of State for Wales; and (d) In or
adjacent to the counties of Devon and Cornwall and the Isles
of Scilly, the Duchy of Cornwall; and (e) In or adjacent to
the counties of Cumbria, Lancashire, Merseyside and Cheshire,
the Duchy of Lancaster. There are similar provisions for works
affecting the banks or the riverbed of, or the subsoil beneath,
a river. Now unless I am mistaken, your interpretation of
the Duke’s rights means that the above Statutory Instrument
is either illegal, or Devon is not a part of England. Comments
please.
Interestingly, I received no comments from Hunlef. This brings
me neatly on to the ‘Duchy’ clause in the Tamar
Bridge Act 1998. As the foundations of the towers of the bridge
are in the subsoil of the river, I would have been very surprised
if the clause had not been included, as Statutory Instrument
1992 No. 2902 obviously applies. Any comments? If Dyalor Kernewek
is going to pursue his claims, let's have some facts, which
stand up to scrutiny. Perhaps he would care to respond to
these points, and he still hasn't told us what it is that
he is avenging
Bob Burns, Barton-upon-Humber |
|
Mitten da Bob ha oll, Had a nice holiday on the Costa del
Perranzabuloe and am now back to educate.
Bob,
I take exception to your posting that you use 'verifiable'
facts whereas I use 'distorted' facts which makes me a Nationalist
and you not.
You
once applauded me on the depth and breadth of my posting,
every aspect of which was clearly articulated and supported
by either Act, Statute or Law so that even the most sceptical
of you out there would at least assume that I was not in
the game of bullsh**ing when dealing with matters of the
utmost importance with regards to the unique Constitutional
position of Kernow. You, however, seem to wish (as all Nationalists
do) that none of these VERFIABLE facts exist. Unfortunately
for you and your ilk, they do and are not going away just
because you want them to. It appears to anybody having witnessed
your Devonian Nationalist rantings, that your word cannot
be taken seriously when you have the sheer arrogance to
dismiss postings supported by verifiable facts which are
writ in stone and are not subject to individual interpretation
(especially by the likes of you, who wish to imbue the word
of Law with your own Nationalistic bigotry).
The
Acts, Statutes and Laws to which I reffered, are within
the British Constitution, "English" Law and will remain
extant until an Act is passed to repeal them. So, just get
used to the fact that just because you don't like them does
not mean that they are "distorted" according to your mindset.
The Law of the land is just that, either accept it or change
it!
Dyalor Kernewek, Rysrudth
|
|
My humblest appologies to the Picts. In my rush to finish
my last post, I left you out. No offense intended.
Just to clarify what I said before, I have no problem with
identity/ethnic awareness, as long as it doesn't turn into
rampant nationalism and hatred for all those "not of the
clan". As my fellow Devonians have stated, our Celtic heritage
has been hidden from us even more so than for the Cornish.
In fact, to a large extent, it has been the misinformation,
from the Cornish Nationalist minority, about the (non existant)
distinct racial divide at the Tamar, which has perpetuated
this lack of undersatnding about our heritage. The big difference
between the enlightened Devonians and the Cornish Nationalists,
is that we haven't declared that people from Dorset and
Somerset are racist, imperialist foreigners, because we
know that they aren't. We are also open minded enough to
realise that many of the problems, which the nationalists
claim are unique to Cornwall, also apply to many areas of
Britain which are remote from London.
Awareness
of ethnic identity is to be welcomed, but should not be
allowed to evolve into malignant separatism. At the end
of the day, we are all British.
Bob Burns, Barton-upon-Humber
|
The game
is afoot! A new political party has been launched, The English
Democratic Party. The EDP will contest seats at the next general
election,by-elections and council elections.Cornwall is to
have as much autonomy as desired (including seperation),from
an English parliament. It will be interesting to see how Cornwall
votes in the future.
