Early Medieval England (or something to that effect) is the least worst of the options in rebranding AS studies without erasing people. The renaming comes from a very real concern and a real danger to our peers and students.
-
-
Um, I think this is hugely problematic. It's not England. England didn't exist. Some parts of AS Britain are now in Scotland, and Lowland Scots is a language of Germanic/AS origin.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @regordane @Liminalitea and
If a term is needed, which I accept that it probably is, then it should be something along the lines of Early Medieval British Communities/States of Germanic Origin. Yeah, that may well be racist too. But English is plainly wrong and ahistoric.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Except British refers to the Brittonic language speaking peoples and those we have referred to as English is actually pretty accurate but they are not all of “Germanic” origins and that has roots in racist scholarship too, that Germanic identity stuff. So neither of those work.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
There's no good term, I agree. But Britain is recognised as a name for this island. So its existence does at least stretch back to the relevant period, which England's doesn't and in any case doesn't accurately cover.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @regordane @AdmiralHip and
I think in terms of racism, and current politics, it's not just that England/English is ahistoric. It's that England/English is to be avoided at all costs. I know it's hard to come up with something better.. but saying England encourages rather than reduces racism. Sad, I know.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Explain to me how using English encourages racism. Racism against whom? These people called themselves English. That is well documented. So it’s not ahistoric.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
As I understand this debate, it reflects concerns about AS being co-opted as a racist term in current, not necessarily technical, usage. Which I can see is a real problem. English appears much more vulnerable to such misuse.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @regordane @AdmiralHip and
Yes, the language spoken was a pre-cursor of english, and within that people used a term that translates to "English". But by parallel, I don't call the Franks "French", although the words are similarly related. Some became French, over time. Others didn't.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
English is directly from Ænglisc. Old English is literally called that everywhere. It’s what they spoke. It’s also what they called themselves. It’s not ahistorical like you said.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
And the Franks are not a one to one comparison here. So unless you have something actually constructive that is based on evidence instead of claiming racism without backing that up, bye.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.