Tally, Darlington |
In answer to Steve Garrett, I agree with what my passport
tells me I am, i.e. "British Citizen". If we had less of the
English, Welsh, Scottish (or even Cornish), there would be
less of the Nationalistic rubbish that we get today. This
is Great Britain, which has (in regional groupings) Brythonic
Celts, Goidelic Celts, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danish Vikings,
Norwegian Vikings, Normans(?) and any other ethnic grouping
(who I appologise to for not mentioning), and that just represents
the first Millenium or so. It is when we start talking about
the names "English", "Welsh" and "Scots" that we get into
deep water. English implies "Angles", Scottish implies "Dalriada
Scots" (an Irish Goidelic Tribe) and Welsh just means "Foreigner"
in Anglo-Saxon. Now do you see why I try to avoid words like
"English", and why I am opposed to the Cornish creating yet
another nationalist group (especially as there is no difference
between them and their neighbours). Oh Mel! Just try rearranging
the spaces.
Bob Burns, Barton-upon-Humber |
In answer to Steve! Perhaps this is the wrong forum for a
discussion on Devon - go look at the BBC Devon website (under
'sense of place'). However, being presumptious enough to comment
for both Devon and Cornwall, perhaps you don't appreciate
that for hundreds of years both of "us" have been typecast
as something we are not. This is not unique to the south west.
Go look at India or Singapore. Both devoutly British - until
the British /(English) dumped them. I suspect the problem
stems back to the 'British empire'. However Britain never
was united, neither abroad nor at home. The (media?) attitude
nowadays of 'bow down to London' sticks in the craw of many
Devonians and Cornish. I am surprised that the north west
is so happy to rest its head under London's boot. In fact
'is it?' That sounds extreme - and I don't intend that any
nastiness should be read into it. However - Britain was always
an amalgam of different backgrounds - and that is Britain's
strength. The fact that we now have people from India/Pakistan/West
Indies etc.. living amongst us is a boon - so long as we allow
it to be one. So - enjoy! But that doesn't mean that multi-culturism
means 'no diversity' don't try to undermine that variety has
made Britain what it is - and Devon (and Cornwall) what THEY
ARE.
Keith, Plymouth |
The current discussion needs to be put in perspective. 40
years ago - when I was just a young lad growing up in Saltash
- the nationalist movement (if I may call it that) was confined
to western Cornwall. Then - we - being in eastern Cornwall
- were apparently too 'misinformed' to really understand our
background. then - only those in the west (where the Cornish
language died out) were apparently the true Cornish. We -
supposedly - had lost our heritage! We weren't 'real cornish'.
Come on! I remember those messages from the 'so called nationalists'.
Get real! The story I read today is apparently different -
we are now a unified people - and for sure many of us in south
east Cornwall are happy to claim our nationhood - and always
were - but I do remember! Back when I was a lad both sides
of the Tamar were Janners - and the west didn't seem to like
that. Well - we are Cornish, and we are Janners. Thank you!
Peter, St Germans |
Tim, Do
I sound like a 'Charles Ormonde Roderick Edgar Francis'? You
were obviously wrong. Couldn't you have picked the 'O' was
for an Oswald??? 'Yeghes'!
Coref, Noss Mayo, Devon |
Is 'Coref's' nom-de-plume an acronym for something like 'Charles
Ormonde Roderick Edgar Francis', or an indication of his favourite
drink?
Tim Saunders, Caerdydd |
Fee, Fi, Fo Fum ……. So! Keith, Bob, Coref and others don’t
consider themselves English, but rather ‘Devonian’ or ‘British’.
In fact Keith ‘objects to being called English’. Why is that
then? Do the English cheat at games – or just push grannies
into the gutter? What is wrong with you people? It’s almost
as if you are ashamed of the Country you were born in – and
of its values and standards that are admired throughout the
World. Or is it because you are ‘Celts’? Because I call myself
‘English’ I must be a Saxon, right? Err… wrong! My ancestry
comes from Scotland, Wales, Ireland and the Isle of Man –
I am a sort of super Celt, but my family have lived in England
for 200 years. I don’t live in the past, or insult my fellow
countrymen by denying the country of my birth. To consider
yourselves ‘Devonian’ and then ‘British’ is a joke. Don’t
you know what is going on at the moment? The U.K. is fissuring
– people that consider themselves ‘British’ are dwindling
faster than Marconi’s share price. Pretty soon, being called
‘British’ will have gone the way of the dinosaur. So what
are you, Keith, Bob, and Coref – Jurassic, Cretaceous or Devonian?
Steve Garrett, Lancashire |
ALB IONONTH EMARCH! - Anagram? Acronym? Give us a clue, Tommy,
give us a clue!
Mel, Menheniot |
back
to talk index
back to previous comments
More comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
